In Reply to: Digital vs Analog Cable... Not real impressed. posted by AbeCollins on August 3, 2003 at 09:59:17:
I don't find either to be all that special. It's more marketing: digital is perfect, right? There's no distortion with digital, right? Everything will look good, right? Right... And you don't have to hold your CDs by the edges or take care of them, either.Honestly, I thought digital satellite looked like steaming poo the first time I saw it. Very blocky from the compression, differences between the colors is severe, etc. You could tell it was digital just by looking at it. Same thing with digital cable... it was nice having the extra channels, but how many of them were being watched? The simple fact is that the cable companies get the increased bandwidth of cable, then jack them so full of extra signals that they look worse than before. I'm resigned to the fact that the only way we're going to get better pictures is from HD signals being broadcast or shot down the wires properly.
Another problem... Time Warner was pushing their digital cable in the south Atlantic states wiht the guarantee that you'd be able to go back to analog if you didn't like it after the trial period. Guess what happened if you didn't like it? That's right, boys and girls... you were stuck with it... increased price tag and all. Their reason? They were converting to digital completely. This was two or three years ago. Would you believe you can still order basic analog cable from them to this day? Strange...
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Digital cable and satellite... - Some Guy 06:33:20 08/08/03 (1)
- Re: Digital cable and satellite... - AbeCollins 23:04:03 08/10/03 (0)