Specialist23

the reason why i ask is because i went to the mitsu conference and they stated that cable is definately the way to go in the future. reason being, even if all the satellites for direct tv and dish network were to combine, there still would not be enough bandwidth for all the h.d. channels. they stated only about 18 would be in true h.d. just wondering if anyone else has heard this?

Frank S

Whomever was telling you this does NOT have a clue what he is talking about! Dish Network with it's new satellite at 121 and the 8PSK transmission standard (doubling the HD channels per transponder without compression over DirecTV) will be able to do over 50 HD channels at the full 19.2Mb range off of the 121 satellite! Then you add the capcity Dish has at 61.5 and the West coast satellite and you have a bunch more!

Considering cable is already compressing their HD channels to 14Mb and less I can hardly see how "cable is the way to go in the future"! Sound like Mitsubishi needs to hire some people who actually know what they are talking about!

Chew

Although true, neither satellite company will be able to bring local affiliates in HD to the entire country unless technology changes. The only way to get NBC, ABC, etc would be either OTA or cable. I don't see laws changing to allow us to receive a national network HD feed either.

Spanky BananaPants

I'm hedging my bets that the technology will advance to a point where HD can be delivered via satellite. It would be nice, but not a deal breaker for me. I've been with DirecTV since 1997, and about six months ago upgraded all my equipment to HD. I can get all my local HD channels quite nicely via a directional TV antenna, and I think the quality is better than any HD DirecTV is providing now. Plus, I use the antenna as a backup in case I lose the satellite signal due to weather.

But it is sad that I have to use 1950's technology to get 21st century television.