quick question about digital cable

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- quick question about digital cable
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Posted by Lews on Nov-19-2009 00:20:

You underestimate me, Bas!

Posted by bas on Nov-19-2009 00:24:

I'm serious lol, are you talking about the on demand stuff? I mean I guess cable has satellite beat in that respect, but in terms of quality, AMOUNT of content, and HD packages overall, satellite destroys you. Sorry

Plus with satellite you get the east and west coast feeds of everything.

Posted by Lews on Nov-19-2009 00:28:

On demand stuff, cable wins.

With quality, take note again this is just in my personal opinion, cable wins.

Amount of content and HD packages, for the same cost, cable wins.

For East/West, satellite wins =p

And yeah I meant On Demand lol.

Personally I think they're both fine, just depending on what you want / what you're going to pay / where you live / if FIOS is available.

My girlfriend's parents' house has FIOS. I wants it.

Posted by idoru on Nov-19-2009 00:42:

quote:
Originally posted by Lews
On demand stuff, cable wins.

I got rid of Comcast a few months back (no TV, whoo!), and I really don't miss their On Demand service at all. In terms of what I wanted out of it, they had nothing. If cable is better than satellite, I don't even want to know what satellite offers.

Posted by bas on Nov-19-2009 00:49:

Quality issues might depend on where you live, but it's a known fact that DirecTV has had a purely digital signal for years now and Time Warner's digital cable wasn't. I believe it's actually still an analogue signal converted to digital in the box, could be wrong though.

Posted by Lews on Nov-19-2009 00:52:

Yeah, I've heard rumors of that. Though I believe that now it is a fully digital signal too, it just didn't use to be. Still, I firmly believe that the quality issue is definitely person to person, place to place. Actually, I know it is. My place had horrible satellite picture, but amazing cable. My aunt and uncle have amazing satellite picture. Stuff like that is completely relative.

I think the decision on cable or satellite completely changes depending on where you live and what you want it for. Both are amazing, however

Posted by gehzumteufel on Nov-19-2009 05:18:

quote:
Originally posted by bas
Quality issues might depend on where you live, but it's a known fact that DirecTV has had a purely digital signal for years now and Time Warner's digital cable wasn't. I believe it's actually still an analogue signal converted to digital in the box, could be wrong though.

lol this is such horseshit. This is exactly the shit I had to deal with when I worked at a cable company almost 10 years ago. The content is delivered the same way to satellite providers and cable providers. How your provider decides to rebroadcast it to you, is where it changes. The company I worked for, and it mostly works the same, the "analogue" stuff, the stuff that doesn't require a box, is 480i. The stuff that requires a box is EDTV, or 480p and not compressed anywhere near as much. It is broadcast digitally.

And you missed the boat. When I said that cable wins on content delivery, this has nothing to do with the on-demand service. It means, the way in which content is delivered. That is all. A physical medium will always, for the foreseeable future, beat air. It is faster and less prone to interference, and has very little delay compared to an air interface.

Pages (2): « 1 [2]