backtop


Print 63 comment(s) - last by jmunjr.. on Dec 21 at 8:57 PM

False advertising is a no-no says Time Warner

Time Warner took DirecTV into court this week over what Time Warner claimed as "false advertising" by DirecTV. According to reports, DirecTV had placed ads in several regions across the U.S. claiming that customers would not be able to watch certain NFL football games without subscribing to its services.

While the ads did not target Time Warner's services directly, they were strategically placed in areas where team loyalty would help drive up customer subscriptions. The ads by DirecTV claimed that certain areas would not be able to watch their local teams play.

Representatives from Time Warner commented that "these false ads were obviously targeted at markets where DirecTV believes that loyalty to the local football team will drive consumer purchasing decisions."

DirecTV football ads have been placed in newspapers in major U.S. cities but Time Warner is suing DirecTV for its televsion ads as well. Featuring William Shatner and Jessica Simpson, DirecTV ads indicate that its high-definition service is better than those of Time Warner's. DirecTV representatives did not respond to questioning.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Pot, meet Kettle....
By sintaxera on 12/19/2006 5:46:54 PM , Rating: 3
They both do this kind of thing to each other all the time. Anyone ever see the commercials where the satellite customers lose reception when it rains? I have DirecTV and the only time that happened was during a hurricane. For about 15 minutes total. Cable was out for DAYS.

But enough about that, just wanted to say they both lie out their A$$E$, especially to consumers (super fine print etc.)




RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By retrospooty on 12/19/2006 5:50:48 PM , Rating: 1
I have to agree with you there. I have watched DTV through massive monsoon's in Arizona. My 12 foot tall tree was ripped out of the ground and relocated to my neghbors yard, and not a glitch in my reception.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By masher2 (blog) on 12/19/06, Rating: 0
RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By HakonPCA on 12/19/2006 6:39:51 PM , Rating: 1
FYI, There is a monsoon season in AZ


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By edpsx on 12/19/2006 6:47:02 PM , Rating: 1
DTV's picture SUCKS in comparison to Verizon's Fios service. My dad has DTV and I have the Fios and there is by far a much better non compressed signal coming from the fios. They can say they have the best picture all they want, until it rains or snows or drizzles or I take a piss outside to interrupt the picture. My dad had his service setup by supposed professionals who fine tuned his satellite into to max signal strength and he still has problems. Thank goodness verizon comes out this week to help him throw it all out the window. My father in law has time warner and its much better in PQ from what Ive seen as well. There are just too many variables when it comes to satellite tv that can interrupt it for it to be a viable option in most places.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By FITCamaro on 12/19/2006 7:58:52 PM , Rating: 1
I've lived in Florida most of my life (not at the moment though). I worked for Best Buy at one point and for Sprint in a Circuit City. In both they pushed DirectTV. In both with a heavy cloud cover or rain the picture would be pretty much nothing but static.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By edpsx on 12/19/2006 11:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
Been there.. seen that. There was a giants game playing one night while at BB in DirecTV HD.. well it just happened to start raining outside while in the store and they had to change it to a DVD due to the singal breaking up constantly.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By rykerabel on 12/20/2006 10:47:10 AM , Rating: 2
Someone needed to aim the dish better.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By cobra61771 on 12/20/2006 3:33:54 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly! It all depends on how good your installer was. In my previous home, I installed the dish myself with well over 95% signal strength. On my new home I used DTV movers program where they put up the dish for me... Signal strength is about 85% and I get an occasional breakup. (I do mean occasional)


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By deeznuts on 12/19/2006 6:46:14 PM , Rating: 2
A monsoon just means a seasonal windshift. It's not what you think it is. For instance in SE Asia, there is a wet monsoon and a dry monsoon. It's a shift in wind that takes precipitation along with it(its more complicated then that but that's the basics)

But AZ does have a monsoon.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By masher2 (blog) on 12/19/2006 6:53:55 PM , Rating: 1
From the NWS:

quote:
In Phoenix, the monsoon is considered to have started when we have three consecutive days when the dew point averages 55 degrees or higher...The average start date of the monsoon in Phoenix is July 7, while the average ending date is September 13. Normal rainfall during this period is 2.65 inches...

2.65 inches an hour is heavy rain...not 2.65 inches/season. It very rarely rains hard enough anywhere in Arizona to interrupt satellite service.




RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By carl0ski on 12/19/2006 7:51:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
2.65 inches an hour is heavy rain...not 2.65 inches/season. It very rarely rains hard enough anywhere in Arizona to interrupt satellite service


2.65 inches = 67.31 millimeters
rain in one day is an absolute downpour and would easily cause storm water drain flooding.


2.65 inches an hour will result in massive floods
5 hours of rain would be more than some cities get in a whole year.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By masher2 (blog) on 12/19/2006 8:05:38 PM , Rating: 1
> "2.65 inches = 67.31 millimeters rain in one day is an absolute downpour..."

That's what I said, isn't it? Some areas get more rain in a day than Arizona can receive all year...therefore, it shouldn't be a surprise that a person living there has never seen interruption of satellite service due to heavy precipitation.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By Lord Evermore on 12/20/2006 4:43:16 AM , Rating: 2
You referred to 2.65 inches in an hour, which goes far beyond what people complain about causing bad reception. That's "what are you doing watching TV, we need to get to high ground" rain with land areas washing away and cars underwater. 2.65 in a day is a downpour where everything gets drenched and some sewers back up, and people's cable and satellite have problems.

However 2.65 in a season does seem unlikely that there'd ever be a period where the rain was heavy enough to cause a problem with reception. That averages 0.039 inches a day. Even if ten days worth fell at once, that's only a third of an inch, and it'd have to fall within a space of 3 hours to be equivalent to 2.65 per day. Are there ever storms that long or that heavy in Arizona?


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By masher2 (blog) on 12/20/2006 9:26:39 AM , Rating: 2
I used the 2.65" figure, as that's the rainfall Arizona receives throughout its "monsoon" season. I'm well aware that much rain, over a single hour, is extraordinary. However, it can and does happen. The point is that Arizona doesn't see such heavy rainstorms, nor anything near it.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By rushfan2006 on 12/20/2006 11:05:10 AM , Rating: 2
Weather can and does affect satellite reception, why do you folks keep arguing left and right about it -- the companies that MAKE the technology even admit this fact. It happens.

I suggest that if it never or rarely happens to you, you probably live in a place with much nicer weather more often than most, you have an unusually clear unobstructed view of the southern sky for your dish or you are just "lucky".

My cable (Comcast)....on the other hand would satisfy me perfectly if not for the fact comcast is EXPEN$IVE...that is however my sole complaint with them. Been a cable subscriber for all 5 years I've been in my condo and about 6 times (in FIVE years) my cable went out...and you know what....5 of those times was because of power outtages.



RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By wallijonn on 12/21/2006 4:27:12 PM , Rating: 2
Yes. Ask the knuckleheads who drive into floodable areas only to see their cars go downstream.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By cubby1223 on 12/19/2006 7:38:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They both do this kind of thing to each other all the time. Anyone ever see the commercials where the satellite customers lose reception when it rains?

DirecTV loses reception frequently when there's a bad storm. It happens.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By MrSmurf on 12/19/2006 7:41:31 PM , Rating: 2
Time Warner is simply losing too many customers and it likes to prey on satellite myths such as rain fade. Their suit against Directv is nothing more than a bitch move and I hope they lose.

They need to focus on the real problems; stop raising people's bill every month and improve their customer service.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By masher2 (blog) on 12/19/2006 8:06:43 PM , Rating: 2
> "...and it likes to prey on satellite myths such as rain fade."

Where do you get this is a myth? It's a problem in some areas, and not in others.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By Goty on 12/19/2006 8:24:08 PM , Rating: 2
All these people that lose reception when it rains obviously don't have the dish set up correctly. My family has been using DirecTV since about an hour after it went on the air (ok, maybe a week realistically) and I can count on one hand the number of times we've lost signal. Our cable, on the other hand (which we recently dropped because we get all of our local channels over the satellite now) used to go out once every other week.

As long as you have a good view of the Southern sky, your signal should almost never drop to the point where you'll lose signal. If you ever do lose signal, then you probably shouldn't be watching TV anyways because a tornado is probably about to relocte your house to the next county.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By The Boston Dangler on 12/19/2006 8:34:56 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPage.j...

Problem
Your picture is breaking into squares or pixels.


Possible causes
Severe weather (heavy rain or snow) can interfere with the signal, causing your picture to freeze frame or "pixelate."
This may also happen if there are any obstructions (such as tree limbs, buildings, etc.) blocking your dish's clear view of our satellite, or excessive water pooling on the face of your dish's low-noise blockers (LNBs).

Solutions
Unplug your receiver for 15 seconds and it will reset itself.
If there are obstructions blocking the dish’s clear view of the satellite, you should contact a professional to remove them or a DIRECTV installer at 1–800–531–5000 to relocate your dish.
If there is excessive water build–up on the LNBs, wipe them off with a soft cloth if your dish is easily accessible. When dry, apply silicone spray to allow the water to "sheet" off in the future. In cold, wet areas, a dish heater or dish cover can also aid in keeping the LNBs clear.
If your signal strength is lower than 70 (60 or lower on HD receivers) on most transponders in good weather, contact a professional installer to realign your dish or call us at 1–800–531–5000. Your system manual explains how to check your signal strength.

More help
If the problem persists, call customer service at 1–800–531–5000.

Yeah, that certainly sounds like a reliable, low-maintenance service my mom could enjoy.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By kg4alb on 12/19/2006 9:32:15 PM , Rating: 1
Well, if you're halfway intelligent, you shouldn't set your satellite up so that it points at a bunch of trees.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By marvdmartian on 12/20/2006 9:59:27 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Well, if you're halfway intelligent, you shouldn't set your satellite up so that it points at a bunch of trees.


While there is the taste of truth in what you say, how about the case where the neighbor to the south has a bunch of high, thick trees in the way? Since you're pointing the satellite dish at an equatorial satellite in geosynchronous orbit, you don't have much room to play with, especially if you live further north. My neighbor happens to have 2 trees in his yard, one in front, one in back.....and both are at least 60 feet tall, and just as large around!

My choice then is to either set my satellite dish up ~50-100 feet from the house, on a pole, to clear the trees, or set it up on a pole higher than my house, to clear the tops of the trees, either of which is going to be a great lightning collector during any thunderstorm! Or, I could simple eschew the satellite, and go with cable, which has only gone out twice in almost 7 years I've lived here.

Please, try to be considerate of the fact that we all can't have clear southern exposures to point satellite dishes at, and understand that we're not all morons, okay? Thanks! :)


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By masher2 (blog) on 12/19/2006 9:56:39 PM , Rating: 3
> "All these people that lose reception when it rains obviously don't have the dish set up correctly..."

All those people who claim it isn't a problem obviously live in an area without heavy rainfall, and believe their own local situation is a global phenomena.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By Goty on 12/20/06, Rating: 0
RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By masher2 (blog) on 12/20/2006 9:31:17 AM , Rating: 1
> "I have very rarely lost signal..."

"Very rarely" isn't never, though. Where I live, I rarely lose signal also...only in very heavy rain, perhaps 10-12 times per year. About twice that often I'll have some minor signal degradation.

In a more northern latitude, I suspect the problem would be worse. The dish must be inclined more towards the horizon, which means more atmosphere (and thus more rain) to travel through.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By Lord Evermore on 12/20/2006 4:48:02 AM , Rating: 2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_TV

C-band transmission is susceptible to terrestrial interference while Ku-band transmission is affected by rain ( as water is an excellent absorber of microwaves ).


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By Pythias on 12/20/2006 1:16:09 AM , Rating: 2
meh. Cable goes out all the time during storms. As often as satellite does. Cable comes from satellite feed.


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By Lord Evermore on 12/20/2006 4:50:03 AM , Rating: 2
That would depend on where the storm is and where you live. If the storm is passing over your house but not over the place where the cable company receives the feed for your area, then you shouldn't lose cable for that reason (although you could still lose it due to equipment at the end of the street exposed to the water or a cable that's not protected).


RE: Pot, meet Kettle....
By Locutus465 on 12/20/2006 10:02:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Anyone ever see the commercials where the satellite customers lose reception when it rains? I have DirecTV and the only time that happened was during a hurricane.


I suppose this all depends... When I was in Ohio my roommate and I had direct TV and we really did lose our TV signal any time that a decent thunderstorm brewed up. So I suppose your quality of service would depend on how good the install people did and how good the hardware you got was. So at least from my perspective, those commercials aren't entirly false even if they are not the norm.

Saying "Hey everyone, if you get cable or watch free air TV you'll never see football again" is simply completely wrong.


HD-Lite on DirecTV is not better than cable, but
By abhaxus on 12/19/2006 5:48:25 PM , Rating: 2
Considering both satellite services only broadcast 1280x1080i at reduced bandwidth, as well as doing 720p at reduced bandwidth, their HD offerings are pretty bad compared to current cable providers. However, in the ads I do not recall the brilliant Ms Simpson saying that HD on DirecTV is actually better than cable, simply that it was great quality. While that is a somewhat dubious statement, I don't think it's enough to say that they are insinuating that they are better than cable.

As for carrying football games that aren't in the local market, that is somewhat true. There have been games in the past that our local CBS affiliate has not broadcast in HD but were available in HD via SundayTicket SuperFan.




By djcameron on 12/19/2006 6:08:13 PM , Rating: 2
Are you kidding? HD on DirecTV looks much better than HD on Comcast! (and all the HD channels aren't up in the 500s)


By The Boston Dangler on 12/19/2006 8:22:52 PM , Rating: 2
So, pressing 5xx, with 100's of channels to choose from, is too much for you?


By djcameron on 12/19/2006 9:06:51 PM , Rating: 2
I typically browse the guide, and Comcast doesn't let you remove channels from your guide, while DirecTV does.


RE: HD-Lite on DirecTV is not better than cable, but
By AlexWade on 12/19/06, Rating: -1
By masher2 (blog) on 12/19/2006 6:24:35 PM , Rating: 4
> "When you are digital, nobody is better than anybody else..."

Err, where did you get an idea like this? Two digital feeds can (and do) have far differing resolutions, bit rates, and image quality.


By deeznuts on 12/19/2006 6:41:41 PM , Rating: 2
You have no idea what you are talking about. THere are different compression rates, signals etc.


By MrSmurf on 12/19/2006 7:32:26 PM , Rating: 2
Picture quality is always subjective. Hell, I work for Time Warner, get free cable and I still have Directv. I think its picture quality is better. I know at one point Time Warner was bitching about Directv's ads stating they offer 100% digital channels while TW doesn't, which was true until TW rushed to digitalize all of their channels.

What I want to know is how Time Warner gets away with these NFL ads when they don't have the NFL Network nor can their customers purchase the NFL package.

Furthermore, how they say phone is only $25 yet when you get your bill it's actually $45. I don't know how they stay in business. I think TW is ran by a bunch of monkeys.


By The Boston Dangler on 12/19/2006 8:16:05 PM , Rating: 2
In the Star Trek ad, Shatner says, and I'm paraphrasing, "after what Starfleet ponied up for this big screen tv, settling for cable would be illogical." The obvious implication is that cable service is vastly inferior.

As for local-market NFL games, a cable company can only deliver what the local affiliate is carrying. The SundayTicket package is an exclusive deal between the NFL and Hughes (DirecTV). Every time the contract is up, DirecTV comes up with a mountain of money to retain exclusive rights. It's a "must" for them, since TV is the only product they offer.

Just a couple days ago, I watched the Pats game in ultra-low quality, and then Sunday and Monday night games in very, very good HD. Why the Boston market had such ass for a picture, I'll never know. Maybe there's some shenanigans keeping HD out for certain games.


RE: HD-Lite on DirecTV is not better than cable, but
By Goty on 12/19/2006 8:26:22 PM , Rating: 2
You can imply all you want in an ad as long as you don't come right out and name a competitor. Time-Warner is not the only provider out there.


By The Boston Dangler on 12/19/2006 8:43:42 PM , Rating: 2
No, I cannot say "Bill's TV Company has absolutely the best picture ever." without it true. That would be a lie, which is supposed to be illegal.


By masher2 (blog) on 12/19/2006 9:58:38 PM , Rating: 2
> "No, I cannot say "Bill's TV Company has absolutely the best picture ever." without it true. That would be a lie, which is supposed to be illegal..."

You most certainly can say this, and many advertisers do. The word "best" has a very subjective definition, which allows a great deal of latitude.


By Lord Evermore on 12/20/2006 5:08:21 AM , Rating: 2
Does he ever specify digital cable? Most cable providers, all of them as far as I know, still provide analog service for both the really basic, local channel only package, as well as the standard cable which is local plus "regular" cable channels like CNN, Comedy Central, TNT, Discovery and TLC, etc. So technically, you would be "settling" for cable if you didn't pony up for the higher priced digital service. DTV's 40 dollar package seems pretty much the same as what standard analog cable service is, and is priced around the same as analog cable, but DTV is digital. Now TW's site only talks about digital cable, so maybe they are only offering that these days. However DTV can still claim they were referring to DTV versus analog cable as cable being vastly inferior. It's not actually lying, even if it isn't providing all the information you should have; they don't have to tell you all your options.

Time Warner does the same thing.

quote:
Local Channels - Time Warner Cable brings you local broadcast channels with local news, weather, sports and network programming at no extra charge. Satellite offers local channels, but you might have to pay extra for them.


DTV includes local channels with all their packages, including the basic (unfortunately their website's online order system fails to work for me to look in detail). The only places you don't get it is where they just don't offer local channels at all. And it's not like you're going to sign up and then suddenly discover you can't get them. But again, TW isn't lying, some satellite services COULD still charge you for them, they don't specify who they're referring to.

quote:
Local Presence - For convenient customer service, Time Warner Cable is nearby. Most satellite broadcast companies are halfway across the nation.


What the hell does that even mean? That DTV doesn't have any local service techs? Does DTV have no field offices, just headquarters? That no matter where you live, DTV's offices are 1500 miles away?


By Ochophosphate on 12/19/2006 11:17:37 PM , Rating: 2
I guess as far as the football thing goes, they're either pumping the NFL Sunday Ticket (which really doesn't help/hinder those in the local markets) or the fact that they carry NFL Network in their standard package (something Time Warner seems to be fighting to keep as a special upgrade in a "sports package"). While games played on NFL Network are still carried in local markets, markets immediately surrounding those are often left out in the dark. For instance, I will be flying to see some family in Kansas for Christmas. But, since they don't have NFL Network, I won't be able to watch the Chiefs v. Raiders game on Saturday night. Seems stupid since they live in Kansas, but it falls outside of what is considered the "local market". Oh well.

This is pretty much the chief reason that I have DirecTV. If I don't have Sunday Ticket, I am lucky to get one, maybe two of my favorite team's games televised in my market. So I suck it up and get "the ticket" and now I get all of them and I'm a cappy hamper. Small price to pay for football fanatacism.


Good
By walk2k on 12/20/2006 1:20:05 AM , Rating: 2
I'm glad they are doing this.

I've been seeing those ads for a while now and they really piss me off.

They are flat-out LIES.

Comcast cable takes the HD broadcasts as they come off the air or sat feed and retransmits them EXACTLY AS THEY ARE with no further compression. THE PICTURE SIMPLY CAN NOT GET ANY BETTER!

Meanwhile DBS companies have to re-compress them at a much lower bitrate (aka "HD-lite") because they don't have the bandwidth to push them at full-rate!




RE: Good
By Lord Evermore on 12/20/2006 8:11:26 AM , Rating: 2
Cable companies do compress video when you use digital cable. Even cable has limited bandwidth and if they believe it won't kill the quality, they'll do it, and unless a lot of people complain, they'll push it to the limits.


RE: Good
By walk2k on 12/20/2006 4:11:13 PM , Rating: 2
Nope, mine doesn't add any more compression to the HD feeds. Maybe yours does.


RE: Good
By masher2 (blog) on 12/21/2006 5:51:13 AM , Rating: 2
Oh really?
quote:
To conserve additional space on bandwidth-starved systems, virtually all operators ratchet down some HD channels even further, to as low as a 10-Mbps stream, in a process known as transcoding...

The practice isn't advertised, and none of the operators who spoke with Multichannel News would detail which specific channels get the treatment and how far down they compress the signals. But at least two major operators, Comcast and Charter Communications , both confirmed their systems use the technique.

"There's certain acknowledged manipulation" of HD signals, said Showtime Networks vice president of engineering technology Jim Occhiuto...


RE: Good
By mjcutri on 12/20/2006 8:38:15 AM , Rating: 2
The ONLY way to get uncompressed HD video is with an OTA antenna. Digital Cable, Satellite, etc all use some type of compression. I have had TW HD Cable, I have Dish HD, and an OTA antenna and for the most part, they all look the same in HD. A good comparison is to look at the grass on the field during a football game.

BTW, I used to work in a radio shack, and we NEVER lost our dish signal. My aunt and uncle have DirecTV and they only loose their signal in hurricanes (in Orlando). And I have never lost my Dish signal since I have gotten it, and I live in Cleveland with lake effect snow.

What this all boils down to is that you should select the service that fits you best. I get my internet from my local cable company (Cox), but since they don't offer any discounts for bundling, it was MUCH cheaper to get a Dish for the HD programming. When I lived in Florida and had Brighthouse cable, it made more sense for me to get internet and calble with them.


RE: Good
By walk2k on 12/20/2006 4:21:49 PM , Rating: 2
There's no such thing as "uncompressed" HD video.

It's all compressed.

My point is, MY cable system takes the ATSC broadcasts (local TV stations) and re-transmits them on the cable exactly as they get them (actually they have direct fiber-optic feeds for most of them). The same thing for cable channels (ESPN, HBO, etc). They do NOT re-compress them, they don't NEED to (unlike DBS!). They have 750-860 Mhz cable systems out here (and new ares are being built at 1Ghz), maybe in other areas of the country they have old systems that require re-compression, I don't know.


RE: Good
By masher2 (blog) on 12/21/2006 5:18:52 AM , Rating: 1
> "They do NOT re-compress them, they don't NEED to (unlike DBS!). They have 750-860 Mhz cable systems out here (and new ares are being built at 1Ghz)..."

FYI, DirecTV uses the following Ka bands: 18.3-18.8 GHz; 19.7-20.2 GHz; 28.35-28.6 GHz, and 29.25-30.0 GHz. That's 2 GHz of total bandwidth. They also have 1 GHz of bandwidth in the Ku range. Half of that is used for uplink, but the other half is fully available for downlink traffic.



FiOS vs. DirecTV
By Eris23007 on 12/19/2006 7:13:13 PM , Rating: 2
I now have FiOS, and previously had DirecTV. In my opinion, FiOS definitely has some advantages. The picture quality seems marginally better, and of course the lack of possible interruptions is a nice feature. On-demand is cool too.

On the other hand, their DVR box (just like pretty much all of the other Motorola DVR boxes I've ever tried to use) SUCKS. The UI is clunky, it seems to freeze up when it tries to do something, there's no 30-second skip-ahead, etc.

I miss my DirecTivo. :-(

Unfortunately, the price was too good to pass up on the FiOS TV service, plus then there's no dish to install (and in a rental house, that's kind of an issue, what with having to drill cable holes and all...)




RE: FiOS vs. DirecTV
By Ochophosphate on 12/19/2006 11:09:07 PM , Rating: 2
I have to agree with you on the DirecTV DVR... it is absolutely terrible. Thank god I still have 2 of the older Tivo boxes from when they were still supported.

I can't figure out who designed these awful monstrosities. The UI (as you said) is downright awful. The fast-forward and rewind features are frustrating to say the least. If you've ever used the Tivo systems before, you want to punch this new DVR in the neck.


RE: FiOS vs. DirecTV
By Goty on 12/20/06, Rating: 0
RE: FiOS vs. DirecTV
By Lord Evermore on 12/20/2006 5:13:20 AM , Rating: 2
FiOS is moving into my area, in fact the house at the end of the street can get it but I can't yet. I was looking at Internet and TV, but then realized you can only use their set top box, which means renting one for every TV or TV tuner I use. I've gotten too use to my computer PVR with two tuners as well as the cable into the TV to go to a single live TV again, or renting a crappy standardized DVR box so that I can still only record 1 show if I'm watching one live. I've avoided digital cable because I just plain don't care about most of the channels, digital quality is nice but not required, and I hate channel change latency. So I think I may end up staying with cable TV even if I get FiOS Internet.


Rain fase goes away if you buy a 3foot dish
By Einy0 on 12/20/2006 4:55:46 AM , Rating: 2
When I lived in NC bad storms would knock out our direct tv. One day we got a nasty little storm and our dish was setup only temp. We attached it to a cement block. The storm threw the dish 30 deet from it's original spot. The dish was mangled. I bent it back but the signal was really weak. My roomate got online and found a 3 foot dish. It was like $50. We mounted that bad boy up and never lost a signal again. I watched DTV through a Category 4 hurricane until the power went out. He moved back home to Massachusetts and watched DTV during a blizzard. He said he cleared snow off the thing once during a storm that dropped 4 feet of snow. I have Time Warner Cable and the picture pales in comparison to DTV. The few digital channels I do have sometimes blank out too... My first ten channels have speckles on them. Time Warner sucks crap. I wish I had the option to get FIOS that would rock.




By Lord Evermore on 12/20/2006 5:17:05 AM , Rating: 2
The average consumer isn't going to go buy and install a 3rd party dish and tune it themselves. But a larger dish does help because it increases the signal reception just due to the size, larger area to receive more energy and have a higher likelihood that a piece of the signal will get past the raindrops, and upstream is I think improved as well.


By Thetech on 12/19/2006 10:49:19 PM , Rating: 2
I've had digital cable and DirecTV, In my opinion all of the ads they both air are full of lies. For the most part no cable or satellite service broadcasts high quality HD mainly because of compression, And it's been said before compression is a moving target.

In some areas cable company A will use more compression and in other areas cable company A will use less, it all varies. As far as the picture going out? yes I've had outages and/or pixelation with satellite(caused by rain) but on the other hand I've had the same problems with digital cable, outages sometimes but pixelation and picture skips and lags(I lived not too far away to the cable co.) and if it was raining in the cable co's area then I would see the mentioned problems. There are so many other varibles I could mention, but my point is
In my opinion and based upon my experinces, there is no clear cut winner.

As far as Verizon's FIOS service goes, it looks pretty good more bandwidth equals less compression but we must realize compression is nesscessary(although if satellite,cable etc. changed their compression algorithms it would make a diffrence).

Overall more competition is better, it equals improved tech. and service for us all. No reason to argue with each other over it all, they all have their pro's and con's :)




Steelers!
By encryptkeeper on 12/20/2006 10:50:34 AM , Rating: 2
they were strategically placed in areas where team loyalty would help drive up customer subscriptions

Yeah um, if your cable service won't carry the LOCAL sport's team's game, you probably shouldn't call and subscribe to MORE services from them. Instead you should call their competitor and sign up.




Time Warner has become Evil!
By casket on 12/21/2006 1:19:00 PM , Rating: 2
It appears that Time Warner has replaced the defunct Adelphia, with lawsuits towards DirecTV.

They did purchase part of adelphia... it looks like they purchased their evil lawyers.
****************
Rehashing old News: Adelphia sued Directv for using 1 NBC, etc... for the whole country. They said what about the local news? A stupid judge agreed with them and said they had to broadcast All NBC's and that you would have to pay additional for them. The other major networks followed suit (CBS,NBC,FOX, etc...)




they all suck
By jmunjr on 12/21/2006 8:57:05 PM , Rating: 2
I am trying to upgrade my parents' setup to HD and they have Dish right now. Dish wants to charge $200 up front for their DVR and then $7 a month to "lease" it and then another $6 a month for the DVR part. Huh? The DVR is built into the device itself why would they charge monthly fees for it?

Anyway they all have scams like this. we need more competition to squelch this BS..





"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki