Locals in HD THRU E* ? (1 Viewer)

protoboard

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Family
May 13, 2004
57
0
Can someone explain to me why local digital cable providers such as Comcast can have CBS, ABC, FOX etc.. in HD, yet with DISH you have to get them OTA? Why does DISH not have local channels in HD? Is this a legal issue or are they coming?
 

rcbridge

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 22, 2003
583
0
Limerick Pa
It's known as lack of bandwidth, to carry every station in every local market in HD would take a tremendous amount of it, which is not available on satellite.
Any cable company only needs to carry the stations in there market. That could translate from as few as 3 to about 6 or seven stations.
 

SimpleSimon

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Feb 29, 2004
5,692
3
Florissant, CO
I just thought of something. Right now, LiL is in SD, and I'll guess almost all analog OTA. It's not going to be long (FCC mandated for 2008 maybe?) before it's all digital, and therefore much more likely to be HD all the time.

What's E* and D* going to do then?
 

GaryPen

Rich or poor, it's good to have money.
Supporting Founder
Here's a thought, as well. Why not offer Network HD for those with Distant Net waivers? I know WCBS/KCBS-HD is an automatic waiver for subs in CBS O&O DMA's. And, there is currently no blanket waiver like that for the other Nets. But, why not do it for the manual waiver receipients?
The HD subs already have the wing dishes for CBS, plus there is apparently bandwidth there. WTF not?
 

SimpleSimon

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Feb 29, 2004
5,692
3
Florissant, CO
GaryPen said:
Here's a thought, as well. Why not offer Network HD for those with Distant Net waivers? I know WCBS/KCBS-HD is an automatic waiver for subs in CBS O&O DMA's. And, there is currently no blanket waiver like that for the other Nets. But, why not do it for the manual waiver receipients?
The HD subs already have the wing dishes for CBS, plus there is apparently bandwidth there. WTF not?
Oh, I wish, I wish.

While we're brainstorming, the only reason to have locals is for the news and commercials, right? News can be SD, and highly compressed - say 50-60 channels to a transponder :rolleyes: so all that's left is the ads. Just add a transponder auto-switch feature that's triggered by the same signal the networks use to have the local commercials start.

Problem solved. ;) :p
 

waltinvt

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Feb 16, 2004
3,439
1
Vermont
GaryPen said:
Here's a thought, as well. Why not offer Network HD for those with Distant Net waivers? I know WCBS/KCBS-HD is an automatic waiver for subs in CBS O&O DMA's. And, there is currently no blanket waiver like that for the other Nets. But, why not do it for the manual waiver receipients?
The HD subs already have the wing dishes for CBS, plus there is apparently bandwidth there. WTF not?

This brings up a point and I wish someone could clear this up. Supposedly the new Shiva that was passed by the House had a stipulation that Satellite companies could provide ANY HD network (as a distant) to ANY customer where their local affiliate was NOT yet broadcasting in HD. Then I heard that the provision may not still be in the bill but no info about when, why or if it was removed.

If there was ever a time for us to be getting on our Senator's butts - it's now. Otherwise we'll all of a sudden be stuck with a bunch of crap that has to wait until the next renewal date to be changed.

This provision (if it's still in there) could potentially be huge in the sense that it finally seperates HD from plain digital and analog when it comes to qualification requirements. It would be especially good for many of us in outlying areas (like me in Vermont), whose local stations plan to ride the "time extension" as far as the FCC will let them and still probably won't go HD even when they have to go digital.

WaltinVt
 

mini1

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jan 2, 2004
662
0
you want locals by satellite in HD? you need DirecTV, they will be adding them to the top 30 DMA's next year. And they will keep moving down the list after that.
 

WeeJavaDude

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 25, 2003
766
0
SoCal
mini1 said:
you want locals by satellite in HD? you need DirecTV, they will be adding them to the top 30 DMA's next year. And they will keep moving down the list after that.

Got a link for this Mini or is this pure speculation?
 

GaryPen

Rich or poor, it's good to have money.
Supporting Founder
mini1 said:
you want locals by satellite in HD? you need DirecTV, they will be adding them to the top 30 DMA's next year. And they will keep moving down the list after that.

Even with the new 7s bird, they wouldn't have enough bandwidth for HD locals for more than a few DMA's. Perhaps they are adding East/West HD Nets for O&O DMA's and those with waivers from local affiliates (a la CBS)? That would seem more likely.
 

ChuckW

Active SatelliteGuys Member
Sep 8, 2003
20
0
The most recent D* quarterly report indicates that they are going to add the top 30 markets in HD by next year.
 

SimpleSimon

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Feb 29, 2004
5,692
3
Florissant, CO
rcbridge said:
http://www.iwantmyhdtv.com

This link.

That will only provide the national feeds for those who cant get local if you qualify!!
Maybe - or maybe you'll be able to get satellite HD if you're out of digital OTA range (remember - analog will be dead within a few years - or centuries :)). Part of this campaign is to reset the rules on coverage areas.

In any event, it would be nice if the entire world bombarded their representatives on behalf of those of us that will never have OTA, and the locals are sticking their longest finger in the air at us.
 

Foxbat

Addicted to new HW
Supporting Founder
Lifetime Supporter
Nov 25, 2003
15,486
7,494
Michiana
I'm sure if D* downconverts the HD signals taken OTA from the major markets, they could fit more than if they tooks the original Network HD feeds and sent that. That's the lie of OTA HD, it is rarely passed at the full 19.2Mbps, it's usually diluted by one or more parasitic 480i sub-channels. So, D* takes a 15Mbps and further trims it to under 10Mps, and you've got two "HD" channels squeezed into the space of one.

I'm happy I can get my ATSC locals via OTA. It's bad enough loosing the "cable" channels when the big storms hit; I'd hate to lose the local weather alerts as well. Although severe weather usually means no HD as the local stations don't have HD graphics overlay capabilities yet.

And yep, I went and did my part going to the www.iwantmyhdtv.com, since we'll never have HD ABC or WB in our area.
 

snathanb

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Feb 26, 2004
2,580
1
DFW
Foxbat said:
That's the lie of OTA HD, it is rarely passed at the full 19.2Mbps, it's usually diluted by one or more parasitic 480i sub-channels.

Ain't that the truth! And for what? Around here is for a silly weather radar.

We have one channel here in Dallas now using their spectrum to broadcast 4 separate 480i channels with different programming. (Except it's Pax, and we don't really watch it).
 

waltinvt

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Feb 16, 2004
3,439
1
Vermont
HD Networks - If you want them..........

The point is that NOW is when this stuff is being decided. Somewhere between the end of the summer and early next year we WILL have a revised Shiva as LAW and we WILL be stuck with whatever it says for a long time.

We'll be stuck with more crappy decisions made by the NAB, FCC and the Cable industry - people who haven't a clue or a care as to what Sat viewers really want or what's really fair. Then they'll be a slew of posts here with everyone moaning and groaning about how abused we are.

This mess is about as low on the legislator's priority list as anything can get. They just want to get it over with and will probably follow the path of least political resistance. Unless some of that loud "political" is from sat providers and viewers, we won't get much and may loose a lot.

They're goint to eliminate any possibility of anyone, under any circumstances being able to have both local and distant networks. Either they or you will choose but you ain't gonna have them both - UNLESS........

There does seem to be some openess to the possibility that the HD broadcast of networks should be treated differently. We know there is some interest on Dish's part in providing all the HD networks or they wouldn't be pushing us to call / write our congress people.

This openess has nothing to do with careing about Sat viewers getting HD Networks but everything to do with money. There's billions at stake with the release of analog bandwith and the push to digital. There's nothing however that says anything about HD - only digital. However HD is going to be the carrot and the catalyst.

Many of these small affiliate stations will apply for extension after extension and resist the conversion to digital as long as they can (Fox may be the exception). Even if / when they go digital, they'll resist providing HD forever if they can keep getting protection from DBS providers being able to give us the HD Networks.

The rub here is the goverment. They want the analog space and the money it will produce. They push from one side. The NAB protects the affiliates to the death and so they push from the other side. The Cable industry, who lost "locals" protection under the last Shiva, now realize their ONLY hope is HD Networks, and push back.

Everyone has their organized push and what do we have - Charlie and Rurpert - and they arn't even working together. Sure makes me feel warm and fuzzy.

Seriously, unless Sat providers agree to fight this thing together - as an industry, they don't have much chance. A combined effort of Dish, DTV, even Voom could get some attention, especially if there is a "ground swell" of noise from Sat viewers.

They can go back to fighting and competing later but for now combine efforts and fight for 2 things:

1. That DBS providers be able to provide anything cable is allowed to provide.

2. That DBS be able to provide a distant HD Network to ANYONE whose local affiliate can't / won't provide an HD signal to that viewer - period.

WaltinVt
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top