Now it is time to write DISH Again.

[waltinvt]

Let's hear from the rest of you. It is not enough to express your displeasure on this site or "Let Scott Do it." Pound out your own email to DISH and make yourself heard. Even if they don't read them all they will know from the title of your email what you are writing about. Time to speak up for yourself. Good idea that gvilledish has to forward to local papers and trade journals. That got a lot of attention in VOOM's phase one closure/ not closing last February. We can do it again. Force DISH to provide an answer or give amunition to the competition to use against DISH. Either one works in my book.

Scott can'do a lot but he can't do it all. Besides it sounds like Charlie really takes note when he gets a lot of emails. He said so in the chat last night. It bothers him. I can't think of a better reason to write.

My own letter went out a few hours ago.

 

[goaliebob99]

Guys

http://ftp.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Ord...1/fcc01022.pdf

Check out pages 22-26 (section E.) ... Dish and Directv is breaking the law and IS SUBJECTIVE TO A Class action LAWSUTE!!!!!!!!!!

I do recommend emailing dish and directv..

 

[RandallA]

Bob,

The link is not working.

 

[goaliebob99]

http://ftp.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.pdf


Whoops there you go

 

[RandallA]

Thanks.

 

[Gary Murrell]

who has the mineral rocks to go thru with the lawsuit ??

I am crazy enough to do it, or at least inform Dish that it is possible

advertising mpeg4 and delivering mpeg2 and selling receivers to receive said phony Mpeg4
is also a pure form of bait and switch, which the BBB loves to hear about

-Gary

 

[Weezknight]

http://ftp.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Orders/2001/fcc01022.pdf


Whoops there you go

I'm not really a guru when it comes to these things. But as far as that says they are not breaking the law. Since the FCC only claimed that signals broadcast in 780p or 1080i qualify, than Dish is doing its job. They are not reducing those signals, but in the case of HDLITE (pardon the expression) they are still broadcasting in 1080i (as per the law), but it just happens to be 1280x1080, instead of 1920x1080.

The FCC should've clarified the defintion to include 1920x1080, but since they did not I believe DISH will be okay by saying they are receiving a 1080i broadcast, and sending it as a 1080i broadcast.

But that's just my interpretation.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

You are all assuming that Dish is the one downgrading the resolution.

Al we met with both VOOM and Dish, and VOOM said they where not down rezing and Marc Lumpkin gave us an explanation of WHY they were down rezing.

I actually called HokieEngineer and Scooters over to listen to Marc explanation to make sure I reported everything correctly.

From where I sit all fingers point to Dish for the issue, especially when they were willing to take the blame.

 

[drsiebling]

To Whom it May Concern,

Thanks for taking the time on last night's Charlie Chat to address upgrade issues for current customers to the new MPEG-4 format. While I believe the plan is well thought out, I think that opening an option up BEFORE April for those of us who want to upgrade to the new 611 would be a wise move. I for one am extremely eager to upgrade my 942 to the new 611 and waiting until April seems like an awfully long wait to experience these new channels. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to take advantage of the same promotional deal and still have the ability to enjoy all the new HD channels immediately.

On a completely different note, Dish Network has still not addressed the alarming trend of downrezzing its HD channels to the 1280x1080 resolution. The drop in picture quality is extremely noticiable and makes HD content less enjoyable. Furthermore, the FCC specifically defines high definition television as adhering to the following standards:

FCC 01-22 released January 23, 2001, FIRST REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE
OF PROPOSED RULE RULEMAKING, paragraph 71 (and footnote 204).
http://ftp.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Ord...1/fcc01022.pdf

States the definition of HD:
The Executive Committee of the Advanced Television Systems Committee has approved for release the following statement regarding the identification of the HDTV and SDTV transmission formats within the ATSC Digital Television Standard: "There
are six video formats in the ATSC DTV standard which are High Definition. They are
the 1080 line by 1920 pixel formats at all picture rates (24, 30 and 60 pictures
per second), and the 720 line by 1280 pixel formats at these same picture rates.
All of these formats have a 16:9 aspect ratio."

So, as you can see, the FCC does not even recognize your current 1280x1080 broadcasts as being in high definition. If Dish continues to broadcast at this level, then calling it High Definition would be tantamount to false advertizing.

I eagerly await your response.

We'll see what form letter I get in response to this one...

 

[Weezknight]

FCC 01-22 released January 23, 2001, FIRST REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE
OF PROPOSED RULE RULEMAKING, paragraph 71 (and footnote 204).
http://ftp.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Ord...1/fcc01022.pdf
States the definition of HD:
The Executive Committee of the Advanced Television Systems Committee has approved for release the following statement regarding the identification of the HDTV and SDTV transmission formats within the ATSC Digital Television Standard: "There
are six video formats in the ATSC DTV standard which are High Definition. They are
the 1080 line by 1920 pixel formats at all picture rates (24, 30 and 60 pictures
per second), and the 720 line by 1280 pixel formats at these same picture rates.
All of these formats have a 16:9 aspect ratio."

I'm glad you pointed this out. That's what I get for not reading the foot notes!

 

[goaliebob99]

I'm not really a guru when it comes to these things. But as far as that says they are not breaking the law. Since the FCC only claimed that signals broadcast in 780p or 1080i qualify, than Dish is doing its job. They are not reducing those signals, but in the case of HDLITE (pardon the expression) they are still broadcasting in 1080i (as per the law), but it just happens to be 1280x1080, instead of 1920x1080.

The FCC should've clarified the defintion to include 1920x1080, but since they did not I believe DISH will be okay by saying they are receiving a 1080i broadcast, and sending it as a 1080i broadcast.

But that's just my interpretation.

Actually it does... its on page 23.. cut and pasted right here

ATSC Restates Definitions for HDTV and SDTV Transmission Standards​

, Press Release (Feb. 20, 1998) at​

http://www.atsc.org/Presshtml/PR_Def.html

("The Executive Committee of the Advanced Television Systems Committee has
approved for release the following statement regarding the identification of the HDTV and SDTV transmission formats within the
ATSC Digital Television Standard: "There are six video formats in the ATSC DTV standard which are High Definition. They are the
1080 line by 1920 pixel formats at all picture rates (24, 30 and 60 pictures per second), and the 720 line by 1280 pixel formats at these
same picture rates. All of these formats have a 16:9 aspect ratio.";DTV Fifth Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 11 FCC Rcd. 6235,
6237 (1996) ("DTV Fifth FNPRM") (Noting that 720-line and 1080-line formats represent high resolution video). Both
high-resolution formats use a picture aspect ratio of 16 units horizontally by 9 units vertically. The choices of 1280 pixels per line for
the 720-line format and 1920 pixels per line for the 1080-line format result in square pixels for both formats, based on the 16:9 aspect
ratio. "I" designates "interlaced" scanning and "P" designates "progressive" scanning. Progressive scanning lines are presented in
succession from the top of the picture to the bottom, with a complete image sent in each frame as is commonly found in computer
displays today. For interlaced scanning, which also is used in NTSC (analog) television, odd and even numbered lines of the picture are
sent consecutively, as two separate fields. These two fields are superimposed to create one frame, or complete picture, at the receiver.
The interlace picture rates can be 24, 30 or 60 fields per second. Id. at 11 FCC Rcd at 6237-38. See also CEA Expands Definitions for
DTV Products, www.digitalbroadcasting.com, September 6, 2000 (Definitions, which now allow for DTV to be defined in the 4:3
aspect ratio standard, are expected to be incorporated into new products in time for holiday buying season)





​

 

[Weezknight]

I'm glad you pointed this out. That's what I get for not reading the foot notes!

Repost my apology from the bottom of page 3. I didn't read the footnotes.

 

[scottrell]

I'm not really a guru when it comes to these things. But as far as that says they are not breaking the law. Since the FCC only claimed that signals broadcast in 780p or 1080i qualify, than Dish is doing its job. They are not reducing those signals, but in the case of HDLITE (pardon the expression) they are still broadcasting in 1080i (as per the law), but it just happens to be 1280x1080, instead of 1920x1080.
The FCC should've clarified the defintion to include 1920x1080, but since they did not I believe DISH will be okay by saying they are receiving a 1080i broadcast, and sending it as a 1080i broadcast.
But that's just my interpretation.

Please read footnote 204 in the document, which does declare the 1080i resolution to be only 1920. It appears to let the ATSC define HD, which may be a problem.

I'd like to see a cease and desist on the "breaking the law" whooping. They are under no requirement to deliver any HD. But they shouldn't be selling products as HD when in fact they aren't--it could void the contract and make them liable for damages (ie. refunds).

-sc

 

[goaliebob99]

Yea I see where your coming from Ill cese and disist ..

 

[BFG]

Marc Lumpkin gave us an explanation of WHY they were down rezing.

Scott can you please show me this again. Because I have yet to find an explanition that makes sense. If it's because it's giving them more bandwidth and room to add more channels, then that explanation is false. Voom is at 3 HD per Tp which is the same thing the HD pack is at over on 110 and all of those channels are at 1920. 3 channels on a tp at 1280 currently takes just as much room as 3 channels on a tp at 1920

 

[BFG]

Dish can easily do 3 HD per transponder, by mixing HD Movie channels and 720p with 2 1920x1080i HDTV video, 720p and HD Movie channels(with telecine flags) use less bandwidth
It's not ideal though, but does work decent
I agree with BFG 100%, this just makes no sense
I fired off another email
-Gary

Yeah I think I'm going to add my question in my sig until it gets answered. And I don't think they'll be able to answer it because there's no logic to dish's madness

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Scott can you please show me this again. Because I have yet to find an explanition that makes sense. If it's because it's giving them more bandwidth and room to add more channels, then that explanation is false. Voom is at 3 HD per Tp which is the same thing the HD pack is at over on 110 and all of those channels are at 1920. 3 channels on a tp at 1280 currently takes just as much room as 3 channels on a tp at 1920

I never said it made sense to me eaither... I was just reporting what I was told, Maybe Hokieengineer or Scooters can hope in here and tell you what they heard as they were with me as well.

 

[RandallA]

I read this as there are 6 video formats in the ATSC DTV standard for High Definition. I don't see any mention of 1280 x 1080, so technically I think we might have something to bitch about. But that's just my opinion.

1920 x 1080 (24, 30, and 60 pictures per second).
1280 x 720 (24, 30, and 60 pictures per second).

"There are six video formats in the ATSC DTV standard which are High Definition. They are the 1080 line by 1920 pixel formats at all picture rates (24, 30 and 60 pictures per second), and the 720 line by 1280 pixel formats at these
same picture rates. All of these formats have a 16:9 aspect ratio."

"Both high-resolution formats use a picture aspect ratio of 16 units horizontally by 9 units vertically. The choices of 1280 pixels per line for the 720-line format and 1920 pixels per line for the 1080-line format result in square pixels for both formats, based on the 16:9 aspect ratio."

 

[BFG]

I never said it made sense to me eaither... I was just reporting what I was told, Maybe Hokieengineer or Scooters can hope in here and tell you what they heard as they were with me as well.

So then if I recall correctly, what you were told is they need to lower voom to 1280 so they can offer ESPN2-HD and Universal-HD? I just wanna get their silly story straight...

 

[CPanther95]

Please read footnote 204 in the document, which does declare the 1080i resolution to be only 1920. It appears to let the ATSC define HD, which may be a problem.
I'd like to see a cease and desist on the "breaking the law" whooping. They are under no requirement to deliver any HD. But they shouldn't be selling products as HD when in fact they aren't--it could void the contract and make them liable for damages (ie. refunds).
-sc

If it were determined that the ATSC standards apply to HDTV as a whole in the industry - then they would be breaking the law. It would be illegal to call it HD when it isn't. More important than refunds would be the requirement that they couldn't call it HD - that would be all it takes.

However, it has yet to be shown that they are under any obligations to adhere to the ATSC standards. While they used to reference those standards when defining HD, they no longer advertise those standards as the exclusive determinant of what qualifies as HD. Until someone (FTC) determines that the ATSC standards are the generally held standards in the industry - and the standards that shall be used when marketing HDTV - a lawsuit would lead nowhere, except to the degree that the press picks up on it and educates the public.