[dsmark2]

Given that I own an HDTV with the DirecTV receiver built in, I'm biased towards the DirecTV hardware winning out, BUT there is also the question of the number of boxes that would be swapped out.


According to Dish's website they serve 6 million homes and DirecTV serves 10 million. It would seem (assuming hardware is comparable) that the economics would lie in siding with the DirecTV hardware by a factor of 4 million units.


First question... Is the Dish hardware essentially better?


Honestly, I don't see how they would replace all the built-in components and Dish is (as far as I know) all easily swapped set top boxes. Nothing that I know of has built-in Dish hardware so I'd think that they could avoid the whole kettle of fish by going with the more intrenched DirecTV equipment.


I'd be willing to buy a replacement for what is in essence a DTC-100 built-in to my F38310, but I fear that that will not be an option and I'll have to settle for a cheezy outboard Dish unit as will every other HDTV owner with the DirecTV unit built in.


Honestly I don't care which hardware wins, so long as my TV isn't bas+ardized in the process because of a silly corporate culture decision.


Unless there is something I'm missing (like MPG vs MPG2 or ability to prevent piracy), it would seem that the logic would be to go with the DirecTV hardware.

 

[Lee L]

It seems at this point that it is not really a matter of Dish or Direct having their harware win out but it will likely be a 3rd system that might be able to work temporarily with both systems until the new one is fully implemented. There are new compression and modulation schemes out there that will require new boxes and this is the time to implement that kind of stuff. I would assume that they would have to give a replacement STB to anyone with a set having a built in tuner assuming it has inputs that can hook up to whatever STB output standard they settle on by then.


I don't know which is better, there are features on each that the other does not have. Many people prefer DirecTV guides to Dish's. I have a Dish 6000 and havent spent any time looking at a DirecTV guide in several years so the Dish guides do not bother me. A new system would have the advantage of pulling the best features from each and combining them into one awesome STB package.


There are some piracy issues with whatever they do as the DirecTv system has been heavily compromised. The Dish system has been compromised as well but seems to suffer from less hacking. I do not know whether that is because it is harder to hack or because DirecTV is bigger or that they have the Pro sports packages. A new system would probably use another scheme all together and many lessons have been learned since this stuff was designed.

 

[artshotwell]

Lee,


I think security is the main concern in unifying the two services. It sounds like EchoStar would like to move to a better (and more recently designed) security system.


Art

 

[ADent]

Charlie will NOT use the DirecTV security system. Can they see three satellites (the current 110 LNB does not count as it frequency shifts to gaps in the 119 LNB)?


Echostar's security is not impenetrable and if they can increase the memory, use the APG, switch to 8PSK, etc all the more reason for new boxes.


The current Dish boxes would choke on twice the number of channels in the guide, but theoretically could be used and save a bundle.

 

[rogo]

They are going to swap out *all* the boxes. First will come a box for new folk that works with both Dish and Directv's existing modulation and CAM (conditional-access module) schemes.


Eventually, they will move everyone to the new technology, which will use 8PSK for 50% more channel capacity per transponder without a loss of quality and a newer better CAM scheme that will -- like all copy protection -- be broken eventually, but will probably be more challenging for pirates.


The new era is dawning, and it's going to be great for television.


Mark

 

[thartnett]

Quote:

Originally posted by rogo Eventually, they will move everyone to the new technology, which will use 8PSK for 50% more channel capacity per transponder without a loss of quality Mark

8PSK I assume is a modulation technique. How does one alter the modulation method of a transponder already in orbit?


Tom

 

[DevoX]

Quote:

Originally posted by thartnett 8PSK I assume is a modulation technique. How does one alter the modulation method of a transponder already in orbit? Tom

Programmable trace routing.


-- Robert

 

[rogo]

I'm not sure what programmable trace routing is .... but I'm reasonably sure a transponder is just a conduit and doesn't really care what the modulation of the waveform looks like.


I used to help run the cable system in Palo Alto (well, I was on the board) and when we implemented cable-modem service, which was the first time we used 64QAM and BPSK modulation, we didn't change out any of the amplifiers. I think the situation is somewhat analogous.


There may need to be some reconfiguration of the transponders and precisely how they work, but they are designed to send electromagnetic waves in a particular set of frequencies. They are less concerned about what those waves look like.


Mark