It depends on where you live and what companies you are dealing with. Here are the considerations:
From the above we see that both have their respective pros and cons. So now you can be the judge of which is better for you.
Yeah satellite maybe cheaper but does your dish provide you with both VOD (Video On Demand) and a DVR?
I have owned both services, and even compared the two on identical televisions for the so called digital vs analog difference. Comparing apples to apples meaning high def HBO or ESPN on DirecTV to that of Comcast's high def equivalents, I dare anyone to see and note a difference in picture or sound quality. Cable is every bit just as clear and sharp.
It depends on the quality of the dish installation and the performance of the cable company. If cable has the programming you want and takes care of their system and customers I have found them just fine.
The same is true of satellites I make sure I get a good installation with a good view of the right part of sky and use a large enough dish for the strength signal you have you won't have the problems the cable companies advertise. The farther north you live the more critical the installation is as the weaker the signal gets. One can get a dish for satellite from as small as 10 inches and large as 40 inches. A 40 inch dish would have 5 times more signal strength at the antenna than an 18 inch one would and set you back about $250.00 more.
When I had Cox for a cable provider things worked well on both the TV and internet side. Cox sold/traded us to SuddenLink and all that was sudden was the decline in service. While the SuddenLink help desk was open 3 hours later until one AM there was very little help to be had from them as there was no one that could diagnose or fix a problem. Not even when I found the problem, wrote it up and found the fix.
Now I am out on the end of a DSL line far enough the speed is degraded 30% or 40% down to about 1/3 what I had on SuddenLink but throughput is twice what it was on Suddenlink as there are no dropped packets and many less retires. On the TV side of Suddenlink more and more programs are missing their scheduled times, being replace without notice or record a lousy quality.. The local channels are often recorded without sound or not recorded at all. The high dollar programing is slipping away and a lot more paid programing fills the night as the stuff that was there fills in for the stuff they toss in the trash as costing too much. It's been 3 years since they dropped 24 Hours and they dropped House for a year or two. They don't have the new Dr Who either.
As long as you have a direct line of sight to the satellite, it should be no better or worse than cable tv service.
Satellite TV is almost always better than cable.
Satellite TV is better only in some cases. It is better in areas that have no cable service or have very limited cable selection. In some major areas with cable carrier competition, satellite is actually more expensive than cable. Satellite TV is a great choice for those in rural areas. This is because cable has a limited reach because of isntallition issues.
Do you think cable tv is a better solution than satellite for HD? Which offers more channels in HD?
DIRECTV is a satellite company and cable TV is not. DIRECTV has more channels and clear reception. Also, DIRECTV is a good company and satellite is much better than cable TV.
Cable can have a lesser quality than satellite tv. Most of the time the difference will not be noticable but other times, as you go up in quality like to HD the quality will start to diminish.
Yes, satellite TV is clearer than cable TV. It also has more channels and you can read more at www.directv.com/DTVAPP/content/directv/competition Satellite isn't always clearer than cable. If you have a HD television and have HD cable services, the picture is very crisp! Satellite is easily knocked out in a thunderstorm.
As per me , Setellite TV is the better choice than the Cable , Becase it has more choice of channle, and entertainment. Satellite TV is the cheaper way to go, UNLESS you happen to live in an area that is prone to severe weather such as icy winters or extreme windy conditions....
Cable TV and Satellite TV both have wonderful qualities. The following website compares and contrasts the two. http://www.moveutilities.com/cable_vs_satellite.html
That's a tough one. We've had `wireless TV' since the first TV broadcast transmitter went on the air. It was free and still is. Then came cable and it was followed by satellite systems. I've had both cable and satellite. My personal preferences are for one of the satellite providers over cable, but unless you can get a good `line of sight' to the satellite with your receiving dish, you may have no choice but to opt out for cable. NO, NAOL IS
I have had both satellite tv and cable tv in the past. Both types of service ran around the same price.
"Satellite TV offers better picture quality than cable TV. However, harsh weather conditions may affect the picture on the TV when using a satellite. There are also a wide variety of choices when using a satellite versus cable TV>" --------------------- If you are referring to ETV Corp's Satellite Direct, then the answer is 'No'. But if you are looking for the fastest, easiest and cheapest way to get access tons of live and on-demand channels via computer, then this software/service is one option to consider. You can find out more from a real user when going to Google and entering... satellite direct + "real user"