Direct TV vs Cox Cable

[restored2x]

quote:Originally posted by Kashmir

quote: I watched "The Wizard of Oz" on HD the other day.. think about it.

Ah, did you kick on some Pink Floyd simultaneously for the real experience? [8]

I remember those days... Wizard of OZ, Pink Floyd and a bag of er, uh, ... popcorn. Popcorn! Yeah, that's the ticket!

[swake]

Satellite is also just broadcasting in 1080p at best. Cable does 1080i (when available).

It's all about two directional bandwidth and the future is HD on demand and interactive television and that is simply not truly possible with a one directional satellite service.

Cox does not offer much compared to other cable providers, but, look for that to improve as AT&T rolls out U-Verse here. Cable and phone providers keep getting closer to having real FTH (Fiber to Home) service. I saw a new subdivision going up in Glenpool advertising FTH phone service.

AT&T is working on a fiber to pedestal system (sadly unlike Verizon's real FTH push in their markets) that will greatly increase AT&T's offerings. The service is called U-Verse (Verizon's is called FIOS). Cox uses a HFC (hybrid fiber coax) system and I believe has fiber to nodes that handle about 100 homes each today. I don't think they have fiber to pedestals yet, much less home, but then coax cable has much great bandwidth than old phone pairs. I believe that both FIOS and U-Verse are using SDV (switched digital video) where a cable channel is only supplied to a node if someone is watching it. You can imagine the bandwidth saving with that. Cox I am sure is working on that, but it requires an all digital system and Cox is not quite there yet.

Where we are going is hundreds of on demand interactive HD services with gigabit internet all in one. Phone will just be a feature that's included. It will be some years, but it's coming. The competitors are going to be what we call cable and phone companies today. Electric companies can get in the game too if they choose.  I just don't see linear Satellite service being a long term competitor.

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by Wilbur

Is that true?  They are simply upconverting and claiming HD?  If so, that is bogus.

It sure would be.  If someone like ESPN HD is doing that all the time, I would yell foul.   More than likely it's going to be a mix of true HD and upconverted content, which is going to look about the same no matter who carries it.
Standard-def programing isnt going to go away just because everyone's going digital.  Our great grandkids will always have Lucy's Vitameatavegamin and the choclate factory scene  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wp3m1vg06Q

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

Shame I have to pay for phone service to get DSL.

"Naked" DSL is available in many markets, but not ours since not enough people have been putting pressure on our Corporation Commission.
Im curious what AT&T's plans will be when they introduce their U-Verse and Homezone video services to compete head-to-head with Cox.
Landline, wireless, internet and TV all from Ma Bell.  That's going to shake some people up.

[cannon_fodder]

I have Cox HD and am satisfied.  Every now and then I'll lose a couple HD channels but I think it is because my dogs worked over my line and I "repaired" it - not Cox problem.

One thing I would like about Cox is MORE INFORMATION on channels. Direct TV lets you purchase more individual channels and tells you how much the subscription is with the push of a button.  Cox you have to buy most in packages.

Basically, I want CSTV so I can watch the U of Tulsa.

Conan:  Sports NOT in HD barely count as sports anymore.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by swake

Satellite is also just broadcasting in 1080p at best. Cable does 1080i (when available).

I think you've got it backwards, apparently you missed the Jessica Simpson commercial bragging about 1080i and "I don't know what it is but I want it."
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7d18mZzBQf0

My box I've had for 2 years on cox does 1080p.

AT&T/SBC is way behind in the Tulsa market as evidenced by the lacking DSL speeds. Much is due to the old wiring and their oft-delayed fiber projects. They've been working on fiber to the pedestal for almost 10 years.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by swake

Satellite is also just broadcasting in 1080p at best. Cable does 1080i (when available).

I think you've got it backwards, apparently you missed the Jessica Simpson commercial bragging about 1080i and "I don't know what it is but I want it."
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7d18mZzBQf0

My box I've had for 2 years on cox does 1080p.

AT&T/SBC is way behind in the Tulsa market as evidenced by the lacking DSL speeds. Much is due to the old wiring and their oft-delayed fiber projects. They've been working on fiber to the pedestal for almost 10 years.

Yes, you are correct. I did type it backwards.

AT&T did announce that they would have U-Verse soon in Jenks and Edmond. Who know what that means to them. What this area needs is a good overbuilder to put some panic in AT&T and Cox.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by swake

Satellite is also just broadcasting in 1080p at best. Cable does 1080i (when available).

My box I've had for 2 years on cox does 1080p.

I don't want to have a geek-out competition, but when I bought my TV I was told that the only available 1080p feed was from HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray DVDs.  Wikipedia confirms that, at this time, there is no 1080p television broadcast available from any provider, satellite or cable.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

1080i is what you're getting.  And just because a movie is old, doesn't mean it can't be broadcast in HD.  Any movie shot on 35 mm film has infinitely high analog quality and can be converted into as high a digital format as there is digital storage and broadcast capability.  Films shown from a focused projector in a dark theater have always been "high definition"--we're just at a point technologically to be able to pipe that definition into living rooms digitally.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by swake

Satellite is also just broadcasting in 1080p at best. Cable does 1080i (when available).

My box I've had for 2 years on cox does 1080p.

I don't want to have a geek-out competition, but when I bought my TV I was told that the only available 1080p feed was from HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray DVDs.  Wikipedia confirms that, at this time, there is no 1080p television broadcast available from any provider, satellite or cable.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

1080i is what you're getting.  And just because a movie is old, doesn't mean it can't be broadcast in HD.  Any movie shot on 35 mm film has infinitely high analog quality and can be converted into as high a digital format as there is digital storage and broadcast capability.  Films shown from a focused projector in a dark theater have always been "high definition"--we're just at a point technologically to be able to pipe that definition into living rooms digitally.

Most HD-DVD players are 720p, ironically enough.

[cannon_fodder]

Progressive anything is half the battle.  480p looks almost as good as HD itself.  Those scan lines are not visible really, but in movement they make a difference.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I have Cox HD and am satisfied.  Every now and then I'll lose a couple HD channels but I think it is because my dogs worked over my line and I "repaired" it - not Cox problem.

One thing I would like about Cox is MORE INFORMATION on channels. Direct TV lets you purchase more individual channels and tells you how much the subscription is with the push of a button.  Cox you have to buy most in packages.

Basically, I want CSTV so I can watch the U of Tulsa.

Conan:  Sports NOT in HD barely count as sports anymore.

Eh, the only sports I generally have enough patience to watch anymore is auto racing or college football.  I might watch March Madness or the NBA or MLB finals, but that's about it.   I've had the real life 3D experience in race cars and I've sat in plenty of football stadiums.  Having finer resolution just doesn't puff my skirt all that much.  I guess I'm just a walking anachronism. []

[jiminy]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle


Most HD-DVD players are 720p, ironically enough.

No they are not.  The A1, A2, A3 and the Venturer are all 1080i.  All others are 1080p.  There are no 720p-only players from either HDDVD or Bluray.

[MichaelBates]

If TGOV would ever get around to putting city government video on their web site, I could at least think about dropping Cox for some other option.

[RecycleMichael]

You watch TGOV, too?

Man...we need a life...

[Conan71]

Heh, make that three, I've got TGOV on right now, Nov. 8 council meeting.

Some observations here: From the camera angle, Cason Carter reminds me of Michael J. Fox, and John Eagleton looks sort of like a Doonesbury character.  No disrespect intended, TV has a way of altering peoples looks.  The audio makes Roscoe sound like Kenny in Southpark.

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by swake

Satellite is also just broadcasting in 1080p at best. Cable does 1080i (when available).

My box I've had for 2 years on cox does 1080p.

I don't want to have a geek-out competition, but when I bought my TV I was told that the only available 1080p feed was from HD-DVDs and Blu-Ray DVDs.  Wikipedia confirms that, at this time, there is no 1080p television broadcast available from any provider, satellite or cable.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

1080i is what you're getting.  And just because a movie is old, doesn't mean it can't be broadcast in HD.  Any movie shot on 35 mm film has infinitely high analog quality and can be converted into as high a digital format as there is digital storage and broadcast capability.  Films shown from a focused projector in a dark theater have always been "high definition"--we're just at a point technologically to be able to pipe that definition into living rooms digitally.

out of all the posts here, yours and mine are the only ones not dripping with bull****.


5 years ahead of the curve?  give me a break.