The deal is done.

[ExpatNYC]

That is kind of silly if you ask me. I have DirecTV and I have had Comcast cable. Both have HD packages, but the HD picture that I get from DirecTV is much much better than the one I received from Comcast cable. I don't know if it is the quality of cables of if Comcast has to use converters or what not, but you can definitely tell a huge difference in quality.

 

I won't get VOIP for a while. I don't trust it.

 

You have to get DSL because you need a phone line to plug into the DTV receiver? I don't get it.

I too much prefer it to Comcast.

 

What does COmcast offer DirecTV customers besides On Demand? Are there any channels that Comcast customers get that you can't get on DirecTV?

 

Sorry, I should have explained myself better. DTV requires a phone line (a land line, no VOIP). Since I had to get a land line for DTV anyway, I figured I'd bundle it with DSL and save a few bucks a month. (DSL is also cheaper as a stand-alone product than is a cable Internet connection.)

 

I can't speak to Comcast's HD picture quality, but my Cablevision HD picture is excellent. Everything I've read about DTV HD seems to indicate that DTV over-compresses their HD signal, resulting in lower picture quality. Obviously I'm not in Chicago, which is why I'm so pissed about this Extra Innings deal. I want to watch the Sox in my living room. It's become a summer ritual since I left Chicago. Bud Selig, dolt that he is, seems not to grasp that he is making it difficult for baseball's most loyal fans to follow their teams.

 

Having had both cable and DTV, I can report that outages with DTV were much more frequent than with cable. Plus, as I said, they make you pay for HD, and my cable company doesn't. Add to that the fact that if you want HD and you want a DVR with DTV, you have to shell out several hundred dollars before your service even starts. DTV's HD DVRs are super-expensive. With cable, I pay $5 a month to rent my HD DVR.

[hogan873]

I've never gotten Extra Innings or really been interested in it, but this deal really does stink. As many know there's a big campaign going on to break up cable monopolies to give consumers more choice. As a baseball fan who wants the Extra Innings, now you are forced to get DirectTV. And everyone knows that switching to cable or from cable or whatever is a pain in the ass. What about those who have signed a deal with Dish Network? Early cancellation will cost ya a couple hundred bucks.

 

There's a lot a bad with this deal and very little good. Should the government get involved? I don't know. Should MLB be a little more in tune with its fans? Absolutely.

 

If I was interested in Extra Innings, I don't know if I would make the move to DirectTV. I had the Dish for two years a eventually dropped it due to its inconsistency in bad weather and the fact that there might be a tree in the way.

 

 

 

Having had both cable and DTV, I can report that outages with DTV were much more frequent than with cable. Plus, as I said, they make you pay for HD, and my cable company doesn't. Add to that the fact that if you want HD and you want a DVR with DTV, you have to shell out several hundred dollars before your service even starts. DTV's HD DVRs are super-expensive. With cable, I pay $5 a month to rent my HD DVR.

 

 

I agree. The biggest reason I dropped Dish Network was because of the price of HD. And I didn't switch to DTV because of their cost of HD and DVR. You have to buy the equipment with DTV and pay a monthly fee for the DVR. You only have to pay a monthly fee with Comcast.

 

Yes, Comcast charges too much, but I still pay less for a DVR and three HD boxes than I would with DTV.

[aboz56]

You don't need a slingbox to watch the MLB.tv product through the TV. If your computer or laptop has S-Video, you can hook it directly to the TV.

 

Also for those who are worried that they'll no longer be able to Tivo/DVR the games, MLB.tv has archives of every game that are uploaded about 15 mins after the games end.

[Texsox]

Internet for me.

[Dick Allen]

mlb.tv improved the picture a bit for the deluxe package this season. I saw a sample and if you full screen it, it still looks a little underwater, but not as much. Its at least watchable. I definitely would buy it if I didn't live in the Chicago area.

[maggliopipe]

You don't need a slingbox to watch the MLB.tv product through the TV. If your computer or laptop has S-Video, you can hook it directly to the TV.

 

Do you have any idea the difference in picture quality between MLB.tv and slinging games from someone's house in Chicago? (Boz I think you said you had DirecTV so maybe you don't...) Or does anyone have any experience with a Slingbox? If the picture quality's the same between the two, then screw MLB. I'm not gonna give them $100 annually or whatever it is for MLB.tv after their screwing of the fans. If the quality of slinged video is decent and I can get all Sox, Bulls and Bears games via a Slingbox for a one time fee of $250, that's the option I'm going for.

[vandy125]

One of the reasons it makes me upset is because I like the set up that I have. I have DISH satellite, and it has been real good for me. I'm not switching over to DTV because of Bud Selig. That is ridiculous that in the age of flexibility, they are taking options away.

[southsideirish]

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Mar 5, 2007 -> 04:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Also it would cost me 25 more dollars a month to then have internet without the cable tv. My condo association bans any dish on the outside of our building. Many of the buildings around me are the same, even some have contracts with dish network or somehting other than Directv. Basically, im screwed if I ever wanted the package.

 

 

On Demand itself it freakin awesome. If you havent had it, I understand, but the quality of TV on there is worth every penny.

 

 

 

I have had it, however I would much rather have the NFL Sunday Ticket if I had to choose between the two. However, this may not be the case as DirecTV has stated they will be coming out with their version of On Demand sometime this year.

 

 

 

QUOTE(ExpatNYC @ Mar 5, 2007 -> 05:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry, I should have explained myself better. DTV requires a phone line (a land line, no VOIP). Since I had to get a land line for DTV anyway, I figured I'd bundle it with DSL and save a few bucks a month. (DSL is also cheaper as a stand-alone product than is a cable Internet connection.)

 

I can't speak to Comcast's HD picture quality, but my Cablevision HD picture is excellent. Everything I've read about DTV HD seems to indicate that DTV over-compresses their HD signal, resulting in lower picture quality. Obviously I'm not in Chicago, which is why I'm so pissed about this Extra Innings deal. I want to watch the Sox in my living room. It's become a summer ritual since I left Chicago. Bud Selig, dolt that he is, seems not to grasp that he is making it difficult for baseball's most loyal fans to follow their teams.

 

Having had both cable and DTV, I can report that outages with DTV were much more frequent than with cable. Plus, as I said, they make you pay for HD, and my cable company doesn't. Add to that the fact that if you want HD and you want a DVR with DTV, you have to shell out several hundred dollars before your service even starts. DTV's HD DVRs are super-expensive. With cable, I pay $5 a month to rent my HD DVR.

 

 

 

I have had no problem with the compression of my picture, but I did have trouble with Comcast's DVR in the past - none with my DirecTV's DVR. We also didn't have to buy any hardware to get DirecTV, so there are not rental charges. I am not sure where you got that information from about the DVR HD, but it wasn't that way for me. I have not had any outages in the 2 years I have had DirecTV. NONE. So it is pretty reliable for me.

[TLAK]

AP indicates the deal might not be final.

 

Updated: March 3, 2007, 2:17 AM ET

DirectTV acknowledges agreement with MLB in letter

Associated Press

 

NEW YORK -- DirectTV acknowledged an agreement with Major League Baseball to become the sole television distributor of the sport's out-of-market package in a letter to the Federal Communications Commission, saying the deal will benefit consumers.

 

While the seven-page letter from DirectTV president Chase Carey to the FCC on Friday referred in the second paragraph to "DirecTV's agreement," company spokesman Robert Mercer said later that the letter was incorrect.

 

"The letter should have said proposed agreement. There is no agreement as yet," Mercer said.

 

Carey's letter was released by Edelman, the company's public-relations firm.

[kapkomet]

1.) Where you're living you can't have a dish (apartment, condo, dorm)

2.) You have a package deal with internet and cable.

3.) You have a multi year contract with the cable company.

4.) There are certain channels that you can only get on cable.

5.) You don't want a dish or you just prefer cable to DirectTV.

I know I'm way late on this, but #3 is bogus. Almost 100% of the time you do not have a long term deal with a cable company. The satellite companies are the ones that do this to you, and so does Verizon, etc. Comcast, Cablevision, Cox, nor Time Warner makes you sign a long term deal.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Such greedy-a$$ bull$hit.

 

My phone, internet, and digital cable are all bundled and I get a good price and decent service. Switching to DirectTV would cost me at least $300 more a year if I had to unbundle those services.

 

I've coughed up for Extra Innings for four years now, and certainly I now feel abandoned and beneath the concern of MLB.

 

I've watched mlbTV games on my computer monitor and they are fine for what they are, but the quality was so marginal if you sent the signal out to your TV. maybe the increased bandwidth of the Pemier package will help some but it's not going to match even standard broadcast quality I'm sure.

 

Selig's comments about being baffled as to why everybody doesn't just switch to DirectTV are more disingenuous than ignorant, because he really doesn't want everybody to do that. He wants scads of people to also sign up for mlbTV.

 

I'd better seriously look into the slingbox option because the thought of rewarding MLB for screwing over every out of market fan who doesn't have or won't/can't switch to DirectTV by giving them more of my money to see the mlbTV broadcasts is nauseating.

[BearSox]

I highly suggest to get mlb.tv for all the people who can't watch the games no because of this... In fact, I think mlb.tv is better. My dad gets mlb.tv and lets me use it, and I love it.

 

This year they have added a bunch of new great features for users. The video quality will be up to 700k, and they will have a new and improved mosaic where you can watch any 6 games you want (that aren't blacked out of course).

[Soxpranos]

Great news... I have the Titanium package so it just keeps getting better .

 

[ExpatNYC]

Mac users are sheeot out of luck, though, since Windows Media Player for Mac is one of the buggiest programs ever written. And Mosaic requires OS X 4.5 to run. Incidentally, the 700K stream comes with the premium package ($120/year), but not the regular one ($90). Still, I'd much rather be able to kick back on my couch, flip on the Extra Innings channels, and watch some ball, rather than run wires from my computer to my TV and hope my Mactastic WMP doesn't freeze up ten minutes into the game. (Which it always does.)

[FlaSoxxJim]

Mac users are sheeot out of luck, though, since Windows Media Player for Mac is one of the buggiest programs ever written. And Mosaic requires OS X 4.5 to run. Incidentally, the 700K stream comes with the premium package ($120/year), but not the regular one ($90). Still, I'd much rather be able to kick back on my couch, flip on the Extra Innings channels, and watch some ball, rather than run wires from my computer to my TV and hope my Mactastic WMP doesn't freeze up ten minutes into the game. (Which it always does.)

 

My sentiments exactly. But it's not going to happen if it means being forced to switch to DirectTV and having to go back to paying separately for all the services now bundled to my cable package.

[3 BeWareTheNewSox 5]

Yeah, mlb.tv increased the quality, but you have to pay extra for that and all those other new features they keep repping. And I think they raised the price between early in the offseason and just recently, since I was watching it earlier. You'd think they could at least give a spring training free preview, you know, let people see the pq and how their computers run things, morons.

 

And I don't think it's official yet, probably likely, but that site in the first post jumped the gun a little

[Controlled Chaos]

Get six guys together...get six receivers and each person take one receiver for their house. Split the bill up 6 ways. I'm not sure the overall cost, but even if the bill was 100.00 a month, it would only be about 17 bucks each guy. Plus if you want to get like a gold package with all the movie chaneels and stuff....its's cheaper cause you're splitting the bill. Only thing is you'll only have it on one tv...so you'll want to keep your other service as well.

[Chisoxfn]

Well I bit the bullet and bought the mlb.tv premium. I honestly can't tell the difference in the picture quality between the 350 and 700 on my tv (only thing in 700 I've seen is the demo of the Cardinals so maybe I'm missing something). That said it isn't horrible but I still have fear of the stupid lag time issues that mlb.tv has had over the past couple years with the streaming games.

 

I was impressed that I have a connection rate of 2884 though.

 

Still I wish I could still just watch it on cable in high quality (even if its not HD) and knowing if my internet s***s out or wireless s***s out I got no worries.

[aboz56]

Well I bit the bullet and bought the mlb.tv premium. I honestly can't tell the difference in the picture quality between the 350 and 700 on my tv (only thing in 700 I've seen is the demo of the Cardinals so maybe I'm missing something). That said it isn't horrible but I still have fear of the stupid lag time issues that mlb.tv has had over the past couple years with the streaming games.

 

I was impressed that I have a connection rate of 2884 though.

 

Still I wish I could still just watch it on cable in high quality (even if its not HD) and knowing if my internet s***s out or wireless s***s out I got no worries.

How are you hooked up to your TV?

 

Also, does the MLB.tv package allow you to watch full screen on your computer? I noticed you can't watch the demo in full screen.

[Kalapse]

Spring Training games are broadcast in 350K by the way and yes you can watch in fullscreen.

[Chisoxfn]

How are you hooked up to your TV?

 

Also, does the MLB.tv package allow you to watch full screen on your computer? I noticed you can't watch the demo in full screen.

My TV has a PC input on the back of it so I just picked up a VGA cable for the cheap and plugged it into the back of the tv and leave it plugged in and than I just plug the other end into my laptop when needed.

 

Spring Training games are broadcast in 350K by the way and yes you can watch in fullscreen.

The demo was in 700K though right? The spring game I saw looked pretty solid (it was the first Sox/Rockies game...I watched a few minutes just to see how it looked).

 

On a sidenote, you know what would be smart...MLB finding a way to allow users to watch on there tv's through xbox360's and ps3 since both systems have online capabilities (albeit the Microsoft doesn't allow you to browse the web).

 

Personally speaking I think that would be a good business decision for them.

[Kalapse]

My TV has a PC input on the back of it so I just picked up a VGA cable for the cheap and plugged it into the back of the tv and leave it plugged in and than I just plug the other end into my laptop when needed.

The demo was in 700K though right? The spring game I saw looked pretty solid (it was the first Sox/Rockies game...I watched a few minutes just to see how it looked).

Yeah the 700K demo is legit but any Spring Training games you watch are going to be of lesser quality than anything you see during the regular season. Just saying.

[Chisoxfn]

Yeah the 700K demo is legit but any Spring Training games you watch are going to be of lesser quality than anything you see during the regular season. Just saying.

Thats what I figured, which is why I thought it was weird that I couldn't really notice the difference on my big screen between the 700K and the 350K spring broadcast. But I probably should look on my computer screen and I'm sure I'd notice more of a difference.

 

Either way this is gonna be the ultimate distraction when things get slow at work and there is a day game, haha.

[aboz56]

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-d...p&type=lgns

[Chisoxfn]

Smart job by both MLB and DirectTV. I got to be honest, I don't see a problem in what MLB is doing because they are getting so much more money and are going to force a lot of people directly into there own online service which they have a much greater margin on.

 

It sucks cause I'd prefer to have my games on tv as opposed to having to deal with hooking my laptop up to the tv and dealing with the lower quality but it still beats not seeing the Sox and I don't blame MLB for taking that fat contract.

 

And over the long haul, lets be honest the only people effected by this are the big time die hard baseball fans and none of us are going to actually boycott our favorite sport just because of this deal (no way, no how).