Slashdot Mirror
Many Analog TV Watchers Aren't Aware of Upcoming Switchover
A recent poll of TV watchers shows that many Americans aren't aware the end times are coming for analog broadcast signals. "The survey found that the group most affected by the analog cutoff -- those with no cable or satellite service -- are most in the dark about what will happen to their sets: Only one-third of them had heard that their TVs are set to stop receiving programs. Of course, there are solutions. Congress is subsidizing the purchase of digital television receivers. And the cable TV industry is hoping that this will spur the last holdouts to buy pay TV."
Just funny. What's the point of HD-TV without digital television?
How do I uncompress my MD5 archive?
...to start the family exercising to help beat obesity?
If TV gets turned off on Americans, maybe it would be a good thing.
And don't flame me. TV is the major issue with American obesity, particularly in children.
You moved your mouse. Please restart Windows for changes to take effect.
Rich: no worries about money, because you have plenty. Poor: no worries about money, because the government will provide for you. Keep watching TV.
because they are too busy adjusting their rabbit ears...
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
who don't care what is happening around them. Well, they will act when their TVs will be black. Is this a problem?
I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
As soon as TV stations themselves begin to worry about whether they will lose watchers, they will simply run commercials explaining to people how they can get *free* converter boxes from the government. TV is the one of the most effective communication mechanisms ever devised, after all. Problem solved.
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
It's not like people need 14 months to save up for a digital TV. A 'good enough' off-brand 32" TV runs $700 now, and it'll probably be more like $500 later.
Besides, a few "your TV will black out 1/14/09!" commercials have already starting airing. By January 2009, I'm sure the public at large will be as tired of similar commercials as they will be of general presidential election commercials by Election Day '08.
-Rob
Biblical fiscal responsibility
There's still another holiday shopping season, and another 'Superbowl'(can I legally say that word anymore?) TV buying season between now and then. I'm sure you'll be seeing lots of advertising starting next November about the upcoming cutoff. No reason to buy a TV now when the one you've got is working, and will continue to receive for the next 14 months.
I wish we'd done away with interlacing when the HD standards were being written.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
This may be a stupid question. But I have direct TV, do I already have a digital reciever?
I haven't checked lately but I believe they are still selling analog TVs at a lot of places. I know I saw some over the summer. I'm sure the salesmen aren't exactly pointing out the fact the TV will go dark unless you get an expensive converter box in 18 months. They should have been phased out less than 24 months before the switch over and 36 months would have been better. I can see a sudden influx of TVs into the local landfill with a disturbing number fairly new. It may have been well intended but it's hardly eco friendly making a large number of electronics into very large paperweights overnight.
I think its the same in other countries, too. People just aren't aware of it...
You can tell how powerful someone is by the magnitude of the crime they can commit and be able to get away with.
We've already converted to digital. Many has cut of their TV contract. I never had one, and I woun't get one. Only crap on telly. Many agree and this worries TV companies as they see people abandoning TV.
Now is a good time to get rid of the TV.
m10
This is crap. I am very aware of the switchover. But if I go to find out things like where I get the box there isn't any information. If I want the discount cards, they aren't available yet.
This type of story is what gets airplay when you have unlimited news outlets with nothing to say. And shame on slashdot for covering this non-story.
Why should the Govt be laying down rules about analog & digital broadcasting?
What next - govt mandating that photographic shops should stop developing analog
pictures & accept only customers with a digital camera?
really?
I thought basic economics and government courses were requisites in public schools these days.
Of course, TANSTAAFL. The national government will be taking tax dollars from people, taking an administrative cut, then turning around and giving it back to pay exclusively for converter boxes. The net effect is the US national government is screwing with free markets and funding (mostly overseas) consumer electronics companies.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
It totally sucks that the government regulates things! Air traffic control? Psh. Waste of money. A road system that ensures transcontinental travel is always possible? Where did they get THAT power? Long distance electric transmission lines? Let the flooded cities do without power! They can just rebuild their shit--without power!
Christ.
You act like designating sections of the spectrum for certain uses, which is in EVERYONE'S benefit, is some arbitrary intrusion into your bedroom. Digital cameras don't transmit high power EM energy across dozens of square miles.
As a student overseas, I'm slightly annoyed with the notion that Congress will subsidize TV equipment that I can't use, but will not subsidize a radio, computer or telephone that I *could* use. Harrumph!
Now we're having digital TV rammed down our throats. This time with the help of the government. TV and electronic shops are jumping for joy, and of course the cable companies are rubbing their hands in glee. The poor consumer is having to buy lots of new equipment and most likely a more expensive cable subscription too.
Here in Switzerland the switch over well under way. Terrestrial (air) broadcast of analog signals has stopped, and the cable companies are switching over too. The technique to 'encourage' their customers to switch to digital is to silently remove more and more of the non-major channels from the analog offering, while offering balkanized digital 'packages' that end up a higher monthly cost if you want to duplicate the same selection channels you had before.
To the yuppies and the technically competent this is probably a relatively small inconvenience. But I wonder about the poor and older generation, who are essentially having a perfectly acceptable analog service taken away from them.
Compare the introduction of digital TV with that of color TV. Color TV was introduced in the early 60s and you could still use and buy new black and white TVs well into 80s. While I'm not asking for a backwards compatibility, I would appreciate it if a similarly long switch over period would be given.
---- It won't be as bad as you fear or as good as you hope, but it will take twice as long as you plan.
Hopefully this will spur those people to ditch TV altogether and download their favorite shows. Yarr me hearties.
... in the UK a lot of houses need upgraded aerials to receive digital TV and digital radio - is the cost of fitting these going to be met by the government / tax payers?
We didn't need digital TV, or HD, or HD DVD, or Blue Ray, or DRM, or the Spice Girls but somehow the media industry is yanking our chains like this.
Time for a revolution. Led by Germaine Greer.
The people of Sweden are probably aware of it, given that they shut down their old analog network over 2 months ago..
I spoke to a couple of my older relatives who were under the impression that everyone had to buy an HDTV because of this switch to digital. I think they were fed this idea by TV salespeople. If that's true, it's dishonest way to sell TVs to people who don't understand the technology.
Easy solution - don't replace them.
Having a television in the first place is like inviting a salesman into your house to tell stories and perform magic acts on condition that once every 15 minutes he has your permission to try to sell you something - except, of course, once inside your house, he will try to sell you something the whole time, stories or not.
Nobody thinks they're a sucker, but nevertheless you end up buying some of the things he tells you about - you sucker.
Dump your TV. Do something else with your time. You'll never look back.
Alternatively, you could just stay sitting on your fat backside and turn your brain off for the rest of your life - that'd be easier at least.
At least with an analog tv if you have a crappy antenna you get some snow or other interference and the program is still watchable. With Digital TV you get big pixel blocks and sound cut-out that makes the program completely unbearable to watch. That's progress for ya.
How we know is more important than what we know.
You don't actually need TV either.
Or resurection - DVB-T supports a lot more channels then analog tv - in germany where the swich over happened a few years ago many consumers terminated there cable tv subscription because they could get the 20 channels they are interested in via DVB-T.
Martin
This is what's going to happen when the TV's go blank.
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
I'm seeing alot of people throughing around high prices for TVs. First of all poor people can have TVs too, they may be 10 year old TVs but TVs none the less, TV sets are so commonplace there more or less free, if your not looking for anything fancy. Besides if all those media companies want there customers to keep watching why don't they just send them free converter boxes.
Picture quality improves... content degrades.
Who will be voted off the Island? As long as you keep watching, you are on the Island.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
On the bright side, this cuts down on some of the cancer causing airwaves, but I have a feeling this will cause the return of Max Headroom.
Wow - in germany we did the switch over several years ago. What is it with the US? I thought you are at the forefront of technologie. But no:
Your mobile phone are so far behind time that you think the iPhone is God's gift to mankind.
You think that 35 mpg is an impossible to meet target for fuel economy - in 12 years that is.
And now: your TV system is several years behind as well.
No not forefront at all - hobbeling behind is more like it.
Martin
"in the UK a lot of houses need upgraded aerials to receive digital TV and digital radio - is the cost of fitting these going to be met by the government / tax payers?"
Sort of, but not quite. The government and broadcasters aren't going to pay to upgrade anyone's home antenna but they are going to increase the power of the digital transmissions when the analogue ones have been turned off, so the problem will just go away.
The fear was that digital transmitters might have caused interference to the existing analogue service so they were all made low power, but with analogue gone that's no longer an issue.
Oxford Dictionaries Online
That converter is about $50 with delivery; and it is from a third party with a miserable 75% positive rating. For many people in the US, $50 is a substantial amount of money; and a 75% positive rating is the shits.
We have DirecTV on some sets but as they keep escalating prices, I keep cutting service. Was contemplating dropping them all together. All my TV's are analog but getting digital converters wouldn't be that expensive. I can use the same big air antenna that's already up. So some converter boxes and that should be all there is to the transition.
The other option would be switching to Free To Air satellite, but that's still pretty complicated.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
I can understand how someone might take such a simple view. I find it surprising that you ask not to get flamed, after making such a simpleton sounding statement. My guess is you wanted to stir up a nest.
BTW, did you notice the statement, "Congress is subsidizing?" That means all taxpayers are funding, instead of the corporations who were given, free, the frequencies they will be broadcasting on to make money. (The same frequencies that used to belong to the American people, who now are going to pay money to subsidize those companies' money making transmissions.) Seems few people noticed that, as it wasn't covered on TV that way.
To start selling tinfoil hats. What with the conspiracy nuts claiming the new broadcast standard are for mind control purposes, and those who didn't know about the digital switchover collecting canned foods and firearms, convinced that Al Qaeda knocked out that bastion of American culture, the almighty teevee.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
In Soviet Russia, analog TV network shuts off YOU!
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Of course, there's STILL nothing worth watching. Bah! Humbug!
I'd don't know about the US, but here in the UK the digital signals are very weak. It's virtually impossible to get good reception with an indoor aerial and I have tried lots of different types. So is this going to be the end of portable televisions?
Part of the problem, of course, is that the marketplace utterly ignores the need.
As an early adopter of HDTV, I have a toshiba set that doesn't have a built-in receiver. For well over the last year, I've been looking for an HD set-top receiver with no luck. Best Buy, Circuit City, and none of the usual electronics outlets carry or know anything about them, and until now I've been reluctant to buy an HD receiver until I've seen the signal quality for myself, thus making internet purchase less interesting.
-Styopa
Not a problem. I will just stop watching tv.
One big problem is a lot of places don't even sell over-the-air digital TV receivers.
Wasn't that something they had back in the late Twentieth Century? You know, before Bit Torrent and the Internet?
"My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
Damn straight.
... http://www.getlyrics.com/song/disposable+heroes+of+hiphoprisy/television%2C+the+drug+of+the+nation
the disposable heroes of hiphoprisy said it best
Step 1) Create legislation to get rid of low-def TV to get funding from the tech industry
Step 2) Face political backlash from the masses when the TV "stops working"
Step 3) Fund yet another huge government handout to make the TV "start working" again
Step 4) Run your next campaign on how you "saved TV"
Step 5) Profit
There are just so many, wonderful things wrong with this situation, I find it hard to begin.
The Constitution of the United States granted precious few responsibilities for the federal government. Can someone name me one non-trivial aspect of our lives that isn't now covered at the federal level? Because I can't think of an example.
The longer I live, the more I become disillusioned with the two-party-is-actually-one-party system we have, so I've changed my position. I'm now voting for the libertarian, the independent, and the unknown, in that order. Call it "wasting my vote" if you'd like, but I'll be here when the rest of you come around.
Acts 17:28, "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
I guess they haven't heard of Chronos. Corp. from the Guyver series. Or does this mark Chronos' 30-year anniversary?
Not most places anyhow. 8 years ago when OnDigital were first launching then yes, you needed someone to come round and verify your house aerial was good enough.
Now the boxes run just fine with a 5 quid set top aerial. They've either sorted the issue and are able to decode better, or the signal's been turned up, because you really don't even need a house aerial any more.
Maybe with an income tax return, but we'll see when the time comes.
I think you missed something here. You do realize that the "return" you speak about is YOUR money in the first place, right? The govt is doing you no favors by "returning" you tax money. You still pay taxes. Your return is just the money you withheld over the year minus your tax bill. ie: return = your change from your taxes.
Methinks you meant to say "Maybe with lower taxes, but we'll see when the time comes".
People - your return means nothing. Look at the other number. That's the one that matters. And that number is "Total tax dollars paid to the IRS".
From TnsFA:
The cable part is right. The satellite part is not. While most people can get their local stations over the satellite, a great many choose not to pay the extra 5 dollars a month. Some don't even have the option since the satellite providers still don't have 100% local coverage (and have apparently stopped building it to focus on high-definition expansion).
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
...am I missing the point, or are most of these comments? There are places where there are no cable TV landlines, where people now get TV with an antenna (cuz, btw, the airwaves are supposedly the public's in the U.S.). Does no one care that you couldn't bring a tiny TV camping? Or on a boat? And, besides that, when did we all get tricked into believing that we should have to pay for something the public supposedly owns, which is already hoarded by unaccountable private tyrannies?
Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
1) People find out in their newspaper their tv wont work after next year
2) They get the tv converter box for $50
3) They continue to watch tv on their 20 year old RCA set with their new fangled box
4) They tell all their friends about how they are able to get 30 channels of digital tv for free!
5) Lifeline cable customers cancel their packages because they get a better picture from OTA digital than from 10 channel cable
6) life goes on
Who needs a tax to pay for the boxes? The federal government will auction off the freed analog spectrum for around $30 billion. It can subsidize a lot of $50 converter boxes for those who still use antennas and care enough to continue getting a signal over the air. If there's one market that government has a right to screw with, it's the airwaves.
No matter how I try, I cannot think of being suddenly unable to watch broadcast TV as a problem.
Hmmm, let's see... Perhaps they could switch over to manufacturing buggy whips?
Besides, the impending switch-over was publicised literally *years* ago. Even saving just a few pounds per month should have been ample to cover any associated cost (other than perhaps a brand new 1080p plasma screen...)
It's official. Most of you are morons.
I know it's popular to rip on TV around here. But if you're interested in education, you should realize that TV is education. Millions of people learn what to eat, how to manage their health, and how to interact with the world through television. One of the most popular shows is The Biggest Loser, educating people about health.
If you don't like what exactly TV is teaching then you ought to blame it on the damn free market of broadcasters.
Americans are ignorant about technology?! Stop the presses, wake the neighbors, and kill the dog. Damn, this is news.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
When I heard of the newest date for the transition I determined that it would make sense to fully sever the tie with broadcast/media TV. I am not alone for once ... 8 percent said they would just watch DVDs or play video games. And 12 percent said they would simply abandon television altogether. Maybe people can start rating politicians on how annoying their ads, and those of the various interest groups, are. And, simply by doing nothing, a significant number of people can find themselves disenfranchised from TV and begin to experience freedom. What a wonderful change is coming.
But -- there is also a great opportunity for the goverment to watch the population and determine who is no longer connected to the propaganda pipeline. Ya know, with all that time on their hands, those people might start thinking for themselves and destabilize the whole feudal system. Right now, you have to request discount coupons for converter boxes - I will bet that they will give boxes (or TV sets, for that matter) free soon to keep people nursing on their media formula.
My mother can't order cable, because it isn't available. Her only choice is OTA or satellite. At her previous address, comcast did not have digital cable available and STILL doesn't (I just checked) to this day. It only had analog. Keep in mind that, although it is a rural area, there are quite a few people living there.
So, I just upgraded to a 42" TV, and what I was surprised to find was the number of digital channels I could receive through my roof-top antenna. Great pictures! But I have an older VHS machine and a large VHS library (in addition to my DVD library), and of course the VHS recorder can't tune in to ATSC broadcasts. What are people using to record their local ATSC broadcasts when they don't have cable or dish?
--
Carey
Does anyone know if Canada has announced anything of the sorts? While I realise this is USA regulation, some airways stuff is cross-border.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Why should anybody pay attention when it is over a year away? The prices on digital TVs are only going to drop. At the present time, the incentive for buying a digital TV is quality, not a shift that won't be for many months. Publicity will take care of itself; I can guarantee that by next Christmas, every other retailer will be running big ads saying, "Don't let your TV go dark! Digital TVs and converters on Sale!" while Comcast and DirecTV will be running TV spots at every commercial saying "Don't let your TV go dark! Take advantage of our introductory rates on crystal clear cable/satellite TV!"
Ah well, I do live in London, quite centrally, so I'm pretty much bound to be an exception!
High Definition is not required. The digital standard broadcasts in both high def and standard def. All this is required is a television that can process the digital signal. The US govt is offering $40 vouchers for households to buy analog-to-digital converters for their existing televisions.
Every evening, as I make dinner, I watch PBS "News Hour" on an analog 5" BW whip antenna portable that cost me about $20. For the past 25 years or so, a basic personal television could be had new for less than ~$70 (nominal dollars, not inflation adjusted). Suddenly, because of this edict, that price point jumps to ~$200, and it appears that nine- to thirteen-inch ATSC televisions just cannot be had. This is not progress.
Will it run on Linux?
'sig' deleted due to the stupidity of it's 'nature'
If they had decided that the signal for NA HD was to be 1080p/30, we'd all be done now.
On the surface that seems much saner than what we have now, but there's a serious problem with that - bandwidth. I imagine the broadcasters wanted the flexibility so they could choose how to best divide up their available channel bandwidth. I'm quite grateful for the fact that my local PBS affiliates are able to cram four virtual channels into one physical over-the-air channel, for example. Much of what's on TV doesn't require 1080p, and it would be hugely wasteful to broadcast it that way. Even my local network affiliates (which frequently broadcast at full 1080i) often have a secondary channel of some sort, like a local weather channel, in 480i. If all these variants weren't in the official standard there would be no guarantee that consumers' equipment could decode a particular format, and the broadcasters wouldn't bother dividing up their bandwidth this way.
It's worse than you think. The return is the paper you file with the IRS. The refund is the check they send you.
Yes, do without TV. I thought this was an outrageous notion myself, until I did it.
For me there were numerous benefits:
1. I had more free time, that I never even realized I was spending. Sometimes *five or six hours*, or even more.
2. I quit smoking. Because I wasn't sitting idly, I stopped chain-smoking. Almost by accident.
3. ROOM! I needed room for a grand piano in my house, but never thought I had it. The space occupied by a TV screen, together with the line-of-sight and the seating, is a *huge* investment of real estate. Get rid of it and re-think your room arrangement. You might have ten square meters you never considered before.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Congress is subsidizing anyone that needs help purchasing a digital to analog converter box for their TV. The people will notice that digital TV comes in crystal clear, with much less issues then analog ever had. The only problem I have with this is that the cable companies are using this as an excuse to encrypt all of their digital basic channels (except the ones you could get OTA). This is bullshit compared to the analog basic cable we can get on any TV set in our house without a digital box. Even if I go out and buy a brand new TV that has the digital ATSC and clear QAM tuner built in, I still need a damn box from the cable co so I can get my extended basic channels. The only reason the cable companies should be forcing boxes on you should be if you want to pay for on demand, or premium channels. I never have and never will. The cable companies are screwing us over by forcing us to pay for set top boxes that we never used to need, all because they want more control over their content. Well fuck that. I will be canceling my cable the moment they require me to rent a set top box for every TV I own. I will stick to OTA digital broadcasts and my DVD collection. I understand it's a business, but when you take something away from your consumers that you have supplied since the beginning, it pisses them off. Fuck you Comcast, start putting the "enhanced basic" channels in the clear.
If only there were a way to let these people know. Perhaps, they could insert some kind of announcement into the middle of the television programs.
I do not have cable, but the few times I've watched at my parent's house I've seen commercials outlining very simply that analog TV is going away and your current TV will cease to function unless you have a converter. Does that mean my parents know.. No! My Dad who's a little savvy in such matters has no idea.
Another anecdote.. My friend who works at Target is instructed to tell customers buying analog TV's that they will not work in 2009. He tells them this... Do they buy them anyway? Yes!
RadioShack, Best Buy, Circuit City, Kmart, Sam's Club, Sears, Target and Wal-Mart are the big retailers on line to provide these. The pricing is to be between $60 and $70, with a federal government credit of $40 available (limit 2 per household.)
you should know that...
1) The national government has no Constitutional authority for controlling RF spectrum.
2) The entire US system of regulation is unconstitutional. It is defacto law without representation. The Constitution grants sole legistative authority to Congress, and makes no provision to allow Congress to delegate that authority.
3) Even if the above weren't true, the airwaves belong to the public, and the national govenment can't legitimately sell rights to the airwaves, anymore than they can sell rights to speech or the air you breathe.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
modern "emergency" communications networks are, at best, extremely unreliable. Witness 9/11 and Katrina, where the only effective communications came from the private sector (primarily amateur radio).
Virtually all new "emergency" systems are based on frequency changing "trunked" systems, which depend upon a centralized intelligence for proper operation. In a severe emergency, such systems fail as soon as the central-site power does.
There is no need for new RF spectrum to provide emergency communications, what is already allotted is entirely sufficient, it's just used in an idiotic manner.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
I'll make this quick because all this talk of food is making me hungry.
Maybe I'm missing something here, but last time I checked analog TV was those three channels that come in all fuzzy if you unplug the cable. Saying that getting rid of these will lower obecity is completely stupid because they're just going to transmit the channels digitally, which means any TV made in the last couple years will be able to see them anyways. Chances are anyone who doesn't know and has an old TV will go "wtf, all three of my channels are gone" go ask some people, find out, and buy the adapter.
read before you post. "Free market" obviously refers to sales of reception devices. Are you claiming that sales of TVs is somehow regulated? It's not (minor exception for requiring closed caption and parental control features). If you want to buy a PAL or SECAM TV, you can.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
... and the beginning of DRM on every broadcast. Now broadcaster can determine what/when/where/how long you can watch anything. And say good bye to independent stations with an alternative viewpoint.
What a deal. Makes me proud to be an American. phhft
---- Booth was a patriot ----
As soon as television goes off the air, I'll be ready with a low-powered neighborhood station that is broadcasting on the old (and now empty) channel to all the people who have come to expect to be able to turn on the TV and see shows.
It will be MY television station. Showing the things that I want. DVD movies, porn (after the children have gone to bed, of course!), and especially political documentaries that would never be shown on ABC (owned by Disney), NBC (owned by General Electric), CBS, or FOX (Fascist Obstinate eXcrement network).
It goes without saying that there will be no commercials.
And when or if the FCC finds the transmitter, we'll just build another one, put it in a different location, have some kids with guns hang around to protect it, and be back on the air in no time. Bringing TRUTH to the community!
Taking television off the air in poor neighborhoods might prove to be one of the dumbest things that the rich white corporate government ever did.
Congress & the house purposely timed it so it happens no where near an election and just before yet another pig skin game.
Too bad they didn't legislate everyone a fair paying job to afford this crap! Even with the minimum wage increases I still will not be able to replace my tv's and buy new ones by 1/14/09
TSS
What about Analog magazines? will they become unusable after 2009 too,
I bought a box of them at a garage sale, thtere were also a few Galaxy's and If's...
Picture a simple set up. TV and VCR. Now picture the mess when you add two converter boxes (so you can watch one channel and record another). This assumes converter boxes can be set to output on two different channels. Combine output of both boxes using a splitter (in reverse), feed this to the VCR which then feeds the TV. Minimum you need 3 remotes. This assumes converter boxes won't both be controlled by one remote. Ugly. Bottom line a lot of working analog TVs and VCRs are going into the trash.
After the switchover in germany to DVB-T you have to suffer through mpeg-artefacts as soon as there is quick motion in the picture (fire/sports, etc.) If you have done compressing of video material, you can't ignore those artifacts like other people who would think it's just a bit blurry. As I understand it they could raise quality, but they would gain less channels that way.
... and won't be asking for one. Maybe the writer of the article missed an important aspect of not having satellite/cable tv in this day and age: some people just don't want to watch TV.
Many people have small, battery-powered analog TVs as part of their emergency gear. I bet a lot of people will forget about those. Maybe one station in each area should be subsidized to keep analog broadcast equipment functional, for use in emergencies.
I don't understand how this happens. The demographic that is going to be affected by the switchover has these characteristics:
1. Analog TV -- OK, so far, pretty basic. We probably all have one of these, or at least a television capable of playing analog video.
2. Over-the-Air transmission -- in other words, Rabbit Ears.
That's it folks. There isn't a large pocket of aliens sitting in a canyon getting their TV reception from disruptions in the ionosphere, or at least, I don't think so. The digital conversion will leave these folks behind.
Anyway, why the hell aren't there more PSA's on network television advertising this stuff? There are all these anti-drug ads, anti-piracy ads (in theatres mostly), and tons of idiotic political ads (hmm...can't understand that one). Why doesn't the network come up with a snazzy "Hey, if you're still using rabbit ears, you won't be able to see us anymore, without getting a set-top box" type commercial. Do they really want all the complaints?
I think the reason that the networks are not prepared for the digital crossover is that they are hoping to delay it, and in doing so, deny the FCC from giving back the white-spaces to the people. Oh well, we'll just have to "Take the Power Back." Yeah, good luck with that.
Almost as bad as people that don't know about the situation at all - how many of you guys have heard people that think digital TV broadcasting only means that all channels will be broadcast in high-def? Even if people know "some sort of change is coming, things are going to be 'different' somehow!" it doesn't do a whole lot of good if they don't know what the hell those changes mean for them...
Most "if they didn't want me to do this, then they should do this" fall apart when confronted with reality. For example; "if they didn't want me to recieve broadcasting then they would have encrypted the signal". Reality; "pirate satellite boxes". "If they didn't want me to enjoy content in my country then they should use CSS". Reality; "DeCSS". "If they didn't want me to pirate then they should use DRM". Reality"piratebay". Whatever happen to common sense* and self control were you didn't need a technological let alone legal solution to "tell you what not to do"? Plus if you read the post above yours there's someone trying to turn this into a "my rights" argument without a firm understanding of "rights" (and responsabilities) and "society".
*Common sense like an nderstanding of physics for starters.
you're right, it's dishonest and I won't defend the practice on moral grounds. However, if I can play devils advocate here for a moment, HDTV is probably better for their eyes and, in the long term, they'll be better off with the undeniably better technology. Hdtvs at walmart are reasonably priced and a one time tv upgrade is better than using a crutch and watching stuff at 480i. Maybe greed and misinformation are helping and not hurting overall in this case.
... in the UK a lot of houses need upgraded aerials to receive digital TV and digital radio
Actually, I can't get terrestrial analogue TV where I come from anyway, so it's either Sky or Bittorrent...
And is "no cable or satellite service" actually at risk? (Heck, I fit into that category.) Ignoring the fact that a DTV set-top box is trivially cheap, what are they at risk from? They'd have to be without an Internet connection to be 'at risk' of missing the news, such as it is. They'd have to be without a VCR, DVD player or video game console to be 'at risk' of their old TV not having any use.
Last time I checked here in Australia, digital TV had some serious signal issues and no content worth bothering about. They're basically cloning the current system onto a new set of frequencies, and there's nothing to watch now.
The concept of 'Pay TV' has been lost since the early 70's. When you subscribed to cable (aka pay TV) you weren't bombarded with shit loads of commercials. You will NEVER get me to pay to watch commercials, I have lived without cable or rabbit ear TV for the past 13 years. Now there are just as many if not more commercials or scrolling tickers on the screen that make watching TV more or less useless.
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
Riddle me this: if I already download everything I watch, the change will affect me... how?
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
Now that we're all to be forced to pay to watch television, they'll be removing all those annoying commercials that supposedly subsidize the free analog television broadcasts... right?
"Cut word lines. Cut music lines. Smash the control images. Smash the control machine." - William S. Burroughs
I live in an area where tv reception is not possible. (except for 1 or 2 occasional channels -- sometimes)
Before I had cable and internet, I used the radio, shortwave, AM, FM (especially AM at night) now that I've got internet access.. I find... I prefer listening to old radio programs over watching TV any day. (search for "OTR" on archive.org if you're interested)
An old episode of "Nightfall" or "Suspense" beats reality tv (and pretty much all the other TV dribble) any day.
What I wonder.. will radio make a come-back as the preferred entertainment?
Seriously, watch an episode of "the west wing" some time, notice how most of the video is people frantically running through the white house? Now, picture that same program as a radio show. Lower production costs and they won't have to invent visuals.
If you want proof (and something you're probably already familiar with), they've re-done the "twilight zone" in audio format:
http://www.twilightzoneradio.com/tune.html
When you listen to the shows, it's every bit as good as watching it.
Something to think about. Bring back radio!
You wrote:
Sort of, but not quite. The government and broadcasters aren't going to pay to upgrade anyone's home antenna but they are going to increase the power of the digital transmissions when the analogue ones have been turned off, so the problem will just go away.The fear was that digital transmitters might have caused interference to the existing analogue service so they were all made low power, but with analogue gone that's no longer an issue.
Can you point to a site to confirm that? I'm currently having problems with only one channel, and I don't want to move to cable.
Not gonna be that way Jack! The only thing that keeps the lid on poor areas ....just about the whole country now-a-days....is the boob tooob. Take that away and the people will be on rooftops chuckin bricks and rotton tomatoes and otherwise 'fittin and riotin'. Believe it! All it will take is some hot days in summertime. It is the poor that will suffer most from this. Watch the divorce rate too as folks have to actually TALK to one another again. You know, more than: "Hey bitch, gimme a beer!"
Are the alien civilizations ready to start receiving in digital?
Hooked rabbit ears up to my HD tv and WOW!!
More channels at quite a high quality than I ever expected.
All because my girl friend is too cheap to get cable and TimeWarner pisses me off.
The power increases over what's currently used is quite substantial. I'd imagine if you're receiving all but one channel it's because that channel is out of band for your aerial setup... the power increase will quite possibly overcome the inefficiency of your aerial in that band, if it's still remaining out of band after DSO that is; most sites are having a bit of a shuffle around to bring them back together.
Thanks for your info. I'm in the U.S. and I can only hope the situation is the same here. I must admit that channels 7.x are working fine today.
The in-attic antenna is UHF-VHF and it works extremely well for both analog transmissions, even though we're in an almost-fringe area. And all three networks (here, channels 2, 4, and 7) are on the same mountain top (it's not that tall a mountain though we call it one) and the antenna points toward that mountain. Other channels seem to work well, though many are in completely different directions. The "talk" in town is that the difference is power. Digital reception without cable was actually a surprise to me, since the salespeople at the "big-box" store where I bought the set tried hard to sell me cable (I cannot get a "dish" for satellite reception in my apartment complex), but it's so good except for channel 7 that I'm loathe to subscribe to cable and lose all the other great digital channels I'm getting.
I'm going to try the more expensive (hopefully better) amplifier from Radio Shack if the channel drops out again; if that doesn't help I'll reserve making a decision until analog completely goes away. At that point I may be so addictive to my range of digital channels over the air that I'll forget about cable.
Again, thanks.
Channels can be split about 4 ways, giving multiple low-quality signals. Thus, instead of 500 lame channels, we may see 2000 lame channels. Already I'm seeing "digital cable" that looks way worse than analog, including many over-the-air NTSC transmissions. Note that this means there was no good reason to increase the resolution. Going to 480p, with the option for alternate frame rates, would have been sensible however.
Analog shutdown is a myth. Congress will stop it every time. Nothing makes people riot like the loss of their TV.
We could have switched over if we'd simply permitted digital on the analog channels, then slowly reduced the hours of analog service permitted per day. Pretty soon the stations would transmit digital instead of going off the air for a few hours during the night, people would see the need to get digital without being immediatly 100% pissed off, and before long we'd be done.
This stuff is MPEG2. Eeeew. After 50 years, more if you count non-color TV, waiting an extra decade wouldn't have killed us. Wavelet-based compression would be nice. Heck, even just MPEG4 would be nice.
Now I'm just waiting for the obnoxious analog snobs to start blathering on about how analog TV broadcasts just look "warmer".
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.