Why is there so little HD on C-Band/4DTV?  

C-band is dying for the consumer. The content owners don't think there is enough of a market left to supply programming to. I have not even turned on my 4dtv since the football preseason ended. I think is only a matter of time befoe they cut off all consumer signals.


Robert

All of those you question are distributed on C Band - however it, most have moved away from the early form of the properiatary Digicipher II distribution.

Cinemax and Showtime East use the more advanced MegaPipe with Digicipher II distribution. This is not available to consumers.

HDNET uses C Band, but uses a Wegner System because they feel it allows them more flexibility without a Motorola Encoder.

Both HDNET and CinemaxHD are on 127W - just like HBO and STARZ.

Others use the Scientific Atlanta PowerVu Encyrption system, again not compatiable with the early 4DTV Digicipher II systems.

So its there - you just can't get access to it.

[quote=pappy97]"
This is quite paltry. Where is the rest of the HD?

If ESPN can be received via c-band, why not ESPNHD? Is it not uplinked just like ESPN? [quote]

C-Band distribution is NOT intended for you. It is to provide the programmers product to cable (and DBS) for distribution. The home C-band population is insignificant to the programmers when compared to the aforementioned.

LOL ... yeah we wouldn't want anybody bypassing the middlemen to get full HD (or analog) quality. That would be anti-Capitalist, un-American, and un-Patriotic ... ;) :D

HD-Lite - Love it or leave it.

Yea.. If the public could only see real HD @ 40 mb/s...... :)

[quote=pappy97] Bingo! We have a winner here.. ! :)

You have to remember, the public in general prefers quantity over quality.. other wise DuhwreckedTv, QuakDonalds, etc.. would never survive.. :)

You are too funny. That's the best laugh of the month.

Look at how many stuck with D* with HD LITE for 3 years just for ST.

Most here complain about the price now - yet you say they will pay extra for better feeds??????

As I type this, HBO-HD East and SHO-HD East are the same bitrate you would find directly off C Band on E* 148W - which can be gotten if you REALLY want it - but how many have gone to the expense to do just that (hint - and it's MUCH cheaper than putting in a C Band Setup).

I got into C-Band in the ‘80s when nothing was encrypted except the premium movie channels. Even then, there weren’t many of us but the programming resellers were only competing against local cable companies, so there was money to be made. As years passed, though, the small dish services like D* entered the marketplace, so the satellite market was fragmented. Still later HD started and, as noted by another poster, new proprietary encryption systems were introduced, with the result that the old Digicipher II, used by C-Band subscribers for HD decryption, could not decrypt all or even most HD programming. Things had got so bad by 2000 that I gave up on C-Band and went back to cable. The executive summary for all of this is that there simply isn’t a market for consumer C-Band anymore. No matter how those of us who used to love it wish it were otherwise we have to learn to live without HD on C-Band.

Your timeline reflects mine almost exactly. In the 90s, my brother-in-law had just signed up with D*. He told me to come over and marvel at the PQ he got from digital satellite. My c-band ANALOG was much better than his D* digital.

I never had c-band HD, but I can only imagine how GREAT it must look.

Being a C-band guy, I have a hard time watching down-rezzed HD, so I'll live with the HD I can get (OTA and BUD) and HD-DVD. I don't really feel a need for Food channel etc. in HD anyway. . .

Willie

[quote=pappy97] Voom.

You can see how well that went.

I have a different story. I was a DBS very early adopter with the original Primestar. Of course, no HD back then, but they did very little compression compared with what they do now. All their channels looked terrific, twice as good as the satellite SD channels look now. Over the years, I had D* & E* both and every year the quality got a little worse as they kept adding more and more channels to a finite number of transponders. It happened so gradually, the average viewer didn't even notice. Finally, it became the muddled, muddy mess of overcompression we see today. The picture quality died the death of a thousand cuts. But those first few years? They were stellar, better than DVD looks now (less filtering).

[quote=pappy97] I think you mean less-heavily compressed rather than uncompressed HD... If you wanted full uncompressed pure HD - then you're talking around 1.2Gbs not the 10-20Mbs currently used for final broadcast... This is totally out of the question for satellite distribution using current technology (though it is possible for fibre - and was used in Germany for the World Cup distribution between stadia and the IBC)

However full, resolution, less-heavily compressed HD IS possible - you just have to find more transponder space and increase your transmission costs to provide it.

Very good quality 1920x1080 MPEG2 HD can be carried using 25-34Mbs if you aren't concatenating, and are happy with 4:2:0.

Other than some backhauls, I don't think there's much 4:2:2 HD on satellite in the US - there's too many IRDs that can't receive it.

[quote=sneals2000] hmmmmmmm

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/2952/nbcnflhdcz9.jpg

Except they never really delivered what they promised ... in a consumer friendly way ... and they were at least 3-4 years too early. ;)

I'll keep my C-Band dish until it's death. I can get enough HD to make me happy, and the SD is quite good on a 50" plasma. my only experience with the "small" dish was at my dentist's office on a 19" (?) LCD TV in SD and I couldn't see how people live with it, or even continue to pay for it. As long as I can get what I can on my C-Band dish and local TV I'm happy.

They also thought they were going to make money after 12 months with that too-early product. Silly people. Should've taken a 100 level class at some point.

While I would agree that it was ridiculous to think they would make money in 12 months rolling out a DBS Satellite Service, I would also point out that 9-11 threw the Country back into an economic recession (which one can argue that we still have not fully come out of) which slowed down the adoption of HDTV to a much slower rate than anyone had projected - we are seriously behind the curve everyone projected in the late 90s.

This economic recession caused Broadcast Stations to curtail spending on the DTV transistion and spending only the bare minimum and kept consumers from spending high dollars on early HDTV - slowing the adoption rate from both sides.

So will I - for HBO etc in HD.

However, it makes no sense to pay for the Denver 5 in SD on 4DTV; when for a few dollars more/month, I get 7 US Network + 3 Canadian + TSN/Rogers Sportnet all in HD on Star Choice.

The PQ of SC HD is clearly superior to SD on 4DTV

Thanks to Captain Midnight :mad: :p.

I remember when I first got D* in '96 the picture was stunning but as the compression has gone up as well as the screen size picture for 95% of the channels is now crap. Weekends even the HD is crap with ST on as they rape all the bandwidth they can... :mad:

Even my OTA isn't what it could be as the NBC/ABC stations have to Multicast weatherchannels and "Towercams" gotta wonder who would program a towercam into the brodacast stream, WHY? :confused: