When will Directv ADD more HD?
- Thread starter DSS Fan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 103
- Views 15K
- Status
They are probably counting all the RSN's to get to 92 I would imagine.
IF you added in the Locals in HD you would have WAY more than the 69 you mentioned.
Jimbo
Sorry but that dog dont hunt no more. COX Communications has reached agreements long ago, Verizon FIOS ( a neophyte provider) carries the channels and E* has also reached agreements. D* Excuse time by blaming Lin is over. EVERY TV provider in this DMA has reached agreements EXCEPT DIRECTV.
LIN making a deal with Cox is like Germany making a deal with Italy in 1938. It's just two corrupt entities agreeing on a common cause.
Comcast claims the "capacity for 1000 HD programs". There has to be something just a little fishy about that.
Both satellite carriers offer significantly less than what they claim. I think you may be right about DISH missing their claimed number by a larger percentage that DIRECTV. I'm less concerned about the differences in how they count than the fact that both are counting some channels that have little to no HD programming. I'm also more than a little tired of both claiming the rather large number of sports specialty channels that have programming only a few times a week.
I'd like a rundown as opposed to an estimate of how many probable channels that one might get if one subscribed to every season this and gameplan that.
LIL don't count as they're not available to everyone. Sure, cable counts them, but they offer them to everybody.
http://jameslong.name/hdcount.html
This one doesnt have the "gameplans", but it is a good list of nearly everything else
If you got all of the sports subscriptions, you would get HD on all of the part time RSNs which gives D* a count of 96 channels. Add the HD PPV and now you are over the magic 100 barrier. That's without counting LiL.
Correct, it puts it at 110 (he lists 109 without the networks, but doesnt count the 101, which wasnt HD when he made the list)
Sports packs from D* ,"that E* counts in their line up claim"
Directv has in HD
NHL 16
NBA 13
NFL has between 4-6 channels I believe?
Nascar Hot Pass 5
MLB hasn't been uplinked yet so I'm not sure!
Directv has in HD
NHL 16
NBA 13
NFL has between 4-6 channels I believe?
Nascar Hot Pass 5
MLB hasn't been uplinked yet so I'm not sure!
Didn't EVERY provider (cablecos as well as satcos) claim ESPN-HD and ESPN2-HD as HD channels when they launched? Think back - when those launched they also had little in HD. SportsCenter was not in HD for OVER A YEAR after the channel launched. The channel launched, don't blame the providers.
DirecTV recently lit WWOR channel 9 (MNT) in NY DMA in HD. That channel shows NOTHING in HD really. But it is officially carried as WWOR-DT and is officially listed by the FCC as a HD channel. So, what makes it a HD channel or not a HD channel?
Hallmark Movie Channel HD is due to launch on April 2nd, but I don't know on what services (this is according to Hallmark's website). Don't see much mentioned about them on the forums and it's probably not the most watched channel in the world, but they really do have some good family films (Hall of Fame, etc.).
This is where you have to debate, do you want the channel up in HD and have a small amount of HD available at the time and the potential to expand to most HD,or wait till they actually have the HD programming to fill it up , then be lit up as HD.
I don't have a problem with channels that are up and listed as HD but show very little, because in the long run they just need to ADD to the programming vs the efforts to actually turn a channel on in HD.
Yes, it would be nice that the current HD channels show more, and they will ... eventually.
Jimbo
And if you think they shouldn't be put up until there is enough hd content, how much is that? 50%? 75%? 75.000000000000001%?
I say put the channel up when it is available, and let the content take care of itself.
This is where DISH subs have to debate, and why they are. DirecTV has enough bandwidth to have all of those channels NOW, without having to so selectively pick and choose. I don't care what the percentage of programming on a particular channel is or isn't HD.
On the other hand, when you can only add a small sampling (or not be adding any at all), this debate might make some sense.
And for gosh sakes, wasn't it the other way around for the 2+ years prior to D10 lighting up?
Keep this up and you'll be asked to surrender your apologist credentials.
In the interest of accuracy, the wait was just over three years (9/4/2004 to 9/26/2007).
How about 20%?And if you think they shouldn't be put up until there is enough hd content, how much is that? 50%? 75%? 75.000000000000001%?
That's fair, since there are a few channels that have virtually no hd content at all. Since they will eventually, why not have them there ready to go? There is no good reason not to that I can think of. The upconverted sd content looks much better. Now if you want to talk about the stretching done by some of the channels, that I can agree with you on. Wait, did I just say I could agree with Harshness?
If they have enough bandwith - why wait? Don't count it if you don't want, don't watch it if you don't want - but why not carry it?
Scobuck, while they do have the bandwidth. The cant carry the channels yet because the providers are not offering them until the 30th. I don't think they can launch them any sooner contractually. Also, the band-with could be already used testing these guys out prior to launch. 
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
