HDTV: Boon, or ripoff?

[gadgetere]

There are alot of people who don't want "HD", but we're being forced. Most of my TV "watching" is mobile; starting February I will never have TV again away from home, and no TV at home in an emergency.

Don't be fooled; there is no "changeover"; digital is broadcasting NOW --- all that happens February is analog shuts off; then prepare to pay, and pay, and pay.

Only 5 "benefits" are offered, and have no value to most; the costs are considerable. And the biggest offense, is this country is not supposed to be a "dictatorship". No one is asking us, no one is giving us a choice.

Please visit the website, and view the "cost/benefit discussion". Even if you LOVE digital, understand they're lying to us, and please sign the petition to stop the "ripoff". www.stophdtv.org

This is not "spam"; it's a grass-roots effort by people who have little money, no venue, and no other options; especially not enough funds to buy all new TV equipment they don't need, don't want, and shouldn't have to buy.

Congress is not the government; the FCC is not the government; WE are the government, and we're being completely "disenfranchised".

They are supposed to represent us; we tell THEM what to do, they do not tell us "you HAVE to get a box". BTW, most households will need 6-8 boxes, one for each TV and vcr/dvdr.

I look forward to your ideas; please understand the petition on the website is only asking for signatures, for the sake of those who want "portable TV", and for those of limited income (especially Seniors, Retirees, Single-Parents, Fixed-Income, etcetera).

[AchillesRising]

I believe one can apply for a voucher to get a digital to analog converter.

[waynevan]

What I don't understand, is why the FCC even cares. Are analog signals evil or something? Do they want the bandwidths for something else? I've pretty much ignored this entire issue because I don't think it effects me in any direct way whatsoever.

[Gray]

"Stop HDTV'?

Talking about ****ing into a hurricane! What a joke.

[Gray]

What I don't understand, is why the FCC even cares. Are analog signals evil or something? Do they want the bandwidths for something else? I've pretty much ignored this entire issue because I don't think it effects me in any direct way whatsoever.

Analog is a bandwidth hog.

The spectrum that is leased out will have much more available when analog becomes digital. It will become a tiny slice and the rest will be leased out for billions of dollars.

New services will become available and old one will become better.

[waynevan]

Analog is a bandwidth hog.

The spectrum that is leased out will have much more available when analog becomes digital. It will become a tiny slice and the rest will be leased out for billions of dollars.

New services will become available and old one will become better.

Like maybe dirt cheap broadband internet over the airwaves or something?

Anyhow, billions of dollars explains it just fine. Follow the money and all that ya know.......

[Gray]

Like maybe dirt cheap broadband internet over the airwaves or something?

Anyhow, billions of dollars explains it just fine. Follow the money and all that ya know.......

To anyone here paying attention..if you buy a HDTV make sure it has a "QAM" tuner.


It comes in handy for getting lots of free cable.

[NCRedState]

Progress, technology....

[aggies for conservatism]

I love my HDTV, I'm actually wanting the new Blackberry that has HDTV:drool:

[Gray]

I love my HDTV, I'm actually wanting the new Blackberry that has HDTV:drool:

What possible use could such a small screen have with HD?

[curtis123]

There are alot of people who don't want "HD", but we're being forced. Most of my TV "watching" is mobile; starting February I will never have TV again away from home, and no TV at home in an emergency.

Don't be fooled; there is no "changeover"; digital is broadcasting NOW --- all that happens February is analog shuts off; then prepare to pay, and pay, and pay.

Only 5 "benefits" are offered, and have no value to most; the costs are considerable. And the biggest offense, is this country is not supposed to be a "dictatorship". No one is asking us, no one is giving us a choice.

Please visit the website, and view the "cost/benefit discussion". Even if you LOVE digital, understand they're lying to us, and please sign the petition to stop the "ripoff". www.stophdtv.org

This is not "spam"; it's a grass-roots effort by people who have little money, no venue, and no other options; especially not enough funds to buy all new TV equipment they don't need, don't want, and shouldn't have to buy.

Congress is not the government; the FCC is not the government; WE are the government, and we're being completely "disenfranchised".

They are supposed to represent us; we tell THEM what to do, they do not tell us "you HAVE to get a box". BTW, most households will need 6-8 boxes, one for each TV and vcr/dvdr.

I look forward to your ideas; please understand the petition on the website is only asking for signatures, for the sake of those who want "portable TV", and for those of limited income (especially Seniors, Retirees, Single-Parents, Fixed-Income, etcetera).

You're not being forced to HD, you're being forced to recieve a digital signal, rather than analog. You can get a converter for your tv, and get a coupon from the feds to get it.

The govt. is kicking tv stations off their regular frequencies, because it's a huge amount of bandwidth on the spectrum, and they can sell the bandwidth to other industries and make money, rather than just have the public benefit from it.

They can't wait to auction it off.

[chip]

What possible use could such a small screen have with HD?

Zero.

[gadgetere]

Yes I know the frequency "hogging" is less; but the use is far less too. Surely no one likes the whole HOUR of commercials now in a two-hour movie? And news --- 2 minutes of news, 5 of commercials. It's an "unfunded mandate", stations have to struggle to pay for it themselves. So more commercials.

There will be NO portable TV, no television in an emergency. The whole city here lost power last December (ice storm, 95% without electricity for 1-3 weeks; mine was off 1.5). We don't need to keep informed in a storm, flood, tornado (we have lots), earthquake?

Wait until the technology WORKS, before forcing the format. The "portable HD sets" are almost a foot wide, run for only an HOUR on a charge, and a couple times a year you'll have to fork over a HUNDRED BUCKS for a new lithium battery.

"Digital" has been compared to "8-track"; apples and oranges, 8-track is not a RECEIVER. How will we get news and other info? Don't count on radio being around --- they're trying to push HD-RADIO.

The reason everyone should be rushing to sign the petition, is that this country isn't supposed to be a DICTATORSHIP. You're right, "Gray", it's all about money.

And their website is a little mis-named; what they're really trying to accomplish is to just repeal the "shutoff".

OH --- this december all the local stations are going to MINIMUM POWER; so we likely won't be able to watch anything anyway.

"Reduced power", because "we need to prepare for the changeover" --- they're lying; the digital channels are on NOW, there is no changeover, the only thing that will happen is analog will shut off.

Analog is better than digital in so many ways; sound is better (hi-fi, surround, DBX-encrypted, no "digital distortion"); picture easier to watch (no cut-off heads; best theater in town is I-Max, it's full screen).

It's not too late; one stroke of a pen, and the shutoff is repealed. Wish they could get a million signatures; then maybe the place wouldn't be such a dictatorship. ...we can hope...

[Gray]

Yes I know the frequency "hogging" is less; but the use is far less too. Surely no one likes the whole HOUR of commercials now in a two-hour movie? And news --- 2 minutes of news, 5 of commercials. It's an "unfunded mandate", stations have to struggle to pay for it themselves. So more commercials.

There will be NO portable TV, no television in an emergency. The whole city here lost power last December (ice storm, 95% without electricity for 1-3 weeks; mine was off 1.5). We don't need to keep informed in a storm, flood, tornado (we have lots), earthquake?

Wait until the technology WORKS, before forcing the format. The "portable HD sets" are almost a foot wide, run for only an HOUR on a charge, and a couple times a year you'll have to fork over a HUNDRED BUCKS for a new lithium battery.

"Digital" has been compared to "8-track"; apples and oranges, 8-track is not a RECEIVER. How will we get news and other info? Don't count on radio being around --- they're trying to push HD-RADIO.

The reason everyone should be rushing to sign the petition, is that this country isn't supposed to be a DICTATORSHIP. You're right, "Gray", it's all about money.

And their website is a little mis-named; what they're really trying to accomplish is to just repeal the "shutoff".

OH --- this december all the local stations are going to MINIMUM POWER; so we likely won't be able to watch anything anyway.

"Reduced power", because "we need to prepare for the changeover" --- they're lying; the digital channels are on NOW, there is no changeover, the only thing that will happen is analog will shut off.

Analog is better than digital in so many ways; sound is better (hi-fi, surround, DBX-encrypted, no "digital distortion"); picture easier to watch (no cut-off heads; best theater in town is I-Max, it's full screen).

It's not too late; one stroke of a pen, and the shutoff is repealed. Wish they could get a million signatures; then maybe the place wouldn't be such a dictatorship. ...we can hope...

Maybe on some other planet. This is now beyond the point of no return. It is now market driven and you and no one else are going to stop millions of people from having this.

Every new technology brings out the "Flat-Earthers".. The doom-sayers and the kooks.

[RedheadedTexan]

Something else to remember about digital. You have to have enough signal strength to watch. If the signal strength is to weak then you get no sound or picture. At least with analog you can still watch a fuzzy picture.

[Gray]

At least with HD and if it has a QAM tuner you get tons of free channels.

[woodard]

There will be NO portable TV, no television in an emergency.

False. I already have a 12-volt portable 15" LCD with an ATSC tuner. There is also a battery powered D/A converter you can connect to your less-portable tv.


ETA: You're from Oklahoma? We were without power 12 days during the storm.

[Silk]

At least with HD and if it has a QAM tuner you get tons of free channels.

Okay, I'm going to look real stupid for asking this, but here goes: can you get a QAM tuner seperately or does it have to be built into a HDTV?

[Gray]

Okay, I'm going to look real stupid for asking this, but here goes: can you get a QAM tuner seperately or does it have to be built into a HDTV?

Not stupid at all. It is built in.

..and they sell cards for your computer.

If you do buy an HDTV get one with the QAM tuner and a PC input.

Do not get one without the PC input. My monitor is 36".

[Talk2Bill]

i have noticed several programs that are formatted for the wide screen. but they do not have the bars on the top and bottom....noooo...they just shave off the edges so in some shots 1/2 of the actors faces are cut off, and in others the text on the screen is cut off...

[gadgetere]

False. I already have a 12-volt portable 15" LCD with an ATSC tuner. There is also a battery powered D/A converter you can connect to your less-portable tv.The "battery-powered" one I've heard about, runs on 6 "D" sized batteries; this is not portable.
ETA: You're from Oklahoma? We were without power 12 days during the storm.Yup. Branches ripped the pole off my house, took me an extra few days to get it connected.

[gadgetere]

Something else to remember about digital. You have to have enough signal strength to watch. If the signal strength is to weak then you get no sound or picture. At least with analog you can still watch a fuzzy picture.Exactly --- that point is on the website.

The "petition" is only to delay the shutoff of analog; there is no reason for the public not to get on board with the petition. In a free society sales should not be forced; especially when they're still predicting $5 gas next year. :sigh:

[gadgetere]

Maybe on some other planet. This is now beyond the point of no return. It is now market driven and you and no one else are going to stop millions of people from having this.

Every new technology brings out the "Flat-Earthers".. The doom-sayers and the kooks.You're missing the point. No one's calling for "shutoff of digital" (though I think they say on the site that would get rid of the extra commercials); we just shouldn't be requiring those who don't have much funds, to spend money on TV equipment they don't want, rather than on other luxuries like food and medicine...

And there still will be no pocket TV's, for probably a decade. A couple of my sets, are "wristwatch" units (back when I had some extra cash).

I can't see the increased resolution from my couch, prefer full screen, like weak distant stations (as opposed to "not"), analog sound is BETTER --- this is a decrease in function.

There is no good reason to shut off analog this soon.

[Gray]

You're missing the point. No one's calling for "shutoff of digital" (though I think they say on the site that would get rid of the extra commercials); we just shouldn't be requiring those who don't have much funds, to spend money on TV equipment they don't want, rather than on other luxuries like food and medicine...

And there still will be no pocket TV's, for probably a decade. A couple of my sets, are "wristwatch" units (back when I had some extra cash).

I can't see the increased resolution from my couch, prefer full screen, like weak distant stations (as opposed to "not"), analog sound is BETTER --- this is a decrease in function.

There is no good reason to shut off analog this soon.

Tough.

[FactHunter]

Analog is better than digital in so many ways; sound is better (hi-fi, surround, DBX-encrypted, no "digital distortion"); picture easier to watch (no cut-off heads; best theater in town is I-Max, it's full screen).


Even ignoring the errors in the rest of your posts - digital vs. HD, the fact that no, not all analog is being shut off, the lack of knowledge regarding the virtually free converters - the above is just flat out wrong.

For example, you mention "digital distortion" of all things! You can go back to listening to impulse-noise infected, bandwidth-limited, phase-distorted, dynamic range limited, other-distorted vinyl if you want, but digital audio is more faithful to the master by an order of magnitude or more, and that's the simple fact.

[woodard]

The "battery-powered" one I've heard about, runs on 6 "D" sized batteries; this is not portable.
Yup. Branches ripped the pole off my house, took me an extra few days to get it connected.

I lost all my trees. Luckily, unlike some of my neighbors, they missed my pick-up and, more important, my truck, when they came down.

Here's the point. TV is radio. Analog radio frequencies are so overcrowded, we're running out of frequencies for emergency services and commercial 2-way. The bandwidth is needed.
BTW. Why the freak-out now? It isn't new. The legislation was signed into law in February of 2006 and the plan was announced about 2 years earlier.

[grapabeaux]

I'm one of those who eschewed cable and have an old TV, so I did in fact get my coupon and bought a converter and a stronger antenna.

I will say that when the picture is in, the quality is much better. However, it is an all-or-nothing deal with reception. Instead of a little bit of snow on your screen, you get pixillation of images and no sound at all when the reception is weak. And on windy or stormy nights, reception becomes weak.

In the commercials I see announcing/forewarning about the death of analog, the script actually says, "In fact, digital is so good, all stations are required to use it by February 2009". That's rather annoying, using government command for the change as a substitute for consumer demand.

[RedheadedTexan]

New tech will come out to support this. I would not be surprised to see boxes come out that operate like our DVRs do now. They will have the ability to record on more than one channel like our DVRs do now. Someone will eventually come out with good portables that will pick up the HD TV signals. Of course there will be the drawbacks of shorter ranges. I do agree however that going fully digital in Feb is to soon. They need to wait at least 5 more years so more people have time to buy the new TVs as they come down in price. When the analog is cut off in Feb there will be a lot of very upset people. Being forced to get cable or dish is not nice at all.

[grapabeaux]

I don't think that's the case come February. The only people who will see a difference in February are those people who don't have cable or satellite, and who haven't bought a TV in the past few years, and who haven't purchased a converter.

And I don't know if this is showing up on cable/satellite broadcasts, but a scroll runs on my TV every couple of nights during shows warning of the upcoming change, in addition to the commercials. PBS runs half-hour programs showing how to make the changes. The only people who wouldn't be aware of the change are people who don't watch TV at all.

Even without cable or satellite, new TVs are supposed to be equipped for DTV, so they'll be able to get their broadcast stations.

[waynevan]

I don't think that's the case come February. The only people who will see a difference in February are those people who don't have cable or satellite, and who haven't bought a TV in the past few years, and who haven't purchased a converter.

And I don't know if this is showing up on cable/satellite broadcasts, but a scroll runs on my TV every couple of nights during shows warning of the upcoming change, in addition to the commercials. PBS runs half-hour programs showing how to make the changes. The only people who wouldn't be aware of the change are people who don't watch TV at all.

Even without cable or satellite, new TVs are supposed to be equipped for DTV, so they'll be able to get their broadcast stations.

The only show I've ever seen that message on is Jeopardy.

[gadgetere]

New tech will come out to support this. I would not be surprised to see boxes come out that operate like our DVRs do now. They will have the ability to record on more than one channel like our DVRs do now. Someone will eventually come out with good portables that will pick up the HD TV signals.That's right --- but as you said, "WILL come out", "WILL have the ability". As the website says, we don't have the technology to support shut-off, now. Of course there will be the drawbacks of shorter ranges. I do agree however that going fully digital in Feb is to soon. They need to wait at least 5 more years so more people have time to buy the new TVs as they come down in price. When the analog is cut off in Feb there will be a lot of very upset people. Being forced to get cable or dish is not nice at all.I agree; if I don't have hundreds to buy a new TV, I certainly can't afford subscription. Why is it OK in America that we're not given a choice?

And no one's addressing the fact that gas is relatively cheap now, but they're still predicting $5 in a year. As more and more lose jobs and face skyrocketting grocery prices, why isn't this being protested more? I think it's because many don't realize the problems.

Let's hope those people are upset enough to GET the additional 10 years (more realistic than 5)...

[FidelisAdMortem]

You can watch premium tv for free online. Theres a thing called TVU where you can watch premium channels, like sports on regular and sporting events on pay per view for free. There are also other programs online as well that allow you to watch tv for free that you would otherwise have to pay for.

Its up to you the individual to seek them out if you truly feel you are being ripped off.

[gadgetere]

PBS runs half-hour programs showing how to make the changes.Yeah, and the corporate sponsors for those shows are Samsung and Bestbuy. It's a "cash cow" for manufacturers and retailers.

[gadgetere]

Tough.This I just don't get; if something doesn't affect you one way or the other, why be adversarial? I mean you no disrespect, Gray, but I'm glad that in American history our predecessors were not as selfish. Forgive me if I've offended you; I just don't understand a lack of concern for the low-budgeted like single parents, seniors, retirees, jobless, etcetera...

[gadgetere]

You can watch premium tv for free online. Theres a thing called TVU where you can watch premium channels, like sports on regular and sporting events on pay per view for free. There are also other programs online as well that allow you to watch tv for free that you would otherwise have to pay for.

Its up to you the individual to seek them out if you truly feel you are being ripped off.I have dialup, I can afford $5 per month; can't afford high-speed. Dialup cannot receive video; unless I want to wait hours for each download.

The question remains, in a free society (like we're supposed to be), how can this be forced, rather than as Grapabeaux said "consumer-driven"?

[gadgetere]

I lost all my trees. Luckily, unlike some of my neighbors, they missed my pick-up and, more important, my truck, when they came down.One of my cars was not so lucky; but all it received, was a nicked roof and smashed side window.
Here's the point. TV is radio. Analog radio frequencies are so overcrowded, we're running out of frequencies for emergency services and commercial 2-way. The bandwidth is needed.What emergency services? The way I understand it, companies are not lining up to buy the frequencies; so they came out with "need-for-emergency-services". Police fire and ambulance already HAVE channels, don't they?

It's still not too late; one stroke of a pen, and the shut-off is repealed. The benefit of such a delay far outweighs any reason not to...

[AchillesRising]

One of my cars was not so lucky; but all it received, was a nicked roof and smashed side window.
What emergency services? The way I understand it, companies are not lining up to buy the frequencies; so they came out with "need-for-emergency-services". Police fire and ambulance already HAVE channels, don't they?

It's still not too late; one stroke of a pen, and the shut-off is repealed. The benefit of such a delay far outweighs any reason not to...


https://www.dtv2009.gov/ApplyCoupon.aspx

you can apply 2 per household

[FidelisAdMortem]

I have dialup, I can afford $5 per month; can't afford high-speed. Dialup cannot receive video; unless I want to wait hours for each download.

The question remains, in a free society (like we're supposed to be), how can this be forced, rather than as Grapabeaux said "consumer-driven"?

Dude, if you cant even afford a cable hookup, you shouldn't even be on this messageboard, you should be depressed somewhere hitting the bottle, boozing it up at the life you live.

[AeroEngineer]

One of my cars was not so lucky; but all it received, was a nicked roof and smashed side window.
What emergency services? The way I understand it, companies are not lining up to buy the frequencies; so they came out with "need-for-emergency-services". Police fire and ambulance already HAVE channels, don't they?

It's still not too late; one stroke of a pen, and the shut-off is repealed. The benefit of such a delay far outweighs any reason not to...

Nowadays EVERYTHING uses radio waves. Your TV, cell phone, wireless mouse, keyless entry on your car...


Analogue transmission uses more of the frequency range than it needs to and it often leaches over into other signals and causes interference.

We've done a format switch before with cell phone signals, and its not that big of a deal. People have had YEARS to prepare for the transition and in my opinion, the government has been more than accommodating with coupons and advertising.

[gdoane]

You're missing the point. No one's calling for "shutoff of digital" (though I think they say on the site that would get rid of the extra commercials); we just shouldn't be requiring those who don't have much funds, to spend money on TV equipment they don't want, rather than on other luxuries like food and medicine...

And there still will be no pocket TV's, for probably a decade. A couple of my sets, are "wristwatch" units (back when I had some extra cash).

I can't see the increased resolution from my couch, prefer full screen, like weak distant stations (as opposed to "not"), analog sound is BETTER --- this is a decrease in function.

There is no good reason to shut off analog this soon.

Nobody is required to spend a dime on TV equipment. There's always the option of going without TV like most American homes were before 1960.

Full-Screen TV sucks. The NTSC (Never The Same Color) standard sucks. It's 6 MHz of bandwidth for cripe's sake! The entire AM radio broadcast band from 535 KHz to 1700 KHz is only 1.2 MHz wide. You could fit the entire AM Broadcast band into one Analog TV station bandwith FIVE TIMES OVER!!

I work on public safety radio systems all the time. I know 911 dispatch centers as well as anyone could and even with most public safety agencies using trunked radio systems and going narrowband we're still getting killed on a lack of frequencies.

Here's the deal: If you add citizens requiring services, then you have to add cops, you have to add firemen, you have to add public works and when you add all of those, you have to add dispatchers. When you add dispatchers, you have to add channels for them to do their jobs on.

We are flat out of channels. The demand to add services for the added population is at a breaking point and somebody's Ox is going to have to be gored.

A 6 MHz per station bandwidth Ox. Hasta La Vista, NTSC.

Everybody else has already had to sacrifice. FM radio services have already been narrowbanded from 25 KHz channelization to 12.5 KHz channelization. Rebanding the 800 MHz spectrum is already in progress. Satcom has already gone digital for all services.

The NTSC Ox is getting gored and it's about time. No other radio service takes up even half of the NTSC TV allocations.

The Sonet Microwaves I work with could pack 84 T-1's into a single NTSC channel. NTSC is wasteful. It's throwing away resources we dearly need.

If anybody should understand that you don't go wasting your resources, it should be the poor and people on limited incomes. My grandmother lived through the Great Depression and she wouldn't even throw out a bread wrapper. She'd weave them into plastic rugs. She lived by "waste not, want not" as a rule.

NTSC is a waster. There is no reason why, in the 21st Century, that we should have such a resource hog. We're wasting resources now. The time to stop wasting resources is now.

If the poor say "waste resources anyway!" then they must not understand poverty. Poor people don't want to see waste.

[imdwlaw]

I don't know the particulars of this, but, when something (that is a staple) is taken away and your more or less forced to give it up for the new, I don't like it.
Again, forgive my ignorance, but does it have to be one or the other?

[gdoane]

I don't know the particulars of this, but, when something (that is a staple) is taken away and your more or less forced to give it up for the new, I don't like it.
Again, forgive my ignorance, but does it have to be one or the other?

Yep, it pretty much does.

Let's say your city is growing and everybody has wells for clean water and outhouses for sewage. It's a nice first plan but when things grow, it's not sustainable. So there's a plan "b". Water systems and city sewage works better.

This is just plan "b". TV has been around for 60 years and technology has changed but the NTSC standard hasn't much. Growth has happened and it's not sustainable.

There's no reasonable argument to be had that technology isn't better now than it was when the standard was created. We've gotten better sewers but we still don't have better TV. What's wrong with that picture?

[imdwlaw]

Yep, it pretty much does.

Let's say your city is growing and everybody has wells for clean water and outhouses for sewage. It's a nice first plan but when things grow, it's not sustainable. So there's a plan "b". Water systems and city sewage works better.

This is just plan "b". TV has been around for 60 years and technology has changed but the NTSC standard hasn't much. Growth has happened and it's not sustainable.

There's no reasonable argument to be had that technology isn't better now than it was when the standard was created. We've gotten better sewers but we still don't have better TV. What's wrong with that picture?

Nothing is wrong with that picture, as long as you can still look at the picture you prefer!

I'm surrounded by cities with sewer and water systems. I have a well and septic system. I wouldn't trade them. There should be no reason why I should have to. Unless what is mine, is no longer mine!

[imdwlaw]

p.s. Gene...

Use your argument in support of better living through chemistry!! Take a pill!!

[gdoane]

Nothing is wrong with that picture, as long as you can still look at the picture you prefer!

I'm surrounded by cities with sewer and water systems. I have a well and septic system. I wouldn't trade them. There should be no reason why I should have to. Unless what is mine, is no longer mine!

I happen to be an FCC-licensed radio technician. I have more claim to the airwaves as a resource than you do because I actually know how to use them and I don't consider those resources to be mine.

The United States is a nation which respects property rights. Indeed, the 4th Amendment embodies respect for property rights in our most hallowed and highest law of the land.

HOWEVER, part and parcel of private property rights is know what's yours and what ain't, and you don't own the airwaves. They're a natural resource, same as any river, same as the sky, and the same as the minerals in the ground.

You can look at any picture you prefer, so long as you own the picture. This only affects broadcast TV. You can use your VCR and DVD player to your heart's content. Nobody is taking any pictures you own away from you. You're losing nothing of yours.

[Gray]

This I just don't get; if something doesn't affect you one way or the other, why be adversarial? I mean you no disrespect, Gray, but I'm glad that in American history our predecessors were not as selfish. Forgive me if I've offended you; I just don't understand a lack of concern for the low-budgeted like single parents, seniors, retirees, jobless, etcetera...

You do not like something so you would work to deny it to others?

[blackcatrun]

It been five or six years scence I have had a TV hooked up to cable or antenna.
Cant say I see what all this fuss is about to sit and be bored to tears and bitching about commercials. I really dont miss it at all.

From what I gather shows aint much improved. Which leads me to this, I hear about that singing show when it comes on alot. Like I have any idea. Drives me nuts.

[RTchoke]

Dude, if you cant even afford a cable hookup, you shouldn't even be on this messageboard, you should be depressed somewhere hitting the bottle, boozing it up at the life you live.

Sweetie, some of us live where there is no cable, broadband............nothing. We have to use dial-up.

we now have the option of satellite, but I have to convince hubby it's worth the $200 installation and $50/month for the cheap service.

[blackcatrun]

Sweetie, some of us live where there is no cable, broadband............nothing. We have to use dial-up.

we now have the option of satellite, but I have to convince hubby it's worth the $200 installation and $50/month for the cheap service.

Those nice hook up package deals should come with an ice bag and asprin. The foot in the door and wham they knock you out and steal your wallet. My brother had this happen to him with the dish network. He got the special package service and wham they slammed him with a whopper of a bill.

I wanted to hook up cable TV but too expencive for my budget.
So I got high speed cable for the computer..it's not as cheap as it used to be.

[gdoane]

It been five or six years scence I have had a TV hooked up to cable or antenna.
Cant say I see what all this fuss is about to sit and be bored to tears and bitching about commercials. I really dont miss it at all.

From what I gather shows aint much improved. Which leads me to this, I hear about that singing show when it comes on alot. Like I have any idea. Drives me nuts.

It's really not improved. I have full-on cable TV, digital tiers, 300 channels and I watch maybe 3 hours of TV per week. Mostly news when I do watch.

I'd rather play movies on my DVD or play videogames on one of my console game systems than play channel roulette and hope one of the networks actually has something worth watching on.

We're stuck on reality shows now. If I wanted to see cops I'd go to a doughnut shop. If I wanted to see fat people I'd go to Waffle House. If I wanted to see bad singing I'd go to a Karaoke night club.

I don't like reality shows. If I wanted reality I don't need a TV, all I need is a walk.

[RTchoke]

Those nice hook up package deals should come with an ice bag and asprin. The foot in the door and wham they knock you out and steal your wallet. My brother had this happen to him with the dish network. He got the special package service and wham they slammed him with a whopper of a bill.

I wanted to hook up cable TV but too expencive for my budget.
So I got high speed cable for the computer..it's not as cheap as it used to be.

We have Directv. We actually started when it was Primestar so any hook-up installation stuff was actually cheap back then. :mrgreen:

The satellite I was referencing in my post was for internet access. Around here it's dial-up or satellite internet period. There are some places in town where you can get wireless but very few. Kinda like, it starts at the grocery store and ends 1/4 mile up the road and doesn't include the 3 blocks 4 houses up from the sewer plant sort of a deal. :))

[Cold_War_Warrior]

I have DirecTV on my main TVs and in my spare bedroom where I have my office I have Digital TV.

I got the satellite setup shortly after moving into my present home when I found out the Cable TV signal was crap. I originally had Digital Cable in the living room and standard cable in the other rooms. Watching the other TVs stunk since the picture had so much interference in the cable signal. The COX Cable technicians could not resolve the signal issue so I had it disconnected.

The DirecTV is 100% digital and is so awesome I’ll never go back to cable. The installation was free vs. the $150 I wasted getting cable installed. I have only two satellite converter boxes since I’m not willing to spend more than what I am per month for the setups. The TV in my office has the digital TV converter connected to an amplified indoor antenna and watching it is nearly as good as the satellite which is like watching a DVD on every channel.

The Digital TV converter lets you adjust the size of the picture on the screen. You can watch in letter box or standard or cropped. You get more channels with DTV than are available with analog. I imagine in February there will be many more channels to come. The only problem with the DTV and antenna setup is it requires you to adjust the antenna for some channels.

I used the Government coupon for $40 to buy the DTV box and I already had the antenna but those are very inexpensive to get too. Anyone that has a problem paying money for the DTV setup only has to stop going to McDonalds and Domino’s Pizza every week for a month and it’ll be like it’s for free.

There is ample time to go out and get the coupon for the converter boxes: Click Here (https://www.dtv2009.gov/ApplyCoupon.aspx)

For everything you need to know about getting Digital TV: Click Here (https://www.dtv2009.gov/)

[FidelisAdMortem]

I think that anybody who watches HDTV should be taken out and shot.

I love watching tv in HD. Sports especially. If you tried to take me out and shoot me, I'd put two in your chest. It would be awsome.

[ValricoKate]

There are alot of people who don't want "HD", but we're being forced. Most of my TV "watching" is mobile; starting February I will never have TV again away from home, and no TV at home in an emergency.

Don't be fooled; there is no "changeover"; digital is broadcasting NOW --- all that happens February is analog shuts off; then prepare to pay, and pay, and pay.

Only 5 "benefits" are offered, and have no value to most; the costs are considerable. And the biggest offense, is this country is not supposed to be a "dictatorship". No one is asking us, no one is giving us a choice.

Please visit the website, and view the "cost/benefit discussion". Even if you LOVE digital, understand they're lying to us, and please sign the petition to stop the "ripoff". www.stophdtv.org

This is not "spam"; it's a grass-roots effort by people who have little money, no venue, and no other options; especially not enough funds to buy all new TV equipment they don't need, don't want, and shouldn't have to buy.

Congress is not the government; the FCC is not the government; WE are the government, and we're being completely "disenfranchised".

They are supposed to represent us; we tell THEM what to do, they do not tell us "you HAVE to get a box". BTW, most households will need 6-8 boxes, one for each TV and vcr/dvdr.

I look forward to your ideas; please understand the petition on the website is only asking for signatures, for the sake of those who want "portable TV", and for those of limited income (especially Seniors, Retirees, Single-Parents, Fixed-Income, etcetera).

we received our 2 coupons.
got the 2 converters.
Hook up the old tvs to the converters.

Downgraded our dish services to drop the locals (the locals over the air I get more channels and all in HD on the new tv) for the subscription channels I just pay a basic 19.99. I will not pay $29.00 for the basic HD service or an extra $5.00/month for the digital box, when I see you can get it no problem and shouldn't cost extra money.

If no one pays their subscriber service extra $$ for the HD, maybe they will drop the price or eventually it will just be included

[ValricoKate]

I think that anybody who watches HDTV should be taken out and shot.

I only watch it over the air. There is a greater delay(If I switch from regular CBS to CBS HD for example I can see the same couple of word twice) but the picture is awesome!

[blackcatrun]

I only watch it over the air. There is a greater delay(If I switch from regular CBS to CBS HD for example I can see the same couple of word twice) but the picture is awesome!

I live at the bottem of a large hill. The only way to get a TV signal is by putting up a tower. Dont need to do that any more... Around here when a rare thunder storm passes through it's over this house...thats just asking to be fryed by lightning. Next door got hit twice. Cooked all of his eletronics dispite a massive ground off the thing. He had me take down his very melted antenna before he got hit again.

[ValricoKate]

I live at the bottem of a large hill. The only way to get a TV signal is by putting up a tower. Dont need to do that any more... Around here when a rare thunder storm passes through it's over this house...thats just asking to be fryed by lightning. Next door got hit twice. Cooked all of his eletronics dispite a massive ground off the thing. He had me take down his very melted antenna before he got hit again.

We live in Florida (flat) the tv stations' antenna farm is about 2 miles away or less as the crow flies w/ the exception of ABC which is 35 miles away. But I can totally understand the lightning thing, in the summer almost everyday a storm rolls through where we are getting upwards of 1500 strikes an hour (why the Rays play indoors).

We are able to get all channels with an amplified indoor antenna ($40). If ABC ever joins the party on the farm, I can craig list it and get by with $8.00 rabbit ears.

I couldn't care less about the other channels but I'm not the only person in the house, so the $19 / month plan is a compromise.

[AvgGuyIA]

I love watching tv in HD. Sports especially. If you tried to take me out and [insensitive response removed]. It would be awsome.

All this hype and worship of HDTV, especially for sports tv watching, is as creepy as the worship going on over Obama.

I've seen both and I don't see a dime's difference.

[brouski]

All this hype and worship of HDTV, especially for sports tv watching, is as creepy as the worship going on over Obama.

I've seen both and I don't see a dime's difference.

Your lack of eyesight is...disturbing.

I won't even watch football in standard def any more, unless it's LSU.

[Jeemie]

To anyone here paying attention..if you buy a HDTV make sure it has a "QAM" tuner.


It comes in handy for getting lots of free cable.

I found this out by accident when I hooked up the HDTV I bought for the kids' game systems to my cable.

I used to get all the locals in HD without the use of a box (however, my CBS affiliate recently scrambled their HD signal- I expect other channels to follow suit once this "loophole" becomes more well-known).

[woodard]

I found this out by accident when I hooked up the HDTV I bought for the kids' game systems to my cable.

I used to get all the locals in HD without the use of a box (however, my CBS affiliate recently scrambled their HD signal- I expect other channels to follow suit once this "loophole" becomes more well-known).

Actually, more likely, your cable provider scrambled the CBS affiliates signal. The affiliate wouldn't care if you pay the bump to the cable company or not. The provider, on the other hand, wants the extra dough.

By the way, get a good antenna for your locals. Cable and satellite providers compress the signal so they can deliver all that content on that single line. Broadcast signal comes in uncompressed. Much better quality.

[Jeemie]

Actually, more likely, your cable provider scrambled the CBS affiliates signal. The affiliate wouldn't care if you pay the bump to the cable company or not. The provider, on the other hand, wants the extra dough.

By the way, get a good antenna for your locals. Cable and satellite providers compress the signal so they can deliver all that content on that single line. Broadcast signal comes in uncompressed. Much better quality.

I've heard that.

[RickRhetoric]

HDTV is awesome on satellite. But on cable the sound is weak and you have to keep it on captions or get larger speakers.

[Christine]

So my question veers off the OP but I have a question. I am looking at flat screen LCD televisions. I really like the Samsung 40 Inch -http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-LN40A550-40-Inch-1080p-HDTV/dp/B001418W2C/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=audio-video&qid=1227047373&sr=1-4

Are these good televisions? We are thinking of getting a blu ray player as well. I would like to get a new setup for no more than $1200. Advice?

[gadgetere]

You do not like something so you would work to deny it to others?Not at all; the site is NOT "trying to get rid of HDTV", but rather to stop forcing it on others.

I'm at the library, listening to TV right now; come next February, I'm NO LONGER ALLOWED.

That's the complaint; technology does not support shutting off analog now.

And this is not supposed to be a dictatorship.

:sigh:

[gadgetere]

You can look at any picture you prefer, so long as you own the picture. This only affects broadcast TV. You can use your VCR and DVD player to your heart's content. Nobody is taking any pictures you own away from you. You're losing nothing of yours.We're losing portable TV. The sets they're selling, might fit in a large purse; but not a pocket.

We're losing "emergency tv". If we need TV to stay informed in a disaster (earthquake, hurrican, tornado, ice-storm, flood, you-name-it), it's not allowed.

This is not acceptible.

Technology should be set by consumers, not by "the government".

Hey, wait --- WE are the government.

...supposed to be anyway...

[gadgetere]

Just don't shut off analog; many of us recognize it's BETTER, and much more useful. There is no "big line of companies wanting the frequencies", and I don't believe the hype that "emergency services need them"; last time I looked police, fire, and ambulance already had radios.

If you sign the pettition, you're only saying "don't shut off the analog. We should have the right to decide --- we are the government, this is not a dictatorship"...

[gdoane]

We're losing portable TV. The sets they're selling, might fit in a large purse; but not a pocket.

We're losing "emergency tv". If we need TV to stay informed in a disaster (earthquake, hurrican, tornado, ice-storm, flood, you-name-it), it's not allowed.

This is not acceptible.

Technology should be set by consumers, not by "the government".

Hey, wait --- WE are the government.

...supposed to be anyway...

It's not practical to use a TV for emergencies. TV's are power hogs. An AM radio on receive might draw 100 mA maximum from a battery. A TV set on receive with a 2.5" LCD display (I own one) takes 500 mA to run.

You'd get FIVE TIMES the bang for the buck using radio for your emergency information.

Worse, TV towers are extremely vulnerable to most disasters. They are, by necessity, located high and clear right where lightning, wind, ice and all the forces of nature can get at them. If anything gets destroyed, TV towers go down first. AM broadcasters don't even like high sites. They don't need it because of the nature of the band they're in. I could explain the difference between MW and VHF propogation to you but that would take several pages. Trust me, MW and VHF have very different characteristics.

Even if an AM station is destroyed, it doesn't take anything fancy to cobble together a simple low-powered broadcast station. AM will be back on the air a lot faster than TV would.

In the USA, there are 844 TV's per 1,000 population but 2,116 radios per 1000 population. With nearly triple the number of radios among the population as TV's, radio would be the obvious first best choice for spreading information.

I listen to a lot more radio while I drive than I watch TV. That might come in handy if I'm busy evacuating. TV on the run just doesn't have the same appeal.

[imdwlaw]

I happen to be an FCC-licensed radio technician. I have more claim to the airwaves as a resource than you do because I actually know how to use them and I don't consider those resources to be mine.

The United States is a nation which respects property rights. Indeed, the 4th Amendment embodies respect for property rights in our most hallowed and highest law of the land.

HOWEVER, part and parcel of private property rights is know what's yours and what ain't, and you don't own the airwaves. They're a natural resource, same as any river, same as the sky, and the same as the minerals in the ground.

You can look at any picture you prefer, so long as you own the picture. This only affects broadcast TV. You can use your VCR and DVD player to your heart's content. Nobody is taking any pictures you own away from you. You're losing nothing of yours.

If you don't consider "airwaves as a resource" to be yours, how can you "...have more claim to the airwaves as a resource than..." I do?

One does not own the minerals on their property?

Who owns (has control over) the airwaves?
Is it our government?
Is that not of, for and by me?

[gdoane]

If you don't consider "airwaves as a resource" to be yours, how can you "...have more claim to the airwaves as a resource than..." I do?

Because I've studied how to use the resource properly. Same as a chef has more claim to the kitchen. Same as people who can drive belong on the road and people who can't drive should stay off 'em.

One does not own the minerals on their property?

You didn't know that? You'd best check with your State mining authority before you go digging a mine shaft in your back yard.

Who owns (has control over) the airwaves?

Nobody does. You may as well ask who owns the sky.

Is it our government?

Our government acts as trustees to ensure the resource is used for the maximum benefit of all citizens.

Is that not of, for and by me?

Not unless your name is Fidel Castro and you live in Cuba.

There are 537 elected officials on Capitol Hill in our Federal Government. There are 435 Representatives, 100 Senators, a President and a Vice President.

Of those 537 Ladies and Gentlemen, you have voted for 1 Representative, 2 Senators, and the President and Vice President, assuming you vote legal and proper. That's five people out of 535 elected officials. Your influence as a voter only has an effect on 1% of the elected officials in Washington D.C. and the other 99% don't have to answer to you.

As a best case scenario, you voted and elected 5 out of 537 elected officials. Your sphere of influence is less than 1%. So to answer the question if the government is you, the answer is no.

[rob_b52]

All I know is, I got one of these "converter boxes" but I cannot seem to get a signal.... I chaulk it up to my curse which says if I want something, I cannot have it and if I happen to have it, it won't work... I hate my life almost as much as I hate myself.... and to whomever put this curse on me.... **** you....

[Gray]

Not at all; the site is NOT "trying to get rid of HDTV", but rather to stop forcing it on others.

I'm at the library, listening to TV right now; come next February, I'm NO LONGER ALLOWED.

That's the complaint; technology does not support shutting off analog now.

And this is not supposed to be a dictatorship.

:sigh:

In a few years you will not be able to buy an analog TV.

Just like many gadgets that are no longer on the market.

......because they are obsolete.

[Chucky]

Just to clear up an apparent point of confusion: in a few months over the air TV signals will be going to digital-only. As has been noted, you can get a converter box for your analog TV to handle the change (satellite receivers have this built into them).

However, "HDTV" is High Definition TV. It's a digital signal, but a totally separate technological discussion. The upcoming change is only to a digital signal, not HD.

[imdwlaw]

Because I've studied how to use the resource properly. Same as a chef has more claim to the kitchen. Same as people who can drive belong on the road and people who can't drive should stay off 'em..

My question was how can you have more of a claim on something that you don't or can't own?


You didn't know that? You'd best check with your State mining authority before you go digging a mine shaft in your back yard. ..

I admit it...I did not know that!

Nobody does. You may as well ask who owns the sky...

Then how can you have more of a claim on it than anyone else?
You may be more knowlegdable about it than someone else, but you have no more right to it than that person.

Our government acts as trustees to ensure the resource is used for the maximum benefit of all citizens.

Not unless your name is Fidel Castro and you live in Cuba.

There are 537 elected officials on Capitol Hill in our Federal Government. There are 435 Representatives, 100 Senators, a President and a Vice President.

Of those 537 Ladies and Gentlemen, you have voted for 1 Representative, 2 Senators, and the President and Vice President, assuming you vote legal and proper. That's five people out of 535 elected officials. Your influence as a voter only has an effect on 1% of the elected officials in Washington D.C. and the other 99% don't have to answer to you.

As a best case scenario, you voted and elected 5 out of 537 elected officials. Your sphere of influence is less than 1%. So to answer the question if the government is you, the answer is no.

By me, I meant the people...if a gov. of, by and for the people is controlling the airwaves...and I'm one of those people, then...

Anyway...I'm digital now!!

[gdoane]

My question was how can you have more of a claim on something that you don't or can't own?

It's a simple matter of purpose. People who can't read can check out library books too but the people who can read them will be able to do more with one.

I admit it...I did not know that!

One of the radio sites I work on is sitting on a gold mine... literally. The Yarnell Mining Company of Arizona wants it and another site gone so they can blow the thing up and get the gold ore. To do so, they have to pay to move the radio sites, a very expensive proposition but one they can well afford if gold is over $800 per ounce.


Then how can you have more of a claim on it than anyone else?
You may be more knowlegdable about it than someone else, but you have no more right to it than that person.


In resource management, the resources are allocated to those who do the most good for all the owners of that resource.

For example, one of the answers liberals had to "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less" was the fact that oil companies already had permission to drill in places they weren't bothering to drill. The criticism was that the resource was given and wasted as nothing was done with it, so why give the oil companies even more?

By me, I meant the people...if a gov. of, by and for the people is controlling the airwaves...and I'm one of those people, then...

There's more than one government controlling the airwaves, not just ours. The ITU (International Telecommunications Union) is the oldest existing international organization. Radio bands are allocated internationally, and not just willy-nilly by any Banana Republic that wants to make its own rules.

http://www.itu.int/net/about/index.aspx

Anyway...I'm digital now!!

I'm not, not really anyway. I have a converter box but the only time I watch TV off of my rooftop antenna is if the cable is dead. That probably happens about 3 times a year, usually because of a storm or some idjut couldn't drive and ran over the cable pedestal.

Most of the time I just run across the street to the BB Video and grab a movie. It's faster than trying to find something good on today's crummy cable TV full of infomercials and reality shows.

[gadgetere]

It's not practical to use a TV for emergencies. TV's are power hogs. An AM radio on receive might draw 100 mA maximum from a battery. A TV set on receive with a 2.5" LCD display (I own one) takes 500 mA to run. I have ~20 pocket TV's; some do take power. But the one I use most runs for more than 12 hours on 4 "AAA" batteries.
You'd get FIVE TIMES the bang for the buck using radio for your emergency information. And I can't see the weather patterns, or hazards, or traffic etcetera, on radio.
Worse, TV towers are extremely vulnerable to most disasters. They are, by necessity, located high and clear right where lightning, wind, ice and all the forces of nature can get at them. If anything gets destroyed, TV towers go down first. AM broadcasters don't even like high sites. They don't need it because of the nature of the band they're in. I could explain the difference between MW and VHF propogation to you but that would take several pages. Trust me, MW and VHF have very different characteristics.

Even if an AM station is destroyed, it doesn't take anything fancy to cobble together a simple low-powered broadcast station. AM will be back on the air a lot faster than TV would.Let's say I'm retired, or lost my job to the "economy"; why am I being forced to spend money I dont' have, for technology I don't want?
In the USA, there are 844 TV's per 1,000 population but 2,116 radios per 1000 population. With nearly triple the number of radios among the population as TV's, radio would be the obvious first best choice for spreading information.

I listen to a lot more radio while I drive than I watch TV. That might come in handy if I'm busy evacuating. TV on the run just doesn't have the same appeal.I listen to TV when I drive. Been known to WATCH it sometimes too, but I find watching does distract from driving. Radio doesn't run NCIS or CSI, or movies, etcetera.

All these things are being forbidden by our dictatorship government. That is unconscionable.

The "benefits" (sharper picture, better sound, more channels, wider screen) --- are either worthless to the vast majority, or nonexistent (outright lies).

Why not let BOTH coexist? Technology should not be "government-mandated".

[gadgetere]

Just to clear up an apparent point of confusion: in a few months over the air TV signals will be going to digital-only. As has been noted, you can get a converter box for your analog TV to handle the change (satellite receivers have this built into them).Converter boxes are not "portable"; the one that's being TOUTED as portable, requires six "D" batteries every 18 hours.

And I'll be hanged if I'll buy a converter box for my living room TV. And another for the vcr/dvdr. And another for the bedroom TV. AND another for the kids-room, one for the guest room, one for the bathroom (yes I have a small black & white in there while I shower). This is NOT CHEAP!
However, "HDTV" is High Definition TV. It's a digital signal, but a totally separate technological discussion. The upcoming change is only to a digital signal, not HD.Digital, hd --- tomato tomahto.

They're shutting off all portable TV, and it's gonna cost us plenty. Not just INITIALLY --- the costs will continue.

Sigh.

[gadgetere]

In a few years you will not be able to buy an analog TV.

Just like many gadgets that are no longer on the market.

......because they are obsolete.Let's list what we're getting:

1. Sharper picture --- no, I'm slightly myopic, most people are; the vast majority cannot see improvement from normal viewing distances. Sit a few feet from the set, or watch a 4' to 8' picture, you'll see it. Nobody I've seen in stores can tell the difference when they step back a few feet.

2. Wider screen. Best theater is "I-MAX" --- full screen. Human eyes are full screen. Widescreen often cuts off heads and chests; full is better.

3. Better sound. This is a lie --- MTS sound is hi-fi, surround-sound, DBX encrypted. It's very good. Analog doesn't have digital distortion; there's a picture of this on the "stophdtv" website.

4. More channels. People aren't watching them; those who want extra channels, buy cable or satellite.

The fifth "benefit", is "free up the channels" --- that's irrelevant to us.

Now --- if what is being"obsoleted" is better than the "replacement", if quote-unquote "obsolete" has more features and utility, then the replacement is not better.

This is a DECREASE in features and use. Portable TV is gone (unless you want a "large purse-sized" set that only runs an hour on $100/year rechargeable batteries). No one I know likes the additional commercials. Digital sets are complex, meaning break more often* and cost a LOT to fix.

In a "cost/benefit analysis", the benefits of extending analog far outweigh shutting it off.

If enough people sign the petition, analog will continue. Protest against "dictatorship" is enough reason to sign the petition, regardless of one's fascination with digital.


----------------------------------------------------
* An ancient truth: "The probability of failure is directly proportional to the complexity of the system." Digital sets are highly complex, expensive or impossible to fix.

[Samm]

There are alot of people who don't want "HD", but we're being forced. Most of my TV "watching" is mobile; starting February I will never have TV again away from home, and no TV at home in an emergency.

Don't be fooled; there is no "changeover"; digital is broadcasting NOW --- all that happens February is analog shuts off; then prepare to pay, and pay, and pay.

Only 5 "benefits" are offered, and have no value to most; the costs are considerable. And the biggest offense, is this country is not supposed to be a "dictatorship". No one is asking us, no one is giving us a choice.

Please visit the website, and view the "cost/benefit discussion". Even if you LOVE digital, understand they're lying to us, and please sign the petition to stop the "ripoff". www.stophdtv.org

This is not "spam"; it's a grass-roots effort by people who have little money, no venue, and no other options; especially not enough funds to buy all new TV equipment they don't need, don't want, and shouldn't have to buy.

Congress is not the government; the FCC is not the government; WE are the government, and we're being completely "disenfranchised".

They are supposed to represent us; we tell THEM what to do, they do not tell us "you HAVE to get a box". BTW, most households will need 6-8 boxes, one for each TV and vcr/dvdr.

I look forward to your ideas; please understand the petition on the website is only asking for signatures, for the sake of those who want "portable TV", and for those of limited income (especially Seniors, Retirees, Single-Parents, Fixed-Income, etcetera).

I know what you mean... I'm still ****ed that I can no longer buy 8-tracks. ;)

[Gray]

Let's list what we're getting:

1. Sharper picture --- no, I'm slightly myopic, most people are; the vast majority cannot see improvement from normal viewing distances. Sit a few feet from the set, or watch a 4' to 8' picture, you'll see it. Nobody I've seen in stores can tell the difference when they step back a few feet.

2. Wider screen. Best theater is "I-MAX" --- full screen. Human eyes are full screen. Widescreen often cuts off heads and chests; full is better.

3. Better sound. This is a lie --- MTS sound is hi-fi, surround-sound, DBX encrypted. It's very good. Analog doesn't have digital distortion; there's a picture of this on the "stophdtv" website.

4. More channels. People aren't watching them; those who want extra channels, buy cable or satellite.

The fifth "benefit", is "free up the channels" --- that's irrelevant to us.

Now --- if what is being"obsoleted" is better than the "replacement", if quote-unquote "obsolete" has more features and utility, then the replacement is not better.

This is a DECREASE in features and use. Portable TV is gone (unless you want a "large purse-sized" set that only runs an hour on $100/year rechargeable batteries). No one I know likes the additional commercials. Digital sets are complex, meaning break more often* and cost a LOT to fix.

In a "cost/benefit analysis", the benefits of extending analog far outweigh shutting it off.

If enough people sign the petition, analog will continue. Protest against "dictatorship" is enough reason to sign the petition, regardless of one's fascination with digital.


----------------------------------------------------
* An ancient truth: "The probability of failure is directly proportional to the complexity of the system." Digital sets are highly complex, expensive or impossible to fix.

Then don't buy it.

[gadgetere]

I know what you mean... I'm still ****ed that I can no longer buy 8-tracks.With respect, I'm really tired of this bad comparison. 8-tracks are not receivers. Apples and oranges.

An 8-track is made to play 8-track tapes; there are cars that still have 8-track-players, and they still work. You can still buy 8-track tapes.

Pocket tv's are made to play television; and they will not work. Neither will tv-radio. Simply stated, no more television away from home. No tv AT home, in a power failure.

I wanted to watch a Christmas show last Friday; power went off for 40 minutes --- I watched my show on a high-resolution wallet-sized set, 2.7" screen. February all that ends. And "Oh tough" is the right attitude, in a country that USED to be free?

Further, no additional hardware is required for "8-track", or "cassette", or "reel-to-reel". BUT if I wanna watch tv, I'll hafta buy stuff for each tv. I lose features; timed recordings hard or impossible. Many channels won't exist.

So instead of saying "8-track", go ahead and say "vanilla fudge"; makes just as little sense.Then don't buy it.That's a great attitude; let's just tell everyone, "Hey, Congress will legislate whatever they want, and no one cares about you; radio may shut off (for "hd-radio"), but hey forget you, you don't need to listen to radio anyway.

Again meaning no disrespect --- I'm thankful this country was built by people who cared more for us than themselves (many sacrificing their own lives so that we could live free); but nowadays it's all a "me generation".

Lots of people will be hurt by the shutoff; utility suffers, function decreases (and stations will be gone). "Tough" is not an appropriate answer.

www.stophdtv.org (http://www.stophdtv.org)

[Samm]

With respect, I'm really tired of this bad comparison. 8-tracks are not receivers. Apples and oranges.

An 8-track is made to play 8-track tapes; there are cars that still have 8-track-players, and they still work. You can still buy 8-track tapes.

Pocket tv's are made to play television; and they will not work. Neither will tv-radio. Simply stated, no more television away from home. No tv AT home, in a power failure.

I wanted to watch a Christmas show last Friday; power went off for 40 minutes --- I watched my show on a high-resolution wallet-sized set, 2.7" screen. February all that ends. And "Oh tough" is the right attitude, in a country that USED to be free?

Further, no additional hardware is required for "8-track", or "cassette", or "reel-to-reel". BUT if I wanna watch tv, I'll hafta buy stuff for each tv. I lose features; timed recordings hard or impossible. Many channels won't exist.

So instead of saying "8-track", go ahead and say "vanilla fudge"; makes just as little sense.That's a great attitude; let's just tell everyone, "Hey, Congress will legislate whatever they want, and no one cares about you; radio may shut off (for "hd-radio"), but hey forget you, you don't need to listen to radio anyway.

Again meaning no disrespect --- I'm thankful this country was built by people who cared more for us than themselves (many sacrificing their own lives so that we could live free); but nowadays it's all a "me generation".

Lots of people will be hurt by the shutoff; utility suffers, function decreases (and stations will be gone). "Tough" is not an appropriate answer.

www.stophdtv.org (http://www.stophdtv.org)

Lighten up a little... you take things far too seriously. :D

[Wookinstien]

I for one who works at a TV station, I'll be damn glad to get rid of our crappy analog transmitter. We are holding that thing together with bailing wire and duct tape. We already have both our new transmitters in place and been happily broadcasting digital for a couple of months. We have twice the range with half the power usage with a cleaner signal to boot.

[Wookinstien]

You want mad, talk to my friend who has a beta max.

[gadgetere]

Lighten up a little... you take things far too seriously.I'm afraid I am. I've enjoyed the CBS affiliate for nearly 40 years on every standard FM radio; channel 6 "News at Noon", etcetera. I have pocket TV's, and a tiny radio that receives tv-sound; and in two months I will be forbidden to have ANY tv away from home.

This is just one example of how our government steam-rollers over us; our university wanted land "for a new entrance", and stole two restaurants with "eminent domain". They built apartments instead of the "new entrance".

100% of people responding here should be signing the petition, and telling everyone else about it; starting 2/17 television's utility decreases significantly.

This is not "BETTER".

[gadgetere]

You want mad, talk to my friend who has a beta max.Again, "Beta-max", is not a receiver. Same class as "8-track". Beta-maxes can still be USED.

BUT --- no vcr/dvdr will be as useful, with a dtv box --- you won't be allowed to make multiple recordings, and you'll have to figure out how to change the channel on one but not the other.

Pocket TV's will not be allowed.
Radios with TV sound will not be allowed.
Television away from home will not be allowed.
Television in an emergency will not be allowed.

This is not acceptable.
We have twice the range with half the power usage with a cleaner signal to boot.There's no way that's true --- the "new frequencies" are UHF, and don't travel as far. Digital is intolerant to noise; we can watch analog with 95% noise --- but digital just won't display the channel.

The comment I heard from a tv station engineer, is that six times the power is required. So a station paying $1000/month for electricity to power the analog transmitter, is now paying $6000/month. It's an unfunded mandate, that stations have to pay for that, THEMSELVES.

...that's one reason why there are now nearly twice the commercials...

[gadgetere]

I believe this is the first time that Congress has made law that costs everyone (except for some taxes), and will continue to cost.

Most people don't realize the damage and expense.

People scream about taxes; why is no conservative pundit screaming about this?

Sean --- where are you?

[Hoobeedoo Bejesus]

Sean --- where are you?

Broadcasting on a digital signal.

[chip]

I have pocket TV's, and a tiny radio that receives tv-sound; and in two months I will be forbidden to have ANY tv away from home.


Total BS.

They have been making portable and handheld TV's with ATSC tuners for quite some time now.

You arent "forbidden" to have a TV away from home.

[chip]

Pocket TV's will not be allowed.
Radios with TV sound will not be allowed.
Television away from home will not be allowed.
Television in an emergency will not be allowed.



Hogwash

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8870046&type=product&id=1210377520598

Why not just tell the truth?

[Wookinstien]

Again, "Beta-max", is not a receiver. Same class as "8-track". Beta-maxes can still be USED.

BUT --- no vcr/dvdr will be as useful, with a dtv box --- you won't be allowed to make multiple recordings, and you'll have to figure out how to change the channel on one but not the other.
That is complete garbage. You hook the dtv box to the vcr set your tv on channel 3 and use the tuner on VCR. You can record as normal.

Pocket TV's will not be allowed.
Radios with TV sound will not be allowed.
Television away from home will not be allowed.
Television in an emergency will not be allowed.

You have get new equipment. Television in an emergency? What the hell does that mean. TV will broadcast, just in digital, so just more crap.

This is not acceptable.
There's no way that's true --- the "new frequencies" are UHF, and don't travel as far. Digital is intolerant to noise; we can watch analog with 95% noise --- but digital just won't display the channel.

More crap dTV signal is cleaner. Analog signal degrades over distance and may be barely detectable at the farther reaches of the broadcast area - this is why the signal from a distant radio station fades in and out. As the signal reaches the farther limits of its range, the signal-to-noise ratio ( SNR ) decreases and the quality of the broadcast suffers. In comparison, when the SNR decreases in a digital signal, the quality of the broadcast does not degrade.



The comment I heard from a tv station engineer, is that six times the power is required. So a station paying $1000/month for electricity to power the analog transmitter, is now paying $6000/month. It's an unfunded mandate, that stations have to pay for that, THEMSELVES.

...that's one reason why there are now nearly twice the commercials...


Your engineer is an idiot. The only way its costing more is that he's able to put out more signal power, expanding their population size and therby getting more revenue per commercial. Oh, btw. If your station is a network affiliate there is a limited amount of commercial avails and they CANNOT add more commercials.

The site you keep talking about does not know what they are talking about. Try looking at other sites before going to the tin foil hat web ring. :)

[akuma]

I believe this is the first time that Congress has made law that costs everyone (except for some taxes), and will continue to cost.

Most people don't realize the damage and expense.

People scream about taxes; why is no conservative pundit screaming about this?

Sean --- where are you?


and it doesnt cost anything - you get a voucher for the cost of a receiver that you can put on your old TV -

[msny]

There are alot of people who don't want "HD", but we're being forced. Most of my TV "watching" is mobile; starting February I will never have TV again away from home, and no TV at home in an emergency.

Don't be fooled; there is no "changeover"; digital is broadcasting NOW --- all that happens February is analog shuts off; then prepare to pay, and pay, and pay.

Only 5 "benefits" are offered, and have no value to most; the costs are considerable. And the biggest offense, is this country is not supposed to be a "dictatorship". No one is asking us, no one is giving us a choice.

Please visit the website, and view the "cost/benefit discussion". Even if you LOVE digital, understand they're lying to us, and please sign the petition to stop the "ripoff". www.stophdtv.org

This is not "spam"; it's a grass-roots effort by people who have little money, no venue, and no other options; especially not enough funds to buy all new TV equipment they don't need, don't want, and shouldn't have to buy.

Congress is not the government; the FCC is not the government; WE are the government, and we're being completely "disenfranchised".

They are supposed to represent us; we tell THEM what to do, they do not tell us "you HAVE to get a box". BTW, most households will need 6-8 boxes, one for each TV and vcr/dvdr.

I look forward to your ideas; please understand the petition on the website is only asking for signatures, for the sake of those who want "portable TV", and for those of limited income (especially Seniors, Retirees, Single-Parents, Fixed-Income, etcetera).

Using your logic then, we should never even allowed telivision broadcasts in the first place. People should have stayed with
newspapers and read books.

I find my digital HDTV set far superior in every way to my
old analog set, especially watching football.

[curtis123]

What I don't understand, is why the FCC even cares. Are analog signals evil or something? Do they want the bandwidths for something else? I've pretty much ignored this entire issue because I don't think it effects me in any direct way whatsoever.

$$$$$

That's why the FCC and the government cares. They're selling that spectrum to the highest bidder. So where is that money going? Who knows.

Once TV stations are booted off their analog signals, the spectrum auction can begin.

They tried to force digital conversion as early as 1999. They can't wait any longer to get that money.

[gadgetere]

I believe one can apply for a voucher to get a digital to analog converter.Not really; first, it's 1.5 billion more debt to the Chinese -- the day will come when they call in the debt.

Second, I need a converter for the living room TV; one for the VCR/DVDr. One for the bedroom TV. One for the kid's tv. One for the guestroom. Yes I have a TV in the bathroom. And I'll be struggling with remotes, unable to make timed recordings, etcetera.

Each "voucher" is for $40. Each converter costs $50-100.

I don't like widescreen; I don't like 2 hours of commercials for an hour of movie (or more than half a newscast, being commercials). I don't like the reality that some of the channels I WATCH, will be gone.

Delay the shutoff, until we have the technology to support it. A free society should not have forced technology; "government" should be stealing the frequencies, nor should it be stealing private land to give to a store or condominium-builder (theft of our frequencies is just as wrong as theft of private land).

We used to be free.

[gadgetere]

That is complete garbage. You hook the dtv box to the vcr set your tv on channel 3 and use the tuner on VCR. You can record as normal.Who changes channels for the SECOND program???

I'm sitting in my car, accessing the library's internet; and I'm watching "Happy Days". Will I be able to do that after February?

Never again, and you know it.
You have get new equipment. Television in an emergency? What the hell does that mean. TV will broadcast, just in digital, so just more crap. We lost power for 1-3 weeks a year ago (ice storm); we needed to see the weather maps, and find out where to go for help.

There is no such thing as a "battery-powered dtv". A battery-powered box is proposed; six "D" sized batteries, changed daily. A current "portable", runs only an hour on a charge. It requires a new $100 battery at least once a year. My pocket tv's are excellent, and served well during the power outtage. (We cooked dinner over the fireplace.)
More crap dTV signal is cleaner. Analog signal degrades over distance and may be barely detectable at the farther reaches of the broadcast area - this is why the signal from a distant radio station fades in and out. As the signal reaches the farther limits of its range, the signal-to-noise ratio ( SNR ) decreases and the quality of the broadcast suffers. In comparison, when the SNR decreases in a digital signal, the quality of the broadcast does not degrade. You know very well that if the digital signal isn't strong, it's NOT THERE at all.
Your engineer is an idiot. The only way its costing more is that he's able to put out more signal power, expanding their population size and thereby getting more revenue per commercial. Oh, btw. If your station is a network affiliate there is a limited amount of commercial avails and they CANNOT add more commercials.Did I mention I'm an electronic engineer? The new signals are UHF, and do not travel as far. An analog signal with 95% snow is watchable; digital with half that, is blank.
The site you keep talking about does not know what they are talking about. Try looking at other sites before going to the tin foil hat web ring.They may or may not be right on every minute point; but they're completely right that tv is going to suffer.

We have nothing to lose by delaying shutoff of analog, and lots to gain.

...otoh, the "hdtv lobby" has plenty to lose; this is a "cash cow" for them...

[gadgetere]

That's why the FCC and the government cares. They're selling that spectrum to the highest bidder. So where is that money going? Who knows.

Once TV stations are booted off their analog signals, the spectrum auction can begin.

They tried to force digital conversion as early as 1999. They can't wait any longer to get that money.There is not a "long line of people waiting to buy the frequencies"; that's why they came up with the lie of "EMERGENCY SERVICES".

What "emergency services" do we need, that we don't have?
We have police already.
And fire.
And ambulance.
And sheriff.

It's a lie, isn't it? Just like "sound is better" (lie), "picture is better on your standard tv with a converter box" (lie), and other promises.

It's gonna cost us. Dollars, and utility.

Delay the shutoff, ten years. It's the only answer. "Diehard Digital Nuts" can have their digital, and we can have our portability.

Everybody wins. (Except those getting bribes, etcetera...)

[chip]

Hogwash

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8870046&type=product&id=1210377520598

Why not just tell the truth?


LOL

Electrical engineer.

:))

[gdoane]

There is not a "long line of people waiting to buy the frequencies"; that's why they came up with the lie of "EMERGENCY SERVICES".

What "emergency services" do we need, that we don't have?
We have police already.
And fire.
And ambulance.
And sheriff.

When the population grows, Public Safety Communications needs to grow with it. I know for a fact that Maricopa County (Phoenix, AZ) has nearly TRIPLED their 911 Dispatch positions since 1997. More Officers means more Dispatchers, more Dispatchers need more frequencies.

Scottsdale Police Department has likewise more than doubled the number of their dispatch positions in their 911 center from five positions to currently 11.

They're about maxxed out and thinking of adding more than that. But, they need more frequencies to do that with. There's only so much that a dispatcher can keep track of so each dispatcher you add requires more resources on the airwaves.




It's a lie, isn't it? Just like "sound is better" (lie), "picture is better on your standard tv with a converter box" (lie), and other promises.

It's gonna cost us. Dollars, and utility.


Better that than costing a peace officer or fireman his life because his radio frequency was overcrowded with traffic and he couldn't get help in time.

Delay the shutoff, ten years. It's the only answer. "Diehard Digital Nuts" can have their digital, and we can have our portability.

Everybody wins. (Except those getting bribes, etcetera...)

No, there are some serious losers in Public Safety.

You don't seem to realize what a big fat pig analog is as a bandwidth hog. SIX MEGAHERTZ PER TV CHANNEL. It's insanely wasteful. In the FM Broadcast band between 88 MHz and 108 MHz you could fit only 3 TV Channels.

Failure to shut down the bloat and waste of analog broadcasting will start creating a public safety hazard. The frequencies are desperately needed now, not ten years from now.

[Bolshevik Hunter]

HD TV is the biggest scam ever. Yes, it looks much better, I got it, but they had it long before they released it. I remember when 'Digital Cable' was the big thing right? Well, that was supposed to be 'High Definition', then all of a sudden a few years later they come out with HD. The *******s could have given it to everyone then under the label Digital Cable! I mean, what the **** was the point of digital Cable? It was much clearer than the regular connection, am I wrong? Oh no, but they wheeled and dealed with the TV companies in order to make another buck.

Basically, if the TV makers include a so-called HD receiver and they get some of the profits, the cable companies in turn would force people to need a converter. A load of ****ing bs. Just like this Blue ray over DVD crap. People are so stupid.

Fact is, these vermin will constantly come up with a new product just to hose the consumers of America and world-wide. They may as well be called XBOX or Playstation. Every 2 years some new swindle. Bottomfeeders. ~BH

[chip]

Why dont you guys just go back to your gramaphones and quit complaining about better technology.

[Bolshevik Hunter]

Why dont you guys just go back to your gramaphones and quit complaining about better technology.

What now, attacking consumers that just want a good deal? Maybe you should just continue to be the slave that you are, and bow down to every next version of technology that your masters sell to yuh Chippy? Yuh know what, I suggest a pair of these bro? Something tells me that they will fit real good on yuh Chippy? What do yUH tHINK bRO? Do yUH think that they will fit cHIPPY???

http://sk1.yt-thm-a02.yimg.com/image/53c010a74a8797ba

;) LOL!!!!! Love always cHIPPY! Love always!!!!!! ~BH

[Wookinstien]

Why dont you guys just go back to your gramaphones and quit complaining about better technology.

I think I heard the same argument when the music industry switched to cassettes and then to cd's

You can't confuse these guys with facts, so I'm out.

before I go follow this link and get you a converter for 8 bucks (after the coupon)
http://www.buy.com/retail/product.asp?sku=209872773&listingid=34859134&dcaid=17902


Here is one for $40, (hey that is what the coupon is worth!)
http://www.summitsource.com/product_info.php?ref=1&products_id=6773

[Wookinstien]

Oh I forgot!

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h156/DavidBohm/snidely1.jpg

We did our first complete converstion test. Turning off the analog transmitter!

[gadgetere]

Hogwash

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....=1210377520598 (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8870046&type=product&id=1210377520598)

Why not just tell the truth?Ha! Click on the link. You'll find:
1. 7" picture, there are NO pockets this thing will fit. As I said, LARGE PURSE.
2. Powered by AC ADAPTER --- it's not even portable!

Show me the small, portable sets, that run off of batteries. They don't exist. (Oh Radio Shack has a RECHARGEABLE one, 1 hour run time on a $100, replace-couple-times-a-year, lithium battery.)
"Stop HDTV'?

Talking about ****ing into a hurricane! What a joke.In the second place, they're not trying to "stop dtv"; they're trying to stop the shutoff of analog.

Analog is better, in many ways.

In the first place, I betchya they said something about "(something) into the wind", about the Boston Tea Party.

This is a hardship and loss-of-service, for many people. We don't have the technology to shut off analog.
If anyone reading this has a stack of cash sitting on the dresser he/she doesn't want, then just don't say anything, don't sign the petition, don't get mad at dictatorship.

[gadgetere]

Why dont you guys just go back to your gramaphones and quit complaining about better technology."Better"?

No pocket sets, is not better.
No radios with TV sound, is not better.
No battery powered sets in an emergency, is not better.
Widescreen is not better in many people's opinions.
Sharper picture is not better*.
Sound is BETTER on analog. Analog doesn't have digital distortion.

If we lose FEATURES, and FUNCTION, it's not better.

* I crashed a "seminar" put on by a local tv station, at a tv-store; they had two pics, one "hi-def", the other "standard". No one could tell the difference, from where they were sitting.

[gadgetere]

When the population grows, Public Safety Communications needs to grow with it. I know for a fact that Maricopa County (Phoenix, AZ) has nearly TRIPLED their 911 Dispatch positions since 1997. More Officers means more Dispatchers, more Dispatchers need more frequencies.Hmmm; 911 uses phone lines, doesn't it? I've never heard of radio frequencies being needed; why not make the emergency lines "digital", to save space?
They're about maxxed out and thinking of adding more than that.No, you only need a hundred channels, if a hundred events are happening at once. I don't believe there is a "traffic jam" of all the cops being sent to all the disasters. (mild unoffensive sarcasm intended) But, they need more frequencies to do that with. There's only so much that a dispatcher can keep track of so each dispatcher you add requires more resources on the airwaves.There is a difference between a "911 operator", and a "police dispatcher". Operators don't use radios. They use land-lines.
Better that than costing a peace officer or fireman his life because his radio frequency was overcrowded with traffic and he couldn't get help in time.With respect, this sounds like an "emotional plea that ignores the facts". Police frequencies are not overcrowded.
No, there are some serious losers in Public Safety.

You don't seem to realize what a big fat pig analog is as a bandwidth hog. SIX MEGAHERTZ PER TV CHANNEL. It's insanely wasteful. In the FM Broadcast band between 88 MHz and 108 MHz you could fit only 3 TV Channels. Did I mention I'm an electronic engineer? I know full well what they use.

...and I'm "politically active"; I know what it will cost people who don't have the money. Retirees, single-parents, fixed-income, the jobless --- and many more people are BECOMING jobless. :sigh:
Failure to shut down the bloat and waste of analog broadcasting will start creating a public safety hazard.I've never seen the proof of that. Where are the news stories about "These people died because there weren't enough radio frequencies"?

Those stories don't exist.
The frequencies are desperately needed now, not ten years from now.Sorry, meaning no disrespect, I'm not buying it.

[chip]

Ha! Click on the link. You'll find:
1. 7" picture, there are NO pockets this thing will fit. As I said, LARGE PURSE.
2. Powered by AC ADAPTER --- it's not even portable!

Show me the small, portable sets, that run off of batteries. They don't exist. (Oh Radio Shack has a RECHARGEABLE one, 1 hour run time on a $100, replace-couple-times-a-year, lithium battery.)
In the second place, they're not trying to "stop dtv"; they're trying to stop the shutoff of analog.

Analog is better, in many ways.

In the first place, I betchya they said something about "(something) into the wind", about the Boston Tea Party.

This is a hardship and loss-of-service, for many people. We don't have the technology to shut off analog.
If anyone reading this has a stack of cash sitting on the dresser he/she doesn't want, then just don't say anything, don't sign the petition, don't get mad at dictatorship.

Youre a loon, you said they dont exist. I showed you an example and you provided an example on your own. Again I ask. Why not just tell the truth?

Seriously. You claim

"Radios with TV sound will not be allowed."

Well thats a lie

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3302170&numProdsPerPage=60&y=2&y=15&x=6&x=15&retainProdsInSession=1&retainProdsInSession=1

You claimed

"Television away from home will not be allowed."

Ive already proven that false.

You claimed

"Pocket TV's will not be allowed."

Well you even said above that Radio shack has one avail so you proved your own statement false.

[gadgetere]

HD TV is the biggest scam ever. Yes, it looks much better, I got it, but they had it long before they released it. I remember when 'Digital Cable' was the big thing right? Well, that was supposed to be 'High Definition', then all of a sudden a few years later they come out with HD. The *******s could have given it to everyone then under the label Digital Cable! I mean, what the **** was the point of digital Cable? It was much clearer than the regular connection, am I wrong? Oh no, but they wheeled and dealed with the TV companies in order to make another buck.

Basically, if the TV makers include a so-called HD receiver and they get some of the profits, the cable companies in turn would force people to need a converter. A load of ****ing bs. Just like this Blue ray over DVD crap. People are so stupid.

Fact is, these vermin will constantly come up with a new product just to hose the consumers of America and world-wide. They may as well be called XBOX or Playstation. Every 2 years some new swindle. Bottomfeeders. ~BHYou're 100% right. Every 30-minute-special touting the "wonders of DTV", is SPONSORED by corps like SAMSUNG and BESTBUY.

When I called the local PBS head, I asked: "Is it just me, or is this an outrage?"

He said, "It's an outrage."

DVD is one example that has some benefits, and some hazards over VHS. The most obvious is smaller size; but they scratch easily, and won't play. And they fade & won't play, some in as little as a few years.

I have VHS tapes over 30 years old; they play fine. A power glitch resets a DVD position, but not a VHS.

But VHS is obsolete; DVD will soon be obsolete. Every few years they come up with a new format, forcing people to dump all their tech and buy new.

It's ALMOST like it's a conspiracy to make money.
(More mild sarcasm intended...)

[chip]

this sounds like an "emotional plea that ignores the facts"

Oh the irony.

[gadgetere]

Youre a loon, you said they dont exist. I showed you an example and you provided an example on your own. Again I ask. Why not just tell the truth?There are worse things to be called, than a "loon". :P
Seriously. You claim

"Radios with TV sound will not be allowed."

Well thats a lie

http://www.radioshack.com/product/in...odsInSession=1 (http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3302170&numProdsPerPage=60&y=2&y=15&x=6&x=15&retainProdsInSession=1&retainProdsInSession=1)

You claimed

"Television away from home will not be allowed."

Ive already proven that false.Really. Go to this link, for the specifications:
http://rsk.imageg.net/graphics/uc/rsk/Support/ProductManuals/55030051_SP_EN.pdf

Scroll down --- "receives AM, FM, and...
CHANNELS 2-13 NTSC!!!

Starting next February, that is ONE MORE unit that WILL NOT WORK.

You are part of the problem, Chip; everyone is saying "Oh you can buy them" --- NO YOU CAN'T. You many be one of those who THOUGHT the technology exists; but it doesn't. The guy at that "seminar" lied through his face --- "they are making pocket sets". That's what he said, and he KNEW it was a lie. And people BELIEVE the lies, until they try to go BUY one.

You claimed

"Pocket TV's will not be allowed."

Well you even said above that Radio shack has one avail so you proved your own statement false.I said "Radio Shack has one that runs an HOUR or two; and I said it uses a Lithium battery, expensive, requiring frequent replacement.

You said "Here is a pocket radio that receives digital TV".
Would you like some ketchup, or salt when you eat your words?

[gdoane]

Hmmm; 911 uses phone lines, doesn't it? I've never heard of radio frequencies being needed; why not make the emergency lines "digital", to save space?

If you look at police cars, ambulances and fire engines you'll notice a thin straight piece of metal called an "antenna". These antennas are hooked to the radios that 911 uses to summon their assistance to where it's needed. It's not all telephone.

No, you only need a hundred channels, if a hundred events are happening at once.

Which there usually is. The Phoenix Metropolitan area is home to over 3 Million people. 100 events would be just 3/1000ths of 1% of the population.

I don't believe there is a "traffic jam" of all the cops being sent to all the disasters. (mild unoffensive sarcasm intended) There is a difference between a "911 operator", and a "police dispatcher". Operators don't use radios. They use land-lines.

They also use radios. How do you think they tell the police officer that the bank is being robbed? Smoke signals?

The Motorola Centracom Gold Elite radio dispatch console has a telephone interface built into it just so that 911 operators can operate phone and radio with the same headset. I know that setup like the back of my hand because I maintain a network of over FIFTY of them.


With respect, this sounds like an "emotional plea that ignores the facts". Police frequencies are not overcrowded.


Yes, they are. Police use not only voice, but mobile data now as well. The Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) is a way to run data for suspect pictures, wants and warrants and other necessary data for law enforcement. Vehicle Location Systems likewise use radio frequencies so if a police officer requests backup there's no confusion as to where the backup is needed at. A cop pinned down in a firefight doesn't have a whole lot of time to spend giving directions over the radio.

The typical police car has at least four radio systems in it, every one of which contributes to officer safety. I care about officer safety quite a bit because I happen to appreciate the job that the police do. My Dad was a cop for several years.

Did I mention I'm an electronic engineer? I know full well what they use.

Did I mention that I've worked on Public Safety Communications systems for 20 years, that I've built several 911 dispatch centers and that we're talking about a subject that I happen to be an expert in?



...and I'm "politically active"; I know what it will cost people who don't have the money. Retirees, single-parents, fixed-income, the jobless --- and many more people are BECOMING jobless. :sigh:

TV is a luxury item. If they don't have the money for the luxury, then tough turkey. Jobless people shouldn't be watching TV anyway; they should be out and about trying to solve their jobless situation. I've never seen anybody get a job interview with a TV Remote in their hands.

I've never seen the proof of that. Where are the news stories about "These people died because there weren't enough radio frequencies"?

I don't WANT there to be those kinds of news stories. One of the most common uses for 911 recordings are to defend the response times. Lawyers love suing the police and one of the most common allegations in the lawsuit is that it took too long for the cops to come, resulting in a homicide that the cops should have prevented or other such ridiculousness.

The whole thing is recorded, every bit of it. Most agencies use DVD-RAM for recording the audio now. The reason why is because in our litigious society, if somebody gets hurt, somebody is gonna get sued.

Traffic congestion on radio, much the same as on freeways, causes delays. Delays in emergency response is a very bad thing.

Those stories don't exist.
Sorry, meaning no disrespect, I'm not buying it.

It doesn't really matter if you buy it or not. The NTSC standard is dead inside of two months. It's not even close to being a decent signal.

You say you're an electronics engineer?

Tell me what happens when you mix signals like the NTSC standard does with Chroma and Luminance with an IF. You'll never achieve 100% fidelity. You'll always get out worse than what you put into the blender.

Digital doesn't have that problem with fidelity. If you put in a 1 and a 0, you get out a 1 and a 0. It's a lot more perfect.

[gadgetere]

If you look at police cars, ambulances and fire engines you'll notice a thin straight piece of metal called an "antenna". These antennas are hooked to the radios that 911 uses to summon their assistance to where it's needed. It's not all telephone. Are they "digital"?
Which there usually is. The Phoenix Metropolitan area is home to over 3 Million people. 100 events would be just 3/1000ths of 1% of the population. As I asked before, how many people die because of "jammed radio"?
Yes, they are. Police use not only voice, but mobile data now as well. The Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) is a way to run data for suspect pictures, wants and warrants and other necessary data for law enforcement. Vehicle Location Systems likewise use radio frequencies so if a police officer requests backup there's no confusion as to where the backup is needed at. A cop pinned down in a firefight doesn't have a whole lot of time to spend giving directions over the radio.I see; so in a firefight the officer can type his info into a terminal???

All cellular telephones now have "direction finding". Odds are the cop has a phone.
And if he doesn't, there's no way that short GPS bursts jam spectrum.
The typical police car has at least four radio systems in it, every one of which contributes to officer safety. I care about officer safety quite a bit because I happen to appreciate the job that the police do. My Dad was a cop for several years.So millions of people must have their television service reduced, so a few police officers can have "extra features"? Meaning no disrespect --- there are no news stories about any emergency service personnel injured/dying because of radio jams.

This "digital revolution" is all about money. Everyone else here knows it.
TV is a luxury item. If they don't have the money for the luxury, then tough turkey.Gosh --- how many other freedoms do we now enjoy, that should be called "luxury" and taken away??? Jobless people shouldn't be watching TV anyway; they should be out and about trying to solve their jobless situation.As one who has BEEN jobless, one can cover the available job listings in a few hours a day; but you're saying that when I come home and eat dinner, or want to watch the 11 o'clock news, I CAN'T because I'm JOBLESS?

Let's make a list of freedoms that aren't necessary and should be canceled. I've never seen anybody get a job interview with a TV Remote in their hands. Sigh.
I don't WANT there to be those kinds of news stories. One of the most common uses for 911 recordings are to defend the response times. Lawyers love suing the police and one of the most common allegations in the lawsuit is that it took too long for the cops to come, resulting in a homicide that the cops should have prevented or other such ridiculousness. Again with respect, what you or I want, doesn't change reality.
Traffic congestion on radio, much the same as on freeways, causes delays. Delays in emergency response is a very bad thing. I've never seen documentation on delays caused by "jams". The delays I've heard about, are caused by PEOPLE not making the right choices.
And my previous question remains --- are the emergency calls digital?

You can pack a whole lot of calls into a short time, if they're digitized. And no emergency person CARES if the audio is slightly distorted.

....people who watch TV, and record movies, care about distortion...
It doesn't really matter if you buy it or not. The NTSC standard is dead inside of two months. It's not even close to being a decent signal. Really? What part "isn't decent"? Picture? I can't see the difference. NO one in stores that I've seen, even viewing "blue-ray hi-deff", can tell the difference.

Sound is better? Hmmm; analog is hi-fi, surround-sound, DBX encrypted. Analog has no digital distortion. Tell me what sounds better --- vinyl, or CD?
You say you're an electronics engineer? That's what the paper in the frame says...
Tell me what happens when you mix signals like the NTSC standard does with Chroma and Luminance with an IF. You'll never achieve 100% fidelity. You'll always get out worse than what you put into the blender.Let's see --- the video signal must get to my eyes, each of which has ~100 million sensors. 1/3 of which are cones. That comprises a matrix comparable to about 5700x5700 pixels; but that's not the whole story --- the Macula is quite small, and is the "highest resolution" center.

In short, the Human eye is low resolution. No one can SEE those errors.
Digital doesn't have that problem with fidelity. If you put in a 1 and a 0, you get out a 1 and a 0. It's a lot more perfect.That's not the whole story, and you know it; if there is NOISE, the digital receiver cannot strip OUT those ones and zeros.

It's better to see NOISE, than to see NOTHING.
UHF doesn't travel as far, and digital doesn't tolerate noise.
Oh but let's just sit in front of our house-chained-sets, chanting:
"Digital is better! Digital is better! Digital is better!"


Nothing has been said by anyone to overturn the basic reality --- we don't have the technology to allow analog to shut off. The big motivation is "money-grab".

Our money. At least it used to be...

[gdoane]

Are they "digital"?

Yes, they are. They conform to the APCO 25 digital modulation plan. Bandwidth has been reduced from 5 KHz to 2.5 KHz and trunking has been implemented to wring every last bit of available resources dry before the public was ever asked to sacrifice anything.

As I asked before, how many people die because of "jammed radio"?

I said before, such deaths are attributed to delays. Delays are a result of radio unavailability.

I see; so in a firefight the officer can type his info into a terminal???

No, that's to AVOID a firefight. You see, it helps to know if the guy you're dealing with is a bad hombre or not. Knowing that can get the bad hombres off the street and keep the number of firefights to a minimum.


All cellular telephones now have "direction finding". Odds are the cop has a phone.
And if he doesn't, there's no way that short GPS bursts jam spectrum.


I know all about how E-911 works and it's not up to snuff for public safety requirements. Cell phones don't work everywhere and they especially don't work when you need them the most.

So millions of people must have their television service reduced, so a few police officers can have "extra features"? Meaning no disrespect --- there are no news stories about any emergency service personnel injured/dying because of radio jams.

Television service is being increased, not reduced. Most broadcasters are getting three channels to replace the one they're giving up. Tripling capacity is not a reduction in service.

It's not just emergency service personnel dying due to delayed critical response times... civilians needing assistance die waiting for that ambulance too.

This "digital revolution" is all about money. Everyone else here knows it.

No, it's not. It's about the responsible management of a limited resource and the irresponsible squandering of that resource by sticking with the NTSC standard that the FCC released in 1941.

That's right, the standard is as old as WORLD WAR II. Why are we using WWII era technology in the 21st century? It's wasteful, it's dated, and it no longer meets the needs of the American people.

Gosh --- how many other freedoms do we now enjoy, that should be called "luxury" and taken away??? As one who has BEEN jobless, one can cover the available job listings in a few hours a day; but you're saying that when I come home and eat dinner, or want to watch the 11 o'clock news, I CAN'T because I'm JOBLESS?

You can watch the 11 O'clock news anytime you want. You own a computer. Just point your browser to your favorite station's website and watch the streaming video. You don't need a TV if you have a computer.


Let's make a list of freedoms that aren't necessary and should be canceled. Sigh.
Again with respect, what you or I want, doesn't change reality.
I've never seen documentation on delays caused by "jams". The delays I've heard about, are caused by PEOPLE not making the right choices.
And my previous question remains --- are the emergency calls digital?


The radios are indeed digital. The standard is called APCO 25 or P-25. http://www.apco911.org/frequency/project25/information.html

I can answer any question you like concerning it. I work on this stuff for a living.

You can pack a whole lot of calls into a short time, if they're digitized. And no emergency person CARES if the audio is slightly distorted.

Au contraire, I talk to First Responders all the time and they want NO MISTAKES. If an officer transmits "HOLD YOUR FIRE!" and the only thing that the other radios hear is "FIRE!" there's going to be trouble. Having to repeat traffic or worse, missing traffic is not acceptable in public safety communications.


....people who watch TV, and record movies, care about distortion...
Really? What part "isn't decent"? Picture? I can't see the difference. NO one in stores that I've seen, even viewing "blue-ray hi-deff", can tell the difference.


I can go into most any store and look at the picture on their TV's, and tell you with almost 100% accuracy whether the signal source is RF, Composite, S-Video, Component or HDMI. The easiest way to tell is how clean the lines of contrast are when text is present in the signal.

Trust me, you wouldn't like your computer display much if it were modulated over RF and put on your TV.

Sound is better? Hmmm; analog is hi-fi, surround-sound, DBX encrypted. Analog has no digital distortion. Tell me what sounds better --- vinyl, or CD?

My iPod has literally 4 days, over 100 hours of music on it and it slips into my pocket. Let's see you slip 200+ CD's into your pocket. Digital is more practical.

Analog does have distortion, by the way. Anything requiring amplification will. Class A amplifiers are still going to mix and distort. Not as badly as Class B or Class C amplifiers, but class A amplifiers are also the least efficient of the designs.


That's what the paper in the frame says...
Let's see --- the video signal must get to my eyes, each of which has ~100 million sensors. 1/3 of which are cones. That comprises a matrix comparable to about 5700x5700 pixels; but that's not the whole story --- the Macula is quite small, and is the "highest resolution" center.


The highest resolution available in HDTV is 1080p. That's about a FIFTH of what you're claiming the human eye can see at 5700.


In short, the Human eye is low resolution. No one can SEE those errors.
That's not the whole story, and you know it; if there is NOISE, the digital receiver cannot strip OUT those ones and zeros.


Sure it can. It's called Forward Error Correction. http://www.tech-faq.com/forward-error-correction.shtml

Such error correction is a basic strength of digital media transmissions. It doesn't have to strip out those ones and zeros because it gets another shot at them.


It's better to see NOISE, than to see NOTHING.
UHF doesn't travel as far, and digital doesn't tolerate noise.
Oh but let's just sit in front of our house-chained-sets, chanting:
"Digital is better! Digital is better! Digital is better!"


UHF travels plenty far. We use UHF to talk to Geostationary Satellites in the Clarke Belt orbiting 22,000 miles out and back.

Did I mention I'm also a satcom technician? Satellite comms dropped analog transmission back around the time AT&T lost Galaxy 5 in the mid 1990's to a solar flare. Almost all satcom broadcast is now digital multiplex uplink so almost all of your precious analog TV has already been digitized at least once. Surely you don't believe that your superior analog signal has never been digital?

Nothing has been said by anyone to overturn the basic reality --- we don't have the technology to allow analog to shut off. The big motivation is "money-grab".

Our money. At least it used to be...

Like I said, it's not about money, it's about resource management. The NTSC Standard was published in 1941 when there were no emerging technologies screaming for bandwidth. Taking 6 MHz gulps for TV channels seemed like the sensible thing to do back then, but no more.

Wi-Fi.
Cell Phones.
Bluetooth.
RFID.
GPS.
On-Star.
Lo-Jack.
EVDO
Keyless Remote Entry.
Garage Door Openers.
Family Radio Service.

Every little bit of technological magic wants a slice of the RF pie, and it's a limited resource. So limited that a pig taking 6 MHz of bandwidth needs to be led to the slaughter because we've got a lot better things to be doing with that bacon.

So long and Sayonara to NTSC. At 68 years old, it's time to put that old dog down.

[chip]

There are worse things to be called, than a "loon". :P
Really. Go to this link, for the specifications:
http://rsk.imageg.net/graphics/uc/rsk/Support/ProductManuals/55030051_SP_EN.pdf

Scroll down --- "receives AM, FM, and...
CHANNELS 2-13 NTSC!!!

Starting next February, that is ONE MORE unit that WILL NOT WORK.

You are part of the problem, Chip; everyone is saying "Oh you can buy them" --- NO YOU CAN'T. You many be one of those who THOUGHT the technology exists; but it doesn't. The guy at that "seminar" lied through his face --- "they are making pocket sets". That's what he said, and he KNEW it was a lie. And people BELIEVE the lies, until they try to go BUY one.

I said "Radio Shack has one that runs an HOUR or two; and I said it uses a Lithium battery, expensive, requiring frequent replacement.

You said "Here is a pocket radio that receives digital TV".
Would you like some ketchup, or salt when you eat your words?


LOL

Eat my words? Your the one knowingly spreading lies about the digital switchover.

Again

You claimed

"Television away from home will not be allowed."--Big Lie


You claimed

"Pocket TV's will not be allowed."--Another big Lie


What is your aversion to just being truthful? OK so you wont get TV audio on a radio. Oh no!!!! Everything else will still be available, you can still use a TV away from home, you can still use pocket TV's, there will still be portable TV's.

[zerk]

in the 800 sqft of my condo I have a 67" samsung DLP 1080p tv, a 32" proveiw LCD 1080i tv and a 32" Sony CRT 1080i tv. all three double as computer monitors and I have a half dozen game consoles and 3+ (3 connected and extras in case one breaks) HD DVD players with almost 200 titles ( I started buying up the great deals this summer, after the technologies demiseand this spring), a blue ray player with about 10 movies. not too mention a vast amount of DVDs, which I have been collecting since '99.


if you don't believe in HDTV come watch football with me n my 67" and we'll watch a quarter on the regular TV channel and then one on the HDTV channel.

[gadgetere]

Yes, they are. They conform to the APCO 25 digital modulation plan. Bandwidth has been reduced from 5 KHz to 2.5 KHz and trunking has been implemented to wring every last bit of available resources dry before the public was ever asked to sacrifice anything.Then there should be no problem with available channels.
Television service is being increased, not reduced. Most broadcasters are getting three channels to replace the one they're giving up. Tripling capacity is not a reduction in service. If reception range is decreasing from ~70 miles to as little as 20, it's decreasing. You know that analog is watchable with as much as 95% snow; digital does not tolerate noise. A little noise is ignored by digital; more than that, the channel is blank.
It's not just emergency service personnel dying due to delayed critical response times... civilians needing assistance die waiting for that ambulance too.Cite the news stories.
No, it's not. It's about the responsible management of a limited resource and the irresponsible squandering of that resource by sticking with the NTSC standard that the FCC released in 1941. And the balance is all the people who don't have money, forced to make a choice --- food/medicine, or tv. I'm tired of hearing "television is a luxury; not a necessity". What other freedoms do we now enjoy, that we don't need?

What about the luxury of free travel? Why, if we stop everyone at all borders (even town limits) and demand papers, that will catch a BUNCH of crimes; but the Founding Fathers did not want to live like that.

Contrast Bill Clinton, after the Oklahoma City Bombing:
"We may have to give up some of our freedoms in the interest of public safety"...

...with Benjamin Franklin:
"Those who are willing to forsake freedoms for safety, deserve neither freedoms nor safety"...

[gadgetere]

That's right, the standard is as old as WORLD WAR II. Why are we using WWII era technology in the 21st century? It's wasteful, it's dated, and it no longer meets the needs of the American people.Because it's the only format that allows portability.
You can watch the 11 O'clock news anytime you want. You own a computer. Just point your browser to your favorite station's website and watch the streaming video. You don't need a TV if you have a computer. Hmmm; I have DIALUP, because I don't have much money. I pay 5 bucks a month; I can retrieve email and do some surfing; and I can go to the library.

...I cannot watch tv programming on line, real time...
Au contraire, I talk to First Responders all the time and they want NO MISTAKES. If an officer transmits "HOLD YOUR FIRE!" and the only thing that the other radios hear is "FIRE!" there's going to be trouble. Having to repeat traffic or worse, missing traffic is not acceptable in public safety communications.Cite the incidents. There aren't any being reported that I've seen.
I can go into most any store and look at the picture on their TV's, and tell you with almost 100% accuracy whether the signal source is RF, Composite, S-Video, Component or HDMI. The easiest way to tell is how clean the lines of contrast are when text is present in the signal. And that's standing in front of the set. As I said, in numerous instances I've "butted in" to people drooling over "Blue-Ray Hi-Deff", and asked them to take ten small steps backwards, the distance to their couch.

...they can't tell the difference...
Trust me, you wouldn't like your computer display much if it were modulated over RF and put on your TV. I don't type on my tv. The comparison is similar to comparing "tv" with "8-track"...
My iPod has literally 4 days, over 100 hours of music on it and it slips into my pocket. Let's see you slip 200+ CD's into your pocket. Digital is more practical. Does your iPod, RECEIVE?

[gadgetere]

Analog does have distortion, by the way. Anything requiring amplification will. Class A amplifiers are still going to mix and distort. Not as badly as Class B or Class C amplifiers, but class A amplifiers are also the least efficient of the designs.And digital goes through amplifiers; first it exists as "analog", then it goes through an "analog-to-digital-converter"; then transmitted, then goes through a "digital to analog converter", a couple more amplifiers, finally a speaker.

...it's more distorted...
The highest resolution available in HDTV is 1080p. That's about a FIFTH of what you're claiming the human eye can see at 5700.The only way to utilize 5700, is for the screen to completely fill your eye.

When the screen occupies a TENTH of the eye (or less, which is what happens at normal viewing distances), then analog already exceeds Human visual acuity.

Add to that the reality that most people are myopic (and have other imperfections); thus the ability to resolve fine details is reduced further.

There's no way to deny that for the vast majority, DTV is not sharper. At the presentation, they had the exact same picture side by side --- one "hi def", the other "standard"; no one could see the difference.

You can see it in the video store, standing inches away from the screen.
Human nature transfers the "expectation of improvement" to home; but people would fail a comparison test, given with adequate controls...

[gadgetere]

UHF travels plenty far. We use UHF to talk to Geostationary Satellites in the Clarke Belt orbiting 22,000 miles out and back. Hmmm; how many trees and buildings are in the way? How many watts are used? (Answer that in watts/square-area, because those are focused beams; tv is not.)
Like I said, it's not about money, it's about resource management. The NTSC Standard was published in 1941 when there were no emerging technologies screaming for bandwidth. Taking 6 MHz gulps for TV channels seemed like the sensible thing to do back then, but no more.So the "sensible thing to do", is force people to spend money they don't have in the midst of an economic crisis, before technology has caught up.

...oh, I forgot --- "tv is a luxury, not a necessity". So are cars, flashlights, and many other things; let's make a list of freedoms we don't need.
=So long and Sayonara to NTSC. At 68 years old, it's time to put that old dog down.So long to portable tv; so long to pocket sets at a ball game, bus station, airport. So long to tv audio in the car.

So long to tv in an emergency; got a tornado, hurricane, earthquake? Tough toenails; you can't be informed even if it costs your life. Just keep up on radio.

....that is, until radio goes "HD", which is what they're trying NOW...

"Hello" to greater costs; repairs (if you can FIND someone to do the repair --- else you'll just "BUY MORE".) Hello to lead-bearing sets in landfills. Millions of tons. Hello to more commercials, less programming.

As the website states, a "cost/benefit analysis" is very clear --- don't shut off the analog.

www.stophdtv.org (http://www.stophdtv.org) --- if anyone has extra money they don't want, then relax and do nothing;
if you DON'T, then sign the petition.

[gadgetere]

LOL

Eat my words? Your the one knowingly spreading lies about the digital switchover.Really?
1. There are no pocket TV's.
2. There are no pocket radios that receive digital tv sound.

You claimed RS sold one --- I simply clicked on "specifications", and proved you were wrong. That set receives standard analog, not digital.

Thus, "eat your words"...
Again

You claimed

"Television away from home will not be allowed."--Big LieShow me the pocket sets that EXIST, let alone ones priced within range of most.
What is your aversion to just being truthful? OK so you wont get TV audio on a radio. Oh no!!!! Everything else will still be available, you can still use a TV away from home, you can still use pocket TV's, there will still be portable TV's.Please read this carefully ---
THERE ARE NO POCKET DIGITAL TV'S

And there likely won't BE any, for YEARS.

I said, there are "pseudo-portable" ones --- if you carry a LARGE PURSE, then you can carry a TV. But better fork over several hundred dollars for extra rechargeable batteries, and extra chargers. (Then be prepared to lug the stuff around, and fumble with holding them to watch...)

No matter how you "slice" it, we're losing function --- severely...

[gdoane]

And digital goes through amplifiers; first it exists as "analog", then it goes through an "analog-to-digital-converter"; then transmitted, then goes through a "digital to analog converter", a couple more amplifiers, finally a speaker.

...it's more distorted...

Not at all. The transmission of digital allows for CRC and Forward Error Correction so any errors introduced can be restored to digital perfection in reception.


The only way to utilize 5700, is for the screen to completely fill your eye.

The 72" screen in my living room pretty much does that.


When the screen occupies a TENTH of the eye (or less, which is what happens at normal viewing distances), then analog already exceeds Human visual acuity.

Then I must have superhuman visual acuity because I can spot the difference easily on any set larger than 42".

Add to that the reality that most people are myopic (and have other imperfections); thus the ability to resolve fine details is reduced further.

Only if you factor in old people losing their sight. Most people my age have great vision and don't even need glasses.

There's no way to deny that for the vast majority, DTV is not sharper. At the presentation, they had the exact same picture side by side --- one "hi def", the other "standard"; no one could see the difference.

Maybe they should have demo'ed it someplace besides the Special Olympics.

You can see it in the video store, standing inches away from the screen.
Human nature transfers the "expectation of improvement" to home; but people would fail a comparison test, given with adequate controls...

Most people don't know how to properly adjust their TV sets. Ask the average joe what the difference is between Gamma and Brightness and you won't ever get a right answer.

[AugustGem]

Is this portable and digital?

http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/messaging-internet/mobile-tv/?wt.srch=1

[zerk]

sega is making a portable media player with digital TV called the sega vision.

[ogibillm]

sega is making a portable media player with digital TV called the sega vision.

sega is making hardware again? weird

eta: looked it up... sounds interesting

[zerk]

they should make the Dreamcast II, with 1080p Hi-Def, wireless tilt controlers and touchscreen/color VMUs.

[gadgetere]

Is this portable and digital?

http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/messaging-internet/mobile-tv/?wt.srch=1

No --- it is a subscription service.

"*Offer valid for new subscriptions on AT&T Mobile TV Basic plan only. Compatible phone required. You must contact AT&T customer service by dialing 611 to receive this offer if you have subscribed to AT&T Mobile TV through your phone."

As I said, prepare to pay and pay and pay.

[gadgetere]

Not at all. The transmission of digital allows for CRC and Forward Error Correction so any errors introduced can be restored to digital perfection in reception.The concept of "digital perfection", itself is flawed; look at the website --- all digital has distortion.

Question --- which format has better sound, "vinyl", or "cd"? CD is "digital perfection". But vinyl sounds better.
The 72" screen in my living room pretty much does that.So because you can afford a 72" screen, the rest of the public must suffer?

This is "free America"?
Only if you factor in old people losing their sight. Most people my age have great vision and don't even need glasses.I'm slightly myopic. But there are no restrictions on my license.

The majority of people who think they can "instantly spot the difference", will fail a "blind test". A psychological phenomena of "expectation" applies.
Maybe they should have demo'ed it someplace besides the Special Olympics.I think you are better than insults and "ad-hominem".

It detracts from productive discussion.
Most people don't know how to properly adjust their TV sets. Ask the average joe what the difference is between Gamma and Brightness and you won't ever get a right answer.And ask "the average Joe" what digital is, and he won't know.

...look on the website, and it's clearly explained...

www.stophdtv.org

[foxgurrrl]

Ripoff.

[Ballygrl]

Can I ask a question?

I have 7 TV's in my house, we get cable through cablevision, we have 5 boxes for 5 of the TV's, the other 2 TV's are cable ready so we don't have a box for those, we just use the cable wire, they're in rooms that aren't used that much so we deal with the channels offered.

Are we going to have to get boxes now to use on those 2 TV's? or can I continue using the cable wire?

[gdoane]

The concept of "digital perfection", itself is flawed; look at the website --- all digital has distortion.

Of course it does. However, the distortion is PREDICTABLE which makes it easily compensated for. For example, in digital land mobile radio vocoders, the algorithms are different for different language sets to account for very predictable sets of phonemes which are different between Germanic, Romantic and Asian languages.

Question --- which format has better sound, "vinyl", or "cd"? CD is "digital perfection". But vinyl sounds better.

Not when it's worn out and scratched all to hell it doesn't sound better. Vinyl sounds worse and worse with every play.

Try this experiment for analog. Print out a copy of something, anything at all from a digital source. An e-mail, this post, whatever, and copy it. Then copy the copy. Then copy the copy of the copy. You'll soon find the copies deteriorate at about the 4th or 5th generation so badly as to become unacceptable. Not so with digital copies.

So because you can afford a 72" screen, the rest of the public must suffer?

It's a LUXURY ITEM. What size screen did George Washington have? Abe Lincoln? Thomas Jefferson??? Oh, that's right, they didn't HAVE any screens. They didn't own any cars and never had an e-mail address either. These things are LUXURY ITEMS, not necessities.

A lack of a luxury item is not in any way equal to "suffering". How can you make such a ridiculous charge? Television wasn't even in half of American homes until the 1970's, after this nation was nearly 200 years old. Are you suggesting that Americans suffered due to a lack of TV pablum for 200 years before being rescued by "Gilligan's Island" or some such?

This is "free America"?


If you take the meaning of "free" to be anarchy, then no. I do not confuse anarchy and freedom. America is a Republic, governed by rule of law.


I'm slightly myopic. But there are no restrictions on my license.

The majority of people who think they can "instantly spot the difference", will fail a "blind test". A psychological phenomena of "expectation" applies.


Nope, I'll tell you the easiest way to do it. Pull up a normally SVGA display like e-mail with high contrast on a progressive scan output and you'll see just how bad an alternate-laced display like NTSC is.
Around the high contrast colors of the RGB output you'll notice a "crawling ants" giveaway due to the artifacting. Once you know what you're looking for, it's ugly and stone cold obvious.


I think you are better than insults and "ad-hominem".

It detracts from productive discussion.
And ask "the average Joe" what digital is, and he won't know.


Point taken, and my counterpoint would be that you could ask twenty average people today what NTSC is an acronym for (National Television System Committee) and they won't know that either.

Nor do average joes know much of anything about why TV is the way it is.

For example, the NTSC 4:3 aspect ratio wasn't picked by any logical manner. It was picked because that's what the movies of the time were being projected in. Movies since progressed to 16:9 aspect ratio (now called widescreen) because that aspect ratio better represents how people really see things.

Another example is the colorburst signal added onto the back porch of the NTSC standard. NTSC as originally designed was a Black and White signal. The color is a very lowly defined burst signal added as a piggyback to keep Black and White sets functional. It basically sucks, doesn't do the job adequately and requires a comb filter using recovered clocking from the broadcast source which may or may not be affected by multipath interference or fading, which would be why weak signals look like they lose their color... they do.

...look on the website, and it's clearly explained...

www.stophdtv.org (http://www.stophdtv.org)

8-track tapes.
Polaroid cameras.
Pinball machines.

I appreciate old technologies, I really do. I can name, off of the top of my head, all five parts of a Pentode tube (Plate, Screen Grid, Control Grid, Suppressor Grid, and Anode) but I know what the old technologies did and what the new technologies offer.

Horses and buggies were great. They can't pull off 75 MPH on the Interstate. They got the basic idea going, but it's time to let 'em be museum pieces sometime.

[gdoane]

Can I ask a question?

I have 7 TV's in my house, we get cable through cablevision, we have 5 boxes for 5 of the TV's, the other 2 TV's are cable ready so we don't have a box for those, we just use the cable wire, they're in rooms that aren't used that much so we deal with the channels offered.

Are we going to have to get boxes now to use on those 2 TV's? or can I continue using the cable wire?

Short answer is yes, you can continue using the cable wire.

CATV (cable TV) systems are considered "closed systems" as they are not broadcast over the airwaves. The FCC rulemaking has no effect on closed systems.

Theoretically, you could make your own Cable TV system in your own home with a DVD player rerunning the same movie ten times per day on one coax-connected channel going to every set connected to it. In fact, that pretty much defines HBO.

The rulemaking only affects antenna reception. No other sort of use is affected at all. Cable TV is left the same as it ever was.

[FactHunter]

Sound is BETTER on analog. Analog doesn't have digital distortion.

Ignoring the rest of your rant, this is just factually wrong.

Please tell me what "digital distortion" is, and then compare it to the distortion found in analog.

[Ballygrl]

Short answer is yes, you can continue using the cable wire.

CATV (cable TV) systems are considered "closed systems" as they are not broadcast over the airwaves. The FCC rulemaking has no effect on closed systems.

Theoretically, you could make your own Cable TV system in your own home with a DVD player rerunning the same movie ten times per day on one coax-connected channel going to every set connected to it. In fact, that pretty much defines HBO.

The rulemaking only affects antenna reception. No other sort of use is affected at all. Cable TV is left the same as it ever was.

That's great news, thanks! I was a little annoyed thinking they were going to force me to get boxes for those TV's.

[Gray]

It's really not improved. I have full-on cable TV, digital tiers, 300 channels and I watch maybe 3 hours of TV per week. Mostly news when I do watch.

I'd rather play movies on my DVD or play videogames on one of my console game systems than play channel roulette and hope one of the networks actually has something worth watching on.

We're stuck on reality shows now. If I wanted to see cops I'd go to a doughnut shop. If I wanted to see fat people I'd go to Waffle House. If I wanted to see bad singing I'd go to a Karaoke night club.

I don't like reality shows. If I wanted reality I don't need a TV, all I need is a walk.

Season TV Shows DVDs are the bomb.

[gdoane]

Ignoring the rest of your rant, this is just factually wrong.

Please tell me what "digital distortion" is, and then compare it to the distortion found in analog.

Are you familiar with the Nyquist Rate?

http://www.answers.com/topic/nyquist-theorem?method=22

Digital sampling is limited by how many samples it takes. If you don't take enough samples, at least half the rate of whatever you're sampling is happening at, then basically you're never going to get anything better than a guess of a reproduction.

The range of human hearing is basically from 300 to 3,000 Hz. The telephony biz graphs that in "C-Message Weighting" to make telephone calls happen in limited bandwidth. Most information that the human ear processes happens outside of the C-Message spectrum.

It's a tradeoff between fidelity and bandwidth, a classic case of resource management. If you can do the job with 3 KHz of bandwidth, but 20 KHz would sound better and carry the harmonics and resonations, then do you do the job effectively with one-sixth of the resources or be a purist wasting five times more bandwidth than you need?

I'm a conservative. I believe in taking what you need, but I do not believe in waste. I don't leave faucets running, I turn unused lights off, I participate in recycling and I like saving money too.

I like digital technology because it takes resources so very seriously. Much more seriously than any analog technology ever has, this side of Morse Code.

BTW, Morse Code... is digital.

[gdoane]

Season TV Shows DVDs are the bomb.

I used to think so too until I got Gilligan's Island Season One and Two at the same time. I should have saved that for my retirement. I couldn't get anything done at all until I saw how Professor got them off the Island.

[Ballygrl]

I used to think so too until I got Gilligan's Island Season One and Two at the same time. I should have saved that for my retirement. I couldn't get anything done at all until I saw how Professor got them off the Island.

:))

Wasn't season 1 in black and white? for some reason the color versions of Gilligans Island are funnier then the black and white version. I love the radioactive vegetables episode.

[FactHunter]

....people who watch TV, and record movies, care about distortion...
Really? What part "isn't decent"? Picture? I can't see the difference. NO one in stores that I've seen, even viewing "blue-ray hi-deff", can tell the difference.

HD vs SD is trivially easy to determine on any half-decent display. Even on quarter-decent ones.

Sound is better? Hmmm; analog is hi-fi, surround-sound, DBX encrypted. Analog has no digital distortion. Tell me what sounds better --- vinyl, or CD?

"Better" is subjective. As to objective fidelity to the original source (the master) - CD is vastly superior, hands down and it's not even remotely close.

Greater bandwidth? - CD wins
Phase distortions? - CD wins
Noise/Dynamic range? - CD wins
Impulse noise? - CD wins
Low frequency artifacts? - CD wins
Longevity of media (continued fidelity)? - CD wins
Better cover art? - ah, well, there you go, vinyl wins

That's what the paper in the frame says...

Gee, mine too, and I betcha mine is from a more highly-regarded university. Big deal.

[FactHunter]

Are you familiar with the Nyquist Rate?

http://www.answers.com/topic/nyquist-theorem?method=22



Yes, I am quite familiar with the Nyquist Theorem, and sampling rates, etc. etc. etc.

Digital sampling is limited by how many samples it takes. If you don't take enough samples, at least half the rate of whatever you're sampling is happening at, then basically you're never going to get anything better than a guess of a reproduction.

And the flip side of this is that whatever does fall into the band of interest (f < 1/2 of the sampling rate) is captured perfectly (within the constraints of bit width, etc.). Properly implemented, the digitization itself introduces no distortion below the Nyquist frequency.

The range of human hearing is basically from 300 to 3,000 Hz.

The range of human hearing is roughly 20 to 20,000 Hz (for young'uns; the high end does deteriorate somewhat as one ages and/or is exposed to excessive sound).

I will assume though that you are referring to spoken voice, however, in which case your numbers seem reasonable.

It's a tradeoff between fidelity and bandwidth, a classic case of resource management. If you can do the job with 3 KHz of bandwidth, but 20 KHz would sound better and carry the harmonics and resonations, then do you do the job effectively with one-sixth of the resources or be a purist wasting five times more bandwidth than you need?

Of course it's a tradeoff. I believe that the voice-only channels of XM/Sirius are squeezed into a 2.5Kbps channel. The audio quality stinks, but I can still hear the Sharks games! Note that they overly compress (to my mind) the music channels as well - a vague recollection is that these are 40-64kbps. Perceptual coding can do wonders, but this is a far cry from CD quality.

I'm a conservative. I believe in taking what you need, but I do not believe in waste. I don't leave faucets running, I turn unused lights off, I participate in recycling and I like saving money too.

I like digital technology because it takes resources so very seriously. Much more seriously than any analog technology ever has, this side of Morse Code.

BTW, Morse Code... is digital.

Higher quality and lower bandwidth - what's not to love? :D

[gadgetere]

On the talk shows lately people have been calling, realizing that in power outages (ice storm, etcetera) they won't have emergency television. One talk show host said "Yeah, what about Hurricane Katrina?"

Our new president was quoted as "asking Congress for an extension to the tv shutoff". Depressing thing, is that we're supposed to TELL Congress what we want ("of the people, by the people, for the people"), not vice-versa.

One only asks permission, from a dictator.

Sigh...

[gdoane]

On the talk shows lately people have been calling, realizing that in power outages (ice storm, etcetera) they won't have emergency television. One talk show host said "Yeah, what about Hurricane Katrina?"

Our new president was quoted as "asking Congress for an extension to the tv shutoff". Depressing thing, is that we're supposed to TELL Congress what we want ("of the people, by the people, for the people"), not vice-versa.

One only asks permission, from a dictator.

Sigh...

It's unreasonable to power a television in a power outage. You're talking about 20 watts per hour for an average 12" Black and White TV.

Go try to find a battery that can hold a 20 watt draw for more than a day. Your car battery couldn't do that.

In emergency conditions, power needs to be sipped, not gulped down and TV's are gulpers.

Television isn't even a reasonable emergency information source. A laptop PC with a wireless card or a typical cell phone would be far superior because information is on demand, and not just waiting and hoping that the broadcasters will talk about your affected area.

Of course, there's a possibility that the cell phone towers will go down, but seeing as how cell phone towers are typically a third of the size of television broadcast towers and consume a tenth of their power requirements it readily apparent which technology has the greater survivability in a disaster.

Television is the weakest link. The fancier you get, the less reliability you'll have. TV is wholly unsuitable for emergency class communications which is why no public safety agency uses it for 911 dispatch operations.

[AeroEngineer]

Did I mention I'm an electronic engineer? I know full well what they use.

For some strange reason, I don't believe you.

What is the common name of this type of chart?

http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/2739/plots9pr6.th.png (http://img150.imageshack.us/my.php?image=plots9pr6.png)

[chip]

On the talk shows lately people have been calling, realizing that in power outages (ice storm, etcetera) they won't have emergency television.

Thats what emergency radios are for, duh.

[Vaard]

i have 2 hd and 1 non had tv........

i have hdmi on one of the tvs and the other i use those red green and blue hook ups, forget the name atm.........


i dont really notice much of a difference between any of them........

[gadgetere]

Thats what emergency radios are for, duh.Yes, I LOVE watching my radio. Why, in 1999 when a tornado hit town at midnight (you could see it in the light from the exploding transformers), it was VERY informative watching my radio, and seeing exactly the path the twister was taking. Hey who needs TV when we can watch all we need on RADIO. (That tornado passed right over the house, btw, thank God it was not on the ground.)

But you're RIGHT, we get exactly the same level of warning by WATCHING RADIO.

Sigh.

[Wookinstien]

1 more month.

I get to turn off the old transmitter! Still in negotiation whether or not I can set about a pound of C4 under it and send it into orbit!

Our Digital and HD transmitters are purring along great!

can't wait!

[gadgetere]

It's unreasonable to power a television in a power outage. You're talking about 20 watts per hour for an average 12" Black and White TV. Hmmm; my favorite television is a Citizen 2.5", yes it's black and white, and it runs for more than TWELVE HOURS on four "AAA" batteries.
Go try to find a battery that can hold a 20 watt draw for more than a day. Your car battery couldn't do that. Backatchya --- the ANALOG pocket tv's are very low power; the BRIEFCASE (or large-purse-sized) hdtv's, draw lots of power.
In emergency conditions, power needs to be sipped, not gulped down and TV's are gulpers. Did I mention I have about two dozen pocket tv's? Some of them (the "Watchman" for instance, with its real CRT) do "guzzle power".

...the rest of them do not...

But while we're complaining, the only "portable converter" proposed, runs offa six "D" batteries; and not even for a day...
Television isn't even a reasonable emergency information source. A laptop PC with a wireless card or a typical cell phone would be far superior because information is on demand, and not just waiting and hoping that the broadcasters will talk about your affected area. Hmmm; how many "AAA" batteries does your laptop use? MINE, uses a rechargeable battery; and only runs for an hour. Gee, that's the same complaint as about the "pseudo-portable dtv".
Of course, there's a possibility that the cell phone towers will go down, but seeing as how cell phone towers are typically a third of the size of television broadcast towers and consume a tenth of their power requirements it readily apparent which technology has the greater survivability in a disaster.Well, my cell phone does NOT have video. ANd it's rechargeable also --- remember me telling about the ice storm, we lost power for 1-3 WEEKS?

But hey, we don't really NEED tv, it's a luxury; and the loss of freedom is not a problem to those for whom it doesn't directly impact.
Television is the weakest link. The fancier you get, the less reliability you'll have.Now you're finally making sense. Problem is, you just quoted the WEBSITE.

DTV's are MUCH more complicated, therefore prone to failure, expensive to repair (if you CAN get it fixed!).

Thank you! :razz: TV is wholly unsuitable for emergency class communications which is why no public safety agency uses it for 911 dispatch operations.And with respect, why do you feel qualified to decide that part of my freedoms for me?

Sigh.

[gadgetere]

i have 2 hd and 1 non had tv........

i have hdmi on one of the tvs and the other i use those red green and blue hook ups, forget the name atm.........


i dont really notice much of a difference between any of them........In a "blind taste test", no one can tell the difference in formats; they ran two pics on DTV's in the show-room, one STANDARD resolution, and one HIGH-DEFF --- no one in the room could tell the difference.

"Look around the eyes, maybe you can see it" suggested the salesman.

...we couldn't...

As the website says, all five "benefits" are bogus.

I'm still furious at the commercials; especially the part about "BETTER SOUND".

Hi-fi, surround-sound, DBX-encrypted audio, is BETTER than digital.

[Wookinstien]

In a "blind taste test", no one can tell the difference in formats; they ran two pics on DTV's in the show-room, one STANDARD resolution, and one HIGH-DEFF --- no one in the room could tell the difference.

"Look around the eyes, maybe you can see it" suggested the salesman.

...we couldn't...

As the website says, all five "benefits" are bogus.

I'm still furious at the commercials; especially the part about "BETTER SOUND".

Hi-fi, surround-sound, DBX-encrypted audio, is BETTER than digital.

I can see the difference and hear the difference as well.

[gdoane]

Hmmm; my favorite television is a Citizen 2.5", yes it's black and white, and it runs for more than TWELVE HOURS on four "AAA" batteries.


A 2.5" screen at analog resolution isn't going to be of much use when informational text is scrolling along the bottom of the screen.


Backatchya --- the ANALOG pocket tv's are very low power; the BRIEFCASE (or large-purse-sized) hdtv's, draw lots of power.
Did I mention I have about two dozen pocket tv's? Some of them (the "Watchman" for instance, with its real CRT) do "guzzle power".


You have two dozen TV's and you claim that you can't afford an HDTV? Heck, I've only got five. I must be flat out broke compared to you.


But while we're complaining, the only "portable converter" proposed, runs offa six "D" batteries; and not even for a day...
Hmmm; how many "AAA" batteries does your laptop use? MINE, uses a rechargeable battery; and only runs for an hour. Gee, that's the same complaint as about the "pseudo-portable dtv".


http://www.amazon.com/Axion-AXN-8701-Widescreen-Portable-Handheld/dp/B001FWYLLG/ref=pd_cp_e_1?pf_rd_p=413863501&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B0002PSINY&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0P5EH9DYDM6RN4XNNC9H

$150 for a portable HDTV that has rechargeable batteries and comes with a car adapter. Target carries them.


Well, my cell phone does NOT have video. ANd it's rechargeable also --- remember me telling about the ice storm, we lost power for 1-3 WEEKS?

In that case the TV Stations are going to be off the air anyway because the generators won't run that long and it takes power to run a gas pump.

Nobody is going to bust their hump keeping a TV Station on the air in a widespread emergency to get information to the half-dozen people who might have working TV's and the power to run them.

TV stations will be the first to go in almost any disaster because the VHF and UHF antennas are vulnerable due to a necessary height above average terrain profile that MF antennas don't need down on the AM broadcast band. AM broadcast has bar none the most survivability of any public broadcast communications media.


But hey, we don't really NEED tv, it's a luxury; and the loss of freedom is not a problem to those for whom it doesn't directly impact.


Did George Washington have less freedom because he never owned a TV? TV has nothing whatsoever to do with freedom. This nation had freedom for 150 years before the idiot box landed in American living rooms.


Now you're finally making sense. Problem is, you just quoted the WEBSITE.

DTV's are MUCH more complicated, therefore prone to failure, expensive to repair (if you CAN get it fixed!).


They're no more complicated than a PC with a DVI output. Actually, DVI is electrically compatible with most DTV inputs. Anybody who can repair a DVI capable PC monitor shouldn't have much trouble with any digital TV.

Thank you! :razz: And with respect, why do you feel qualified to decide that part of my freedoms for me?

Sigh.

TV has nothing to do with freedoms. Analog TV is a GROTESQUE waste of natural resources that should be put to better purpose. Only a crummy 15% of TV reception is even watched from over the air broadcasts and when 85% of the United States Population has abandoned the airwaves then it's time to push the remaining stragglers off and find better ways to reclaim the wasteful excesses of broadcast television.

[gadgetere]

Wookenstein:
I can see the difference and hear the difference as well.You are the best judge of that; however, there are people who think they can tell the difference, but in a "blind test" can't. There is a psychological phenomena of "expectation".

...that's why placebos work...

(No disrespect intended...)

[gadgetere]

A 2.5" screen at analog resolution isn't going to be of much use when informational text is scrolling along the bottom of the screen. I can see the text on my small set, very easily. :)
You have two dozen TV's and you claim that you can't afford an HDTV? Heck, I've only got five. I must be flat out broke compared to you. They've accumulated over the years; and come from clearances, pawn shops, etcetera (and some from a time when I had more money...)

...not that I need to 'splain myself... ;)
$150 for a portable HDTV that has rechargeable batteries and comes with a car adapter. Target carries them.I don't have the extra $150; and how will I carry it around when I'm not in my car???
In that case the TV Stations are going to be off the air anyway because the generators won't run that long and it takes power to run a gas pump. 95% of our citizens had no power a year ago --- 1-3 weeks. ALL tv stations were still working.
Nobody is going to bust their hump keeping a TV Station on the air in a widespread emergency to get information to the half-dozen people who might have working TV's and the power to run them.EVERYONE here has the CBS affiliate on their FM radio; and MANY people have radios with TV sound, AND pocket sets like me.

Say --- why are we fighting? I want you to have the right to enjoy your life as you wish; will you say the same for me?
TV has nothing to do with freedoms. Analog TV is a GROTESQUE waste of natural resources that should be put to better purpose. Only a crummy 15% of TV reception is even watched from over the air broadcasts and when 85% of the United States Population has abandoned the airwaves then it's time to push the remaining stragglers off and find better ways to reclaim the wasteful excesses of broadcast television.Wasteful to WHOM? Not to me.

Wasteful to the PROFITEERS?

Yup.

[gadgetere]

Oops --- I missed the point about "hear the difference". Perhaps if the current tv sound was piped through a hi-fi stereo AMPLIFIER, people would realize that "DIGITAL SOUNDS BETTER", is a lie.

The DBX encryption scheme inflates the amplitude, and imposes variable pre-emphasis (which the receiver then decodes and restores); the result, is a very clear and clean, hi-fi SURROUND-SOUND compatible signal.

From a technical viewpoint, digital is NOT better. Digital may have a slightly higher audio frequency range; but anyone above teens can't hear those sounds (evidence by the "teens-only ringtones").

Analog sound is better. The commercials are paid for by consumer-products corporations (and government agencies).

[GoBucks]

:whistle:

[mtdim]

You are the best judge of that; however, there are people who think they can tell the difference, but in a "blind test" can't. There is a psychological phenomena of "expectation".

...that's why placebos work...

(No disrespect intended...)

About HD quality vs non-HD: I remember watching hockey used to be very difficult because it was always hard to see where the puck was; this was such a problem that they tried adding a digital "tail" to the puck for a while to make it easier to see (like the yellow first down line in football broadcasts). These days, with HD, it is very easy to see where the puck is, no digital tail necessary. Maybe other things have changed (camera angles or something), but this is a change that has been VERY clear to me.

I also notice that watching TV these days HD means you can see all of the little flaws and blemishes on actors' faces. I knew those damn celebs weren't perfect. :razz:

[gdoane]

I can see the text on my small set, very easily. :)

The text would be clearer on an HDTV. Most HDTV units have a handy zoom feature as well.


They've accumulated over the years; and come from clearances, pawn shops, etcetera (and some from a time when I had more money...)

...not that I need to 'splain myself... ;)


Just think how much cheaper they'll be when they're obsolete! People will practically giving the things away.

I don't have the extra $150; and how will I carry it around when I'm not in my car???

It only weighs two pounds including the batteries so it's lighter than the average laptop PC.


95% of our citizens had no power a year ago --- 1-3 weeks. ALL tv stations were still working.
EVERYONE here has the CBS affiliate on their FM radio; and MANY people have radios with TV sound, AND pocket sets like me.


And they're all obsolete in 4 weeks, joining the scrap heap of bygone technologies with the 8-track, the teletype, the telephone booth, the slide rule and the punch card reader.

Say --- why are we fighting? I want you to have the right to enjoy your life as you wish; will you say the same for me?
Wasteful to WHOM? Not to me.

Wasteful to the PROFITEERS?

Yup.

It's wasteful because 85% of television viewing is not done over the airwaves and new technologies are screaming for that reclaimed bandwidth which will be freed up once the WWII-era TV spectrum is reallocated to better uses.

RFID. Wireless Internet. Personal communications. The possibilities are wide open if we can just gore the old ox of analog television. It's a dated, wasteful technology standing in the way of glorious new technologies.

[Vaard]

About HD quality vs non-HD: I remember watching hockey used to be very difficult because it was always hard to see where the puck was; this was such a problem that they tried adding a digital "tail" to the puck for a while to make it easier to see (like the yellow first down line in football broadcasts). These days, with HD, it is very easy to see where the puck is, no digital tail necessary. Maybe other things have changed (camera angles or something), but this is a change that has been VERY clear to me.

I also notice that watching TV these days HD means you can see all of the little flaws and blemishes on actors' faces. I knew those damn celebs weren't perfect. :razz:

i see the puck and football fine on all three of my sets....... one of which is not HD

i think that has more to do cameras used to record the game and the transmission of the data........

[zerk]

/\you're not watching sports on HD channels then. I can't watch football or basketball, unless it's in atleast 1080i anymore.

[Wake-Up]

/\you're not watching sports on HD channels then. I can't watch football or basketball, unless it's in atleast 1080i anymore.

Then you must be watching sports on Blue Ray DVD's.

There are no broadcasts in 1080. HD broadcast are 720 today and for several years to come. Even if your TV is 1080, the best resolution you can get from broadcast TV is 720.

Only thing that comes across 1080 is Blue Ray.

[FactHunter]

Then you must be watching sports on Blue Ray DVD's.

There are no broadcasts in 1080. HD broadcast are 720 today and for several years to come. Even if your TV is 1080, the best resolution you can get from broadcast TV is 720.

Only thing that comes across 1080 is Blue Ray.

Your post is factually incorrect.

From wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p),

In the USA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States), 720p is used by ABC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Broadcasting_Company), Fox Broadcasting Company (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Broadcasting_Company) and ESPN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESPN) because the smoother image is desirable for fast-action sports telecasts, whereas 1080i is used by CBS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBS), NBC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBC), HBO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBO), Showtime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Showtime) and Discovery HD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_HD) due to the crisper picture particularly in non-moving shots.http://www.nbc.com/Footer/HDTV/ specifies 1080i broadcasts.

For an example from DirecTV (http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/packProg/channelChart2.jsp?assetId=1200064):

HD Theater delivers the awe–inspiring experience of high definition television in pure 1080i and 5.1 digital surround sound for millions of viewers. Others as well, but I'm too lazy to do additional searches.

[gdoane]

/\you're not watching sports on HD channels then. I can't watch football or basketball, unless it's in atleast 1080i anymore.

With all the athletes getting arrested these days it's hard to tell the difference between a game and a perp walk. The games ought to be sponsored by the Betty Ford Clinic.

Each TV has a "native resolution" and if a display is 1080i then everything that isn't 1080 has to be upscaled. You can't make upscaling look any better than the original source because there won't be any new image data from upscaling. The video source is all your TV can work with so an upscaled image will not look as good as an image in a TV's native resolution all the way from source to display.

[gadgetere]

The text would be clearer on an HDTV. Most HDTV units have a handy zoom feature as well.If I can already read the text just fine, then what good is it to make it more readable? That's one of the complaints; for the majority of people, analog is already sharper than most can see.

...but we're going to make it even SHARPER, even though most can't see it...
Just think how much cheaper they'll be when they're obsolete! People will practically giving the things away.More sarcasm. What good is a set that doesn't receive anything? And what good is TV when no real portable exists?

When there's a tornado, hurricane, earthquake, ice-storm, when all the power's out, just watch RADIO, and keep repeating to yourself:
THIS IS BETTER.
THIS IS BETTER.
THIS IS BETTER.
It only weighs two pounds including the batteries so it's lighter than the average laptop PC.Points:

2. The batteries only last a couple hours. If there's an emergency longer than that (the ice storm? Last winter? 1-3 weeks???), tough.

1. My couple dozen pocket TV's all weigh a few ounces. We cannot carry around a two pound, twelve inch brick.
And they're all obsolete in 4 weeks, joining the scrap heap of bygone technologies with the 8-track, the teletype, the telephone booth, the slide rule and the punch card reader. OK, let's review this --- you're not getting it.

The 8-track STILL WORKS. Tapes can still be BOUGHT.
The teletype was replaced with something BETTER.
The slide rule was replaced with something better, and only a dollar.
The phone booth was a LOSS; most people appreciated the privacy.
The punch card reader, to the user, is NOT as good as a thumbdrive.

If tv shuts off 2/14, we will NOT have "portable", we will NOT have "emergency tv", every person will fork over hundreds to buy equipment that gives resolution most can't see, and most don't want.

You're making such bad comparisons, because you don't have anything better to offer.
No disrespect intended; all of the "benefits" are bogus, these faulty comparisons are all ANYONE has to argue.
It's wasteful because 85% of television viewing is not done over the airwaves and new technologies are screaming for that reclaimed bandwidth which will be freed up once the WWII-era TV spectrum is reallocated to better uses.Sayyyy --- next week we're going to need your HOUSE, to build condos; hey tough, we can make more money with THEM, than for YOU.

You have no rights. Don't worry, the state will give you "fair market value" for your house; of course, it will be with STATE assessors, and the value will be (if you're lucky) HALF of what you could get if they weren't building condos. But you can still hire a lawyer, pay legal fees and court costs and spend vast amounts of time, perhaps you'll even win; but you've lost tons of time and money in the fight.

...see the comparison? One of the "conspiracy theories" is that TV is being stolen so that certain entities can make MONEY. Exactly the same complaint as when someone steals a HOME to build condos or a store.

In a free society, profiteering companies should not be able to trample private citizens. Period.
RFID. Wireless Internet. Personal communications. The possibilities are wide open if we can just gore the old ox of analog television. It's a dated, wasteful technology standing in the way of glorious new technologies.Yeah, a whole 'nother issue; if people realized what RFID was, they'd scream just as loudly. Those RFID "dots", never die. Customers will be tracked around stores, and demographics recorded on each customer. Pause in front of diapers, start getting baby-product ads. It will be like in the movie "Minority Report" --- barraged with ads.

And the loss of privacy somehow is a "non issue"...

[gadgetere]

Supposedly our new president has asked for an extension; because of the lack of funding of the "voucher" system, because so many people have NOT bought dtv sets (most really don't WANT it), because of the economy crunch and people not having "extra money" (especially the jobless), I really expect television NOT to end on 2/14. The discussion is extending the shutoff until at least June.

...if more people would get together and express their anger at the shutoff, it wouldn't shut off. But most don't know where to go.

That's why "contact your congressmen", and "tell everyone about stophdtv.org".

[gdoane]

If I can already read the text just fine, then what good is it to make it more readable? That's one of the complaints; for the majority of people, analog is already sharper than most can see.

...but we're going to make it even SHARPER, even though most can't see it...
More sarcasm. What good is a set that doesn't receive anything? And what good is TV when no real portable exists?

When TV was invented during WWII, no real portable TV existed either. No real portable radios existed nor would they exist until the invention of the transistor in 1959 by Bell Laboratories. Portability is not any argument for television or for any multimedia form of entertainment because they cannot be used while driving or walking or any other task requiring attention.

Making text sharper makes it more readable even when the differences cannot be detected by the naked eye. Not all reading is done by people anymore. Machines often translate text to speech for the visually impaired and the more legible the better for all.




When there's a tornado, hurricane, earthquake, ice-storm, when all the power's out, just watch RADIO, and keep repeating to yourself:
THIS IS BETTER.
THIS IS BETTER.
THIS IS BETTER.


I live in Phoenix. We don't do tornados, hurricanes, ice storms or any other disasters because they don't happen here. If there were a disaster here, I'd do the smart thing and leave. Watching TV would not be among my top priorities in how to respond in the face of adversity.

When the going gets tough, do the tough sit back and watch TV?

I hope not! No disaster gets better by sitting around and watching it. TV has never been and will never be an appropriate response tool for emergencies.

You show me a cop or a paramedic watching TV during an emergency call and I'll show you a cop or paramedic getting fired.



Points:

2. The batteries only last a couple hours. If there's an emergency longer than that (the ice storm? Last winter? 1-3 weeks???), tough.


What do you need with more than a couple of hours? Afraid you might miss your show before you freeze to death? TV's are wholly inappropriate for emergency communications.


1. My couple dozen pocket TV's all weigh a few ounces. We cannot carry around a two pound, twelve inch brick.
OK, let's review this --- you're not getting it.


Digital takes less power than analog. Look at an analog cell phone and then look at a digital one. TV's will be the same way.

The 8-track STILL WORKS. Tapes can still be BOUGHT.

Used tapes in various states of deterioration perhaps. It's no longer a viable media format.

The teletype was replaced with something BETTER.

Did I ever mention I was a teletype technician? It's not hard to beat 75 baud FSK these days. Nobody in their right minds would use that for communications, although I have the gear here to do so if I wished.

The slide rule was replaced with something better, and only a dollar.

I thought battery life was important to you. Hard to beat the battery life on a slide rule.

The phone booth was a LOSS; most people appreciated the privacy.

Most people didn't appreciate the rudeness of the freaks who would spend hours yakking away in there while they waited to place a phone call to get a ride home.

The punch card reader, to the user, is NOT as good as a thumbdrive.

You can get a punch card wet and still restore the data. Try that with a thumb drive.


If tv shuts off 2/14, we will NOT have "portable", we will NOT have "emergency tv", every person will fork over hundreds to buy equipment that gives resolution most can't see, and most don't want.


I'll still have portable, I've got a laptop with an air card capable of receiving TV and the Internet and blowing any TV clean out of the water for information exchange.

And forking over "hundreds"??

What is that supposed to be, big money? I fork over "hundreds" to the IRS every week and I don't even get a TV for it so my sympathies about an expense of "hundreds" is less than none.

I could buy a BRAND NEW HDTV, BIG SCREEN 52" every single month for what I pay in taxes to the IRS so when the "poor" and the "elderly" cry broke I have no sympathy. If I can pay that kind of money, they can to and I don't buy any excuses for their failures.



You're making such bad comparisons, because you don't have anything better to offer.
No disrespect intended; all of the "benefits" are bogus, these faulty comparisons are all ANYONE has to argue.
Sayyyy --- next week we're going to need your HOUSE, to build condos; hey tough, we can make more money with THEM, than for YOU.



Nobody is taking your TV so your example is bogus. Your TV will still work fine with your VCR and your cable or satellite service. It just won't work with an antenna anymore. It's not the house that's changing, just the neighborhood and neighborhoods always evolve.


Yeah, a whole 'nother issue; if people realized what RFID was, they'd scream just as loudly. Those RFID "dots", never die. Customers will be tracked around stores, and demographics recorded on each customer. Pause in front of diapers, start getting baby-product ads. It will be like in the movie "Minority Report" --- barraged with ads.

And the loss of privacy somehow is a "non issue"...

Privacy is overrated. Customers are already tracked, that's what those "club cards" do and if you use a debit card at all, they've got your name and what you've bought so you're already on a list.

There's nothing wrong with customer service. Retailers need to know what sells to do their business, don't they?

[FactHunter]

If I can already read the text just fine, then what good is it to make it more readable? That's one of the complaints; for the majority of people, analog is already sharper than most can see.

...but we're going to make it even SHARPER, even though most can't see it...

Excuse me, are you seriously claiming that current analog broadcasts are sharper than the average viewer can discern? That claim is so wrong as to be, well, delusional if you have truly convinced yourself.

More sarcasm. What good is a set that doesn't receive anything? And what good is TV when no real portable exists?

I can already watch TV on my cell phone. It'll get even better as more larger-screen devices like GPS start to roll it out.

When there's a tornado, hurricane, earthquake, ice-storm, when all the power's out, just watch RADIO, and keep repeating to yourself:
THIS IS BETTER.
THIS IS BETTER.
THIS IS BETTER.


I can get emergency information just fine on my radio. Why can't you?

2. The batteries only last a couple hours. If there's an emergency longer than that (the ice storm? Last winter? 1-3 weeks???), tough.

Batteries will last much longer in a radio than in a television. Why do you need video for emergency information?

1. My couple dozen pocket TV's all weigh a few ounces. We cannot carry around a two pound, twelve inch brick.

In an emergency you can't deal with two pounds????? Wow . . .

I won't even begin to speculate on why you own over twenty portable TVs . . .

OK, let's review this --- you're not getting it.

Nah, you're the one not getting it - analog video broadcasts, that is! :))

If tv shuts off 2/14,

TV is not shutting off.

we will NOT have "portable",

Wrong.

we will NOT have "emergency tv",

Wrong, and you will have emergency radio in any case.

every person will fork over hundreds to buy equipment that gives resolution most can't see,

Laughably and absurdly wrong.

and most don't want.

The free market called - you're wrong here as well. At least you are consistent.

...see the comparison? One of the "conspiracy theories" is that TV is being stolen so that certain entities can make MONEY. Exactly the same complaint as when someone steals a HOME to build condos or a store.

The funny thing about most conspiracy theories is that they are dead wrong. Like this one.

In a free society, profiteering companies should not be able to trample private citizens. Period.
Yeah, a whole 'nother issue; if people realized what RFID was, they'd scream just as loudly. Those RFID "dots", never die. Customers will be tracked around stores, and demographics recorded on each customer. Pause in front of diapers, start getting baby-product ads. It will be like in the movie "Minority Report" --- barraged with ads.

When did we get RFID implanted into us?

And the loss of privacy somehow is a "non issue"...

And the conversion to digital broadcasts (which I believe is the topid of this thread) is a loss of privacy because of ???

[FactHunter]

I thought battery life was important to you. Hard to beat the battery life on a slide rule.

Light powered calculators FTW! :D

[sironin]

When did we get RFID implanted into us?

Well there was that one guy that did it to himself. Personally I'll be happy to wait for the much smaller implants. It'd be great to be able to monitor my sugar intake without having to do blood tests. Or monitor the efficacy and dosage levels of a medication.

[gadgetere]

Excuse me, are you seriously claiming that current analog broadcasts are sharper than the average viewer can discern? That claim is so wrong as to be, well, delusional if you have truly convinced yourself.It’s not a claim, it’s a fact. Digital looks better if you sit a couple feet from the set, or have an eight foot screen.I can already watch TV on my cell phone. It'll get even better as more larger-screen devices like GPS start to roll it out.If people can’t afford dtv’s, how could they afford “cell phone tv”?
Batteries will last much longer in a radio than in a television. Why do you need video for emergency information?Oh, I dunno, TORNADOES for instance? Sometimes it’s helpful to look at weather maps…
In an emergency you can't deal with two pounds????? Wow . . .It would be helpful to read the rest of a thread, when you join it; that way you won’t make people repeat. But for your benefit --- there are no battery powered dtv’s that run for more than a couple hours on a charge. In 1999, there was an F5 tornado 70 miles away; one of its offspring hit us six hours later. And we DID track it on tv…
I won't even begin to speculate on why you own over twenty portable TVs . . .First, why is it anyone’s business how many TVs I own?
Second, why is it anyone’s business why I want to watch tv while walking?
Third, if someone must know, each pocket tv has different features; some have radio, some are wristwatch sized, some last for hours and hours…
Nah, you're the one not getting it - analog video broadcasts, that is! And that’s why a lot of people are angry.
TV is not shutting off.For everyone who experience tv “mobily”, it is. And those who love DTV, sit around ridiculing those who lament that the technology they’ve long enjoyed is ending.
Of course, ridicule is a COMPLIMENT, it means there is no legitimate response.
Wrong.RIGHT.
The pseudo-portables are bulky, not pocketable, and require frequent recharging.The funny thing about most conspiracy theories is that they are dead wrong. Like this one.Really. Every 30-minute pro-dtv-commercial, is sponsored by SAMSUNG and BESTBUY. That’s NOT a “conspiracy”?
If you say so…When did we get RFID implanted into us?Follow the conversation --- RFID gets implanted into everything we buy; and it never dies. Demographics can then be compiled on each person’s buying habits --- for directed marketing. Didn’t you see “Minority Report”?
But you LOVE technology, and it’s not “loss of privacy” for you. Sigh. And the conversion to digital broadcasts (which I believe is the topic of this thread) is a loss of privacy because of ??? Please go back and read the thread, before you post. The ‘loss of privacy” referred to “RFID”. If your clothes have them, then next time you walk into a store you’re identified, and tracked around the store. Your buying habits recorded.

[gadgetere]

The whole thing seems to be a moot point any way; the "delayed shutoff", is being ignored by many tv stations. We have the distinction of being the town with the most "non-digital citizens". The coupon program is broke, the manufacturer bankrupt. Joblessness is skyrocketing. Shut off analog, and tens of thousands of people are disenfranchised.

TV stations exist for viewers. Yet many of our stations are saying "Go jump, we're shutting off ANYWAY".

I want to know the REAL reason they're shutting off.

[gadgetere]

Digital takes less power than analog. Look at an analog cell phone and then look at a digital one. TV's will be the same way.You're wrong. My Citizen pocket tv runs 12 hours on one set of triple-a's.

DTV's run a couple hours, on a high current lithium battery. It's because of all that processing required.
I'll still have portable, I've got a laptop with an air card capable of receiving TV and the Internet and blowing any TV clean out of the water for information exchange. Good for you. What do you tell your Grandma, who can't afford the laptop (or instructions how to use it)?
And forking over "hundreds"??

What is that supposed to be, big money? I fork over "hundreds" to the IRS every week and I don't even get a TV for it so my sympathies about an expense of "hundreds" is less than none. Do you know what it's like to plan meat for the kids, TWO DAYS in one week, 'cause that's all you can AFFORD? Or to sit down and ponder which utility bill you can IGNORE this month, because you can't pay them all?

Or what level of kindness is it, when people IN that "hand-to-mouth" existence are told:
"You don't HAVE to watch tv!"
I could buy a BRAND NEW HDTV, BIG SCREEN 52" every single month for what I pay in taxes to the IRS so when the "poor" and the "elderly" cry broke I have no sympathy. If I can pay that kind of money, they can too and I don't buy any excuses for their failures.With respect, please let slip your address, and next time we vote, I'll let the air our of your tires for the sake of the rest of the citizens.

Sigh.

[gdoane]

The whole thing seems to be a moot point any way; the "delayed shutoff", is being ignored by many tv stations. We have the distinction of being the town with the most "non-digital citizens". The coupon program is broke, the manufacturer bankrupt. Joblessness is skyrocketing. Shut off analog, and tens of thousands of people are disenfranchised.

TV stations exist for viewers. Yet many of our stations are saying "Go jump, we're shutting off ANYWAY".

I want to know the REAL reason they're shutting off.

Let's say you have a typical broadcast running 100kW, and further make the ridiculous (but convenient) assumption that RF power generation is 100% efficient so 100kW electricity in means 100kW RF power out.

100kW per hour is obviously 100kW hours of electricity. Therefore the broadcast tower takes 2,400 kilowatt hours of electricity per day to run, 72,000kW hours per month.

Now, if electricity costs a dime per kilowatt hour (close enough for ballpark figures) and you're burning 72000 of those dimes, the cost for the electricity to run the analog signal alone is going to be over $7,000 per month.

At $7,000 per month, keeping that analog torch lit for another 6 months means an added expense of $42,000 in electricity alone.

That's a lot of money just for keeping the lights on for a signal that has almost nobody left watching it.

[gadgetere]

And digital transmitters use SIX TIMES the power. (That's why there's SO MANY MORE commercials.) So keeping the analog on becomes a minor expense.

There's a reason why the "shutoff" has been delayed --- because a lot of people ARE still watching analog.

I predict that when our stations shut off next week, they will turn ON again in the face of the screams...

[thr3]

Progress, technology....

NO. It is simple economics.

[gdoane]

And digital transmitters use SIX TIMES the power. (That's why there's SO MANY MORE commercials.) So keeping the analog on becomes a minor expense.

No, they don't. The digital microwaves I work on pull less than 5 amps at -48 volts and they're pushing 84 T-1's (OC3/STS3). Since Watts = Voltage times Current (Ohm's Law P=E*I) digital takes about 240 Watts. A TV signal taking more than that would just be for the RF power amplification.

$100,000 per year to broadcast a signal nobody watches is crazy.

There's a reason why the "shutoff" has been delayed --- because a lot of people ARE still watching analog.

There are about 253 Million TV sets in the USA. Estimates are that a crummy 10 Million, 1 in 25, are not ready for the switch. That's a crummy 4% market share for analog broadcast stations as 24 out of 25 viewers, 96%, are good to go.

PBS, ABC, CBS and NBC each have about 300 towers broadcasting, FOX has about 200. Other smaller players like My NetworkTV (UPN) and The CW (The WB) have fewer than 100 broadcast outlets combined.

So, there are about 1,500 analog TV broadcast towers in the USA, vying for the kind attentions of 10 Million viewers. Averaged out, that's about 7,000 viewers per analog tower.

Now, you've got an analog TV tower that costs $100,000 per year to run (electricity alone, mind you) and you've got 7,000 viewers, so you're paying more than a buck apiece for everybody who watches... if they're even watching.

Heavy TV watchers average 4 hours per day watching TV shows. I average maybe 4 hours per week myself because I prefer video games, DVD's and self-paced entertainment options.

4 hours per day is 17% of the day watching TV, so broadcast towers with 7,000 viewers per day average 1,200 viewers.

High school football games do better than 1,200 in the stands.

The stations are losing money staying with analog broadcast. Why should they lose money?

Do you know how they MAKE money? Advertising! Now, people who haven't bought a new TV in the past couple of years obviously don't spend money, so how lucrative is that advertising market really going to be?

Why would advertisers want to reach tightwads who haven't even bought a new TV in the past four years? Advertisers are fleeing in droves. Broadcast stations are selling infomercial slots because the viewership doesn't pay the rent. They need money on the supply side because the demand side is eight miles high and falling fast.

If you keep the analog candles lit, keep broadcast analog available, you're going to see shopping channel crap and reality TV. The money in it is gone. No profit to be had.

You admit yourself that the hardest hit are the "poor" who don't have money to spend. People who can't possibly afford a $40 converter box. Why would advertisers seek such people out?

Airtime costs money. My cell phone bills between my work and my play phones run well over $200 per month. I don't really see it as a major expense because it's less than a FIFTH of what my Federal Government costs me.

My Federal Government is a $1,500 per month necessity. So anything less expensive is a plaything. I don't have much patience for the poor because I have to work my ass off so liberals can buy their votes with my money.







I predict that when our stations shut off next week, they will turn ON again in the face of the screams...[/quote]

[gadgetere]

As I was driving, my pocket radio (with TV sound), allowed me to hear ABC and NBC weather broadcasts. Much more complete than radio stations.

Power went out, too, for several hours; thankfully I had fresh batteries in my pocket TV.

Guess I should buy my coffin now, for when I need TV to avoid injury. :((

OH --- I got a reply from the FCC --- first I asked "why can't the CBS affiliate be allowed to continue broadcasting audio on FM?" They blew me off.

Then I asked, "Who can I sue in a case of 'wrongful death'?"

They said, "Sue Congress".

...really helpful...

[NCRedState]

As I was driving, my pocket radio (with TV sound), allowed me to hear ABC and NBC weather broadcasts. Much more complete than radio stations.

Power went out, too, for several hours; thankfully I had fresh batteries in my pocket TV.

Guess I should buy my coffin now, for when I need TV to avoid injury. :((

OH --- I got a reply from the FCC --- first I asked "why can't the CBS affiliate be allowed to continue broadcasting audio on FM?" They blew me off.

Then I asked, "Who can I sue in a case of 'wrongful death'?"

They said, "Sue Congress".

...really helpful...

Get over it. :rolleyes:

[gdoane]

As I was driving, my pocket radio (with TV sound), allowed me to hear ABC and NBC weather broadcasts. Much more complete than radio stations.

Try 162.550 NOAA which is 24/7 weather and the source that ABC and NBC use. HDTV has a 24/7 weather channel too run by NBC.

Power went out, too, for several hours; thankfully I had fresh batteries in my pocket TV.

You could just call 511 on the cell phone and recharge the cell phone as you drive.

Guess I should buy my coffin now, for when I need TV to avoid injury. :((

An HDTV would be less expensive than a coffin.

OH --- I got a reply from the FCC --- first I asked "why can't the CBS affiliate be allowed to continue broadcasting audio on FM?" They blew me off.

Then I asked, "Who can I sue in a case of 'wrongful death'?"

They said, "Sue Congress".

...really helpful...

Why would CBS want to continue broadcasting on FM? They pay for their broadcasting expenses with advertisements and people who are too cheap to go buy an HDTV aren't likely to buy from their advertisers so there's zero motive for them to broadcast to cheapskates.

[gadgetere]

Get over it.Hmmm; how do you suggest I do that? I'm almost always "out and about" when the evening news is on; I listen on my pocket tv-radio. Is it up to you to tell everyone "Hey I don't care if you lose what you've always had"?

I've talked to DOZENS of people who live "out in the sticks"; their converters don't receive anything. If they're faced with having NOTHING to watch, or to pay money they don't have to subscribe to cable/satellite, is it appropriate for others to say "Oh tough get over it"?

I hope that those who run for public office don't have a "tough go jump" attitude...

Maybe a list of the privileges we don't really need:

"You don't HAVE to watch tv!"
"You don't have to drive a car!"
"You don't have to own a gun."
"You don't have to own property" (eminent domain, lose to stores/condos)
"You don't HAVE to own money".

On 12/16/1773 a bunch of tea was dumped into Boston harbor. But heck, the problem was only a piddly li'l 'ole tax, less than ONE PERCENT. With respect, had you been there would you have said "tough get over it"???

[gadgetere]

Try 162.550 NOAA which is 24/7 weather and the source that ABC and NBC use. HDTV has a 24/7 weather channel too run by NBC.My pocket radio (the one that receives AM/FM/TV) does receive weather. It has five weather bands. Usually it sounds like:

"The forcasssst shhhhhh partly ssshhhhhhhh high of sshhhhhhhhhhh. Tonight ssshhhhhhhhh....."
You could just call 511 on the cell phone and recharge the cell phone as you drive.Hmmmm; dialing on my cell phone, and listening as I try to drive. Don't those who do that just make you furious?

You know them --- they're driving 30, weaving from lane to lane...
An HDTV would be less expensive than a coffin.You and I have discussed this. There is no HDTV that is truly portable. They won't fit in a pocket, they only run a couple hours. Remember how I told you about 1999, power was off for hours, and we were watching the path of tornadoes on our pocket TV's?

That's what I meant by "I should just buy a coffin".

...that is, if they find enough left to bury.... Sigh.
Why would CBS want to continue broadcasting on FM? They pay for their broadcasting expenses with advertisements and people who are too cheap to go buy an HDTV aren't likely to buy from their advertisers so there's zero motive for them to broadcast to cheapskates.They wanted to. Every driver listened to the evening news (and commercials!). I've been around for over four decades; I've always had programming in my car.

I guess I shouldn't complain, it's not up to me what rights and privileges I enjoy; the Government dictates what I'm allowed. I should just "get over it".

Right? :(

[NCRedState]

I guess I shouldn't complain, it's not up to me what rights and privileges I enjoy; the Government dictates what I'm allowed. I should just "get over it".

Right? :(

Right.

http://www.millionbuy.com/cbytftv791.html

Features:

o 7" Widescreen TFT LCD Color Display
o Dual ATSC/NTSC Tuner for Over-the-Air Digital TV Broadcast Reception
o Integrated Telescopic Antenna
o Coaxial Antenna Input for use with External Antenna Sources
o AV Input for use with Video Games, VCRs, or other AV Sources
o Headphone Jack for Private Listening
o High-Output Stereo Speakers
o Integrated Viewing Stand
o Rechargeable Lithium-Ion Battery
o Three-Way Power: AC/DC/Battery Operation
o Full Function Remote Control
o Unit Dimensions: 7.27" x 5.9" x 1.18" (WHD)
o Accessories Included
+ Full Function Remote Control
+ AV Cable
+ DC Car Adapter
+ 120V AC Adapter

[twigit]

I can see gadgetere's fustration....Since I live in MI, being able to "see" the track of a tornado's pathway is a nice thing to have. If you're "listening" on a radio and the weather guy annouces "A tornado has touched down in Brent Creek, Genesee County and is headed in an Easterly direction"...I'm East of Genesee Co., but is Brent Creek North or South of me???? Without a map, be it on TV or the paper map I left upstairs when told to take cover, I could be in a lot of trouble and not even know it.

I did buy my digital converter box for my TV in case the cable goes out during a threatening storm, or what have you. (I have a generator I can plug into...) but I can only tune in one station and get two channels...the reg. channel and a sub channel..does that make sense?

What I want to know, and maybe gdonane can help answer...
I have an Emerson emergency weather alert radio. I think I've figured out that I won't be able to tune in to the TV stations after the change over, but will I still be able to receive the emergency weather center's broadcasts? (I've only picked up their signal once a long time ago, maybe this alert system was disposed of years ago.....I don't know...)

[gadgetere]

I guess I shouldn't complain, it's not up to me what rights and privileges I enjoy; the Government dictates what I'm allowed. I should just "get over it".Right? :(
Right.Hi, "NC". I'm curious about something --- I'll show in a moment how it relates.

What is your opinion to this statement?

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

This generally is used about things like medical insurance.

Whaddya think?

:)

[gadgetere]

I can see gadgetere's fustration....Since I live in MI, being able to "see" the track of a tornado's pathway is a nice thing to have. If you're "listening" on a radio and the weather guy annouces "A tornado has touched down in Brent Creek, Genesee County and is headed in an Easterly direction"...I'm East of Genesee Co., but is Brent Creek North or South of me???? Without a map, be it on TV or the paper map I left upstairs when told to take cover, I could be in a lot of trouble and not even know it.

I did buy my digital converter box for my TV in case the cable goes out during a threatening storm, or what have you. (I have a generator I can plug into...) but I can only tune in one station and get two channels...the reg. channel and a sub channel..does that make sense?Perfect sense. For a lot of people, dtv means less channels, and vastly less portability. Thanx for an excellent post.

RE the "weather radios" --- there are two kinds of "alert radios"; one will sound even if the problem is in another corner of the state, the other can be narrowed down to counties. But you have to turn them on, set them to "alert", and make sure they have fresh batteries. (Easy on a conventional battery radio, not so easy on a rechargeable lithium battery one.)

So even with a "county code", when the radio-siren goes off odds are the problem is dozens of miles away.

I agree that it's much better to watch the weather-notices. During a big event here, all programming ceases; we have hours of coverage, maps, detailed analysis. I remember when Edmond got hit with a tornado; it was headed north-east right towards us; but as we watched its progress, the cell suddenly got smaller and smaller, until it was probably only a few yards across.

I'm not gonna have that coverage any more. Should I go for "walnut", or a nice copper coffin with nickle-plated handles?

[NCRedState]

Whaddya think?

:)

I think you need to

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/attachments/thumbs/191000/wambulance.jpg

[gdoane]

My pocket radio (the one that receives AM/FM/TV) does receive weather. It has five weather bands. Usually it sounds like:

"The forcasssst shhhhhh partly ssshhhhhhhh high of sshhhhhhhhhhh. Tonight ssshhhhhhhhh....."

Then just go to http://www.weather.gov/pa/recordedforecasts.php

Select your State and dial the number. All the weather info you can stand.

Hmmmm; dialing on my cell phone, and listening as I try to drive. Don't those who do that just make you furious?

Not particularly, no. I do that all the time. Usually it goes like this:

Phone: Say a command.
Gene: Dial 555-1212.
Phone: Dial 555-1212, is that correct?
Gene: Yes.
Phone: Dialing 555-1212.

You know them --- they're driving 30, weaving from lane to lane...
You and I have discussed this. There is no HDTV that is truly portable. They won't fit in a pocket, they only run a couple hours. Remember how I told you about 1999, power was off for hours, and we were watching the path of tornadoes on our pocket TV's?

Watching tornadoes on a battery powered device is rather pointless because you can't outrun them anyway unless you're in a car. Even the fastest Olympic runners can barely beat a 4-minute mile... or 15 MPH.

That's what I meant by "I should just buy a coffin".

...that is, if they find enough left to bury.... Sigh.

Wouldn't do any good, the coffin would blow away too.


They wanted to. Every driver listened to the evening news (and commercials!). I've been around for over four decades; I've always had programming in my car.

Where do you think I am when I'm usually listening to Sean Hannity? I'm listening to the radio, but to AM radio which is better than FM because of the band it's in. I can get KFYI halfway to Mexico from Phoenix but the FM stations start dropping out about a quarter of the way there. AM is a far, far superior emergency radio information band.

It's the difference between the MF band and the VHF band. I can explain that to you but since you're a BSEE you should already know that.

I guess I shouldn't complain, it's not up to me what rights and privileges I enjoy; the Government dictates what I'm allowed. I should just "get over it".

Right? :(

You're allowed anything you want. The problem is you want others to provide things for you. I'm an electronics technician, my job depends on the plain and simple fact that electronics won't work forever and you bought your TV knowing full well that it wasn't going to last a million years.

You say you're over 40 years old, so where's your first TV at? It ain't working anymore, is it? It practically can't be, it's a tube-based device and tubes being what they are do wear out.

You simply have to replace your old junk to keep the same capabilities you had before and the government even had vouchers to help you with that. What more could you want?

[gadgetere]

I think you need toIt was a reasonable question. You posted on this thread, so continue your commitment --- help me understand where you're coming from. Tell me what you think of the saying, and I'll tell you how it relates to our discussion here.

:)

[gadgetere]

Then just go to http://www.weather.gov/pa/recordedforecasts.php

Select your State and dial the number. All the weather info you can stand.Hmmm; so when a tornado is coming, you want me to:

Turn on the computer. Wait until it boots.
Open my internet service program. Click "dial".
It sits there a moment, then says "dialing".
I get a dialtone, then it dials the number, and negotiates the connection.
Often it says, "Dialing another number".
Dialtone, dials, negotiates the connection. Finally says "connected".

I click on your site, and it says "Loading".
...loading...
...loading...
...loading...
...loading...
...loading...

Several minutes go by, while it loads. OH WAIT, the POWER is off; the computer is running on batteries --- it's about this time that it says "Battery depleted; going to standby."

But a tornado is coming.
I have to die.

See the problem?
Not particularly, no. I do that all the time. Usually it goes like this:

Phone: Say a command.
Gene: Dial 555-1212.
Phone: Dial 555-1212, is that correct?
Gene: Yes.
Phone: Dialing 555-1212.And how much do you pay for that? Not everyone can afford a "speech recognition" phone. BTW, my cell phone only costs $15 per month, and I get an hour of free time. I don't want music, internet, color screens, I don't want text messaging.
Watching tornadoes on a battery powered device is rather pointless because you can't outrun them anyway unless you're in a car. Even the fastest Olympic runners can barely beat a 4-minute mile... or 15 MPH.Well, I do have a car, and in 1999 THOUSANDS of people in Oklahoma City drove out of danger; but if I follow the weather coverage, I can head to a sheltered spot, which I don't want to stay in all night in case there MIGHT be a tornado.
Wouldn't do any good, the coffin would blow away too.I guess you're right. Maybe you can buy me flowers, and put on my memorial grave. :((
Where do you think I am when I'm usually listening to Sean Hannity? I'm listening to the radio, but to AM radio which is better than FM because of the band it's in. I can get KFYI halfway to Mexico from Phoenix but the FM stations start dropping out about a quarter of the way there. AM is a far, far superior emergency radio information band.Hmmm; "AM" is old school, ancient technology.
Are you saying that sometimes the OLD technology is BETTER???

...I agree... :D
It's the difference between the MF band and the VHF band. I can explain that to you but since you're a BSEE you should already know that.One of our AM stations just bought an FM --- they're saying,
"Listen to us now on CRYSTAL CLEAR FM". Of course that's backwards...
You're allowed anything you want. The problem is you want others to provide things for you.Well, you see, that's the issue --- the government has mandated that everything "go digital"; and a lot of us are going to lose television.

You're right, WE are allowed anything WE want --- and WE are the government.

Do you remember "Of the people, by the people, for the people"? Oh I predict you'll say something about "the majority want this".
But millions will be hurt by this, in real risk and real loss of function.
I would respond,
"The tyranny of the majority shall not override the rights of the minority".
I'm an electronics technician, my job depends on the plain and simple fact that electronics won't work forever and you bought your TV knowing full well that it wasn't going to last a million years.

You say you're over 40 years old, so where's your first TV at?I know exactly where it's at. It ain't working anymore, is it?Works fine. The ONLY tv's I have that aren't working, are a new one, and tiny 5" one where my idiot brother thought it would be FUNNY to switch the wall outlet on-off-on-off-on-off. That will blow out any tv.

TV's USUALLY last at least 30-50 years... It practically can't be, it's a tube-based device and tubes being what they are do wear out. Well, y'know, I do have a tube-based black-n-white set I used in College.

It works perfectly.
You simply have to replace your old junk to keep the same capabilities you had before and the government even had vouchers to help you with that. What more could you want?You're not doing well in this argument against me. Let's focus on your words, SAME CAPABILITIES.

Tell me where I can get a pocket DTV?
Tell me where I can get a pocket radio that receives DTV sound?
Tell me where I can get a DTV that runs more than a couple hours, for emergency viewing?

One person tried --- remember? He posted a link to a Radio Shack Sangean Digital AM/FM/TV audio receiver. I posted the specs --- "AM, FM stereo, and television NTSC channels 2-13".

Analog.

Won't work in a few months.

Portable TV won't exist.

People living on the fringe, who don't have money to buy subscription TV, aren't allowed television.

And your attitude to all these people (they are many), is "Tough; get with the program, upgrade. You are 'users', wanting something for FREE."

You're 100% right, you know --- all we WANT, is the SAME CAPABILITIES as we've ALWAYS HAD.

Sigh.
.

[gdoane]

Hmmm; so when a tornado is coming, you want me to:

Turn on the computer. Wait until it boots.
Open my internet service program. Click "dial".
It sits there a moment, then says "dialing".
I get a dialtone, then it dials the number, and negotiates the connection.
Often it says, "Dialing another number".
Dialtone, dials, negotiates the connection. Finally says "connected".

I click on your site, and it says "Loading".
...loading...
...loading...
...loading...
...loading...
...loading...

Several minutes go by, while it loads. OH WAIT, the POWER is off; the computer is running on batteries --- it's about this time that it says "Battery depleted; going to standby."

But a tornado is coming.
I have to die.

See the problem?

You could get the telephone number off the website now and keep it by your phone with the rest of your emergency numbers. You don't need a computer to make a telephone call. Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone and he didn't even own a computer.


And how much do you pay for that? Not everyone can afford a "speech recognition" phone. BTW, my cell phone only costs $15 per month, and I get an hour of free time. I don't want music, internet, color screens, I don't want text messaging.

My cell phone costs about $100 per month before the 20% taxes are thrown on. I get unlimited internet, unlimited texting, 500 minutes and unlimited nights and weekends with no long distance or roaming charges. I want everything and I want a cherry on top. The cell phone is a Motorola Q, the "Blackberry Killer".

Well, I do have a car, and in 1999 THOUSANDS of people in Oklahoma City drove out of danger; but if I follow the weather coverage, I can head to a sheltered spot, which I don't want to stay in all night in case there MIGHT be a tornado.
I guess you're right. Maybe you can buy me flowers, and put on my memorial grave. :((

You could always move out of Tornado Alley. We don't do tornadoes here in Phoenix. We're not too big on earthquakes or hurricanes either.


Hmmm; "AM" is old school, ancient technology.
Are you saying that sometimes the OLD technology is BETTER???

...I agree... :D


Ship and aircraft communications all use AM because it's more reliable. FM has a "capture effect" that can result in a powerful broadcast drowning out an SOS and if a plane is crashing or a ship is sinking they don't always have the ability to repeat their SOS.


One of our AM stations just bought an FM --- they're saying,
"Listen to us now on CRYSTAL CLEAR FM". Of course that's backwards...

It's not even true in most cases. FM in most modern stations is actually a modified PM or Phase Modulation technique. It's not pure FM.

Well, you see, that's the issue --- the government has mandated that everything "go digital"; and a lot of us are going to lose television.

Which you can get back with a simple trip to Wal*Mart and a couple bucks. Nothing is getting lost, it's just getting a little bit more expensive.

You're right, WE are allowed anything WE want --- and WE are the government.

Do you remember "Of the people, by the people, for the people"? Oh I predict you'll say something about "the majority want this".
But millions will be hurt by this, in real risk and real loss of function.
I would respond,
"The tyranny of the majority shall not override the rights of the minority".

There is no right to TV. If you don't pay your power bill and the electric company shuts off your TV, are they violating any rights of yours? Of course not.

If you have to pay for it, then it's not a right. You have to pay to watch television and if you don't pay, then you don't watch because it's simply not a right.

I know exactly where it's at. Works fine. The ONLY tv's I have that aren't working, are a new one, and tiny 5" one where my idiot brother thought it would be FUNNY to switch the wall outlet on-off-on-off-on-off. That will blow out any tv.

Switched outlets are for lamps, not appliances.

TV's USUALLY last at least 30-50 years...Well, y'know, I do have a tube-based black-n-white set I used in College.

It works perfectly.

Other than being a fire hazard and a piece of junk you couldn't get $5 for in a yard sale.

You're not doing well in this argument against me. Let's focus on your words, SAME CAPABILITIES.

Tell me where I can get a pocket DTV?
Tell me where I can get a pocket radio that receives DTV sound?
Tell me where I can get a DTV that runs more than a couple hours, for emergency viewing?

http://www.amazon.com/Axion-AXN-8701-Widescreen-Portable-Handheld/dp/B001FWYLLG/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1238417787&sr=8-1

Free shipping. Costs less than I pay for a month of cell phone service.



One person tried --- remember? He posted a link to a Radio Shack Sangean Digital AM/FM/TV audio receiver. I posted the specs --- "AM, FM stereo, and television NTSC channels 2-13".

Analog.

Won't work in a few months.

Portable TV won't exist.

People living on the fringe, who don't have money to buy subscription TV, aren't allowed television.

People who don't have money to pay electric bills aren't allowed television either. Poor people shouldn't be watching TV, they should be out getting a job. TV makes a life of poverty too much fun and nobody who makes less than minimum wage should be allowed to have them.

And your attitude to all these people (they are many), is "Tough; get with the program, upgrade. You are 'users', wanting something for FREE."

You're 100% right, you know --- all we WANT, is the SAME CAPABILITIES as we've ALWAYS HAD.

Sigh.
.

Pay for the same capabilities you've always had and you'll have them. Nothing in life is free. NOTHING.

[natalie addict]

TV's USUALLY last at least 30-50 years...Well, y'know, I do have a tube-based black-n-white set I used in College.



I just retired my 26" Sony Trinitron I bought in 1985 for a new Panasonic 50" plasma. The old Sony was getting really tired, the picture was getting dimmer and dimmer and the color was going, reds bleeding everywhere. A good run for 25 years.

[gdoane]

I just retired my 26" Sony Trinitron I bought in 1985 for a new Panasonic 50" plasma. The old Sony was getting really tired, the picture was getting dimmer and dimmer and the color was going, reds bleeding everywhere. A good run for 25 years.

The trini's are infamous for their red oversaturation. I got the service code for mine and cut the gun so the red wasn't so bad and I cut the 20% overscan on the Trinitron series TV I own. The Sony TV's aren't bad, they're just programmed that way.

The problem is a two-way street. The consumer generally doesn't know jack about TV or movies or anything and the sales department is trying to sell to consumers who don't know jack.

So what happens when a sales department that doesn't know jack tries to sell to a consumer who doesn't know jack?

Jack doesn't sell, that's what happens.

Most TV's are sold in total ignorance. Joe Sixpack walks into a store, he'll see a TV that looks good and buys the thing with his swipey card. Yahoo, put that baby on the VISA/MASTERCARD/RENT TO OWN and that's all she wrote. Free delivery.

Those TV's on display are NOT what you get in a box. Those are calibrated and fed with component video at the very least. My Trinitron is calibrated because I did it myself, but out of the box it was bad. I had to drop the red, lower the contrast and lower the brightness.

Consumers love red and bright. That's why TV displays favor red and bright, because that sells. But it's wrong, it's basically wrong and it is not an accurate picture in your living room. What works in the showroom to sell does not work in the living room to view.

TV sales are practically impulse buy items and yet they're big ticket purchases. I don't get the logic in this.

[gadgetere]

I guess I shouldn't complain, it's not up to me what rights and privileges I enjoy; the Government dictates what I'm allowed. I should just "get over it".

Right? :( Right.Seems "NCRed" does not deign to answer. Not surprised --- his reply accepts that government dictates to us what we have, do where we go, etcetera.

...not realizing that we are "the Government".

Of the people, by the people, for the people. That is, people who will get off their couches and fight for their rights.

The quotation, of course, is from Carl Marx --- anyone who listens to Sean knows this. So many of our citizenry believe that "Government should take care of us". Such a "nanny-government", of course dictates what we have, where we go, what we do, etcetera. It is NOT what our Founding Fathers wanted.

DTV is a complete ripoff; as the website clearly shows, the benefits are bogus, the costs (in function and utility) considerable.

As my most vocal opponent admits, "this will cost money; nothing is free".

Case closed --- ripoff. Our money.

...used to be ours...

[AeroEngineer]

TV stations exist for viewers. Yet many of our stations are saying "Go jump, we're shutting off ANYWAY".

I want to know the REAL reason they're shutting off.

TV stations exist for profit. Don't kid yourself into thinking they are providing you a service.

[AeroEngineer]

The trini's are infamous for their red oversaturation. I got the service code for mine and cut the gun so the red wasn't so bad and I cut the 20% overscan on the Trinitron series TV I own. The Sony TV's aren't bad, they're just programmed that way.

The problem is a two-way street. The consumer generally doesn't know jack about TV or movies or anything and the sales department is trying to sell to consumers who don't know jack.

So what happens when a sales department that doesn't know jack tries to sell to a consumer who doesn't know jack?

Jack doesn't sell, that's what happens.

Most TV's are sold in total ignorance. Joe Sixpack walks into a store, he'll see a TV that looks good and buys the thing with his swipey card. Yahoo, put that baby on the VISA/MASTERCARD/RENT TO OWN and that's all she wrote. Free delivery.

Those TV's on display are NOT what you get in a box. Those are calibrated and fed with component video at the very least. My Trinitron is calibrated because I did it myself, but out of the box it was bad. I had to drop the red, lower the contrast and lower the brightness.

Consumers love red and bright. That's why TV displays favor red and bright, because that sells. But it's wrong, it's basically wrong and it is not an accurate picture in your living room. What works in the showroom to sell does not work in the living room to view.

TV sales are practically impulse buy items and yet they're big ticket purchases. I don't get the logic in this.

Kind of off topic, but you made me think of it-

I predict a lot of people burning out their new HDTV's quickly in the coming years because they won't know how to switch from the default "Showroom" mode to the standard brightness/contrast settings needed for home use.

[NCRedState]

Seems "NCRed" does not deign to answer. Not surprised --- his reply accepts that government dictates to us what we have, do where we go, etcetera.

...not realizing that we are "the Government".

Of the people, by the people, for the people. That is, people who will get off their couches and fight for their rights.

The quotation, of course, is from Carl Marx --- anyone who listens to Sean knows this. So many of our citizenry believe that "Government should take care of us". Such a "nanny-government", of course dictates what we have, where we go, what we do, etcetera. It is NOT what our Founding Fathers wanted.

DTV is a complete ripoff; as the website clearly shows, the benefits are bogus, the costs (in function and utility) considerable.

As my most vocal opponent admits, "this will cost money; nothing is free".

Case closed --- ripoff. Our money.

...used to be ours...

There is nothing to answer.

Your claims are bogus.

You're whining.

You are in the minority. A very small minority.

;)

[KyanWan]

I'm not really a TV person myself - but I love my computers. I've had TV output since forever, and I noticed just how bad TVs were ... well, since forever.

I do like that I can now use my TV with a DVI or HD15 cable - and get the same performance I get from a regular old computer monitor ... out of these TVs.

While I'm not technical with the displays - I see better, sharper pictures, increased performance - and even on the antenna side - digital > analog - I get signals better where I am, I've never seen FTA-Terrestrial looking as good as FTA/Pay-Satellite.

I don't mind it - all I see is improvement.


So what happens when a sales department that doesn't know jack tries to sell to a consumer who doesn't know jack?

Jack doesn't sell, that's what happens.

Most TV's are sold in total ignorance. Joe Sixpack walks into a store, he'll see a TV that looks good and buys the thing with his swipey card. Yahoo, put that baby on the VISA/MASTERCARD/RENT TO OWN and that's all she wrote. Free delivery.

[ clip ]

Consumers love red and bright. That's why TV displays favor red and bright, because that sells. But it's wrong, it's basically wrong and it is not an accurate picture in your living room. What works in the showroom to sell does not work in the living room to view.


I get a color-bars key that I've got - and make sure I've got all the black/white bars, and - those primaries matched perfectly. All those consumer electronics fall in the same trashy category. If it's at Best Buy - it's never the best. No matter how much you pay for it ( usually double what it should cost........ )

Even the cables they charge you an arm and a leg for - you get a decent shielded noname cable that looks well-made for $5-10, it's the same as or BETTER than those "Premium" $100.00 cables. I learned that while talking to a guy I know ... who owns (gasp!) a cable shop.

Good looking cables from the whoever company - the only difference ... he said - was the $100.00 ones had a nicer jacket ... molded with a REALLY COOL NAME AND MULTIPLE COLORS!!!! YAY!!!!

I always buy my cables online. Forget the stores ... I'll wait a day and keep $90.00. Did that with my HDMI cables - $24.00 - for $300 worth of cables. I see no differences, and they work perfectly. Only difference - I had $276 left for myself.

[AeroEngineer]

I'm not really a TV person myself - but I love my computers. I've had TV output since forever, and I noticed just how bad TVs were ... well, since forever.

I do like that I can now use my TV with a DVI or HD15 cable - and get the same performance I get from a regular old computer monitor ... out of these TVs.

While I'm not technical with the displays - I see better, sharper pictures, increased performance - and even on the antenna side - digital > analog - I get signals better where I am, I've never seen FTA-Terrestrial looking as good as FTA/Pay-Satellite.

I don't mind it - all I see is improvement.



I get a color-bars key that I've got - and make sure I've got all the black/white bars, and - those primaries matched perfectly. All those consumer electronics fall in the same trashy category. If it's at Best Buy - it's never the best. No matter how much you pay for it ( usually double what it should cost........ )

Even the cables they charge you an arm and a leg for - you get a decent shielded noname cable that looks well-made for $5-10, it's the same as or BETTER than those "Premium" $100.00 cables. I learned that while talking to a guy I know ... who owns (gasp!) a cable shop.

Good looking cables from the whoever company - the only difference ... he said - was the $100.00 ones had a nicer jacket ... molded with a REALLY COOL NAME AND MULTIPLE COLORS!!!! YAY!!!!

I always buy my cables online. Forget the stores ... I'll wait a day and keep $90.00. Did that with my HDMI cables - $24.00 - for $300 worth of cables. I see no differences, and they work perfectly. Only difference - I had $276 left for myself.

100 dollar "Premium" HDMI cables are the biggest scam I've ever seen- THEY'RE CARRYING A DIGITAL SIGNAL!!!

It either gets there, or it doesn't. You probably could use a wire coat hanger and get comparable performance. :D

[gdoane]

Kind of off topic, but you made me think of it-

I predict a lot of people burning out their new HDTV's quickly in the coming years because they won't know how to switch from the default "Showroom" mode to the standard brightness/contrast settings needed for home use.

I'm not a video technician, I usually do data or radio or an unholy alliance of both at 11 GHz, but I do have a calibration DVD that makes a lot of sense to me.

When the average consumer wants a great tv picture, he wants one that really stands out from the crowd, a lot of contrast and a lot of color.

That's not good, and here's the reason why: Your eyes have muscles and work pretty hard, and when you have a TV with the brightness cranked and the contrast maxxed, then you're adding eyestrain. Making a picture that your eyes will be seeing for hours at a time more stressful on your eyes is simply a bad idea.

I've heard tell that the most expensive school on the planet is the school of hard knocks. TV's in the showroom are not set up for home use, they're set up to "Wow" the eyes and you can only "Wow" the eyes for so long before you hit eyestrain problems and the headaches behind them.

I never leave TV's on stock settings. I get enough headaches from liberal politicians as it is.