Cable or Satellite tv?

[tecnowraith]

I have question for the Enworld users and this the best place for technology talk. Most who have read my threads has help me a lot in the past so I trust their feedback . I need help deciding to either staying with my Comcast or go to a satellite tv service like Direct TV. Who here has Cable and who has Satellite TV and why you like them?

 

[Nylanfs]

It also would depend on whether you have DSL or Cable for your Internet fix. If you have Cable and switch to using a Sat connection, there's a 3-5 sec lag between you requesting and recieving data. Now if you are just doing normal surfing, forums and video this won' matter. But if you play games on line that require twitch reflexes then you will have issues. If you are currently using DSL then ignore what I just said.

For just TV, IMHO cable tends to be slightly more reliable (ie storms don't interfere with picture). But in my area Sat tends to be cheaper so I went with Sat. Of course it also depends on whether you can get a clear sat signal. We couldn't get one in summer because of some tree's across the road, but it just happened that we had a big mulberry tree on our property that had to be cut down (it was split and hanging over the garage) that free'd up enough southern sky to get a signal.

 

[drothgery]

Here in San Diego, weather isn't going to have much impact on satellite TV, and I've got a sort-of-friend/former co-worker who switched between cable and satellite every year so that he could stay on intro rates all the time. I've always stuck with cable, but I've recently learned AT&T U-Verse has become available in my area, and I'm thinking about it because it may be effectively cheaper to get cable & internet that way... and every once in a while three shows I like are on at the same time, so the two-shows-at-once abilities of a normal CableCo DVR don't quite cut it.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Columbia SC here, only time I have issues with my DISH is during of the nasty storms, last time was when 3 inches fell in about a 4 hour period, a couple of weeks ago. I have heard from a couple of people at work that Time Warner has been throttling, the best thing is to look at any forums in your area that may discuss them, as think it is going to come to price.

 

[El Mahdi]

There are many things to consider, all of which depend on your preferences and priorities.

By way of Qualifications: I had Direct TV when I lived in Valdosta, GA two years ago; I have Comcast now in West Palm Beach, FL (basic package - provided by my condominium association as part of my maintenance dues - although I'll probably upgrade soon); and, I'm a retired Aircraft Avionics Crafstman and Flightline Supervisor with over 20 years of experience (this includes navigation systems, instrumentation, automatic flight control systems, FLIR systems, radios and radar, and most appropriate to the discussion, Satellite Communication systems {SATCOM} and Satellite Data Transmission systems).

First, as stated above, how you connect to the internet may be a factor. If you run through a DSL (or gods forbid - dial-up) by way of a phone line, and plan on keeping that connection, then internet connectivity isn't a factor. Internet through a satellite connection does have more lag than a cable connection and may become intermittent during inclement weather. Internet through a cable connection is extremely good, and unlike their TV broadcasts, probably will not be affected by inclement weather (unless lines go down, or your buried cables get wet - a common problem in areas where the underground cables haven't been upgraded and still have there 1980's/1990's cables).

Now for the part that just absolutely irks the hell out of me, especially every time I see a commercial for Cable TV: Weather has almost as much of an effect on Cable TV as it does on Satellite TV. Cable TV providers claims that Satelite TV drops out in bad weather, but Cable doesn't, is an absolute lie that Cable TV providers continue to perpetuate in order to win over customers. It's not as if Cable TV has some central transmission site from which it sends out all of it's broadcasts through hard cable lines. Comcast has thousands of substation recievers scattered around the country that send your TV signal out through a cable. But, those substations recieve their signal from, ...you guessed it..., A SATELLITE. If you live in a Metropolitan area, the substation that's recieving your TV signal (and then sending it to you through a cable) is probably in the same relative local area. If the weather is bad enough to interupt your Satellite TV reception, IT CAN ALSO DISRUPT YOUR CABLE TV SIGNAL. My cable signal becomes intermittent EVERY time a strong thunderstorm rolls through the area (which in Florida means pretty much every afternoon during the summer). If you live in a rural area, with cable you sometimes get that wonderful situation where you have perfect weather and skies, but your cable seems to be intermittant for no reason. This is more than likely because the receiving station is experiencing heavy weather.

So, with no real difference between cable and satellite as far as reception goes, the only things that really matter is what options you want.

Comcast and Satellite are virtually the same when it comes to your standard broadcast channels (local channels and primary networks such as ABC, CBS, NBC, etc.; news channels such as CNN, etc.; satelite/cable networks such as TNT, USA, FX, etc.). They are both going to have all of them available, for very similiar package prices, in both standard broadcast format (NTSC) and HD. So there's no real difference there.

Where Comcast (cable) beats satellite, is in On-Demand Movies and Programs. Satellite provides quite a bit of Pay-per-view movies and other programs, but cable now provides hundreds (and maybe more) of On-Demand movies and programs (such as television shows). It's probably close to being the equivalent of services such as HULU and Graboid (not quite as good but getting close). Satellite doesn't even come close to providing the same amount.

Where satellite (DirectTV) beats cable, is in sports programming (although this may change as cable providers possibly gain more access to sports programming).

Football: DirectTV has Sunday Ticket for football (every single NFL game, every Sunday, plus the NFL channel and the ocassoinal Thursday game), Comcast has a package that provides the NFL channel, a limited number of games (and not necessarily the teams you want) and a highlight channel showing highlights of the weeks games (only slightly better than watching ESPN for highlights).
Hockey: DirectTV has Center Ice for hockey (not every game, but as close as possible, they play as many games as basketball or baseball). Comcast has a Hockey highlight channel, gives you access to a very limited amount of games (which is still better than normal broadcasting in certian areas, like Florida, where you get almost no Hockey programming at all).
DirectTV has similiar packages for all of the other major sports (MLB, NBA, even professional soccer). Comcasts sports packages for the rest of these is just as limited as they are for football and hockey.


So, in short:

Weather: NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE!
Price: Satellite and Cable providers need to remain competitive with each other, leaving their prices very similiar for like packages and services.
Basic Broadcasting: No significant difference.
Internet: Cable is slightly better than satellite.
On-Demand Programming: Cable is significantly better than satellite.
Sports Programming: Satellite is significantly better than cable.


Personally, if I could get DirectTV where I live, I'd choose it over Comcast hands down (but that's mostly because I want to be able to watch the Detroit Lions and the Detroit Red Wings - both of which are never shown on local programming, and are hit-and-miss on Comcast - on DirectTV I can get every football game, and about 75% of regular season hockey and every single playoff game). The only reason I can't is because of restrictions in my condominium association which forbid attachment of anything on the exterior of the buildings (except for huricane shutters). I had DirectTV see if I could get an adequate signal from my patio (through the windows) but my windows blocked too much signal for reception to be reliable (and I wasn't about to open a window every time I want to watch TV). So, I'm left with upgrading my Comcast to get as much sports as possible (my only other alternative here is sports bars - and since it's Florida that still means virtually no hockey - even the Florida Panthers - go figure). I'll probably switch to getting my internet through Comcast also (my AT&T DSL has been less than stellar).

Hope this helped (and I hope I kept the extraneous info to a minimum).

Come back and tell us what you decide so we can all flame you for your choice.

 

[tecnowraith]

At this point it's mostly pricing for per month that we are looking at changing services. I am not a big sports but the household, including me, are movie buffs. i saw Direct TV does have On Demand programming. We have AT&T DSL but their U-Verse TV is not available in our area yet. We live in Atlanta GA some some of you might my concern for the weather with Satellite TV.

Also with the new Digital TV, Comacst now says we either have to this added equipment for TV not connected to a cable box has to get a converter if that tv wants to keep getting any channel basic channel. I have 2 TV one with the box (in the living downstairs) and one without (in my room) and I am disabled hard time walking. So you see my concern and reason for asking. If I want to keep wating any cable I either get the converter or acable box. Personally If I want to keep cable I go with 2nd cable box to view the digital channels and OnDemand.

 

[Mercutio01]

Also with the new Digital TV, Comacst now says we either have to this added equipment for TV not connected to a cable box has to get a converter if that tv wants to keep getting any channel basic channel.

This is NOT true. They told me the same thing about six months ago, and I listened to them and got the digital box. Economic issues have forced a change in what I can afford, and I shifted back to basic cable (no box) and nothing has changed. Furthermore, when I pressed the manager I had on the phone about this lie, he admitted to me that it was a marketing thing and that your cable service will continue with or without a box. The cable is already transmitted in digital format, and the only difference in the digital/non-digital world is broadcast, over-the-air waves if you used an antenna.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Because of work I've seen the output coming from broadcasters and been able to compare cable and satellite side by side. Cable wins as far as picture quality. Compression loss is higher with home tv satellite dishes than it is for cable. However, unless you DO compare them side by side you're not likely to see what you're missing. AFAIC the difference isn't large enough to matter a lot.

Cable ISN'T as affected by weather as satellite. Although cable providers do get their signal from satellites they are rather larger dishes than your pathetic 18" dish at home, the hardware is orders of magnitude more reliable, etc. Your dish at home receives less signal with more compression and is subject to clouds, wind, rain and snow when dishes at the cable company are not.

Assuming similar content from the providers, I think the biggest factor would wind up being price. Can you get bargains on satellite tv, telephone, and your high-speed internet connection for less than an all-in-one cable package?

 

[Umbran]

Now for the part that just absolutely irks the hell out of me, especially every time I see a commercial for Cable TV: Weather has no more of an effect on Satelite TV than it does on Cable TV. Cable TV providers claims that Satelite TV drops out in bad weather, but Cable doesn't, is an absolute lie that Cable TV providers continue to perpetuate in order to win over customers. It's not as if Cable TV has some central transmission site from which it sends out all of it's broadcasts through hard cable lines. Comcast has thousands of substation recievers scattered around the country that send your TV signal out through a cable. But, those substations recieve their signal from, ...you guessed it..., A SATELITE.

But, respectfully, there's a failure in that logic.

First off, if they aren't using the same satellites, for Sat-TV as for cable relay, then all bets are off.

Next, even if they are using the same satellites, I thoroughly expect that the cable company uses a far better receiver for the local relay stations than a sat-TV company would give me for my house. The local relay stations should be working with equipment valued at tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Conditions that would disrupt my own receiver may not disrupt the better equipment at the relay station. Not to say that the cable system is invulnerable - just that it should be less vulnerable than what gets put on one's roof.

I know for a fact that friends of mine who have satellite TV in my area in the past couple of years have had weather-related TV service disruption when my cable was still operational - they came to my house to watch TV!

Whether or not this phenomenon is common enough these days to be a major part of the decision I could not say.

 

[El Mahdi]

True, the cable receiver station is probably going to have a more sensitive receiver than your personal satelite system (and probably a much bigger dish), but drop-outs will still happen (just not as often as with a personal dish, but still enough to be noticeable - I'll edit my previous post to be more accurate). But, no matter how sensitive a receiver is, if the rain and clouds are thick enough, it will disrupt reception (transmission power could have a difference also, but I honestly don't know if the satellite feed that cable companies receive is transmitted with a higher wattage than DirectTV/Dish Network signals or not).

Perfect example: I currently have Comcast. Whenever we have significant weather (which, during a Florida summer, happens at least once a week - not counting the almost daily afternoon thunderstorms) my cable will become intermittent and pixelated (a sign of disruption at the reciever, not the cable - water in the cable will simply cause fuzz or loss of signal - unless it's an HD channel where the result is either a perfect picture or nothing). In the six years I had satellite TV while living in Georgia, I can count the times it dropped out due to weather on both hands (less than 10) - and two of those were tropical storms. The other times it was simply raining so hard I couldn't see the neighbors house on the other side of the street.

As far as using different satelites, it really doesn't matter. All that matters is whether the receiver has uninterupted line-of-sight to the satellite. If the sky is blocked by heavy weather, it doesn't much matter where the satelite is (unless it's just barely above the horizon, allowing the signal to come in under the weather, but typically the satellites are going to be at a relatively high angle of incidence to the ground station, not just off the horizon, unless you're in northern Canada and trying to pick up a DirectTV signal). Radio waves do bounce around, and higher frequency signals are much more able to "penetrate" than low frequency signals, but heavy weather can still interupt them. (Low frequency signals actually bounce around more than high frequency signals - this is why HF can bounce off the ionosphere and reach areas outside of line-of-sight, unlike VHF and UHF signals, and definitely unlike satelite signals which are basically up in the microwave range.) Of course, it's not just about how thick the weather is. Significant lightning will cause ionizing interference if it's between the satellite and the receiver.

More than likely, if you had cable while your friends lost there satellite signal, then the cable receiver that sends out your cable signal was probably at a geographic location outside of the weather that was disrupting your friends signal. Or, the weather just wasn't bad enough to disrupt the cable stations signal, but just bad enough to disrupt your friends satellite reception. The threshold for disruption of the cable stations satellite reception is probably higher than the personal satellite receiver, but it does occasionaly get exceeded.

So, every time a cable company claims that satelite TV drops out during bad weather, but cable doesn't, they are flat out lying. It may not happen as often, but it does happen. And satelite TV drop-outs aren't nearly as common as cable companies would have you believe. Of course, mileage will vary depending on your geographic area. As I said earlier, my cable here in Florida drops out more than my satelite ever did in Georgia. It may be the other way around where you live.

But, you said that you don't know whether this phenomenon is common enough to really make a difference. I don't think it makes a difference at all, but cable companies are sure going to tell you it does. As long as people believe it's true, the cable companies can keep perpetuating this myth, and winning customers over because of it.

The only real considerations are price, and which one has the programming and features you want.