Satellite HD or Cable HD?

[DakotaDave]

Which do you prefer? I mean some say that cable is better, but then you have Satellite. For example DirecTV HD which has been called the highest quality HD available.

Me; I have DirecTV and I am quite satisfied with my HD channels. What ticks me off is I still can't get my locals in HD through DirecTV. I have to have an HD antenna to get my locals in HD, and most of the time I have to phuck with it to get the picture to come in clear.

[chlngr1970]

I have DirecTV and have been somewhat satisfied. I say somewhat, because my HR21 is having compatibility issues with my VP50 Pro. First I was having issues with HDMI not syncing...so they sent me a new box. So, new box, new HDMI cable, and I still can't sync. I am havinig to watch via component video, and coax digital audio...instead of the all digital path that HDMI as to offer. Hell, now I get no audio at all

I am going to contact Anchor Bay tomorrow to see if there is a fix to this.

Other than that, I like the selection of HD, and the PQ is pretty damn good.

I have heard that Dish Network actually has better PQ, but have not seen this for myself. I don't realy want to switch, so I will just keep trying with DTV. I'm goin to, over the next few months, pick two more ( maybe three ) HD DVRs so that we have more options. I already have the two 6X8 multiswitches

j

[SilentBob]

Hard to say which i think is better. I only have HD Cable for my tv(Cogeco) and non of the others in the houe are HD. We have satellite for them (StarChoice) If i were to buy a HD receiver from the satellite provider then i get the basic HD channels for free unlike the cable company that charges me extra $15 on top of the basic cable price. (sister still use basic cable in there room) I do get the . . . well i has HDNet and Discovery working for me for about a year in HD and now i need to subscribe to them. Why that is i don't know but at least the channels stay on a lot longer during a lightning storm (screws signal for satellite) and i get my local weather and not setup for all of Canada broadcasting. Then again i don't get my basic channels on a west coast feed but i do get some for HD.


Overall if it weren't for the DVR cost for the satellite receiver i think i would of switched by now, but HD cable is working for now and isn't too bad for rental of the DVR unit (which i love all so much)

[Ruined]

SAT has more channels, Cable has higher quality and reliability.

[Sycho]

All HD broadcasts available to me look like crap. We have Shaw cable and it looks like complete shit. I think that Star Choice is the best quality available where I live, but oddly, they are owned by Shaw, who provides the worst quality.

[dugpa]

Supposedly Verizon FiOS is the highest quality of them all as they use the highest bitrates and have the most bandwidth available. I haven't put that to the test though. I know we have DirectTV here at work and it's a horrible compressed mess. I used to have TimeWarner Cable at home and it was so bad it was unwatchable most of the time. And thus the reason I stick with shiny discs for my HD viewing.

[Ruined]

Cable companies have the ability to have over double the current bandwidth of FiOS with the rollout of DOCSIS 3.0 cablemodems. However, cable companies can often be lethargic so it may be a couple of years before they do this.

[Sycho]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Cable companies have the ability to have over double the current bandwidth of FiOS with the rollout of DOCSIS 3.0 cablemodems. However, cable companies can often be lethargic so it may be a couple of years before they do this.

And cable companies like to go "Oh more bandwidth, that means more channels, not higher quality."

Shaw likes to put 3 HD channels in the space where most cable companies put two HD channels...

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by Sycho

And cable companies like to go "Oh more bandwidth, that means more channels, not higher quality."

That's sort of what happened here in Dallas with TimeWarner. When DirectTV rolled out their new satellites with tons of HD channels last year, TimeWarner decided they needed to counter by adding some new channels. They were already horribily maxed out on bandwidth as it was. But they added a few new channels anyway, with the result being that while there are a couple new HD channels, now all of them look horrible. That was when I dropped my cable. In their mind, they don't care what the channels look like, they just want to be able to say they have them.
As for Ruined's statement about the new cable modems, cable companies are the absolute worst when it comes to advancing technology. When I got my cable initially I had to beg for them to dig up a box that had HDMI outs. And all their boxes are still using motorolla processors that are about 10 years old and slow as hell.

[biglyle]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Cable companies have the ability to have over double the current bandwidth of FiOS with the rollout of DOCSIS 3.0 cablemodems. However, cable companies can often be lethargic so it may be a couple of years before they do this.

Sadly, decades seems like a more appropriate time frame to the cable companies around here. HD on cable in Canada ranges from brutal to worse than brutal.

I have bell expressvu and when I first got it the HD quality was excellent. Now they are jamming more and more channels in the system and the quality has gone down a fair bit. Still far better than what our cable companies are offering but no where near what it could be. The part that pisses me off is they promote their hot new HD channels like National Geographic HD and Showcase HD, even though both have only about 30% of their content in HD. Just a complete waste of already sparse bandwith.

[Sycho]

Originally Posted by biglyle

I have bell expressvu and when I first got it the HD quality was excellent. Now they are jamming more and more channels in the system and the quality has gone down a fair bit. Still far better than what our cable companies are offering but no where near what it could be. The part that pisses me off is they promote their hot new HD channels like National Geographic HD and Showcase HD, even though both have only about 30% of their content in HD. Just a complete waste of already sparse bandwith.

How would you say the expressVu compares to Shaw in town? I haven't seen expressVu HD in a very long time, not for like 5 years, and when I saw it, it looked horrible, banding and lots of macroblocking. Similar to how Shaw is right now. Have things improved since then?

[limacharliewhiskey]

I have HD cable with Time Warner. Other people in my apartment complex have satellite dishes mounted on their patios, so I could get it. But from everything I've read, mostly on the AVSForums, HD satellite quality is inferior to cable HD. HD satellite does offer many more channels, and maybe those new satellites broadcasting MPEG-4 have greatly improved the quality recently.

Most of my local HD channels, which I watch mostly, look pretty good. Only some of the channels like Discovery HD, Universal HD, HDNet have some questionable quality. Selection of HD channels seems to be less than satellite, as one I really want is the Sci-Fi Channel HD. Did get something in the mail that Time Warner will be adding HD channels like the Food Channel, A&E, ESPNNews, Versus, etc. to my lineup soon.

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by limacharliewhiskey

I have HD cable with Time Warner. Other people in my apartment complex have satellite dishes mounted on their patios, so I could get it. But from everything I've read, mostly on the AVSForums, HD satellite quality is inferior to cable HD. HD satellite does offer many more channels, and maybe those new satellites broadcasting MPEG-4 have greatly improved the quality recently.

Most of my local HD channels, which I watch mostly, look pretty good. Only some of the channels like Discovery HD, Universal HD, HDNet have some questionable quality. Selection of HD channels seems to be less than satellite, as one I really want is the Sci-Fi Channel HD. Did get something in the mail that Time Warner will be adding HD channels like the Food Channel, A&E, ESPNNews, Versus, etc. to my lineup soon.

Agreed, LCW. I have a friend that has satellite HD, and it looks worse than my HD does with Cox. Not to say that Cox has the best HD ever, there is still a lot of compression and motion artifacts. But when there isn't fast motion, there is a pretty good picture. And it is still worlds better than standard def tv

[biglyle]

Originally Posted by Sycho

How would you say the expressVu compares to Shaw in town? I haven't seen expressVu HD in a very long time, not for like 5 years, and when I saw it, it looked horrible, banding and lots of macroblocking. Similar to how Shaw is right now. Have things improved since then?

Yes, its gotten far better in that regard. I havent seen any macroblocking in over a year now, it was real bad at one point, especially on the movie networks. Banding seems to be gone as well. I also see very little if any motion blur on fast moving sports, and this was a real issue a while back. I dont what they have done, but it is better in that regard. IMO it could still be a lot better if they dropped all the junk channels. Like having and East and West PBS hd feed when the 2 channels play the exact same programming at the exact same times.

[Loiosh]

Were I not a football fan I would say no to satellite since they compress their HD (sometimes harshly). Sadly DirectTV has the football package.

Were choices offered I would avoid both cable and Satellite and go with Verizon FIOS (which is offered here) or Uverse since both offer full-bitrate HD channels and more of them.

[DakotaDave]

Well; I got a new HD antenna, and it works great. I had to get it because my DirecTV dish took a crap due to the flood. I don't get any sd or hd channel. I had to get a new antenna; just to be able to watch tv.

Since I have the dish on a pole in the back yard; the water got up to the bottom rim of the dish. It stands about 5' tall at the top of the rim. I think the water got into the connections on the dish, or got into the LNB. We have to wait until July 6th for a repairman to come out. Due to the floods; they are swamped with repairs. Also due to the floods; DirecTV is offering all parts and repairs for free to victims.

[umainebearman]

Well I don't loose my digital cable when it starts to rain and the wind starts blowing. So I'll stick with cable.

[chlngr1970]

Well, I imagine with the floods that the midwest is experiencing, cable/satellite would be the last of your concerns...

j

[No6PackJoe]

Originally Posted by biglyle

The part that pisses me off is they promote their hot new HD channels like National Geographic HD and Showcase HD, even though both have only about 30% of their content in HD. Just a complete waste of already sparse bandwith.

It's worse in the morning, Breakfast Television is on 6 different channels at the same time

[elfman]

Originally Posted by DakotaDave

Also due to the floods; DirecTV is offering all parts and repairs for free to victims.

Hey, that's a pretty cool thing for them to do. Hat's off to 'em.

[DakotaDave]

Originally Posted by umainebearman

Well I don't loose my digital cable when it starts to rain and the wind starts blowing. So I'll stick with cable.

I dont usually have any problems either, but if the water got as high as it did; cable would go out too, and it did! Cable is not without problems of outages. Many of my family members and friends have cable, and I often hear of their cable going out for no reason. Most of the time the problems of the outages arent weather related; its just poor service!

[Wirehed]

My cable hasn't gone out for quite a few years.

[Iguana Man]

My DirecTv has gone out for quite a few years.

(I assume you mean 'burps' vs. flat out dead Wire)

[sub780lime]

I still prefer cable. I just find its interface easier and the channel guide easier. The boxes are slow some times, but I think that is the case all around. The picture has always been great.

[DakotaDave]

The reason why I have a problem with cable is that the company here (Mediacom) has monopolized the county. They even went as far as to make an agreement with the county; to make a no compete clause. This means no other cable company can come into the area to offer their services. This forces nowhere else for county citizens to go for Digital/HD TV. I think that's why people choose satellite.

Plus the cable company raises their rates up to $10 every 6 months to a year.

This is why I chose satellite. The outages are a minor thing in my book; because they never last longer than 5 or 10 minutes. I have an emergency tv with rabbit ears for weather; if our satellite goes out for a longer amount of time. I will buy an analog box for it next February.

Satellite is better for the price and I rarely have any problems with it.