Shaw forcing customers to DTV - they suck
I hate Shaw
to digital cable?
In rural MB shaw is forcing customers to digital cable. I don't know if
this is happening in the city yet?
I get one free (probably the crappy) digital box. Then I have to rent or
buy any extra boxes for every other TV in my house. I don't get anything
extra from SHAW, and for that I have to pay an extra $12/month. Plus I lose
the ability to record shows using my hard drive analog PVR.
As far as I can tell the $2.95/month digital box only has coax or composite
video output so I don't even get a better pciture quality. Oh sure, I could
get better quality cable signal if I want to pay even more $$$ for the
better digital box which has component video for HD.
I hate Shaw cable they suck...
I would like to hear what other customers think about this issue!
G.
Clueless Newbie
news:Xns9CB4412BA0E1...@69.16.185.247...
No one is forcing you to do anything, if you aren't happy then go to
satellite TV or erect your own FTA antenne on a pole or your roof. If TV is
too expensive for you take up something you'd be good at like masturbation.
Iowna Uass
> customers
> to digital cable?
>
> In rural MB shaw is forcing customers to digital cable. I don't know if
> this is happening in the city yet?
>
> I get one free (probably the crappy) digital box. Then I have to rent or
> buy any extra boxes for every other TV in my house. I don't get anything
> extra from SHAW, and for that I have to pay an extra $12/month. Plus I
> lose
> the ability to record shows using my hard drive analog PVR.
>
If you think you lose the ability to record to your analog PVR, then you
don't have a very good PVR.
I've used a shaw box and various forms of PVR applications, like windoz
media, Hauppauge and Myth (on Ubuntu). They all did the job. That is until I
got hi-def and my hi-def pvr. Now the pvr comp sits idle.
> As far as I can tell the $2.95/month digital box only has coax or
> composite
> video output so I don't even get a better pciture quality. Oh sure, I
> could
> get better quality cable signal if I want to pay even more $$$ for the
> better digital box which has component video for HD.
>
If you had the ability to record component, then why not go hi-def?
Otherwise the regular video out works just fine. My digital box has s-vid
out for regular tv.
> I hate Shaw cable they suck...
>
Shaw has way better tv than MTS.
Second to Bell for HD, but then you need a dish.
4newsgroups
"Clueless Newbie" <clueles...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3YuGm.531$n02...@newsfe11.iad...
You know you almost sounded like you had a clue, then you threw in the
"masturbation" quip.
homepc
I found that one by one, various stations became totally unviewable or got
much more snow and or interference. My better half happened to be calling
Shaw for a better rate quote on our cable service a couple of months back
and they offered her two digital boxes for free and a reduced cable rate for
the next six months. I only bothered to install one box so far. The
picture quality is better and I get all the stations that I lost previously.
What angers me is that they did indeed force me to upgrade.
Recording isn't much of a problem using my VCR ( old technology now ). The
drawback is that the analog cable input used to automatically give me a
stereo audio signal. Now I have to get an extra set of RCA cables, more
wire ;-( , to connect the digital box to my VCR, otherwise I will only get
mono sound while recording. I will have to watch regular TV though my VCR
to get stereo sound on my new HD TV, and only after I install the extra RCA
cables. Plus, I can't watch a different station while recording anymore. I
know these are issues that can be solved by throwing more money out on a
digital recorder. My argument is that I really didn't want to upgrade and
spend more money in the first place.
If Shaw wants to hike rates again to satisfy local broadcaster demands, I
will start to consider other alternatives in the future. I get what they
used to call their Classic cable package. Out of all those garbage stations
they offer, I only watch about 6 stations beyond the FTA local stations I
can get for free in the first place. I've checked MTS's more choice offer,
and they aren't any better. Both carriers force you to buy a pound of their
crap, for an ounce of quality programming. I hope someone from Shaw is
reading this!
JJ
It is called progress. Like the 8 track, the cassette, the VCR, technology
changes. Eventually Shaw will shut down the current analogue channels and
yes everyone will need a digital box although it hasn't happened in Winnipeg
yet. This will accelerate as we near the 2011 switchover to all high
definition signals. Why? Shaw needs the extra capacity and a digital
channel system allows, them to carry many more HD channels in the existing
space occupied by analogue. Shutting down the outdated analogue channels is
the most cost effective and efficient way to do it. It is almost time to
dump the 60's cable TV technology and move on.
JJ
Canuck57
You have the CRTC to thank for this. Instead of looking out for the
consumers best interest the politicians caved in and Ottawa sold us out.
For example, everyone gets basic cable right? Not a realistic option
not to. So why not put out all basic channels clear QAM 256? (Without
the encryption).
This allows Shaw (and Rogers) to encrypt their signals in a proprietary
way that attacks fair use. And only works with Shaw's over priced under
featured offerings. It leaves the consumer no choice but to buy their
silly priced equipment.
There is no other reason than Ottawa politics and cable company greed
why consumers can't use Media Center or MythTV that make a Shaw Digital
box look like scrap rate material. For example my media PC holds 2 TB
of recordings. I can record a whole 8 or 12 episodes and watch them
back to back.
We need to make our last stand on bandwidth throttling. Shaw would love
to throttle Internet video downloads forcing you to use their antiquated
and expensive digital solution. HDTV is a fad/farce, bring on Internet
TV. On demand when you want.
Dont' vote for MPs and a government who supports bandwidth throtling.
As at some point your next high definition movie will be downloaded.
Canuck57
Canadian services are inbreads of each other. Who are you kidding?
Legal Canadian offerings suck.
While you like paying too much, know in the USA the rates are about 1/2
and stations like HBO and SciFi make Canadian offerings like the 3rd world.
If it were not for the Internet, I would pull the Shaw cable out of the
house right to the property line.
Canuck57
> I was quite happy with my analog service from Shaw until about 8 months ago.
> I found that one by one, various stations became totally unviewable or got
> much more snow and or interference. My better half happened to be calling
> Shaw for a better rate quote on our cable service a couple of months back
> and they offered her two digital boxes for free and a reduced cable rate for
> the next six months. I only bothered to install one box so far. The
> picture quality is better and I get all the stations that I lost previously.
> What angers me is that they did indeed force me to upgrade.
Yes, they have. Lost two good channels out of the lot too. The two
channels that were not time shifted by a month showing the same movies a
month apart. I think the Canadian conglomerates were ticked.
The excuse given to me was they needed the bandwidth. Which is 100%
certified BS.
> If Shaw wants to hike rates again to satisfy local broadcaster demands, I
> will start to consider other alternatives in the future. I get what they
> used to call their Classic cable package. Out of all those garbage stations
> they offer, I only watch about 6 stations beyond the FTA local stations I
> can get for free in the first place. I've checked MTS's more choice offer,
> and they aren't any better. Both carriers force you to buy a pound of their
> crap, for an ounce of quality programming. I hope someone from Shaw is
> reading this!
CRTC has assured Shaw that you don't really have too many viable and
economical alternatives.
Canuck57
But then why encrypt the channels in a proprietary way? Hint, there is
a 98% profit in thos $600 junk Digital PVRs. Why not use a simple PC?
Need more storage, $100/terabyte at Memory Express.
It is about constricting the consumer for obscene profits.
Canuck57
> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:24:00 GMT, I hate Shaw <ihat...@mts.net>
> spake thusly:
> They probably need the time to convert everything to digital before
> being caught with their pants down on 2011. I highly doubt that it's a
> simple process.
>
> Personally, I am quite happy with Expressvu.
Trouble is Expressvu does not offer Internet does it?
When Shaw nixes analog, I will re-evaluate my needs, pure Internet and
download what you want.
homepc
"JJ" <bit...@biteme.com> wrote in message
news:PLKGm.744$CK3...@newsfe12.iad...
along with it. That being said, why then, must I use a Shaw digital box to
receive a digital TV signal when my HD TV is already equipped with a digital
tuner?
People in the US got the option to purchase discounted generic digital to
analog converters to view FTA digital TV signals on their older analog
equipment. Why then can't Shaw do the same with their cable signal? Just
scrap the analog signal all together and go digital and let the end user
apply analog converters if and when they need to. To force customers to use
dedicated Shaw equipment to receive cable TV signals is nothing more than a
cash grab. The cable company is creating a stream of revenue where none
existed or was needed before.
Canuck57
There is actually no technical reason why they can't support analog
going forward. It is purely politicial to rope us into more expense
with fewer options. There is lots of bandwidth on the cable.
I agree, just a cash grab.
And that expensive cable company supplied equipment might not last that
long. HDTV will have a slow acceptance rate and a short lifetime. The
next phase is TV on demand over the Internet. It will make HDTV decode
sets obsolete.