Or perhaps I should say Xfinity? The cable giant seems to be moving towards changing their name from Comcast to Xfinity, so I guess we can expect to see more of that cool “X” name soon.

Anyway, the latest round of Comcast commercials almost had me rolling on the floor laughing. The ad shows two piles of televisions stacked up; one pile on the right and one pile on the left. The pile on the right is dramatically bigger than the pile on the left.

The ad then goes on to say that the pile on the right represents the number of HD “choices” offered by Comcast, while the pile on the left represents the number offered by satellite TV providers.

Although the ad does not come right out and say “channels,” that is the word that Comcast is probably hoping pops into the minds of those watching that particular commercial.

By “choices,” Comcast has to be including their library of on-demand programming into the equation. Yes, cable has always had more on-demand programming than satellite due to the nature of the way each service is distributed, and I don’t think anyone disputes that. However, I’m far more accustomed to hearing the various pay-TV services comparing their number of HD channels to the competition, which is something Comcast is reluctant to do since that reveals too much of the truth.

Does each on-demand program available in HD format equal an HD channel? I don’t think so, but that would certainly explain the dramatic difference between what Comcast says the satellite companies are offering and what they claims to be offering. How about pouring a little truth into the mix?

I’ve just finished checking the HD channels that Comcast offers in my area. I did not count HBO, Showtime or any of the other premium movie channels. The number if HD channels available from Comcast in my area is a whopping 36.

After that, I checked my DISH Network programming guide to see how many HD channels I could find. Again, not counting any premium movie channels, I counted a total of 64 HD channels on DISH Network. I excluded a number of HD sports channels that I presume are also premium channels, so if anything, the number I came up with for HD channels on DISH is conservative.

To take things to an even more ridiculous level, the new ads claim that Comcast’s HD picture quality is superior to satellite. My experience suggests otherwise. I have relatives that had Comcast cable (before they switched to Verizon FiOS recently) and comparing my DISH Network HD picture quality to theirs left no doubt that Comcast’s picture quality was inferior. My relatives even have a much newer and more expensive HD television set than I do!

Sorry, Comcast, or Xfinity, or whatever you are calling yourself, “choices” does not equal “channels,” and at least where I live, both satellite providers beat you hands down when one takes the time to actually count the number of HD channels from each provider. And from what I can see, as far as picture quality goes, that has not changed in the dozen or so years since I was a cable TV subscriber myself. Satellite delivered a better quality picture then, and still does today.

This is one of those stories that makes you say: “Huh?”

It’s being reported that DirecTV, the largest satellite TV provider in the country, is suing DISH Network for “false advertising.”

It’s all due to some commercial advertisements that DISH Network has been using that claim they are offering the same programming that DirecTV does for $24 less per month. At least that’s what the suit claims. The DISH ads feature a slogan that asks, “Why pay more?”

I’m a little surprised by this news, since I constantly see competing advertisements on TV for various products and services that tell completely different stories. An excellent example would be the latest Verizon Wireless vs.. AT&T commercials.

If I am not mistaken, Verizon started the battle by featuring a map of their wireless coverage compared to AT&T’s, which, if the Verizon ads were to be believed, looked pretty pathetic compared to how they depicted their own network.

It didn’t take AT&T too long to fire back, claiming that their wireless network was much better than Verizon was claiming, and if course, while they were at it, they declared that AT&T’s wireless network was better.

Well, obviously someone is not telling the truth. These two companies are tearing each other up with claims that are completely contradictory, yet I am not hearing any reports of AT&T suing Verizon or vice versa.

As far back as I can remember, competing companies have used advertising that oftentimes shed a rather unflattering light on on another, but I don’t think they spent a lot of time suing each other. It seemed that was just the way the advertising game was played.

It will be interesting to see how this one plays out.