Slashdot Mirror
Confusion Reigns As Analog TV Begins Shutdown
As TV stations across the country switch off their analog signals, uncertainty reigns. Some 691 stations will have converted to digital broadcasting by midnight tonight (some interpreted the mandate as going digital by Feb. 17, not during Feb. 17, and shut down yesterday). This represents about a third of TV broadcasters nationwide. No one can say how many of the estimated 5.8 million households unready for the transition are in areas served by the stations that are switching now. The FCC added to the uncertainty by imposing extra conditions, making it unclear until last Friday exactly which stations would be switching at the beginning of the transition period. The article quotes a former analyst at Barclays Capital who said the whole process has been "botched politically."
The idea behind pushing back the deadline was so that the current coupons(which were all given out) had time to expire. They could then create new coupons so people who missed out the first time could get a chance at a coupon, and thus their free converter. Or that's how I read it.
2. When the TV was moved to digital, it should have been better than what was offered before. Yes, the quality is better (when you can receive the signal) but most of the time (even with good equipment) the signal doesn't come in, you lose channels, and they randomly drop audio and video. At least with the old way, if it came in most of the way, I could still see and hear what was going on.
This is the killer for me. Digital TV does not degrade gracefully. You can't get a low-res substitute if your signal starts going badly. And the use of 8VSB modulation means that stations *theoretically* can cover more distance with less power than COFDM, but it also means moving receivers are out of the question (goodbye Sony Watchman and car TV) and multipath interference (common in cities) can keep receivers from working properly.
In the 50's and 60's, they were able to upgrade to color TV without breaking compatibility with existing black and white sets. Today, they broke compatibility and they've failed to offer enough to justify it.
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
You stations may not be broadcasting full power yet. I believe they can go full power after today, or possibly that was delayed with the (optional) analog shutoff delay too.
(I think they may also change frequencies, but that's all automagically handled by the tuner.)
It's pretty clearly stated in the FAQ
Me thinks we will either have either a surge in domestic violence rates or a surge in birth rates as a result of this switchover. When you think about, TV is probably the most effective birth control device known to man... all the countries with high per-capita television ownership also have low birth rates.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Yes, 54Mbps is plenty for a single HD stream. The maximum bit-rate allowed by the blu-ray standard is 40Mbits
Except that you never really do get 54Mbps. You'd be lucky to maintain a constant 10Mbps. 54Mbps wireless is completely unacceptable for HD Content because the player is expecting a semi-constant stream of data which the wireless router typically can't deliver. I'd stick with a hardline.
We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
I used to work for a company that made wireless access points. The highest we ever saw during testing (of our products and our competitors) was 22 Mbps.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
You dont know anyone who is a videophile, or someone that can actually see.. I watch OTA because it's not destroyed by the satellite or cable company. The PBS hd channels here that are OTA are at least 90% higher resolution and far less blockyness than the re-compressed mess that Comcast passes off as the OTA HD channels. (Yes they compress them, I got the transport stream files to prove it. Comcast and DISH have the crappiest HD signals available. If you want to see your best video OTA is the best choice.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
...but what the hell is an HD antenna?
It is marketing BS, but there are geek issues involved. As you may know, analog TV uses 3 different frequency band ranges: VHF-lo (channels 2-6, which will be reallocated. Good for LONG DISTANCE transmissions at high power (using the atmospheric bounce) but also vulnerable to EMI), VHF-hi (channels 7-13), which will be kept for DTV, and UHF, which its upper band, from channels 52-69, will be removed from DTV reception.
Different antenna designs have different reception efficiency in different bands. Rabbit ears (folding twin dipoles) were only good for VHF, and since there is no more VHF-lo, useless for DTV. The other common cheapo UHF antennas, circle and bowtie, allegedly will work at receiving VHF-hi, but are not terribly efficient. There are designs like Gray-Hoverman, which weren't popular in the analog TV era, because besides not getting VHF-lo well, it wouldn't get the high end of UHF well either. Well, there's no more "UHF-hi" (ch 52-69), so now those type antennas can be used, and are pretty darn efficient in the DTV range.
Then there is the multipath issue. (ghosting) On analog-TV, it was an annoyance. On DTV, it can actually kill reception, because its a form of signal interference (which weakens reception). In places where its an issue, you're better off with those "new-fangled" DTV antennas (e.g. - Philips silver sensor, which looks like a triangular raygun made of metal tongue depressors) which are designed to "suppress multipathing", which then improves DTV reception.
I would imagine the "ideal" DTV antenna would be most efficient for receiving VHF-hi, the truncated UHF, and suppress multipathing. The old rooftop antennas should still work, but you MAY be able to get a new TV antenna that will bring in more dB, because of its design. But there is no industry standardization for the term HDTV antenna, so you won't know if its worthwhile to buy it without a spectrum analyzer. (Or more cheaply, read avsforum.com, and let the engineering geeks tell you what's the best antennas to get.)