Why choose Sat over cable?
- Thread starter master1
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 18
- Views 3K
Here are a few I can think of, They are my opinion only, it may depend on your area and provider.
Satellite Advantages:
More international channels.
Some PPV are only on satellite.
More choice in channels.
disadvantages:
You may have a commitment.
Currently less VOD and (no?) free VOD.
Satellite Dish outside your house.
Less Bandwidth for HD means lower quality. (My local channels are much better on cable than on satellite, I am in Los Angeles)
May be more expensive than Cable.
Satellite Advantages:
More international channels.
Some PPV are only on satellite.
More choice in channels.
disadvantages:
You may have a commitment.
Currently less VOD and (no?) free VOD.
Satellite Dish outside your house.
Less Bandwidth for HD means lower quality. (My local channels are much better on cable than on satellite, I am in Los Angeles)
May be more expensive than Cable.
Satellite does suffer from rain fade (loss of signal) but it happens only during strong storms and recovers in a few minutes. When cable has an outage it can last hours if not day(s) before they get it fixed.
ok, just my op, but the picture quailty looks better for me with my sat than cable, my bro in law works at comcast, he has the hd dvr box they have, I personally think the dish hd quailty looks better, even the locals from atlanta look great, i switch from my ota in richmond and back to the sat feed from atl, and it looks the same, so for picture quality on hd, its great, for sd programming, since most cable is still analog, pictures look fuzzy etc, not with the dish, same channels i see in my back up lifeline with cable, look 20 times better on dish, now there is a like 4 or 5 sec delay in programming from the dish, but nothing really bad, now as far as the boxes go, comcast boxes blow big time, i love the 622 and i had the 525 before i got hd, and both are awesome, im staying with sat as long as possible 
More channels with satellite. What do you think Cable is anyWAY? Its satellite TV piped in through a wire.
For my situation, these are the factors that keep me with DIRECTV rather than my local cable co., Time-Warner Cable:
1) I have waivers for CBS and FOX, which means I get the HD feeds out of NYC. TWC doesn't carry those nets in HD in my area.
2) I have Lifetime DVR service through DIRECTV.
3) I find DIRECTV to be more reasonable about adding additional DVRs than TWC and they have a more realistic capacity drives in their DVRs.
4) Other than HSI and VOD, I find DIRECTV to be more innovative and better seated to making agreements with major Sports entities, like the NFL Network.
5) The DIRECTV commercials are so much better than the TWC.
6) After 9 and 1/2 years with DIRECTV I'm just more comfortable with them and if I went back to TWC, I'd have adjust and I'd miss more of what I'd give up than appreciate what I might gain.
7) DIRECTV will be adding a lot more HD in a month from now. I don't really know what TWC will do.
Hope that's clear enough.
1) I have waivers for CBS and FOX, which means I get the HD feeds out of NYC. TWC doesn't carry those nets in HD in my area.
2) I have Lifetime DVR service through DIRECTV.
3) I find DIRECTV to be more reasonable about adding additional DVRs than TWC and they have a more realistic capacity drives in their DVRs.
4) Other than HSI and VOD, I find DIRECTV to be more innovative and better seated to making agreements with major Sports entities, like the NFL Network.
5) The DIRECTV commercials are so much better than the TWC.
6) After 9 and 1/2 years with DIRECTV I'm just more comfortable with them and if I went back to TWC, I'd have adjust and I'd miss more of what I'd give up than appreciate what I might gain.
7) DIRECTV will be adding a lot more HD in a month from now. I don't really know what TWC will do.
Hope that's clear enough.
Make a checklist of the programming that you want, add up the dollars and see who wins the programming battle. Next, move on to the hardware battle.
It doesn't do any good to research and choose a hardware platform if the software isn't there.
As stated above, it can depend on what your local cable provider has. But you are wrong if you think all cable has as many channel offerings as Direct or Dish. Charter here does not offer all the channels Dish does, including not as many HBO channels. And their movie package costs more. In fact it still is true for me - cable offers somewhat less, costs more.
Satellite can go where cable cant though cable can go to a few small places that satellite cant. Satellite is generaly cheaper than cable, the picture quality on satellite tends to be better than cable, you can take satellite camping though its best with an rv. Cable has VOD and some free VOD, cable also has internet as part of its service that is truely high speed and aforedable while satellite internet really isnt high speed and is subject to throttling and is out of the reach of the average Joe on the price, cable also has VOIP telephone, cables downfall is its picture quality and prices and having to be tied down to a drop line.
Its going to depend on how good your cable company is, the services they offer and what Direct / Dish offers.
For me cable was not an option as they did not have any HD support and their digital lineup was not only sh*t but very expensive.
Made my decision for me.
For me cable was not an option as they did not have any HD support and their digital lineup was not only sh*t but very expensive.
Made my decision for me.
Seriously, how many times are you going to post this same comment? This is getting absurd.
Or do what one of my co-workers did. He came into some money and fixed up a "bonus" room in his house as a party room with 12 tvs (2 HD) and they are fed by 3 satellite services (D*, E* and Star) and the cable. He usually has his buds over on the weekend to watch sports events.
1)Advantage Satellite has a much cleaner crisper picture dvd quality because the signal is coming straight from the satellites.
2)You get many more channels on sat then you do cable.
3)Satellite programming isn't raising rates as fast as cable
Disadvantages of sat over cable
1)So far no local on the 8's on the weather channel that you get with cable.This could be fixed by adding weather scan to the line up.They have the ability to send local weather to your area.
2)Rain Fade ususally during Heavy Thunderstorms.Also snow,ice and even hail can cause signal loss.I rarely ever have rain fade during a lite to modarate rain but when the rain gets heavy that's when I experience it.Then again I unhook my satellite when it is lightning.
3)With cable if something goes wrong outside generally your covered.Example if the splitter is corroded and you start having a lot of snow in your picture the cable company will replace it for free.They will also replace damaged coax cables if you run over them with your lawn mower of lightning strikes them and causes damage.With satellite if any of this happens you have to pay to get it fixed unless you buy a warrenty.
2)You get many more channels on sat then you do cable.
3)Satellite programming isn't raising rates as fast as cable
Disadvantages of sat over cable
1)So far no local on the 8's on the weather channel that you get with cable.This could be fixed by adding weather scan to the line up.They have the ability to send local weather to your area.
2)Rain Fade ususally during Heavy Thunderstorms.Also snow,ice and even hail can cause signal loss.I rarely ever have rain fade during a lite to modarate rain but when the rain gets heavy that's when I experience it.Then again I unhook my satellite when it is lightning.
3)With cable if something goes wrong outside generally your covered.Example if the splitter is corroded and you start having a lot of snow in your picture the cable company will replace it for free.They will also replace damaged coax cables if you run over them with your lawn mower of lightning strikes them and causes damage.With satellite if any of this happens you have to pay to get it fixed unless you buy a warrenty.
Last edited:
I can understand the logic from both perspectives although I think that cable is trying to catch up but they never expected dbs systems to be as big as they are now.
Back in the day when it was analog there was really no compairson. Digital cable (no offense to anyone) is kinda a invention out of competition rather than that of something from the ground up. Sure it has on demand material but honestly much of it changes so much and some restrict how long you can record them (if you can)
In terms of technology I'd say cable can actually do more than satellite but there's no way they can do it for the same costs. Sure a satellite could have wind or rain damage but so could the dishes the cable company uses...
the only thing I think that's keeping cable companies alive is the high speed internet access. Once you have dsl and others then it becomes a harder choice.
HD is going to make things get a bit complicated. The OTA switchover should do well but unless cable can tame their rate increases they are going to gradually slow down their growth.
If you were to strip things further down the only other connection cable has to an area would be cable access and the donation of wiring/equipment to local areas. Cable access in my area used to be pretty decent but we now get 16 year old reruns of material and the quality looks like crap. If I want a town meeting to be recorded they can burn it to a dvd and then record from there...legal duplication of dvd's of government functions is far easier than making vhs tapes.
Cable is kinda like what microsoft was...yes they have cash but everything catches them off guard (web browsers, mp3's, video, phones, pda's etc...never the first in anything) and now you have a 3rd competitor of fios and maybe a 3rd if people rediscover OTA with hdtv...many people I know get cable just to get reception...why shell out $10-15 a month for locals if a decent antenna can get you it for free?
Back in the day when it was analog there was really no compairson. Digital cable (no offense to anyone) is kinda a invention out of competition rather than that of something from the ground up. Sure it has on demand material but honestly much of it changes so much and some restrict how long you can record them (if you can)
In terms of technology I'd say cable can actually do more than satellite but there's no way they can do it for the same costs. Sure a satellite could have wind or rain damage but so could the dishes the cable company uses...
the only thing I think that's keeping cable companies alive is the high speed internet access. Once you have dsl and others then it becomes a harder choice.
HD is going to make things get a bit complicated. The OTA switchover should do well but unless cable can tame their rate increases they are going to gradually slow down their growth.
If you were to strip things further down the only other connection cable has to an area would be cable access and the donation of wiring/equipment to local areas. Cable access in my area used to be pretty decent but we now get 16 year old reruns of material and the quality looks like crap. If I want a town meeting to be recorded they can burn it to a dvd and then record from there...legal duplication of dvd's of government functions is far easier than making vhs tapes.
Cable is kinda like what microsoft was...yes they have cash but everything catches them off guard (web browsers, mp3's, video, phones, pda's etc...never the first in anything) and now you have a 3rd competitor of fios and maybe a 3rd if people rediscover OTA with hdtv...many people I know get cable just to get reception...why shell out $10-15 a month for locals if a decent antenna can get you it for free?
For some reason I keep seeing subliminal messages about TV on this post and can't concentrate enough to understand the content.
