Slashdot Mirror


Is the US Ready For the Switch To DTV?

tonsofpcs writes "On Monday, September 8, Wilmington, NC will be the first television market (#135) to make the switch to DTV by shutting off their analog transmitters. This forum will be posting updates throughout the coming months to keep everyone updated on how the transition works so that we are all prepared come February 17, 2009. So far, it seems Wilmington will still be going ahead as planned, despite Tropical Storm Hanna's proximity."

57 of 423 comments (clear)

  1. I have a feeling by bigtallmofo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Something tells me that after several delays and numerous announcements that the people that are unaware of the switch to digital TV probably wouldn't be too upset about missing out on TV for a few days while they track down an analog->digital converter.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:I have a feeling by electrictroy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Over-the-air DTV works terribly. First off, with analog, I could point my antenna in just about any direction and get SOME kind of fuzzy picture that was watchable. In other words, analog was easier to tune in,

      With digital the tuning is much more difficult. I have to align the antenna perfectly along the 55th meridian, check the stars, adjust the horizontal azimuth, and get down on my knees and pray the signal is strong enough to not freeze the video (extremely annoying). And if there's a Tropical Storm blowing by? Forget it. The rain attenuates and destroys the signal. Yesterday I was unable to get my normal programming due to Hanna's presence... just a bunch of pixelated images instead of clear video.

      DTV also provides fewer stations than analog.

      In the Lancaster PA region analog reception provides these stations: 2,3,6,8,10,11,12,13,15,17,21,27,29,33,35,43,45,48,49,51,57,61,65,69 from various sources like my hometown, Baltimore, and Philadelphia. Switching over to my DTV tuner trims that number down to just a few: 8, 15, 43, 49, 57, 61. Twenty-four downto just six.

      Pathetic.

      The FCC's discontinuation of analog in favor of digital broadcasting is yet another government-sponsored frakup. Good thing I've learned how to stream TV shows off the net. Thanks to DTV, I no longer can watch ABC or CBS stations. Channels 21 and 27 have disappeared off my DTV dial! What a brilliant job Mr. FCC Engineer. I now have LESS choices to watch, not more. /steps off soapbox

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    2. Re:I have a feeling by itsdapead · · Score: 2, Informative

      Something tells me that after several delays and numerous announcements that the people that are unaware of the switch to digital TV probably wouldn't be too upset about missing out on TV for a few days while they track down an analog->digital converter.

      Greetings, visitor - you picked a windy day to visit our strange planet.

      Seriously, some people will start screaming when the glass nipple is wrenched from their lips, and "didn't you see all the announcements?" just ain't gonna cut it.

      The UK is just embarking on the same experiment and its pretty clear that a lot of people (a) rank this as equivalent to having their water or electricity cut off, (b) are "confused" by the announcements and expect the man from the gubment to turn up and fix it for them and (c) resent the idea of having to shell out £25 for each telly.

      To be fair - there are some complicating factors (at least in the UK version):

      1. The decoder boxes are cheap, but to get terrestrial digital in some areas you need an aerial upgrade, which is somewhat more expensive.
      2. Some areas can't get digital at all - theoretically, once the digital transmissions don't have to co-exist with analogue they will crank up the power somewhat - except I'm not sure how that squares with plans to sell off the spectrum for loadsamoney.
      3. People may not have got the message that you need an adaptor for every TV in the house - and dealing with VCRs is a headache. Cleverly, shops have continued selling analogue-only TVs, VCRs and even DVD/HD recorders without clear labels saying Don't buy this, you moron!
      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    3. Re:I have a feeling by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm not sure about the US but as I understand it in the UK many digital transmissions are currently transmitted at reduced power to avoid screwing with analogue reception. Once analogue is switched off digital reception should get a lot better.

      --
      Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
    4. Re:I have a feeling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      DTV also provides fewer stations than analog.

      Get a different tuner/antenna.

      My experience was quite the opposite. Using my original crappy bunny ears, I was able to receive around 5 channels in analog. Switching to digital brought these fuzzy/static channels to full 1080i. Add in a mid-sized powered antenna, pointed the right way and that number goes up to 32 (counting the spanish and shopping channels).

      From the suburbs west of Boston I get: Boston, Providence and Manchester. All in far better quality than analog could have possibly provided.

      If you want to blame the FCC for something, blame them for selecting ATSC. Why on earth they chose MPEG2 when everyone else gets MPEG4 or H.264 is anyone's guess (greed from patent holders maybe?).

    5. Re:I have a feeling by sortius_nod · · Score: 2, Funny

      Idiot much?

    6. Re:I have a feeling by tonsofpcs · · Score: 4, Informative

      The US has similar restrictions, however even after the changeover is complete, many stations will still be operating at 1/10 of their original power (or less). You can find information on specific station licenses via FCC's TV Query

    7. Re:I have a feeling by quetwo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In most areas, stations are using their combined analog and digital power ratings to report to the FCC. In Michigan, analog stations are reducing their power levels this month to what digital was, and digital is getting more power. When the analog is switched off, digital will be at 100%.

      One thing to note too, UHF stations (which what all television will be living in after the transition) require more power than VHF (usually by a magnitude of 20x - 30x) because of the frequency difference (higher frequency => more power for same output).

    8. Re:I have a feeling by Dogtanian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If you want to blame the FCC for something, blame them for selecting ATSC. Why on earth they chose MPEG2 when everyone else gets MPEG4 or H.264 is anyone's guess

      Who's "everyone else"? Other countries? The current UK digital terrestrial TV system, DVB-T, uses MPEG2.

      Though I should make clear that DVB-T is only used for standard res transmissions (*) and has been in proper use here since the late 1990s, so it at least has a good excuse for being based on 1990s tech(!). Even though we're only just *now* starting to switch off analogue in favour of this already dated system!

      Also, unlike the US where (AFAIK) you're going straight to a single terrestrial digital standard that supports hi-res transmissions which can still be shown by standard-res boxes (albeit at reduced resolution), the UK/European DVB-T boxes won't handle hi-res. So we're getting another new standard for that which probably *will* use the more modern and efficient H.264.

      And to be honest, I'd have thought MPEG-2 would be horribly bandwidth-hungry for hi-def and a pointless choice given that more advanced codecs are now available and the existing boxes wouldn't support it either way (even if the original MPEG-2 DVB-T standard would have).

      Anyway, are your FCC/ATSC *really* using MPEG-2 for hi-def? If that's true, it makes no sense at all.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    9. Re:I have a feeling by jonfr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This was a problem in Iceland, when they did first start broadcasting in digital. The idiots at 365 Media (that runs most of the private tv stations in Iceland) did turn the digital transmission to 100% when it first started. The end result was that the digital signal did create snow and other issues with the remaining analog signals on 2500Mhz band that they are using and also normal uhf analog broadcasts.

      In the end they did drop the signal strength down enough so it did not create issues with the analog broadcast.

      Iceland is going to go all digital in 2010. Too late in my opinion. Some areas have had 99% of all tv stations go digital already.

    10. Re:I have a feeling by pjbgravely · · Score: 2, Informative

      One thing to note too, UHF stations (which what all television will be living in after the transition) require more power than VHF (usually by a magnitude of 20x - 30x) because of the frequency difference (higher frequency => more power for same output).

      That is a urban legend. Binghamton NY, where I point one of my antennas at has only one station that will broadcast in UHF, the rest are VHF. This will not change after the end of analog.

      --
      Star Trek, there maybe hope.
    11. Re:I have a feeling by pottymouth · · Score: 4, Informative

      Absolutely correct. This has been sold to broadcasters as a way to save money while transmitting the same content. They can cut power, theoretically, save a ton of money and still get the same advertising revenue.

      Unfortunately, as the previous posting observed, the public will pay the price in quality and quantity of stations available to their antenna.

    12. Re:I have a feeling by electrictroy · · Score: 3, Informative

      According to the FCC, 99% of stations are already at their full digital power limits. Only a few will be increasing their power in March 2009.

      One major change is that most stations will be moving from UHF to VHF, and VHF is less prone to breakup. For example my local WGAL is moving from 58 to 8, which should stabilize the image.

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    13. Re:I have a feeling by moosesocks · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah. Seriously. I live 40 miles from New York City, and can barely get the four major broadcast networks (Back when it was around, UPN used to come in fine, which was a sort of cruel irony)

      I just got back from spending a few months just outside of Dundee in Scotland (read: middle of nowhere, especially by American standards). We could pick up a couple dozen OTA channels, with considerably better quality than I get with digital cable. It just works.

      The US digital adoption is clearly being manipulated by the cable companies, who just want to protect their obsolete monopolies....

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    14. Re:I have a feeling by LordVader717 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Obviously YMMV, but generally and for most people, DTV provides better quality reception and more channels. Of course it depends on the transmitter you're tuned to, and antenna you're receiving with and there can be difficulties particularly when switching the broadcast systems like now. But this happened all the time with analog aswell, with channels going lost and having to re-tune your TV.

    15. Re:I have a feeling by Wing_Zero · · Score: 2, Interesting

      you know i think it's funny, I bought a $60 Radio shack outdoor antenna, and it works alright, but if i take a $9 rabbit ear from wall-mart (RCA if you care) I can recive digital from grand rapids michigan. considering I set this up in my mom's house on the west side of Milwaukee, I thought it was pretty cool. (on a side note, where she sits, we can get about 7 analog channels, but we get somewhere around 20 digital)

    16. Re:I have a feeling by eples · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some DTV boxes are better (much) than others, as are various antennas.

      I realize you weren't asking for advice, but the Samsung H260F just might dramatically improve your viewing experience.

      --
      I'm a 2000 man.
    17. Re:I have a feeling by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I suspect what will happen is, somebody will figure it costs more to broadcast a stronger signal, everybody has been getting by with the weak signal, plus the TV viewers have no choice now, so it would make better business sense to keep the weaker signal.

    18. Re:I have a feeling by TheSync · · Score: 2, Informative

      Anyway, are your FCC/ATSC *really* using MPEG-2 for hi-def? If that's true, it makes no sense at all.

      When the US DTV transition was planned, there was no H.264...

      The truth is that a $20,000 broadcast HD MPEG-2 encoder does a pretty good job at 18 Mbps. Real-time H.264 HD encoders that could do the same thing have only been in serious commercial production for a year (I've seen them try and fail for years, but now we seem to have enough CPU to make them operate stable and well).

      It is my impression that most DVB-T systems like UK Freeview also use MPEG-2. As far as I know, no terrestrial HD digital television uses H.264, though it is possible that some satellite services might.

    19. Re:I have a feeling by evilviper · · Score: 2, Informative

      Though I should make clear that DVB-T is only used for standard res transmissions (*) and has been in proper use here since the late 1990s, so it at least has a good excuse for being based on 1990s tech(!). Even though we're only just *now* starting to switch off analogue in favour of this already dated system!

      Although referring to the UK (and explaining why your system isn't as good) you've just described the US DTV switchover precisely...

      Digital transmissions (in highdef, no less) in the US have been going on longer than DVB-T transmissions in the UK and most everywhere else in the world. ATSC is also an even OLDER standard than DVB-T by at more than couple years, or perhaps more depending on how you want to look at it.

      the UK/European DVB-T boxes won't handle hi-res. So we're getting another new standard for that which probably *will* use the more modern and efficient H.264.

      Indeed. You get to waste twice the bandwidth, having one lowdef channel, and one highdef. And everyone needs to buy a second box if they want to get the latter. ATSC isn't sounding so bad after all.

      And to be honest, I'd have thought MPEG-2 would be horribly bandwidth-hungry for hi-def and a pointless choice given that more advanced codecs are now available

      You'd be wrong. First, because H.264/MPEG-4 AVC simply wasn't available. Secondly, because increased resolution (and/or framerates) brings substantial additional economies with lossy video codecs.

      And finally, there's the law of diminishing returns... MPEG-2 is a very good format, and it's very difficult to design something better. H.264/AVC is extremely computationally intensive, and for all that work, you're extremely lucky if you can get twice the compression out of it. In fact, the 2X figure that's commonly cited to explain H.264/AVC's superiority over MPEG-2 really only applies at extremely low bitrates (eg. streaming video), while the two being to converge as bitrate increases...

      You can see the same thing with audio... AAC came out at the same time as MPEG-2, and despite more than a decade, there's nothing out there to surpass it. Now, HE-AACv2 is newer, but even those heavily interested in it, openly admit that it's only better at low bitrates, and at 128kbps (for stereo) it provides no improvement over plain AAC (LC-AAC).

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    20. Re:I have a feeling by nsayer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Wrong. Power for NTSC transmissions are measured as peak power. The sync pulses are at the peak, and the average power is much, much lower.

      ATSC transmission power levels are measured as average power, which due to the digital nature of the signal is much, much closer to the peak power level anyway.

    21. Re:I have a feeling by evilviper · · Score: 2, Informative

      I should have phrased that "that will be reasonably practical by the time it's expected to see mainstream use".

      I don't understand. What's not "practical" about VP7?

      If they're wrong fine, but I'd rather you pointed out what or why you still disagreed with them rather than disragarding it.

      I have yet to ever find ANYONE here on /. with whom I can have a rational discussion about codec internals.

      Never the less, the last line of my reply is "See the other reply to my earlier comment for details." which you apparently didn't do, or you'd have found a bit more detail.

      You're also welcome to look-up subjective benchmark comparisons of H.264/AVC and MPEG-2, which, even if they've biased the test to use old and poor quality MPEG-2 encoders, at the very least, will demonstrate the diminishing returns of H.264/AVC at increased bitrates/quality.

      And finally, there are inherent limits that audio and video codecs cannot possibly exceed... For audio, that limit is called "Perceptual Entropy" (PE), and was defined decades ago. Once you exceed PE, you no longer have any hope of reproducing an audio signal that cannot be distinguished from the uncompressed original... You can only hope to make it sound acceptable, the distortions non-obvious, and eliminate sounds that might seem like they don't belong, anyhow. MPEG-1 Layer II audio, as used in DAB, is already quite close to that limit, and 128kbps compression substantially exceeds the PE for 44.1KHz stereo audio.

      For video, I will admit I have never heard of such a nice simple term and single study to exactly define the limit... Still, I'd be willing to make an educated guess that the figure is no more than 40:1, because (like PE with audio) a rather sharp tailing-off of improvements can be seen in subjective codec tests when nearing that level of compression, which spans the full range of codecs, no matter the technology used.

      As with audio, even early lossy video codecs (like MPEG-2) are sufficiently close to that fundamental limit to make the development of better high-bitrate codecs largely pointless. Instead, the focus has been, and continues to be, on the low-end, where you're simply trying to make it look "good", rather than identical, and can flexibly discard perceptual information in a way that it isn't too... distracting.

      There is still some room for debate on the subject, since MPEG-2 doesn't entirely hit the perceptual limits of lossy compression. Still, newer codecs don't have very much room to squeeze better compression out of video, while maintaining high-quality video that is close to being indistinguishable from the original.

      But if you want to argue that point with me, you face two further problems... First, I've used H.264/AVC encoders and recent/advanced MPEG-2 encoders plenty, so I can speak pretty conclusively when I say there's not much improvement to be had at high bitrates (but like HE-AACv2, it does an impressive job at very low bitrates). Secondly, I know codec internals pretty well, so I can also attest that H.264/AVC is heavily based on the same technologies as it's predecessors (MPEG-1, MPEG-2), and that all the (terribly CPU-hungry) improvements that have been made (eg. qpel vs half-pel, multiple ref/anchor frames, in-loop deblocking, et al.) simply can't provide very much compressibility improvement with high quality (weakly quantized) materials... The amount of change and randomness is too high for such tricks to be effective, so the encoded error remains the most substantial consumer of bits.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    22. Re:I have a feeling by evilviper · · Score: 2, Informative

      I assumed that you were making a point that VP7 may be theoretically better, whilst being impractical at present.

      VP7 is a very good codec (and has been around for a while now), but gets completely ignored, because it's proprietary. Not that On2 wouldn't be happy to do the RAND thing, as well as hand out the source code of VP7 to any company out there willing to pay a small amount of money for it... After all, VP3.2 is open source (Theora) and VP6 is part of Flash v8. And in the past they've often committed to keeping license fees much lower than modern MPEG standards.

      But, not being a standard, means economies of scale don't kick in... When you're making a VP7 decoder chip, which is only going to be used in a few million boxes for DVB2 (versus innumerable millions of boxes that are likely to use H.264 at one time or another) the cost of designing the chip, and setting up the plant to produce them, keeps prices quite a bit higher. Hence the rationale for standards.

      Still, that's just ONE aspect to keep in mind when selecting the video codec you want to use in your standard, for the next several years. Things like license fees, or performance, may negate that added expense.

      My only point being... it's very tricky to chose the ideal codec for any standard. You can't just pick something recent and assume it will be the best option into the future. And planning too much for the "future" may drive up prices and ensure that your standard doesn't get adopted, in the present, and instead dies a slow death on the shelf.

      The general level of knowledge in "geek fields" on Slashdot is - outside of a few areas (e.g. general programming, MMORPGs, etc) - not as high as most people here would like to think.

      Yes, that's certainly true. However, I would point out that there are actually a pretty good number (albeit a very small percentage of the readership) of experts in just about any field that frequent /. It seems they only poke their heads out on rare occasions, however. This leads to strange phenomenon like an article on (eg.) a new RISC CPU getting lots of mindless, worthless, and inaccurate comments... meanwhile, when the same story gets duped two days later, that second article on the subject gets extremely good comments, extensively detailing internals of microprocessors, and similar. Who knows why?

      In addition, there are a few regulars who both know what they're talking about, and seem to comment on /. frequently for whatever their reasons. The two that come to mind are Animats and Doc Ruby, (in addition to myself if I may be so bold), who I frequently see offering accurate insights, even though each has their own shortcomings. eg. http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=954211&threshold=2&mode=nested&cid=24883605

      I'm unclear which one you're referring to. I normally link stuff like that.

      Not very relevant now, since I've already elaborated in much more detail, here, but it does contain a bit more info on HE-AACv2 if you care.
      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=956141&cid=24930875

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  2. Are prisons ready for the switch? by Nymz · · Score: 2, Interesting
  3. Re:Despite Tropical Storm Hanna? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is going to happen in February, why on earth should a tropical storm delay it if it's still September? For that matter, why would it be delayed at all? Is there something mystical and magical about tropical storms that we don't know here?

    The use of TV as a warning mechanism for evacuations / seeking shelter. If you turn that off fro those still on analog you've added to the complexity of an evacuation.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  4. Re:Despite Tropical Storm Hanna? by Xylaan · · Score: 2, Informative

    Monday, September 8, Wilmington, NC will be the first television market (#135) to make the switch to DTV by shutting off their analog transmitters.

  5. Yes. by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is there something mystical and magical about tropical storms that we don't know here?

    Yes. It adds drama! Just image some bold brave techs driving through the rain and wind in order to get DTV to the people!

    Read with one of those voice actors saying this in your head.

    The struggle. The bravery. The challenges!

    Men and women fighting so that their neighbours can stay informed! Keeping them from being cut off from the rest of the World all the while batting Nature's worst! With the bonds that form between people who have gone through hell together!

    Mat Damon is .... THE DIGITAL TECH!

  6. There's a change? by Vertana · · Score: 2, Funny

    I doubt most people are even going to notice the switch over to digital. Between cable and satellite providers relatively few are going to see the need for a digital-analog converter. On another note... Wilmington just wanted to put a simple "We did it first so we're 'technologically advanced'" stamp on a tourist brochure. Whatever and good luck to 'em (I guess).

    --
    "The best way to accelerate a Macintosh is at 9.8m/sec^2" -Marcus Dolengo
  7. Re:I've had cable for almost 30 years by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've had cable for almost 30 years. They could shut off all broadcast TV as far as I care

    Phew, on behalf of all Slashdot readers who were fraught with worry over how this would effect you, thanks for letting us know we can sleep easy.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  8. Will they broadcast a notice? by bigtallmofo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How hard would it be to broadcast on all common channels in the area a fixed pattern that says something along the lines of, "TV broadcasts using your current equipment are no longer available. Please conatct... blah blah blah".

    Seems that would be better than just turning it off. Maybe just run it for a week or so.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:Will they broadcast a notice? by maxume · · Score: 2, Informative

      They have been broadcasting notices here for the past, oh, I don't know, several months.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Will they broadcast a notice? by HairyCanary · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't speak for other markets, but here in Portland at least one station recently ran a prime time demonstration. They said "Right now we are going to turn off the analog transmitter for 60 seconds. You will know if you are affected if your picture goes away."

      That's pretty smart IMO, and they should start doing that more often, perhaps every evening as we get closer to the switch, maybe even several times a day.

    3. Re:Will they broadcast a notice? by BraksDad · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think the digital signals use the same bandwidth segment as the old analog signal.

      Can someone confirm this?

      If this is true they cannot have them both on at the same time. Part of the benefit is the digital takes up less room than analog so they free up some space between channels with the digital.

      --
      Slowly waving my hand - "This is not the sig you are looking for."
    4. Re:Will they broadcast a notice? by arkane1234 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can't speak for other markets, but here in Portland at least one station recently ran a prime time demonstration. They said "Right now we are going to turn off the analog transmitter for 60 seconds. You will know if you are affected if your picture goes away."

      That'd be an awesome pre-recorded commercial. Have william Shatner talking about episodes of Star Trek back in the 60's when talk about how we're stepping into the next generation, with Patrick Stewart stepping out from the side, speaking of the new way that information is relayed from person in order to speed up Federation data transmission... then have him say that without this update, all you'll see is... then throw the fake screen fuzz up.
      Would be funnier, at least.
      More so than theoretically real-time analog transmitter outages.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
  9. Re:If you cable you may need a box on satellite yo by electrictroy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just tell people:

    "If you have cable, dish, or FiOS television, then you need not worry about the over-the-air transition. It does not affect you."

    --
    The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
  10. Prisons not ready by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Numerous stories mention that prisons are not ready for digital television, and prison administrators are worried.

    Generally, inmates pay for their own television sets and (for some reason that escapes me) are not eligible for the $40 coupons.

    Prison administrators say"the tube does more than fill year after year of idle hours. It provides a sense of normalcy and is a bargaining chip that encourages good behavior... At Indiana's Wabash Valley super-maximum security prison [a psychiatrist said], far fewer behavior problems were reported among inmates in isolation after they were given small TVs. 'You don't want to be managing prisoners who have nothing to lose,' Kupers."

    I expect the test will show that, in fact, prison inmates represent only one example of what will prove to be a large population of forgotten Americans... the people who don't answer telephone surveys because they don't have telephones, the people who don't shop at Best Buy because they don't have cars and the nearest Best Buy can't be reached by public transportation, etc.

    I will grant that the amount of publicity being given to the DTV switchover on our local TV stations is so large... at least during the times of day we watch and on the channels we watch... that it's hard to imagine people not knowing about it, but there is always that twenty percent of the population who can't name the President.

    Indeed, I'm astonished at the poster who asks "Will they broadcast a notice?" since our local stations have been doing that continuously since February. Either his are not or he, like those twenty per cent I'm talking about, didn't notice.

  11. recession by gbh1935 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    House in foreclosure CHECK Credit Cards past due CHECK Car Repossessed CHECK TV ready for Digital....not a priority

  12. Re:Short Answer by Sleepy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is not called trolling; it is called elitism. ... and it is wrong. Your "demographic" probably leaves out the majority of those affected, those who shop at Walmart and purchased Chinese-made NTSC sets. Walmart got slapped a few times in the recent past for selling non-DTV capable sets - we're talking months ago.

    See? It's possible to introduce a demographic you're not a part of, without a snide twist of the knife. All seriousness aside, there's plenty of bad stereotypes that could be made with the Walmart crowd (meth and prescription addiction anyone?). (I suppose even acknowledging the possibility of this counter stereotype is the same as saying it, but I'm trying to draw a distinction).

    Good luck with your views

  13. UK is *very* different by jabithew · · Score: 4, Informative

    My experience with digital TV in the UK is going from analogue at 4.5 channels (5 was not available in about half the places I went) to digital with far too many to count. The signal strength, picture and sound quality went through the roof with the transition too. Plus, no messing around with tuning at all, it just pulls channels, names and schedules out of the ether.

    If your experience is typical, the FCC has managed a frak-up of truly epic proportions.

    Of course, with all the new channels there's still nothing on worth watching, but that's a problem with the culture, not the technology.

    --
    All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    1. Re:UK is *very* different by jabithew · · Score: 4, Informative

      I know exactly what we're talking about; terrestrial Digital Video Broadcasting(DVB) through the air. The stuff you breathe, with antennae and no cables or dishes.

      The only tuning you have to do is press autotune and the rest just happens. I've never had to fiddle around with the antenna on digital TV. Same with Digital Audio Broadcasting(DAB), though I have more signal problems with that.

      I love the fact that a self-confirmed resident of Pennsylvania, USA has the audacity to tell me how my TV works from the other side of the Atlantic. You may have seen pictures of the boxes; I've owned and used one. This is why I think the FCC has conducted such an epic fail, if what you've said is accurate.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    2. Re:UK is *very* different by hedwards · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's largely my experience. I don't get so many channels that I can't count with digital,but I definitely get all the broadcast channels I was plus a few others which weren't close enough to be visible.

      And all of those are in better quality than what they were when I had comcast delivering the video. Not quite a good as DirecTV, but quite a bit better than either comcast or the older over the air programming.

      I don't think that when I was growing up my parents would have gotten cable if we could have gotten this kind of good picture on a consistent basis.

    3. Re:UK is *very* different by xaxa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know one person in the UK who can't get DVB-T, even if she replaced her antennae. She lives in a valley in a remote part of Devon. She's been told she will get DVB-T when the analog signal is turned off and the digital signal power increased.

      Do most houses in the US have antennaes on the roof? (Most in the UK do). That might be causing confusion.

    4. Re:UK is *very* different by raju1kabir · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do most houses in the US have antennaes on the roof?

      Never! That's a sure way to get the TV Licence people to your door.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    5. Re:UK is *very* different by jabithew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you may have hit the nail on the head. I can't remember the last time I saw rabbit-ear aerials here and I'm a student.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    6. Re:UK is *very* different by Mix+Master+Nixon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Eh? We don't HAVE TV licenses in the US. And in most places, when Cable TV first came through the cable companies made sure to see if you wanted to get rid of that "unsightly" antenna up on the roof. For reasons that I'm certain had nothing whatsoever to do with preventing people from dropping Cable TV somewhere down the line and reconnecting the rooftop antenna.

      --
      Oppressing an entire population is never cheap.
      --Jeckler (/. Beta IS GARBAGE!)
  14. Re:Despite Tropical Storm Hanna? by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well for one, it would be nice to see those red boxes when the weather man goes "there is a tornado warning for the communities within blah blah blah..."

    EBS isn't worth a shit. All it does is replay a canned warning message with the counties under the warning, and at the end of the message it says tune to your local channels for more information...

    What irritates me about the switch (which I still see as completely without merit - unless you are a telecommunications company or a DTV manufacturer), is the fact that they keep saying "If you have cable or satellite, you need not to worry about the conversion. Only people who uses traditional off-the-air television have to make the switch". Even worse is when your local cable company advertises that to avoid the switch just get cable...

    Problem being that when the cable goes out (and it does during a hurricane) you are screwed and must resort to listening to the weatherman on the radio who continues to say "if you look in this area of the screen..."

    --
    These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
  15. Re:Despite Tropical Storm Hanna? by tonsofpcs · · Score: 2, Informative

    Even if EBS is still transmitting an analog signal (will it?) many people will probably have their TV off since tehy aren't getting programming and not get a warning at all.

    EAS will still be analog as most stations receive it from radio stations. EAS is relayed by the TV station though, which will not be broadcasting analog, so there will be no way to receive it on an analog set (unless a local LPTV station is still operating in analog, as they are exempt from the changeover for now).

    As fro radio, it'd be nice if everyone had a working radio and maybe even a weather alert radio; but they are a less effective means of providing updates and warnings since they have to stop broadcasting to send updates; unlike a continuous scroll.

    EAS requires an audio interruption of programming, both on TV and radio. Crawls without audio do not meet EAS requirements. Some stations will continue crawls of information that is not required to be relayed via EAS, but this is as a service to the public (and in order to tell the FCC "hey, we meet our public service requirements" next time the license is up for renewal).

  16. Disaster Radios by spoonist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One problem I have with the switch to DTV is that there are a plethora of disaster radios out there that have analog TV coverage. In an emergency, I can scan AM, FM, and TV stations for what's going on. That gives me a lot of good options. Now my hand-cranked emergency radio has a band that can no longer be used: analog TV. That's a bummer in my book.

  17. This is more serious than you think ! by speedlaw · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I once worked at a large development with 25 + apartment buildings. I was the guy who answered the phone for the repairs, clogged toilets, etc. One day, the CATV system serving the entire complex went out. Now, it was a Tuesday afternoon, but you'd be amazed. It was the single highest call volume we ever got. Worse was the amount of "re-calls" and plaintive complaints. There's a lot of folks out there who can't function unless they are lashed to the fantasy teat, and they were not all elderly or shut-in. There will be a rash of "grandma can't get her stories" news articles, but in the end, this will be a boon to the Content Industry, for whom HDCP will now be part of the equipment. It buys their business model ten years.

  18. Some commentary on my switch... by ghostis · · Score: 4, Informative

    I live in a valley...

    next to an HD-only transmitter.

    Needless to say, analog *anything* has been an issue. Last spring, sensing there may a be rush later, I got our two coupons from Uncle Sam, and cashed 'em in. A few points on my experience:

    o Direction and gain are definitely more of an issue. Since we barely got anything analog clearly on bunny ear/loop, we got next to nothing with digital.

    o With digital, it's all or nothing. Either you have clear signal, maybe with some artifacts, or you have black screen.

    o *The* most annoying thing is that sounds cuts first.

    o So, I did what any self-respecting tinkerer would do. I build a grey-hoverman antenna out of foam board, packing tape, tin foil, and picture hanging wire - all from from Walgreens (U.S. pharmacy) :-D. http://www.digitalhome.ca/ota/superantenna/

    o Obviously, with such rarefied materials I have a less-than-precise design - that works... really well.

    o The GH antenna is highly directional. Since digital is crystal-clear, we put up with adjusting the thing in the bay window.

    o We get 9-12 clear channels now, instead of 4-5 distorted ones.

    o It's best to put it in an attic, or outside. Be sure to ground it, etc. The higher, the better - generally.

    o Note that there are two ranges for VHF DTV, high channels and low channels. The Grey-Hoverman seems to do well with UHF DTV and high VHF. Most DTV seems to be UHF.

    o Only some DTV is HD. Stations were given sub-channels. Some use only the main channel and switch back and forth between HD. Others put SD on one and HD on the other. Others use all for HD, with different content. The public television stations, strangely enough, seem to be making the best use of the sub-channels.

    o The other prominent build-able design is called a Yagi. It consists of connected bow-ties, rather than zig-zag elements. The Yagi design is nice, because its gain is roughly even across UHF. The Grey-Hoverman seems to have better gain than the Yagi on some ranges, but cuts out in others. Check the frequencies of your local stations and compare them to the two antennas' gain charts before deciding.

    o Why the range of channels for me? Well, in a valley the signal has echoes. Some echoes are stronger than others. Sometimes the amp makes the two echoes the same strength. In that case the converter box cannot lock in. Thus, if your location is subject to echoes (hills, valley, etc.), design your wiring to allow the easy removal of your amplifier.

    o Also, atmospheric conditions seem to have an effect. On clear dry days we don't do so well; on wet or humid days, I think we could get New York City, if we wanted (we're in southern N.E.).

    o Finally, going digital with a converter has one interesting benefit for you OSS fans. Since the Neuros OSD is still SD, converted DTV works nicely with it. I don't have one yet, but they are now on Amazon, and I am strongly considering getting one.

    --


    Computer Science is all about trying to find the right wrench to bang in the right screw. -T.Cumbo?
    1. Re:Some commentary on my switch... by evilviper · · Score: 2, Informative

      The other prominent build-able design is called a Yagi.

      It's actually a "Yagi/Corner-Reflector".

      It consists of connected bow-ties, rather than zig-zag elements.

      "Bowtie" refers to a specific type of antenna, a "multi-bay" unit... an antenna that is most definitely NOT a yagi. In fact a multi-bay bowtie antenna resembles a Grey-Hovermann much more than a Yagi/Corner-Reflector.

      Yagi/Corner-Reflector: http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=MXU59
      Multi-bay/Bowtie: http://www.solidsignal.com/prod_display.asp?PROD=ANC4228

      The Yagi design is nice, because its gain is roughly even across UHF.

      That's completely wrong. Yagis have extremely good gain at high frequencies (most of which aren't being used for TV anymore), and almost always very poor gain at lower frequencies. The idea of getting ANY VHF frequencies with a yagi is laughable.

      See: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  19. Govt/Retailers only making half-hearted effort by mianne · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not to sound overly cynical about the whole issue, but I do some contract work for a big box retailer. Folks come in all the time seeking the $50 digital to analog converter boxes. Yet the individual stores typically only receive about a eight units a week and sell out within a few hours! Add to that, the overly complicated process of requesting $40 coupon/rebate certificates to defray most of the cost. Then let's not forget that the typical person seeking these boxes does not read Slashdot, is on a fixed income, and uses 'DTV' and 'HDTV' interchangeably, not really understanding the definition of either. So why such little supply for such high demand? Why the bureaucracy? Why the readily confused acronyms? Because the push to DTV allows corporate interests to make use of the prime spectrum currently allocated for analog broadcasts while the retailers get taxpayer funded advertising that essentially tells a gullible public that the path of least resistance is to go out and buy a new LCD or plasma television - The stores just happen to have plenty of them, and gee aren't they pretty! As far as corporate/government corruption is concerned, this is small potatoes compared to many examples seen here on pollution, war profiteering, and eroding civil liberties. However, the callousness I've observed in the push to sell you a bigscreen television--err I mean a converter box, if you really insist; is really going to hit hard in Middle America. I'm wondering if while mobs of social rights activists and anti-war protesters have had minimal effects on Washington, what will happen when a few million pensioners find themselves without access to television?

    --
    Javascript, cookies, flash, and ActiveX must be enabled in order to view this sig.
  20. Re:More $$$ for Hollywood by nsayer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I call "bullshit" on that.

    The spectrum "giveaway" you speak of was actually an unfunded mandate. The broadcasters were forced to operate dual, redundant facilities for a few years and on 2/17, the "extra" spectrum is going to be summarily taken away from them.

    In the meantime, the top 100 MHz of the UHF TV spectrum is being removed from TV service was auctioned off to the wireless industry for billions and billions of dollars.

    How, exactly, did Hollywood benefit from that?

  21. A simple rig. by LordVader717 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Any Slashdotter could do this

    1. Get Digital receivers to decode only the channels you want them to watch.
    2. Hook up the outputs to some UHF modulators.
    3. Output the signals to your existing Television cabels.
    4. Re-tune the TV's

    Could be done for a few hundred dollars at most.

  22. Re:Who cares? by mikechant · · Score: 3, Insightful

    TV is done. It's going to die faster than radio, because I can listen to radio in my car.

    You haven't got the faintest clue, have you? The majority of the population (in the US or in the UK where I live) still come home from work and slump in front of the TV. They don't want to choose a DVD or find something on youtube, they just want to flick through a few channels and settle on something comfortable and familiar while they wind down. Maybe later they'll do something else.
    Yes, TV isn't as important and central as it was; but it'll still be broadcasting (profitably) to millions in 5, 10, 20 years.

  23. Re:Slashdot only making half-hearted effort by tekrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well goody for you; I'm so happy you can afford multiple TVs (one for each eye?). However, not everyone is in your income bracket. Many are struggling just to keep their homes, and the rising price of gas has made things even tougher (I assume with all those TVs, you must have watched the news at some point).

    For over a year now I have been predicting riots in the streets when the people living in our ghettos are suddenly thrust into a situation where they have no more bread and circuses. Without their steady opitate of "American Idol", they might suddenly notice they are living in a country with no freedoms and a repressive government.

    I'm not poor and neither are the people I associate with. Despite that, I know exactly TWO people with HDTV setups, and yet, I know even more with TV antennas and no digital boxes. I myself have DirectTV, so I'm unaffected, but I'm still watching it on a standard NTSC box, and I suspect I'm far from alone.

    So just because you have two nice plasmas, don't assume the rest of America is the same as you. And have fun with them next time a nasty storm knocks out your power. Pull out your battery powered TV to get a weather update and then find out it doesn't work without your digital box.

    Fortuantely, we have radio as backup, but how long until they make that unaccessible to us as well without paying fees, making it entirely digital, relying on a broken infrastructure, and causing more problems than it's worth.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  24. Minimal effect by geek2k5 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It doesn't really affect me because I haven't watched TV on a regular basis for a couple of decades. If there is a show I want to watch, I wait for it to come out in DVD. If I want current news, I check the web or read a newspaper. If there is an emergency that requires extremely current information, I listen to the radio.

    I do pity those people who rely upon broadcast TV for their entertainment and/or information. But that IS a life style choice that they make and this change has been talked about for quite a few years not.

    They'll adjust. I do suspect that there will be a lot of calls to the local TV stations from people that never listen to public service ads warning of the changes. (I wonder how many of these calls will be from channel flippers that never listen to commercials or public service ads?)