More competition coming....

[wmhjr]

http://www.cabledatacomnews.com/jan05/jan05-2.html

The only real advantage that Dish/Direct have over Cable (with the exception of rural areas with no cable infrastructure, therefore no cable choice) is getting ready to be eliminated. Note the end of the article, where it even indicates that it's long term cheaper for cable to deliver HD rather than analog, as opposed to Dish, where the sat bandwidth is actually more expensive because they're not eliminating analog to start with.

 

[earth station]

it's long term cheaper for cable to deliver HD rather than analog, as opposed to Dish, where the sat bandwidth is actually more expensive because they're not eliminating analog to start with.[/QUOTE]


Then why does cable use satellites?

BTW, your attachment doesn't work.

 

[Stargazer]

Maybe what they are talking about is that it uses less bandwidth on their cable lines to run that HD picture to the home vs. more bandwidth to get form the satellites to the receivers (at the cable's headend) in which each satellite user would feel the affects of the increased amounts of bandwidth that would be required to receive the signal. The main issue is the HD locals, they should find a different way to deliver them to the consumers' home.

 

[wmhjr]

Stargazer, you got it

First of all, the attachment works for me, so....

And, Stargazer got it correct. Cable providers can pick and choose easier, and only need to worry about delivery to head ends as opposed to the last mile. They currently carry Analogs, which they will eventually not need. Those analogs take 3x the bandwidth for delivery. They don't need to deliver HD locals via Sat to their head ends. Those can be delivered via UHF or Microwave. There is no way for Dish to do that, or Direct, etc for that matter. They have no local infrastructure.

 

[Stargazer]

The local cable companies only have to deliver locals to that local market. If Dish Network and DirecTv could share some of their bandwidth with each other that would help them both out immensely. There could also be other technology developed like what I saw a while back which would deliver the signals via hot air balloons which are cheap and does not have to travel nearly as far. This would be great for broadband and video to local areas without much ping. New ideas such as this plus the shared bandwidth like what NorthPoint was going to use may be what it takes to save all of that bandwidth.

One of these days all services may be provided by fiber (phone, internet, television, whatever else may become available) and andvanced wireless technology. There will have to be a wireless market in addition to the fiber market because people will want high speed internet with their laptops no matter where they go and they could receive satellite radio and digital television on that laptop as well or perhaps smaller devices that has a screen pull out of it at the top and a keyboard that comes out of the sides or the other end. I can envision there being something such as a community server where everyone can access it wirelessly with their computers and perhaps access their internet in the same way. On that server one could access the files that they stored there or perhaps videos that they stored there as well to play back or retrieve from it. The wireless internet could be accessed just like OTA is if it gets a strong enough signal. Instead of receiving it from a phone line it would be received through the air. Its just a matter of the technology developing and advancing enough in order for this to happen.

 

[James Long]

They don't need to deliver HD locals via Sat to their head ends. Those can be delivered via UHF or Microwave. There is no way for Dish to do that, or Direct, etc for that matter. They have no local infrastructure.

E* does not use satellite to send most of the current locals feeds to their head end. A satellite backhaul is only used where a fiber link from the local point of presence (POP) is not feasable.

V*'s plan is to directly uplink locals from each market's POP to Rainbow1 for direct reception by viewers on the related spotbeams. Spot receives serving spot transmits, with no downlink to their "headend" for locals. Normal channels (non-locals) are received at and uplinked from their headend.

If E* or D* wants to stay local they can. They just have to pay for it by building uplink centers to feed certain transponders. With the bandwidth involved this may be the best way to go. Direct in market uplink to the satellite the customer will be using.

JL

 

[DishSatUser]

JL,

The point is that there is finite bandwidth available to each Sat, regardless of how many spot beams are added, because of the uplink facility requirements.

The problem is not getting the locals in HD to E*, D* or V*, but that every customer that receives them is doing so directly from the Sat. Redundant Microwave connections, multiple head-ends, these are not available to the Sat companies.

Sat always was a mid-term solution to a problem that the cable operators would eventually resolve. Once this is completed, E*, D* and V* will always only be able to compete for the rural and "Mobile" users. Since E* and D* both purchased DBS frequency spectrum for the terestrial use when auctioned last year, they could also provide a "wireless" solution.

Regardeless, competition is good for us customers if there is sufficient amounts and no "price fixing". If the competition all have backroom agreements to sell service within $1.00 or so, then we all are stuck and just go with whoever has the best service. If the service is the same and the pricing is the same, we just use whatever joe neighbor uses and service fiefdoms are created.

 

[wmhjr]

You're missing the point

First of all, many don't have reasonable fiber connections. Still too much dark fiber and too high cost. Second, that's a massive amount of data to try to move via fiber in realtime across the country from multiple points to a headend. Third, V*'s plan is not scalable in terms of cost. Fourth, building uplink centers is also not a scalable or cost effective plan.

The point remains.

E* does not use satellite to send most of the current locals feeds to their head end. A satellite backhaul is only used where a fiber link from the local point of presence (POP) is not feasable.

V*'s plan is to directly uplink locals from each market's POP to Rainbow1 for direct reception by viewers on the related spotbeams. Spot receives serving spot transmits, with no downlink to their "headend" for locals. Normal channels (non-locals) are received at and uplinked from their headend.

If E* or D* wants to stay local they can. They just have to pay for it by building uplink centers to feed certain transponders. With the bandwidth involved this may be the best way to go. Direct in market uplink to the satellite the customer will be using.

JL

 

[wmhjr]

Oh, and one more thing....

Any of the methods you mention for E*, D* or V* logically induce them to over-compress, further degrading PQ. We already have significantly degraded PQ on many SD channels due to heavy compression. Specifically, when viewing KDKA Analog via Adelphia Cable compared to KDKA SD via Dishnet using the same exact display, cables, etc, there is virtually no detectable difference. If the SD signal were not being over-compressed, this would most certainly not be the case. The same argument holds true for other analog cable channels when compared to SD channels via Dish. I can detect no advantage whatsoever to Dish in HD. Some slight advantage on select channels in analog vs SD.

 

[James Long]

JL,

The point is that there is finite bandwidth available to each Sat, regardless of how many spot beams are added, because of the uplink facility requirements.

And V*'s design for Rainbow1 (soon to be owned by Echostar) takes that in to account by having MANY uplink beams. In fact, the plan has 22 spot beams of up to five to eight transponders each, being fed from 13 uplink centers.

For example, beam R11 - received by the satellite from an uplink near Chicago can send up to 12 transponders up to the satellite (V* included TP23) to be bounced back down to Chicago ("E11" up to 5 downlinks) and Detroit ("E10" up to 7 downlinks). BTW: The E# is for "emit" from the ITU filing for Rainbow1, not E*.

All E* has to do to get full use out of Rainbow1 is build 13 uplink centers.

Yes there are finite limits, but Rainbow 1 was designed to push those limits to the limit. Even at MPEG2 and 3 channels per TP (E*'s worst public display) the Chicago example above is enough to carry 15 HDs to the Chicago area and 18 HDs to the Detroit area. Some of those HDs would be in nearby DMAs. And with MPEG4 there is more capacity to work with.

Overall Rainbow1 can accept 110 TP uplinks via spot receive. An easy 300 channels - more likely 500 or more - of local HD. All on a high power DBS satellite (not ka or FSS). That is something to contend with.

JL

 

[SimpleSimon]

We had someone here a while back who's sig-reply of "Woof Woof Grrr" is certainly appropriate here. Fire that puppy up!

Maybe even free up a little space on 110/119 (but I doubt it).

 

[wmhjr]

Charlie would probably do that if he felt that there was "compelling programming" to be had. Read the sarcasm.

Not holding my breath!

All E* has to do to get full use out of Rainbow1 is build 13 uplink centers.

JL