Scott Greczkowski said:
What a joke. There is not enough bandwidth available. If Dish were granted additional bandwidth do you think they would use it for HD locals? Hell no we would get more PPV and International Channels.
And IF dish were to offer HD locals, I am sure they would cost about $7.95 a month to get them.
I am thinking of registering
http://www.iwantmyfirewireonmy921.com
I believe Dish is NOT serious about HDTV.
I do believe you've hit the nail on the head.
None of them are going to get any more serious about Hd than they are forced to by competition and with the FCC and NAB giving the edge to cable, it's going to be a slow painfull process for us Sat customers and there's not a whole lot we can do about it.
Unless maybe we go in from the back door. This is a copy of something I posted this on the HDTV forum:
We know that for now, providers are probably only going to offer the bare
minimum HD they can get away with (and stay competitive) due to associated bandwidth costs and equipment problems but it seems to me that with all the widescreen tvs already out here and many more predicted for this year, that they'd be smart enough to realize the market potential for more widescreen programming now. I believe, in addition to the many
viewers that already own a widescreen tv, there are many more riding the
fence and just waiting for a sign before they take the plunge. More decent widescreen programming could be that sign.
The trouble is, the average tv viewer doesn't really understand the
technology and sees this mostly as just an HD issue, which currently
doesn't present much of a reason to go out and buy new equipment.
Most people that spend 2 to 4 grand on a widescreen tv very quickly become
aggravated every time they have to watch 4:3 programming on it. I think
most of them would be a lot more patient with the slow transition to HD if
bigger percentage of their SD programs were at least presented in a true widescreen format.
I'm not even talking enhanced definition. Take the "LBX" version of PPV
movies, they look real decent on a 16:9 tv. Personally, I no longer even
consider PPV unless it is in Letterbox. Even some ads are now being
presented in a wider aspect ratio and they look good. I don't believe it
costs much or any more to present an image in a wider format, it just takes
making the decision to do so.
Instead, if anything, they're cutting back. Letterbox PPVs is a good
example.
I'd be willing to bet that, if polled, most viewers would find having to
watch 4:3 programming on their 16:9 tv (zoomed, stretched or otherwise) is
as much, if not more, aggravating than the lack of HD.
Don't get me wrong, HD is great - anyone sees it - they love it - but most
of us live with the reality that it's going to take a while. I believe aspect ratio is a more relevant, every-day-aggravating issue and the signal
provider that addresses it first is going to have the biggest market share
of viewers while HD is still plodding along.
Just my long-winded 2 cents
WaltinVt