Slashdot Mirror
Who Cares if Analog TV Goes Dark?
AVIDJockey writes "Take this with a grain of salt, but earlier this month the Consumer Electronics Association giddily released data showing that of America's 285 million TVs only 12 percent (33.6 million) are used for watching OTA broadcasts. In a further revelation, the CEA's numbers say that approximately 3 million (around 10 percent) aren't used for viewing broadcast television at all. Instead, the electricity gobbled up by these sets is used to play videogames, watch movies on DVD, or view old Jane Fonda exercise tapes."
So tell me, who's going to be the first major television broadcaster to completely shut down their analog over-the-air broadcasts and lose 12 percent of their viewers?
All of them - because they have no choice. The only open question is the date it's going to happen. (Unless congress finally decided that - it was still an issue a week or two ago, when I last read about it.)
Personally, I think paying $300+ a year for cable to PAY for the privledge of watching television is completely stupid.
Nobody said you had to pay for cable. You're free to upgrade to a TV that will receive digital OTA broadcasts, or buy a STB that will convert them to analog for your obsolete set.
Don't want to do that? Tough. I don't recall where any of the TV broadcasters signed a contract with viewers like you guaranteeing your 20 year old TV would always be able to receive a useable free signal.
I don't understand people who consider it some sort of God-given right that they be entitled to free analog TV at the expense of things like better emegergency service communications systems, which is one of the things that spectrum is going to be used for once it's available.
You were warned about the switchover nearly (maybe even more than) a decade ago; you have had plenty of time to prepare, and even if you purchased an analog set at that time, you have gotten plenty of use out of it. If you would like to continue to use it, there are plenty of options available, and it is not the rest of the public's fault if you're not happy with any of them.
I'm in the UK, getting constantly bombarded with propaganda from the BBC to buy a digital set-top box for 'only' £100. So I did. And I'm not impressed.
You have a little box next to the TV. It takes up yet another power socket, and it plugs into the TV via a scart lead. The aerial plugs into the box. Then you turn on the TV, and the digital box replaces your TV with a digital version. It's like normal TV, only slower.
Instead of channel changes being instant, they take quite a few seconds. If the channel comes up at all. It's a bit like Sky, as in you get a little box at the bottom telling you what's on, and what channel it is etc. Except it's nowhere near as good. It's like a dodgy Sky box off the market. The interface is slow and crap, it's rarely accurate, rather than the fast pace of Sky, this makes browsing through the channels feel like crawling through cement. It's ugly as well, like using a ZX Spectrum to watch TV.
The TV guide features is slower and less featureful than Sky, and full of gaps. Most of the schedule is blank. The picture is often shaky or blurry. If you accidently go onto a channel which doesn't exist (which is a lot, half the channels are blank), it tries to load it, which takes a while, and getting off takes about 5-10 seconds.
And on top of all that, it comes with another remote control. Which of course doesn't offer all the features of your TV, so you have two remote controls. Even with all the faults, you only get a few more channels. There's E4 which seems to show American sitcoms in perpetuation. There are a couple of extra BBC channels which show nothing because they only run for a few hours per evening.
Although the other night I got a couple of episodes of Phoenix Nights, albeit on a blurry picture. Which goes to show you don't really need digital TV, quality shines through whether it's on a crisp digital picture or a shitty analogue one.
If you want digital, get Sky digital, it's like terrestrial digital, but done right. By people who actually know what they're doing. The interface done is properly, and you get all the proper channels, like Sky 1, the Sports and the film channels.
Well, those losers could do something productive instead of wasting their time, donchathink?
And no, it doesn't make me an elitist for proposing that those who cannot get a decent job, should do something.
Bot Assisted Blogging
You arrogant, elitist, asshole.
I think you should do something with your life besides spank your tiny monkey and post on slashdot.
You are a fuckhead. How is it in any way your right to decide such things for others?