Team Summit: General Assembly Notes

[vegassatellite]

I can see your point here, but I still maintain that anyone that would call you to COMPLAIN about the removal of channels is an idiot. I mean, I suppose it's about as useful as calling a CSR...they can't do anything either.

I've never used an installer, so I didn't know you could handle ordering programming.

Most techs I know won't perform this service. We, on the other hand, take ownership of our customers. We know that having a local guy to call is what makes the difference in who they choose for service. It really adds another dimension to customer service that people can't get anywhere else. Funny thing is, this type of service really ought to just be "business as usual". I really like being that "guy" that customers tell their friends about when they tell them "I got a guy".

 

[BobMurdoch]

While the receiver is called a 722s, it is not a 722 at all.

This is a totally brand new box.

And when its released it would not surprise me to see it have a different name.

Just call it the 822 and end the confusion....

I think they are just asking for trouble with a box SO different from one already in the line.... We're not talking only a bigger hard drive like we've had before.....

 

[drdroo]

Just call it the 822 and end the confusion....

I think they are just asking for trouble with a box SO different from one already in the line.... We're not talking only a bigger hard drive like we've had before.....

+1

 

[Pepper]

Don't worry, when it's released it will be the "High definition DVR receiver for two rooms of television with integrated Internet streaming capability"

 

[Smith P.]

It will be handled same way as:
- DP962 -> ViP622/722
- DP411 -> ViP211k
...

 

[kaman]

ANYONE, regardless of their location, can subscribe to ALL the RSN Channels (for an extra monthly charge, of course). So in this sense, they are certainly "national" channels, even though the channels might be named with a "local" name, such as "Fox Sports Detroit", etc.

Even though you may subscribe to the Fox Sports Detroit Channel (and live in CA), any professional sporting events and many college events will be blacked out on every RSN, except your local RSN (s). Since the professional/college sporting events are virtually the only HD programming the RSNs offer (at the present), people are questioning if it is misleading to call the RSNs a "national HD" channel.

The channel itself might be "national", but the HD-parts of their programming (i.e. pro sports) certainly are not. There's the rub.

 

[drdroo]

The channel itself might be "national", but the HD-parts of their programming (i.e. pro sports) certainly are not. There's the rub.

Yeah that's another dimension to the problem of RSNs that really grinds my gears.

 

[comollitd]

Why do you dislike VOOM?

Most techs I know won't perform this service. We, on the other hand, take ownership of our customers. We know that having a local guy to call is what makes the difference in who they choose for service. It really adds another dimension to customer service that people can't get anywhere else. Funny thing is, this type of service really ought to just be "business as usual". I really like being that "guy" that customers tell their friends about when they tell them "I got a guy".

I don't understand why you would wish for the end of VOOM. Isn't it better for your customer base if there are more true HD channels to select from rather than few. If the answer is more channel space for allocation of the "22 New HD Channels, then I don't understand the fact at one point both the VOOM and new channels co-existed.

 

[waltinvt]

Such as what ?

I have the cable feed of NESN-HD (they DO carry it 24/7) and quite often there is something on there in HD when the Dish channel is off.

I think Jerry Remmy's pre & post game shows are in HD as well as Sport's Desk and other shows.

I haven't had either (Charter's or Dish's) feed for very long, so I'll pay more attention but I think others (maybe Scott) have also stated that NESN-HD carries more HD than almost any other RSN in the country.

 

[vegassatellite]

I don't understand why you would wish for the end of VOOM. Isn't it better for your customer base if there are more true HD channels to select from rather than few. If the answer is more channel space for allocation of the "22 New HD Channels, then I don't understand the fact at one point both the VOOM and new channels co-existed.

VOOM ended its own run as a pay TV satellite provider with only 35,000 customers before being taken over by DISH. With carriage by DISH, VOOM essentially expanded to literally millions of subscribers. Now instead of taking this newfound subscriber base and creating a set of awesome channels, they took the low road and instead just looped their programming. Voom's demise was a suicide in my opinion. They killed the golden goose that was DISH for them. I understand that channels like Discover, etc., will loop programming from time to time, but they have a much more vast library and also have a name known to every subscriber. Discovery is not in danger of losing its relevance to the average viewer any time soon.

The way VOOM just went for the loop and easy ride I'm sure was a real slap on the face and embarrassment to Charlie Ergen. Here is DirecTV adding lots of top-name channels to their HD lineup and all VOOM gives Charlie is a loop of the same tired content. I can see why Charlie cut the feed the first chance he got and did it so judiciously. Like a Roman Emperor deciding the fate of a gladiator who fought so weakly, he turned the thumb down.

I'm sure if things played out differently, perhaps Charlie would have opted to carry VOOM on a lesser used satellite such as 118.7. However, VOOM proved to be such an embarrassment that Charlie has decided to cut them without mercy.

VOOM was not a big selling point for our customers so its removal is no big deal to us. I know both the new additions and VOOM co-existed at the same time. However, I do expect new HD additions and the removal of VOOM will allow for that. Mainstream channels in HD, even if just the logo will do more for our bottom lines than VOOM ever will. I understand that this is an ordeal for the videophile, but there aren't that many out there and channel recognition is still what sells systems.

 

[cparker]

vegassatellite,

Succinctly and intelligently presented. :clap:

 

[KAB]

vegassatellite,

Succinctly and intelligently presented. :clap:

+1

 

[gadgtfreek]

Did anyone ask the Dish guys in the private session about future PQ enhancements? Is Dish happy with the PQ of their current mpeg4 stuff?

 

[vegassatellite]

Did anyone ask the Dish guys in the private session about future PQ enhancements? Is Dish happy with the PQ of their current mpeg4 stuff?

I think Charlie has a found a PQ that he likes that will support the number of channels he wants without running off a big chunk of subscribers. To the average viewer with an off the shelf HDTV 42" or smaller, the picture looks fine to them. For the people who have >42", and are concerned with their viewing that they have opted for nothing but the best, will probably never be satisfied with the picture of a system that has to use compression to put in channels. It's nice to think that there may be someday when a utopia of satellite bandwidth is achieved and PQ is truly phenomenal, but if that day comes, they will probably opt to fill the extra bandwidth with more channels as opposed to lower compression.

As TVs get bigger, so do scan lines. That's why people with large sets are going to see more PQ problems. The segment with really large HDTV sets is probably still small enough that Charlie isn't too concerned about over-compression. He's probably willing to lose a few viewers in order to be able to bring in the masses with more channels that are almost HD-Lite.

 

[richiephx]

Did anyone ask the Dish guys in the private session about future PQ enhancements? Is Dish happy with the PQ of their current mpeg4 stuff?

Great question...I think E* should survey all their HD subscribers if they really cared about picture quality. There is a big difference between being mediocre and being spectacular. I think E* falls somewhere closer to mediocre than spectacular.

 

[gadgtfreek]

I personally hope they arent happy with the PQ and plan on improvements. Anything less than what D* gives is not enough IMHO. You cant truly be the HD leader without content, a great dvr AND PQ.

 

[kstuart]

I think Charlie has a found a PQ that he likes that will support the number of channels he wants without running off a big chunk of subscribers. To the average viewer with an off the shelf HDTV 42" or smaller, the picture looks fine to them. For the people who have >42", and are concerned with their viewing that they have opted for nothing but the best, will probably never be satisfied with the picture of a system that has to use compression to put in channels. It's nice to think that there may be someday when a utopia of satellite bandwidth is achieved and PQ is truly phenomenal, but if that day comes, they will probably opt to fill the extra bandwidth with more channels as opposed to lower compression.

As TVs get bigger, so do scan lines. That's why people with large sets are going to see more PQ problems. The segment with really large HDTV sets is probably still small enough that Charlie isn't too concerned about over-compression. He's probably willing to lose a few viewers in order to be able to bring in the masses with more channels that are almost HD-Lite.

Not only that, but...

MPEG2 and MPEG4 (and all HD digital video) are lossey systems. That means they throw out 99% of the data, and keep 1% of the data. Otherwise the entire CONUS 110 satellite would be only enough for one HD channel.

In order to throw out 99% of the data, the encoder makes a decision about what will not be perceived by a human eye .

Since the vast majority of HD TV viewers have 32", 37" or 42" sets, then the encoder needs to take that into account.

Thus, the bigger your TV set, the more flaws you will see in any MPEG2 or MPEG4 video. If your set is bigger than 52 inches, then frankly you are outside of the norm, and are not really within the specifications of the system.

In essence, by using an unusually large screen, you are blowing up (magnifying) the image in a way that is designed to show all the flaws - in the same way that a forensic investigator might magnify a photo to see a very small detail otherwise not visible.

PS I do find the old handful of MPEG2 HD channels to be a little less clear and bright than the MPEG4 HD channels, but that will eventually be resolved when they are converted.

 

[RandallA]

"PS I do find the old handful of MPEG2 HD channels to be a little less clear and bright than the MPEG4 HD channels, but that will eventually be resolved when they are converted."

Not only that but lots of macro blocking when watching fast action shows or sports. TNT and HD Theater do this a lot. I don't see the macro blocking on the MPEG4 channels.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Well, regardless of tv size and whether Ill like compression, they need to realize D* has better HD PQ. I would hope theyd at least want to rival it. Maybe not, if so, then I know where I can go to get the best PQ on sat.

Other upcomer is FIOS, they roll out in more areas and get a better dvr, then Dish has more issues.

 

[kstuart]

Well, regardless of tv size and whether Ill like compression, they need to realize D* has better HD PQ. I would hope theyd at least want to rival it. Maybe not, if so, then I know where I can go to get the best PQ on sat.

Actually, if you read the relevant threads on AVS Forum, it is not true that D* HD PQ is better than E*.

It's amusing that evidently everyone's first inclination is to whine. It seems that even after the launching of satellites and bringing all these MPEG4 HD channels online, the D* fanboys on AVS whine about how some of the E* channels are nevertheless better in PQ. This leads one to quip:

" The grass on Sunrise Earth is always greener on the other satellite provider. "