Jan 2009 Deadline for HDTV Cutoff

stlhawkeye writes "Broadcasters have recently accepted a deadline of January 2009 for the mandatory end of analog television signal broadcasts. Broadcasters have expressed concerns that those without subscription television services will see blank screens unless they buy new units. "

Comments

Not an HDTV cutoff.

[sweeney37]

this is the cutoff to convert to DTV not HDTV. how is the public supposed to figure it out if even the nerds can't get it right?

Mike

Re:Not an HDTV cutoff.

[crow]

Yes, technically it's the elimination of NTSC broadcasts, with only the new digital ATSC broadcasts. However, at least in Boston, most ATSC broadcasts are in 720p or 1080i only, so they are HDTV (even if they're just upsampled SDTV shows). That's probably true in many places.

So the distinction between DTV, ATSC, and HDTV from a broadcasting perspective is really just a nitpick that can be ignored for all practical purposes.

(Of course, from a television perspective, there's a huge distinction between simply displaying ATSC, and displaying HDTV resolutions.)

Re:Not an HDTV cutoff.

[Chosen Reject]

Except that DTV and HDTV are the same size in terms of radio spectrum. HDTV = High Definition Television, which is done digitally. DTV = Digital Television. So HDTV is a subset of DTV. No one is ever going to be forced to broadcast HDTV. They are being told by the FCC to go digital. That is all. There is no cutoff to switch to HDTV. Some stations are even planning on still broadcasting at low resolutions and thus be able to fit in the same spectrum different shows (it's called multi-casting http://www.pbs.org/opb/crashcourse/digital_v_analo g/multicast.html). What resolution a broadcaster decides to send their signals in is their choice, but they must do it in digital.

Re:Not an HDTV cutoff.

[pthisis]

Even for SD, it's worth the switch from NTSC to ATSC. The improvement in the color resolution is visible, and the digital sound is very good

But it really sucks if you're on the fringes of the broadcast. The place I stay over the summer in Maine, during the day we get a pretty snowy picture and some static in the sound in over analog--but you can still keep track of the ball game, catch the news, etc. With digital, we get a frame popping up every 4-5 seconds and no sound.

At night, both come in clear and the digital picture is nicer.

But I'd gladly give up slightly nicer picture at night for watchable during the day (even if snowy).

Digital Television != HDTV

[KillerBob]

High Definition TV != Digital TV. You require a digital framework to provide HDTV, but having a digital framework does not imply HDTV. Sets aren't going dark when it comes into effect, but the quality of signal is going to improve greatly.

Canada has had this in effect for a while. The deadline was January, 2005, and as of this writing, all TV channels are available digitally. Except, of course, some of the channels that come from the US. The difference in signal quality is very noticable when watching one of them. Most of the networks are already digital, BTW.

It's still compatible with OTA transmission, as well as analog cable signals. Old TVs can still see it, because the mandate was not to eliminate analog signals, it was to ensure digital availablility. Those of us who have an HDTV, or a digital/satellite receiver have a digital signal, complete with better sound and picture. Those of us on analog still have analog TV.

Re:Great...

[MindStalker]

Simple, radio spectrum is valuable and limited. Analog TV uses a lot of radio spectrum. One they get rid of Analog there will be a lot of spectrum available for the government to resell to others. Effectivly the FCC is saying that in 2009 all broadcasters will be revoked their license for existing analog spectrum. It will be resold at a much higher price, and used digitally so many more things can use it. Hopefully much of it will be allotted to the public for things like WiFi, but that is yet to be seen.

Re:Absolutely unncessary!

[Detritus]

ATSC allows the FCC to pack the same number of stations in a smaller broadcast band due to ATSC's superior resistance to interference from transmitters on the same or nearby channels. The channel size remains the same (6 MHz), but the minimum space in between transmitters, both in frequency and geographical distance, is being reduced.

Re:In the year 2000... (and 9)

[Detritus]

It's just one data point but my analog reception is marginal due to distance, geography and being limited to an indoor antenna. I get better reception of the digital signals. It isn't perfect, but it's much more watchable than analog. It eliminates all of the snow and ghosts.