HD vs. SD

[SAEMike]

Ok, there has been a lot of discussion about adding HD channels to Dish. There has also been a lot of discussion about different SD channels we would all like to see added to Dish.

So here's the question, all else being equal, would you rather see Dish add more HD channels regardless of the content of the channel, or more SD channels that people are asking for (Such as Oxygen, Trio, NFL Network ect.)?

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

The future is HD.

1 out of every 5 sets sold today is HD compatable.

What I would like to see them do is build STANDARD DEFINITION receivers which can downconvert all HD signals, this way they could get rid of duplicated programming such as Standard Definition HBO, ESPN, SHOWTIME and TNT and only broadcast the HD version to ALL.

That would open up bandwidth for additional channels. I would also like them to set a date stating that as of this date all new channels will only be available in HD.

 

[SAEMike]

The future is HD.

I agree, HD is the future. The problem is right now we are living in the present. There just is not an abundance of quality HD programming out there.


At one point Betamax was the future as well.

 

[Stacy A]

Also, I think "Enhanced Definition" channels could be a real possibility and might should have been added to the poll as a choice. I agree with Scott that they should concentrate on going widescreen all the way and downconvert to SD.

Stacy

 

[briani]

I don't agree that there is no compelling HD programming available to Dish. Their program director(michael S.) talks a good game about repetitive programming on some
channels and "simulcast" of SD channels on premium channels, but most HD customers
are looking for both quantity and quality. Yes, Charlie is correct in saying that alot of
the movies on the premium channels are up-converted and are not true HD, but the
up-converted movies still look sharper(In My opinion) then the SD feed. Obviously, providers like Voom have alot of work ahead to improve content on their exclusive channels, but the number of channels give more choices for people who want to see
a better return on the investment they've made in HD-capable monitors.

 

[NightRyder]

At one point Betamax was the future as well.

Poor analogy. Betamax was one of 2 consumer video tape formats. The VCR was the future. HD isn't competing with SD, it is succeeding it.

A few of the past debates.

Why buy an expensive TV when you can listen to the radio?

Stereo? Why would anyone want 2 speakers?

Color TV? Why bother? B/W is good enough.

CD? Why buy a player when there is hardly anything to play on it? LP's will dominate for another 10 years.

DVD? My VHS tapes look just fine.

DVR? My VCR can do everything it can. (Ok, this one is still with us ).

NightRyder

 

[dbronstein]

The future is HD.

1 out of every 5 sets sold today is HD compatable.

What I would like to see them do is build STANDARD DEFINITION receivers which can downconvert all HD signals, this way they could get rid of duplicated programming such as Standard Definition HBO, ESPN, SHOWTIME and TNT and only broadcast the HD version to ALL.

That would open up bandwidth for additional channels. I would also like them to set a date stating that as of this date all new channels will only be available in HD.

Yes, the future is HD, but the present is still SD.

Do you really think that Dish would provide millions of replacement receivers to customers for free? Of course not. So when they tell people they have to buy new receivers to get channels they've already been getting, what do you think will happen? It would be suicide.

What's going to kill satellite if they don't get more bandwidth up is the lack of HD locals. You can talk all you want about the viewership of locals is dropping and people can get them with an antenna, but the bottom line is people want their locals through their satellite or cable. I know several people that switched from Dish to Comcast so they could get HD locals.

 

[GaryPen]

SD weak. HD strong. Weak die. Strong survive. Species evolve!

 

[jeffwtux]

The Satellite solution for HD locals is a partnership withe RBOCs and get the HD locals send via DSL when it finally evolves. We are only

 

[Wayd Wolf]

The Satellite solution for HD locals is a partnership withe RBOCs and get the HD locals send via DSL when it finally evolves. We are only

DSL isn't a broadband delivery system, it's baseband. The medium is twisted pair cable of varying quality and length from Central Office(CO) to Customer Premises Equipment(CPE). It is interconnected at myriad points between you and them which in any delivery system is a no-no.

DSL is like the cable company sending cable modem over straight copper for six miles from the node and there being eighty-six splices in between. As any cable or DBS installer would tell you, that's insane.

HD can't be sent via DSL without SBC's Project Pronto for instance being expanded to one Remote Terminal(RT) for every few hundred homes passed, and would require a new pair from the RT for every HD channel and flawless wiring all the way.

It would make more sense to partner with the hated cable industry to deliver the programs they don't have capacity for.

 

[SimpleSimon]

Yes, the future is HD, but the present is still SD.

Do you really think that Dish would provide millions of replacement receivers to customers for free? Of course not. So when they tell people they have to buy new receivers to get channels they've already been getting, what do you think will happen? It would be suicide.

You're right - it would be suicide. On the other hand, a phased approach over a period of time would work just fine - except for those that are still using their original Mark I DBS receivers from 1942.

For all we know, the current line of 3-digit boxes might actually be able to do something like this (I doubt it, but it's not impossible).

 

[BobMurdoch]

Hey I'll take ANY flavor of improved PQ. I'd prefer 1080i or 720p, but I won't turn my nose up at 480p or anything else that it is better than the current version (I'd love to be able to see Stargate SG-1 and Stargate: Atlantis with better PQ)

 

[dfergie]

Hey I'll take ANY flavor of improved PQ. I'd prefer 1080i or 720p, but I won't turn my nose up at 480p or anything else that it is better than the current version (I'd love to be able to see Stargate SG-1 and Stargate: Atlantis with better PQ)

I second that, dvd quality or better would be nice for Sg1

 

[JoeSp]

The new Stargate Atlantis will be produced in 480p. SCIFI was ( and I hope still is) to start sending in 480p this summer. I always figured that it would be in concert with their new summer programming. USA was also supposed to start 480p programming this summer. I would like to know if it is possible to get maybe 4 to 6 of these extended definition channels per transponder? That would make it alot easier to get than if they went to HD considering the band usuage. 480p would be a heck of alot better than SD! I hope *E offers these as soon as they become available!

 

[GaryPen]

With USA/Sci-Fi's acqisition by NBC, You'll probably see more ED and even HD programming that may also end up on NBC affiliates/O&O's, much in the same way Queer Eye does.
I don't know how much NBC had to do with creating Bravo-HD, but who knows? We may also see a USA or Sci-Fi HD in the not-too-distant future.

 

[ocaddict]

Nightryder, you're hilarious bro. Anywho. I think they need to concentrate on getting more and better HD content. It is simply the wave of the future but current HD offerings are pathetic at best. I had HD subscription for about 2 months and finally got rid of it along with my crappy 811 receiver. I'm much happier with great SD content and DVR capability. Much more bang for the buck for me. But if they start getting more HD, I'll be more than happy to jump back on the bandwagon.