Quantity or Quality in Your HD channels?

[BFG]

I want both quantity and quality, but since these polls keep restricting it to either or I picked quantity, because I'd rather have more channels than stuck with the same stuff

 

[stone phillips420]

all current hd channels are worthless, lets get compelling programing and up the resolution to 1920 * 1080

Might want to add a real sports channel how bout tsnhd

 

[lovswr]

So maybe I'm the only brave person out here to admit it. But I want quantity but with quality programming. i want something i will pay for. I also have let Dish now as I just cancelled Voom because the quality was so low (in terms of programming - repeats don't do it for me, and Kung fu ???? What's all that about ), NOT because it's not HD full rez.

I also am someone, that spent less than $2k on my 42 inch plasma HD equipment, so the full rez issue is less important to me.
As a counter point. 7 years ago, I spent, more than than 2k on a 36" Sony regular TV, so i think you have to factor in the people now having access without spending 3K+. HD lite is good enough for me. Now you can all have a shot at me

Joe (Jeff) public

I'm right there with you Brother. At this point in time, I think the Quality Queens are just barking up the wrong tree. (THis SOOOO reminds me of the 921 USB issue). Just like I posted in the AVS thread, I have taken to watching all sorts of stuff that I would normally never even think about. Give me NGHD, Science HD, TNT HD & just more HD, thennn we can worry about qualilty.

However I know that here that statements like the above are anathema, but this is the world that we live in, IMHO.

 

[Sean Mota]

Almost 3 out of 10 people want Quantiy (HD Lite). Interested....

 

[kokomogator]

So far 1 out of 5 people will prefer Quantity (HD LITE) over Quality (Full Resolution).

But I thought this forum was represented at CES as preferring Quantity over Quality to Dish execs!!!
Not my opinion by the way.......

 

[BigFella]

Just FYI that I voted for quality. I just wanted to state what we all really want with HD not what we have to accept. Once you draw a line in the sand and say, "Ok, I will accept this", you weaken your voice. If there are 30 HD channels available out there, I want the ability (choice) to have all 30 and all in full-rez. If it takes a year or two to get the bandwidth necessary, fine, but the pressure to get there should never stop.

I know this will ruffle the feathers of the "Quality" purists (a group that I usually consider myself to be a proud member of), but the current state of Quality on Dish is acceptable to me so I chose Quantity. To my eye, there's a night and day difference between SD and HD (Lite) programming on my BenQ projector via my 942. I know that if I were to do an A/B test between HD-Lite and Full Res HD I'd probably see a difference, but given the choice of this poll, it's worth it to me to have more variety.
Right now the market dictates competition on the quantity side. A couple/few years from now I believe that Dish and Direct will be competing with each other and cable on quality (when bandwidth permits and J6P's eyes become more critical) - that's where "the pressure to get there" will come from.

 

[gutter]

It is interesting that one year ago DISH was telling us that VOOM wasn't reall HD because it was 1440 X 1080i. The CSR's were well schooled to say this. Now they give us 1280 X 1080i and we are supposed to think this is HD. How did this miracle happen?

 

[CPanther95]

We don't even need J6P's eyes to become more critical or to recruit more "purists". This whole issue will hinge on one company making it an issue. When that happens and the message is pounded into the consumers minds - no amount of "just as good" or "can't tell a difference" will matter at that point - consumers will gravitate to the quality even if it is only perceived.

E* had the choice of making that an issue or jumping into HD-LILs. Possibly promoting HD PQ and limiting themselves to Top 20 markets of HD-LIL (the point beyond which they earlier claimed was not profitable). Instead it appears they are jumping into HD-LILs with both feet. With 800 HD channels out there, they are not exactly bandwidth flush - certainly not enough to challenge D*. Not when by the time the marketing is likely to have an effect, D* will be launching D10 & D11.

It's sad to say, but the most likely chance we have for HD PQ to become marketable is probably going to be left up to the HD-Lite master when they have bandwidth to burn.

 

[Mark_AR]

We didn't spend $2,000-$10,000 to watch fuzzy downgraded images lacking deatil and definition.

We pay for *HIGH DEFINITION*, we should not get Mediocre Defintion.

If that is the case I should wheel my hdtv out in the yard and plant flowers in it.

 

[gutter]

I was just watching Industry Insiders on HDNET. It seems the manufacturers of the sets keep making them better and better with more brightness, contrast and detail. Even talking about 1440P. This is what is so frustrating. They keep making the sets better but many of the distribution channels down rez so you can't see all that quality. This is nuts!!!

 

[klen]

This was an issue going back to the VOOM days. Sure, quality is great, and it is why we bought our sets. But at what point do you get bored with repetition that fewer channels would show? Why not combine some of the Voom channels, and just have less repetition?

Here are your choices:
6 channels with true HD and tons of repetitive programming or
15 channels of HDlite with a much better variety of programming.

If they opted for the 6 channel plan, then everyone would bitch about lack of variety. Truth is, people are more willing to bitch about something than they are to appreciate the good in some things.

With more channels, they are trying to appeal to the mass market that doesn't know what true HD is.

The videophiles are the minority in this world- just not here and on AVS.

It is similar to when you could get "Original master recordings" of albums and cds. Very few people appreciated how much better it was, so it was always just a novelty. You could eat a steak at Ruth Chris's Steak House and it would be a killer expensive meal, but most other people can eat a steak at Outback and still think that it was a fantastic meal at a decent price.

There are anologys all over the place. You want tons of true HD? Start up your own company, and send up your own birds. Oops. I forgot. Voom already tried that, and even with their super cheap monthly rates, they only got 50,000 people to understand what they were doing, and they folded in 15 months after burning a BILLION dollars.

Variety is the selling point- at least for now. Hopefully, they will tout "new and improved picture" down the road.

 

[Sarang]

This was an issue going back to the VOOM days. Sure, quality is great, and it is why we bought our sets. But at what point do you get bored with repetition that fewer channels would show? Why not combine some of the Voom channels, and just have less repetition?
Here are your choices:
6 channels with true HD and tons of repetitive programming or
15 channels of HDlite with a much better variety of programming.
If they opted for the 6 channel plan, then everyone would bitch about lack of variety. Truth is, people are more willing to bitch about something than they are to appreciate the good in some things.
With more channels, they are trying to appeal to the mass market that doesn't know what true HD is.
The videophiles are the minority in this world- just not here and on AVS.
It is similar to when you could get "Original master recordings" of albums and cds. Very few people appreciated how much better it was, so it was always just a novelty. You could eat a steak at Ruth Chris's Steak House and it would be a killer expensive meal, but most other people can eat a steak at Outback and still think that it was a fantastic meal at a decent price.
There are anologys all over the place. You want tons of true HD? Start up your own company, and send up your own birds. Oops. I forgot. Voom already tried that, and even with their super cheap monthly rates, they only got 50,000 people to understand what they were doing, and they folded in 15 months after burning a BILLION dollars.
Variety is the selling point- at least for now. Hopefully, they will tout "new and improved picture" down the road.

Jeez did you even READ my post in the "HD Vs. HD-Lite" forum where I made the point you were full of s**t when you bitched about VOOM since they offered about the same amount of HD that Dish offers currently. You kidding me about the 15 channels?! When VOOM was around people were bitching about the repetitiveness on those 21 channels so explain to me WHERE the f**k you're coming from?! More channels doesn't neccesarily mean more variety or if it does not neccessarily worthwhile programming. WE comes to mind, Nick...toons as another one.
Here's my list of worthwhile s**t for HD that I won't stand under HD-Lite and might give you some stuff you could actually stomach: TCM-HD, IFC-HD, MBC-HD, SBS-HD, KBS-HD, BBC America-HD, FHD, all six EXTRA HD movie channels, Animania HD supplemented with HD Anime at night provided by TV Tokyo, think "Adult Swim" with SAP as well and the rest of the day separate, VOOM channels compressed more CONTENTwise or almost no more loops on the existing one's.
I can't think of much more at the current time but there's a bit more s**t that could be stomached programmingwise for the HD fans that hate this repetition and Dish could give full HD to this and then sit on HD for a while long as they got some of them exclusive for a while. Quality content speaks for itself and I'm sure the quantity people would quit bitching for a while if they could get some of the good s**t I'm mentioning above. TCM and IFC you'd be getting loops but I think they could satisfy people to some extent.
Sorry for rambling peeps.

 

[cebbigh]

Quality.

Quantity will follow.

 

[klen]

Jeez did you even READ my post in the "HD Vs. HD-Lite" forum where I made the point you were full of s**t when you bitched about VOOM since they offered about the same amount of HD that Dish offers currently. You kidding me about the 15 channels?! When VOOM was around people were bitching about the repetitiveness on those 21 channels so explain to me WHERE the f**k you're coming from?! More channels doesn't neccesarily mean more variety or if it does not neccessarily worthwhile programming. WE comes to mind, Nick...toons as another one.
Here's my list of worthwhile s**t for HD that I won't stand under HD-Lite and might give you some stuff you could actually stomach: TCM-HD, IFC-HD, MBC-HD, SBS-HD, KBS-HD, BBC America-HD, FHD, all six EXTRA HD movie channels, Animania HD supplemented with HD Anime at night provided by TV Tokyo, think "Adult Swim" with SAP as well and the rest of the day separate, VOOM channels compressed more CONTENTwise or almost no more loops on the existing one's.

Thanks for your polite and intelligent response.
BTW- Your list of "worthwhiles" sucks.
I wouldn't take any of those crap channels, with the exception of the "extra HD movie channels", and most other people wouldn't, either.
HD Anime??????? Gimme a break. Do you collect Yu Ghi Oh! cards, too?
That's why variety and more mainstream is the business focus.
DUHHHH?

 

[tonyp56]

I didn't vote:

How about a happy medium? The poll is like asking "Do you want a million dollars or none?" There has to be a happy medium in there, which do you want 10 channels at 100% or 20, 30, ... at 75%? It don't have to be 30 channels at 50%. It is kind of like saying all or nothing isn't it?

Of course, I want great quality HD, but why not worry about perfecting HD after it becomes more wide spread. Why not show some patience with your provider, and perhaps wait until after MPEG4 and everything else is fully implemented.

 

[FIREBIRD81]

We didn't spend $2,000-$10,000 to watch fuzzy downgraded images lacking deatil and definition.
We pay for *HIGH DEFINITION*, we should not get Mediocre Defintion.
If that is the case I should wheel my hdtv out in the yard and plant flowers in it.

Of course we didn't! We paid it to watch Mischievous Meerkats 10 times a week in glorious 1920 x 1080i! Personally I paid all that money, plus the monthly programming fee and 811 lease fee so I could wathc the same Chicago, Fleetwood Mac and Genesis concerts over and over again--on a program I could have received for free OAR on PBS-HD. And those awesome claymation special effects that half the movies on Monsters HD look so much better in 1920 x 1080i. I can watch the same group of people bungee jumping off of the same bridge, the same guy climbing the same mountain, and the same crappy art gallery I've been watching for the past YEAR. Because QUALITY HD is simply a resolution thing!

Really, from everything I've seen, we are talking about VOOM, as HDNET and all of the regular HD tier channels are still being broadcast in the same resolutions with no apparent plan to reduce them. I certainly understand and agree wholeheartedly that full resolution is superior to hd-lite, but the more pressing issue for VOOM right now isn't resolution-----it's content. I just watched the first new show I've seen on RushHD last night in nearly a year. VOOM is certainly stepping up plans to offer new content, but so far I haven't seen ANY plan from VOOM that updates content enough to maintain 10 channels, much less 15 or the 21 some people around here are screaming about. Let VOOM concentrate on making itself a compelling alternative to HD NET or DiscoveryHD Theater and then I will wholeheartdly jump on any bandwagon that demands full resolution. Until then--I don't really give a rat's ass WHAT resolution VOOM is in.

 

[Gary Murrell]

Of course we didn't! We paid it to watch Mischievous Meerkats 10 times a week in glorious 1920 x 1080i! Personally I paid all that money, plus the monthly programming fee and 811 lease fee so I could wathc the same Chicago, Fleetwood Mac and Genesis concerts over and over again--on a program I could have received for free OAR on PBS-HD. And those awesome claymation special effects that half the movies on Monsters HD look so much better in 1920 x 1080i. I can watch the same group of people bungee jumping off of the same bridge, the same guy climbing the same mountain, and the same crappy art gallery I've been watching for the past YEAR. Because QUALITY HD is simply a resolution thing!
Really, from everything I've seen, we are talking about VOOM, as HDNET and all of the regular HD tier channels are still being broadcast in the same resolutions with no apparent plan to reduce them. I certainly understand and agree wholeheartedly that full resolution is superior to hd-lite, but the more pressing issue for VOOM right now isn't resolution-----it's content. I just watched the first new show I've seen on RushHD last night in nearly a year. VOOM is certainly stepping up plans to offer new content, but so far I haven't seen ANY plan from VOOM that updates content enough to maintain 10 channels, much less 15 or the 21 some people around here are screaming about. Let VOOM concentrate on making itself a compelling alternative to HD NET or DiscoveryHD Theater and then I will wholeheartdly jump on any bandwagon that demands full resolution. Until then--I don't really give a rat's ass WHAT resolution VOOM is in.

I do not agree with this, I think Voom's content is fine, we need True 1920x1080i resolution first and for most, as soon as that happens I can enjoy the entire Voom catalog 3 or 4 times

I don't think folks realize how good all those PBS concerts on Rave would look, PBS is top notch 1920x1080i HD and among the top of the class in picture quality,

Rave HD looks so bad right now , it's like viewing thru a piss stained window

-Gary

 

[gbjbany]

Perhaps we can start another survey, not sure how to do it,

I would expect for free Quality programming (limited repeats, all premium Movie Channels) (HD Lite)
I would expect for free any programming but lots of it (HD Lite)
I would expect for free only quality resolution not worried about content (HD full)


I would pay $10/month for Quality programming (limited repeats, all premium Movie Channels) (HD Lite)
I would pay $10/month for Quality programming and quality Res (limited repeats,, all premium Movie Channels) (HD-Full)
I would pay $10/month for any programming but lots of it (HD Lite)
I would pay $10/month for only quality resolution not worried about content (HD full)

I would pay any amount for Quality programming (limited repeats, all premium Movie Channels) (HD Lite)

I would pay any amount for Quality programming and quality Res (limited repeats,, all premium Movie Channels) (HD-Full)
I would any amount for only quality resolution not worried about content (HD full)


OK, worked out how to do a poll but can only do 10 questions and i have 16. Should i post it ?

 

[danielle_s]

I don't own an hdtv atm, but I guess I should express my personal view upon this since I'll eventually have an hdtv.

1280x1080i or no i = it doesn't really matter to me. If you going to down convert the signal that much then you should just thow the channel into at180 and be done with it. It doesn't make any sense to go out and spend thousands of dollars on a tv when your picture isn't worth it.

1440x1080i? Well the picture has definately gotten better imho. The money is now being well spent on the tv. I could live with this. Hell even at this ratio the pic is way better and even comes through better than any digital or analog station that I've seen even on an sd tv.

1920x1080i = Awesome TV! If I'm going to spend thousands of dollars for a tv that was designed to recieve a signal with this ratio then that's excately what I intend to get. I really don't understand the who ratio and bitrate thingy but I will tell you this, if echostar will not put up more than 3 hd channels to a transponder regardless if it's 1280 or 1920 then they should just keep it at 1920. It makes no sense not to.

In my personal opinion there should be no reason to have to down covert any signal that is received. If you receive it at 1920 then keep it that way. If you receive it at 1280 then keep it that way. However though, if I was heading echostar I'd encourage them to up they ratio to at least 1440 and then broadcast they're signal at 1440 when they upped. Fighting with these service providers almost seems pointless and worthless at times but apparently that's what we need to do to get what we pay for. If echostar and directv and local cable companies start down rezing signals then that sends a message to the various content providers, "Why do we need to send them a 1920 (for example) ratio when they're going to down convert it? We'll just send it in 1280 since that's what they're broadcasting to they're subs." This is the reason that we need to fight for quality over quanity. Over the past 4 years it seems that the number of channels available in HD seems to be doubling each and every year, and that's good thing. In just a couple of years, 2009, I believe that we will have well over 50 channels not counting the voom stations and it would be a realy shame to have that many channels paid for seperatly to only receive them in 1280 because echostar and directv showed them that people didn't care if they received them in 1280 or 1920

Thanks for reading my rant,
Danielle

 

[mike123abc]

I would bet that most of the people that picked Quality would secretly pick quantity if it came down to a choice of either having their favorite channel in HD or not having it at all. Everyone has different channels they like to watch and of course they want their channels to be in pure pristine HD with a few extra bits thrown in to be sure the utmost detail appears in every second. But, Dish knows that having a channel that someone wants will sell many more Dish subscriptions than not carrying a channel because other channels will look better.