Slashdot Mirror
Obama Recommends Delay In Digital TV Switch
gregg writes "Six weeks before the nation's television stations are scheduled to convert to digital transmission, the Obama administration is asking Congress to consider a delay. In the most significant sign to date of concern about the impending digital TV transition, the Obama transition team co-chair John Podesta said the government funds to support the change are 'woefully inadequate' and said that the digital switch date, Feb. 17, should be 'reconsidered and extended.'"
Maybe its just me not being poor or actually liking cable, but is OTA TV really that pervasive these days?
Bye!
In other words, the TV in the Oval Office isn't digital ready, and Obama doesn't want to miss American Idol.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Fact is a lot of people aren't affected by the switch (me included) but I think it's only fair for those who can't get the help transitioning, to be able to have extra time to switch over.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Given the state of broadcast television, I can't say blacking some people out wouldn't do them a favor. Okay, you need to get a convertor box and you may have to wait to get one, but if we encourage people in the meantime to read a book, go to the library, use the computer there and read the news and so on, that's bad? Really?
I mean, I'm scared that people think that TV is that much of a requirement. Local news is nice and all, sure, but you can make do.
He just want's to change everything the previous administration did!
It was a reality the second the first coupon was given away. Those smart enough to get in on in the last year are fine, now those who didn't are starting to whine. I don't even need my two, but picked them up anyways.
What about all the people that have already bought equipment and are waiting for the stations to go full power with DV? What about all of the stations who have spent tons of money and time gearing up for the switch? In my city (Denver) we have a large new tower built for broadcasting HD, and part of the promise to the residents of the area was that after the switch happened the old towers (and associated problems with them broadcasting) would go away. If you let this linger another year or two they are kind of screwed.
It's going to have to happen sometime, it might as well be now. Yes it sucks that the coupon program is underfunded (the web site you use to get coupons says they are out of money, so no more coupons are to be had), so make it a priority to get coupons out to those in rural areas much less likely to have cable or satellite already.
You just can't decide at the last moment to pull the rug out from under what is a useful technical move forward. There has to be some continuity between what government says will happen and what actually happens, or all dissolves to chaos as government promises are further devalued.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
There will be riots on street, if millions of low income homes are out of TV.
No, seriously.
Why is the government pushing digital. It is not for the clearer image. It is because it takes less airspace, and you can free and resell a lot of the airspace.
However that said. Delaying this isn't really going to help anything. Most Americans either don't watch TV (perhaps playing movies) or have cable or satellite hooked up. The largest group effected is the Sr. Citizens. Who are not much effected by the economy (minus the ones with good 401k) but for the most part the pain going digital will be the same today as it will be next year.
Besides there is no important information that you can get on TV that you cant get via the Radio. You may actually get it faster via the radio.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Noooooo. Let's let things actually finish. We're SO CLOSE.
Fun the coupon program better with an executive order. Let analog stay on at night for a while in "nightlight mode" as has been discussed (just shows a "you need a converter box" screen).
But please, we're so close. The trial in November went very well, and the nightlight thing was shown to be very helpful.
But please don't delay things. "Enough people" will never be ready. This needs to happen, it's not like it's news. We've known about this for 2+ years.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
for goodness sake, if people aren't ready by now, they never will be. even my luddite sister in law has a converter box. delays would probably screw up all the stations that have busted ass to get ready.
The switch was already supposed to happen years ago, but they delayed things back then for the same reason. Should we delay forever and waste a huge amount of spectrum on an ancient broadcasting mechanism?
I think the program is out of money because a lot of people who don't even need coupons are getting them - my guess is that probably half of the people at least do not understand that if they have cable they don't need a different box.
There's still more than a month til the switch, time enough to sort out who really needs help and help them.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
After all, the spectrum that TV uses have already being partly sold. Wouldn't Verizon, et. al. be rather annoyed about this development?
A system of interconnected network of wireless radio employing dish antennas would be as revolutionary as the internet.
News crews use ground microwaves. No more to the Golf channel,Bet,Mtv and QVC! Yeah!
Well, it would have been 9-12 months ago. Now, current broadcasters are in the final stages of switching over and some have even decreased signal strength on analog broadcasts in preparation.
One of the big problems - having a fringe-area television with a rooftop mast and rotator - is at that house we go from 4-5 channels to 1 digital one. Period. Now maybe we will get more when (if?) they increase the digital signal strength but it seems unlikely. Repeat this throughout the rural areas of the country and you will have a significant impact on television watching.
The problem is, 30 days out from the switchover is a little too late to delay it. People have made their peace with the transition one way or another. For my house it will absolutely be cable or nothing. How many rural TV owners have already decided they can just do without? Especially after seeing what dismal results a converter box gives them.
Sure in cities there may be a lot more people with analog TVs that need get a converter box, and the idea the government was going to buy them for people sort of fell down. The government was never going to put out the kind of money it would really take to do that, and it was fairly obvious early on. A better approach might have been for the current advertisers to pay a tax to keep viewers watching.
What happens in February? My guess is that there is a slight shift in ad demographics and it is all for the worse for advertisers. Not exactly the sort of thing that will do any good in the current economic situation because for these advertisers increased spending isn't going to help. What will the real impact of more-or-less ceasing OTA television be in the US? Not sure, but I do not see this as an overall good move.
OTA television provided a certain cultural foundation for the last 50-60 years or so. You could more or less count on people watching certain popular shows. Without free OTA television it will fragment the culture more and provide less common experiences to share between people. We will further retreat to our own (smaller) cultural worlds and have less in common with our neighbors and coworkers. The Internet fosters this kind of isolationism. Good thing? It is if you are all about "diversity" and seeing no point to having any common ground with your neighbors. Chatting with people half a world away online isn't the same thing.
I'd rather do it and suffer consequences.
Because asking somebody to fix something with a movable timeline means it NEVER gets fixed.
If they keep the timeline, you can guarantee there will be people up nights and weekends to get it done on time. Just like the year 2000, where almost nothing happened because of the massive amount of work behind the scenes. Not like they could move that date either.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
Why should the government still be obligated to assist everyone at this stage in the game? The coupon program dried up; tough noogies, you've only had nearly a year to apply for one. If you needed the discount that badly, then you should have taken 2 minutes to apply earlier. And if you can't muster up the cash to rub two 20's together, your ability to watch television should not be anywhere on your radar at the moment.
Beh
I seem to remember that it was a parody of "The Shining".
The US has enough problems right now. They don't need a bunch of TV-starved psychos running around, killing their families, as well.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
When they pushed digital set top boxes to make your TV more awesome my next door neighbour got one. Then everytime there was a medium to strong wind he would lose signal or when a cloud past over his house. Extreme quality, i can't imagine if they try an implement it without backing it up with enough funding, it would probably turn out like aour current broadband system, shit.
In Utah at least, there are two areas where the analog signals have already been turned off. Granted they are areas that are served via translator stations, but AFIK, the analog signals were turned off (one in December, one earlier).
All stations should be broadcasting in digital already. Most Utah stations have been broadcasting in digital for a while. They turned on the digital broadcast tower in 1999 (see here) for which most local stations use. The only reason for the delay would be to give the consumer with old televisions more time to get a converter box if they need one. The infrastructure on the broadcaster side has to all be in place and ready to go by now, otherwise they'd probably miss the deadline.
He also supports keeping the space shuttle on life support (@ $3B/yr).
Oh, hell no. I am so tired of all the PSA, and businesses running ads, about how I can be ready for The Big Switch, I could scream. Leave it alone, and let it happen.
Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
Seriously, how many YEARS of warning have we all had now? Just do it already.
I hope there will be cheap radios that can pickup digital TV sound like there is now for analog.
During the recent long power outage in New Hampshire, we found it very useful to have a little radio that picked up TV sound. The coverage of the emergency seemed to be better on TV than radio.
Radios like that will soon be less useful.
Publicity-starved WZMY Derry-Boston (MyTV affil) shut down their analog signal on 50 on Dec. 1 to what seems to be no ill effects. They ran their station in "nightlight mode" (Lowering power with a loop saying to effect "This used to be the analog signal of WZMY Derry... we've moved to digital." WFXT Boston met a little less happier fate. Their analog transmitter had been malfuctioning, and in Mid-December they gave up on it. With two months then to redeploy, the bean counters just wouldn't go with a project to revive the analog signal, so they're all-digital ready or not. Some stations are set to receive upgrades when the analog services go away. For example, WHDH-DT is off in UHF neverland, but once the analog WHDH 7 goes away, WHDH-DT gets the 7 slot not just on the logical dial, but also the physical frequency space.
Gilligan?
At least have someone (Morgan Freeman?) read out the ATSC spec for a few days prior to the switch so the professor can whip up a coconut converter box!
(Yes, I know they were rescued.)
(Yes, I know they went back.)
People will be up nights and weekends to get their converter boxes?
It's not the networks and stations that need extra time, they're ready already.
I can't speak for everywhere obviously, but here in Los Angeles pulling the plug on the analog transmissions is a big big deal. Not just because of Southern California's population but because of it's LATINO population.
I work in this industry for a Low Power Analog TV station (one that broadcasts on 4 different stations locally and a bunch more across the country). And the transition represents about 80% of my workload lately (I do broadcast engineering and IT).
But back on point, a LOT and I mean like hundreds of thousands of Latino families in the area rely on OTA transmissions. When you pull their plug, you might say "great, now they can go outside, read a book, etc" but in reality they're not tuned in. So that means advertising revenue dries up for the station (as it has for ours and almost every other that caters to the Latino community as well as mainstream tv programming). That means more layoffs and so on down the line.
Speaking for my company and other smaller players this delay is a good thing. Eventually the analog stations will go away and that's fine and eventually the low power guys like myself will have a concrete deadline too, and that's fine as well. Just remember though, millions have cable, direcTV, Dish, etc but there are still MORE than a few out there that really rely on plain vanilla over the air TV broadcast.
I agree with your concerns. Culture matters tremendously precisely for its ability to bring people together, which is a precondition for everything from politics to basic human happiness.
However, the evidence suggests that you have your causes backwards. Research shows a strong causal connection between the advent of TV and a sharp decline in community life. Robert Putnam talks about this in his book Bowling Alone. The DVD version of The Naked City features an interview with James Sanders, who describes the impact of TV on city life in New York. Here's an excerpt:
As for the effect Internet, a number of studies have found that people who socialize more online also socialize more offline. Cyberspace is very rarely the '80s vision of this other world where we take on other identities and socialize with strangers (the old dog on the Internet). For the most part it's a medium we use to reinforce the relationships we have with people we know in the real world. Now that may be a step down from the street life Sanders describes - the pre-broadcast world in which we made our entertainment (playing sports, singing songs, and so on instead of waiting for someone else to provide them to us), but it's light years ahead of the private CBS & me experience of watching TV alone in the dark.
Maybe Obama can consider a deadline for conversion to IPv6 instead?
That's something that actually matters. TV is something from the last millennium.
Why is it people believe just because somebody doesn't receive weather information over the TV that their lives are at risk and that the government is going to be sued. If anybody is truly serious about staying on top of weather information they would have a weather radio and listen to the National Weather Service at critical times operated by NOAA. There are even radios that can be bought cheaply that automatically turn on whenever severe weather is going on in your county or area.
In my experience of NOAA weather radios they are far more reliable because with all weather radios I've seen so far operate off of batteries which will allow the radio to continue to operate with or without power to the home compared to that of TVs where well: no power, no TV, no weather information.
I have read a few articles that give the impression that once analog broadcasts are turned off then the digital broadcasts will be allowed to boost their power output, but by how much I have no idea. Hopefully this is true because some stations broadcasting in the same county as on the receiving end is just terribly difficult to pickup. The worst so far is WTVF (CBS) here in Nashville, Tennessee that I have noticed.
This space is not for rent.
It's all part of conspiracy to make the government as irrelevant as the UN.
"All the world now faces a test, and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?" George Bush, September 12, 2002
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912-1.html]
And allow us to not be in such an all-fired rush.
I just learned that the Comcast HDTV delivery to my home in ultra-wired Fremont is only 1080i, which is barely better than 720p, so if waiting means I can save $500 on the price of a TV set I can't afford, cool.
Besides, all these purchases are for foreign-manufactured HDTV and game consoles to play the content (like Sony), so delay may be a very very good thing.
I'd rather spend it on a US-made computer anyway.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Another one here. After finding cable signals are worse than OTA, I downgraded cable package (I get discounted rate for bundling with Internet service any way). OTA digital has many interesting channels not on cable.
I second that. OTA digital is amazingly good picture quality.
Just pick up a cheap amplified loop antenna. You don't need anything fancy.
I find being offended by me offensive.
I would love to go just an antenna and get rid of my cable bill. But, without sports, I cannot do it. Unfortunately NESN (Boston Red Sox & Bruins) is cable-only. Same with Comcast Sports New England (Boston Celtics).
I refuse to go without sports. So that forces me to pay for cable. Just no choice on that unfortunately.
I would much prefer a la carte, but that doesn't seem like it will happen anytime soon despite the FCC Commissioner being a big fan.
Too bad I just can't pay for say a 15 channel package of the channels I want to watch.
Why did he do the horns hand sign, just like Bush?
I know, it's off-topic. But perhaps it's relevant, in the sense that Obama belongs to the same 'clan' as Bush, secretly following the same policies.
i shit out an obama.
Socialized Medicine = latest conservative bogeyman
Health Insurance = reason why you get overcharged
Get it straight.
How will consumers be brainwashed into buying the latest shiny new piece of plastic crap?
Large sections of the population will either find themselves truly free and happy for the first time or they will enter a state of mass depression as they realize that nothing they buy can rescue them from their pathetic miserable lives.
I watch netflix for entertainment. TV is dead to me. I plan on having a party on the day the tube goes dead.
We have the best government that money can buy.
Ummm... This could be a very, very, slow and deliberate 4 years until the next election.
Gently reply
There's a lot of warning for the upcoming switch. It's not like OTA is being pulled, it's being shifted.
If you let people slide another few years, people will simply not be ready the NEXT time the switch comes along. People will never be ready, so you have to actually be ready to make the switch against some resistance and then people will be motivated to actually switch.
People are highly motivated to get TV, and so I don't think the switch will have as much power over even the poor as you think it will. When people are motivated, they figure out a way - coupon or no.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Just like the insurance-companies do now? What's the difference?
-rozzin.
There's no reason if you used to be able to get OTA broadcasts before, you shouldn't be able to get them after the switch. You may need to change your antenna a bit though, there are some pretty nice HD antennas now that are pretty optimized.
I actually think OTA HD could bring a resurgence in OTA use compared to cable. There's a lot of freedom with what you can do with OTA broadcasts that you don't get with cable - I can record OTA shows and automatically transcode for an iPod for example, or transfer recordings to other people, or burn them to DVD.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The thing I like about the video switch, is that you have far more freedom with broadcast digital than you do with digital signals from cable boxes, or even a TIVO.
I can record a broadcast and automatically transcode into any format, for instance conversion for an iPod. Or I can burn the video to DVD, or I can transfer a show to someone else. It's all just MPEG2 after all.
If people start taking advantage of the freedoms they have with OTA HD, then they may start demanding those same freedoms for other digital video as well. OTA could be a gateway to a much more open video model all the way around.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I hear you, but this deadline was set in 1996 (or actually, extended twice from a 2006 transition). Is the best outcome for broadasters to continue to hog BOTH digital AND analog bandwidth (the grace period they were given in 1996)? Or do you think the date is important to the community you describe? By the way, I own a company that takes the analog USA TVs and inspects them and sends the better ones to NTSC Peru, Mexico, and Venezuala, so I got a stake in this too.
Gently reply
How about rather than delaying the switch to digital broadcasts we do the switch on time and if you don't have a converter box already, and didn't get a coupon yet, just make the people who procrastinated send in a mail in rebate rather than receiving a coupon. Perhaps that's an oversimplification but I'd rather the government spend a few extra dollars processing rebates than have the digital broadcast deadline extended yet again.
But how many converter box coupons have been used? The program was supposed to supply two coupon per household. Given $1.3 billion in funding, that would have covered 32.5 million sets. That would have easily covered the estimated 15.5 million TV users w/o cable or satellite and have enough left over for the website and advertising. IMHO, I don't think it's going to cost in excess of $100 million for the Feds to run a damn website, print vouchers, and create the radio/TV ads (the ads are public service announcements and cost nothing to put on the air). But instead, we hear that there is another 1 million in backlog orders and only 1/2 the people have upgraded. There needs to be an investigation to find out where the money went.
People paid good money for their TVs. Why should the government get to fuck them up?
Nah, they'll just cap what Doctors and Hospitals can charge for their services
Just like the insurance-companies do now? What's the difference?
Not commenting on the advantages or disadvantages of socialized medicine,
Now people without insurance have to pay full price (at least that is the bill that they are presented with) - the price of which represents the shortfall resulting from other's bills being capped.
This is what is actually going on..
Government is really worried that there are a lots of dumb people out there that won't be able to figure out why their TV's don't work. These people do probbly exist, although I have no idea about the numbers (I would assume the high and mighty politicians are overestimating because they think they are smarter than most people anyhow.) They have been attempting to run an education campaign, and have endless advertisements for converter boxes.
Trouble is.. people who actually needed to get the ad's probably don't have any idea *what* they have, and sales show people have not been buying converter boxes even with the coupons.
And here we see the nature of how government operates in everything, it's slow, expensive, inefficient, and bureaucratic.. in technology matters those "qualities" make it that much worse.. Everything must be held back because those wizards in government think a handful of rubes out there might get pissed if they miss Oprah. Progress is being held back to the lowest common denominator. Trust me, this isn't going to be the last delay either, we will be lucky if we see that spectrum open up in 5-10 years, and they will probably start mailing those converters to people for free even if they don't know if they need them or not. ..The spectrum shouldn't even be "owned" by government in the first place. Somehow the market was able to figure out how to make everything from Bluetooth, to microwave ovens, to wi-fi work in the tiny little 2.4Ghz band.
Bringing liberty to the masses. - http://freetalklive.com/
From my POV here in Rhode Island, it looks like most 'poor' people have satellite, the middle class have cable and fios. I attribute this to the sat. companies not doing a credit check, which the cable companies seem to do.
The upper-middle class are the only folks I see with 'regular' TVs anymore. They listen to NPR and tune in to PBS or watch the news, but that's pretty much it.
And the rich folks... I wouldn't know. They never invite me over. :-) I would assume they keep high-end HDTV setups, but rarely watch.
I do think that there is an inversely proportional relationship to how much TV you watch and how much money you make though. I don't really ever spot my well-to-do friends watching TV. I haven't figured out if it's because
more disposable income -> better things to do than TV
or
educated and motivated -> more disposable income
The funny thing was, I went over to my parents a few days ago, and they think they're all set because they have cable, which is true in the TV room; but then they flipped on their little black-and-white 4" TV in the kitchen for the news. I pointed out that they'll have to drop about two hundred bucks to replace -that-, to which my dad replied, "Screw it, I'll throw it away."
Come to think of it, I haven't seen -one- actual, installed DTV converter, and I was in a -lot- of houses in the last month. I also don't know anyone who consumes OTA digital TV.
I'll bet there are a -ton- of elderly folks in those huge apartment towers I see all over town that have bunny ears though... They're going to be pissed, and they vote.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
That's not change! That's more of the same!
"government funds to support the change are 'woefully inadequate' " Give me a freakin' bvreak! Of course. Government funds are ALWAYS inadequate. And since when is it the taxpayer's responsibility to pay for people's TV tuners. And, look at the price! If you can't afford the box, how is it you can afford TV! You should be getting off your ass and get a job. I can't believe what a nation of whiners this country has become. Suck it up and buy the box, a new TV, or read a freakin' book and get your damn hands out of my wallet!!!
I guess it's to be expected...
Woefully underfunded? A fund for giving us crap we don't need is underfunded? Well, that figures.
I have a coupon because I have to just to stay even (it's going to come from my taxes later), but no intention of using it until my net cost for a converter is 0.
I thought that might happen today, but Meritline's $0. converter deal seems to be nothing but a timewaster, I tried twice and got "Credit card rejected" on a perfectly good card.
Now, having given them the coupon code in a comment as they requested, I could well find myself testifying in a fraud investigation later on.
What President Obama should do, if he really believes in change, is explain, in his best Khan Noonien Singh voice: "Let them eat static"!
"Breaking" everyone's analog TV is going to be controversial enough. But to time it to happen right after a new president is inaugurated? Forget that this changeover has been in the works forever, who is Joe Blow going to blame? I don't blame the Obama administration for wanting to postpone it a bit.
we've got a pres-elect that, at a time when we're at war, the economy is in meltdown and the US is in the process of giving up the idea of democracy all together, has time to worry about poor people getting enough TV time with their TV. Yeah, that's what they need. More TV.....
and this is fucking me over.
It was fairly painless - I got my two converter boxes (and used them, thank you very much) and it looks amazing.
Except, it doesn't. The signal strength (especially on the local PBS affiliate) is crap because the physical channel is in the sixties. When the switch is over, they'll be back on good ol' 13 where it works fine.
I have no sympathy for those who don't have the necessary equipment - how do you miss the notices? They're on every other break!
Just get it over with. There will be problems at any point, all from the same people. So stop pissing off the people who get it.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Obama should be familiar with the following turn of phrase. "Oh Hell no!" Seriously, this is a bad idea. Throw the switch already.
I think the program is out of money because a lot of people who don't even need coupons are getting them - my guess is that probably half of the people at least do not understand that if they have cable they don't need a different box.
And the recent "Media Blitz" campaigns often just confuse the average user more than inform them. I've had to explain to a few people already that they don't need a converter box...including a friend with an HDTV and OTA Antenna, but didn't know that he could tune into HD channels with it (ie: 5-1 instead of 5). He saw the color bars during a recent test and was about to go out and buy one before he asked me. Sad, but likely more common than people suspect...
Also, digital is pretty much line-of-sight. There are literally millions of people in the U.S., especially in more rural areas that have no ability to get TV at all.
If you go to antennaweb.org and put in your zip code, you can see how the reality is that digital signals only are good for roughly 40-50 mils and then that's it. NADA. zilch. Get Dish or Cable TV, thankyouverymuch.
Take Santa Rosa, CA. 150,000 people. With a large antenna and a rotor to point it, you can get 2 local stations and 13 San Fransisco stations, which are 43 miles away.
With digital, You get... One local station. And one that's iffy at best. The entirety of Sonoma County has about 460,000 people in it and 50% of them will be forced to switch to cable TV to get any signal at all.(about half have, talking to friends, about half still have antennas)
Now, if you're in some place like Illinois, well, you're out of luck, no matter how flat the land is. 50 miles or so out and you're without a strong enough signal. Either it works great or not at all. That's just wrong, IMO.
... I thought we were almost done with those annoying commercials telling us that the switch is coming!
First Obama wants to kill off NASA. Then he appoints the RIAA lawyers to the DOJ. Now he wants to delay the digital TV switch which really is the delay to cheap ubiquitous wireless internet. Now we know who really paid to get him elected.
The real problem here is that VHF is not UHF. VHF frequencies are better at following the lay of the land. They bend better over hills, and tend to travel more consistently over longer distances. The low band of TV, channels 2-6, follow hills well. Channel 4,5 and 6 are by far the best for a ground wave. Channel 2 is a bit too long in wavelength-acts more like HF. VHF high, channels 7-13, follows hills well, but not as well as the low VHF channels. Moving up to the UHF region, we are more like cell phones in that the radio waves become strictly line of sight, less to no bending over the earth, and become harder to catch. Most folks don't understand that moving a UHF antenna a few feet up, down or sideways can make all the difference. A VHF TV antenna is pretty much just pointed in the right direction, but UHF can be tricky. You might get pixellation at the front of the roof but 90% on the back of the roof. Sadly, those with the least ability to figure this out will have the most problems getting the UHF DTV. If you understand that you may need to move the antenna about a bit you will have much more success snagging uncompressed and free Digital TV. I view from a spot 50 or so miles out from a UHF station(WNJN-PBS) which is both analog and digital. It also slightly off axis from my NYC-pointed antenna. I get reception for most of the year, but it gives me a real world view on varying signal strengths based upon tree attenuation. Digital does work better-up to about 75% of the distance. 51 is the digital feed, 50 the analog. In the winter, where all the trees are clean, both 50 and 51 look really good. You have to look hard to see the digital difference with SD signals on both channels. As the trees fill in, the analog station begins to fade. There is some dot crawl, then static, then unstable picture on the analog station until it becomes a weak fuzzy signal. The digital station stays perfect until the analog picture gets decidely static-Y. You can watch the analog signal beyond the point the digital one is gone but it is not great, probably bottom 30%, at that time. When summer comes, and the trees fill in fully, you can't get a lock on the digital or a watchable signal from the analog. I pull the channels out until fall. So for 75% of the time, the digital signal wins, as it is always perfect if it works. That does not do much for you if you are beyond. I do want to subscribe to whichever system takes over channels 4-6 and puts broadband on it. This is the prime radio territory for a ground wave based system.
You won't see many opinions from OTA customers here because if they can't afford the $12 for cable (that is what I pay) they won't be able to afford the $50 for net.
It affects mostly poor, elderly, or rural customers--the ones least able to help themselves.
Hasn't the FCC already sold off the spectrum that is going to be reclaimed by the move from NTSC to ATSC for our broadcast TV?
If so, would the new spectrum owners get paid to wait to use it?
I think that delaying is not going to help fix the problem. It's sort of like worrying about the y2k stuff. There's only so much you can do, and then you have to flip the switch and find out what's fallen through the cracks.
I think this is point is not being emphasized enough. What digital you can get OTA even today is not representative of what you will get after Feb 17. Many stations are not running their digital at full power and others have translators that are not switching until the transition. In my area, geography (i.e. foothills) makes translators essential even for analog, so stations who haven't switched their translators are really hard to get.
Actually, I have found just the opposite to be true.
As an indie contractor...I buy my own insurance, high deductible for catatrophic needs ($1200 deductible). With this, I qualify for a Health Savings Account, that this year, I can load up with $2900 pre-tax dollars to use for my health needs. It is not a use or lose thing...and it earns money too.
I use that for medical visits, services. When I tell them I'm paying on my own, I get at least a 15% discount pretty much everywhere I got. I had an MRI done last year, and they charged me significantly less then they would have if I'd done insurance.
Heck, if you're paying your own way medically...shop around. Ask about discounts with non-insurance, etc.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
This discussion of transition to digital TV makes me think of a question I have been meaning to ask. Perhaps it is more appropriate for Ask Slashdot, but it is related to the topic under discussion, and I am sure I'm not the only one in this situation.
I have a friend on a fixed income (and yes, it really is a friend--I have cable), who has a roof antenna and gets her programming off the air on an analog TV. She understands about the transition to digital and is perfectly willing to buy a converter box.
She works during the day and is a fan of soaps. She has an analog VCR which she programs to record her shows. They are on multiple channels at different times, eg. 12:00 to 12:30 on channel 7, 1:00 to 2:00 on channel 5, 3:00 to 3:30 on channel 9, etc.
She has been asking me about her VCR. As I understand, if she hooks up the converter box to her VCR, she will be able to record only one channel since the tuning is done in the converter box. So she realizes she will have to buy some sort of DVR, and I have been enlisted to help her shop. (She incorrectly assumes that since I'm a computer geek, I must also be an A/V geek) The problem is I know nothing about DVRs, but I'd really like to help.
I suggested a Tivo, but a friend told me it works only if you have cable, not for off-the-air. Is that true? And what other options are available? I also have been told that you need to pay a monthly fee to operate a DVR. Is that true? She doesn't need program guides as she is perfectly willing to program the start/stop times and channels manually, just as she now does with her VCR. I also understand that some units use a hard drive, some others burn the programs to DVD and some do both. As she is more interested in time shifting than archiving, it seems a HDD solution is probably best. Her budget isn't huge, about $300 max for this device. I've been doing some research, both online and at local stores, and haven't yet found something exactly suitable. I'm sure I'm missing something obvious. Any Slashdoters out there who have been looking for something similar? What do people recommend? She's not a computer person, and her computer is very old, so I don't think a PC based solution is right for her.
(And please don't suggest that she get a life and quit watching soaps. While I don't disagree with that sentiment, I'm really looking for a more technical solution here.)
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
With this, I qualify for a Health Savings Account, that this year, I can load up with $2900 pre-tax dollars to use for my health needs. It is not a use or lose thing...and it earns money too.
I'd like to know that the rationale was for restricting HSAs to those with high-deductible plans. I'd much rather take part in an HSA for my own medical expenses rather than the "flexible" spending account that's anything but.
I love how they get to call something "flexible" when it comes with a "use it or lose it" provision and you can only adjust your election once a year.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
What I never understood about this situation, is why does the government have such an all-or-nothing attitude about this? How about ONE channel, say ch. 3, that is still on in analog that informs people about the digital switch. They seriously can't spare ONE channel?
There, problem solved!
Like most card carrying nerds, I get my TV from the ATSC broadcast OTA today on mostly the UHF band. If the switch happens what do *I* need to do?
The FCC is selling a big chunk of the 700MHz UHF spectrum, right? So will some of my channels move?
The only information that I can find about "THE SWITCH" assumes that I have an NTSC tuner (and that I'm really slow.)
AHA! Answering my own question...
Any channel mapped higher than 52 will go away:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_broadcast_television_frequencies#UHF_band
Which for me means there are a few channels that will move.
And they show which ones will move here:
http://www.antennaweb.org/
Interestingly - there are ATSC channels being moved even though they aren't in the sold spectrum!
Here in Finland the switch was made in Sep. 2007 for terrestrial broadcasting and cable television Feb. 2008. The rest of the EU member states are expected to stop analogue television transmissions by 2012. Wasn't such a big deal... many people actually are still refusing to buy the convertor box after being able to notice a dramatic improvement in their quality of life.
I live in Las Vegas and can definitively say that OTA TV is of much higher quality than cable (Cox). I was going to get cable when I recently bought a new 1080p LCD, but when I hooked up my old rabbit ears and saw how much better the picture was compared to my friends with cable I decided to stick with the antenna. Every channel has excellent reception and every major show including local news is in 16:9 1080i. On top of that, a few of the local channels run dedicated weather and traffic stations 24/7 on their subchannels which aren't available via cable.
On Slashdot everyone is already well aware that the changeover is for over the air broadcasts and not cable but outside the tech crowd nobody understands this. TV's are being sold cheaply because they have analog cable tuners, and even a number of comcast cable guys I've talked to were under the impression that the changeover meant analog cable was going and they didn't know what the company was going to do when it did.
Well, they sort of are doing something like that.
Ars ran a story last week, FCC okays DTV "analog nightlight" rules. Unfortunately, it's only for 30 days - seems like it should be 90 or 180 days. Also, apparently, this doesn't apply to all markets, so I think the FCC is kind of messing up there.
Partly, though, I'm confused about how anyone could possibly not know about the digital TV transition and not be prepared for it at this point? Every time I try to watch OTA broadcasts using my digital converter box, I'm constantly being annoyed by text overlays obscuring the programming I'm watching, with messages about the digital transition. I've seen one possible explanation.
Still, I do agree with the parent - why not *permanently* leave one analog channel for information about the fact that TV has switched to digital transmissions, and also use it for emergency programming (like evacuation and health-related notices, severe weather coverage, disaster-related instructions and info, etc)?
Obama is not even in office and he had made changes, changed his mind. You wanted change and you got it. If he was all about change (hopefully for the better), we would not be talking about this.
It is an old standard, better technology now exists. Sorry, it is not backwards compatible. I have seen people get completely enraged about this change. People look at it like, "If it's not broken, don't fix it." The change is a good thing, but people get defensive about the government breaking their stuff (vs. preparing for the future). Since when has watching TV been a RIGHT, not a PRIVILEGE?
PS: I don't care how I get modded. I am happy just because you used/wasted your mod points on me.
Maybe phase out analog TV by time slot. Leave analog up from 1800 to 2200 hours for a few extra months; the rest of the time broadcast "Convert to digital" messages at reduced power. That will get the message across to the holdouts without causing withdrawal symptoms.
Hello, I don't live in the USA so I'm wondering what sort of education campaign the FCC has run about this.
I would have thought that there would be ads every hour or two saying "This station is going away soon - Do something!", but it seems that is not the case.
Can someone provide some details?
-- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
Yep, it's true, there are some selfish greedy two-bit entrepreneurs who are getting two coupons, buying two boxes, keeping one (or none) and selling the other on eBay or Craiglist. I've seen the listings for them. Unless they're using the identities of dead people to get a truckload of them, though, I doubt if the few people who are doing this amount to much more than a drop in the bucket.
Since when was an American born right one that involves free television, paid for by tax dollars?
You're SO entitled!
So you say hurray for me, and fsck you!
It's not your fault, it's fault.
*sarcasm*
You support, enable, and contribute to the problem while actively hindering the cure.
Stupid git!
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
Maybe all the umm-dumbs out there will start reading when their TV's don't work anymore, and drastically improve education levels in this country.
I agree...this options should be open to everyone. I have to guess somehow maybe the insurance co's are against this? Or...maybe the govt. doesn't want it easy for the general public to spend their pre-tax dollars as they see fit on medical needs?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
They were paid for with the money raised auctioning off the soon to be available bandwidth.
The government made billions of dollars on the deal even after you subtract the value of the coupons.
I ordered a coupon even though we have cable because we may decide to drop cable in the future. The only reason we have it now is because it's $8 a month as part of the HOA fees.
I also have an old WinTV PCI card that is far from digital ready so we may not need it now there is a definite potential for use.
Work Safe Porn
A "progressive" against progress? Shocking!
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
IF people by now don't know that digital TV is coming in a few weeks after all of these years, then they probably don't even watch much TV anyways.
I can understand Obama fighting for the poor folks out there, but this is not a communist society that everyone needs to have the same possessions at the same time. I thought it was time for change?
How long has this been going on for? 10 years? 5 years? Enough with the hand-holding!
Just make the damn switch. I am guessing that people will work out a way to get DTV pretty quick. Since they won't be watching TV, they will have (an average of) 4 extra hours a day to work out a solution.
So if you have to re-point your antenna on your root because the transmitter has moved, your saying that February is the best time to do so? There is no way my mother is going to go up on her roof, in Minnesota, with snow to experiment on the direction to point it. Who thought the middle of winter was a good time to do this?
Only if verizon et al are planning to do anything other than sit on it to kill competition.
Obama fixed my grandma's analog TV!
> The FCC is selling a big chunk of the 700MHz UHF spectrum,
> right? So will some of my channels move?
See http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/markets/ and select your city for a list of channels and coverage maps.
Americans living near the Canadian border might be interested in http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/vwapj/DTV_PLAN_Dec08-e.pdf/$file/DTV_PLAN_Dec08-e.pdf (PDF document). It lists Canadian Analog/Transitional/Final frequencies. The Canadian analogue shutdown is scheduled for August 31, 2011
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
...is because he's afraid people won't be able to watch his infomercials during the 2012 election campaign.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
I don't think you'd have to re-point, unless they changed the location of the antennas. It's just that other antenna designs work better for HD programming than traditional antennas, but existing ones may do.
You could also look at powered indoor antennas which can help a lot.
It is kind of funny though they decided long ago to do this in winter, like you say not a lot of thought put in there.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Well here in the EU we are almost done with the switch. I am not sure if there are any regions anymore which are still analog.
It worked out pretty much without flaws.
People on cable basically didnt have to switch, a load of people have satellite receivers those did not have to switch either and many of them already were digital only anyway. That left out around 20% of the population with antennas. Those could get a 30$ refund on the converter boxes. And since the cheaper boxes were around that price it was basically getting such a box for free if you opted for the lowest possible option!
There were almost no complaints in the switch and there was a load of advertisement on TV on how to switch, so the rollout was more or less flawless!
I decided that I did not want to 'move forward' to the 'new' format, so on Feb 20th I'd had static on my TV.
That way when Neilson or whatever polling org contacted me I could tell 'em "I stopped watching - nothing compelling enough and I'm busy doing more important things" Like posting to slashdot.
I decided to dump the cable company, and the television/DVR for that matter, and get a EyeTV and a decent antenna for my MacBook. I basically just watch PBS and news anyway, and download movies and TV shows from iTunes. It's not cheap, but I also spend a lot of time out of the country, so for me it makes sense. I'm in a semi-urban area of Philadelphia, so I figured the reception when I'm back in town should be good.
The digital picture looks fantastic, when it works, but it doesn't degrade well at all. Once the signal quality drops below a certain threshold the content becomes rapidly unwatchable. In my experience, even on strong stations I'd inevitably get dropouts, on average every 5 or 10 minutes, where I'd just lose all picture and audio for a second or more. This could be environmental changes, interference, or whatever. Frankly, I don't think digital switch-overs are going to go well anywhere because of this.
With analog TV, you would just tolerate snow or ghosts, but with digital TV if you don't meet some threshold signal level and the tuner loses the key frames, you're hosed. A complete dropout of picture and sound is a horrible user experience. And I'm in a semi-urban area. What about rural viewers?
So to those supporting a fast switch to digital, good luck...
Does anyone think they are worried about the poor unready masses? ... REALLY?
NO People .. ..
This is just another example of you not being told the truth.
This is about viewership, ratings, and losses in advertising dollars. This will cause a flux in the base audience size and rates will have to drop
due to that reduction.
They should just tell us the truth, we can deal with it. Don't spin it and take the fabricated
High road.
Hello Moryath,
It sounds like you know what you are doing but here are some idea's on how to resolve your DTV reception issues.
Sounds like you are close in.
Get rid of the antenna preamp. Most have a horrible S/N ratio and just add to the problem with receiver front-end overloading.
Switch to a more onmi directional antenna. This would help with the multi path issue.
Forget the sales hype. DTV is in the same band space as conventional TV. The same antenna's work. The lowest channels frequencies are lower than conventional FM broadcasts. (Ch2-6 55.25-83.25Mhz)
Twin lead has considerably less loss than coax, use it for your down feed, twisting it every so often. Put a balun (4:1 300 to 75ohm) at the bottom.
Or...maybe the govt. doesn't want it easy for the general public to spend their pre-tax dollars as they see fit on medical needs?
That doesn't make sense either though. You can get a tax deduction on medical expenses when you file your income taxes if you are so inclined. The big advantage to an HSA or Flex account is that it makes that deduction automatic and also includes your social security/medicare taxes.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Hasn't someone already bought rights to that spectrum? It doesn't belong to the TV stations. Is the government going to keep the money but not give the buyer the spectrum?
Yeah, but, don't your health expenditures for a year have to cross some 'threshold' before you can start claiming them? If you're healthy a year...you get no break, but, with a HSA...you can sock that money away pre-tax, and let it grow.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
But... Obama said there would be change!
Disclaimer: I am not god.
We may not be created equal
But we can be treated equal.
Also, the FSA and the tax return medical deductions aren't the same thing. When you file your taxes, you can only deduct the portion of medical expenses that are in excess of 7.5% of your adjusted gross income. With the FSA, you can deduct every dollar of expenses if you estimate right. As long as your FSA deduction is under your actual expenses, and by less than 7.5% of your AGI, then the FSA is the better bet. In fact, if you are under by more than 7.5%, I beleive you can still take the deduction for the portion over the 7.5% that wasn't covered by the FSA. So really, the FSA is always the same or better deal as long as you don't overestimate by too much.
Two scams here: 1. Gummint allocates fortune for boxes for the "poor". Gummint cronies corner market on boxes that cost $5 bucks to make, sellim to chumps with coupons for $40 bucks and change. 2. Digital signals are 30 to 40% weaker than analog. Millions who get good enough analog broadcast TV now, will get zilch after the switch forcing them to get cable. Comcast wins.
Where do I get all these magical digital freedoms? You make it sound like the Broadcast Flag and DMCA magically vanish with over the air transmission, and the content providers are going to sing Kumbaya with us as we rip their content in the ways we want to.
I have my doubts.
Sig under construction since 1998.
but comcast and other cable subscribers are currently giving "free cable" for a year or something if people sign up for phone or internet service. I just got a thing in the mail saying you can buy their lowest tier broadband for like $25. for those people who don't want to buy that converter box, that's an option. basic cable itself is something like $8 a month and still gives you more than OTA.
;)
when I moved to my apartment, I got the $45 HSI [fios is still not here yet, grr], and they gave me that same full year of basic cable. outside of that it's like $11 a month or something, but I only really watch a few shows and sports and that's about it. I use the 'net more.
I know the argument comes up that cable is compressed, etc etc. but I agree with the others; you got a chance to get a box/antenna for practically cheap or zero, and you didn't go for it even though it's been announced for well around a year or so. now you're angry that you're not prepared? how's that "shame on you" thing go from president bush again?
for the person who was saying that the converter box doesn't help with the weak signal, if that program is THAT IMPORTANT to you, then just get cable. I'm all for free use and all, but I'm not for people complaining about stuff and not willing to do anything about it.
This made sense, because VHF antennas are large, bulky, expensive, and difficult to install, and because _currently_ all digital television frequency assignments are in the UHF band.
Parent makes a good point but with a slight inaccuracy:
Some DTV have been VHF for years:
In Kansas City KMBC analog channel 9 has been DTV channel 7 for years -- I specifically bought a large bulky VHF-UHF combo antenna just for this reason.
If my TV doesn't work, I will not know who to hate this week. I also will not have any idea what I should buy to keep our corporate masters from bringing the hammer down on our economy. I eill be completely cut off from the inane "inforation" TV brings my way.
I might actually have to start interacting with my community. That might lead to non-medicated happiness and love for my neighbors.
What about my avatar of sloth - the remote ?
It may also be rendered useless.
Please Obama, save us from these horrors!
http://www.digitalhome.ca/ota/superantenna/ Also there's this:
The Gray-Hoverman antenna designs, schematics, and diagrams on this site are Copyright ©2008 and are free: you can redistribute them and/or modify them under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at our option) any later version.
Deltron 3030 - Virus (music video)
Where do I get all these magical digital freedoms? You make it sound like the Broadcast Flag and DMCA magically vanish with over the air transmission
The broadcast flag was cast off long ago, the FCC decided not to require adherence to it (and no stations are going to use it).
The video broadcast is all plain MPEG2 anyway - even if they later added the flag, all you need is equipment that ignores it. All equipment you can buy today ignores it...
Thus you get totally open MPEG2 video you can do whatever you want with.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Everyone knew about the switch for more than a year and they had plenty of time to prepare. Anyone who doesn't know about the switch or isn't prepared is either an idiot or living under a rock. They should have done the switch earlier. I'm sick of seeing the ads about the switch.
I have cable, a 51-inch HDTV, and use OTA for my HD. The image quality is so much better than Comcasts digital signal, I don't even bother with it. I have a feeling if people really saw what cable signals offer vs OTA, everyone would be furious with their cable company.
The biggest problem with digital OTA is it doesn't have the same distance as the old signals. Since I suspect most people using OTA live in rural areas, I'm betting even with a digital converter or TV, they'll lose TV. The government should be subsidizing replacement TVs and digital signal repeaters instead of converter boxes.
Oh. Don't forget any VCRs. They all have tuners that aren't digital either.
Why couldn't we let market forces play in a bit? For example, why can't we wait until analog broadcasts aren't economically feasible? It seems that the rapid adoption of digital TV would make most analog channels economically unfeasible rather soon, anyway.
No, I will not work for your startup