More Details About HDTV Pact

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by michael on Thursday January 2, 2003 @05:51AM from the controlling-the-horizontal-and-the-vertical dept.

Masem writes "The NYTimes reports that a pact between the makers of HDTV systems and cable and satelite providers appears to be a consumer-friendly route to pushing HDTV technology. The solution proposed by the two groups will remove the need for a set-top box to receive the programming (save for on-demand or interactive services) in upcoming HDTV sets, and will standardize on the DVI port for these (Existing HDTV's, however, will probably still need some set-top device for compatibility - the deal specifically requires set top boxes to send both analog and digital signals as to support older HDTVs). The proposal must still get FCC approval before it becomes set in stone."

6 of 259 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Wait a second... by Bobman1235 · 2003-01-02 06:05 · Score: 2, Funny

This actually seems like they're doing something right. And this is in the US? Actually adopting technology STANDARDS in the US? My mind has officially been blown.

Maybe I've just been dealing with cell phones for too long.
How high def should TV be? by L.+VeGas · 2003-01-02 06:08 · Score: 5, Funny

Here's how to set it. Keep pushing the resolution higher and higher until you can see the breast-enlargement scars. Then shift back one.

--
Best Windows Freeware
5 million! by Old+Ike · 2003-01-02 06:39 · Score: 1, Funny

And ten of them were useful! Happy 2003 Slashdorks!
heh. by Rob+Bos · 2003-01-02 06:49 · Score: 5, Funny

No group of professionals meets except to conspire against the public at large.
-- Mark Twain
Re:Congress needs to Address the NFL Sunday Ticket by jandrese · 2003-01-02 07:05 · Score: 3, Funny

The DirecTV exclusive was a fluke. In the early 1990s, rumors circulated that the NFL would stop free, over-the-air broadcasts and move its product to cable pay-per-view. Congress threatened antitrust retaliation. The NFL responded by making a big public commitment to free broadcast, while granting a monopoly on residential pay-per-view to the brand-new service called DirecTV, then being promoted as something anyone easily could receive.
Damn you Congress. Damn you DirectTV. Damn you NFL. You are indirectly responsible for the constant pre-emption of Futurama! You had a chance to do something about it in the early 90's and you managed to screw it up.

--

I read the internet for the articles.
Re:The 2 things that worry me about DirectTV by MrChuck · 2003-01-02 09:52 · Score: 2, Funny

A friend lives in a skankie neighborhood. Has DirectTV.
He had the dish mounted in his backyard on a low beam so it's about 3' high total. It points back south towards (and over) his house. There's a BIG plastic trashcan on the top of it. Atop that is some scrapwood and some old logs rest near the base. It looks like corner-of-the-yard junk.
But given that gunshots are not unknown in the neighborhood, it means that everyone else sees yard junk.
(We moved stuff the computers in in various random boxes, a 40" TV came in inside a refrigerator box, he drives a 75 Lincoln (by some bizarre preference) that nobody will steal (despite my efforts and hopes)).
The point? You can disguise the dish. Plastic/rubber are invisible to magical sky rays. If you really wanted it INSIDE, you could stick it in an upstairs windows with lucite in front of it (and perhaps around it for insulation). Clever folks might bury it in an outside wall and paint over a covering or put a box around in on and outside wall. You don't have to see it.