FCC Says Analog TV Lives Until 2012

walterbays writes ""The FCC voted 5-0 to require that cable operators must continue to make all local broadcasts available to their users, even those with analog televisions." I don't understand how AT&T manages to deliver U-verse without any analog channels. Did they get it classified as not-cable and exempt from existing rules? Or as a result of this vote, will they suddenly have to drop 50 SD channels to make room for 5 NTSC channels?"

Comments

The digital TV switch isn't going to happen

[AuMatar]

I've been arguing it here for years- we aren't going to switch to digital TVs anytime in the next 5 years. Too many people still only have analog TVs. Watch them decide to push back the OTA deadline next. Until analog only TVs are under 5% of the install base, they won't make that move.

Re:The digital TV switch isn't going to happen

[mrchaotica]

If you subscribe to cable you normally have a set-top box that can take either analogue or digital.

No, in my experience you normally have a "cable-ready" analog TV and just plug the coax straight into the back of it, which is the way it's supposed to be. Then you just use the normal remote that came with the TV to tune to channels.

The last thing I want is a damn extra box with an extra remote with extra cords and extra complexity and extra frustration!

Hell, you know what? With all this fucked-up DRM and CableCard and incompatible whoozits and whatzits and bullshit, digital TV doesn't work the way it's supposed to (see above for my definition of "supposed to") anyway! Maybe once they drop the damn DRM entirely and just let the TV plug directly into the wall, then digital TV will be ready for prime-time. Until then, it's not!

Re:The digital TV switch isn't going to happen

[kestasjk]

Maybe a digital to analog converter will be invented.

Re:The digital TV switch isn't going to happen

[Proudrooster]

Not only that, but digital cable REQUIRES a set top box because they encrypt the BASIC CABLE channels? So, even if I go out and spend $4000 on a giant wall mount Digital LCD panel, I still have to have the SET TOP BOX unless I want to limit myself to OTA (Over The Air Broadcast) HD channels and Digital Mexican Music stations. I want the FCC to mandate that DIGITAL CABLE has to work the same as ANALOG CABLE so I don't need a SET TOP box for NON-PREMIUM CHANNELS.

What does this have to do with AT&T?

[BronsCon]

Seriously, I would love to know what this has to do with AT&T. Of course U-Verse was declared not to be cable, since it isn't cable. How is this relavent in the context of the article? A non-cable television service doesn't have to follow the same rules as a cable television service? What a shocker!

Mod me as you will, but you know you're thinking the same thing.

Welcome to the Dark Ages

[EmbeddedJanitor]

This comitment to analog technology is just as much a problem for cell phones as for TV. This desire to keep the old stuff going is what keeps USA in the cellphone middle ages.

The only way to really get up to date is to have the balls to dump the past.

Re:Welcome to the Dark Ages

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

This comitment to analog technology is just as much a problem for cell phones as for TV. This desire to keep the old stuff going is what keeps USA in the cellphone middle ages.

You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

• No one except a very few luddites (and older OnStar users) use AMPS in the US.
• The FCC ruled years ago that, as of February 2008, Cellular band (850MHz) providers are no longer required to provide any AMPS service.
• PCS (1900MHz) carriers (T-Mobile, Sprint) have never been required to provide AMPS service. Neither T-Mobile nor Sprint have ever provided analog mobile services
• Verizon and Sprint have already deployed national 3G (CDMA2000 1xEV-DO Rev A) networks.
• Sprint will begin deploying WiMAX at the beginning of 2008
• AT&T is in the process of a major UMTS/HSDPA launch. Major metro areas are covered, with more to follow in the fall.
• T-Mobile is launching UMTS/HSDPA this fall. They are late not because of a lack of hardware but because of a lack of spectrum (which they rectified during the AWS auction).
• There are over 85 million GSM subscribers in the US, more than any country in Western Europe.
• Unlimited GPRS/EDGE/HSDPA/EV-DO is standard in the US. Billing by the megabyte is rare. I pay $20/mo for unlimited GPRS/EDGE.
• Unlimited nights, weekends, and calls on the same network are common in the US.
• We don't pay to call customer service.
• Roaming rates in Canada/Mexico are less than roaming rates in Western Europe, despite the fact that there are legal limits on the rates in Europe.

The "US is behind in mobile phones" argument is bullshit. You might argue that the contract model we use is broken, and it probably is (although it does result in surprisingly good deals for many subscribers). But we have the same technologies as the rest of the world (GSM/UMTS/HSDPA), in addition to CDMA2000 (which is also used by South Korea, Canada, and some other countries) and iDEN. We have two healthy national GSM carriers (and soon two national GSM/UMTS carriers). I can buy any of the fancy GSM/UMTS phones out there and use it on a US network (assuming that it's unlocked and has the right bands).

Maybe you think we should have enforced a GSM monoculture like the EU. But that's not the way we do things in the US, and our way seems to be working out fine.

Re:Welcome to the Dark Ages

[dr_blurb]

> There are over 85 million GSM subscribers in the US, more than any country in Western Europe.

Now there's a good argument. 85 million is more than any country in Western Europe,
because there are no countries in Western Europe with that many people. You probably
think the US has the biggest broadband uptake in the world as well? Percentages, anyone?

This Article Confuses The Hell Out of Me

[rsmith-mac]

So the FCC is requiring that the cable companies carry analog broadcasts of local channels until 2012, but then what's this:

or they can offer digital SD only and roll out converter boxes to all their subscribers (which could be expensive).

It seems like they'll pick option #2 here, and then either charge legacy users a fee to get a box, or just jack up everyones' rate by $5. Everyone is going to end up with a box either way, it's the only way to watch cable given that CableCARD so far is a bust and the cable companies seem anxious to start doing SDV rollouts.

And then there's the fact that the cable industry's main association is happy about this. What's up with that!?

The National Cable & Telecommunications Association applauded the decision, thanking the FCC for "engaging so constructively and fairly with our industry."

Re:What happened to 2009?

[N1ck0]

So the FCC is insisting that all OTA broadcasts are digital by midnight on Feb 17 2009. They are so confident in this deadline that they are already selling off the spectrum used by analog TV.

But now cable providers are required to provide SD, signals to analog sets till 2012? Isn't this now an unfair double-standard?