Aside from the recent compression bit, we haven't heard a whole lot of negative things about AT&T's U-verse. In the same breath, we'd like to add that we haven't heard a tremendous amount of praise either, which leads us to believe it's about as good as every other middle-of-the-road carrier out there. Clearly, those assumptions are remarkably misguided, as AT&T has pumped out a release tooting its own horn over the J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Residential Television Service Provider Satisfaction Study. In the three regions where it was critiqued, U-verse TV ranked highest in customer satisfaction, with the service receiving particularly high marks in the "offerings and promotions factor and the performance and reliability factor." So, the question beckons: agree, or disagree?

Barely a month after hearing rumors that the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) would be granting licenses to 11 China-based manufacturers, in flies official word that the very first Blu-ray Disc testing center has been established in that very nation. CESI Technology, a contributor member of the BDA, is the lucky winner, and as of today, "Chinese manufacturers can receive verification services for the official production of BD-ROM Movie Players at this center." Hopefully, this means that we'll be waiting less for the development and market launch of BD products. On a slightly related note, DigiRise DRA -- also a Chinese company -- found that its homegrown digital audio coding technology has passed an important milestone in the Blu-ray approval process. Not that we're crazy about having one more codec to juggle, but there you have it. More details on both points below.

Read - First BDA testing center in China
Read - DRA audio codec

Far from being the first time Time Warner Cable has upset its subscriber base, the Los Angeles city attorney's office is pulling a Dee Snider and refusing to take the carrier's lackluster service anymore. In a 25-page lawsuit, the city is alleging that the operator "caused major havoc and distress" two years ago when it "failed to live up to its part of the franchise cable agreement requiring that a company answer subscribers' calls within 30 seconds and begin repairs of service interruptions within 24 hours of notification in 90% of its calls for service." The suit claims that no more than 60% of customer calls were answered in time, and cable / internet service was said to be "so intermittent and inferior in quality that it was not much better than no service at all." Not surprisingly, TWC representatives chose not to comment on the whole ordeal, but the outfit could face civil penalties of tens of millions of crisp US dollars in the case. Should've picked up the phone, TWC -- it would've been easier than picking up this tab. [Disclosure: Engadget is part of the Time Warner family]

[Image courtesy of Web 2 Concepts, thanks Scott]

We can't imagine Nick is the only one out there who struggled with getting PowerDVD to handle Blu-ray Discs correctly, so if you've been letting said application collect digital dust while longing for it to function as advertised, take note. CyberLink has just shot out the latest update to the program, and according to our resident tipster, it's a game-changer. It enables hardware acceleration for H.264 encoding, enhances disc load time, reduces memory consumption and makes playback a good bit smoother overall. For PowerDVD 8 Ultra users, this one seems like a surefire download. Hit the read link to get it on!

[Thanks, Nick]

It was around 2.5 years ago that we saw one of the first FiOS users in Texas give his review of the fiber-based service. Now, we're seeing a U-verse subscriber from Ann Arbor give his take on whether or not it's living up to expectations. Essentially, the service was praised for delivering HD material for a low (relatively speaking) cost, and at least for this fellow, his experience with customer service has been satisfactory thus far. As for picture quality, he notes that SD is superior to that of DISH Network, though the HD signals could stand to lose some minor artifacting. Interestingly, the subscriber states that actually getting U-verse installed was "a major undertaking," and although he didn't urge consumers to steer clear of AT&T, he couldn't wholeheartedly recommend the service in its current state either. Check the read link for the full interview.

Talk about an onslaught. Within the course of a few weeks we've seen Shaw, Rogers and Comcast all get flamed for purportedly compressing their signals to a point beyond acceptable, and as if that wasn't enough, a recent research report found that video quality issues (shocking, we know) were the primary reason for call-in complaints. All the while, Verizon is taking the chance to toot its own horn and boast about its ability to pass along HD signals sans additional tweakage. So, are you right in the middle of this firestorm? Or are you gleefully looking in from the outside with a gorgeous HD picture on your set? Give us your story below, won't you?

[Image courtesy of Vidiot]

Considering the recent hullabaloo over Comcast and Rogers Cable deciding to (over) compress at least part of their respective HD lineups, Electronic House's latest writeup is particularly timely. It's investigation into HD Lite reveals quite a few tidbits that everyone should know, but often get overlooked in the uproar. Put simply, every high-def channel that gets piped your way is compressed in some form or fashion (that includes you too, Verizon) before it hits the carrier. In other words, just because a signal gets modified before it hits your set doesn't automatically make it HD Lite. Still, there's no doubt that some providers have taken this squeeze too far and compressed signals to the point of noticeability -- that's where the problem emerges. Give the article a read, you'll likely learn a thing or two about nomenclature if all else fails.

It was inevitable, really. No sooner does Comcast and Rogers Cable begin taking heat for over compressing their HD feeds than Verizon pumps out a TV spot trumpeting its ability to deliver "pure, uncompressed high-definition." The ad campaign asserts that its delivery of material is superior to that offered up by traditional cable providers, but the company's media relations director Bobbi Henson did note that the real purpose was to show that "FiOS TV customers are receiving HD that's not compressed by Verizon." She noted in an e-mail statement that "content owners compress their video before sending it to video service providers, but [Verizon] forwards the signal to its customers the way that [they arrive]." You know what they say about bandwidth: if you've got it, flaunt it.

Bad news for Rogers Cable customers -- word on the street has it that your HD feeds may begin to look a little less fantastic in the coming days. According to Digital Home Canada, the carrier has outlined a plan in a technical briefing sent out by Rogers Network Engineering and Operations that will compress part of its high-definition lineup in order to "deliver more HD channels without having to use more bandwidth." As it stands, 15 HD channels are facing the dreaded HD Lite treatment effective April 9th, but curiously, we're not told which HD networks are actually on the docket to be added. Granted, we've yet to see a definitive confirmation, but given that Comcast has recently caught loads of flack for its decision to shove three HD channels on a single 6MHz slot, we suppose an awful trend could be (re)emerging. Keep a critical eye out, Rogers customers -- let us know if anything changes.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

After taking a look at the realities (or lack thereof) of dynamic contrast, reader caveman posed a question that we found quite intriguing. There's little doubt that higher actual contrast ratios on televisions generally lead to sharper blacks and better overall image quality, but where does a number stop becoming a factor of importance and start becoming an overpriced bragging right? In his own Neanderthalian words:

"I'm looking to buy an LCD TV soon and was wondering how much of a difference contrast ratio made? Where does the cutoff occur where a higher ratio just isn't worth the increased cost?"

Yeah, we know stipulations around set placement, surroundings, etc. all come into play here, but why not give Mr. caveman a glimpse into your own experiences? Have you moved from a low contrast set to a high and seen a noticeable improvement? Have you watched your buddy's G Platform plasma and walked away unimpressed? What's your take on the matter?

Got a burning question that you'd love to toss out for Engadget HD (or its readers) to take a look at? Tired of Google's blank stares when you ask for real-world experiences? Hit us up at ask at engadgethd dawt com and keep an eye on this space -- your inquiry could be next.

We can't say we're shocked to hear it, but new data released by Symmetricom explains that cable operators have identified video quality problems as the primary reason customers call in with complaints. Potentially more disturbing, however, is the note that "only 31-percent [of carriers surveyed] said they use network monitoring tools to discover quality problems," while 61.9-percent learn of said issues via angry subscribers. As expected, these very facts are the same reasons given for high customer churn (along with high prices), and while 40-percent of respondents suggested that VOD is causing the most quality concerns today, 51.6-percent stated that HD is "expected to produce the most quality problems one year from now." Here's a tip -- stop shoving three HD channels on a single 6MHz slot, and we'd bet the quality complaints drop significantly.

[Image courtesy of Donna Earl Training]

It's not unusual to hear of entire neighborhoods kvetching over lackluster HD quality, but judging by the growing chorus of complaints over at AVSForum, we're beginning to wonder if this issue isn't more widespread. Reportedly, Comcast is squeezing three HD channels onto a 38.8Mbps QAM, which is typically used to handle just two HD channels. One particular user decided to pull screen grabs from shows seen on Comcast and Verizon's FiOS TV, and needless to say, the results were fairly startling. We aren't assuming that the overdone compression is being seen elsewhere, but we are curious to know if your Comcast service has taken a hit in quality. So, is your viewing experience as good as ever? Or have things become slightly less Comcastic of late?

[Thanks, Dave]

We had heard that some Shaw customers up north (that's Canada, to be precise) were having some serious quality issues with their HD programming towards the end of 2007, and according to a recent writeup by Digital Home, the problems haven't gone away -- entirely, at least. Apparently, the audio dropouts and macroblocking that seemed to be present on nearly every HD channel were finally brought to the attention of management, and while the bigwigs did proclaim that they were taking the complaints "very seriously," nothing had been done as of early January. After a six-week effort that consisted of gathering data from 38 volunteers experiencing the problems, users say that the audio issues have improved somewhat, yet visual quirks are persisting. Any problem that hangs around for months on end can't be good, but we're curious to see if Shaw's done anything since to improve matters. So, dear Canadians, has it?

[Image courtesy of Vidiot]

After seeing a wave of faulty Blu-ray Discs a few months back, we've heard relatively little about further mishaps. Still, that's not stopping firms from hoping in the quickly-expanding quality control arena. On the docket today is My Eye Media, which is broadening its service portfolio with Blu-Qual, a BD testing solution "designed to analyze the complexities" of the format. More specifically, it's out to "identify impairments, artifacts and technical anomalies much earlier in the production process than traditional optical media testing methodologies have allowed," and while you'll likely never know what titles it touches, we're all for making sure shipping products work as advertised.

After breaking things down as best we could this week, we noticed a flood of comments from critical HD consumers about the quality (or lack thereof) of their HD service. Of course, it's impossible for us to take a look at each provider out there and assess just how wonderful (or not) its deliverance of high-definition programming is, so we figured we'd put it out there for all of you readers. Bottom line: are you stoked about the quality of your high-def service? If so, by all means, let the world know who's treating you right. If not, shout out what's keeping you from extolling your carrier -- be it a shoddy HD DVR, inexplicable compression, a high level of outages, a dearth of HD offerings or simply charging too much for too little.