Are we going to be seeing a bigger dish in the future?

[Mr Tony]

Yeah, I wonder how many of those ancient QPSK receivers are left?

I'm sure there are still lots of 301's out there. Heck in my family alone there are 6 of them (cheap ba'tards wont upgrade to HD)

If you need to replace a receiver due to it kicking the bucket they do give you a 8PSK compatible receiver (311 at minimum)

 

[Cold Irons]

Forced obsolescence money grab.

Exactly!

 

[Stargazer]

4k and 8 K will evolve just like mpeg4 has, perhaps slower. Western arc is all about mpeg 4. Once all upgrades are done to mpeg4, eastern arc could be all about mpeg5 as transponders migrate to it little by little while most satellites will be pointed to western arc by that time affecting the fewest customers while doing so. Kind of the opposite of which arc is premium right now.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using SatelliteGuys

 

[jerryez]

Only thing Dish and Directv are waiting for is customers with older SD Equipment to churn off, or upgrade on their own.

Then why is Dish still issuing SD equipment? The 311 and 322!!

 

[Dishman1978]

Yes, but hd receivers do have composite and rf outputs, so they will work on sd sets. Like has already been said, Dish and Direct are probably waiting for all those old sd boxes to die off. It really does make sense to have a smaller line-up of equipment to service. Then they can get rid of the duplicate sd feeds and just allow the boxes to down-rez if needed.

Except here in Cali I'm still installing SD boxes daily on new accounts, so they aren't going away anytime soon.

 

[MikeD-C05]

I don't see 4k or 8k ever getting any traction this decade. Maybe by the 20's ,( can you believe how funny that sounds , the 20's),will see some movement in this direction. But the economy and people's take home pay is going to affect any transition to any new tvs making it to the market. The last transition was helped by the government and the digital deadline, which we just met in 2010. It is way too SOON for people to buy a whole new kind of tv ,especially since there is NOTHING broadcast in 4k or 8k. Look at HD . It started with about 2 or 3 hd channels back about ten years ago and now hd is considered the norm. That wouldn't of happened without the government pushing everyone to go digital. I don't see tv stations,especially ota stations, pushing to upgrade again so soon after the last transition. I really don't see DISH doing this at all. They didn't even try to do a 3Dtv at all. Who knows if we will even have satellite tv as a mainstream choice come next decade. I'm thinking satellite tv may even be on the decline, except for rural country areas.

 

[Scherrman]

I came very close to ordering the LG 84" 4K TV the other day for our showroom but it's jut too damn expensive. That, and I don't have any content to show on it other than Blu-Rays.

 

[Juan]

ROTFLMAO! And by then, Blugras would be wanting Home Dentistry Channel HD.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/the-home-dentistry-channel/310006245692959

 

[Stargazer]

Broadband may play a bigger role in higher def next time around.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using SatelliteGuys

 

[Time_Shift]

Nice to see Dish taking an aggressive stand like that. I made the same argument concerning having every household HD ready. Time stop making the mass subscriber base wait for the dinosaurs out there.

Bubble in effect.

The mass subscriber base IS the dinosaur. Most people still do not subscribe to HD services.

Super HD...

If you ask me, Super HD would have been a better name.

Then why is Dish still issuing SD equipment? The 311 and 322!!

This.

Otherwise, as history shown, when providers want to phase out old boxes, they will make it happen. Obviously, they don't. At least, not yet.

 

[jevans64]

Yes. We will need 10 meter dishes in our back yards in order to get 4K programming.

Data compression ( packing 0's and 1's in parity bits ) can only go so far from here. I think we are in the neighborhood of 80% efficient in video compression currently. There is still plenty of room left for signal compression though but that would mean going into higher frequencies.

 

[Bob2011]

Its unlikely that you will see Dish launch 4k service in the next ten years. More likely you will first see a new satellite startup offer a few 4k movie channels on a rented satellite. Then at some point 15 years from now the company would burn through its funds and Dish or Directv would swoop in to buy it out on the cheap.

 

[chiodo]

They could always shoot up extra satellites behind other satellites, I think the satcos have had 2 satellites sharing the same orbital position, having one satellite several miles behind another.

But of course extra Satellites would be very expensive, also consider the fact of how much content there is today that is in 1080p, not much, still lots of TV shows being broadcast
in SD, HD maybe mainstream nowadays but it's not 100% implemented yet and I don't see communication companies or even TV stations rushing to upgrade to 4k anytime in the near future.

 

[Laddyboy]

They could always shoot up extra satellites behind other satellites, I think the satcos have had 2 satellites sharing the same orbital position, having one satellite several miles behind another.

But of course extra Satellites would be very expensive, also consider the fact of how much content there is today that is in 1080p, not much, still lots of TV shows being broadcast
in SD, HD maybe mainstream nowadays but it's not 100% implemented yet and I don't see communication companies or even TV stations rushing to upgrade to 4k anytime in the near future.

The limitation with respect to orbital slots is transponders. I believe current regs limit the number to 32.

 

[gpflepsen]

The sooner 4k gets here, the sooner we can enjoy 4k-lite. I'll venture the 4k delivered by DISH in the future will be of lesser PQ than HD you can find on FTA.

 

[Yespage]

But of course extra Satellites would be very expensive, also consider the fact of how much content there is today that is in 1080p, not much, still lots of TV shows being broadcast
in SD, HD maybe mainstream nowadays but it's not 100% implemented yet and I don't see communication companies or even TV stations rushing to upgrade to 4k anytime in the near future.

SD to HD was a huge jump in visual and audio. HD to 4k just doesn't make a big enough to jump to justify any sort of standard switch for the consumer base 4k is going to be more business based. I just fear the next standard going back to the 4:3 setup, so we can see all the stuff above and below the letterbox of 16:9.

 

[Stargazer]

I also think there needs to be a bigger jump in technology in order for it to be worthwhile to the masses. Many changes in technology in general will happen by that time, perhaps things we never thought of and things done differently than what we are doing today.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using SatelliteGuys

 

[RickDee]

Another reason why you don't need a 4K TV: There's no 4K content to speak of. Sure, the TV manufacturers are going to include some content in the TV itself, but that will be limited and possibly not what you want to see.

In the long run, I may be wrong. But in the here and now, 4K TVs are worthwhile only for people suffering from TMM (Too Much Money).

 

[3HaloODST]

The sooner 4k gets here, the sooner we can enjoy 4k-lite. I'll venture the 4k delivered by DISH in the future will be of lesser PQ than HD you can find on FTA.

I'd rather full HD than 4k-lite.

Sent from my iPad 2 using Forum Runner