What's the picture quality like at that price? Do they give you that great Vaseline on the lens look?
CBC Anik F1R at 107.3°W Scrambled?
- Thread starter jwwbrennan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 82
- Views 19K
- Status
What's the picture quality like at that price? Do they give you that great Vaseline on the lens look?
It looks better then both dish and dtv. Plus some channels on shaw are master feeds since they use the shaw platform to send out the media.
I also like being able to have both east and west coast feeds in HD. Plus I really like Discovery World Channel.
Brian... welcome to Canada. Not only do we get taxed up the wazoo, but also get taxed retroactively on previous purchases.
Is this a way of guaranteeing increased revenue for Shaw? On the surface, it appears so.
Highlighted what should be done. If Shaw wants to provide receivers and supply the 'signal', fine. Otherwise open the market to FTA type receivers by many producers. Use a CAM if they are intent of prohibiting their reception by their southern neighbor.
This is remarkably true and the result of political parties representing corporate entities rather than members representing the constituents who elect them. We get those parties because we complacently elect their members according to the information we gather through the media, which as it happens is owned and operated by the same few folks who profit from such shenanigans. It's a little like democracy but without pestering the electorate with the affairs of the country. The information age is tailored for those who control the information. In Canada most people choose between Bell (or one of the other media behemoths) delivering the CBC news or Bell delivering their own network's news (CTV). Some folks are convinced it is perfidious and completely illegal to watch television without paying a monthly tithe to at least one corporation.
I have Shaw Direct Basic service with all Canadian and American basic networks in SD and HD for $34.33/mo including taxes/fees. This is good value. The video quality is OK; HD is good to my eyes. But if watching something "seriously" from locals CBC, CTV, Global, I connect my amplified rabbit ears and receive 720p, 1080i, 1080i OTA respectively full screen. What a difference. Brian's comments above are valid. Most live in cities, and most just assume you buy satellite or cable since they want all the other non-Canadian channels anyway. Other than hobbyists, I don't know anybody in the general public in big cities who even understand about OTA and what is available. How would they? There is no general education about it unless they pursue it as a hobby interest.
Now...if I took those high-quality OTA HD sigs, coupled them into the fiber optic Internet service now on our street, I could probably supply interested parties with fine quality viewing. Maybe that's not authorized...
Now...if I took those high-quality OTA HD sigs, coupled them into the fiber optic Internet service now on our street, I could probably supply interested parties with fine quality viewing. Maybe that's not authorized...
Yes... We are very familiar with the taxes. We get the privilege of paying Canadian taxes as well as the brokerage and customs taxes on shipments made from our Canadian distributor.
My all time favourite, was purchasing an item in the U.S., having it sent to my U.S. UPS address, getting to the border and being taxed on the postage paid on the item, that was shipped point to point inside the U.S. Their point was it added to the value of the parcel. Canadian taxation is just ridiculous. While U.S. citizens can do a day trip to Canada, they can bring back $400.00 per person, tax free. Canadians going the other way? Nothing!!
Today, I went to my Member Of Parliaments office and lodged an official complaint, in regards to the CBC encrypting their C Band signals. My point was, we pay taxes towards it, so it should be free and clear.
Today, I went to my Member Of Parliaments office and lodged an official complaint, in regards to the CBC encrypting their C Band signals. My point was, we pay taxes towards it, so it should be free and clear.
where did you get this info? According to this Shaw wants to extend the LTSS signup until Nov 2013. Nowhere in the original LTSS contracts does it state anything about only lasting 2-3 months.
| Shaw's LTSS was just extended for another year, and was a requirement posed on them by the CRTC when they bought Global. Give them a call, they will check your postal code to see if you're eligible then email you a form to fill out. They then send you a receiver programmed to the local CBC,CTV &Global stations you recieved OTA before the transmitters were shut off. They also book an installer to come and install the dish and reciever. THERE IS NO CHARGES FOR ANYTHING ITS ALL FREE. I have it the lake and its great. |
| Loading... |
They do not cut you off ... been on it for over a year.
So let me get this straight. A public broadcaster... funded by tax dollars... that is supposed to be available free of charge to everyone in the nation... is encrypting their channel and preventing the very people they're supposed to be serving from viewing it... because... why, exactly?
Don't the Canadians foot the bill over at CBC with $1 billion in tax annually? PBS over here in the states only gets $420 million annually from the federal government and they try their hardest to make sure everyone can watch them free.
So Canadians are funding this network's encryption equipment too. This is like being forced to fund your neighbor's home security system.
Don't the Canadians foot the bill over at CBC with $1 billion in tax annually? PBS over here in the states only gets $420 million annually from the federal government and they try their hardest to make sure everyone can watch them free.
So Canadians are funding this network's encryption equipment too. This is like being forced to fund your neighbor's home security system.
Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to defend the CBC's decision cause I disagree with it but... I think (my uneducated view) the point underlined in red is key. From what I've read from the Canadian Broadcast Act... CBC is supposed to make available programming or content by the most efficient means possible which to the CBC execs is by satellite/cable TV/radio or internet.
Last edited:
Probably not correct to point fingers in this case as these signals are going to make money when encrypted. This is Canadian's "The Big DTV Transition Plan" in action.
Unfortunately, many of our Canadian friends must now subscribe to receive their "FREE" channels since many terrestrial transmitters have been turned off during their DTV transition.
Brian I qouted everything but I only want to refer to the "FREE" part. Just my unqualified layman's view but that's just it ... the Broadcast Act doesn't say access to CBC content is supposed to be "FREE" with respect to cost.
I didn't see that in the fine print either, but there was no contract with Shaw so technically they can do what ever they want. An hour+ on the phone gleaned nothing but two conversations with people who knew nothing of what I was talking about. I see their LTSS subscription as cruel false advertizing.
With all the problems up there isn't some parts of Canada block satellite dishes from being installed. So if you have to put up a dish to receive your tv signals then they tell you can't put up a dish that would stink. I believe Canada doesn't have OTARD rules like we have down in the states.
Dan Rose
Dan Rose
The act is written and managed by our government and its agencies, it is our choice to agree, disagree or complacently pony up for the substantial delivery charge (really only substantial for low and middle income families, the wealthy are OK on this one) for our tax funded free lunch. Where we don't have a choice is in paying for it even though we can't use it without paying some very rich corporations for it again. For some time the question has been about the funding of CBC, not whether or not they meet their mandate. I have been a fan of CBC for decades as they supported Canadians from coast to coast to coast, now that they have chosen a distributor operating model, the billing should be done by those who sell it retail. For the most part it is standard procedure to stop paying a supplier for a service when you have to go elsewhere to buy it.
How does paying a Murdoch corporation for the scrambling of a signal already being broadcast (thereby ensuring the people who paid for it can't receive it) make programming more available or efficient?
Last edited:
I guess it's my fault for being asleep on this, the free satellite service from Shaw including equipment and installation ended on November 30th.
LInk
O well I managed to get high speed internet here at last but at great expense (had to instal my own repeater and cable link), it's just the principle of it that bugs me.
LInk
O well I managed to get high speed internet here at last but at great expense (had to instal my own repeater and cable link), it's just the principle of it that bugs me.
- Status
