I agree, this is the way to fix it all. Companies should require a minimum that results in a great PQ, or a provider cannot carry their channel.
A plea to Dish to do the right thing with Mpeg4 HD
- Thread starter Gary Murrell
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 118
- Views 13K
I agree, this is the way to fix it all. Companies should require a minimum that results in a great PQ, or a provider cannot carry their channel.
watching HD is not for simply a better image, it is for a breathtaking image, if people only knew real HD, it is so sad
yes, I would rather watch SD than downconverted garbage HD-Lite, that is the truth and that is just what I have done and are currently doing after Dish headed down it's current path
-Gary
yes, I would rather watch SD than downconverted garbage HD-Lite, that is the truth and that is just what I have done and are currently doing after Dish headed down it's current path
-Gary
You just lost so much credibility in this argument with that statement. That post is about as good as the guy who stated a few weeks ago that HBOHD looked "about the same" as dvd's upconverted.
Now, where's that unsubscribe button? Later.
DVD's via a SDI modified DVD player into a DVDO VP50 scaler do in fact look better than HD-Lite and on a 8 foot wide CRT projection system at that, try it and you shall see, simple as that
-Gary
-Gary
I Hope that this issue does get fixed very soon. I will be looking into what has changed and doing a full review as soon as I get back. 
For those who havn't seen.
The new encoders that are going in for the major suppliers of HD are much different than what you have seen. At the bit rate stated the 2 new sats by themselves will be able to produce around 768 HD channels.
The new encoders that are going in for the major suppliers of HD are much different than what you have seen. At the bit rate stated the 2 new sats by themselves will be able to produce around 768 HD channels.
Actually, Cuban stated on this very site that he had no problem with "HD Lite".
I've stated in multiple threads that the migration to MPEG4 is a good opportunity to boost HD PQ.
However we don't have access to customer survey data and subscription sales data that drive the economics of these decisions. We do know that the general public is not that demanding of the highest PQ. That they prioritize number of channels over PQ.
So E* is going to compromise PQ until there is enough bandwidth to provide both high quality PQ and a competitive number of channels. Even then I expect them to play it safe by not upping PQ too quickly at the risk of having to scale it back to add more channels in the not too distant future.
As far as Scott's predictions go, I suspect they are based upon information he has obtained from E*'s employees, possibly even E*'s upper management. However I wouldn't put 100% faith in what they are saying, because it is based upon a sequence of events coming to pass. Like all of the satellites deploying as expected and on time.
I like to think that as exceptionally good HDTVs become commonplace in the market, as Blu-Ray and HD DVD become inexpensive and commonplace, and as bandwidth becomes plentiful due to improved encoders and more satellites, that the public will expect top notch HD PQ and E* will deliver it. However those hopes are tempered by all of the historical precedents that suggest that won't happen. For example, SD PQ only marginally improved after good SDTV sets became plentiful and DVD players became cheap and commonplace.
I also do not hold out high hopes that the general public will demand high quality PQ. Much of this forum doesn't, and are willing to trade off PQ for more channels.
So while the technology is advancing, the demand just isn't there.
However we don't have access to customer survey data and subscription sales data that drive the economics of these decisions. We do know that the general public is not that demanding of the highest PQ. That they prioritize number of channels over PQ.
So E* is going to compromise PQ until there is enough bandwidth to provide both high quality PQ and a competitive number of channels. Even then I expect them to play it safe by not upping PQ too quickly at the risk of having to scale it back to add more channels in the not too distant future.
As far as Scott's predictions go, I suspect they are based upon information he has obtained from E*'s employees, possibly even E*'s upper management. However I wouldn't put 100% faith in what they are saying, because it is based upon a sequence of events coming to pass. Like all of the satellites deploying as expected and on time.
I like to think that as exceptionally good HDTVs become commonplace in the market, as Blu-Ray and HD DVD become inexpensive and commonplace, and as bandwidth becomes plentiful due to improved encoders and more satellites, that the public will expect top notch HD PQ and E* will deliver it. However those hopes are tempered by all of the historical precedents that suggest that won't happen. For example, SD PQ only marginally improved after good SDTV sets became plentiful and DVD players became cheap and commonplace.
I also do not hold out high hopes that the general public will demand high quality PQ. Much of this forum doesn't, and are willing to trade off PQ for more channels.
So while the technology is advancing, the demand just isn't there.
And I've said this multiple times. They made a huge marketing mistake ever letting viewers see real, full quality HD on satellite TV - especially before HD quality became commonplace in dvd . Had they started with HD Lite, most people would be of a completely different mindset. Now the home video industry is trying to play catch-up but they're caught in the middle of a format war.
There are certain trueisms that control the movie industry and the marketing path of video productions is one of them. A significant amount (in many cases most or all) of up-front production money is provided in exchange for exclusive (with time limits) video production rights.
This marketing path is crucial. After theater runs, the biggest money maker for the industry is DVD sales (and by extension, rentals), which is why video release almost always occurs before PPV. Then it's PPV followed by premium pay channels and so on. It's a proven system that nets the most $$ for any given production.
This is a trillion dollar industry that's not about to let their apple cart be upset by allowing people access to better picture quality from satellite than they currently get from dvd - especially if they'll have the ability for unlimited archive with no loss of quality.
There are certain trueisms that control the movie industry and the marketing path of video productions is one of them. A significant amount (in many cases most or all) of up-front production money is provided in exchange for exclusive (with time limits) video production rights.
This marketing path is crucial. After theater runs, the biggest money maker for the industry is DVD sales (and by extension, rentals), which is why video release almost always occurs before PPV. Then it's PPV followed by premium pay channels and so on. It's a proven system that nets the most $$ for any given production.
This is a trillion dollar industry that's not about to let their apple cart be upset by allowing people access to better picture quality from satellite than they currently get from dvd - especially if they'll have the ability for unlimited archive with no loss of quality.
Mpeg4 equals more bandwidth...which equals more HD channels...both D* and E* could care less about whether we want better PQ...we are already their customers, we've made it easy for them! Until E* or D* puts a customer service message board or blog on their own website for suggestions from their customers, then don't fool yourself and think that they care what you think, they already have your money, and they both understand that in the long run, whoever has the most HD channels is the champion and will attract more customers...at the end of the day, the "trendy" buyer has no understanding of full HD resolution...all he/she cares about is that he has N number of HD channels...
I worked as an installer from 2000 till 2006, Ive seen dish's hd when it first came out all the way up to mid 06 when I left, Ive seen dish hd on cheap tv's and on high end systems costing more than the average 2 story golf course community home. Dish then and now has had the best PQ in sd and HD even with the downrezing wether done by them or by the host source and a couple of the true A/V fanatics that I have dealt with even though they saw the PQ go down with the addition more channels and the downrezing still loved dish hd and were adament about not going to any other provider. I recently saw a toshiba blue ray playing a dvd through a sony large lcd set and I liked it but I am not foolish enough to think that this is how hd is supposed to look, broadcast signals wether ota, cable, or dbs will never be able to compete with a dvd player wich has always provided a better PQ.
Gary you want perfect and thats fine but dont stop to think that the average Joe consumer has no idea what good hd looks like because we do know but we arent going to be nit pickers about it when hd is not the standard yet. IF you stop and really look at it HD is still in its first year status as a technology and like a first year model run on a car its going to have its quirks and probematic issues but once it gets past that first year alot of things get ironed out. With two companies saying outloud that they will be adding a large portion of HD content soon and one that is probably going to do the same but being hush hush this will be what pushes HD out of its first year and into the start of good things to come.
Have some faith and give it some time but dont expect miracles, rather expect market driven decisions with equipment limitations based on customer demands wich all has to be wieghed to balance things out and if it means that there will continue to be some channels in hd lite well then live with it or move on to something else.
Gary you want perfect and thats fine but dont stop to think that the average Joe consumer has no idea what good hd looks like because we do know but we arent going to be nit pickers about it when hd is not the standard yet. IF you stop and really look at it HD is still in its first year status as a technology and like a first year model run on a car its going to have its quirks and probematic issues but once it gets past that first year alot of things get ironed out. With two companies saying outloud that they will be adding a large portion of HD content soon and one that is probably going to do the same but being hush hush this will be what pushes HD out of its first year and into the start of good things to come.
Have some faith and give it some time but dont expect miracles, rather expect market driven decisions with equipment limitations based on customer demands wich all has to be wieghed to balance things out and if it means that there will continue to be some channels in hd lite well then live with it or move on to something else.
Dont be so quick to asume that either provider doesnt care about PQ, they do and they know that a growing number of their customers do as well. This isnt the automakers of the mid 70's when they became dinorsaurs, this business is highly cut throat and if the local cable company has a better PQ then people give it no second thought about jumping ship to another. Cable and DBS providers know this and are working to be the one with the better PQ, DBS is going with Mpeg4 while cable providers are laying fiber and rewiring whole regions, better hd PQ is the next step as more and more people go to hd.
IMHO, at the end of the day, it will be about content (channels) not PQ. But who knows...the PQ crowd might get some love...but the market will drive it and i think at the end of the day most people want the most they can have of something, so whoever has the most HD channels will win...
I am just taking a step back and waiting to see what happens. My 18 month commitment with E* ends next month. I have been with E* for 10+ years and I am one of the early adopters who saw the quality HD E* had several years ago. I hope D* succeeds in their efforts in adding more HD channels. I also hope they provide more bandwidth to improve picture quality. This will force E* and cable to compete in the HD arena. I hope E* makes the right decision too. As I said before, I am not loyal to any provider. The one that has the best quality HD and the channels that I want, at the best price, will get my business. So it is written.
I don't sub to more HD because, as I noted, most of the best HD for me is OTA. I won't pay $15 a month more to get the new HD package when there are only a couple of channels in the additional bunch that I would ever watch.
The former, plus follow the business news over the past several years and note some of the circumstances of management turnover.
In 2003, Dish HD PQ was better than any of my OTA HD locals. Now it isn't as good as any of my OTA HD locals, even the couple that sub-channel their broadcasts.
I've seen Comcast's latest HD and its PQ is as good or better than than of Dish HD. I'm not jumping to Comcast yet because the current economics (I have the old Dish HDPak and I own my HD receiver) favor Dish over Comcast. When Dish pushes to end MPEG2 HD and turns off HD to my Dish 811 receiver, unless they find a way to keep my monthly bill the same without me dropping current programming, I'm probably off to Comcast.
Carl B.
Yes it is funny to see some of the big guys moaning about the HD PQ are also the same guys saying "When will Dish add (channel name here) in HD."
As I posted in the pub members area, I do believe that we are near the end of the HD Lite Generation. Companies are not going to show full HD because they want to... it will be because "The have to!"
Naaaaaah! I'm just a little guy Scott, 5'8" tall. Rather unimportant too. But I do love beautifully colored leaves, especially when fall is near.
