DISH vs WOW!

[MI_SAT]

OK - I know what I don't know, so I'm going to the experts.

I have two televisions, one HD, one SD. Presently have a 508 and a 301 (no, I'm not piping HD through my HD set).

WOW! Cable has the following offer for $84/month:
(1) All Digital Cable - see attached for channel listing
(2) 1 HD-DVR
(3) 1 SD-DVR

For add'l $9.99/month, I could get the HD pack.

Alternative is to purchase an HD DVR and move my 508 to my second television (the one presently using the 301).

On the downside, I believe the WOW! DVR is something called an Explorer 8000 (Scientific Atlanta?). They told me it records 50 hours of SD, which I suspect is like 5-10 of HD (just a guess).

Now, this may not be an issue, since I rarely have more than six hours of programming recorded at any one time on my 508. I mostly time-shift. However, with HD, I might end up wanting to record more.

Knowing what I don't know, I'd like to know what you know. Thanks in advance!

Ooops - Cannot figure out how to attach a .pdf. Here's the link of channel listings.

http://www1.wowway.com/PDF/MichiganChannels.pdf

 

[TuxCoder]

No real answer here, just I have to point out their cable isn't "all digital"--almost half of the channels appear to be analog. I hate when cable companies try to claim "all digital".

Unless "WOW!" cable is a different kind of system... but every cable system I know of still sends the first 70-100 or so channels in analog (proof: your old fashioned TVs tune them without needing an external box).

 

[dishrich]

First IMHO, most people make TOO big a deal on whether cable is "all digital" or not. It really makes NO difference whether it's digital, analog, or comes over 2 tin cans & a string - it's the FINAL result that counts.
Just because something is digital does NOT mean it's GREAT (just look at some of the compressed, pixelated pictures on DBS) & just because something is analog does NOT mean it's bad (if you have ever seen a good C-band analog feed, it blows away anything NOT HD). Frankly, the analog lineup I get from Insight looks better on almost every channel than what comes down from DBS. BUT, this DOES vary from co. to co. & even sometimes within different locations in the same town.

Your best bet would be to give WOW a try. You (usually) don't have to commit to anything & if it turns out to really be bad, you can always disconnect it & go back to DBS. FWIW, that lineup you posted sure beats anything from DBS, speaking contentwise only.

 

[TuxCoder]

It's that CAPS guy.

dishrich, I agree with your statements above. I take all that into consideration but also I enjoy the added functionality a digital system gives me. Not too much added functionality yet, but I see more stuff coming in the future (and I don't mean lousy "interactive" games on the receiver). Granted, the average customer doesn't care about all that and would most likely be only interested in the best picture quality so if analog cable has great PQ at reasonable price, go for it.

 

[tdti1]

(if you have ever seen a good C-band analog feed, it blows away anything NOT HD).

Very true sd on big dish is mindblowing HD is just WOW!

 

[MI_SAT]

I have read many instances of folks with 50+ inch screens where SD (and with some, HD) looks bad. My HD screen is a 36" Sony WEGA 4:3 that I purchased two years ago. Perhaps it won't be subject to too many of the issues I read about with the larger screen.

Also, even with DISH, my local channels (ABC, CBS, etc.) look terrible. It's as if I'm looking at the channels through a dirty window. I cannot imagine analog being any worse. I could be wrong, though.

Finally, I do periodically get a brief (2 - 3 seconds) lost satellite signal. Not a tree problem. It's hard to explain, because when I look at the signal strength, it's almost always 110 or above. The spotbeams are always at 125 (maybe that's what's supposed to happen). This happens even when there is no wind.

I've enjoyed satellite since I've had it, but the minor problems -- coupled with significant investment required to get HD (I'm too leery of the 921 issues I've read about, which I otherwise consider appropriately priced) -- I'm thinking of going back to cable.

Will take more time to consider. I appreciate any and all thoughts on the subject.

 

[tdti1]

I cannot imagine analog being any worse. I could be wrong, though.

Analog is not compressed and so it gives the best picture on any size screen, but on cable due to the long length of run it gets fuzzy, the only way to capture true analog is with ota or big dish. Digital is compressed and has a screen size limit, if it is over commpressed like mini dish then it looks bad on anything 36" and up big dish digital looks great on screens 96" and up, but some channels are bad but most are pritty good some are perfect.

 

[dishrich]

Analog is not compressed and so it gives the best picture on any size screen, but on cable due to the long length of run it gets fuzzy,

Actually, this is not totally acurate - since most upgraded cable systems are now hybrid fiber/coax, the "long cable runs" are NOT really that much of an issue, since the fiber trunks basically have ZERO picture degradation. Now, once they are converted back to coax at the node level, then this might be an issue, but these runs are a LOT shorter than they obviously were pre-fiber, when the entire system was coax. (the actually amount of coax these signals travel is now feet & not miles long)