No HD for road games?

[Warhawk]

I'll take your word for it; Sony.com has a Bravia NX800 52" priced at twenty-eight hundred dollars. That's more than I paid for my car. I'm not spending more on a television than I would on a car.

Well, depends on the TV and the car.

Rock and I have the same TV, a 56" Samsung 1080p set, and watching a Blu-Ray movie is much better than SD TV. I think we may be getting HD Dish or something soon. Haven't popped for it yet, but watching it at my in-laws makes me think it is about time....

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

How bad is his TV? How bad is his eyesight?

How bad is yours if you find the difference from SD to HD largely negligible? The difference is so stark I can hardly watch a news cast if it is not in high def. You know what they say, once you go HD.....

I didn't say that it was negligible. What I said was 1) It wasn't so much better that it enhanced my television watching experience (ie, it doesn't make bad games good, and it doesn't make good games better), and 2) I don't see jersey numbers running together on my television when I watch in standard definition.

Blu-ray? Planet Earth? No thank you. If it doesn't enhance the stuff I actually watch, why should I care about what it does to stuff I don't watch?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Yes that is way too much. You can get into a 50 inch plasma for around $600. Plasma is the best for sports and hi action stuff. But I recommend the Panasonic first then Samsung which run around $799.

I wouldn't spend more on a television than I'd spend to build a decent computer, either.

 

[VF21]

Since this appears to be more a discussion of HD TV than anything directly Kings related, I'm moving it to the Lounge.

 

[Section 101]

I wouldn't spend more on a television than I'd spend to build a decent computer, either.

A decent computer will run you way more. A decent graphics setup is almost $600.

 

[Section 101]

Well, depends on the TV and the car.

Rock and I have the same TV, a 56" Samsung 1080p set, and watching a Blu-Ray movie is much better than SD TV. I think we may be getting HD Dish or something soon. Haven't popped for it yet, but watching it at my in-laws makes me think it is about time....

Stay away from Dish. They just lost a lawsuit for copyright violations on their DVR. Unless you dont want a DVR.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I don't really understand how Dish survives, I have cable but the only thing that even remotely tempts me to sattelite is the NFL package and that is a DirecTV exclusive. RedZone has cured me of all temptation though.

I don't see how any sports fan could think HDTV is overrated. You see more of the court/field/rink in better detail. Granted they still frame the action in a way that suits 4:3 SD but at some point that will change and we'll be able to see a lot of action that happens in front or behind the play than we could in the past. They're also great for gaming though a lot of the enhancements in higher end HDTV sets don't play nice with the games.

As for movies and other stuff, I'm probably a bit too biased having worked in a field where accuracy is critical. But I have a projector in my theater that throws onto a 120" screen and my seating area is a modest 10-12' from the screen so all those extra pixels are critical. Right now I only have 720p as I am holding out for the new 3d spec projectors before I upgrade. When we get real 3d at home I don't think I will have any use for a regular theater.

 

[Warhawk]

I don't really understand how Dish survives

We've had Dish for years and have been very happy with it. We live in the country, so cable and fiber are out. We checked out Dish and DTV a long time ago and liked Dish better at the time, and have seen no real reason to change. We still haven't jumped to HD programming but may soon.

I don't get any sports packages, as I just want to watch the Kings and I get that already without any extra packages.

Last I looked (which was a while ago), DTV's HD wasn't "full" HD. Back in 2006 they were sued for pushing HD Lite instead of full HD, which really turned me off to them as a company. They have probably corrected that since then, and I will check out both before deciding to upgrade to HD.

According to Wiki:

As of December 2009[update], the Better Business Bureau gives DirecTV an F rating.[23]

which doesn't sound good......

Some posts at AVSforum.com indicate that the Dish VIP 722 receiver has more HD space and looks just as good as DTV for a lot less $$$ per month. And for me, that would be very important.

But again, I haven't done much research yet and will look into the options more when we decide to upgrade.

 

[Warhawk]

Of course, then there is this to consider, from 2 days ago:

http://www.multichannel.com/article...o_Shut_Down_8M_DVRs_After_TiVo_Legal_Loss.php

Dish Network may be forced to disable as many as 8 million of its DVRs within a month, after the satellite TV operator lost an appeals court decision Thursday in its years-long battle with TiVo. Moreover, Dish could even lose the ability to offer a DVR altogether, according to Sanford Bernstein analyst Craig Moffett.

"What is at stake is nothing less than their ability to continue to offer DVRs. And without DVRs... well, you can fill in the blank here, but it wouldn't be pretty."

TiVo now has tremendous leverage to negotiate a settlement with Dish, which will likely be even higher than previous proposed licensing fees of up to $2.25 per month per subscriber, according to Moffett. Each $1 per subscriber per month would cut Dish's earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization by $96 million per year, he estimated.

In the worst-case scenario, Dish's loss in the case could give TiVo an opening to negotiate an exclusive distribution deal with DirecTV in the satellite space. In 2008, TiVo struck a new deal with DirecTV under which the DVR maker is developing an HD DVR as an option for DirecTV subscribers.

I would bet that at least in the short term Dish would just pay the fees and royalties to keep their customers. But this could be a real problem for them....and therefore, people like me who use them for TV services and won't give up use of a DVR.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Last I looked (which was a while ago), DTV's HD wasn't "full" HD.

I don't know what "full" HD means exactly but all the providers have limited bandwidth and run heavy compression so the channels will always be of varying quality compared to the source. But I guess Dish does have its place for people not concerned with sports packages. It's also the lowest cost I'm pretty sure. But I guess I've always had NFL Season Ticket envy since I moved back to the West Coast.

 

[tradepeja]

I didn't say that it was negligible. What I said was 1) It wasn't so much better that it enhanced my television watching experience (ie, it doesn't make bad games good, and it doesn't make good games better), and 2) I don't see jersey numbers running together on my television when I watch in standard definition.

Blu-ray? Planet Earth? No thank you. If it doesn't enhance the stuff I actually watch, why should I care about what it does to stuff I don't watch?

You didn't say it was negligible, you just said that it didn't make a big difference. Right.

You're right that HD won't make a bad game good, but oh how it can make a good game better. And its not just the picture. HD signals carry 5.1 surround which you can then use through your own surround sound system. That combined with a giant, crystal clear TV screen makes for an unparalleled viewing experience. If you set it up right, volume way up, subwoofer booming, friends around the TV screaming with every play, its like you're at the game. One day you'll think back to yourself just like the rest of us and wonder how you watched grainy old SD. Trust me, its just going to happen.

And yeah, Planet Earth. Why watch the most stunningly beautiful, most extraordinarily filmed, not to mention most universally critically acclaimed, HD television miniseries ever created? Silliness.

 

[Warhawk]

I don't know what "full" HD means exactly but all the providers have limited bandwidth and run heavy compression so the channels will always be of varying quality compared to the source. But I guess Dish does have its place for people not concerned with sports packages. It's also the lowest cost I'm pretty sure. But I guess I've always had NFL Season Ticket envy since I moved back to the West Coast.

Here are a few things about the lawsuit (and again, this was what, 4± years ago and a lot has changed since then):

http://www.breakitdownblog.com/directv-lawsuit-over-hd-lite-goes-to-court/

Thankfully it’s finally happened, the lawsuit that was filed against DirecTV in 2004 over the fact that the HD it broadcasts is so overly compressed that many folks refer to it as “HD-Lite” was allowed to go to court after a judge denied the DirecTV request for arbitration.
For those of you that have DirecTV and think it looks great, this probably won’t effect you, but for the folks that have DirecTV and have also seen OTA (Over The Air) HD before, you are probably tearing your hair out. An OTA HD broadcast uses around 19Mb/sec of bandwidth for the signal, while Cable TV (Comcast/Cox) is around 12Mb/sec, Dish Network is around 11-12Mb/sec and DirecTV broadcasts at around 8Mb/sec. You start to see that chopping the signal more than in half is allowing DirecTV to save money and broadcast more channels with less hardware. Anyone else think this has a lot to do with the fact that they paid $4 Billion for the exclusive NFL package and ended up boosting their Sunday Ticket prices to try and recoup that cost after they realized football wasn’t actually made out of gold?

http://consumerelectronicsdaily.typepad.com/consumer_electronics_dail/2006/11/directv_hdlite_.html

A class-action lawsuit claiming that DirecTV covertly degraded HD transmissions is once again moving forward through the California court system this week, after the satellite content provider did not appeal a September decision upholding the suit's class-action status.
The case grew out of a 2004 complaint by Philip Cohen, a subscriber of DirecTV's HD service, who alleges that the company has systematically downgraded HD content despite advertising to the contrary. According to Thomas Ferlauto, Cohen's lawyer, the case as, "a proposed class action lawsuit in the superior [trial] court...could still be more than a year away."
The suit alleges that the company broadcasts a below-standard signal, contrary to their advertisements. It is believed that this signal is downsampled from 1920x1080 to 1440x1080 or 1280x1080. The key question in the suit, and ultimately for HD providers and subscribers, is what qualifies as HD in terms of a quantifiable resolution and data stream? For the Consumer Electronics Association, an HD-capable television is defined as one that can display 720 lines of resolution or more at a 16:9 aspect ratio, and broadcasts are generally defined the same way, with those above 720 characterized as HD.
The allegedly-degraded HD signals from DirecTV are a hotly debated topic among DirecTV subscribers and HD enthusiasts online, with many calling the company's broadcasts 'HD Lite' because they come in a resolution above 720 lines, but below full 1920x1080.
DirecTV refused to comment on it's decision not to appeal the court's decision, which threw out the arbitration clause in the company's subscriber agreement, paving the way for the class-action status.
"We don't discuss strategies related to ongoing litigation," says DirecTV PR Director Robert Mercer, "but we are looking forward to debunking Mr. Cohen’s claims on the merits."

And from the HD Lite entry at Wiki:

In 2004, DirecTV subscribers reported that DirecTV broadcasts some HDTV-programming at a reduced resolution of 1280 x 1080i. Since these reports, DirecTV has removed the resolution-indicator from the user-interface of customer equipment.[citation needed]
In September 2007, Dish Network reduced the resolution on HBO-HD and Showtime-HD from 1920x1080 to 1440x1080. These were the last two channels that Dish Network was still offering in the "full" 1920x1080 resolution.

So it looks like Dish hasn't been running full 1080 resolution either, but better than DirecTV, at least at the time. Have to do some research on that later.

I will also note I tend to be pretty rigid about not giving $$$ to companies that I feel are not doing their best to provide what they claim or promote things not in the best interest of the consumer. For example, I can count on one hand the number of times I had been in a Circuit City after they tried to ram Divx down our throats instead of "regular" DVDs.

For those not aware:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIVX_(Digital_Video_Express)

DIVX was a rental format variation on the DVD player in which a customer would buy a DIVX disc (similar to a DVD) for approximately US$4, which was watchable for up to 48 hours from its initial viewing. After this period, the disc could be viewed by paying a continuation fee to play it for two more days. Viewers who wanted to watch a disc an unlimited amount of times could convert the disc to a "DIVX silver" disc for an additional fee.[1] "DIVX gold" discs that could be played an unlimited number of times on any DIVX player were announced at the time of DIVX's introduction, but no DIVX gold titles were ever released.

The status of the discs were monitored through an account over a phone line. DIVX player owners had to set up an account with DIVX to which additional viewing fees could be charged. The player would call an account server over the phone line to charge for viewing fees similar to the way DirecTV and Dish Network satellite systems handle pay-per-view. This method concerned privacy advocates who thought the information could be used to spy on people's watching habits.[1]

DIVX was sold primarily through the Circuit City, The Good Guys!, Ultimate Electronics, and Future Shop retailers. The format was promoted to consumers as an alternative to traditional video rental schemes with the promise of, "No returns, no late fees." Though consumers may discard a DIVX disc after the initial viewing period, several DIVX retailers maintained DIVX recycling bins on their premises.

The DIVX rental system was created in 1998 in time for the holiday season and was discontinued on June 16, 1999 because of the costs of introducing the format, as well as its very limited acceptance by the general public. Over the next two years the DIVX system was phased out. Customers could still view all their DIVX discs and were given a $100 refund for every player that was purchased before June 16, 1999. All discs that were unsold at the end of the summer of 1999 were destroyed. The program officially cut off access to accounts on July 7, 2001.

There was a large movement on the Internet, particularly in home theater forums, against DIVX. Competitors such as Hollywood Video ran advertisements touting the benefits of "Open DVD" over DIVX, with one ad in the Los Angeles Times depicting a hand holding a telephone line with the caption, "Don't let anyone feed you the line." The terminology "Open DVD" had been used by DVD supporters in response to DIVX's labeling of DVD as "Basic DVD" and DIVX/DVD players as "DIVX-enhanced." Many people in various technology and entertainment communities were afraid that there would be DIVX exclusive releases, and that the then-fledgling DVD format would suffer as a result. Dreamworks, 20th Century Fox, and Paramount Pictures, for instance, initially released their films exclusively on the DIVX format.[2] DIVX featured stronger encryption technology than DVD (Triple DES), which many studios stated was a contributing factor in the decision to support DIVX first.[3]

Furthermore, the DIVX catalog of titles were released primarily in pan and scan format and with limited special features (usually only a trailer). This caused many home theater enthusiasts to become concerned that the success of DIVX would significantly diminish the release of films on the DVD format in the films' original aspect ratios and with supplementary material.

DIVX appeared on PC World's list of "25 Worst Tech Products of All Time" in 2006 (as a "Dishonorable mention").[4]

As was widely reported at the time, when news of the demise of DIVX came, Circuit City was said to have lost at least $114 million because of the format's failure.[4]

The use of the DIVX name in the better-known video codec DivX was intentional on the part of the original developer.[citation needed] DivX 3.11 was released in 1998, already the twilight of the DIVX era.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

You didn't say it was negligible, you just said that it didn't make a big difference. Right.

You heard me.

You're right that HD won't make a bad game good, but oh how it can make a good game better. And its not just the picture. HD signals carry 5.1 surround which you can then use through your own surround sound system. That combined with a giant, crystal clear TV screen makes for an unparalleled viewing experience. If you set it up right, volume way up, subwoofer booming, friends around the TV screaming with every play, its like you're at the game. One day you'll think back to yourself just like the rest of us and wonder how you watched grainy old SD. Trust me, its just going to happen.

I don't take TV watching that seriously. I just have a TV. That's it. If I have to buy a certain kind of TV, that meets with particular specifications, and I need to also have a home theatre system, and know the secret handshake, and all this other bull****, just to be able to appreciate it, then it's overrated.

I don't exactly have a garbage television: I bought a thirty-two inch Insignia for $550, which is the most I've ever spent on a television, and is also the largest television I've ever owned (or, as of right now, plan to own). I'm not completely blind: I can tell the difference between SD and HD, I'm just saying that it's not a drop dead, "OMG, how did I ever watch TV without this?" difference, which is what it would have to be in order to justify all this verbal fellatio, in my opinion.

And yeah, Planet Earth. Why watch the most stunningly beautiful, most extraordinarily filmed, not to mention most universally critically acclaimed, HD television miniseries ever created? Silliness.

I could give a rat's *** what's "critically acclaimed." I watch wrestling, dude; I don't think that there's a single thing that I watch that is critically acclaimed. You know what impression I'm left with after reading about this on the wiki and the official website? It makes me think of Nova. And I don't watch Nova, so why would I watch this? I don't do nature shows.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

So it looks like Dish hasn't been running full 1080 resolution either, but better than DirecTV, at least at the time. Have to do some research on that later.

Cable does it too, that's why I didn't understand why DirectTV was unique. All of these delivery methods are pretty much tapped out so unless they redo the cabling or launch more satellites (and license more spectrum) every HD add on is going to eat up the space of something else.

I boycotted Circuit City for a few years after Divx but I ultimately found them to be marginally better than Best Buy before they went belly up. I really do miss having them around along with CompUSA to satisfy my buy now cravings for cheap electronics. Now it's Best Buy or a 40 minute drive to Fry's who I dislike immensely but can't resist from time to time.

 

[Warhawk]

Cable does it too, that's why I didn't understand why DirectTV was unique. All of these delivery methods are pretty much tapped out so unless they redo the cabling or launch more satellites (and license more spectrum) every HD add on is going to eat up the space of something else.

I boycotted Circuit City for a few years after Divx but I ultimately found them to be marginally better than Best Buy before they went belly up. I really do miss having them around along with CompUSA to satisfy my buy now cravings for cheap electronics. Now it's Best Buy or a 40 minute drive to Fry's who I dislike immensely but can't resist from time to time.

Just got an ad in the paper this morning for Dish and they say their "1080P HD technology provides the best HD picture available anywhere." Not sure about the details on resolution, but that what is in the ad.

They also have the largest HD for storing shows you have recorded.

I do know that they are the only one with 2-room DVR units, where I can record something on one TV feed and watch it on another later. In fact, I often will be watching a Kings game off the DVR in the den/computer room, then stop it mid-game and move to the living room area when whoever is using that TV is done and finish watching the game there. It is a really nice feature.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Just got an ad in the paper this morning for Dish and they say their "1080P HD technology provides the best HD picture available anywhere." Not sure about the details on resolution, but that what is in the ad.

That's intentionally misleading because the only things that are 1080p are video on demand movies.

 

[Warhawk]

That's intentionally misleading because the only things that are 1080p are video on demand movies.

Yeah, they use 1080i apparently for most of their broadcasts. Just saw that.

Apparently DTV is the same, according to their manual.

 

[tradepeja]

I could give a rat's *** what's "critically acclaimed." I watch wrestling, dude; I don't think that there's a single thing that I watch that is critically acclaimed. You know what impression I'm left with after reading about this on the wiki and the official website? It makes me think of Nova. And I don't watch Nova, so why would I watch this? I don't do nature shows.

Yeah I get that man. I just mean to say, if there is one show that totally exemplifies the superiority of HD over SD, its Planet Earth. I don't care whether you watch it or not, just if you ever wanted to see how good HD can really be, that's the jumping-off point.

But you gotta realize, sooner or later SD televisions will be completely obsolete. As in not even manufactured obsolete. With 3DTV's on the fast approaching horizon, its going to be sooner rather than later. Eventually you'll have an HDtv of whatever size and you'll be very happy about it. That in the end is what I'm saying to you.

 

[VF21]

You heard me.


I don't take TV watching that seriously. I just have a TV. That's it. If I have to buy a certain kind of TV, that meets with particular specifications, and I need to also have a home theatre system, and know the secret handshake, and all this other bull****, just to be able to appreciate it, then it's overrated.

I don't exactly have a garbage television: I bought a thirty-two inch Insignia for $550, which is the most I've ever spent on a television, and is also the largest television I've ever owned (or, as of right now, plan to own). I'm not completely blind: I can tell the difference between SD and HD, I'm just saying that it's not a drop dead, "OMG, how did I ever watch TV without this?" difference, which is what it would have to be in order to justify all this verbal fellatio, in my opinion.

I could give a rat's *** what's "critically acclaimed." I watch wrestling, dude; I don't think that there's a single thing that I watch that is critically acclaimed. You know what impression I'm left with after reading about this on the wiki and the official website? It makes me think of Nova. And I don't watch Nova, so why would I watch this? I don't do nature shows.

Bravo. I may be the only other human on the planet who just doesn't give a rat's patoot about HD...

 

[Section 101]

Just got an ad in the paper this morning for Dish and they say their "1080P HD technology provides the best HD picture available anywhere." Not sure about the details on resolution, but that what is in the ad.

They also have the largest HD for storing shows you have recorded.

I do know that they are the only one with 2-room DVR units, where I can record something on one TV feed and watch it on another later. In fact, I often will be watching a Kings game off the DVR in the den/computer room, then stop it mid-game and move to the living room area when whoever is using that TV is done and finish watching the game there. It is a really nice feature.

If your wired for ethernet you can watch what is recorded on another DTV HD receiver just as you described. The software was just recently released. Also,you can plug in a esata harddrive up to 2 gigs on the DTV DVR.

As for the Ads, Dish counts the PPV as their HD channels too so it is misleading. DTV has another sat going up soon for more channels too.

 

[Mike0476]

At first I didn't care for HD, but I said the same thing about DVDs when I was into VHS.

Once I saw what a picture in HD looked like I was sold.

I hate watching SD. HD is the way to go. When I watch sports it's like I'm there.

When it comes to watching movies it's like the characters are right there in front of you. It was cool and weird at all once but now I'm used to it and I love it.

Watching sports, movies and other shows in SD is like watching something with a grainy picture.

HD is so crystal clear.

I was thinking about switching to Dish or Direct TV, but decided against it because I love Comast (no matter how hated they are by so many people I know).

I love Comcast's On Demand feature and their high-speed Internet. I pay about $170 per month for movie channels (HBO, CiniMax, STARZ, Showtime, Encore, etc.) and a sports package (WWE Classic On Demand among others) along with the Internet, HD and DVR. I just don't have their phone system. I use my cell phone instead.

 

[Superman]

We've had Dish for years and have been very happy with it. We live in the country, so cable and fiber are out. We checked out Dish and DTV a long time ago and liked Dish better at the time, and have seen no real reason to change. We still haven't jumped to HD programming but may soon.

I don't get any sports packages, as I just want to watch the Kings and I get that already without any extra packages.

Last I looked (which was a while ago), DTV's HD wasn't "full" HD. Back in 2006 they were sued for pushing HD Lite instead of full HD, which really turned me off to them as a company. They have probably corrected that since then, and I will check out both before deciding to upgrade to HD.

According to Wiki:

As of December 2009[update], the Better Business Bureau gives DirecTV an F rating.[23]

which doesn't sound good......

I've had DirecTV for about three years now, and the only reason I went with them was the NFL package. And I'd had a bad experience with them in the past, so I made the decision begrudgingly. But, even though I've had a couple of technical issues in those three years (including having an episode of my favorite show not record, which pissed me off), I haven't had any problems with their customer service. I haven't had any billing issues that weren't fixed immediately. My service is fine, the picture is great, everything is fine. I don't like their OnDemand service, because it's much less convenient than cable on-demand. I have a hard time understanding how they could have an F rating with the BBB. Makes me question the legitimacy of a BBB rating, honestly.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Makes me question the legitimacy of a BBB rating, honestly.

+1 BBB ratings aren't what they used to be, if they ever were.

 

[Superman]

I don't take TV watching that seriously. I just have a TV. That's it. If I have to buy a certain kind of TV, that meets with particular specifications, and I need to also have a home theatre system, and know the secret handshake, and all this other bull****, just to be able to appreciate it, then it's overrated.

I think rating things is overrated. For me, watching TV in high def is worlds better than watching in standard def. Doesn't make bad TV good, but that's not what it's for. It does make good TV better.

Case in point: Kings vs. Thunder last week (I think), the ball gets tipped out of bounds on the baseline, and the refs call Thunder ball. I'm watching in standard def because I wanted to watch the Kings broadcast, and it was a road game, which was the original point of this thread. So they show the replay, and I say, "Wow, I can't really tell, let me switch over to the HD broadcast real quick." So I do, and there's no question, it should be Kings ball. (Sidebar: Watching a standard def channel on an HDTV is worse than watching a standard def channel on a standard TV.) Huge difference. And I didn't switch back.

You don't watch football, but you can see when a player's feet land out of bounds much easier, you can see if he has control of the ball, etc. In fact, before last season, the NFL mandated a switch for the replay system so that the refs would see all challenged plays in high def, so it's pretty well and readily acknowledged that it's a big difference. Watching a movie that was shot in HD on an HD feed is worlds above watching the same movie on a standard feed. It's not even close.

I don't exactly have a garbage television: I bought a thirty-two inch Insignia for $550, which is the most I've ever spent on a television, and is also the largest television I've ever owned (or, as of right now, plan to own). I'm not completely blind: I can tell the difference between SD and HD, I'm just saying that it's not a drop dead, "OMG, how did I ever watch TV without this?" difference, which is what it would have to be in order to justify all this verbal fellatio, in my opinion.

There's a huge difference. It might not be worth a significant amount of money on to you, but there's a difference. For anyone who has experienced the difference between a good HDTV and standard or an average enhanced definition TV, the verbal fellatio is justified.