# Another Good-bye to D*



## teasip (Aug 24, 2002)

Made the switch to Verizon FiOS TV today. So far so good. Called to cancel service earlier and indivdual did spend some time trying to get me to reconsider. Not dissatisfied with D* but just felt Verizon had more to offer. Signal quality is very nice though I was getting my locals via OTA. Just realized as well that the installer hooked my OTA TV to the network as well (without a box). Thanks to all who provided interesting insight and direction over the many years.


----------



## rminsk (Jun 4, 2002)

I think we are going to start seeing more and more of these messages as other services are providing much better value than DirecTV. I hope they have a good DVR...


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

rminsk said:


> I think we are going to start seeing more and more of these messages as other services are providing much better value than DirecTV. I hope they have a good DVR...


Much better value, and much, much better PQ.


----------



## daneyul (Jun 25, 2006)

The Verizon DVR is horrible compared to Tivo's. They do come with dual tuner's, though, and are HD. But the interface is so inept, its torture to use to anyone who's used a Tivo.

The best solution would be Tivo with the FIOS set top box but...
using a Tivo with the Fios set top box requires use of the IR cables, so the channel changing is very slow--which is a irritating, because the Fios STB does have the necessary serial port to enable synching with the Tivo that way...but Verizon, in its wisdom, refuses to turn on those ports.


----------



## teasip (Aug 24, 2002)

I am not able to toggle between the two tuners since there is only one input cable but I think I can live with that (pending release of Series 3).


----------



## fastep (May 22, 2004)

teasip said:


> I am not able to toggle between the two tuners since there is only one input cable but I think I can live with that (pending release of Series 3).


Try the "swap" button on the remote (if you have one).


----------



## teasip (Aug 24, 2002)

No such animal.


----------



## StEvEY5036 (Jul 9, 2003)

teasip said:


> Made the switch to Verizon FiOS TV today. So far so good. Called to cancel service earlier and indivdual did spend some time trying to get me to reconsider. Not dissatisfied with D* but just felt Verizon had more to offer. Signal quality is very nice though I was getting my locals via OTA. Just realized as well that the installer hooked my OTA TV to the network as well (without a box). Thanks to all who provided interesting insight and direction over the many years.


What did the rep offer you?


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

The FIOS DVR is the Moto 6412 series, which is most of what Comcast uses. It's an okay DVR, and it's what Tivo is porting to for Comcast.

You should also be able to use the Series 3 HD Tivo when that comes out, as FIOS TV should support CC by then.


----------



## teasip (Aug 24, 2002)

Never offered anything, just the usual "we're upgrading our system, new products, yada, yada, yada". Very pleasant individual.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

teasip said:


> Made the switch to Verizon FiOS TV today. So far so good. Called to cancel service earlier and indivdual did spend some time trying to get me to reconsider. Not dissatisfied with D* but just felt Verizon had more to offer. Signal quality is very nice though I was getting my locals via OTA. Just realized as well that the installer hooked my OTA TV to the network as well (without a box). Thanks to all who provided interesting insight and direction over the many years.


Good luck. We who stay with DTV (or stay with DISH, or whoever) owe a debt of gratitude to anyone who makes the leap. Churn is what they all fear, and is the prime motivator for all vendors to improve their offerings. Capitalism and freedom from monopoly work pretty good sometimes. After all, if folks just rolled over, DTV wouldn't need a retention department, and would never have given me a HR10 for "free"  .


----------



## kbohip (Dec 30, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> Good luck. We who stay with DTV (or stay with DISH, or whoever) owe a debt of gratitude to anyone who makes the leap. Churn is what they all fear, and is the prime motivator for all vendors to improve their offerings. Capitalism and freedom from monopoly work pretty good sometimes. After all, if folks just rolled over, DTV wouldn't need a retention department, and would never have given me a HR10 for "free"  .


So very true. Let's face it, it was cable's ineptitude and sky high price so many years ago that brought about Dish Network and Directv in the first place. There's nothing better than competition for consumers. The only problem is that nowadays there's less and less of it.


----------



## fjwagner (Jan 22, 2006)

kbohip said:


> So very true. Let's face it, it was cable's ineptitude and sky high price so many years ago that brought about Dish Network and Directv in the first place. There's nothing better than competition for consumers. The only problem is that nowadays there's less and less of it.


Not sure how you say that there is less and less of it (competition). FIOS, Dish, D*, Comcast, TWC, AT and T, etc etc. Not to mention good ole fashioned OTA. Seems there is plenty of competition as people come and go from various services.


----------



## bgtimber75 (Jun 2, 2002)

AbMagFab said:


> You should also be able to use the Series 3 HD Tivo when that comes out, as FIOS TV should support CC by then.


I'm not sure why there is themiscomception about FIOS and CC. Maybe some areas don't offer it but I was able to get one from the beginning (about 3 months for me)


----------



## kbohip (Dec 30, 2003)

fjwagner said:


> Not sure how you say that there is less and less of it (competition). FIOS, Dish, D*, Comcast, TWC, AT and T, etc etc. Not to mention good ole fashioned OTA. Seems there is plenty of competition as people come and go from various services.


What I meant is fewer and fewer companies every year. IE, Comcast absorbing Adelphia. Voom gone, etc.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

kbohip said:


> What I meant is fewer and fewer companies every year. IE, Comcast absorbing Adelphia. Voom gone, etc.


I'd argue there are more, not fewer. Sure, there are mergers, but does Comcast absorbing Adelphia really affect competition? No, since in almost all cases cable TV companies are monopolies anyway, in the sense that a given area typically only has one cable provider.

Yes, Voom is gone, but I don't know that Voom was ever a serious competitor so much as a niche provider (and clearly a niche that wasn't viable financially at the time). But they've been replaced by the telcos, who are a much more serious threat to cable and satellite...at least the two big ones are. Who knows what Qwest is up to.


----------



## whalerfan (Nov 9, 2004)

The real issue is that there is really no competition. Here in CT it's either cable or the dish. The only real competition is in the cellular field and here it seems there is a bit of collusion with everyone offering basically the same plans at the same prices. But why not give me a choice of what cable company I'd can choose? Why not give me the choice of which phone company I can choose? The only real phone competition is with VOIP. Even there a company like Comcast has a very high price $39.95 compared with Vonage or Sunrocket or even AT&T. Perhaps being able to choose a different phone company (Verizon, Quest) would spur lower prices. I'm stuck with AT&T (formerly SNET) and I gave up on them almost 2 years ago.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

AbMagFab said:


> The FIOS DVR is the Moto 6412 series, which is most of what Comcast uses. It's an okay DVR, and it's what Tivo is porting to for Comcast.
> 
> You should also be able to use the Series 3 HD Tivo when that comes out, as FIOS TV should support CC by then.


made me think...

Doesn't tivo have a deal with Verizon to have their cell phone control your tivo? Maybe they can work out a comcast sort of dela with verizon too. The code will be done for the most part... it would be pretty quick to implement... I dont see a downside to Verizon if Tivo set it up so it was an option and they split the profits....

Wouldn't that be cool?!?!?!

Between comcast and verizon (in a few years) they could reach a really big percentage of the populaiton - probabluy not half but still a large chunk...


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

whalerfan said:


> The real issue is that there is really no competition. Here in CT it's either cable or the dish. The only real competition is in the cellular field and here it seems there is a bit of collusion with everyone offering basically the same plans at the same prices. But why not give me a choice of what cable company I'd can choose? Why not give me the choice of which phone company I can choose? The only real phone competition is with VOIP. Even there a company like Comcast has a very high price $39.95 compared with Vonage or Sunrocket or even AT&T. Perhaps being able to choose a different phone company (Verizon, Quest) would spur lower prices. I'm stuck with AT&T (formerly SNET) and I gave up on them almost 2 years ago.


20 years ago the only significant player in the pay tv market was cable.

Today there is cable and dbs.

In 10 years there will be cable, dbs, and the phone companies.

In each group there are less players and more mergers are likely, but there are now 2 TV pipes into the home for the vast majority of the country and now a 3rd pipe is buing built.

Cell phones being the same? Have you compared Verizon's pricing to Sprints?


----------



## hsindogg (Oct 24, 2003)

I can't wait for FiOS to get to my area...supposedly by the fall.


----------



## teasip (Aug 24, 2002)

I gotta tell you, I watched the NASCAR race on TNT-HD today with FiOS and man was it nice.


----------



## smith13 (Apr 29, 2004)

Hope you're not a big football fan. DTV might not have everything for everybody but what's the point of jumping back and forth between providers? As long as DTV has Sunday Ticket and a decent amount of HD channels I will not be going anywhere. And they have increased the amount of HD channels since they first started to offer it and before long they will have more.


----------



## dishrich (Jan 16, 2002)

fjwagner said:


> Not sure how you say that there is less and less of it (competition). FIOS, Dish, D*, Comcast, TWC, AT and T, etc etc. Not to mention good ole fashioned OTA. Seems there is plenty of competition as people come and go from various services.


I CAN say it also, because it's very TRUE, at least in my area as well...

First, let start off the bat by telling you we don't have ANY overbuilders here & probably NEVER will. Not only in the city of Springfield itself, but in all the surrounding communities as well.

Now, let me tell you about our "broadband options" - in about 1/2 of Springfield, the ONLY option we have is Insight cable f/cable modem service. AT&T (formerly SBC) has choosen to halt it's so called "project lightspeed" (read DSL) nework upgrades in their service areas in & around Springfield. I live in an established subdivision that is in a part of town that STILL can't get ANY DSL service, & probably won't anytime soon. And let me tell you, the cable modem service many of us are getting from Insight currently is NOTHING to write home about - but we're stuck with it, with no other (practical) options.

The ONLY other option is wireless broadband, but due to the locations of the towers, you almost have to have a TV tower to mount the x-mit/receive antenna to make it work, which in many subdivisions is NOT a viable option, either.

Now, in almost all of the surrounding towns, they have Verizon as their local phone service. Verizon will NOT be rolling out FIOS in these little towns - matter of fact, the ONLY town where they are even talking about it is in Bloomington-Normal, which is an hour drive north of Springfield. On the contrary, Verizon does NOT even offer DSL in ANY of these small towns, so the ONLY broadband option they have is (again) the local cable TV co, which (fortunately) they offer. The cable co vary from town to town, (Insight, Cass, Greene County, Mediacom) so it's potluck on the pricing/service you get.

Now, as far as TV service goes, again the ONLY option (besides DBS obviously) is the local cable co. While Insight is fairly decent (they STILL do NOT offer Boomerang   ) they are lacking in the HD department. (although they do offer ALL the local stations that are in HD currently - we still do NOT have CBS in HD, as our local affiliate is sitting on it's a$$) The poor suckers outside of Springfield get choices such as Mediacom & Greene County cable. Neither of these companies even KNOW what HD is & not only does Greene County NOT offer HD, they don't offer DVR or on-demand. They can't even offer decent reception - you could get better reception with a coat hanger on the back of your TV! 

Oh & while we're talking DBS - it will be a long time before we ever see OUR HD locals on DBS. Hell, we JUST got our SD locals only about a year ago on DBS! 

So, while YOU may have an endless list of options, DON'T assume everyone else does, too!


----------



## teasip (Aug 24, 2002)

My standard network NFL games are plenty and what I might miss I can catch up on via Sportscenter or somesuch.


----------



## fjwagner (Jan 22, 2006)

dishrich said:


> So, while YOU may have an endless list of options, DON'T assume everyone else does, too!


the original post spoke in generalities and in that scenario there is plenty of competition. In any specific locality, there may be less; which in your case sounds correct. I am fortunate to live in Houston in that regard I do have plenty of options. However, I would love to trade the traffic for some of the benefits you have in a smaller town even if it meant a few less tv options. Fred


----------



## dishrich (Jan 16, 2002)

fjwagner said:


> However, I would love to trade the traffic for some of the benefits you have in a smaller town even if it meant a few less tv options. Fred


That's probably true, but you can do SO much better than Springpatch, IL! (& I am NOT talking about in a broadband sense...)


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

smith13 said:


> Hope you're not a big football fan. DTV might not have everything for everybody but what's the point of jumping back and forth between providers? As long as DTV has Sunday Ticket and a decent amount of HD channels I will not be going anywhere. And they have increased the amount of HD channels since they first started to offer it and before long they will have more.


Huh? Aside from locals, they added: ESPN2, TNT, and UHD - not a stellar array of HD.

And what's your basis for "before long they will have more"? They are now almost TWO YEARS from when they said they would double their HD offering, and they've added a total of 3 channels. They have yet to double it from that original statement.

DirecTV is falling fast, IMO.


----------



## fjwagner (Jan 22, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> Huh? Aside from locals, they added: ESPN2, TNT, and UHD - not a stellar array of HD.
> 
> And what's your basis for "before long they will have more"? They are now almost TWO YEARS from when they said they would double their HD offering, and they've added a total of 3 channels. They have yet to double it from that original statement.
> 
> DirecTV is falling fast, IMO.


From my standpoint I pretty much have what I want for HD content. I am not interested in watching most of the former Voom channels, but am 90%happy with locals, ESPN, ESPN2, HBO, Showtime and occassionally UHD and HDNET. What I would like to have is FoxNews, OLN, and FoxSports SW. However, those are going to be driven by the originator not D* or Dish or cable. I did see that the RSN's are starting to dabble in HD but one must have the H20 which I dont want. Since we all probably have different tastes to some degree, the choice between Dish and D* is a good thing. I dont see a reason to even consider switching. Others may for good reason.


----------



## C McB (Nov 3, 2001)

dishrich said:


> That's probably true, but you can do SO much better than Springpatch, IL! (& I am NOT talking about in a broadband sense...)


DTV used to provide the network feed for CBS if you lived in Springfield. If you now have cable, I guess you wouldn't qualify for that.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

dishrich said:


> So, while YOU may have an endless list of options, DON'T assume everyone else does, too!


That's not the point. Yes, people in smaller towns or rural areas have fewer choices. This is hardly a new development.

The point is things are not getting worse; in other words, you're not losing options, even if cablecos or telcos merge.

Verizon is likely not investing much in the area because, by and large, Illinois is not their state and they are likely focusing on their main territories first.

If AT&T halted their Lightspeed deployment (meaning they started it at one point) then most likely they're getting resistance from a local town.


----------



## dishrich (Jan 16, 2002)

cheer said:


> If AT&T halted their Lightspeed deployment (meaning they started it at one point) then most likely they're getting resistance from a local town.


Why WOULD a town resist the Lightspeed deployment - that's a new one on me.   
And, I worked with SEVERAL [email protected]&T for the past 20+ years that are involved with this issue.

Whatever the case, I can promise you THAT is NOT the problem down here - AT&T is just not doing it here, presumably so they can concentrate in other areas. It's NOT a shock - we hicks down here in Springpatch have been used to this for YEARS from the likes of AT&T & cable co.


----------



## dishrich (Jan 16, 2002)

C McB said:


> DTV used to provide the network feed for CBS if you lived in Springfield. If you now have cable, I guess you wouldn't qualify for that.


Having cable TV does NOT disqualify you for ANY distant network feeds. (that part of the law was removed several years ago) BUT, because both D* & E* now offer our locals, they will no longer activate the NY CBS feeds.

(BUT, I still DO get them, in BOTH SD & HD, since I "moved" to Chicago...   )


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

dishrich said:


> Why WOULD a town resist the Lightspeed deployment - that's a new one on me.
> And, I worked with SEVERAL [email protected]&T for the past 20+ years that are involved with this issue.


Towns want AT&T to negotiate franchise agreements, just as a cableco would. AT&T doesn't want to do this -- they don't mind paying fees, but they don't want to deal with every group of administrators, selectmen, etc. in every municipality. (Some towns also have other requirements that AT&T/Verizon don't want to deal with, like 100% coverage rules, etc.) In several places, lawsuits have been filed.


> Whatever the case, I can promise you THAT is NOT the problem down here - AT&T is just not doing it here, presumably so they can concentrate in other areas. It's NOT a shock - we hicks down here in Springpatch have been used to this for YEARS from the likes of AT&T & cable co.


Again, this is hardly new in small towns/rural areas. Any service like this will initially concentrate on places where population size/density makes things more attractive.


----------



## dishrich (Jan 16, 2002)

cheer said:


> Towns want AT&T to negotiate franchise agreements, just as a cableco would. AT&T doesn't want to do this -- they don't mind paying fees, but they don't want to deal with every group of administrators, selectmen, etc. in every municipality. (Some towns also have other requirements that AT&T/Verizon don't want to deal with, like 100% coverage rules, etc.) In several places, lawsuits have been filed.


YOUR talking about for the IPTV service they are starting - I was ONLY talking about getting DSL service down here, which they were _supposed_ to have finished ages ago down here & which does NOT require any of these things you mentioned. (when they started talking about DSL BEFORE all this IPTV stuff came to frutition, they ALSO called it PL back then as well) I could care less about their "cable like" service.



> Again, this is hardly new in small towns/rural areas. Any service like this will initially concentrate on places where population size/density makes things more attractive.


Yea, the capital of IL, with a current pop of over 111,000, is SUCH a small, rural town...  
We's just now got indoor plumbing recently...


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

dishrich said:


> YOUR talking about for the IPTV service they are starting - I was ONLY talking about getting DSL service down here, which they were _supposed_ to have finished ages ago down here & which does NOT require any of these things you mentioned. (when they started talking about DSL BEFORE all this IPTV stuff came to frutition, they ALSO called it PL back then as well) I could care less about their "cable like" service.
> 
> Yea, the capital of IL, with a current pop of over 111,000, is SUCH a small, rural town...
> We's just now got indoor plumbing recently...


Pretty much goes the same for the "small town" up north, called Chicago...

A significant amount of the greater Chicago area can't get DSL... Heck a lot of it can't get broadband of any type (except for SAT).

They haven't gotten an agreement let alone broken ground on any type of FIOS or fiber based infrustructure....

It is going to be a LONG time before there is a forth choice (OTA, Cable, SAT)...

I guess that Great Fire did more damage then we all thought...


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

dishrich said:


> Why WOULD a town resist the Lightspeed deployment - that's a new one on me.
> And, I worked with SEVERAL [email protected]&T for the past 20+ years that are involved with this issue.
> 
> Whatever the case, I can promise you THAT is NOT the problem down here - AT&T is just not doing it here, presumably so they can concentrate in other areas. It's NOT a shock - we hicks down here in Springpatch have been used to this for YEARS from the likes of AT&T & cable co.


"home rule", free cable, who knows, but clearly it takes much longer to deal with each individual town then make a deal with the state legislature. that seems to be the way verizon is moving- give us the whole state (or at least a whole county) and we'll install fios TV- if they have to go town by town they walk away and spend the money in the states that gave in...


----------



## dishrich (Jan 16, 2002)

MichaelK said:


> "home rule", free cable, who knows, but clearly it takes much longer to deal with each individual town then make a deal with the state legislature. that seems to be the way verizon is moving- give us the whole state (or at least a whole county) and we'll install fios TV- if they have to go town by town they walk away and spend the money in the states that gave in...


Re-read my reply to cheers - I was ONLY, talking about DSL service; NOT the IPTV service. Telcos do NOT have to "deal" with ANY towns before they can offer DSL service, so you can't use that excuse for SBC NOT offering DSL, OK?


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

dishrich said:


> Re-read my reply to cheers - I was ONLY, talking about DSL service; NOT the IPTV service. Telcos do NOT have to "deal" with ANY towns before they can offer DSL service, so you can't use that excuse for SBC NOT offering DSL, OK?


I cant speak for what ATT/SBC but Verizon basically has told their states that they play along nicely with the whole FIOS TV or that Verizon will essetnially stop all non-regulated investement in the state. They essentailly threatened NJ to take their bat and ball and go home for the past 2--3 years untill the state gave them the TV franchise.

THe verizon CEO gets right to the point and threatens to take his capital money and the jobs it will creat to states that give in to his demands.

I dont know about ATT but I wonder if something similar is going on?


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

dishrich said:


> YOUR talking about for the IPTV service they are starting - I was ONLY talking about getting DSL service down here, which they were _supposed_ to have finished ages ago down here & which does NOT require any of these things you mentioned. (when they started talking about DSL BEFORE all this IPTV stuff came to frutition, they ALSO called it PL back then as well) I could care less about their "cable like" service.


Doesn't matter what you care about. Project Lightspeed is a network upgrade, period, but local municipalities have tied its implementation to the U-Verse IPTV offering, and are blocking THE NETWORK UPGRADE.


> Yea, the capital of IL, with a current pop of over 111,000, is SUCH a small, rural town...
> We's just now got indoor plumbing recently...


Where I come from, 111,000 isn't a very large city. Chicago has larger suburbs. And combined with Decatur AND Champaign-Urbana, it's still only DMA #82.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

dishrich said:


> Re-read my reply to cheers - I was ONLY, talking about DSL service; NOT the IPTV service. Telcos do NOT have to "deal" with ANY towns before they can offer DSL service, so you can't use that excuse for SBC NOT offering DSL, OK?


Yes, he can. You clearly don't understand the politics behind all this.

AT&T wants to do a widespread network upgrade ("Project Lightspeed"). Over this network they plan to offer enhanced VDSL, an IPTV offering called U-Verse, and (eventually) voice (and VoIP).

AT&T is not investing in local network infrastructure upgrades (except as warranted by maintenance requirements) that are not part of Lightspeed. This is a purely financial decision, and one that makes all kinds of sense.

Municipalities can block (and are blocking) this upgrade because it involves installing new, large VRADs all over the place. Municipalities want to wet their beaks and could care less about preventing consumers from getting access to new technologies or increased competition.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

MichaelK said:


> I cant speak for what ATT/SBC but Verizon basically has told their states that they play along nicely with the whole FIOS TV or that Verizon will essetnially stop all non-regulated investement in the state. They essentailly threatened NJ to take their bat and ball and go home for the past 2--3 years untill the state gave them the TV franchise.
> 
> THe verizon CEO gets right to the point and threatens to take his capital money and the jobs it will creat to states that give in to his demands.
> 
> I dont know about ATT but I wonder if something similar is going on?


This is exactly what is going on with AT&T, and quite frankly any CEO that decides otherwise should be fired for gross incompetence. Spend money where it will be effective.


----------



## serenstarlight (Aug 17, 2003)

AbMagFab said:


> Huh? Aside from locals, they added: ESPN2, TNT, and UHD - not a stellar array of HD.
> 
> And what's your basis for "before long they will have more"? They are now almost TWO YEARS from when they said they would double their HD offering, and they've added a total of 3 channels. They have yet to double it from that original statement.
> 
> DirecTV is falling fast, IMO.


There were actual news releases that stated dtv was scheduled to launch 2 satellites last year (which they did) and 2 satellites next yr to help increase the quantity of hd channels. In the news release it stated that they will be providing up to 150 nationally provided channels by 2007 as well as local channels in several markets. 
So lets see so we're 8 months into the 2 yr time frame that they provided they have launched 34 markets for local channels, 1 additional channel for the hd package, and various RSNs. I think that so far they've kept up with their promise to add more hd channels. Directv doesn't make news releases without having something substantial to back up their statements.


----------



## super dave (Oct 1, 2002)

And in a year if they launch all the HD they claim they will, I will return. Right now I am enjoying my 35 channels of HD bliss.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

serenstarlight said:


> There were actual news releases that stated dtv was scheduled to launch 2 satellites last year (which they did) and 2 satellites next yr to help increase the quantity of hd channels. In the news release it stated that they will be providing up to 150 nationally provided channels by 2007 as well as local channels in several markets.
> So lets see so we're 8 months into the 2 yr time frame that they provided they have launched 34 markets for local channels, 1 additional channel for the hd package, and various RSNs. I think that so far they've kept up with their promise to add more hd channels. Directv doesn't make news releases without having something substantial to back up their statements.


I think they always say they will "have the capacity to carry up to 150 HD national channels"- dont ever say they will ever have 150 channels. Just a silly aside...

BUT- why would anyone think they will quickly load up on national HD content? It's been about a year now since htey got the first spaceway up with LIL capability. They have said umptten times in their press releases that the 2 spacewasys will have the capacity for 500 LIL channels. They aren't even close to HALF that. Perhaps by year end they will have 250 LIL channels (being generous)- so after a year of deployment they will still only have used half their availible LIL capacity. Only just this month did they add the RSN's. THey still dont have a single PBS channel that I'm aware of. And I think they only carry the big 4 except in 1 or 2 cases where the big 4 extort an independant/wb/cw/upn/my type channel that the same station group also owns.

So I wouldn't hold my breath that they will quickly use any capacity that they launch....

At best, it's another 9 months till they get a significant amount of national HD up and running- with the uncertainties of sat launches- it might be another 18 months before they launch any significant national HD.

might be a good year to test out cable and take advantage of the cheap first year pricing and see what Directv has in 12 months....


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

serenstarlight said:


> There were actual news releases that stated dtv was scheduled to launch 2 satellites last year (which they did) and 2 satellites next yr to help increase the quantity of hd channels. In the news release it stated that they will be providing up to 150 nationally provided channels by 2007 as well as local channels in several markets.
> So lets see so we're 8 months into the 2 yr time frame that they provided they have launched 34 markets for local channels, 1 additional channel for the hd package, and various RSNs. I think that so far they've kept up with their promise to add more hd channels. Directv doesn't make news releases without having something substantial to back up their statements.


And you're forgetting the news releases before that where they promised to double HD content by the end of the year (2004, yes 2004). In that year, aside from NY and LA locals, they added --- UHD! Wow.

Since then, that promise is still unfulfilled. They have only added ESPN2HD and TNTHD. That's 3 - count em - three national HD channels in over 2 years.

There's no way you could possibly claim DirecTV has kept up their end of the HD bargain. Most cable companies, and Dish and Fiber TV have long ago passed DirecTV in HD content. It's not even a race anymore. DirecTV has a long way to go just to catch up.

Again, I restate, DirecTV has lost the HD battle. Now watch as they lose the customer retention battle.


----------



## wje (Jan 8, 2005)

D*'s HD content, or lack thereof, is one of the main reasons I left. I got tired of the endless promises of vast HD content that never materialized. It seems all the new satellite capacity is being used for locals.

Which brings up an interesting question... why so much concentration on locals? Many people can get locals OTA. My personal theory was the lack of MPEG4 receivers and DVRs from D*; those slipped almost much as the promised HD rollout.

That was the other reason I left. Whenever D* actually starts delivering the promised content, it's going to be MPEG4. So, no HR10. Since the HR20 isn't a Tivo, there was no longer any reason for me to stay with D*. Cable isn't an option for me, nor is FIOS. So, that left only one choice.


----------



## FlWingNut (Mar 4, 2005)

wje said:


> D*'s HD content, or lack thereof, is one of the main reasons I left. I got tired of the endless promises of vast HD content that never materialized. It seems all the new satellite capacity is being used for locals.
> 
> Which brings up an interesting question... why so much concentration on locals? Many people can get locals OTA.


HD locals, maybe. I think D* is concentrating on locals because that's more important to more people than HD. I know I'm not planning on going HD for years. I'll wait until the TVs cost less than 1000 bucks. 

My SD picture is excellent. I'm more concerned about program content than in what format it's delivered, and D* does fine by me. I'm sure HD customers are still very much in the minority, but that will change, slowly, I think in the coming years.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

FlWingNut said:


> HD locals, maybe. I think D* is concentrating on locals because that's more important to more people than HD. I know I'm not planning on going HD for years. I'll wait until the TVs cost less than 1000 bucks.
> 
> My SD picture is excellent. I'm more concerned about program content than in what format it's delivered, and D* does fine by me. I'm sure HD customers are still very much in the minority, but that will change, slowly, I think in the coming years.


their current sats can only handle LIL not significant quanities of national HD. It's a limitation of their hardware currently.

(Not to say that LIL's aren't important- just that they dont have a choice really there is no other option currently - it's LIL's or nothing)


----------



## mtchamp (May 15, 2001)

Add me to the list of ex-DirecTV customers. Gone back to cable after 12 years August 21. Using 2 of my old SA's Series2's for now with Comcast and looking forward to the Comcast TiVo or the Series3 upgrade. I might even get the DT SA. 

Waiting to see exactly what the S3 will do for me. I can wait till the price drops and I buy a HD TV. I'm happy I'm done with DirecTV. It was going no where with TiVo. I had to run and SA alongside the DirecTiVo's I had for the HME features. I'm really, really glad I'm headed towards new technology with the S3 option. 

With a computer for everybody in the house, we watch much less TV and expect we'll probably soon have a subscription to a movie download rental service from TiVo.


----------

