|WikiProject Companies||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bell TV article.|
Is it possible to discuss the level of service (or lack of service) on the discussion page?
1. Please sign your comment with four ~ characters.
2. What do you mean by level of service? -- Asdquefty 20:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, this is a discussion page, therefore subjective discussion/opinion should be welcome. Only Bell trolls would erase such matter. Bell Canada's customer service is unbelievably poor. They do not answer emails, their CSR phone lines are almost always busy (expect to wait 30 to 60 mins just to not get an answer)... and their self serve account system is flaky at best. Express Vu customer service is a complete oxymoron. Further, their marketing practises (such as 'upgrade to new programming packages etc') generally involve complete and utter falsehoods (like "we will eliminate admin fees if you upgrade", which they do for a month and then implement them again). If any of you are thinking of moving from another supplier to Express Vu, don't do it. Whatever you have will be less painful than BEV. Posthocergopropterhoc (talk) 02:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like a link to "Pirate decryption". There is a large community that hacks signal and good or bad we should acknowledge it.
- As I understand it, the old smart card system was susceptible to pirating, but the new Nagravision 2 system is harder to (or impossible, depending on who you believe) access. As far as I know, there is very little pirating going on these days. My suggestion would be, rather than trying to steal their signal, just cancel your account. As I said above, there are plenty of better alternatives, IMO. Posthocergopropterhoc (talk) 02:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Whoever is deleting the description of the types of channels offered, stop it.
This statement in this article is not correct:
"RG-59 is generally made to only handle 13 volts which is what odd (01, 03, 05, etc...) transponders require. The usage of RG-59 cabling will typically cause 0% signal on even transponders which will lead to a loss of half the client's channels."
RG-59 will handle very high voltages. It will produce a little more loss than RG-6 but the voltages on a connection to a dish will not be a problem. Please explain why a 0% signal will result.
--> Over long distances, generally required for laying coaxial cabling, RG-59 will experience attenuation and will not be able to handle 18V as required by even transponders; this typically causes 0% signal on evens. Do you have any idea of how many service calls are scheduled to replace RG-59 with RG-6 cabling?
RE: IPTV vs. VDSL
There is no freaking difference between the two aside from the infrastructure. Both services use the exact same set-top boxes and both are to be capped at 26 Mbps. They're stupid marketing terms, if anything. VDSL = Very High Speed DSL and not Video DSL like most people think. IPTV will run off of fiber WANs, max 1.2 km away from elligible customer homes. The WANs then link themselves to switches (stored in cabinets) that act as more local central offices. Rather than the VDSL platform, IPTV will be using ADSL2 line cards.
You are correct. VDSL = Very high speed DSL. These boxes can be run at 52 Mbps but then would only have half the reach so they are only used at 26 Mbs (6.5 Mbs x 3 TVs (standard def) with the remainder set aside for Internet). This implementation of VDSL is ATM based for downstream (TV) and IP based for upstream (PPV requestes, etc). There is a huge debate going on between the two technologies; some people can't get past the fact that ATM has some fixed 5-byte overhead and so prefer the idea IP; Other people don't think that large-scale IP Multicasting of video will ever work properly in the real world; Maybe we all should refresh our memories as to why ATM was invented in the first place. I believe that IPTV will now be introduced in 2007 using VDSL2 --Neilrieck 13:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Bell is developing an actual product they call "IPTV" and VDSL is officially branded as "ExpressVu TV for Condos"; while VDSL is IP-based it is technically not IPTV in the industry sense of the word. It is not marketing speak. In the same way, POTS is not "VoIP" even though both use IP-based fibre transport. Therefore calling VDSL "IPTV" is a definite misnomer. I've changed the article to reflect this. - quanta 22:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
9200 with non-HD TVs (works fine)
"The 9200... Output #1 does not provide any other means of connection beyond HDMI and component [TRUE] so it must be used with a HD television [UNTRUE]."
The word "must" is incorrect. With my 9200 at initial install, it did not provide 480i output and I had to view 'double-column' 480p video on my old 480i TV. But once the 9200 had downloaded the latest SW, then it provided an additional (4th) menu choice for video output standard (480i) and it has been working fine on my old 480i (old fashioned normal) TV ever since. By the way, the picture quality (even down-converted to 480i) is very nice (as compared to the SD channels).
"Although not supported by ExpressVu, a component connection to a non-HD television set at 480i will actually give picture, but only 1080i and 720p will actually yield HD quality."
This one is correct.
Just the word "must" isn't accurate.
220.127.116.11 02:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
full expressvu channel list, latest updates
on official ExpressVu SRDU web site: http://bellsrdu.ca/channellineup.html
I've tagged this statement from the article as needing a citation:
"Previously, the Nimiq 1 signal was available to most of North America. However the launch of Nimiq 3 cut off access to most transponders below the Canadian border."
The cohabitation of Nimiq 1 and 3 did indeed cut off access to many transponders in the US, but this only affects users in extreme southern parts of the US (eg, central/south Florida). I'm a BEV subscriber in Atlanta, Georgia and I can see all transponders that carry BEV service just fine with a standard BEV dish. Rjhatl (talk) 20:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
6000 swap and piracy
There are no citations/references or explanations as to why the 6000 is particularly easier to pirate than other receivers like the 2800 or 3100. Suggest that that line be removed or citations be included. Cedexgatinus (talk) 22:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Pay per view
Classic Movies on channel 299 are only 99 cents each.
removed the word "ONLY" as 99 cents is not particularly cheap for older movies when compared to deals such as 2/$1.00 at the video rental store. Also adjusted wording. Cedexgatinus (talk) 01:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed. The service isn't even offered anymore, so the line will be removed altogether. --LABcrabs (talk) 18:06, 18 December 2011 (UTC)