OT: Satellite vs. Cable

User Forum Topic
Submitted by raptorduck on October 30, 2008 - 5:45pm

I have been lurking, but I have not posted here in a long time. Frankly, people seemed to stop talking about housing and I kept seeing OT: next to every topic with all the Obama/McCain talk and other topics.

Well, going with the flow I have an OT of my own, the old Satellite vs. Cable saga. I have always seen cable and satellite companies advertise the differences between them always arguing that theirs was way better than the other. Now that I have had both here is my opinion.

Cable totally and completely stinks and is not as good as satellite was 15 yrs ago, let alone today.

I had cable in the 1980's. It was fine, I thought it cool and no complaints. Ignorance is bliss. Then I found satellite. Step up I thought. I was a DishNetwork customer for years. Never a single complaint. Never a down connection due to "solar flares" a cable favorite nit on satellite. Not one call to tech customer service until they had some problems with some network contracts and I switched to DirectTV. Years with them and not one single problem either. Never a down connnection, nothing. Perfect reception 24/7 in thunderstorms even (another popular nit from cable). It worked perfectlly and when I did need service in the form of new recievers and dishes and upgrades, their customer service was exemplary. It was a quality product with quality service for a reasonable price. I upgraded to their HD service and got a truck full of HD channels in addition to the already rich choice of channels. Even their DVR was awesome.

So I decided to move to SD and of course wanted satellite. Unfortunately Cox cable has some sort of monopoly down here and though we tried to get DirectTV in RSF we could not (interesting story for another day, but you won't find many satellite dishes in Fairbanks Ranch). So I reluctantly did not go with DirectTV and switched to the only other choice, Cox Cable.

Hate it! Here's why.
1. Fewer channel choices for more $$.
2. The quality of cable's HD channels is "MUCH" lower than satellite's HD. This was a total surprise.
3. WAY WAY fewer HD channels with cable to boot.
4. Lousy signals and connections.
5. Horrible service with lazy, incompetent, and occasionally rude service people (not all of them though). God help you if you need the cable stapled to a wall or put into it or not run down the middle of a room. Must be against union rules to actually put more than minimum crapy effort.
6. I have had them out to fix a down connection, dead reciever, poor signal not less than 8 times in 3 months and I need them out again.

Overall, it is just horrible quality of product and quality of service and it cost MORE than satellite!

I am stuck with cable though. Other than the service quality, had I never seen the high quality of satellite, I would never be the wiser as to how yesterday's technology cable is.

They adverstise as being better than satellite. What they don't tell you is that they are referring to satellite as it existed in the 1950's.

So IMHO is cable better than satellite. NOT A CHANCE. DirectTV or DishNetwork are 100 times better, in quality of product and quality of service. They were even decent to me as I left them as a loyal customer.

I don't usually post things like this, but I am so underwealmed by Cox and get so angry by their false advertising of superior quality and service in their commercials that I needed to call them out somewhere just to feel some sort of redemption. I am at the mercy of their crapy service and quality and they know it. When you have no competition and have captive customers, crappy service is the name of the game.

There, I feel a little better now. This has just been eating away at me like an RSF Black Widdow with attitude. Maybe if enough people on this board switch to satellite, DirectTV will find a way to overcome the Cox mafia in FBR.

DISCLAIMER: THE ABOVE IS THE OPINION OF THE AUTHOR BASED ON PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND AN EXERCISE OF HIS FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. THE AUTHOR RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MODIFY HIS COMMENTS TO "NOT SO GOOD" FROM "TOTALLY SUCKS" IF COX RETALIATES BY CUTTING OFF HIS CRAPPY SERVICE COMPLETELY OR TO "CABLE ROCKS" IF COX PAYS DIRECTTV TO INSTALL SATELLITE IN THE AUTHOR'S HOME.

p.s. If you live in Fairbanks Ranch and have DirectTV I want to talk with you.

‹ OT: San Diego County turns blue this week OT: Economist endorses Obama ›
I'll tell you what, now that
Submitted by afx114 on October 30, 2008 - 5:55pm.

I'll tell you what, now that iTunes/AppleTV serves TV shows in Hi-def, I've considered dumping cable all together. I only watch a handful of shows, so cable often seems like a waste to me. Why pay so much money when I only use maybe 5% of what I'm paying for? I can save a shit-ton of money by ordering TV shows a-la-cart on iTunes. I'm just waiting for the library to expand a bit before I make that jump.

afx114 wrote:I'll tell you
Submitted by nostradamus on October 30, 2008 - 7:05pm.

afx114 wrote:
I'll tell you what, now that iTunes/AppleTV serves TV shows in Hi-def, I've considered dumping cable all together. I only watch a handful of shows, so cable often seems like a waste to me. Why pay so much money when I only use maybe 5% of what I'm paying for? I can save a shit-ton of money by ordering TV shows a-la-cart on iTunes. I'm just waiting for the library to expand a bit before I make that jump.

I agree, I can watch the shows I want, when I want, on the computer. I don't go through iTunes, most of the shows I want are free and readily available.

BTW has anyone else been getting harassed by AT&T salesmen? They've called, mailed, set up a table in my complex, and have come to my door 4 times.

I've been using a FTA
Submitted by Eugene on October 30, 2008 - 8:17pm.

I've been using a FTA receiver for the last few months. Got it just in time for the Olympics. The receiver with DVR capability (non-HD) was just over $100, there are cheaper receivers on Craigslist. The dish was $25, and I had an old LNB that I forgot to return a while back.

Periodic outages whenever DN changes their encryption are annoying, they happen roughly once a week, and it takes 12-36 hours for a new firmware to appear whenever the encryption is changed. But I don't watch TV all that much and I'm quite pleased with what I'm getting. You can get around 200 major channels and a number of pay-per-view programs (sport, movies, adult) with a single dish and two LNBs looking at satellites 110 and 119. The satellite 148 has a wide range of regional and international channels.

If you can live without HD and with frequent outages, that's a possible route. If you want HD channels, you'd have to get an expensive FTA receiver ($300+), so it may not make as much financial sense.

Edit: ah, you live in Fairbanks Ranch ... nevermind then.

What is the deal with FBR and
Submitted by flu on October 30, 2008 - 8:37pm.

What is the deal with FBR and no dish? Is it an HOA thing? If so, I thought it was illegal for an HOA to have prevent you from mounting a dish outside.

http://www.rbndish.com/fcc_rules_for_sat...

BTW: where have you been? We missed you :)

Just a question. Why are
Submitted by Jim Jones on October 30, 2008 - 10:01pm.

Just a question. Why are there not satellite TV customers in Fairbanks Ranch?

If its due to the HOA rules I suggest you reference the FCC website at this link. There is no legal way for an HOA to restrict your installation of the most common antennas on your property.

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html

Q: What types of antennas are covered by the rule?

A: The rule applies to the following types of antennas:

(1) A "dish" antenna that is one meter (39.37") or less in diameter (or any size dish if located in Alaska) and is designed to receive direct broadcast satellite service, including direct-to-home satellite service, or to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals via satellite.

(2) An antenna that is one meter or less in diameter or diagonal measurement and is designed to receive video programming services via broadband radio service (wireless cable) or to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals other than via satellite.

(3) An antenna that is designed to receive local television broadcast signals. Masts higher than 12 feet above the roofline may be subject to local permitting requirements.

In addition, antennas covered by the rule may be mounted on "masts" to reach the height needed to receive or transmit an acceptable quality signal (e.g. maintain line-of-sight contact with the transmitter or view the satellite). Masts higher than 12 feet above the roofline may be subject to local permitting requirements for safety purposes. Further, masts that extend beyond an exclusive use area may not be covered by this rule.

Q: What types of restrictions are prohibited?

A: The rule prohibits restrictions that impair a person's ability to install, maintain, or use an antenna covered by the rule. The rule applies to state or local laws or regulations, including zoning, land-use or building regulations, private covenants, homeowners' association rules, condominium or cooperative association restrictions, lease restrictions, or similar restrictions on property within the exclusive use or control of the antenna user where the user has an ownership or leasehold interest in the property. A restriction impairs if it: (1) unreasonably delays or prevents use of; (2) unreasonably increases the cost of; or (3) precludes a person from receiving or transmitting an acceptable quality signal from an antenna covered under the rule. The rule does not prohibit legitimate safety restrictions or restrictions designed to preserve designated or eligible historic or prehistoric properties, provided the restriction is no more burdensome than necessary to accomplish the safety or preservation purpose.

Q: What types of restrictions unreasonably delay or prevent viewers from using an antenna? Can an antenna user be required to obtain prior approval before installing his antenna?

A: A local restriction that prohibits all antennas would prevent viewers from receiving signals, and is prohibited by the Commission's rule. Procedural requirements can also unreasonably delay installation, maintenance or use of an antenna covered by this rule. For example, local regulations that require a person to obtain a permit or approval prior to installation create unreasonable delay and are generally prohibited. Permits or prior approval necessary to serve a legitimate safety or historic preservation purpose may be permissible. Although a simple notification process might be permissible, such a process cannot be used as a prior approval requirement and may not delay or increase the cost of installation. The burden is on the association to show that a notification process does not violate our rule.

What I did was go with
Submitted by jetonejet on October 30, 2008 - 11:31pm.

What I did was go with Directv and have the $12 month "basic" with Cox with their home phone bundle. The basic includeds Padres channel 4. Cox gives you a bundle discount so the basic cable works out to $6 a month, and their phone service is about the same as ATT. To bad Cox's sports and picture is crap. I love Directv, it kicks ass.

We've used Cox at three
Submitted by svelte on October 31, 2008 - 8:39am.

We've used Cox at three different houses in the last few years and found them to be pretty good and responsive. Good in-house support, good phone support.

Of course, we don't watch a lot of TV. We do use a lot of internet, which is what would concern me if we went with a dish. I'm a speed freak and would not be happy with any reduction in upload or download speed.

That being said, Cox did do a biff recently in that they quit supporting a few types of cable modems - without notifying those customers that had them (they know what you have - whenever I call them they tell ME what I'm using). No problem, I thought, I'll run down to Frys and get a new one.

Nope, they were completely sold out! Apparently Cox had screwed a lot of people that day.

Directv's installation
Submitted by LAAFTERHOURS on October 31, 2008 - 8:55am.

Directv's installation company blows and of course, Directv doesnt take responsibility for their actions.

I dont agree that DTvs picture quality is better. I thought cox had a better picture. In terms of channel offerings, DTV has the most at the moment but that could change quickly.

Personally I wish Verizon would drop FIOS every in SD county. Or I wish Dtv would come up with a wireless solution to send the signal from the sat to the boxes in your home.