Comments on: Psssst: Digital cable TV is cheaper than analog cable

By: house cleaning orange county

house cleaning orange county — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 03:28:27 +0000

if we are to base for what's more cheaper then most preferable the consumers would go for digital cable this is interesting. No wonder why Time Warner is pushing this rather than the analog. House Cleaning Orange County

By: syscom3

syscom3 — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:02:35 +0000

So the cost of the digital is $56.95 a month.

You have to rent the digital box, and that fee is mandantory. No if’s, and’s or but’s.

The Cost $56.95 a month. Please do your math. And stop pushing the Time Warner propaganda.

By: jr

jr — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 05:56:05 +0000

Does anyone else think that paying $50 per month for something that is supposed to be “free” over-the-air seems odd?

If TW and Cox were simply to put the over-the-air broadcasts on to their cables, there would be no need for decoders or other complications. Historically, such service has been worth about $10 – $12 per month, a a substitute for an antenna.

Now, we are to believe that “basic service” is somehow worth $50 or more?

By: Ripoff

Ripoff — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 00:09:14 +0000

@Doug:

I don’t believe that TW is using “switched video” (aka “Switch Digital Video” or SDV) in OC yet. What you are referring to is the logical mapping of channels. I believe that their whole channel line-up is still broadcasted down the pipe. These individual channels might switch frequency from time to time. The logical mapping of channel, done with the set-top box, gives the user the illusion that a particular channel is broadcasted on a forever fixed channel. For example, on my QAM TV, I have seen CBS-HD previoulsy broadcasted on channel 90.?? and currently on channel 2.1 However, those with a set-top box, have always seen CBS-HD on channel 402.

Regarding TW’s recent decision to remove a few channels from their analog lineup… TW claims that it’s to free up some bandwidth. If that’s 100% true, TW could have moved it to clear (unencrypted) QAM digital. It takes the same bandwidth to send these digital channels down the pipe whether they are encrypted or not. It’s a business decision – encrypted them and charge the customer to be able to decrypt them with the set-top box.

Case in point: The Weather Channel… Prior to the transition last week, TW broadcasted “The Weather Channel” on both channel 37 and 133.208 Today, I still get “The Weather Channel” on channel 133.208 via Clear QAM (without a set-top box). TW, if it wanted to, could have done the same with the other set of channels that it switched to the digital only tier. Again, I believe it’s TW way to “encourage” you to lease a set-top box from them monthly.

By: Doug

Doug — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:33:09 +0000

@ [Blocked by CFC] Ripoff:

The thing is that “clear QAM” doesn’t provide any bi-directional communication. It requires continuous service of the programming on those QAM sub-channels.

What TW is doing is moving more and more of its digital content to be effectively “on demand”. When you tune your converter box to a digital channel, the box tells the head-end to start feeding you the programming for that channel. The actual channel/sub-channel that is used for that feed is unrelated to the channel number that you selected, but that’s completely hidden from you.

By: Tamara Chuang, a.k.a. The Gadgetress

Tamara Chuang, a.k.a. The Gadgetress — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:27:53 +0000

Good point Doug.

By: Doug

Doug — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:24:03 +0000

The funny thing is, with Time Warner in OC at least, Digital Cable includes analog cable.

Once one of their service reps convinced me of this, I signed up for digital cable with one box and my rates went down (a little). Most of my equipment is analog and still working just like before. My big-screen TV gets direct analog cable into its RF input and Digital Cable from the converter box into one of its HDMI inputs. I prefer to watch on direct analog cable when possible because the quality is noticeably better than from the converter box.

What’s annoying is losing the analog channels. My bedroom TV is analog, and now I can’t catch The Weather Channel in the morning.

By: [Blocked by CFC] Ripoff

[Blocked by CFC] Ripoff — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:28:12 +0000

To quote:
“If the company could convince analog cable subscribers to switch to digital, that would free up a lot of space in the cable going to each customer’s house and allow the company to offer more HD channels and other digital content.”

Gadgetress – You bought into the company’s spin as to why they want people to go digital… The cable company could have remove those analog channels and replaced them with *unencrypted* digital (clear QAM) channels; that would have achieved the same result. But why *encrypt* those new digital channels? set-top box rentals! The real reason is economics.

Ask TW: When they decide to move analog channels to the digital tier, why is it that they always encrypt them and not just move them in “clear QAM” form? This way, customers with “clear QAM” tuners (probably on all TV sold in past 5 yrs) can still watch these channels without providing TW with set-top rental fee and TW can still “reclaim” that valuable bandwidth…

By: H8cable

H8cable — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:56:16 +0000

No Patio or Balcony
Most apartments face East and West
I could engineer a bracket that comes straight out the window to put the dish on
And it would not touch any part of the inside or outside wall, no holes either! they say no!
They also say Don’t like it? move!

By: raicha

raicha — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:25:51 +0000

The FCC says landlords cannot impose restrictions that unreasonably impair your ability to install, maintain, or use a dish or antenna that meets the FCC guidelines.

By: H8cable

H8cable — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:31:57 +0000

Jeffrey Levine says:
December 17, 2009 at 10:36 am
>I could get better service holding an antenna in my hand on the roof of my house then with the stuff I get from Charter. Don’t get me started either!<
.
If only our apartment owners would allow an outside antenna (or let me put up my dish, which is outlawed in the lease)
But it will never happen

By: H8cable

H8cable — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:28:20 +0000

honky says:
December 17, 2009 at 10:18 am
>or you can get full hd tv for free by buying one of those $30 indoor antena<
.
.
My neighbors in my apartment did
And all they get is one or two channels
where as before with analog they got almost all of them
some were a little snowy but you could see them
Over air Digital has been a major disaster for those in my apartment and I bet millions of others in blind spots (like us) no outside antennas allowed (like us) or far away from the transmitter!

By: bbadbill2

bbadbill2 — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:14:47 +0000

I wouldn’t say they don’t care but i would say they are being negligent of their customers needs. Yes, it is a promotional, gotta take the discounts wherever you can. San Diego still has COX 768/256 speeds for $20 but AT&T also has a dry loop at 768/384 for $20.

By: H8cable

H8cable — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:11:07 +0000

>Psssst: Digital cable TV is cheaper than analog cable<
.
BULLCRAP!
I was paying $42 for analog
Now i’m paying $65 for Digital and only gained 4 channels I wanted!

By: marley

marley — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:04:54 +0000

I think cable comanies should give customers in good standing a month free. You pay for Jan thru Nov on time and Dec is free…. go buy presents… that would be wonderful.

By: BoogerBoy

BoogerBoy — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:52:00 +0000

We appreciate your efforts.

By: bbadbill2

bbadbill2 — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:45:24 +0000

I highly recommend purchasing an inexpensive dedicated HTPC with HDMI for the 50″ plasma.

Didn’t Comcast just buy NBC! Hulu will definitely be better with an ala cart subscription service that supports HD resolution and bit rates. Hulu is great for viewing those extended cable channels. But sometimes I find it better to search the content owners sites for the better quality video.

By: bbadbill2

bbadbill2 — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:38:14 +0000

What we need is a standard IPTV broadcasting platform. Very similar to what the magazine/print industry needs for digital distribution of its subscription services on generic e-readers. This would give consumers the option to select content and mitigate costs for unwanted extras. It could also be a bad thing too, meaning the content owners now package other unwanted elements into their subscription service becoming a new type of content aggregator similar to the cable industry. It really is relative to the individuals perception of evil. Bundled content is cheaper for everyone or individual content can be more expensive per item across the board.

By: stinkyone

stinkyone — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:29:05 +0000

JUST GET YOUR LAPTOP……HOOK UP S-VIDEO……GOT TO HULU.COM or many OTHER’S Hook up staight to your 50 in PLASMA….AND WALLA!!! you have HD T.V VIA THE INTERNET FOR FREEEEEE…That is if someone near you has wireless…just hook up to their’s…I will never PAY THE CABLE OR SAT. COMPANY AGAIN!!!!!!!

By: fixed gear

fixed gear — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:28:23 +0000

Uhhhh, they don’t have “no costs but labor”. They have to pay stations for the right to carry their shows, they have to pay employees to run everything, they have to pay the FCC yearly fees, they have to pay to run the cable all the way to your house, they have massive overhead. I’m not jumping on the side of the cable compnay, I think $50 for TV is ridiculous. But you are soooooooooooo naive about the cost of running a business.

By: bbadbill2

bbadbill2 — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:25:42 +0000

Lucky for us Cable Labs and Microsoft reached an agreement to open up the cable card readers to non OEM customers. You could possibly have up to four tuners per cable card supported under Windows 7 Media Center. If you have MC extenders for each TV your expense is the purchasing of the hardware and then card rental which is roughly $5 per month and channel access pricing.

By: John

John — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:23:05 +0000

You can have my Directv DVR when you pry it out of my cold dead hands!!! Times are tough but I can’t get rid of my Sat. TV. Still a better deal than cable when you crunch all the numbers.