Voom to stay HDLITE in MPEG 4
- Thread starter glennh73
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 95
- Views 15K
I have subbed to DISH since May--when I was a former VOOMER and was promised that we would get the FULL VOOM back in its original format. I am also concerned about the HD Lite and don't know that I will resub to the HD content or may just drop it come Feb 1.
I have the option of C-BAnd HD which is not a lot of channels, but, with the HDD decoder, I believe I will get full 1920X1080i--still looking into this.
But, the more important issue IS the Bait and Switch tactic. IF Dish is still DEMO -in their HD in the 1920 X 1080i -- go to every store that sells SONY WEGA (that's what I have) AND Dish demo channels and switch back and forth between the Demo Channel and any of the VOOm channels.
IF you feel that there is a blatant difference and you also go into a DISH retailer and see the same deception--then there must be some legal recourse.
ALSO, this hurts HD TV sales--if you go into your highest volume HD retailers and stand there on the floor during the busiest times and make a VERBAL issue of the deception on the HD resolution, that will help prospective customers think TWICE before buying HD TV UNLESS they have cable, C-Band or a LOT of HD Locals.
After Monday, if this still stands, I challenge all of our forum to get PROACTIVE and find out the legalities of "bait and switch" and false or misleading advertising AND band together.
ALSO, start frequenting the larger HD TV retailers, as well as DISH retailers, like Sam's Club, Radio Shack, etc and choose a busy time and stand there with a loud voice and start debating with the salesperson!
I have the option of C-BAnd HD which is not a lot of channels, but, with the HDD decoder, I believe I will get full 1920X1080i--still looking into this.
But, the more important issue IS the Bait and Switch tactic. IF Dish is still DEMO -in their HD in the 1920 X 1080i -- go to every store that sells SONY WEGA (that's what I have) AND Dish demo channels and switch back and forth between the Demo Channel and any of the VOOm channels.
IF you feel that there is a blatant difference and you also go into a DISH retailer and see the same deception--then there must be some legal recourse.
ALSO, this hurts HD TV sales--if you go into your highest volume HD retailers and stand there on the floor during the busiest times and make a VERBAL issue of the deception on the HD resolution, that will help prospective customers think TWICE before buying HD TV UNLESS they have cable, C-Band or a LOT of HD Locals.
After Monday, if this still stands, I challenge all of our forum to get PROACTIVE and find out the legalities of "bait and switch" and false or misleading advertising AND band together.
ALSO, start frequenting the larger HD TV retailers, as well as DISH retailers, like Sam's Club, Radio Shack, etc and choose a busy time and stand there with a loud voice and start debating with the salesperson!
Last edited:
Sean Mota said:
There are not enough customers who understand quality over quantity to impact Dish or Directv corporate decision making at this point in HD life cycle.
By very nature Satellite business has to be spectrum efficient to make money. Until there are enough of us who do understand to make material impact on the bottom line, both providers will choose to not use their bandwidth to provide full HD resolution even if MPEG4 allows it now. I am very disappointed with Dish business decision but I am not sure we could do something about it right now.
I think of alot of people will wake up when they get HDdvd or Blue Ray players and start watching movies and seeing what real HD is and then compare that to Dish or Directv HD. I think only then will it finally sink into people that they are paying for crap that would probably look better in SD on a SD tv.
It really is a shame.. I got Dish because I loved my VOOM.. The way it looks now ain't nothing like VOOM was when it was a service. I would not have committed to such a crappy HD service if I knew they were going to pull this..
patrickpiteo said:It really is a shame.. I got Dish because I loved my VOOM.. The way it looks now ain't nothing like VOOM was when it was a service. I would not have committed to such a crappy HD service if I knew they were going to pull this..
I feel exactly the same! I signed on with DISH as soon as they picked-up VOOM as an early customer of VOOM DBS. Thought they deserved my support and recommendations for bringing VOOM back to life. Well VOOM is not back as promised let alone the 21 channels. Those that never had or viewed the original VOOM can and will not understand the PQ that was delivered. I understand that we were a small percentage. It's like having a high powered V8, and being told they don't make that engine any more, so you have to drive with this low HP four cylinder and forget the good old days. Does not have to be like that! The real VOOM programing in full high-definition is hard to forget
Does anybody know if the regular HD channels will also be HD lite? (for 10 bucks/mo)
How do you tell what resolution something is being broadcast in? (1920 vs 1280)
Thanks BP
How do you tell what resolution something is being broadcast in? (1920 vs 1280)
Thanks BP
A good close friend which I wired his house for electrical and coax to all rooms, is wired for any satellite dish install with no extra wires. I was planning on signing him up with Dish since he will have one HDTV. With the Lifetime removal(his wife is addicted to that channel) and this HDLite crap, I bet DirecTV will fill his needs perfectly and probably cheaper too!
Maybe one day after a year of two of HDLite from the E* and D* clowns one will step up to the plate and start offering their HD Ultra tiers ......"New and improved higher resolution HD!! 1920 by 1080 pixels in breathing taking colors!"
Maybe one day after a year of two of HDLite from the E* and D* clowns one will step up to the plate and start offering their HD Ultra tiers ......"New and improved higher resolution HD!! 1920 by 1080 pixels in breathing taking colors!"
My goodness gracious!
Representatives from this forum told Dish, when they had a chance to chat face to face with a highest level Dish executive, that we would rather have more channels than true HD???!!??!?!?!!!?!??
I can't believe this.
After a month of hundreds of forum members screaming the exact oppostive!!!
How in the world did *ANY* reader of these forums come to that conclusion???
At this point, those in this forum who advocate for true HD, don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to arguing with Dish. We had our letter writing campaign. Dish sat down with multiple forum representatives, and they agreed that HD-lite was the better solution.
Representatives from this forum told Dish, when they had a chance to chat face to face with a highest level Dish executive, that we would rather have more channels than true HD???!!??!?!?!!!?!??
I can't believe this.
After a month of hundreds of forum members screaming the exact oppostive!!!
How in the world did *ANY* reader of these forums come to that conclusion???
At this point, those in this forum who advocate for true HD, don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to arguing with Dish. We had our letter writing campaign. Dish sat down with multiple forum representatives, and they agreed that HD-lite was the better solution.
Last edited:
LOL LOL LOL Ok I can't stop laughing at that "dish is looking to transmit in 1080p" a couple sentences after "most people don't have HDTVs capable of 1080i" being the reason the downrezed the channels!!! What a farkin joke these Dish execs are, and I am sorry to say Scott, but you became a complete E* Bi^*# this weekend. Howard Stern and "more HD channels please" how ridiculous is that. Give me a break!
Well Im just glad that we are getting more HD Channels than before. Folks are makeing way to much out of all thie HDLite stuff!! Point is that Dish or whoever can only do so much. Dish does not control what networks which the networks own the channels broadcast in! In those Networks dont upgrade their stuff to broadcast in ""TrueHD"" then things will not change. So for now I think that with what HD they are adding is good and that they are trying to take steps in the right direction. But untill networks due some updateing on their ends it really dont matter. Things are only going to look as good as far as PQ as what those Networks have the ablility to Broadcast in. I think over time they will update their stuff to improve things but that will take time and money on their end to do so. Overall I agree Dish does need to try to make things better and not send stuff in ""HDLite"" but for now I dont think it's the end of the world. Over time I think they will get things back the way it should be and things will get back to TrueHD.
Last edited:
The networks ARE "updated and sending True HD" - D* and now E* are reducing the resolution before sending it out.
Well 1080i for now is the standard from what I understad its all in the lines which is 1080. I'm not really disagreeing with anyone just think that sometimes this gets taken way out of portion is all.
Here is info on MPEG4 is folks what to know how it works and so on.
http://www.m4if.org/
Here is info on MPEG4 is folks what to know how it works and so on.
http://www.m4if.org/
Poke
Don't know where you get your info.
If you check OTA broadcasts you will fine/see that stations are sending HD at full rezz. It is E* & D* that downrezz.
Don't know where you get your info.
If you check OTA broadcasts you will fine/see that stations are sending HD at full rezz. It is E* & D* that downrezz.
The standard is 1920 x 1080i. Reducing to 1280 x 1080i effectively reduces the resolution by a third.
Yes I agree with you that E* and D* have something to do with it. I just think that not all the Networks Channels broadcast things the same is all. Oh ok I see so it's just the resolution then yes they do need to try to keep it at the standard then if they can. If they dont then yes then it is on their end I'm with you know.
Last edited:
Anyway this is a good read on 1080i vs 1080p!
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-6361600-1.html
Every once in a while, when the reader e-mails keep piling up in my in-box, I feel the need to revisit a topic that I've already written about. In this case, the subject is HDTV resolution, and 1080p resolution in particular. This seems to be on everyone's minds as we head into the holiday buying season and we're faced with more HDTV buying choices than ever before. Not a day goes by without someone asking whether they should just buy a "standard" 720p/1080i set or step up and pay the extra bucks for a higher-resolution 1080p set. Or what it all means. And so, I've tried to condense the whole discussion into a neat, little cheat sheet. Read on for the quick and dirty lowdown on 1080p.
1080p TVs to check out:
HP MD6580n 65-inch DLP rear-projection
Sony KDS-R60XBR1 60-inch LCoS rear-projection
Westinghouse LVM-37W1 37-inch LCD
Samsung HL-R6768 67-inch DLP rear-projection
Mitsubishi WD-73727 72-inch DLP rear-projection
1. 1080p defined
1080p resolution--which equates to 1,920x1,080 pixels--is the latest HD Holy Grail. That's because 1080p monitors are theoretically capable of displaying every pixel of the highest-resolution HD broadcasts. On paper, they should offer more than twice the resolution of today's 1,280x720, or 720p, HDTVs, such as Samsung's HL-P5085W. Some companies, such as LG, refer to these super-high-res of sets as ultra-HD, while others prefer to substitute true or full for ultra.
2. Why 1080p is theoretically better than 1080i
1080i, the former king of the HDTV hill, actually boasts an identical 1,920x1,080 resolution but conveys the images in an interlaced format (the i in 1080i). In a tube-based television, otherwise known as a CRT, 1080i sources get "painted" on the screen sequentially: the odd-numbered lines of resolution appear on your screen first, followed by the even-numbered lines--all within 1/30 of a second. Progressive-scan formats such as 480p, 720p, and 1080p convey all of the lines of resolution sequentially in a single pass, which makes for a smoother, cleaner image, especially with sports and other motion-intensive content. As opposed to tubes, microdisplays (DLP, LCoS, and LCD rear-projection) and other fixed-pixel TVs, including plasma and LCD flat-panel, are inherently progressive in nature, so when the incoming source is interlaced, as 1080i is, they convert it to progressive scan for display.
3. What content is available in 1080p?
Really, nothing at this point. Today's high-def broadcasts are done in either 1080i or 720p, and there's little or no chance they'll jump to 1080p any time soon because of bandwidth issues. Meanwhile, some newly announced DVD players from Denon and NeuNeo (who?) are claiming to upconvert standard DVD movies to 1080p resolution, but that's a far cry from native high-def content. More promising is the post-DVD future. There's been a lot of chatter over whether the new breed of high-def movie players, Blu-ray or HD-DVD, as well as the upcoming Sony PlayStation 3, will output in 1080p. Allegedly, they will, but those players and recorders will be very expensive at first (more than $1,000), and they probably won't hit more modest price levels until 2007 or even 2008. The PS3, on the other hand, is designed to be more of a mainstream product; we hope that means a price tag in the neighborhood of $500. It's unclear, however, exactly what it will output in 1080p--games, Blu-ray movies, or both--or neither.
4. How much extra does a 1080p TV cost
Not surprisingly, you'll initially have to pay a premium to get the latest and greatest technology. If you take a look at the product lines of Sony, Samsung, and Mitsubishi, you can see that, on average, you can expect to pay about $1,000 extra for the bump in resolution. For instance, take the Samsung HL-R6167 (720p resolution) vs. the step-up HL-R6168 (1080p). At buy.com, the 6167 is currently going for $3,500 while the 6168 is $4,500. Eventually, of course, the gap will narrow, but it'll take a couple of more years for 1080p displays to become the standard.
TalkBack
Would you pay extra for 1080p?
Post your comment here5. Why you should buy--or not buy--a 1080p set
While we haven't posted any reviews of 1080p rear-projection sets yet--before you ask, we've requested review samples from most major manufacturers, and received some promises but no product yet--we have gotten early looks at several of the new models, some of them have been early, nonshipping units. These include HP's MD6580N, a 65-inch 1080p DLP, and Sony's KDS-R60XBR1, a 60-inch LCoS (SXRD) set that brings the technology from Sony's highly regarded Qualia 006 down to a more-affordable price point. After seeing 1080p in action, we've come to some conclusions.
Obviously, the quality of the source material you're viewing is very important, but so are screen size and how far you're sitting from your TV. Indeed, our resident video guru, Senior Editor David Katzmaier, reports that the extra sharpness afforded by the 1080p televisions he's seen is noticeable only when watching 1080i sources on a larger screen. Comparing a 50-inch 1080p DLP set to a 50-inch 720p DLP set, for example, he says you'll be hard-pressed to notice more detail with 1080i sources, especially from farther than 8 feet away. Even if you can see the difference, it will be much less obvious than, say, the difference between DVD and 720p HDTV. Of course, performance will vary from set to set, and we'll know more when we have a chance to thoroughly test more 1080p televisions.
Katzmaier also says that the main real-world advantage of 1080p is not the extra sharpness you'll be seeing, but instead, the smaller, more densely packed pixels. In other words, you can sit closer to a 1080p television and not notice any pixel structure, such as stair-stepping along diagonal lines, or screen door effect. This advantage applies regardless of the quality of the source.
Another thing to consider: even if the display has a native resolution of 1080p on paper, it can't necessarily display all 2 million-plus pixels in the real world. For example, the Sharp LC-45GX6U, a 1080p 45-inch flat-panel LCD, actually wasn't as sharp as it claimed to be; it couldn't resolve every line of a 1080i-resolution test pattern.
Finally--and this may sound weird--but many 1080p televisions don't accept 1080p sources at all. In our experience, only the aforementioned HP can handle 1080p via its HDMI inputs--all other current 1080p HDTVs cannot. Instead, they upconvert 720p and 1080i sources to 1080p.
Oh, and I would be remiss not to mention computer connectivity. n 2006 to handle 1080p sources, but for now, that capability is rare.Those of you thinking of running your PC through a 1080p set should be aware that you may not necessarily get to use all that extra resolution--even if you have the right high-end graphics card. For instance, the Sharp set we tested allows you to max out at only 1,280x1,024 resolution while the less-expensive Westinghouse LVM-37W1, along with Samsung's 1080p RPTVs and one series of high-end sets from Mitsubishi, accept true 1,920x1,080 resolution from a PC. We expect most 1080p HDTVs announced i
The bottom line: if you're thinking of going big, really big (a 60-inch screen or larger), the extra resolution may make it worth the difference--as long as you have a pristine, 1080i HD source to feed into the set. As to whether true 1080p sources from PS3, a Blu-ray deck, or an HD-DVD player look better--we'll have to wait until 2006 to find out. Of course, it's probably a good idea to buy--or wait for-a set that can accept a 1080p signal so that you'll be able to make that judgment.
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6449_7-6361600-1.html
Every once in a while, when the reader e-mails keep piling up in my in-box, I feel the need to revisit a topic that I've already written about. In this case, the subject is HDTV resolution, and 1080p resolution in particular. This seems to be on everyone's minds as we head into the holiday buying season and we're faced with more HDTV buying choices than ever before. Not a day goes by without someone asking whether they should just buy a "standard" 720p/1080i set or step up and pay the extra bucks for a higher-resolution 1080p set. Or what it all means. And so, I've tried to condense the whole discussion into a neat, little cheat sheet. Read on for the quick and dirty lowdown on 1080p.
1080p TVs to check out:
HP MD6580n 65-inch DLP rear-projection
Sony KDS-R60XBR1 60-inch LCoS rear-projection
Westinghouse LVM-37W1 37-inch LCD
Samsung HL-R6768 67-inch DLP rear-projection
Mitsubishi WD-73727 72-inch DLP rear-projection
1. 1080p defined
1080p resolution--which equates to 1,920x1,080 pixels--is the latest HD Holy Grail. That's because 1080p monitors are theoretically capable of displaying every pixel of the highest-resolution HD broadcasts. On paper, they should offer more than twice the resolution of today's 1,280x720, or 720p, HDTVs, such as Samsung's HL-P5085W. Some companies, such as LG, refer to these super-high-res of sets as ultra-HD, while others prefer to substitute true or full for ultra.
2. Why 1080p is theoretically better than 1080i
1080i, the former king of the HDTV hill, actually boasts an identical 1,920x1,080 resolution but conveys the images in an interlaced format (the i in 1080i). In a tube-based television, otherwise known as a CRT, 1080i sources get "painted" on the screen sequentially: the odd-numbered lines of resolution appear on your screen first, followed by the even-numbered lines--all within 1/30 of a second. Progressive-scan formats such as 480p, 720p, and 1080p convey all of the lines of resolution sequentially in a single pass, which makes for a smoother, cleaner image, especially with sports and other motion-intensive content. As opposed to tubes, microdisplays (DLP, LCoS, and LCD rear-projection) and other fixed-pixel TVs, including plasma and LCD flat-panel, are inherently progressive in nature, so when the incoming source is interlaced, as 1080i is, they convert it to progressive scan for display.
3. What content is available in 1080p?
Really, nothing at this point. Today's high-def broadcasts are done in either 1080i or 720p, and there's little or no chance they'll jump to 1080p any time soon because of bandwidth issues. Meanwhile, some newly announced DVD players from Denon and NeuNeo (who?) are claiming to upconvert standard DVD movies to 1080p resolution, but that's a far cry from native high-def content. More promising is the post-DVD future. There's been a lot of chatter over whether the new breed of high-def movie players, Blu-ray or HD-DVD, as well as the upcoming Sony PlayStation 3, will output in 1080p. Allegedly, they will, but those players and recorders will be very expensive at first (more than $1,000), and they probably won't hit more modest price levels until 2007 or even 2008. The PS3, on the other hand, is designed to be more of a mainstream product; we hope that means a price tag in the neighborhood of $500. It's unclear, however, exactly what it will output in 1080p--games, Blu-ray movies, or both--or neither.
4. How much extra does a 1080p TV cost
Not surprisingly, you'll initially have to pay a premium to get the latest and greatest technology. If you take a look at the product lines of Sony, Samsung, and Mitsubishi, you can see that, on average, you can expect to pay about $1,000 extra for the bump in resolution. For instance, take the Samsung HL-R6167 (720p resolution) vs. the step-up HL-R6168 (1080p). At buy.com, the 6167 is currently going for $3,500 while the 6168 is $4,500. Eventually, of course, the gap will narrow, but it'll take a couple of more years for 1080p displays to become the standard.
TalkBack
Would you pay extra for 1080p?
Post your comment here5. Why you should buy--or not buy--a 1080p set
While we haven't posted any reviews of 1080p rear-projection sets yet--before you ask, we've requested review samples from most major manufacturers, and received some promises but no product yet--we have gotten early looks at several of the new models, some of them have been early, nonshipping units. These include HP's MD6580N, a 65-inch 1080p DLP, and Sony's KDS-R60XBR1, a 60-inch LCoS (SXRD) set that brings the technology from Sony's highly regarded Qualia 006 down to a more-affordable price point. After seeing 1080p in action, we've come to some conclusions.
Obviously, the quality of the source material you're viewing is very important, but so are screen size and how far you're sitting from your TV. Indeed, our resident video guru, Senior Editor David Katzmaier, reports that the extra sharpness afforded by the 1080p televisions he's seen is noticeable only when watching 1080i sources on a larger screen. Comparing a 50-inch 1080p DLP set to a 50-inch 720p DLP set, for example, he says you'll be hard-pressed to notice more detail with 1080i sources, especially from farther than 8 feet away. Even if you can see the difference, it will be much less obvious than, say, the difference between DVD and 720p HDTV. Of course, performance will vary from set to set, and we'll know more when we have a chance to thoroughly test more 1080p televisions.
Katzmaier also says that the main real-world advantage of 1080p is not the extra sharpness you'll be seeing, but instead, the smaller, more densely packed pixels. In other words, you can sit closer to a 1080p television and not notice any pixel structure, such as stair-stepping along diagonal lines, or screen door effect. This advantage applies regardless of the quality of the source.
Another thing to consider: even if the display has a native resolution of 1080p on paper, it can't necessarily display all 2 million-plus pixels in the real world. For example, the Sharp LC-45GX6U, a 1080p 45-inch flat-panel LCD, actually wasn't as sharp as it claimed to be; it couldn't resolve every line of a 1080i-resolution test pattern.
Finally--and this may sound weird--but many 1080p televisions don't accept 1080p sources at all. In our experience, only the aforementioned HP can handle 1080p via its HDMI inputs--all other current 1080p HDTVs cannot. Instead, they upconvert 720p and 1080i sources to 1080p.
Oh, and I would be remiss not to mention computer connectivity. n 2006 to handle 1080p sources, but for now, that capability is rare.Those of you thinking of running your PC through a 1080p set should be aware that you may not necessarily get to use all that extra resolution--even if you have the right high-end graphics card. For instance, the Sharp set we tested allows you to max out at only 1,280x1,024 resolution while the less-expensive Westinghouse LVM-37W1, along with Samsung's 1080p RPTVs and one series of high-end sets from Mitsubishi, accept true 1,920x1,080 resolution from a PC. We expect most 1080p HDTVs announced i
The bottom line: if you're thinking of going big, really big (a 60-inch screen or larger), the extra resolution may make it worth the difference--as long as you have a pristine, 1080i HD source to feed into the set. As to whether true 1080p sources from PS3, a Blu-ray deck, or an HD-DVD player look better--we'll have to wait until 2006 to find out. Of course, it's probably a good idea to buy--or wait for-a set that can accept a 1080p signal so that you'll be able to make that judgment.
Last edited:
Correct me if I am wrong but I thought going to MPEG 4 would decrease size of the signal and leave more bandwidth so Dish and the others could send their HD signal at full resolution. So why are they still down rezzing the broadcast if MPEG f4 gives them more room? This is total crap. Charlie better have something good to say next week or he'll have one less customer.
