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."

104 of 434 comments (clear)

  1. My TV is still up by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hmmm, my programming source still seems to be up.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    1. Re:My TV is still up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      So is mine http://eztv.it

    2. Re:My TV is still up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well for those interested, 1-888-CALL-FCC. Posting anon, cause I work at that hotline. : ) It's a hotline to help with the switch, advise on Converter Boxes, and help with hooking it up.

    3. Re:My TV is still up by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was going for "funny"...

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  2. Once again... BFD by __aagmrb7289 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why the heck are we getting a story posted on this almost daily? Who cares? I've read the threads, and it's not a big deal. Anyone with half a brain will be fine. Anyone else, well, maybe there are survival of the fittest selection standards still hitting us, on occasion. I don't see that as a bad thing.

    1. Re:Once again... BFD by Chabo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't see why the deadline had to be pushed back any further. Even if it did, I don't see any reason why the deadline became a "dead-range". It should've been all-or-nothing, and that's what it was intended to be.

      --
      Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
    2. Re:Once again... BFD by Who+Is+The+Drizzle · · Score: 3, Funny

      But...but...but they might miss American Idol, The Bachelor or Dancing With The Stars!!!!

    3. Re:Once again... BFD by PeanutButterBreath · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why the heck are we getting a story posted on this almost daily? Who cares?

      WTF? This is like Y2K, except TV is actually important!

    4. Re:Once again... BFD by bcong · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

    5. Re:Once again... BFD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      But...but...but they might miss American Idol, The Bachelor or Dancing With The Stars!!!!

      You obviously missed the part where he said

      Anyone with half a brain will be fine

    6. Re:Once again... BFD by Niris · · Score: 2, Funny

      Survival of the fittest? Hrm. I find something funny in keeping a television signal in the home making someone more fit.

    7. Re:Once again... BFD by Gilmoure · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ah, that explains that startrek.tv usenet site.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    8. Re:Once again... BFD by hurfy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even tho that has nothing to do with reality?

      If they didn't get one yet, they are screwed anyway...well unless the CW was the only* station here that you wanted to receive tomorrow! Can even the half-brains watch that station and only that station all day ?!?

      I am confused as to why they made it more confusing.....

      *Disregarding Ion television which appears to be on a low-power transmitter.

    9. Re:Once again... BFD by camperdave · · Score: 5, Funny

      A TV (or television) is like a computer monitor, except that it doesn't need to be plugged into a computer to display a video signal. It uses a radio link to connect to a wireless access point, kind of like bluetooth or wifi, except the link is only one way, and the access point may be many kilometres away. In fact, the same signal is sent to many TVs simultaneously, in much the same way that a broadcast frame is seen by all of the computers on a LAN. They actually call the television signal a "broadcast". Everybody sees the same stream at the same time. TVs have no facility to back up and replay the video stream. It cannot be paused, either.

      Since the wireless link is a simplex link, everyone is stuck receiving the same video signal. A TV viewer is bound by the scheduling and content choices made by a person called a program director who works at the broadcast facility. In order to alleviate this obvious problem, "channels" were introduced. Each channel streams a different video stream. However, due to the expense of the transmitting equipment and the fact that they are all using the same transmission medium (the so called aether), only a handful of channels exist. Until recently, these video streams were transmitted using an analog signal. As such they were plagued with interference, crosstalk, etc.

      To combat these obvious defficiencies, many places started streaming the video to the TV over a shared wire. This eliminated most of the interference issues, and allowed for more video stream channels to be sent to the television. Over time, the TVs became more like computers. The monitor was connected to a box which contained a hard drive, allowing video streams to be recorded and played on demand. The signals were transmitted digitally, which allowed for error correction, and it allowed for true internet connectivity and two way communication. Most people still use them only for simple video streaming, however. There are also quite a few people who (probably for quaint religeous reasons), still rely on the analog wireless broadcasts to receive their pre-scheduled, pre-chosen video stream.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    10. Re:Once again... BFD by Dallas+Caley · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously, we've got more important things to worry about in this country that weather people can watch their soaps on channel 4. Why are we wasting money on this.

      Here's a wake up call to all those who are watching regular TV and can't afford to get a box. Perhaps they should stop watching so much TV and get a real job

    11. Re:Once again... BFD by edittard · · Score: 4, Funny

      Perhaps they should stop watching so much TV and get a real job

      I'm a television monitor/researcher, you insensitive clod!

      --
      At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
    12. Re:Once again... BFD by NevermindPhreak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Forgetting about the elderly?

    13. Re:Once again... BFD by Dallas+Caley · · Score: 5, Funny

      My apologies, i'm a vodka and olives taste tester so i completely understand.

    14. Re:Once again... BFD by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are also quite a few people who (probably for quaint religeous reasons), still rely on the analog wireless broadcasts to receive their pre-scheduled, pre-chosen video stream.

      Everyone I know who watches OTA TV does it by and large for one reason: It's free.

      Yes, you have to watch ads, nothing is free, blah blah blah, but the fact remains that once they've bought the set and the antenna they don't have to pay to watch TV. In my jurisdiction, basic cable is nearly $450 per year. Some people just choose to spend that $450 elsewhere.

    15. Re:Once again... BFD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The part he nailed on the head was that it's the networks who care, not the majority of the consumers. If the networks don't have anyone to watch their ads, they won't have anyone to buy ad space.

    16. Re:Once again... BFD by bitrex · · Score: 5, Funny

      There are also quite a few people who (probably for quaint religeous reasons), still rely on the analog wireless broadcasts to receive their pre-scheduled, pre-chosen video stream.

      Analog television signals can convey the subtle nuances of a scene in a way that the average wood-eyed viewer could never notice, but that a trained videophile such as myself can spot like night and day. Also, cathode-ray tubes impart a dynamic character and emphasis to the even-numbered harmonics that impart a "holographic" like quality to the images, while still retaining the overall linearity of sweep azimuth and elevation granted by the intrinsic behavior of electrons given thermal energy by a heated cathode with a low work-function and accelerated inside a synchronized magnetic or electrostatic field. You'd never catch me watching digital TV on some cheap LCD display, buddy! Even an idiot can tell that the greens are heavily excoriated and taste entirely wrong.

    17. Re:Once again... BFD by ElectricRook · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think someone has unplugged the anode while touching a ground...

      --
      - High Tech workers, please say NO to Union Carpenters, their Union sees fit to control our compensation.
    18. Re:Once again... BFD by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Funny

      Anyone else, well, maybe there are survival of the fittest selection standards still hitting us, on occasion.

      Yes! Those people who are too stupid to figure out how to get out TVs to work will instead resort to sexual activity for recreation, and are more likely to be too stupid to use birth control, and eventually...

      um... I think I see a problem here.

    19. Re:Once again... BFD by maxume · · Score: 2, Informative

      You may have to buy your own HD antenna. The good news is that most antennas are HD antennas, and people who are reasonably close to towers will probably be fine with the antennas that they already have.

      People used to dealing with fuzzy analog may be out of luck, or they may need to add a directional UHF antenna (in my area, the company that owns NBC and ABC is going to start simulcasting ABC on the NBC transmitter, so I will likely gain a channel).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    20. Re:Once again... BFD by spinkham · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly. I took about $300, built a mythtv box, and signed up for netflix..
      Ongoing costs for netflix: ~$108 a year.
      So far there's nothing I've wanted to watch I can't get OTA, on Hulu, or on Netflix. And I get to watch it when it's convenient for me... Less money, more convenience.. Not bad IMHO.

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
    21. Re:Once again... BFD by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.
    22. Re:Once again... BFD by MissionAccomplished · · Score: 2, Insightful

      20 bucks for continued free TV? How about you take up a collection for those poor folks who can't afford that...

    23. Re:Once again... BFD by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 2, Funny

      Seriously, we've got more important things to worry about in this country that weather people can watch their soaps on channel 4.

      Yes, spelling for example...

    24. Re:Once again... BFD by nick.ian.k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Here's a wake up call to all those who are watching regular TV and can't afford to get a box. Perhaps they should stop watching so much TV and get a real job.

      Because anyone who can't work such a box into a tight budget obviously hasn't got a real job, right? Because your baseless judgement of other people's situations relative to your own just flat out reign supreme? Here's a wake up call to you and every last fake Libertarian shitbag who modded you insightful: yes, we know you've managed to obtain jobs just good enough to afford a few luxuries, not struggle vary hard, and yet, between all that exalted 80+ hours a week "real job" time, find time to bitch about the failings of the poor and lazy on Slashdot, and tip us off to the truth: you just robbed another lazy sad sack of a position, and if not for you, one more person could've bought the box already, or even cable, and done what you've done here.

    25. Re:Once again... BFD by Nyeerrmm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While I agree with the sentiment, the one serious counter-argument I'd give is that you need to ensure that people are able to receive public safety announcements. TV is much better than radio for dealing with severe weather, because being able to see the weather maps and storm tracks gives you a much better idea of what's going on. Going into tornado season in Oklahoma (where I grew up) without TV would make me a little uncomfortable.

      Recall that we (the people) give the broadcasters the right to use the airwaves in exchange for them providing public services: news, weather, and emergency announcements. We decided these things are important, so its important to make sure their accessible.

      But at the same time, this has been coming for a long time, people should have been able to figure it out by now.

    26. Re:Once again... BFD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      ...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.)

    27. Re:Once again... BFD by ukemike · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why the heck are we getting a story posted on this almost daily? Who cares? I've read the threads, and it's not a big deal. Anyone with half a brain will be fine. Anyone else, well, maybe there are survival of the fittest selection standards still hitting us, on occasion. I don't see that as a bad thing.

      Wrong. EVERYONE without exception will be fine. TV is not a life critical resource. It's not like they are upgrading the electricity and if you don't have the converter box yet then you might freeze to death tonight. This is the boob tube. We're talking about Survivor, Wheel of Fortune, and daytime soap operas.

      I'd say that the people most likely to thrive are those that don't bother with the so called "upgrade" and give up TV altogether. I'm one of those households that they are saying is "unprepared." I haven't bought a converter, I wouldn't get one if they were giving them away. I feel like I am perfectly well prepared.

      I'm repeatedly surprised at how cronic TV junkies are so boring to talk to. Worse, how they are so afraid that they'll be murdered, kidnapped, or attacked by terrorists if they go out their front door.

      Give it up! It's rotting your brain! This is the perfect opportunity. Shred your converter box coupon and read a book to your kids.

      --
      -- QED
    28. Re:Once again... BFD by eleuthero · · Score: 2, Insightful

      rather than spreading vitriol, I think a good number of us are simply amazed that TV has become a necessity so much so that the government (and thereby each taxpayer) has to pay for us all to keep having it--last I checked, the trees and parks of the world still had kids playing in them.

    29. Re:Once again... BFD by ForrestFire439 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you couldn't save up $50 in the time since the transition was announced, perhaps you've got bigger problems than not being able to watch television.

      --
      "Bread and Circuses is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure." --Robert Heinlien
  3. The confusion is part of the Stimulus by dmomo · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is designed to get people off of their couch and out shopping!

    1. Re:The confusion is part of the Stimulus by mweather · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But how will they know what to buy?

    2. Re:The confusion is part of the Stimulus by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      "This is designed to get people off of their couch and out shopping!"

      But, most people don't have money to buy anything....

      I do, however. I was at Sam's club the other day, and surprised to see one of the latest Samsung 52" LCD 120hz flatscreen tv's for like $1789 or thereabouts. Wow..that looked nice, and I need a nice tv for my bedroom. I'll hook it to my mythtv box I'm rebuilding.

      Hey..speaking of mythtv, I've got a question. I'm currently renting, and wanting to go do the mythtv client server route in the house. I was at this point (renting) hoping to avoid running cat5 all over the place. Can wireless work fast enough now for a myth client server system? For HD content? I've got my server with a HDHomerun pulling QAM off the cable, and ATSC over the air...

      I've been seeing dual channel wireless stations going for about $100...not sure what the cards cost. Would this be fast enough to stream content throughout the house? Do any of the dual channel cards work well with current linux drivers?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:The confusion is part of the Stimulus by maino82 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hey..speaking of mythtv, I've got a question. I'm currently renting, and wanting to go do the mythtv client server route in the house. I was at this point (renting) hoping to avoid running cat5 all over the place. Can wireless work fast enough now for a myth client server system? For HD content? I've got my server with a HDHomerun pulling QAM off the cable, and ATSC over the air...

      I used wireless for awhile on a little frontend box that was away from the master backend and it worked fine for SD content. When I switched out my tuner to HD though I started getting some stuttering and then broke down and just decided to figure out how to run a twisted pair to the box. I was using wireless G at the time... don't know if N would be good enough to eliminate the stuttering, but it's possible it might.

    4. Re:The confusion is part of the Stimulus by PIBM · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've tried a N router with a 2x2 link, in the 130mbps reported connection speed, and I still got random stutter with 1080p content, but not with 720p. It might have been environmental issues reducing the bandwidth available, but it's not acceptable anyway.

      I ran 22 gb lines through my house :)

    5. Re:The confusion is part of the Stimulus by Doug+Neal · · Score: 4, Funny

      But how will they know what to buy?

      A DTV box and/or a new TV, obviously.

    6. Re:The confusion is part of the Stimulus by PetriBORG · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I'm trying to do that exact same thing myself, but haven't been able to get it right. There are just so many neighbors running their own wifi that I think it is causing signal degradation.

      Also, the MythVideo plugin *does* not stream, so you have to share (via SMB or NFS) the directory between the Front and Back ends... This makes those sort of files play too slowly as well.

      --
      Pete/Petri "damn, my chainsaw is clogged with 1's and 0's again." --clyde
    7. Re:The confusion is part of the Stimulus by Chabil+Ha' · · Score: 4, Informative

      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
    8. Re:The confusion is part of the Stimulus by LordNimon · · Score: 4, Informative

      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
    9. Re:The confusion is part of the Stimulus by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's easy, whatever Sparky at Best buy tells them to buy.

      He's an expert and those $98.00 HDMI cables have such a clearer picture!!! I'm going back to buy a $980.00 power strip to make my greens greener!

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  4. My biggest problem with all of this... by garcia · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As I have said time and time again, this has been a gigantic clusterfuck of enormous proportions.

    1. The American public should have received a check (not a tax credit, not a credit card looking coupon, etc) for the total sale of the spectrum divided by every single citizen of this nation.

    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.

    3. This was all unnecessary anyway. I don't care about opening up spectrum for other services when I am not directly benefiting in any way, shape or form by the change over. If you are seriously going to tell me that because I now have access to more channels, most of which rarely come in well after spending $20 on a box and $20+ more on rabbit ears or $40+ on a "HD" antenna, then you're wrong.

    Boo on digital TV.

    1. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1. I disagree - the amount per person is too small. It would be like one of those $1.60 checks you get in the mail for some class action settlement you'd rather not have been a member of.

      2 & 3. I'm sorry it didn't work out for you. For me, I got only a few fuzzy channels before with severe ghosting and now I have all the major networks, crystal clear with only occasional drop-outs. I almost never turned on broadcast TV before, and now the picture is good enough to watch hockey. I guess this is very much a YMMV situation.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Good enough to watch hockey?! Does it come with a gun to the back of your head too?

    3. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by afidel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The American public should have received a check (not a tax credit, not a credit card looking coupon, etc) for the total sale of the spectrum divided by every single citizen of this nation.

      How about NO, it costs a hell of a lot of money to print and distribute checks, better they just not charge me as much or give me more back on my rebate check. The cost of the 2008 rebate checks was $84M, personally I'd rather they save that cost and use the money to feed more poor kids or something.

      This was all unnecessary anyway. I don't care about opening up spectrum for other services when I am not directly benefiting in any way, shape or form by the change over.

      How about if your life gets save because first responders are able to talk to one another, is that good enough for you?

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    4. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      LOL. I happen to like hockey :)

      I only used it as an example because it is one of the harder things to watch without a good picture.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    5. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by Gizzmonic · · Score: 5, Informative

      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)
    6. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by CodeBuster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Today, they broke compatibility and they've failed to offer enough to justify it.

      I disagree. The UHF spectrum was simply to valuable for society to continue to allow a few analog TV holdouts to continue squatting on some of the most valuable parts of the EM spectrum for free or minimal cost. Part of the reason why wireless services in the United States are so behind Europe, Japan, and even China is because there are lots of legacy squatters occupying prime pieces of EM spectrum real estate for peanut change. The EM spectrum rights should go to whomever is willing to pay the public the most for them, and nowadays that is wireless telecom companies such as Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint/Nextel not grandma with her Philco black and white analog TV that she has not upgraded since 1964. if the remaining analog TV users wanted to continue using the UHF spectrum, preventing the rest of us who are willing to pay from getting next gen wireless services, then they should have bid against the telecoms in the auction. Analog TV lost because other uses are worth more to more people, plain and simple.

    7. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by Toonol · · Score: 3, Interesting

      1. $13 billion in revenue; that would be around $100 per household. Not a huge amount, but not insignificant.

      2. Yes, YMMV. I get some channels with amazing reception now, and others are now unwatchable. Overall, I would rather have stayed with analog.

    8. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by TheSync · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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

      ATSC-M/H has been developed to allow existing ATSC (8VSB) stations to also deliver signals to moving receivers (M/H means mobile/handheld). It basically throws a ton of FEC on the low-bitrate M/H signal.

    9. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Informative

      If they couldn't get enough to fully compensate the American people for their trouble, then they sold at a loss

      It's not worth sending me a check for $64, only to take it away again on April 15.

      I think that they made the right compromise - they more or less compensated people who were impacted by offering box coupons, they freed up additional spectrum for other uses, and they made some dough in the process.

      Plus, it's a nice reminder of why you don't want government running everything.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    10. Re:My biggest problem with all of this... by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Informative

      The 700 megahertz band is valuable because it propagates a longer distance than the gigahertz bands being used by current cellphones & wireless internet standards, requires less power, and uses a relatively small antenna (1-2 inches). Therefore it is MORE valuable than most of the other sections, for the task desired.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  5. Revolt by evil_aar0n · · Score: 5, Funny

    Frankly, I see something like this - the disruption of TV - as one of very few events that could get people off their butts to do something about their government. Spy on their phone calls? Eh... Take away their American Idol? Riot in the streets.

    --
    Truth, Justice. Or the American Way.
    1. Re:Revolt by bfwebster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you've never read it, go read "The Machine Stops" by E. M. Forster. It was published 100 years ago and still remains remarkably relevant and prescient. ..bruce..

      --
      Bruce F. Webster (brucefwebster.com)
    2. Re:Revolt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Good point. Americans are likely to get extremely angry when [1] they can't watch TV, and [2] the price of gas breaks a psychological barrier, like $2. The problems?

      - What percentage of Americans receive their TV over the air?

      - Congress is currently experiencing approval ratings rivaling David Duke at the Million Man March, yet over 90% of the current Congress was re-elected. I voted 100% anti-incumbent this fall, and maybe Americans should wake the freak up and stop just voting party lines. Congress is well aware of this: they can do anything [and I mean, ANYTHING], and they WILL get re-elected.

    3. Re:Revolt by RudeIota · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Congress is currently experiencing approval ratings rivaling David Duke at the Million Man March

      I'd just like to point out that Congressional approval polls mean nothing.

      Approval ratings taken by random, national samplings will yield nothing but unresearched opinions based on shallow news coverage and your average person's limited understanding even what congress does. I doubt even 50% of the people polled even understand that Congress and Senate are part of the same government branch, let alone have a meaningful, formulated opinion based on actually performance.

      --
      Fact: Everything I say is fiction.
    4. Re:Revolt by jalefkowit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I doubt even 50% of the people polled even understand that Congress and Senate are part of the same government branch...

      Actually, it's the House of Representatives and the Senate that are part of the same government branch, which is collectively referred to as the United States Congress.

      If you're going to be calling half the people in the country idiots, make sure you're in the other half first ;-)

  6. You'll Thank me Later by castorvx · · Score: 4, Funny

    Turn off your phones. Grandma is calling.

    1. Re:You'll Thank me Later by Samschnooks · · Score: 4, Funny

      Grandma has cable - no worries.

  7. Honey... by lymond01 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Honey, signal's out. Could ya give the betamax a kick?

  8. Why keep pushing back the deadline by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If grandma hasn't upgraded the old Philco black & white by now, she probably never will (until forced). As for the coupons, there was no reason they couldn't have extended the coupon program but still kept the original timeline.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Why keep pushing back the deadline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because Obama's advisor for the DTV transition works for a company that benefits from the delay. Until that chunk of the spectrum becomes available to the people who paid for it (mainly Verizon & AT&T), his company has less competition.

    2. Re:Why keep pushing back the deadline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      A company called Sprint.

      Let's name names here.

      Specifically, Sprint's wireless internet service has no competition from Verizon until the DTV transition happens, because Verizon can't use the spectrum they purchased to use for their (superior) service until after the transition happens.

  9. Across the country? by mrphoton · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Across the country" Which country? My analog TV here in the UK is still working fine.

    1. Re:Across the country? by Curtman · · Score: 2, Funny

      My analog TV here in the UK is still working fine.

      All is well with my TV in Canada as well.. Hoorah for the commonwealth. :)

    2. Re:Across the country? by eln · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, since you're reading the news on an American website, and news of the digital TV switch has been all over American news for years, simple deductive reasoning would lead you to believe the country they're talking about is obviously Uzbekistan.

    3. Re:Across the country? by tenco · · Score: 2, Informative

      Germany already switched to digital TV between 2002 and 2008. Austria did this betweenn 2006 and 2007. And in Switzerland the switch was done in 2007. And I don't see why this is a big deal. If there's something which is a clusterfuck, it's analog TV transmission techology.

    4. Re:Across the country? by eln · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's pretty clearly stated in the FAQ

    5. Re:Across the country? by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nobody said US-only. It's a lot simpler to make up a point than to actually make one, isn't it?

    6. Re:Across the country? by Yvan256 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes of course. Assholes from Uzbekistan! You be right, you friend of gloriful nation of Kazakhstan!

    7. Re:Across the country? by MemoryDragon · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree here, I live in austria and the switchover was absolutely painless. We also hat a coupon system where everyone got a 70 Euro coupon or so, you could get the cheapest receivers exactly at that price. Benefits, in many areas the reception now is way better and cheap DVB-T sticks are basically now available in every supermarket.
      Downside, I have yet to see one, except that the national television station lost a lot of viewers (mostly older people were still watching air only, and those are in a huge degree incompetent to tune in their tv) because suddenly they had more stations and could reach the private stations which they never had tuned in.

      But the situation here is differently. Cable is way cheaper and 1/3rd of all households has already a satellite dish because we in the past had only two channels and people started to switch over to cable and satellite asap (in the 70s and 80s) to get out of this misery. The only ones left with a houshold antenna mostly were elderly people!

      I guess it depends on many factors, but overally the situation here is quite good with DTV, the reception definitely is better. The picture quality is good but not that much of a huge jump since PAL never had the issues of NTSC!

  10. so what? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can't be the only one who just bought a DLP projector, hooked it up to an old computer, and configured it to boot to Hulu.com. With a bluetooth mouse, that's video on demand and zero need to get over-the-air broadcasts.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    1. Re:so what? by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can't be the only one who just bought a DLP projector, hooked it up to an old computer, and configured it to boot to Hulu.com.

      Considering that when I point my netboot parameters to hulu.com, I dont get any kind of operating system upload and cant find anything that will boot hulu.com... I tried for hours. there is no BOOTP or TFTP servers running at any of the addresses owned by hulu.com.

      Yes, you are in fact the only one who has.

      You have created an IT miracle and need to be on the face of time magazine by making your computer do the impossible, and boot a website.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  11. You think you've got it bad â¦. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Think five months for the transition is causing confusion? Try five years: the UK is in the process of doing exactly that. It started in 2007 and will not finish until 2012. In addition another, incompatible, type of digital TV will start to be rolled out from next year at the same time.

  12. Once Again... by acrobg · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you do not get your broadcasts over the air (ie you use cable, satellite, U-verse, Verizon, etc.), you are unaffected, period. If you have a television that has a decimal point or a hyphen on your remote in the numbers area (on the remote that came with the TV), you are fine. In this case, you may need to start entering stations in other ways, such as 11.1 as opposed to 11. The ONLY time you need to get a converter box is if you have an analog-only tuner in your television, as most 4:3 tube televisions have, AND you receive your television via antenna.

  13. Re:I agree. by SBacks · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm in a spot were I'm at least 20 miles from any TV broadcast so nothing really comes in well - lots of the blocking, no sound and many times the "no signal" floating box. Oh, my microwave disrupts the TV signal.

    20 miles and you don't get a signal? You either have no concept of distance or you don't actually have an antenna.

  14. Re:I agree. by mattack2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.)

  15. Re:Cable Guy Reference... by kbielefe · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know...the rate of people who abruptly stop watching TV the day they die is alarmingly high. I'm not ready to take that risk.

    --
    This space intentionally left blank.
  16. Re:I agree. by Samschnooks · · Score: 2, Informative
    Indoor rabbit ears and UHF doesn't propagate as well as the longer wave lengths.

    Just as well.There isn't much good on TV these days anyway. Even the PBS stuff is getting kind of shitty - they take an hour to show and explain things that can be done in 10 minutes. Also, some of the nature shows are so depressing: shows loss of habitat, people in Third World countries who believe that Tiger Penis soup will give them a hard-on (when it's their cigarette smoking causing their impotence), catching and slicing off shark fins and throwing the poor things back in the water, poisoning reefs to catch stuff for Western reef aquariums, etc... all stuff that I can't do a damn thing about.

  17. Re:most are the elderly many alone and without fam by Propaganda13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If people haven't heard what to do then they're not watching enough tv. They've had plenty of test blackouts scheduled with numbers to call if they are not receiving a digital signal.

    My 90 year old grandmother was ready 6 months ago. She watches the least amount of TV of anybody I know. I really don't think it's old people that aren't setup.

  18. And so begins the war of the two kings by Sloppy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Confusion Reigns As Analog TV Begins Shutdown

    But also

    As TV stations across the country switch off their analog signals, uncertainty reigns.

    Confusion. Uncertainty. Who reigns, and who is merely the figurehead, its strings pulled by the other?

    Personally, I vote (yeah right, as though we get to vote on this) for Confusion to reign. It evokes images of people running around with their hands up in the air, yelling hysterically. A Reign of Uncertainly merely makes me think of people grimacing, with their eyes darting back and forth.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  19. Re:I managed to survive 10 years without a TV... by KylePflug · · Score: 2, Funny

    You sure the waste of money isn't that he is running a 50-inch rss-reader in his living room?

  20. I watched two of my local ones blink out by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...it was actually kind of entertaining. The station that stopped last night had some fun and went old-school. They announced the end of the broadcast day (for good), played the national anthem over patriotic images of the flag.

    After that, they put up the old Indian Head test pattern and audio tone for a couple of minutes. At the stroke of midnight, it cut to static. It was just like nightly sign-offs when I was a little kid, and it almost made me misty-eyed.

    The one that went out this afternoon showed a bunch of snippets from the past 50 years, then they showed a live coverage of one of their engineers out in the transmitter shack pushing the "OFF" button. The instant cut to static was good for a laugh.

    1. Re:I watched two of my local ones blink out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      After that, they put up the old Indian Head test pattern and audio tone for a couple of minutes. At the stroke of midnight, it cut to static.

      Everything OK at your place? Chairs not stacking themselves? Little girls not sliding across the kitchen? Kids not getting eaten by trees?

      My thoughts are with you.

    2. Re:I watched two of my local ones blink out by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Informative

      >>>The station that stopped last night had some fun and went old-school.

      I too watched my stations switch-off their analog, but it was anticlimatic. PBS33 in Harrisburg simply turned-off their transmitter during the mid-morning. FOX45 in Baltimore blanked-out for half a minute, and then started playing a 5-minute loop explaining how to buy and hookup a DTV box. CW15 in York displayed a 30-second card that said, "We will now be ending our analog broadcast and transitioning to full digital." I'm hoping the June 12 switchoff will be more dramatic.

      >>>It was just like nightly sign-offs when I was a little kid, and it almost made me misty-eyed.

      Yeah stations rarely turnoff anymore. Now they sell half-hour blocks of commercials to pay the bills. There are still some smaller markets like Binghamton New York where the stations turn-off between 2 and 6am. It felt odd to have no television in the middle of the night.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  21. Bender said it best by Locke2005 · · Score: 3, Informative
    "Have You Ever Tried Simply Turning off the TV, Sitting down with Your Children, and Hitting Them?"

    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.
    1. Re:Bender said it best by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 3, Informative

      ``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.''

      Yeah. And piracy is the most effective way to combat global warming.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  22. Botched? by DannyO152 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who with any perceptive acuity and fundamental understanding of economics thought that everyone would pay more to continue to see free television? Especially when the recession train was in sight?

    The Congress and FCC? Well, there you go.

  23. The scrolling text on my screen will be over soon by theurge14 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Over 12 months of wall-to-wall "PLEASE UPGRADE YOUR TELEVISION BY FEBRUARY 17, 2009!" covering the entire bottom of my screen.

    If you haven't seen that by now and made plans you deserve to have your TV dropped on your head.

  24. Wish I were living in Fargo, ND in February by smchris · · Score: 3, Interesting

    According to the spreadsheet that was compiled it looks like most or all their stations said "screw it" and converted en masse. Where I am, only a couple rerun stations went for it.

  25. Oh yeah... It is time for action by Shivetya · · Score: 3, Insightful

    After this wonder demonstration of government incompetence I say let us let them manage our Health Care and Health Care records!

    At least we know they are demonstrably bad at most of what they do, so we won't have higher than normal expectations.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  26. Duh... by Groggnrath · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Here's a thought, when you make a plan...stick to it.

    The few people who aren't ready for the digital conversion now will likely fail to be ready by June.

  27. Re:most are the elderly many alone and without fam by Dynedain · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I agree... I'm so tired of the "old people don't know what's going on...." canard. My grandmother has asked me about it and knew it was coming, and she doesn't even OWN a TV.

    --
    I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
  28. Re:Oh yeah... It is time for action by PunditGuy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    OMG incompetent guvmunt can't do nuthin right, right?

    I'm so sick of this argument, especially as it relates to health care. We pay more and get less in return than the citizens in dozens of other countries. The difference? People in other countries ceded some and varying levels of control of health care -- a basic human necessity -- to an entity without a profit motive.

    No amount of anecdotal "waiting lists" or complaints about phantom lawsuits driving up costs can change the objective fact, which is that we're being ripped off by the existing private system. It has failed to expand the reach of care, to control costs or to improve the health of the nation. Yet we continue to fall for idiotic "government can't do anything right" arguments despite all the real-world examples of governments that are succeeding in keeping their populations healthy while spending less per capita.

  29. Last one to leave-- turn out the lights... by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Finance has crashed, housing has crashed, oil is crashing, retail is crashing, now here begins the media. Maybe now I can get some peace and quiet.

  30. Re:Cable Guy Reference... by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wapner. 12 minutes to Wapner. Must watch Wapner. People's Court. Eight minutes to Wapner. - We got eight minutes to Wapner.

  31. Some can't wait any longer by tcgroat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Colorado PBS affiliate KBDI can't delay. Their analog transmitting antenna was badly damaged, and it's not worth the cost to fix it for a few more months' service even if they had the money (and like most PBS stations, they don't have much to spend). Besides that, repairs on that mountain really should wait until the weather improves--which isn't likely until May. Such is life when the antenna is at 11,500 feet!

  32. Re:I'm just glad to see by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2, Funny

    And while most people know that you don't have to go HDTV for digital, I doubt many retailers are losing much sleep over customers buying new sets because they don't know any better.

    I don't think there's anyone who believes you need HDTV for digital.

    I do think there are a fair number of guys who've told their wives this, to justify the HDTV that they'll be watching the NFL, NBA, MLB on in the coming years.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  33. the near-sighted geek by westlake · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Seriously, we've got more important things to worry about in this country that weather people can watch their soaps on channel 4. Why are we wasting money on this.

    Because it affects our most isolated and vulnerable populations. the elderly, the poor, and the disabled.

    Look around you.

    Find out where these people live.

    How these people live.

    Four hours spent on a rural bus run can be very educational.

    The third-rate nursing homes.

    The group homes and apartments built on barren agricultural lots five miles from the nearest traffic light.

    The tenant houses and run-down trailer parks you never gave a thought to.

    $90 a month as a personal allowance.

    Out of which will come your co-pays for therapy and drugs and blood work.

    Capped at perhaps $300/yr.

    Life-Line phone service at 10 cents a minute.

    1. Re:the near-sighted geek by troll8901 · · Score: 2, Funny

      $90 a month as a personal allowance.
      Out of which will come your co-pays for therapy and drugs and blood work.

      That's depressing.

      Oh well, back to my TV. I've only watched 3 hours out of my daily 8 hours scheduled. Let's see what's on...

  34. Rescan Your TV or Converter Box by batteryman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Some stations have the option to go back to their old channel as a digital station. That means that these stations will be giving up their second channel that they have been using as their digital channel. Here in the Los Angeles area the following channels will go back to their original channel. 7, 9, 11, 13, 18, 28 & 34. The rest will remain on their second channel while their analog channel goes dark. I should call some of the stations like channel 5 to see if they will be changing their logo, since their second channel that they have been using is 31.

    Make sure that when the big transition day comes, that you perform a channel scan on your TV or converter box. That way you will be able to view the channels that have made the change.

    Channels assigned for Los Angeles:
    7, 9, 11, 13, *28, 31, 34, 36, *41, 42, 43

    Here are some documents to look at from the FCC.

    DTV Assignments
    http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-138A1.pdf

    DTV Assignments Appendix B
    http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-138A2.pdf