Social Feed

r424chevy48II
Last reply · posted in DISH Network Support Forum
When is Dish going to get these channels full time? Watching the SD feed when the HD feed is not available is horrible!!!!!!:mad: They say it is a bandwidth issue but they keep adding channels all the time!!! So what is up!!!!!!!:rolleyes:
29 Replies · 3818 views
Tampa8
I don't agree with your premise that most or anywhere near most of the current subs want RSN HD over national HD. But that doesn't really matter, we just don't know.

I agree, if you have made the decision to keep posting about it while not having RSN"s in HD full time, instead of having RSN's full time by switching, that is your choice. Just realize just as you are making a choice, so has Dish. Can you change their mind? Doubtful, because they know over time they will have the bandwidth one way or the other and then will provide them. Till then they will not.
M
They say it is a bandwidth issue but they keep adding channels all the time!!!
Because RFD TV and OWN are more important to Charlie than sports
M
Ok, guys, got a question: I have had Dish for 15 years, and except for a technical issue that has now been resolved, have been quite satisfied with their service. However, we're only SD customers. I am considering switching some relatives to Dish, and as far as RSN goes, they would like FS North and Big Ten Net in HD. Can anyone in the Northern Plains help me out? Are games (Twins, Wild, Wolves) always in HD, and the complaint is other programming isn't? Frankly, I think FSN programming is pointless except for the games, which is why I don't care if they're full-time HD. Or is it random?

And this is slightly off-topic, but if someone wants to convince me to go DirecTV, I'm listening. My biggest gripe about them is after great promotional pricing (w/ annoying rebates), they're the most expensive, and there's no option to downgrade. If I'm going to be stuck in a 2 yr. contract, I want to be able to go to a package like Dish 120+ or Dish America w/o giving up the RSN. Thanks.
I
I don't agree with your premise that most or anywhere near most of the current subs want RSN HD over national HD. But that doesn't really matter, we just don't know.

I agree, if you have made the decision to keep posting about it while not having RSN"s in HD full time, instead of having RSN's full time by switching, that is your choice. Just realize just as you are making a choice, so has Dish. Can you change their mind? Doubtful, because they know over time they will have the bandwidth one way or the other and then will provide them. Till then they will not.
Wow. Talk about reading something non existent into a post. I never said subs would prefer RSN's in HD over National HD. I never mentioned the word "most" or the words "National HD". The difference between me making a choice to switch, which I've already stated, I will not, and Dish choosing not to provide a greatly desired and available product is that I don't make my livelihood off of Dish, but they do they make theirs off of me and all the other subs.They have a financial interest in me staying. After hanging around this and other Dish sites for many years I feel safe in saying that, as I stated earlier,that the number of subs that want badly their RSN's in HD 24/7 is substantial. That's why the subject keeps rearing its ugly head.
The Fat Man
I gave up on this matter a couple years ago. I get the teams I want live in HD so I'm happy FOR NOW. Heck, with the way the Red Sox are playing, yesterday didn't even bother. I watched the Bruins actually play (unlike this season's Red Sox, so far) and after switched to WGN America and watched the White Sox game.

I remember a time not to long ago when I would either call or computer chat with a customer service rep about NESN HD full time, and always got the same question: "Does NESN broadcast in HD?" The answer is that they were either the first or one of the first to go full time HD. But back then the game was blame the network (not Dish Network). I would love one CSR to come here and just tell us the truth. OUR HIGHER UPS DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR RSN.

Again, I get what I want in HD for now. Don't think that MSG and SNY aren't clear writings on the wall for the rest of the country, with the exception of FSN Rocky Mountain and Altitude (god forbid Charlie doesn't get his teams). Our time will come. Heck, in October FSN Rocky Mountain was one of a few FSNs that wasn't lost in the FOX blackout.
L
good to see this thread stay alive, if only to piss off the Dish apoligist who keep saying it is a lost cause. they are always quick to jump on and tell us to quit wasting time talking about this. if they don't want to discuss this, they should just skip the post related to it. if they think they know what the majority of subs want any more than anyone else by the small sample of people who even know about this web site, i fear thay are mistaken. most people know nothing about the difference between Dish and Direct conserning sports. they sign up with a provider ,get what's there, and belive they are getting the best programing they can get . those with Dish get the advertizing that Dish is cheaper and that they provide HD sports channels and go with that. thats what a lot of us did. we like the equiptment and the price compared to what we see other people are paying, and probably will stay. that should not mean tha t we should stop trying to improve the product we are paying for by posting here and calling and e-mailing the company. someday it will change, or we will leave. in the meantime this discussion will go on and if some don't like it ,they can ignore it.
Tampa8
Wow. Talk about reading something non existent into a post. I never said subs would prefer RSN's in HD over National HD. I never mentioned the word "most" or the words "National HD". The difference between me making a choice to switch, which I've already stated, I will not, and Dish choosing not to provide a greatly desired and available product is that I don't make my livelihood off of Dish, but they do they make theirs off of me and all the other subs.They have a financial interest in me staying. After hanging around this and other Dish sites for many years I feel safe in saying that, as I stated earlier,that the number of subs that want badly their RSN's in HD 24/7 is substantial. That's why the subject keeps rearing its ugly head.

I agree, looking at you post again you did not say most subs.
That said, you did not say "National HD" but that is the fact. Dish not providing full time RSN's in HD is the same reason Direct does not carry as many national HD channels, satellite space. Dish is not just deciding not to carry the RSN in HD, as I stated, it is a business decision. They have separated themeselves from Direct by providing several channels in HD that Direct does not. So when you say you want them to carry the RSN in HD full time, it is indeed at the expense of carrying national HD channels.

While you did not say "most" I still question, given the choice how many would choose to lose many national HD channels to have only a couple of RSN's in HD. Remember, for most you are talking about giving up several HD channels just to have your RSN in HD full time. And to add to that, you are really saying, give up several national HD channels to get your team in HD all the time, instead of most of the time. (I realize some markets get more hd games than others) That is the trade off, and that is the business decision Dish has made untill they can get more space available.

I am saying, all the posts are not going to make Dish return the national HD channels to SD and add RSN's full time. There is nothing that can be said only because Dish is fully aware they have customers who want all their games in HD. If you are not going to switch to a service who will provide that, I don't see how it can be that important to you. If you wait, I have no doubt Dish will move towards providing them. Given the satellite contraints, and having to get all the subs who have the MPEG2 receivers to switch to MPEG4, and getting MPEG4 to the WA, you will indeed have to be patient. The fact that you want to post about it is why these forums exist however.

In answer to the post above, it IS a lost cause untill dish can find space, and/or get everyone to MPEG4. There is no magic switch to provide them short of returning many national HD channels to SD. Good luck with that.
Tampa8
Because RFD TV and OWN are more important to Charlie than sports

I am neither defending or criticising Dish, but rather stating a fact, yes, that is why. The national channels in HD are more important to their business model.
M
Ok, guys, got a question: I have had Dish for 15 years, and except for a technical issue that has now been resolved, have been quite satisfied with their service. However, we're only SD customers. I am considering switching some relatives to Dish, and as far as RSN goes, they would like FS North and Big Ten Net in HD. Can anyone in the Northern Plains help me out? Are games (Twins, Wild, Wolves) always in HD, and the complaint is other programming isn't? Frankly, I think FSN programming is pointless except for the games, which is why I don't care if they're full-time HD. Or is it random?

Big10 is in HD 24/7
FSN is random and its games only. You may get lucky and have 2 Twins games in a row in HD or you may only get 3 games out of 7 in HD
Wild and Wolfie's are the same way
TWiT Tech Podcast Network
· posted in TWiT Tech Podcast Network
0 Replies · 0 views
Bruce
Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter
Last reply · posted in Internet Television (IPTV) Discussion Forum
I was reading this article


That said this-
Last summer, for the first time, streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime claimed the largest share of the television viewing audience, surpassing both cable and broadcast TV. Streaming captured 34.8 percent of July viewers, according to Nielsen data, compared to 34.4 percent for cable and 21.6 percent for broadcast.

And then, sometime in the second half of 2022, cord-cutters became the majority. The share of cable and satellite television subscribers dipped to 48 percent, according to a report from Samba TV, a television technology company.


Now I do not consider those with YTTV and the likes, Cord Cutters, but they still do not have Traditional Cable/Satellite delivered Live TV, so I decided to do the math.

There are, now, 129 Million Households in the United States.

In 2015, there were 100 Million Cable/Sat Subscribers , no streaming Live TV Service.

Today, there are 66 Million Live TV subscribers, including Cable, Satellite and Streaming.

Roughly, Streaming Live TV has 14 Million subs including all of them.

So that means, Cable/Satellite now has, roughly, 51 Million Households

So in just 8 years, lost 49% of their subscribers and by the end of this year, expected sub count to be, roughly, 45 million households.

That means a total loss of 55% since 2015 at the end of 2023.

But out of 129 Million households, 45 million will mean only 35% will get Cable/Satellite Delivered Live TV by the end of 2023.

Imagine what 2024 will be like.
875 Replies · 71304 views
  • Wow
Reactions: MikeD-C05
MikeD-C05
My 26 year old son doesn't want to use traditional sat or cable now and only uses streaming apps and he is not on them as much as we were with satellite, using it for back ground noise while we do other things around the house. He doesn't even care about antenna ota TV either. Mind you he had a satellite receiver in his room since he was born and didn't want one after he got to be a teenager. So I took it out. I mainly used it to load up kid shows on the Dvr , so he would be entertained while I was doing stuff around the house when he was a baby and toddler. So Gen Z will not care one bit about live TV services going the way of the Dodo bird.
  • Like
Reactions: Jimbo and dishdude
Bruce
Some interesting information was in this article-


This first-

The total pay-TV sector (traditional service providers and virtual MVPDs) shed 885,000 subscribers in Q2 2026

So with the loss of 2.03 Million in the first quarter, already at 2.915 Million gone this year, two quarters left to report.

#2-

The segment ended Q2 with 61.51 million subs comprising 27.5 million cable video subs, 21.42 million vMVPD customers, 9.56 million satellite TV customers, and 3.01 million telco TV subs.

There are approximately 133.97 million households in the United States, according to recent YCharts US Households Data from mid-2026.

That means more than 72 Million households do not have a paid live TV service, about 54% of the total.

What is worse, 7 years ago, paid live TV had over 80% of the population subscribing ( about 100 Million), almost all were Cable/Satellite customers.

Today, only about 37 Million subscribe to Cable/Satellite, less than 28% of our population.

#3-

At one time, Satellite TV (Dish and DirecTV), had about 34 Million subscribers added together, now, 9.56 Million.

That is over a 70% loss for those who subscribe to Satellite TV.

For Cable TV, not as bad, since they have broadband to help against the losses ( bundles), but as more options appear ( 5G, fiber, starlink, etc), I expect a big increase in those leaving cable.

Also expect YTTV to really start gaining even more subscribers, for those who still wish to have a live TV service, based on price point and it is a really great service.
Bruce
Looks like Optimum Communications ( formerly CableVision) is collapsing, due to it's high debt, lenders/creditors are taking over-

Bruce
Sony is discontinuing it's last 4K disc player, Panasonic has been rumored to be doing the same, the end of physical media is unfortunately, about to happen.

  • Sad
Reactions: navychop
navychop
Got a Sony 700 at WM dot commie.

I think.

Ordered, anyway. Amazon let me go thru entire process but then said no inventory.

Hopefully,, WM will come thru.
dishstaller
Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter
Last reply · posted in The Chit Chat Club
I'm surprised Walmart hasn't banned this guy from all of their stores. He has been on their CASE the past few months.


View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/f3zr37ekgKM?feature=share
30 Replies · 289 views
  • Wow
Reactions: NYDutch
Juan
I'm surprised Walmart hasn't banned this guy from all of their stores. He has been on their CASE the past few months.


View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/f3zr37ekgKM?feature=share

When walmart set a price...they weigh the container and the product...the product label only shows the weight of the product...I am sure if you brought your own plastic baggies to bring the product home you could get the cheaper price
dishstaller
When walmart set a price...they weigh the container and the product...
Then they are stupid. Everyone knows that the price per ounce should be the price per ounce of actual product.
  • Like
Reactions: Jimbo
Juan
Then they are stupid. Everyone knows that the price per ounce should be the price per ounce of actual product.
You are paying for the whole thing
T
You are paying for the whole thing
Well, the bag can't weigh that much, right? But by law food product packaging must display the actual net weight of the product, i.e., the contents of the container, so by any logic, if not law, a store's stated per-ounce cost should reflect that figure. But since there's not any law regulating shelf statements, a store can say whatever it wants without violating any rules. So I guess the answer is more consumer legislation. Or simply caveat emptor.
Juan
Well, the bag can't weigh that much, right? But by law food product packaging must display the actual net weight of the product, i.e., the contents of the container, so by any logic, if not law, a store's stated per-ounce cost should reflect that figure. But since there's not any law regulating shelf statements, a store can say whatever it wants without violating any rules. So I guess the answer is more consumer legislation. Or simply caveat emptor.
But a box can weigh more than an ounce..maybe 2...a can might weigh 5 ounces..a bag...not much
dishstaller
.a bag...not much
Well, according to the price per ounce on that first bag of coffee he mentions, that would mean the bag weighed over 6 ounces. That bag does NOT weigh 6 ounces. According to Google, an empty bag weighs half an ounce.
Juan
Well, according to the price per ounce on that first bag of coffee he mentions, that would mean the bag weighed over 6 ounces. That bag does NOT weigh 6 ounces. According to Google, an empty bag weighs half an ounce.
You need to weigh the actual bag...a deli bag weighs less than that but a thick coffee bag is gonna weigh around an ounce...an empty tin can has some weight
NYDutch
You need to weigh the actual bag...a deli bag weighs less than that but a thick coffee bag is gonna weigh around an ounce...an empty tin can has some weight
Products sold by the ounce, pound, etc, should always be priced for the product only. Only the shipping weight should include the packaging.
harshness
Products sold by the ounce, pound, etc, should always be priced for the product only.
Unless the specific product or its packaging is known at the time of weighing, estimating the tare weight for a PoS system is a tall order.

I'm pretty sure that produce bags can't get any thinner. ;)

You certainly don't want to put unbagged produce on a belt, scale, or in a clerk's hands (gloved or not).
Jimbo
Unless the specific product or its packaging is known at the time of weighing, estimating the tare weight for a PoS system is a tall order.

I'm pretty sure that produce bags can't get any thinner. ;)

You certainly don't want to put unbagged produce on a belt, scale, or in a clerk's hands (gloved or not).
I would think that all the packaging would already be accounted for ... they weigh the container, subtract that from the scale, then add the product , so its weighing the Product only
dishstaller
but a thick coffee bag is gonna weigh around an ounce...

Obviously you didn't read my post.....google says a coffee bag weighs half an ounce. But let's say you are correct and it DOES weigh a full ounce, that would still fall 5 ounces shy for Walmart's numbers to match.
You wouldn't happen to be kin to Bernie would you
Juan
Obviously you didn't read my post.....google says a coffee bag weighs half an ounce. But let's say you are correct and it DOES weigh a full ounce, that would still fall 5 ounces shy for Walmart's numbers to match.
You wouldn't happen to be kin to Bernie would you
None of it means a hill of coffee beans...the price is the price...its not going to get any lower...as long as you pay the price on the shelf at the register..there is no crime
dishstaller
None of it means a hill of coffee beans...the price is the price...its not going to get any lower...as long as you pay the price on the shelf at the register..there is no crime
I can't BELIEVE this is being such a difficult subject. The issue isn't the price....it's the advertised price per ounce. A lot of shoppers, myself included, use the price per ounce in determining which is the better value....with that number being inaccurate, it can trick someone into thinking that one product cost less per ounce than a competing product. Is this a crime?...above my pay grade. Is it dishonest? Yes.
  • Like
Reactions: AZ.
Juan
I can't BELIEVE this is being such a difficult subject. The issue isn't the price....it's the advertised price per ounce. A lot of shoppers, myself included, use the price per ounce in determining which is the better value....with that number being inaccurate, it can trick someone into thinking that one product cost less per ounce than a competing product. Is this a crime?...above my pay grade. Is it dishonest? Yes.
Again it makes no difference...call the ftc and file a complaint...maybe your lawyer can file a class action lawsuit and you can collect your 25 cents
Bruce
Supporting Founder Lifetime Supporter
Last reply · posted in Internet Television (IPTV) Discussion Forum
Comcast is the first to report, with a massive 274,000 loss in video subscribers.

In the 3Q of 2016, Comcast had 21.42 million video subscribers and was the #1 provider, now at 10.39 million and is the #3 Provider, YTTV is #2 ( who also surpassed DirecTV-8 Million and Dish-under 5 Million), Charter/Spectrum is #1.

4 Replies · 56 views
  • Like
Reactions: Howard Simmons
dishstaller
Losing 144,000 internet customers surprises me more.
S
Losing 144,000 internet customers surprises me more.
people are moving to fiber, which is better up and down and also not Comcast.
  • Like
Reactions: dishstaller
dishdude
people are moving to fiber, which is better up and down and also not Comcast.
Losing 144,000 internet customers surprises me more.

Cord cutting 2.0. Not just fiber, 5G is really taking a toll on the cable companies.
AZ.
AZ.
Cord cutting 2.0. Not just fiber, 5G is really taking a toll on the cable companies.
I agree, for $35 it aint perfect but just as reliable as my cable was. And that was twice as much and still rising
dishstaller
Pub Member / Supporter Lifetime Supporter
Last reply · posted in The Chit Chat Club
He was 71 yrs old. One of my favorite songs is Seminole Wind....the violin is killer.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8sh9P3X33w
9 Replies · 89 views
M
I Wish I Could Have Been There is an amazing song. Rest in peace Mr Anderson.
dishstaller
I Wish I Could Have Been There is an amazing song.
That's one of those songs that hits a little too close to home for me. I like the song but just can't listen to it. It's kinda like that song "Daddy never was the Cadillac kind".....reminds me too much of my Grandfather who died Feb 18, 1995.
  • Sad
  • Like
Reactions: Mr Tony and mikew
dfergie
R.I.P. I thought he was older…
M
R.I.P.
Got a few songs on my 'setup' (old cell phone with music) that I can listen to while working
S
RIP
KE4EST
R.I.P. I thought he was older…
Same here. I thought he was older......RIP
SuperDish_Fan23
Last reply · posted in DISH Network Support Forum
Why are ViP922s So rare? like its crazy how ebay has none, i checked everywhere, also, i got a ViP222k now, which is actually activated!
25 Replies · 628 views
S
That's not really unusual. Cable companies like to the provide the box too. The phone company provided the phones in until the government forced them to allow third-party phones.
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
Almighty1
That's not really unusual. Cable companies like to the provide the box too. The phone company provided the phones in until the government forced them to allow third-party phones.
Yes, the Western Electric phones that says "Bell System Property, NOT FOR SALE, Western Electric".
Bobby
Yes, the Western Electric phones that says "Bell System Property, NOT FOR SALE, Western Electric".
In my very early work life I installed and repaired those phones.
AZ.
AZ.
Yes, the Western Electric phones that says "Bell System Property, NOT FOR SALE, Western Electric".
someone is showing their age
Almighty1
someone is showing their age
LOL. It depends if the person saw it during the years when they were actually still available which is 1968 to 1983 meaning the person could be 43-58 years old or they can even be a few years old if they learned to read and write at a young age and actually saw a telephone with that label somewhere recently just like even here in San Francisco, payphone still exist physically in public places but whether they can be used or not is a different issue. It still looks like this even today:
1792633296785.webp
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
dishstaller
I opened my Radio Shack in Sept 1984 and right about that time they did the whole deregulation thing with the phone companies. I bought TONS of those phones that had been refurbished with a new outer shell. You could throw one of those out of a 3 story high window and it would still work.
That was an interesting time in history. I would have older customers come in and ask about phones.....they were terrified that they were going to get into trouble hooking up a second phone without the phone company knowing about it. One of the funniest episodes of WKRP was the one where Johnny thought the cops were showing up because they had an unregistered phone. I guess younger folks can't conceive of a time when you were limited to the number of phones you could have in your house....and limited to the length of the cord 🤣
llokey
In my very early work life I installed and repaired those phones.
And I kept them working through the ESS offices.
Bobby
And I kept them working through the ESS offices.
The two central offices in the area I worked were actually step by step offices. :)
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
Almighty1
I opened my Radio Shack in Sept 1984 and right about that time they did the whole deregulation thing with the phone companies. I bought TONS of those phones that had been refurbished with a new outer shell. You could throw one of those out of a 3 story high window and it would still work.
That was an interesting time in history. I would have older customers come in and ask about phones.....they were terrified that they were going to get into trouble hooking up a second phone without the phone company knowing about it. One of the funniest episodes of WKRP was the one where Johnny thought the cops were showing up because they had an unregistered phone. I guess younger folks can't conceive of a time when you were limited to the number of phones you could have in your house....and limited to the length of the cord 🤣
Speaking about cords, I actually did drop a Trimline phone from probably 3 feet high on the floor when I was about 10 or so and it caused a small crack, this was the one with the modular jacks and it was hooked up with I think a 50 ft or longer RJ11C cable from Radio Shack. I still use the phone today connected to a Obi VoIP adapter and the cord is my custom made 6 position RJ11C, not sure of the official name for it without looking it up and Belden MediaTwist Crescent shaped Cat6+ cable.

1792686536450.webp
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
S
LOL. It depends if the person saw it during the years when they were actually still available which is 1968 to 1983 meaning the person could be 43-58 years old or they can even be a few years old if they learned to read and write at a young age and actually saw a telephone with that label somewhere recently just like even here in San Francisco, payphone still exist physically in public places but whether they can be used or not is a different issue. It still looks like this even today:
View attachment 194957
so that persons in hiding lol:biggrin
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell
S
remembers when ATT had stores and leased home phones
  • Like
Reactions: charlesrshell