Sorry Vader..............
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,118
Likes: 7
From: Burleson, Texas
Sorry Vader..............
The Ravens look more like the bungles than the Bengals. I'm sure you're devastated having wasted your time watching that one, and Cris Collinsworth as color commentator to rub salt in the wound. 
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
From: Pikesville, MD
Wow it was painful....now into KC....bad bad game.
If you look at the stats the teams were about even other than that flee-flicker and the Wideouts for Cincy getting it done...
Oh well...9-3 ain't bad but man I wanted this win.
If you look at the stats the teams were about even other than that flee-flicker and the Wideouts for Cincy getting it done...
Oh well...9-3 ain't bad but man I wanted this win.
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,550
Likes: 2
From: Mount Airy,MD
Originally Posted by Stealth
The Ravens look more like the bungles than the Bengals. I'm sure you're devastated having wasted your time watching that one, and Cris Collinsworth as color commentator to rub salt in the wound.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,424
Likes: 0
From: Motor City
Originally Posted by kingfish51
I have to say as far as the commentators on the NFL channel, Bryant Gumbel and Chris Collinsworth are reasons NOT to watch. They are pitiful.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
From: Westminster, CO
Originally Posted by dzervit
Amen to that brother. I watched part of the Thanksgiving night game and was so underwhelmed I didn't even bother to turn it on last night. Plus, not all cable providers (mine included) do not offer NFL HD. And seriously, who the hell watches standard def football anyway?
Global Moderator &
Senior Member
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,080
Likes: 82
From: Burleson/Athens/Brownsboro, TX
Originally Posted by dzervit
God I love me.
__________________
Jim
Jim
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
From: El Segundo, CA
Originally Posted by dzervit
Plus, not all cable providers (mine included) do not offer NFL HD. And seriously, who the hell watches standard def football anyway?
Directv with NFL package gets you the NFL network games in HD, then all you need to find is the mute button
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,424
Likes: 0
From: Motor City
Originally Posted by adfox77
Directv with NFL package gets you the NFL network games in HD, then all you need to find is the mute button
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 873
Likes: 1
From: Somewhere in the EU
Originally Posted by dzervit
That's a problem. While I am a HD snob, I'm also an HD tightwad and refuse to pay for HD content. It's free HD or bust baby! However, if DirecTV gets off its **** and delivers those 100+ HD channels like they've been promising forever I might be a convert.
Those birds have been up there for a while . . . wonder what's going on?
They are going to have a bunch of unhappy campers when they switch over to MPEG4 and all of us with the prior HD boxes suddenly find themselves having to get new stuff.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,424
Likes: 0
From: Motor City
Originally Posted by kobiashi
I was just thinking about this the other day . . .
Those birds have been up there for a while . . . wonder what's going on?
Those birds have been up there for a while . . . wonder what's going on?
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,118
Likes: 7
From: Burleson, Texas
Originally Posted by kingfish51
I have to say as far as the commentators on the NFL channel, Bryant Gumbel and Chris Collinsworth are reasons NOT to watch. They are pitiful.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,424
Likes: 0
From: Motor City
On a side note, for the Kobster... this is classic!
Originally Posted by tvpredictions.com
Washington, D.C. (September 20, 2006) -- A DIRECTV subscriber has filed a class action lawsuit against the satcaster, claiming it reduced its High-Definition TV picture quality after he signed up for the service.
Peter Cohen, the subscriber, filed the lawsuit in November 2004. The complaint alleges that DIRECTV engaged in unlawful or fraudulent business practices by lowering its HDTV picture resolution in September 2004.
Cohen first signed up for DIRECTV's $10.99 monthly HDTV programming package in 2003. He says DIRECTV at that time promised that HDTV would provide "astonishing picture quality." However, he claims that DIRECTV broke that promise by lowering the picture quality in 2004.
DIRECTV spokesman Robert Mercer yesterday said the lawsuit was without merit.
"We believe the plaintiff’s underlying claims are completely without merit because DIRECTV’s High Definition service is high quality, true HD service under accepted definitions for satellite TV," Mercer said. "If it were otherwise, we doubt the plaintiff would continue to subscribe to and pay for DIRECTV HD programming."
Whether DIRECTV purposely squeezes the HD picture quality to create room for more channels has been a hot topic on Internet message boards for two years. The alleged practice has been dubbed DIRECTV's 'HD Lite.'
However, DIRECTV has consistently maintained that its high-def picture is comparable to or better than any other TV provider.
Cohen's class action lawsuit came to light this week when Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter Lichtman ruled against DIRECTV's motion to compel arbitration in the case.
Mercer said DIRECTV was "disappointed" in the judge's ruling and is now "evaluating our options in light of the ruling."
In the lawsuit, Cohen said that two months after he signed up for HDTV, DIRECTV sent him an amended customer agreement containing an arbitration clause. After he filed his lawsuit, DIRECTV filed the motion for arbitration.
Peter Cohen, the subscriber, filed the lawsuit in November 2004. The complaint alleges that DIRECTV engaged in unlawful or fraudulent business practices by lowering its HDTV picture resolution in September 2004.
Cohen first signed up for DIRECTV's $10.99 monthly HDTV programming package in 2003. He says DIRECTV at that time promised that HDTV would provide "astonishing picture quality." However, he claims that DIRECTV broke that promise by lowering the picture quality in 2004.
DIRECTV spokesman Robert Mercer yesterday said the lawsuit was without merit.
"We believe the plaintiff’s underlying claims are completely without merit because DIRECTV’s High Definition service is high quality, true HD service under accepted definitions for satellite TV," Mercer said. "If it were otherwise, we doubt the plaintiff would continue to subscribe to and pay for DIRECTV HD programming."
Whether DIRECTV purposely squeezes the HD picture quality to create room for more channels has been a hot topic on Internet message boards for two years. The alleged practice has been dubbed DIRECTV's 'HD Lite.'
However, DIRECTV has consistently maintained that its high-def picture is comparable to or better than any other TV provider.
Cohen's class action lawsuit came to light this week when Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter Lichtman ruled against DIRECTV's motion to compel arbitration in the case.
Mercer said DIRECTV was "disappointed" in the judge's ruling and is now "evaluating our options in light of the ruling."
In the lawsuit, Cohen said that two months after he signed up for HDTV, DIRECTV sent him an amended customer agreement containing an arbitration clause. After he filed his lawsuit, DIRECTV filed the motion for arbitration.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 873
Likes: 1
From: Somewhere in the EU
Originally Posted by dzervit
On a side note, for the Kobster... this is classic!
They don't deny it, they just keep repeating that "Ours is just as good as everyone else's . . . "
That said, the stuff I see on my DirecTV HD looks pretty good. especially if you set the box to show 1080i at all times.