MPEG2 HD Channels Gone March 31

Discussion in 'DirecTV TiVo Powered PVRs & Receivers' started by litzdog911, Mar 10, 2010.

  1. litzdog911

    litzdog911 TechKnow Guide

    12,027
    1
    Oct 18, 2002
    Mill Creek,...

    Advertisements

    Just posted at DBSTalk ....
    http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2386012#post2386012

    The MPEG2 HD Channels in the 70's channel range will be coming down at the end of March. HBO, ESPN, ESPN2, TNT, etc. There is a slide on channel 99 (starting tomorrow) that explains the details.

    If you have an MPEG4 HD DVR (HR20/21/22/23), a heads up for some of you that may have DVR recordings scheduled, make sure you change it to the MPEG4 HD channel (i.e 206 for ESPN, 209 for ESPN2, etc,etc).

    If you are one of the handful of folks in which their only HD receiver is of the MPEG2 variety, your last 6 HD channels are only going to be around until the end of the month. Moving forward, only the MPEG4 variety will be broadcast as of April 1st.
    __________________
     
  2. KurtBJC

    KurtBJC New Member

    22
    0
    Jan 1, 2007
    Bloody hell...we let one of the DirecTV DVRs into our house, but have fortunately seldom had to watch it. I hate the thing and it amazes me that the HDTivo box, years older, is so much more responsive and fast (well, at anything that doesn't involve resorting a "to do" list or that sort of thing). I have been waiting and hoping for the new HDTivo, and this is going to mean tuning over to the CrapDVR (as we not-so-affectionately call it, and as it has been labeled on our receiver) much more often in the meanwhile. It will certainly make me that much more eager for the new TiVo unit.
     
  3. Stoystown

    Stoystown New Member

    106
    0
    Jun 13, 2002
    This news (the ending of the old signals) makes me think that the new HD Tivo from Directv is getting even closer. While there aren't that many HD Tivos on Directv, they would be pretty cold in nuking these boxes without an upgrade path.
     
  4. litzdog911

    litzdog911 TechKnow Guide

    12,027
    1
    Oct 18, 2002
    Mill Creek,...
    We can only hope. But the latest "official" word at a recent Tivo investor's converence said "late 2010".
     
  5. KurtBJC

    KurtBJC New Member

    22
    0
    Jan 1, 2007

    Advertisements

    Yeah, I'm not all that optimistic about it showing up soon. Too bad DirecTV and TiVo didn't keep things together in the in-between years -- I always thought that these were two products that complemented each other perfectly. We bought our first standalone TiVo back in 1999, and it's still running, albeit with a good deal less to do these days. The HR10-250 is a really nice unit, and I've been nothing but happy with it (other than a failed HDMI card) -- I hope they don't bugger up the new one...
     
  6. shibby191

    shibby191 New Member

    1,329
    0
    Dec 24, 2007
    They are completely unrelated. The old MPEG2 HD channels would have been turned off nearly 2 years ago if MDU's (apartments/condos) had been ready with the new dishes and switches. That's the only reason it has taken as long as it has.
     
  7. brott

    brott at redh dot com

    968
    0
    Feb 23, 2001
    Pleasanton, CA
    This is correct.
     
  8. TyroneShoes

    TyroneShoes HD evangelist

    3,604
    0
    Sep 6, 2004
    That might not be necessary. I tried to record 79 (HDNet) the other day on a HR20 because I like the smooth FFWDx1. But, I did not get a smooth FFWDx1, which makes me think the HR20 mapped 79 to 306, which is the MPEG4 version of HDNet. IOW, all of the mapping may be done already. I do get it when I use a HR10 (well, at least for now :)).
     
  9. KDX

    KDX New Member

    35
    0
    Jun 2, 2006
    Thanks for the link.

    Is HBO considered one of the HD channels, when six were mentioned? I don't get HBO, so I am only seeing 5.

    My happy mix of two HR10-250's and two HR20-100S's is about to get less useful.
     
  10. stevel

    stevel Dumb Blond TCF Club

    42,606
    15,205
    Aug 23, 2000
    Nashua, NH
    Yes, HBO HD is one of the remaining MPEG2 channels that is going away.
     
  11. Scooter

    Scooter Mattress Tester

    13,454
    22
    Mar 15, 2000
    St. Louis
    It's about time. How long have they been talking about dumping them?
     
  12. Wil

    Wil Unknown Member

    4,844
    340
    Sep 26, 2002
    It really _has_ been annoying. Having those satellite HiDefs still on the HR10-250 has just made some peoples' lives miserable. Thank god they're finally off. Or hopefully soon to be off, anyway.
     
  13. Scooter

    Scooter Mattress Tester

    13,454
    22
    Mar 15, 2000
    St. Louis
    Maybe it's an April Fool's Day hoax.
     
  14. TyroneShoes

    TyroneShoes HD evangelist

    3,604
    0
    Sep 6, 2004
    What is the end game here? Is the strategy merely to make the HR10 less-desirable and push folks to the HR2x DVRs? Or do they have that bandwidth (currently taken up by MPEG2 HD channels) earmarked for something in particular? Maybe a little of both?
     
  15. shibby191

    shibby191 New Member

    1,329
    0
    Dec 24, 2007
    It's all about getting bandwidth back for SD channels and a lot of them. 2 main reasons:

    1) Gotta get the remaining SD locals off 72.5 as the lease they have with Canada is running out on that sat location. So far they have been moving some of these directly to the MPEG4 sats (thus requiring MPEG4 HD receivers for SD locals). But freeing up this space gets them room to move some to 119 if needed or more importantly light up more LIL markets on 119 that they don't already have up and thus making congress happy.

    2) Get some (all?) international packages off 95 so that they don't have to install an expensive extra dish for those that want an international package. If they can deliver the biggest ones at least via the normal 5 LNB dish it saves money and less hassle for the customer.

    Plus, don't you think they want to just dump the old MPEG2 HD channels they no longer need? Why would they care about a few thousand HR10 holdouts that don't already have an HR2x?

    As noted, these would have been shut down a couple years ago but MDU's weren't ready. Simple as that really.
     
  16. Wil

    Wil Unknown Member

    4,844
    340
    Sep 26, 2002
    No. They secretly wanted to help me win _all_ the various bets I made years ago about when they were all going to be shut off. I needed to get into 2010 for the biggest odds.
     
  17. TyroneShoes

    TyroneShoes HD evangelist

    3,604
    0
    Sep 6, 2004
    Well, no; I thought they wanted to keep channels on as if in a living museum long after zero subs were receiving them.:rolleyes: Of course they want to get rid of them. Why maintain overhead with no ROI? In a perfect world (for them) they could get rid of all service that costs them money to put on the bird (and get rid of the birds, too) and still collect the $2 billion in revenue they collect each month. That was not my question.

    The reason they care about a few thousand subs with HR10's is because if you upset what they have, the inertia that keeps them paying every month is now in flux, and they've woken a sleeping dog. Many of those subs will be pissed about the upset, many will investigate their options, some will go elsewhere. That seems just about as obvious as the answer to the first question.
     
  18. stevel

    stevel Dumb Blond TCF Club

    42,606
    15,205
    Aug 23, 2000
    Nashua, NH
    They've already done this with LA and NY HD locals, as well as some other HD channels.
     
  19. shibby191

    shibby191 New Member

    1,329
    0
    Dec 24, 2007
    Well, they shut down half of them a year ago and the LA DNS months before that. I don't think HR10's are at all a consideration, especially considering that they issued press releases 2 years ago about the shutdown and the delay due to the MDU situation. No need to look for other reasons. ;) But hey, think what you want, it really doesn't matter either way.
     
  20. TyroneShoes

    TyroneShoes HD evangelist

    3,604
    0
    Sep 6, 2004
    Sorry, but that sounds suspiciously like a slam, like I'm going to believe only what makes me comfortable even if in the face of that not being reality. Having a long history here as a realist, I am supremely insulted by that notion. That has never ever been the way I roll, and you should know better.

    You are also free to not get my point at all, which you didn't. That also "doesn't really matter either way".

    But just for those who might care, my point was that no matter how many subs have something DTV or any other company wants to change or take away from them, they still run the risk of driving them away, which is intuitively completely counter to every known business model. It doesn't matter if only one person is left, you still run the same risk of pissing them off. So if between the rock of immovable subs and the hard place of needing to drag them to an incompatible system, the smart strategy is to wait until there are a negligible number of them. You have to draw a line somewhere, and this looks like where they are willing to draw it. There will always be collateral damage, and the idea is to minimize it, since you can't eliminate it.

    But don't kid yourself that there is not risk involved no matter where they draw the line. It's about how big of a hit are they willing to take. And now we know. This was also a major consideration in dropping Tivo as their DVR supplier in 2007, as it would have significantly cusioned the blow if they had moved everyone to a MPEG-4 clone of the HR10-250. But they made a smart and shrewd business decision not to (IMHO). Now they will have to take the larger hit for that decision.

    And I disagree vigorously with you; every single subscriber is a consideration when business decisions are made that affect whether they will remain as subscribers or not, including those that have so far refused to move to their DVR.

    And while it may sound like a counter argument due to the clever sophistic way you phrased it, your point about already shutting some things down doesn't invalidate my point at all or in any way. Actually, it supports it.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements