Yes, it is hard to find that information. Is there a link to those measurements? Were the measurements taken recently, or is that the same data from years ago (which might not apply now)?
Dish Networks HD is True HD?
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 109
- Views 20K
I don't have a link .
You would have to look for a thread about PQ and start from there.
Actually you could try the Dish support forum too.
I know it's posted in there.
Start a thread in DBS Talk and see if anyone bites.
There are 2 Guys I know for a fact have the monitor equipment, Because they both sent me links to buy the equipment.
I've not bought the equipment because they already stated the results, so why spend Hundreds of dollars on it when I feel they were 100% accurate with it.
I absolutely agree the Dish HD is soft, and the Sports is fine , Until people start running.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
I haven't seen "current" info on the resolution. The ones being quoted may still be true but the data is from many years ago. It could be closer to 10 years old, if I'm not mistaken.
Sent from my HTC6535LVW using Tapatalk
Sent from my HTC6535LVW using Tapatalk
Let me see, who should I believe, my own eyes or a couple of know it all's on the internet? 
In addition to HD Lite, I remember seeing somewhere that Dish's standard definition is SD Lite - about 540x480. Not even 640x480. And a letterboxed program in SD is therefore effectively only about 540x360.
What's next? 4K Lite?
Exactly my feelings.Let me see, who should I believe, my own eyes or a couple of know it all's on the internet?
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
Look around man.
I'm not finding them for you.
I'VE already been there done that.
Only at satellite guys is this still disputed to this day.
You want to prove that it's Full 1920x1080 show us.
If you want to believe that Dish 1080i ISN'T 1440x1080 you go right ahead.
No one is stopping yous.
You buy the equipment test it, and then let me know how you liked spending $400 to dispute a claim that everyone but a handful of Dish Fanatics already knows and has stated multiple times across.
PM a guy named PSMITH.
He'll send you in the right direction to get your equipment.
I already know quite a few people here know .
But I know they won't chime in .
They would rather save face, Than support facts.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
I think Hall is right. The HD lite data being referred to is from about 10 years ago. I have not seen any recent measurements.
It may be true that Dish is HD lite, but there are many reasons (other than resolution) why the DirecTV image might look better. I would like to see some actual data on bitrates, resolution, etc. I agree that you should believe your own eyes, but it could be the bitrates, or processing (like more edge enhancement), or some other reason rather than resolution that is making the image look better to you. Without the measurements, you cannot conclude that 1440x1080 (if Dish is really doing that) is the only reason for the difference.
It may be true that Dish is HD lite, but there are many reasons (other than resolution) why the DirecTV image might look better. I would like to see some actual data on bitrates, resolution, etc. I agree that you should believe your own eyes, but it could be the bitrates, or processing (like more edge enhancement), or some other reason rather than resolution that is making the image look better to you. Without the measurements, you cannot conclude that 1440x1080 (if Dish is really doing that) is the only reason for the difference.
Let me make it clear: I don't give a sh*t what resolution it is.
I'm not defending Dish either. I also don't believe for one second that Dish has reverted from 1440 back up to 1920 nor did I ever suggest that. I was just looking for facts. Contact PSmith ? I know who he is and he's been long gone from this site for years.
Yes, I also do not care. To me, it does look like the resolution is 1440, but it would be nice to actually have the facts. All I have been saying is that the Dish lite data is really old, and it would be nice to get some current data.
I think PSmith was banned from this site a few years ago.
Whether he was banned, I can't say, Don't really care.
Lots of people get banned, Doesn't make them Liars or bad people.
I really don't give a crap about this either.
It's just another thread about HD quality that ends up solving nothing,and causes pissing matches.
So I'm dropping the subject and maybe it will die.
Most people would never know the difference anyway.
None of it is bad, so it doesn't matter.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
Why the snippy responses? Isn't this the perfect place to ask questions about satellite stuff? It is called Satellite Guys after all. Resolution, compression and picture quality seems like the most basic of factors that we should all be interested in. From reading several of the responses it seems that quite a few are interested in answers to these answers. When this thread first appeared 10 years ago many members we not even here yet. For them and long time members like myself It's past time to re-visit this question. How can anybody that takes the time to join a forum like this complain because some of us want to know who offers the best combination of technological advances. There have been so many. We all certainly talked about moving from meg2 to meg4 didn't we? We certainly are talking now about the advantages of 4K aren't we? We spent months if not years talking about adapting to 3D didn't we? So now we shouldn't talk about the existence of HD lite vs full HD? If you"re one that doesn't give a sh*t about the subject then fine don't worry about it. But telling people to go out and buy expensive equipment and do their own testing, please don't insult our intelligence. If I want to read a review on the Hopper 3 I don't go out and buy the equipment to test it, I read other expert reviews that know a lot more than I do. Same goes with this subject. If I had the equipment I wouldn't have a clue how to use it.
Let us not forget, MPEG-4 has not been static. Improvements have been ongoing since day one.
Even MPEG-2 is being improved, with another 10%+ efficiency gains projected. This might allow 14 infomercial sub channels! ;-)
When the next MPEG gets adopted, it'll allow for more channels, and quite possible we're so close to channel saturation providers might actually -gasp- INCREASE bitrate and resolution. No, I'm not smokin wacky tabaccy.
Even MPEG-2 is being improved, with another 10%+ efficiency gains projected. This might allow 14 infomercial sub channels! ;-)
When the next MPEG gets adopted, it'll allow for more channels, and quite possible we're so close to channel saturation providers might actually -gasp- INCREASE bitrate and resolution. No, I'm not smokin wacky tabaccy.
I hope we are at that limit.
I want them to improve the PQ.
I would rather that than add more HD versions.
Samsung Galaxy S6 Active
I want them to improve PQ. I assume that the vast majority of members here, especially members here, share that sentiment. From a marketing standpoint I'm also sure that we, as enthusiasts, are in the minority of Dish customers. The majority are quite satisfied and oblivious to the remarkable PQ their 2K or 4K could deliver. Slightly compressed 1080P PQ would be stunning if it were made available. Might actually make it hard to sell 4K sets.
Watching my Vikings on Monday night football, the difference in PQ between Dish local and OTA was very obvious just in the opening announcer chat. Faces were very clean OTA, all sorts of macroblocking and mushy detail like watching YouTube video via Dish. This is WCCO in Minneapolis.
IMHO the PQ is perfectly acceptable. The main reason I chose DISH over DTV is the larger number of locals offered by DISH in my area. I have also noticed far fewer signal losses due to the weather with DISH. I am a happy camper, indeed. 
Thats not a fair comparison at all!.... OTA can have an extremely high data rate, 5 to 10 times greater than data over internet or via satellite!
