NeuroManson asks:
"With the growing hype surrounding HDTV and copy protection, and as further corporate control of the FCC becomes more commonplace with the inevitable arrival of the technology thanks to Hollywood, you will have no choice in the future of watching anything else, since your TV, VCR, etc, will be forced into obsolescence.
There are two things that this brings to mind that should be addressed: who will be paying for the retrofit to the thousands of CRT and TV manufacturing plants around the world to make this possible; and assuming that this is going to be a US only problem in the short term (approx 3 years), how do they propose to safely dispose of all those outmoded TVs?" About the only way that this can happen by
the recently proposed deadline of July 1st, 2007, without trashing and replacing the majority of our current televisions, American television owners would have to have their TVs "serviced" by a qualified technician to continue to receive broadcast signals. Having a secondary tuner would not work as that would break the "trusted" display chain that Hollywood is seeking to establish.
"Assuming there are approximately 300 million Americans, with 2/3 having upwards of 2 TV sets, that amounts to close to 500 million or more perfectly functional TVs that will wind up in landfills or third world 'recycling' countries like China. These are not exact figures, but you get the idea. As this grinds on, it looks like economic and ecological impacts are the predominate risks involved, as well as not being able to record the latest Star Trek because they put a copy-block flag into the digital broadcast. This is something that I think everyone, from the geek on the web to the little old lady across the street, through the average soccer mom should be concerned about. Any suggestions as to how such could be made publically known, organized against, and promoted, in such a way that the public would know it as a threat, not only to their way of life, but also to their pocketbook and health?"
Slashdot Mirror
My father bought an HDTV about a month ago (a Phillips, IIRC). It's very nice, though all of the signals are still coming in analog (4:3) because the digital cable receiver *doesn't support HDTV output*, meaning he has to replace it with one that does. Oh bother. It's wonderfully ironic when the local nightly newscasts declare they're "broadcasting live in HDTV" yet the output doesn't change to match this fact.
At least DVD playback looks really good.
As for existing televisions, there are probably legions of geeks and middle-to-lower-class citizens that will either use their older game consoles with them, or simply choose not to buy into the hype and watch their older stuff that they've been taping but haven't had rhyme nor reason to watch, which is pretty much counter to what the industry wants.
Will these become "obsoleted" as well? No. The copyright protection systems discussed so far involve also the recording of analog signals. This is about the same as macrovision did for DVD players. This is already happening with DVHS.
The truth is, probably ~80% of the HDTVs sold (all the reasonably priced ones) do not contain an HDTV tuner, they have analog inputs which are capable of 1080i, 720p, etc, resolutions. These _cant_ be simply ignored since it took so long to get capable equipment into the hands of consumers, the industry isn't just going to say tell everyone to buy another set.
I imagine these will be grandfathered. New sets will contain digital connections (like DVI for example) and some kind of end-to-end protection, but this, as we all know is futile anyhow.
For the time being, there are VERY few practical ways for Joe Consumer to record a high-def broadcast and replay it, or even send it to someone else. DVHS is the only customer usuable solution right now. Which as we read about earlier has already been taken care of.
...that the standards being proposed for digital television transmission were open, and that the specs could be obtained somewhere (possibly the FCC). Hence it shouldn't be all that hard to build your own system to get around all the "don't copy" bits, etc.
-- Even if a god did exist, why the fsck should I worship it?
the problem with the tv today is content, not presentation. crap like "friends" and "survivor" and "who wants to debase himself on national tv for a few dollars" isn't gonna be any better in 720p than it is now. well, if bush gets his way at least the history channel will have some new stuff to beat into the ground by this time next year. grrr. screw you kids and you newfangled digital tv, i'll stick to npr and the bbc on the wireless. feh.
Digital TV has been creeping in for years, all without anyone buying a new TV. In the UK we had BSB digital a decade ago, and BskyB is digital now, and I believe Dish network in the US is also digital. Most europeans have access to over-the-air digital with DVB boxes, and in the US one can get AT&T digital over cable. [Some of these (dish, BskyB at least) transmit one or two HDTV channels, but these mostly seem to be used in TV stores to try to sell the occasional HDTV set.] All of this is done with external translator boxes in the comsumers home - almost no-one has either a DTV, never mind an HDTV.
My local COMET store is selling funny little DVB translator boxes for around 60 quid, so all this stuff about digital TV adding hundreds to the cost of TVs is horseshit. I'd bet that once every TV can do DVB, they'll be _cheaper_ than regular TVs.
Now, there's other reasons to worry about DTV, not least the greatly increased control this gives the content/distribution folks, but "I need to buy three new TVs" isn't one of them.
## W.Finlay McWalter ## http://www.mcwalter.org ##
The answer is obvious to anybody who has studied business in college or in RL. The manufacturers will invest the extra money to adapt the manufacturing process, add the costs into the selling price of HDTV (maybe recovering a portion of the costs in current equipment sales over the next four years as well...), and ultimately the consumer will pay. If the manufacturers collectively cry poormouth through their trade associatons and lobbies, the government will give tax breaks to the manufacturers, ultimately passing the bill to taxpayers who may or may not be consumers of this technology.
Don't worry--the manufacturers will profit from this. How else would you explain the level of confidence that encouraged them to enlist Michael Powell to issue the decree that all devices with video tuners be HDTV-capable by 2006?
"I think all foreigners should stop interfering in the internal affairs of Iraq"
-- Paul Wolfowitz, 7/21/2003
It's sad that this is being forced upon Americans so Michael Powell can land a cushy Hollywood job after he steps down from chair.
"Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means for going backwards." -Aldous Huxley
Apparently, you don't know how the FCC works. The frequencies will be auctioned off to the highest bidder, for private use (probably cellphones). Not to mention that gigabit wireless cannot run at those frequencies anyway (band is too narrow).
As long as the technology is unsettled, at least some people will be reluctant to do anything as long as they have something that works. There will also be a lot of people who just can't afford to upgrade. Advertising driven TV is dependant on a mass audience and the lowest common denominator will dominate it for a long time, no matter what the people pushing the new stuff thing. These are powerful interests.
This is the one thing I always try and impress upon people.
The snow effects you currently see on a big screen tv when watching 80$/month cable will turn into large blocks or black rectangles. The world isn't going to magically quadrouple thier bandwidth overnight, and most stations don't broadcast anything near a proper signal as it is.
Absolutely true. I've got basic cable, my in-laws have digital cable.
Every now and then I get some static on my reception... no big deal really. Sure, it degrades the quality of the picture, but the mind works great and can pick up on enough thats going on, that it has never turned out to be an issue.
I was over at my in-laws. They started getting static. First it started with some mild pixelation on screen, followed by the sound getting spotty (like a bad cell phone conversation), and then they kept having the screen freeze and strobe slightly (kept getting packets of data but not enough to redraw the screen).
Yes, this is just "traditional TV" broadcast in a Digital format but the idea is the same. Signal Quality is important. Without good signal quality, I'll take analog over digital ANY day of the week.
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
I was just talking to someone here at work who is somewhat acquainted with a few of the local TV stations. He said that, on average, it will cost approx. $1.7 million to outfit a television station with the necessary technology to prepare for all this nonsense. That may not be a massive amount to a big city CBS affiliate, but what about public broadcast stations? Won't they also have to participate in this?
I'll certainly bitch and moan if I have to outfit my TV with some new-fangled doo-hickey to watch anything, but I'll bitch and moan even more if I lose the small local/publically funded stations here. That's a lot of call in donations for a station already on a tight budget. Is there some sort of government money available for what they're forcing on everyone?
(please note, this is just a figure that some guy gave me. I'm not claiming it to be absolute, just what I heard.)
Most people with HDTV sets don't have HDTV, they just get better DVD quality. A lot of people get Digital Cable (heavily compressed NTSC/480i signal) and are convinced that their expensive set is important.
I have an apartment, and I got an attic antenna giving me the local OTA signals. Combine that with DirecTV (HDNet, ShoHD, HBO-HD), and you get 8-9 HDTV signals. It's fun, it looks great, but it ain't easy.
Broadcast HDTV is going strong, slowly. All the HDTV STBes for satellites include an antenna input. Samsung has a line of OTA-only STBes.
Living in a city (I live in Boston), you start to think that everyone lives in apartments. However, more middle-class individuals live in houses in the suburbs. Home ownership remains high. Houses can put roof-top antennas up, etc.
HDTV is coming along, its coming along slowly, but its coming along. Personally, I would expect HDTV to die a few years after the DTV switchover. I would expect the local affiliates to show 6 480i signals in the HDTV over-the-air. This doesn't bother me though, if you can get 40 channels over-the-air with a $150-$200 STB, that will put a lot of preasure on cable/DSS.
So if my new TV won't show a picture unless it has the new `broadcast flag' (or something) what happens when I try to plug my camcorder into the back of it to watch a video of my kids ?
Am I going to have to buy a new camcorder ?
What if I want to make a copy of a birthday party recording to give to my mum ?
The whole thing here is that the FCC wants this conversion to take place as soon as possible so they can re-parcel the old televisions spectrum and sell it at auction for bug $$$. TV stations pay nothing for the airwaves under the "public good" clause.
All those analog TVs will still be useful. Just as B&W monural TVs can still be used today in the age of color image and stereo sound. Please don't use such alarmist tones unless you really understand the issues at hand.
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
Second, I just want to rant for a bit: Posts like yours are really lame. They just bug me. I mean no offense to you personally, but just taking someone else's post and replacing some key terms with other ones is, IMO, stupid. Your post doesn't really say anything. Yet, you leave it there as if it is some profound revelation. Everyone, please knock it off.
There are two completely seperate issues that most here can't seem to see.
One is a purely technology issue: converting a 50 year old analog broadcast system to a modern digital system, with many technical advantages.
The other is political: Hollywood, and the congressmen they own, are trying to subvert the open system to extend their control to unprecedented levels.
Now, even the tech issue is being misrepresented here. What's this garbage about throwing away all existing TV's? A simple digital receiver will output NTSC that your existing TV and VCR can use. These are already available, and will be VERY cheap once people start converting.
The technological advantages are very clear, DTV allows 6x the resolution of DVD's (1920x1080), Dolby Digital 5.1 sound, sub-channels to display more than one program per channel, program guide data included in signal, and a perfect digital picture - free of static/ghosting/fuzzines/etc.
Check out this site for some screenshots to demonstrate the quality of HDTV broadcasts.
As a big fan of HDTV, I hate the Hollywood efforts as much as anyone. But, these misconceptions only cloud the true issues.
My 'TV' is a 27" Sony PVM video monitor, and while it is not a truly top-end display, it produces a much better image than any consumer TV i have seen, and it shows up the inadequacy of the picture transmitted through the cable here in NZ rather obviously. The snow is extremely obvious on practically all the channels they carry.
My other big screen, a 29" Mitsubishi VGA monitor (also has composite/S-Video input) has major problems syncing properly to the signal produced by the cable box, (has no trouble with Playstation/VCR/DVD signal)which makes me wonder just how bad the signal these clowns are broadcasting is.
Connecting my PS2 to the Sony via the RGB SCART connector shows me what a sharp, beautiful picture my 'low-tech, analog' display is capable of, but if the cable companies apply the same production quality to their HDTV signals that they do to their current 'low-fi' broadcasts, theres just no point in wasting the money on an HDTV-capable set.
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
Aha, you would think so. But think about it for a minute...Wouldn't such a device, which is designed to convert digital to analog, and thus strip out any "do not record" flags that Hollywood is so fond of, be illegal under the DMCA? You can bet they're going to raise that argument. I really, really hope this happens. Here's why: If such devices are illegal, it would certainly force every couch potato in America to buy new sets. I don't think this will ever happen. If anything, it will bring to light what a horrible law the DMCA is. Hillary, Jack, and their paid off lapdogs in Congress can do as much celebrating as they want. They will sing a different tune when hordes of angry Survivor addicts beat down their doors wondering why they are being forced to buy new TVs that cost three times more than their old ones.
The thing is, the DMCA lives because Joe Average American hasn't been affected by it. Who cares if a few research scientists and hackers get thrown in the can because of it? But having to buy a new electronic babysitter when the old one is perfectly good, well that's another story altogether.
-R
I've not seen the opinion of the average consumer in any of this stuff. I've got digital cable and no plans to buy a new TV. I know a lot of folks who are completely happy with their current set and don't care to change. IF the gov't thinks that they can force consumers to buy something, then they've seriously messed up.
This isn't a tax. This is trying to get the consumer to purchase something they don't necessarily want or need. And the digital crap is too expensive to replace the old sets. No matter what the gubberment might want; or Hollywood wants, or the cable companies. Unless its forced as a tax; no way in hell they're gonna get me to buy anything that I don't want. The only thing that the gov't can do in this situation is require the manufacture of things that aren't wanted. The Soviets did this and look how well they turned out.
I see a lot of ruined businesses and unsold inventory.
'Course, I could be wrong.
As to the digital stuff being all DRM'd so that I can't change the channel during a program. How many phone calls about defective sets and remotes would have to be financed before the IDIOTS that fosted this stuff would change it back? Channel surfing is a WAY of LIFE. (Imagine the million couch potatoe march!) Joe Average Consumer may not have cared or understood when the law was passed, but that don't mean he won't "get it" when ya screw around with how he watches his TV.
Don't buy. Teach som
Creative Spelling Copyright (2002). May use without Persimmons