Distant Network Information

[ltahoe7195]

It's pathetic, we now have the technology to offer ALL satellite customers all the networks from all the local channels across the US. If people are willing to pay a fee to get them, why shouldn't they be allowed to. These ridiculous laws were written years ago before HBO !! LOL. It's a joke. Why not just charge customers a certain amount of money to receive out of market networks and then have the networks split the revenue. How pathetic AND CLOSE MINDED are these idiots.

 

[Robert NTSC Archivist]

I agree I dont see why you cant gt any tv station in America as long as your willing to pay to get it.

 

[ThomasRz]

It's pathetic, we now have the technology to offer ALL satellite customers all the networks from all the local channels across the US.

Doubtful. Do you know how many local affiliates there are? Scrolling through the list would take forever. Besides I don't think that the most rabid technophile wants every local. Most would be repetition of network programming.

If people are willing to pay a fee to get them, why shouldn't they be allowed to.

I want to buy your house. Here is the fair market value. Don't want to sell? Too bad, it's mine!

These ridiculous laws were written years ago before HBO !! LOL. It's a joke.

Ha, ha, ha yep the most recent being waaaaay back in 2004! Do you think that Congress does not know how to change a law if it wants to?

Why not just charge customers a certain amount of money to receive out of market networks and then have the networks split the revenue. How pathetic AND CLOSE MINDED are these idiots.

Interesting idea. I guess if you were willing to make up the lost advertising revenue it might work. Ok any distant you want - $5,000/month!

Think people think.

 

[ThomasRz]

I agree I dont see why you cant gt any tv station in America as long as your willing to pay to get it.

However if the "price" were above what you wanted to pay you'd be screaming for price controls. Call the stations of your choice and make a deal with them. Then any DBS (including Dish) can beam the signal to your home. Nothing is preventing you from doing so. The reality is that you don't want to do all that work - you want the government to force another private entity to give you what you want at a price you deem fair. Now, isn't that really the truth?

 

[stone phillips420]

thomas if you wanna just get people upset maybe your posts should exclusively in the Pit area.
imho youre about as sharp as a bowling ball!
i call them as i see them
just because people post stuff that you dont agree with doesnt give you an invitation to start a fight in every thread

 

[Mr Tony]

thomas if you wanna just get people upset maybe your posts should exclusively in the Pit area.
imho youre about as sharp as a bowling ball!
i call them as i see them
just because people post stuff that you dont agree with doesnt give you an invitation to start a fight in every thread

:up :up

well said

 

[Mr Tony]

If people are willing to pay a fee to get them, why shouldn't they be allowed to.

I want to buy your house. Here is the fair market value. Don't want to sell? Too bad, it's mine!

Gee Tommy gets mad when people use the newspaper analagy yet he uses another apples to pineapple analagy

Hey Mr Kettle. Its your old buddy Mr Black.

 

[stone phillips420]

Hey Mr Kettle. Its your old buddy Mr Black.

lol

 

[ThomasRz]

Gee Tommy gets mad when people use the newspaper analagy yet he uses another apples to pineapple analagy

Hey Mr Kettle. Its your old buddy Mr Black.

I am not interesting in "picking fights." I am interested in the truth, logical thinking and legal behavior. Ok throw in "justice and the American way." The newpaper gambit has been tried repeatedly and people other than myself have demonstrated why it is inapt. My comparison goes directly to the attitude being shown by the poster.

I have X (be it a house or a tv signal).
You want to buy X.
I don't want to sell you X.
Therefore the solution is to get the government to force me to sell you X.

Seems right on target.

 

[stone phillips420]

I dont see all the hubbub about dns, im pissed too but can do nothing
dish broke the rules will pay the fine by passing costs on to us customers
and us the consumer must pay for dishes mistake
same story different day.
threre gone, if you still have them consider this you just won the lottery

if you really need dns go through nps to see if you qualify
no suprises dish/nps can and will change the rules when they see fit with no warnings been done before it will be done again

NO NEED TO BASH OR CALL PEOPLE IMPOSTORS!

imho the only imposter here is DISH as a satellite company lol, i couldnt resist

 

[ThomasRz]

Who called you an imposter? You really are Stone Phillips, aren't you?

I dont see all the hubbub about dns, im pissed too but can do nothing
dish broke the rules will pay the fine by passing costs on to us customers
and us the consumer must pay for dishes mistake
same story different day.
threre gone, if you still have them consider this you just won the lottery

if you really need dns go through nps to see if you qualify
no suprises dish/nps can and will change the rules when they see fit with no warnings been done before it will be done again

NO NEED TO BASH OR CALL PEOPLE IMPOSTORS!

imho the only imposter here is DISH as a satellite company lol, i couldnt resist

 

[stone phillips420]

Who called you an imposter? You really are Stone Phillips, aren't you?

nobody, thomasrz learn to read before you speak. my name is stone phillips420 clearly a difference my real name is phillip stoned420 lol
now when you wanna play 20 questions do so in the pit

DOES AYONE ELSE SEE A SHARP RISE IN THOMASRZ"S POSTS TODAY, trying to take the title away from ice ha goodluck

back to the topic of the day Distant Network Information

 

[orion6192]

I signed up with AllAmericanDirect.com not wanting cable at all ($45.00 install fee and $9.13 / month for lifeline) and really not wanting to switch to DirectTv because I have a $250.00 credit with Dish and pay yearly and that expires in April 2007. My impression so far is this sucks - the channel quality is no where near what Dish use to offer. It looks like I am watching on an over the air antenna in a bad storm - double images - horizontal scrolling line - fuzzy picture .

5731 - fairly clear picture / good surround sound
5732 - fairly clear / muted sound - almost like mono
5733 - double images / good sound
5734 - double images / muted sound - almost like mono
5735 - fairly clear / good surround sound
5736 - double images & fuzzy / muted sound - almost like mono
5737 - clear / good surround sound
5738 - fuzzy w/ horizontal line / muted sound - almost like mono

I e-mailed them about the quality today 12/2/06 and have not had a response yet - I will post when I get it.


Side note - I live in Cohocton, NY; signed up 12/1/06 at 7:55pm and had my channels at 3:30pm on 12/2/06.

At least I can get my broadcast networks which is a bonus but still a little disappointed.

Anyone else having the same results?

 

[odbrv]

Think people think.

I was visiting a friend in Mexico. He had a dish receiver and a 1.6 m dish. It was able to receive all local networks not on spot beams. He paid an annual fee to a local installer. He simply used the favorites feature to get the equivalent of NFL season ticket. It is interesting that Canadiens and Mexicans can get what we cannot. Sort of like the cheaper prescription drug deal. Once you let US politicians get involved , you are sure to get the raw deal.

 

[ltahoe7195]

Well Said, My Point EXACTLY !!

I was visiting a friend in Mexico. He had a dish receiver and a 1.6 m dish. It was able to receive all local networks not on spot beams. He paid an annual fee to a local installer. He simply used the favorites feature to get the equivalent of NFL season ticket. It is interesting that Canadiens and Mexicans can get what we cannot. Sort of like the cheaper prescription drug deal. Once you let US politicians get involved , you are sure to get the raw deal.

Exactly my point !!! It's a joke, Thomas, seems to be one of those guys that think he knows it all. The fact is, the US Politicians and Broadcasters are holding back technology. But you know what , Thomas, just wait , soon companies like AT&T with their broadband capabilities, will blow this whole system up. Companies like them will begin offering TV, long distance, high speed internet all on the computer, if you are willing to pay for it and they'll be nothing that anyone will be able to do to stop it. As soon as old farts like R. Murdoch drop dead and some new younger execs start realizing all the potential sales out there, this whole system will change. Just wait and see, we'll look back at 2006 in a few years and say "Oh yeah, I remember when Dish had to take all the Distant Networks off their programming". Meanwhile some other companies will be offering way more to their customers. It's coming, if you don't think it is, your head is in the sand.

Before you retort Thomas, remember this, do you really think that the broadcasters would be voluntarily going to Hi Def unless they had to by 2009 ?? No way in the world, my point is unless you FORCE broadcasters to come into the 21st century they won't, you can't hold back technological advances !!!! The public won't have it !!!

 

[Mr Tony]

I was visiting a friend in Mexico. He had a dish receiver and a 1.6 m dish. It was able to receive all local networks not on spot beams. He paid an annual fee to a local installer.

um, he was stealing just so you are aware.

 

[ltahoe7195]

One other point Thomas, just so that you know, you keep speaking of how much advertising revenue would be lost if distants were allowed to be received for anyone willing to pay. Guess what ?? Who the heck watches commercials anymore anyway with a DVR ?? I don't and as time goes on less and less people will. Using your logic, DVR's should have been banned and never allowed to go on the market. Are you saying that DVR's should be altered so that viewers are forced to watch the annoying commercials ??

 

[ThomasRz]

Exactly my point !!! It's a joke, Thomas, seems to be one of those guys that think he knows it all.

No, I know what I know and if someone states a falsehood I call him on it.

The fact is, the US Politicians and Broadcasters are holding back technology.

How? What technology is being "held back"? DNS, legal or not, uses the very same technology. Your real complaint is that you cannot do whatever you want with somebody else's property.

But you know what , Thomas, just wait , soon companies like AT&T with their broadband capabilities, will blow this whole system up.

So, why hasn't it happened as you imagine? Do you not understand the difference between a product and the method of delivery?

Companies like them will begin offering TV, long distance, high speed internet all on the computer, if you are willing to pay for it and they'll be nothing that anyone will be able to do to stop it.

Really? If AT&T started unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material, you can bet they would find themselves in court as E* has. This is the answer to the question above.

As soon as old farts like R. Murdoch drop dead and some new younger execs start realizing all the potential sales out there, this whole system will change.

It's really juvenile and rude to cheer over the future demise of a person. You are stuck on stupid. You think that Rupert orchestrated this whole event whereas it was Charlie Ergen's unethical and illegal behavior. Do you harbor some sexual fantasy about Charlie? It's the only reason I can think of that explains your total ignoring of his behavior and projection of his character onto Murdoch. Potential sales are an important force but are restricted in every endeavor to serve other societal interests. I can't force you to deal with reality. I hope that eventually you will become a more clear thinker.


Just wait and see, we'll look back at 2006 in a few years and say "Oh yeah, I remember when Dish had to take all the Distant Networks off their programming". Meanwhile some other companies will be offering way more to their customers. It's coming, if you don't think it is, your head is in the sand.

More and better services sounds great to me! I just don't believe that it should be done by stealing another person's property. If I kicked down your door and held a yard sale of your possessions, I'm sure I could make a few bucks. Would anything be wrong with that? After all somebody was willing to pay for your household goods. Where's the harm?


Before you retort Thomas, remember this, do you really think that the broadcasters would be voluntarily going to Hi Def unless they had to by 2009 ??

Of course not. The spectrum is regulated by the government. It has to be done on an all or nothing basis. If somehow we could magically wall off certain frequencies, I have no doubt that some entrepreneurial type would think digital tv the way to go and develop it if it were feasible to do so. You are confusing governmental functions with private business practices.

No way in the world, my point is unless you FORCE broadcasters to come into the 21st century they won't, you can't hold back technological advances !!!! The public won't have it !!!

To the extent your comment is true, Congress has chosen the timetable for introduction of new technologies and the rules for the protection of copyrighted material. Private industry has developed the platforms and standards. Both sides must work cooperatively to anything to happen. Again you are operating under the misconception that the government and some businesses would introduce great new and superb services if only cretins like Rupert weren't blocking them. You are simply wrong.

 

[ThomasRz]

One other point Thomas, just so that you know, you keep speaking of how much advertising revenue would be lost if distants were allowed to be received for anyone willing to pay. Guess what ?? Who the heck watches commercials anymore anyway with a DVR ??

Apparently somebody does. Businesses invest a lot in advertising and the evaluation of its effectiveness. I am no expert on the subject but it seems that they would not be spending money if it weren't effective.

I don't and as time goes on less and less people will. Using your logic, DVR's should have been banned and never allowed to go on the market. Are you saying that DVR's should be altered so that viewers are forced to watch the annoying commercials ??

Never said any such thing. Nor is it immoral to take a whiz during a commercial. It is your choice whether or not you watch the commercial but it is the business choice whether or not to purchase advertising. This is a source of revenue for the people that own the programming. They like to keep their advertisers happy.

 

[dbirdman]

do you really think that the broadcasters would be voluntarily going to Hi Def unless they had to by 2009 ?

What is it about the DTV mandate that makes you think Hi Def is mandated?