Cable better picture than dish?

[HatGuy]

Cable better picture than dish? Whats up with this.
Just got the new Samsung 6768 HDTV and hooked it up to cable
and Dish 942 receiver and the picture quality is much beter in SD
on cable than it is on dish 942. HD looks great.

Do I need to drop dish before my 30 day trial period runs out?

:

 

[Bruce]

Cable better picture than dish? Whats up with this.
Just got the new Samsung 6768 HDTV and hooked it up to cable
and Dish 942 receiver and the picture quality is much beter in SD
on cable than it is on dish 942. HD looks great.
Do I need to drop dish before my 30 day trial period runs out?
:

Every Cable area ( not just company ) is different, while in my area ( metro Detroit ) the cable in my sub-divison was upgraded a few years ago, we have those big Green nodes in every other backyard, so not far from the signal.

I do get a better picture with Comcast on both SD and HD, but there have been many a horror story about how awful cable was in their areas, there are many a good stories about how great it is, mine is one.

 

[Van]

SD looks better through a cable connection on HD sets than on any form of componant hook up in my opinion, it wont matter so much who is providing the source as you can test this out by taking a vcr and hooking up the rca's and the coax to the tv and test the diference between the 2.

 

[SimpleSimon]

Do I need to drop dish before my 30 day trial period runs out?

Huh? What 30 day trial?

 

[Van]

There is a promo out there, dont know if its still around but it had something to do with new home construction, you would get dish at your new home free for 30 days. I remember it from two or three years ago but it didnt last for long I had thought.

 

[webbydude]

I have to agree with Simon on that one. The only "trial" period I've heard of is the typical 3-day deal where a customer can bail out of things if dissatisfied.

 

[HCI]

I have to agree with Simon on that one. The only "trial" period I've heard of is the typical 3-day deal where a customer can bail out of things if dissatisfied.

This is the only one I know about also. 3 days starting the day it was installed. You can change receiver types or cancel without penalty.

 

[Van]

Yea I think the one Im referring to ended pretty soon after it started.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Dish SD channels are better than my cable's SD channels, because the basic 60 locals and cable channels are still in low quality analog from my cable provider. Poor color, video noise, not pretty.

But I've seen other cable providers where the SD channels were excellent.

Dish's SD channels vary in quality. Some are good, some are average, some are below average. And it can vary hour to hour, depending upon how Dish allocates bandwidth. Although there is a lot of consistency to the quality.

 

[riffjim4069]

Dish SD is typically better than cable analog SD and worse than cable digital SD in my area. Until the VOOM-Lite debacle, HD PQ between the two was similar. The local cable is sending 3 HD channels per QAM (39Mb), but their variable bitrate encoders actually did a pretty job. Sometimes the depth of live sports was lacking, but most of the time is was almost identical to OTA.

Personally, I watch very little SD and it all looks like crap since we only have HDTVs.

 

[OoTLink]

On a rather "pristine" connection (1 coupler involved between the cable company's tap and our TV) -- the picture is almost identical between the two.

Adding a splitter makes it slightly worse for cable, enough you can see the difference without concentrating.

 

[Van]

Personally, I watch very little SD and it all looks like crap since we only have HDTVs.

If your tv(s) have a coax connection then I think the 411 will help to address the sd issue with its coax tv out port connected to your tv.

 

[bbtkd]

It's all about bandwidth and cost

Cable better picture than dish? Whats up with this.
Just got the new Samsung 6768 HDTV and hooked it up to cable
and Dish 942 receiver and the picture quality is much beter in SD
on cable than it is on dish 942. HD looks great.
Do I need to drop dish before my 30 day trial period runs out?
:

Any time you are trying to cram multiple channels thourough on medium (satellite, cable, internet) a compromise must be reached between quantity of channels and picture quality (compression). To add channels, a satellite provider can either compress more, or add bandwidth (more transponders and/or satellites). A cable provider has the limitation of a single coax or a single fiber - but as time progresses, more and more bandwidth can be crammed onto one wire. OTA signals need not be compressed much, if at all since the bandwidth allows a nice picture.

Satellite providers will tend to compress and get as many channels as they can without losing too many subscribers due to poor picture quality. With the move to HD, providers will need to add bandwidth or improve compression. You can count on them doing both. They are putting a lot of hope into MPEG4 allowing more compression than MPEG2, but from things I've heard, MPEG4 is not a cure all.

Cable companies can cram a lot more on a cable given the necessary hardware upgrades. They can also eat more bandwidth by lowering compression and increasing picture quality - easier than satellite providers can. The cable companies will continue to invest in beating satellite picture quality, which will drive their costs up. Satellite providers will have to launch more satellites and raise prices. Both can use MPEG4, but it won't really accomplish much over MPEG2.

 

[RIRWIN1983]

Any time you are trying to cram multiple channels thourough on medium (satellite, cable, internet) a compromise must be reached between quantity of channels and picture quality (compression). To add channels, a satellite provider can either compress more, or add bandwidth (more transponders and/or satellites). A cable provider has the limitation of a single coax or a single fiber - but as time progresses, more and more bandwidth can be crammed onto one wire. OTA signals need not be compressed much, if at all since the bandwidth allows a nice picture.
Satellite providers will tend to compress and get as many channels as they can without losing too many subscribers due to poor picture quality. With the move to HD, providers will need to add bandwidth or improve compression. You can count on them doing both. They are putting a lot of hope into MPEG4 allowing more compression than MPEG2, but from things I've heard, MPEG4 is not a cure all.
Cable companies can cram a lot more on a cable given the necessary hardware upgrades. They can also eat more bandwidth by lowering compression and increasing picture quality - easier than satellite providers can. The cable
companies will continue to invest in beating satellite picture quality, which will drive their costs up. Satellite providers will have to launch more satellites and raise prices. Both can use MPEG4, but it won't really accomplish much over MPEG2.

So are you saying cable is better in the long run?

 

[bbtkd]

Cable varies by area

So are you saying cable is better in the long run?

I guess that if you do the math, the cable upgrades are cheaper than a new satellite - but - the upgrades to the satellite can potentially serve an unlimited number of customers while the cable customers served by an upgrade are finite. So - I suppose it comes down to market pressure. Does the cable provider see itself as a competitor to satellite or is it satisfied being second to satellite? This will vary by area and cable company.

 

[digiblur]

Dish SD is typically better than cable analog SD and worse than cable digital SD in my area. Until the VOOM-Lite debacle, HD PQ between the two was similar. The local cable is sending 3 HD channels per QAM (39Mb), but their variable bitrate encoders actually did a pretty job. Sometimes the depth of live sports was lacking, but most of the time is was almost identical to OTA.

Personally, I watch very little SD and it all looks like crap since we only have HDTVs.

It all depends on the cable company. A few months ago Cox moved from 3 HD channels per QAM256 carrier to 2 HD channels per carrier.

 

[SummitAdvantageRetailer]

In our area, Comcast had better locals on analog because E*'s locals are compressed pretty bad. I never tried digital cable but I think digital cable is about as good as E* if not worse. When analog cable is at its best, it looked great but that was rarely the case as I had a lot of ghosting and fuzzy picture since it was analog and the signal was inconsistent. So picture quality wise, we saw better picture on Comcast for locals and seldomly better picture on other channels. Overall, my family likes E*'s digital channels better due to its consistency.

 

[HatGuy]

I stand corrected. I is only 72 hours for buyers remorse.
Bummer!

 

[MBernier]

Comcast sucks in my area. They introduced the digital service but never upgraded any of the lines so I still have RG59 coming into my house. The picture quality is horrible! The HD picture is comparible to Dish but I will never have Comcast cable until they introduce a real digital solution. My parents have Charter and they ran all new lines on the poles a few years ago, WOW what a difference between the two carriers.

 

[HCI]

Comcast sucks in my area. They introduced the digital service but never upgraded any of the lines so I still have RG59 coming into my house. The picture quality is horrible! The HD picture is comparible to Dish but I will never have Comcast cable until they introduce a real digital solution. My parents have Charter and they ran all new lines on the poles a few years ago, WOW what a difference between the two carriers.

your saying they have RG59 from the pole to your house