I realize that 15-16 yrs ago I was on the cutting edge of HDTV, having an HDTV when nobody had one. Now that we are in 2016, why does Direct TV or Dish carry any channels that are still broadcast in SD. This is something I just dont understand. We have about full deployment of HDTV and SD channels look so poor on large screens. The same applies to Dish and and any other cable networks that offer SD programming. I have never seen much discussion of this. Am I missing anything? Do the execs at these companies care. Basically they should carry only HD programming.
Why are there still SD channels?
- Thread starter robertw477
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 60
- Views 11K
- Status
Not everyone has or cares to have an hd television.
I'm fairly sure 95% of TVS are now HD tvs.
As far as HD service Directv and Dish virtually made it almost impossible since the Hopper and Genie launch to even know that SD option even existed in the past 5 years.
If a customer wants SD you really had to hunt deep for that option.
As far as Existing customer, well I don't know anyone personally with SD only equipment with Dish or Directv.
Certainly no one on Eastern Arc is SD.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
As far as HD service Directv and Dish virtually made it almost impossible since the Hopper and Genie launch to even know that SD option even existed in the past 5 years.
If a customer wants SD you really had to hunt deep for that option.
As far as Existing customer, well I don't know anyone personally with SD only equipment with Dish or Directv.
Certainly no one on Eastern Arc is SD.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
I actually like the SD opetion I realized during storms that the HD channels would go out 1st. I could usually continue watching on the SD version of the station. It comes in handy. For me it really doesn't make a difference. Yep I know, I'll get boooed out of the forum.
What could happen is that they move the HD channels to the same band that they SD channels are on if they go all HD in 2019.
I don't really care to see every pit and pimple on someone's face on the telly.
Kinda like the TV version of TMI. SD is easier on the eyes, less sharp and harsh.
You can get a non 1080 tv and they are much cheaper.
http://www.hhgregg.com/samsung-32-720p-led-hdtv/item/UN32J4000?mkwid=svzSZZzAw_dc|76677962117||&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=&utm_campaign=GSC+-+Video&cid=cse-google-GSC+-+Video+|+LCD/LED-GSC+-+Video
We have a poster uniquely able to talk about HD channels, perhaps he will post...
Umm..... you do realize 720p is still HD and all the HD channels are either 720p or 1080i.
I don't really care to see every pit and pimple on someone's face on the telly.
Kinda like the TV version of TMI. SD is easier on the eyes, less sharp and harsh.
You can get a non 1080 tv and they are much cheaper.
http://www.hhgregg.com/samsung-32-720p-led-hdtv/item/UN32J4000?mkwid=svzSZZzAw_dc|76677962117||&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=&utm_campaign=GSC+-+Video&cid=cse-google-GSC+-+Video+|+LCD/LED-GSC+-+Video
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk
95%....IDK?.... My mom has no HD tvs in her home.....Now I would say 100% of TV sold are HD.....But in the city, and the inner city I bet there is a lot?....Its just a guess....?
She had a dial phone till you couldnt have one anymore in Chicago....That was like 15 years ago?....She would never get rid of something thats works....
Just say'en
Yes, but 480 TVs aren't available that I can find, so the 720 models work fine for SD at a cheaper price than the 1080 models.
Sticking with the original post, there are people that actually do not like HD for whatever reason and prefer to watch non-HD.
Yes there are people that don't care about HD.
SD is a cheaper way to go too.
What about providers and bandwidth availability and costs?
I'm sure this plays a factor too, doesn't it?
Bandwidth is not cheap and is SD not cheaper to offer than HD?
Then there is this:
At 15 feet away, resolution makes no real difference on a 40 inch screen.
And as you get older, the differences probably become even less.
I don't care to spend more than a 32 inch 720 TV costs and at 15 feet, it makes no difference.
I still have a Sharp 32 '' CRT TV that's still kicking, why get rid of it?
It boils down to costs for me also. You have to pay extra for HD at least when I had DirecTV.
"The gold standard of standard definition:"
http://www.directv.com/technology/standard_receiver
Now I have a TV antennas and some Free-to Air Satellite dishes, SD is the majority of the channels.
In conclusion:
1. Some people don't care about HD, as they are not aficionados.
2. They care that SD packages, equipment and lower res TVs are cheaper maybe.
Last edited:
My last sony 32 Inch CRT was in 2008 and it weighed 150lbs and paidYes, but 480 TVs aren't available that I can find, so the 720 models work fine for SD at a cheaper price than the 1080 models.
Sticking with the original post, there are people that actually do not like HD for whatever reason and prefer to watch non-HD.
Yes there are people that don't care about HD.
SD is a cheaper way to go too.
What about providers and bandwidth availability and costs?
I'm sure this plays a factor too, doesn't it?
Bandwidth is not cheap and is SD not cheaper to offer than HD?
Then there is this:
At 15 feet away, resolution makes no real difference on a 40 inch screen.
And as you get older, the differences probably become even less.
I don't care to spend more than a 32 inch 720 TV costs and at 15 feet, it makes no difference.
I still have a Sharp 32 '' CRT TV that's still kicking, why get rid of it?
It boils down to costs for me also. You have to pay extra for HD at least when I had DirecTV.
"The gold standard of standard definition:"
http://www.directv.com/technology/standard_receiver
Now I have a TV antennas and some Free-to Air Satellite dishes, SD is the majority of the channels.
In conclusion:
1. Some people don't care about HD, as they are not aficionados.
2. They care that SD packages, equipment and lower res TVs are cheaper maybe.
$1000 for it in 2002.
That was reason enough when it came time to move it.
Especially when a new 37 inch LCD weighed less than 50 lbs and only cost $500.
That's the year I decided to start getting rid of those big heavy SD CRTs.
By 2009 there wasn't a single SD tv in the house.
By 2011 all of them were Flat panels.
While the CRT HD and SD put out some of the best PQ to date, they also dimmed the lights when you turned them on.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
Hell, I know of people still using a rotary phone.
Some people just don't like change, even when it is better for 'em.
Yes, but 480 TVs aren't available that I can find, so the 720 models work fine for SD at a cheaper price than the 1080 models.
Sticking with the original post, there are people that actually do not like HD for whatever reason and prefer to watch non-HD.
Yes there are people that don't care about HD.
SD is a cheaper way to go too.
What about providers and bandwidth availability and costs?
I'm sure this plays a factor too, doesn't it?
Bandwidth is not cheap and is SD not cheaper to offer than HD?
Then there is this:
At 15 feet away, resolution makes no real difference on a 40 inch screen.
And as you get older, the differences probably become even less.
I don't care to spend more than a 32 inch 720 TV costs and at 15 feet, it makes no difference.
I still have a Sharp 32 '' CRT TV that's still kicking, why get rid of it?
It boils down to costs for me also. You have to pay extra for HD at least when I had DirecTV.
"The gold standard of standard definition:"
http://www.directv.com/technology/standard_receiver
Now I have a TV antennas and some Free-to Air Satellite dishes, SD is the majority of the channels.
In conclusion:
1. Some people don't care about HD, as they are not aficionados.
2. They care that SD packages, equipment and lower res TVs are cheaper maybe.
Sad that you choose to believe that. SD is no cheaper than HD except maybe directv if direct is still charging a separate HD fee. HD has nothing to do with being an aficionado. Those graphs are bs. I use a 40in for a computer monitor, I wouldn't even try to watch a 40in at 15ft. The furniture or the tv would be moving closer. I'm a known cheap skate and die hard penny pincher. The only way it's cheaper is going without subscription tv.
Sent from my iPhone
Directv doesn't charge an HD FEE
Anymore.
They stopped a year or 2 ago.
Some old grandfathered package may show HD fee with their DVR and MRV fees.
But if you are a Non dvr customer there is no HD fee, and Auto pay isn't required to get that benift.
So in reality you SD customers from Dish and Directv are getting less channels and less quality for the same cost as the HD customers.
There are quite a few HD channels especially premiums that have no SD counter part.
Now Cable TV has Options that SD is cheaper.
At least in my area.
SD no DVR packs for non STB services are
Basic Ch. 2 -22 $28
Basic Plus 2- 98 $71
Where as HD requires Digital Starting at $80 and a $4 HD charge For essentially like a Top 200 or Directv "Choice" like package.
But Satellite I see no advantage to remain an SD sub, unless all your tvs are CRTs.
211's and H24-25 are easy excellent working receivers.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
When I subscribed to DirecTV a few years back, HD was extra. Interesting.
Don't currently pay for TV, I use an antenna and FTA satellite.
So the original question then stands, why SD channels on DirecTV?
But that said, I grew up on tvs without remotes, you had to get up and change the channel and fiddle with the rabbit ears.
HD is just not a personal preference or a must have for me. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Most of the shows I prefer these days happen to be in good ole 4:3 SD black and white anyway.
Never heard anyone say they prefer SD before. Even the least technical people I know are HD only. The last device that I owned that was under 1080p was a 720p smart phone from 2012, that I ditched later that year. Time Warner in my area hasn't given out standard definition receivers in years. I'm surprised the satellite companies still do.
Last month I helped the last person I know with one get rid of their old (and still perfectly good) 19 or 21” Sony Trinitron CRT that they had in the garage connected to analog cable. Found a deal online for HPs 27” curved monitor with built in speakers for $250 (normally ~$400 I think).
He had one of those ancient standard definition Scientific Atlanta 2100 cable boxes. Went to the cable store and traded it in for a new Cisco 4742 HD box. The straight up swap wouldn’t have cost him a penny extra, but he was currently a whole house DVR customer and wanted to activate the whole house capability on the new box so he could access his recordings, so he’s paying a few dollars more a month for that, not because it’s an HD box. Before the TV in the garage was something to have on in the background while he’s rebuilding a car and soon a motorcycle. Now my buddy can watch TV while his kids are playing Xbox on the living room TV and his wife is watching her ‘stories’ in the bedroom and actually enjoy it.
Did something similar a few years ago for a relative of mine. Perfectly good dinosaur CRT in the kitchen with analog cable. Didn’t want a cable box connected to it since it was rarely used. Got a cheap 23” PC monitor with speakers and 40’ of HDMI and an HDMI switch from Monoprice. Total cost was around $200 for everything. Ran the HDMI from the kitchen TV to the closest TV with a cable box and used the HDMI switch to toggle the cable box between the big TV and the PC monitor.
I don’t expect new music to be released on audio cassettes, I don’t expect new movies to be released on VHS. No way should standard definition exist in 2016. It needs to go. SD is the waste of bandwidth really. Not sure the numbers in terms of satellite transponder space, but here Time Warner puts 2-3 HD channels on a QAM frequency and 8-10 SD channels on a QAM frequency. We have approx. 185 full time HD channels almost all of which have SD feeds. If SD were to go away TWC could free up around 20 QAMs and us the extra bandwidth to relieve compression on current HD channel or add 40 to 50 more HD channels or a combination of both.
At work, my company partners with a regional electronics recycling company every Spring where all the proceeds go to charity and employees are welcome to bring in stuff from home. This year was the first year they specifically wanted CRT monitors and TV separated from the rest of the junk. According to our Recycling Certificate we collected 3 gay lords worth of CRTs totaling just under 2 tons in gross weight.
Last month I helped the last person I know with one get rid of their old (and still perfectly good) 19 or 21” Sony Trinitron CRT that they had in the garage connected to analog cable. Found a deal online for HPs 27” curved monitor with built in speakers for $250 (normally ~$400 I think).
He had one of those ancient standard definition Scientific Atlanta 2100 cable boxes. Went to the cable store and traded it in for a new Cisco 4742 HD box. The straight up swap wouldn’t have cost him a penny extra, but he was currently a whole house DVR customer and wanted to activate the whole house capability on the new box so he could access his recordings, so he’s paying a few dollars more a month for that, not because it’s an HD box. Before the TV in the garage was something to have on in the background while he’s rebuilding a car and soon a motorcycle. Now my buddy can watch TV while his kids are playing Xbox on the living room TV and his wife is watching her ‘stories’ in the bedroom and actually enjoy it.
Did something similar a few years ago for a relative of mine. Perfectly good dinosaur CRT in the kitchen with analog cable. Didn’t want a cable box connected to it since it was rarely used. Got a cheap 23” PC monitor with speakers and 40’ of HDMI and an HDMI switch from Monoprice. Total cost was around $200 for everything. Ran the HDMI from the kitchen TV to the closest TV with a cable box and used the HDMI switch to toggle the cable box between the big TV and the PC monitor.
I don’t expect new music to be released on audio cassettes, I don’t expect new movies to be released on VHS. No way should standard definition exist in 2016. It needs to go. SD is the waste of bandwidth really. Not sure the numbers in terms of satellite transponder space, but here Time Warner puts 2-3 HD channels on a QAM frequency and 8-10 SD channels on a QAM frequency. We have approx. 185 full time HD channels almost all of which have SD feeds. If SD were to go away TWC could free up around 20 QAMs and us the extra bandwidth to relieve compression on current HD channel or add 40 to 50 more HD channels or a combination of both.
At work, my company partners with a regional electronics recycling company every Spring where all the proceeds go to charity and employees are welcome to bring in stuff from home. This year was the first year they specifically wanted CRT monitors and TV separated from the rest of the junk. According to our Recycling Certificate we collected 3 gay lords worth of CRTs totaling just under 2 tons in gross weight.
There are also plenty of people that prefer record albums and turntables still after all these years of CDs and MP3's.
There is no accounting or explaining personal preference I suppose.
Ask the Amish why they prefer what they prefer and you will probably get some interesting answers.
I'm having a hard time giving any of these companies money anymore.
I've never felt so bent over.
That's another thing that prompted me to start looking at alternatives.
PS Vue,Netflix, HBO now and my first attemp at FTA.
My only struggle is getting the family off dependent on Whole home DVR.
But it's getting easier since these Hoppers are having VOD issues and the PS and Roku aren't.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
No, No,No....very bad analogy!!!!.... lol.... please dont try and compare vinyl analog to 128bit digital....
- Status
