Another reason to hate digital TV [Archive]

gadgetere

May 3rd, 2009, 10:41 pm

That does sound like a neat device you have there, and even though I'm not especially offended by foul language, I have to admit surprise at what's allowed on TV these days.

That said, I disagree with your cause. First of all, the benefit to an all-digital broadcast is huge.Hi, "sage". Thanx for your reply. If you've looked at the website, I agree with them; all five "benefits" are bogus. Especially the "better sound" --- that is prosecutable.

The harm being done to us in terms of lost portability, lost emergency information (we live in tornado alley; we MUST have portable tornado maps!) and denial of television to distant viewers is significant. In addition to significantly better picture quality... As they detail on the site, Human eyes are low resolution; additionally, most people are near-sighted. The picture is only better if one sits a few feet from the screen. (Or has an 8-foot screen.)

If there was a "blind taste test", many people who THINK they can see the difference, would be surprised by their results. When two pictures are shown in a store (one HD and one standard), no one at normal distances has been able to tell which is which. the switch would open up frequencies previously tied up by over-the-air television for use by emergency services and the like. Surely you don't oppose that?Yes, I do; just as I oppose stealing someone's home to build condos (Connecticut), and department stores (Georgia, I think). "Emergency Services" was the adage which appeared after FIRST saying "open frequencies for BUSINESS", but a line of buyers didn't appear.

Police, fire, ambulance, already have radio frequencies. I don't believe the "need".
No, the problem here isn't with digital broadcasts, nor is it with the content allowed on television—although we may not all agree with the standards in place, the majority rules on such matters, and some clever inventor is always quick to help you control what enters your home. Speaking of which, I can assure you beyond any shadow of a doubt that your "TVGuardian" will offer a new model that works with digital broadcasts. The closed captioning technology has changed, but the captions are still offered, and can be used in the same way by a similar device.Go to their link; they don't have access to the digital information; it's not available. The TV itself generates the closed captioning.

They do still make a few DVD players that have it built in.
Better yet, you should consider lobbying cable-box producers (or the government, if you prefer a mandate)—not to postpone the switch to digital, but to include (for free) a service like TVGuardian. It could be included easily in any cable box, but only if you let them know that there's a demand for it.The damage of "forced digital switch" far outweighs the bogus benefits. This is both a mandated tax, and a conspiracy of profiteers (manufacturers and stores).
I wish you the best of luck in maintaining the content filter you have established for your home, but ask that you understand that HDTV will not be stopped by a vocal, well-meaning minority. It has already been pushed back twice now, and your interests would be much better served by making a request for a filter.There are a LOT of people who oppose it; but the problem with Americans is they mostly sit on their rears. Too many don't vote, most aren't even registered.

We've really been like that for a long time; without Pearl Harbor, the Germans might have won WWII. After 12/7/41, we could no longer be "isolationists".

That website is underfunded; if the same cash existed for THEM, that is backing the "pro dtv commercials" (sponsored by corporations like Samsung and Bestbuy), analog wouldn't be shutting off for a long time.

But thanx for your considerate post.

:)

gadgetere

May 3rd, 2009, 10:46 pm

Here is a device you could try:I'd have to be AWFULLY fast to pull that off; not to mention "clairvoyant" to predict when the cuss word was coming...

We watched "Matchmaker"; once I switched on the device, the movie was much more enjoyable without all the swearing...

The "on/off" switch, only works if it shuts off most movies...

IOW, "V-chip"...

sageerrant

May 3rd, 2009, 11:10 pm

Well, at least you read it...

But I'm really not sure you get it. There will be a device equivalent to the TVGuardian, that will work with an HDTV and a digital signal. I understand that you think I'm just speculating here, but I'm not. The switch is going to happen; too many people want it for it to be held off much longer, trust me. The difference in picture quality is drastic in a home setting with a decent (read: low-end, in a year or two) set. That avenue is out. (And that website is a joke. The digital signal—"free tv"—will still be broadcast over the air, and you can make your own antenna for about two bucks if you don't want to buy one. The rest is bogus, but I don't really think this is the place for such a discussion.)

When that switch does happen, what do you find more likely: that TVGuardian will simply go out of business, or that they'll find a way to make it work? If, somehow, they don't, I would personally invest in a replacement, simply because I know there's a market for it.

I'm sorry, but your appoach to this issue just isn't any good. I find it more likely that, for whatever reason, you want to stop the switch to digital, and are just using this profanity-filter as an excuse.

At the very worst, you will have to buy a converter—which only applies if you're using an antenna—and a new TVGuardian. That's a one-time fee in the name of a better technology, and you think it's a valid complaint?

grapabeaux

May 3rd, 2009, 11:21 pm

My government-issued digital converter has closed-captioning as an option. OP, what the hell are you talking about?

ChaosControl

May 3rd, 2009, 11:28 pm

How would digital TV now have closed-captioning? I could imagine there to be lawsuits since it was pushed by the government from deaf people if that is the case.

CaptC

May 3rd, 2009, 11:32 pm

I'm not especially offended by foul language, I have to admit surprise at what's allowed on TV these days.(edited by CaptC)

Whatever happened to George Carlin's 7 WORDS YOU CAN NEVER SAY ON TELEVISION?

Sorry George, you must be turning over in your grave, or laughing your dead ass off! :lol:

Most of those words are now allowed on T.V.

Oh, well...........................

JeffR

May 4th, 2009, 1:11 am

It's really pleasant to watch a movie and not hear the "F" word, or any other profanity.
:eek:

Now that's just craziness!

sgdp

May 4th, 2009, 2:18 am

Haha. When O'Reilly had those two ladies on his show discussing the BK commercial with "I like square butts" song...

The one lady was afraid to say "butts". Really? Gee whiz, man.

AeroEngineer

May 4th, 2009, 5:24 am

Here is a device you could try:

http://shop.razor.com/images/P/MX350_on_switch_lg.jpg

Better not be a digital switch. This guy HATES digital.

AeroEngineer

May 4th, 2009, 5:26 am

I'm sorry, but your appoach to this issue just isn't any good. I find it more likely that, for whatever reason, you want to stop the switch to digital, and are just using this profanity-filter as an excuse.

This is exactly what he is doing. See his other 200 post rant thread about digital TV.

AeroEngineer

May 4th, 2009, 5:27 am

(edited by CaptC)

Whatever happened to George Carlin's 7 WORDS YOU CAN NEVER SAY ON TELEVISION?

Sorry George, you must be turning over in your grave, or laughing your dead ass off! :lol:

Most of those words are now allowed on T.V.

Oh, well...........................

TV parents can sleep in the same bed, too. :lol:

MrShotShot

May 4th, 2009, 8:02 am

gadgetere

May 4th, 2009, 8:09 am

There will be a device equivalent to the TVGuardian, that will work with an HDTV and a digital signal.Right. There WILL be a "TVGuardian".
There WILL be "pocket tv's".
There WILL be "emergency tv".

Some day.

TRUST us.

Hey --- tell me again why we're being forced to give up features (why are we shutting off analog before digital offers the same features)??? I understand that you think I'm just speculating here, but I'm not. The switch is going to happen; too many people want it for it to be held off much longer, trust me.Why should I trust you? Right NOW --- there are no pocket sets. Right NOW there isn't any technology that allows portable TV in a power outage longer than a couple hours. Right NOW there isn't anything available for people who don't live close to the stations.

Oh --- I forgot --- "TRUST us". The difference in picture quality is drastic in a home setting with a decent (read: low-end, in a year or two) set. That avenue is out.Sorry, nobody I've talked to can see the difference, unless they're close to the screen. (And that website is a joke.Really? What part of it is funny?

The joke of buying a converter for every set/recorder in the house?
The joke of hearing the tornado sirens going off, and not knowing exactly where the tornado is?
The joke of never having television in any form away from home?

I'm missing exactly what is funny... The digital signal—"free tv"—will still be broadcast over the air, and you can make your own antenna for about two bucks if you don't want to buy one.The folks have a converter box; you should watch the CBS signal on their box. The sound cuts out every 3 seconds, and the picture tears and tiles.

We'll just have to keep hugging ourselves and chanting "This is BETTER"... When that switch does happen, what do you find more likely: that TVGuardian will simply go out of business, or that they'll find a way to make it work? If, somehow, they don't, I would personally invest in a replacement, simply because I know there's a market for it.Well, see --- there's the problem. The "government", has dictated "you are not ALLOWED to remove the profanity".

Not acceptible.
I'm sorry, but your appoach to this issue just isn't any good. I find it more likely that, for whatever reason, you want to stop the switch to digital, and are just using this profanity-filter as an excuse.For "whatever reason"? I've given the reasons:

No pocket TV's (most of my tv receiving).
No radios with TV sound.
No tv away from home (the pseudo-portables only run a couple hours per charge, and aren't really portable).
Lots of extra expense for me (converters, expensive lithium batteries, etcetera).
Full screen is more viewable (I'm Human, my eyes are symmetrical). Best theater is Imax.
At the very worst, you will have to buy a converter—which only applies if you're using an antenna—and a new TVGuardian. That's a one-time fee in the name of a better technology, and you think it's a valid complaint?They don't make TVGuardians that work on dtv's. The signal isn't there.

And tell me where I can buy a converter that works portably?

Oh I forgot --- "TRUST us, there will BE one".

Some day.

Sigh....

MrShotShot

May 4th, 2009, 8:11 am

TV will be obsolete in a few years anyway so who cares.

gadgetere

May 4th, 2009, 8:13 am

Or you could join us in the grown up world and listen to a few wordy dirties on occasion. If you don't like profanity, don't watch the shows.Oh, I see; I'm not "grown up" if I don't swear. Should I get drunk too and prove my "adultness" (as they used to do at my college dormitory)???

gadgetere

May 4th, 2009, 8:16 am

My government-issued digital converter has closed-captioning as an option. OP, what the hell are you talking about?Yeah you can display the "closed captioning"; but you CAN'T censor the the profanity --- the CONVERTER may display the captions, but the DEVICE won't work AFTER the converter. So we have to get used to our children swearing.

gadgetere

May 4th, 2009, 8:18 am

Whatever happened to George Carlin's 7 WORDS YOU CAN NEVER SAY ON TELEVISION?

Sorry George, you must be turning over in your grave, or laughing your dead ass off! :lol:

Most of those words are now allowed on T.V.

Oh, well...........................That's because people sit on their lazy backsides and allow stuff to happen. It is as Edmond Burke (British Statesman) said in the 1780's --- "All that evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing".

gadgetere

May 4th, 2009, 8:20 am

Now that's just craziness!Really? I don't like to hear profanity. And I'm far from alone in my opinion.

From now on the only choice I have about profanity is to not watch shows at all, or watch only recordings that have "closed captioning".

Not fair.

gadgetere

May 4th, 2009, 8:23 am

This is exactly what he is doing. See his other 200 post rant thread about digital TV.It's just one more FEATURE that we're LOSING.

My "rant", is about LOSING features that we always took for granted.
No one can argue that the utility is not decreasing; the best my opponents can do is ridicule.

"Ridicule" means that there is no legitimate argument.

:)

gdoane

May 4th, 2009, 8:50 am

I was playing with my "TVGuardian" --- a neat device that mutes the speaker, and places an altered caption on the screen. For instance:

"(bleep) OFF!"

....becomes "Go away."

It's really pleasant to watch a movie and not hear the "F" word, or any other profanity.

My parents watch TV (Cable) with closed captioning on all the time and most of the time the CC is WAY off from real-time audio. Another thing that annoys me about CC is the amount of misspelled words which obviously get past the idiots doing the typing. CC has never been done correctly that I've ever seen. It's definitely not reliable enough to base an automatic device on.

But the device exploits "closed captions". And digital tv doesn't pass closed captions. So while it works FINE for tapes and dvd's, it won't work on digital broadcasts. "I'm sorry, you HAVE to hear the profanity".

What are you talking about? HDTV has Closed Captioning. I just tried it out on my Sony Bravia on KNXV 15.1 HD 720p and got the closed captioning on the news report about the Cowboys Dome getting blown apart by a storm last night. Digital TV definitely has closed captioning. I saw it do it.

The technology COULD be included on all tv's; but nooOOOooo --- the government only endorses the V-Chip, which cancels an entire PROGRAM. What if you want to watch a show or movie, but just want the obscenities cut? Too bad, so sad.

That's an ILLEGAL altering of content in violation of copyright law. The copyright owner has SOLE RIGHTS to modify or alter the content of his creation.

Read the company's response to the FCC:
click here. (http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520213645)

www.stophdtv.org (http://www.stophdtv.org) --- so much HARM, so little BENEFIT!

Analog TV causes more harm. Each analog TV channel takes up a WHOPPING 6 MEGAHERTZ of bandwidth. Such wastefulness in a modern society cannot be tolerated. Each dinosaur analog TV channel is over 8 TIMES the size of the entire commercial AM broadcast band. There's no excusing that kind of waste in the 21st century.

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

May 4th, 2009, 8:56 am

Really? I don't like to hear profanity. And I'm far from alone in my opinion.

From now on the only choice I have about profanity is to not watch shows at all, or watch only recordings that have "closed captioning".

Not fair.

Oh the horror!

Also, this website you link to is crap. I mean, I have and still opposed the government led digital transition, but the amount of misinformation on this page is ridiculous.

edit: After reading more of this website if it wasn't intended to be a joke it should be.

So “HD” is sharper? If you don’t yet have an HDTV, do this: at a store, stand in front of an HD set, and marvel at how sharp and clear it is. NOW – take ten small steps back, the distance to your sofa, and look again. Can you STILL SEE the sharpness? NO! It’s no different than what you have at home! Human eyes are not high resolution; analog is already sharper than you can see – when you read the following “Congress Letter”, it’s explained better why.

Also do this – channel surf – go channel to channel, and see what the image is. Virtually every channel you hit will show a HEAD SHOT – someone’s head and shoulders. So making the screen WIDER, serves no purpose. In fact, by making the screen WIDER, the image of the person is SMALLER and CUT OFF. We used to be able to read T-Shirts; now usually we can’t. Tops of heads are cut off by the screen.

Further, with “digital” you will often see TILING – squares in the picture (errors!) called “artifacts”; which you NEVER see with the analog format! Analog is ALWAYS better than digital.

HDTV it is NOT “higher resolution” nor “wider” --- it is shorter and smaller!!! Therefore, HDTV provides NO VALUE AT ALL, and is actually POORER quality!

The majority of Americans DO NOT WANT hdtv --- and especially won’t when they’re told the truth, like facts as you have just read. The expected “crowds of people flocking to buy the new sets” simply isn’t happening. Why do we have a bill FORCING what the people DO NOT WANT?

JeffR

May 4th, 2009, 3:54 pm

sironin

May 4th, 2009, 4:21 pm

That's an ILLEGAL altering of content in violation of copyright law. The copyright owner has SOLE RIGHTS to modify or alter the content of his creation.

I can only hope fair use hasn't been erroded that far. My understanding is that the user may do whatever they wish with what is transmitted into their home (within currently defined limits against rebroadcast or public showings and those applicable under the DMCA).

As to the digital TV transition, I had hoped we'd have finished months ago. Discussion on upgrades to the digital format can't happen soon enough.

RickRhetoric

May 4th, 2009, 4:39 pm

HDTV is turning into a cruel joke. Most of the time my ND (no def) cable channels are clearer and sharper than HD. And on the HD channels the size of the screen shrinks about eight inches on either side. And if the program you're watching, wasn't filmed for HD, the picture is worse than NoDef pictures.

Dump High Def and bring back analog television!

Before I got HDTV, I had a 36" analog. Granted it was bulky and weighed a ton, but the pictures were always crystal clear and it was simple to use -- just plug in play. Also it didn't have an enormous gob of funny cables draped off the back of it.

HDTV -- Pffft!

King Cantona

May 4th, 2009, 4:49 pm

If you want to watch the kind of film that has profanity I think you should expect to hear profanity, go to any bar in the US and you hear it all the time, it doesn't bother me and I would feel cheated if the profanity was bleeped out...

I know everyone's different but in Britain after 9 o'clock profanity is allowed on network tv, this doesn't mean that it's non stop swearing at that time but the rules are very much relaxed...

King Cantona

May 4th, 2009, 4:52 pm

That's because people sit on their lazy backsides and allow stuff to happen. It is as Edmond Burke (British Statesman) said in the 1780's --- "All that evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing".

I wouldn't call profanity on TV 'evil'......

badkarma

May 4th, 2009, 5:08 pm

Samm

May 4th, 2009, 5:36 pm

TV will be obsolete in a few years anyway so who cares.

Right... they will beam the signals directly to the chip that they plant in our brain. And aluminum foil won't stop it... it has to be genuine tin foil to work. :shifty:

:D

sironin

May 4th, 2009, 6:08 pm

Right... they will beam the signals directly to the chip that they plant in our brain. And aluminum foil won't stop it... it has to be genuine tin foil to work. :shifty:

:D

Quite a bit OT, but someone did a test that showed that aluminum and tin foil will actually AMPLIFY any sort of non-visible radiation hitting it (mostly by bouncing it around inside the hat). Effectively, if someone made a mind control beam, it would work better if you were wearing such a hat.

Samm

May 4th, 2009, 6:26 pm

Quite a bit OT, but someone did a test that showed that aluminum and tin foil will actually AMPLIFY any sort of non-visible radiation hitting it (mostly by bouncing it around inside the hat). Effectively, if someone made a mind control beam, it would work better if you were wearing such a hat.

If you use a tin colander sieve and mount a propeller on the top it will scatter the waves before they can penetrate and if some radiation does get through, it will escape out of the little holes. :snooty:

grapabeaux

May 4th, 2009, 7:26 pm

Yeah you can display the "closed captioning"; but you CAN'T censor the the profanity --- the CONVERTER may display the captions, but the DEVICE won't work AFTER the converter. So we have to get used to our children swearing.

What profanity are you getting on broadcast TV?

Spaceman Spiff

May 4th, 2009, 9:07 pm

I bet "Pulp Fiction" and "Goodfellas" would be pretty fun to watch with that device.

"Well, I'm a mushroom cloud laying guy, guy!"

snow96

May 5th, 2009, 1:27 am

Go to their link; they don't have access to the digital information; it's not available. The TV itself generates the closed captioning.

Okay THIS statement is beyond crazy. Your TV doesn't know what program you watching, hasn't been programed with closed caption for every program made.

The CC is sent in the digital signal and decoded by your TV.

at some point, a new service will allow you to do what you've been doing all along.

Yaaaawn.

gdoane

May 5th, 2009, 2:30 am

It's just one more FEATURE that we're LOSING.

My "rant", is about LOSING features that we always took for granted.
No one can argue that the utility is not decreasing; the best my opponents can do is ridicule.

"Ridicule" means that there is no legitimate argument.

:)

Oh, so you want to talk about what we're losing?

We're losing the crummy 30 frame per second flicker for a smoother progressive scan image. No big loss there. Losing eyestrain means losing headaches.

We're losing the lost signal time in the retrace blanking pulse which was a ridiculous waste of bandwidth based on tube technology limitations from the 1940's. We're losing waste.

We're losing a major source of X-Ray radiation in American homes by getting rid of high-voltage CRT sets. Cancer is a nice feature to lose, ain't it?

With a refresh rate over 72 Hz, HDTV loses the flicker that can trigger epileptic seizures. There's another fine feature lost.

We're losing noisy EMF fields from millions of old TV flyback transformers which pollute the RF spectrum so badly you can HEAR it when you get an AM radio near the back of a television set.

We're losing a common source of static electricity in American homes. Static electricity is often responsible for destroying CMOS based electronic devices like iPods, cell phones, handheld video game systems, and such devices which mysteriously stop working. If you can feel a static electricity shock, that's about 5,000 volts. If you can hear the "crack" of a static electricity shock, that's about 10,000 volts. There is commonly over 20,000 volts of static electricity on the screen of any CRT display over 19".

What we're losing in the migration to digital TV are a whole bunch of household hazards.

The EMF field around a traditional TV is nearly off the charts. My 32" Sony Trinitron CRT TV set I measured with an RF noise floor at 2 Meters (150 MHz) pushing -100dBm from two Meters away. That KILLS RF reception. It's like hearing in a noisy room and TV's do that to your radios. Radios like your cell phone, like your cordless phone, like your wi-fi network, those are all radios.

I'm not going to miss these lost "features" a bit.

gadgetere

May 8th, 2009, 9:59 pm

My parents watch TV (Cable) with closed captioning on all the time and most of the time the CC is WAY off from real-time audio. Another thing that annoys me about CC is the amount of misspelled words which obviously get past the idiots doing the typing. CC has never been done correctly that I've ever seen. It's definitely not reliable enough to base an automatic device on.It's fine on the network feeds. And works perfectly with tapes and dvd's.
What are you talking about? HDTV has Closed Captioning. I just tried it out on my Sony Bravia on KNXV 15.1 HD 720p and got the closed captioning on the news report about the Cowboys Dome getting blown apart by a storm last night. Digital TV definitely has closed captioning. I saw it do it.According to the TVGuardian website, the "closed captioning" isn't available outside of the TV. If someone has a converter-box and an analog set that displays closed-captioning, I'd be interested in knowing if it works; seems from what they said it does not...
That's an ILLEGAL altering of content in violation of copyright law. The copyright owner has SOLE RIGHTS to modify or alter the content of his creation. Downright silly, and you probably know it. An end-user can watch it any way he wants to; if he wants to censor the cuss words, no one cares.

(Fade in the cartoon "Herman", he's standing at his door; tanks and helicopters and soldiers are running around, and one GI with a clipboard is saying: "We understand you removed the tag from your mattress???")
Analog TV causes more harm. Each analog TV channel takes up a WHOPPING 6 MEGAHERTZ of bandwidth.We don't care. Our LIVES are more important to us, in a tornado or hurricane or earthquake etcetera --- where we need to view critical information. Such wastefulness in a modern society cannot be tolerated.Really. What about the wastefulness of CARS, and LAWN-MOWERS? In a free society, who decides what will be "tolerated" or not? Each dinosaur analog TV channel...We've given you a LIST of features that are going away. Yet you call "better", dinosaur. Please read this carefully:

LESS FEATURES IS NOT BETTER. ... is over 8 TIMES the size of the entire commercial AM broadcast band. There's no excusing that kind of waste in the 21st century.I'm glad you're not choosing my dinner menu; no telling WHAT you would dictate for me to eat.

gadgetere

May 8th, 2009, 10:08 pm

Okay THIS statement is beyond crazy. Your TV doesn't know what program you watching, hasn't been programed with closed caption for every program made.It's my understanding the "closed captioning" is embedded in the digital stream; not available to the device.
The CC is sent in the digital signal and decoded by your TV.Uhm, I think I just said that.
at some point, a new service will allow you to do what you've been doing all along.

Yaaaawn.Ahhh --- I see.

At SOME POINT IN TIME it will work.

At SOME POINT IN TIME I'll have pocket tv's.

At SOME POINT IN TIME I'll have portable television audio.

At SOME POINT IN TIME I'll have the extra cash to buy all new equipment.

At SOME POINT IN TIME I'll be able to LIVE through a tornado.

Oh --- hey --- I have an idea!

Let's shut off the analog AT SOME POINT IN TIME when all that EXISTS!!!

:frown:

gadgetere

May 8th, 2009, 10:11 pm

Right... they will beam the signals directly to the chip that they plant in our brain. And aluminum foil won't stop it... it has to be genuine tin foil to work.

Exactly what does this add to the discussion?

They say that ridicule is one of the sincere forms of flattery; it means you don't have a valid point.

:D

Alaric

May 8th, 2009, 10:14 pm

I'd have to be AWFULLY fast to pull that off; not to mention "clairvoyant" to predict when the cuss word was coming...

Yeah, that is why I gave up on TV altogether. There is just way too much unavoidable sex and violence. We read the bible instead.

;)

grapabeaux

May 8th, 2009, 10:15 pm

If someone has a converter-box and an analog set that displays closed-captioning, I'd be interested in knowing if it works; seems from what they said it does not...

I do. It works.

I watched an episode of "South Park" with it on, and when the TV bleeped the bad word (this being broadcast, not cable), the word came across as "[bleep]".

Happy now?

gadgetere

May 8th, 2009, 10:21 pm

Welcome to being an adult in the real world. It can be pretty hard sometimes but you will get used to it."Foul language is the use of strong words by weak people"; it is not "adult", it is immature --- they used to do it in Junior High locker rooms to feel "big"...
I wouldn't call profanity on TV 'evil'......I would call it "a form of evil". Recent studies linked viewing of sexually graphic scenes to increased activity especially in teens. Clearly what is seen and heard on tv DOES affect people.

Would you be ok with someone shouting all the four-letter-words over a gradeschool intercom? (I fear your answer might be "yes".)
Personally, I have no problem with profanity on TV. Or nudity.In the words of Sherwood Schwartz, in his book "Inside Gilligan's Island":

"You look back on your life, and ask yourself if you've helped people, or hurt them. They put sex, violence and profanity on television telling us it doesn't affect people --- and then they sell advertising to affect people. You can't have it both ways."

AutoRacer55

May 8th, 2009, 10:30 pm

In the words of Sherwood Schwartz, in his book "Inside Gilligan's Island":

"You look back on your life, and ask yourself if you've helped people, or hurt them. They put sex, violence and profanity on television telling us it doesn't affect people --- and then they sell advertising to affect people. You can't have it both ways."

In the words of Ron White:

"My grandmother then told me after she caught me 'getting it on' that 'One day you and the Lord will be walking side by side, and what are you gonna tell him when this episode comes up?'"

"I'll tell him: 'Look, here comes the good part!'"

Besides, foul language is convenient at times. When's the last time you hit your thumb with a hammer and went "Good golly gracious, this hurts very much bad." Instead of saying "Dammit! Why the **** did I do that?!"

gadgetere

May 8th, 2009, 10:33 pm

Oh, so you want to talk about what we're losing?

We're losing the crummy 30 frame per second flicker for a smoother progressive scan image. No big loss there. Losing eyestrain means losing headaches.TV has never given me a headache. Never.
We're losing the lost signal time in the retrace blanking pulse which was a ridiculous waste of bandwidth based on tube technology limitations from the 1940's. We're losing waste.I've never noticed it.
We're losing a major source of X-Ray radiation in American homes by getting rid of high-voltage CRT sets. Cancer is a nice feature to lose, ain't it?I've never known ANYONE to have died from television cancer; smoking, yes. Modern tubes emit very little x-ray.
With a refresh rate over 72 Hz, HDTV loses the flicker that can trigger epileptic seizures. There's another fine feature lost.I've never had a seizure. Never. (Nor have I known ANYONE that has...)
We're losing noisy EMF fields from millions of old TV flyback transformers which pollute the RF spectrum so badly you can HEAR it when you get an AM radio near the back of a television set. I never listen to my AM radio near the back of my TV...
We're losing a common source of static electricity in American homes. Static electricity is often responsible for destroying CMOS based electronic devices like iPods, cell phones, handheld video game systems, and such devices which mysteriously stop working. If you can feel a static electricity shock, that's about 5,000 volts. If you can hear the "crack" of a static electricity shock, that's about 10,000 volts. There is commonly over 20,000 volts of static electricity on the screen of any CRT display over 19".The last time I had a device destroyed by static, was in 1999.

A modem went out.

....I think the nearby LIGHTNING STRIKE at the time was suspect...
What we're losing in the migration to digital TV are a whole bunch of household hazards.

The EMF field around a traditional TV is nearly off the charts. My 32" Sony Trinitron CRT TV set I measured with an RF noise floor at 2 Meters (150 MHz) pushing -100dBm from two Meters away.Meters? What's that in feet? :P That KILLS RF reception. It's like hearing in a noisy room and TV's do that to your radios. Radios like your cell phone, like your cordless phone, like your wi-fi network, those are all radios.My computer jams my AM radio, and my tv does not. Surely the computer puts out more garbage.

Should we ban computers???
I'm not going to miss these lost "features" a bit.Good for you ---- I am.

And others are dictating what I can or can't do.

Leave analog on for another decade or more, and no big damage is done; shut if off in June, and there is plenty of damage.

You haven't proven your point, nor disproven mine...

:)

gadgetere

May 8th, 2009, 10:58 pm

I do. It works.

I watched an episode of "South Park" with it on, and when the TV bleeped the bad word (this being broadcast, not cable), the word came across as "".I don't know; I don't use a converter box. This is a quote from their website:
[b]
VI. The Digital Transition Forces Foul Language Filtering Technology Into Obsolescence

What’s changing with the digital transition? The answer: A lot! Closed-captions are broadcast as hidden data within the video. They can easily be read. Foul Language Filtering Technology uses these existing closed-captions to detect and mute offensive language. In the analog, pre-HD world, the closed-captions passed through to the TV’s closed-caption decoder.

The TV’s closed-caption decoder, when activated, processed the data and displayed the text as graphic characters on top of the video. Foul Language Filtering Technology could sit between a cable/satellite box/DVD Player/VCR in a dedicated set-top box that would intercept the closedcaptions and audio, before it reached the TV. But that’s not the case in the DTV world.

Cable, satellite and IPTV (e.g. AT&T and Verizon) receivers process the closed-captions for DTV/HD inside their own box—closed-captions are not passed through to the TV, therefore, an external Foul Language Filtering Technology box cannot intercept the closed-captions and audio before it reaches the TV. The DTV revolution has forced this invaluable technology for families into obsolescence as an external box. Foul Language Filtering Technology has to be built into the cable/satellite/IPTV boxes to work with HD.

snow96

May 9th, 2009, 12:35 am

It's my understanding the "closed captioning" is embedded in the digital stream; not available to the device.
Uhm, I think I just said that.
Ahhh --- I see.

At SOME POINT IN TIME it will work.

At SOME POINT IN TIME I'll have pocket tv's.

At SOME POINT IN TIME I'll have portable television audio.

At SOME POINT IN TIME I'll have the extra cash to buy all new equipment.

At SOME POINT IN TIME I'll be able to LIVE through a tornado.

Oh --- hey --- I have an idea!

Let's shut off the analog AT SOME POINT IN TIME when all that EXISTS!!!

:frown:

So lets see here. The new improved digital tv signal that includes the CC is so super secret that how to decode it was GIVEN to all TV manufacturers.

You need to get on the company that makes the device you like so much.

THEY have access to the technology just as mush as the TV manufacurers.

Could it be there is so little interest in the device the manufacturer doesn't want to build a new model?

Now as to living in tornado alley and wanting a pocket TV? To hell with that, I want a radio that will run on batteries or a crank.

I don't want to SEE what's going on, I want to KNOW what's going on!

And again, talk to the manufacturers about things you want NOW. It isn't a surprise that digital tv was coming.

snow96

May 9th, 2009, 12:46 am

I don't know; I don't use a converter box. This is a quote from their website:

VI. The Digital Transition Forces Foul Language Filtering Technology Into Obsolescence

What’s changing with the digital transition? The answer: A lot! Closed-captions are broadcast as hidden data within the video. They can easily be read. Foul Language Filtering Technology uses these existing closed-captions to detect and mute offensive language. In the analog, pre-HD world, the closed-captions passed through to the TV’s closed-caption decoder.

The TV’s closed-caption decoder, when activated, processed the data and displayed the text as graphic characters on top of the video. Foul Language Filtering Technology could sit between a cable/satellite box/DVD Player/VCR in a dedicated set-top box that would intercept the closedcaptions and audio, before it reached the TV. But that’s not the case in the DTV world.

Cable, satellite and IPTV (e.g. AT&T and Verizon) receivers process the closed-captions for DTV/HD inside their own box—closed-captions are not passed through to the TV, therefore, an external Foul Language Filtering Technology box cannot intercept the closed-captions and audio before it reaches the TV. The DTV revolution has forced this invaluable technology for families into obsolescence as an external box. Foul Language Filtering Technology has to be built into the cable/satellite/IPTV boxes to work with HD.

This company apparently needs smarter engineers.

How about telling them THIS for a concept.

You know the converter boxes that are on sale now. You know the ones that take the digital signal, convert it to analog for older tv's.

Wow, they could make a box like that, convert the digital signal, analize the CC and audio. Then send the output to the analog conection on the DTV.

Tell them I only want 10 dollars per box royalty for the idea.

Simple solution, and they've had years to think of it.

Nice try, but I've shows it's possible.

Oh but DTV's won't be built to take analog signals after June when the traditional signal is cut off.

WRONG

Cable is still analog. Until every cable system in the country goes to a digital format, analog options on TV's will still excist.

So again, don't lay the blame of the problem on DTV, lay it on the manufacturer of the little box you like to use.

BostonPatriot

May 9th, 2009, 10:42 am

I hate to make this simple ... but most programming has a little box at the beginning of the show that says something like "TV17-DLV" etc...

This has nothing to do with digital or ananlog. If you want to avoid profanities, then don't watch any of the uncut movie channels... watch the more mainstream channels where they either blank them out or use the second soundtrack, with the words replaced by euphemisms...

Dancer

May 9th, 2009, 10:50 am

sux that technology becomes obsolete

shame you live in a free country

mehWow, it's a free country that the government is forcing to go digital for some unknown reason, FORCING a technology to become obsolete.

Do you even see the irony in your post? Freedom=status quo of allowing people to CHOOSE between analog and digital

gdoane

May 9th, 2009, 12:40 pm

TV has never given me a headache. Never.

Yes, it has. It's a strobe light. Prove it to yourself. Take a pencil or pen and wave it between your eye and a TV screen. The strobe effect you see is causing your eyes to strain. Try the same thing with a good HDTV and the strobe effect isn't there.

Analog CRT TV's are pieces of junk from the 1940's. They're heavier, bulkier, hog more electricity, hog more bandwidth, hog more space and cause more health problems than HDTV does.

I've never noticed it.

That's probably because you've never applied for a frequency with the FCC only to hear howls of laughter. WE NEED MORE FREQUENCIES. When I moved to Phoenix in 1974, we had 300,000 people. Now we have THREE MILLION people and since the population has grown ten times over we need ten times the cops, ten times the firemen, ten times the ambulances and thirty times the frequencies to support police, fire and ambulance service.

I've never known ANYONE to have died from television cancer; smoking, yes. Modern tubes emit very little x-ray.

Modern HDTV emits zero x-ray and any x-ray emission is too much.

I've never had a seizure. Never. (Nor have I known ANYONE that has...)

Most people who have a seizure have to be told by somebody else that they had one. The electrical storm in the brain kind of shuts down the memory keeping storage process so victims often don't remember the attack.

My youngest brother has epilepsy. It scares the Hell out of me because with a family history of it, I'm at risk for it myself.

I never listen to my AM radio near the back of my TV...

It doesn't need to be near the TV at all to affect it. If you're an avid shortwave listener you can hear the racket on the 41 Meter band caused by all the cheap analog TV's.

The colorburst frequency in an analog television is 3.579545 MHz and it's so ungodly sloppy that it splatters clear up to the fourth harmonic. The second harmonic is flat dead in the center of the 41 meter international shortwave band. It affects the 80 Meter, 40 Meter, 20 Meter and 10 Meter international communications bands.

We need to ditch those awful things.

The last time I had a device destroyed by static, was in 1999.

A modem went out.

....I think the nearby LIGHTNING STRIKE at the time was suspect...
Meters? What's that in feet? :P My computer jams my AM radio, and my tv does not. Surely the computer puts out more garbage.

Should we ban computers???

Not really, no and here's the reason why. A COMPUTER DOES NOT HAVE AN ANTENNA ATTACHED TO IT. Televisions have broadband antennas, often a log periodic dipole array which is a GAIN ANTENNA and the emissions of a sloppy television full of unfiltered oscillators are carried up the coax (or worse, twin lead balanced) line to the antenna where they're shared with the WHOLE WORLD.

Good for you ---- I am.

And others are dictating what I can or can't do.

Others dictated the NTSC standard and you went along with that to the point you're trying to defend the dinosaur.

Leave analog on for another decade or more, and no big damage is done; shut if off in June, and there is plenty of damage.

You haven't proven your point, nor disproven mine...

:)

The damage done to the credibility of the government is huge. The government lied and said the switch would happen February 17th, 2009 and now they're saying the switch will happen June 12th, 2009. If they lie to us again and again, that damages their already thin credibility.

The FCC has already sold off the frequencies. The auctions started June 2008 so people have already bought the frequencies that these analog TV broadcasts are hogging up. They need to get off the pot and let the people who spent real money use those real frequencies.

BostonPatriot

May 9th, 2009, 4:07 pm

Of course a look at fine print says ... emphasis mine. That page is here (http://tvguardian.com/gshell.php?page=LEARN).

Principle Solutions, Inc. does not claim that TVGuardian® will filter out scenes or all words and phrases that anyone may consider to be offensive. TVGuardian® does not always filter out 100% of the offensive language due to captioning errors or other such reasons. TVGuardian® will not function on programs that are not closed-captioned or live broadcasts such as news or sporting events. Therefore, Principle Solutions, Inc. cannot be held responsible or liable for the content and dialog in the program viewed when using TVGuardian®.

King Cantona

May 9th, 2009, 4:19 pm

Wow, it's a free country that the government is forcing to go digital for some unknown reason, FORCING a technology to become obsolete.

Do you even see the irony in your post? Freedom=status quo of allowing people to CHOOSE between analog and digital

Well I freely support your democratic right to retain your analogue TV but good luck in trying to get a picture after analogue is shut down...

Then you can express your democratic right to go out and help the economy by buying a converter box, that way you can also be a true American hero...

gdoane

May 9th, 2009, 9:15 pm

Well I freely support your democratic right to retain your analogue TV but good luck in trying to get a picture after analogue is shut down...

Then you can express your democratic right to go out and help the economy by buying a converter box, that way you can also be a true American hero...

Getting a picture after analog is shut down really isn't all that big of a deal. Old DVD players and VCR's will still work. Old video game systems will still give a nice display.

When my DVD collection went over 500 discs I seriously asked myself "WHAT ARE YOU THINKING?" because it's basically true that if I were to actually sit down and watch all of my prerecorded media that the task would take me more than a year.

HDTV had a fun fight between Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. Blu-Ray won on a technicality but DVD is still leading in sales.

The only loss to HDTV might be broadcast TV, and for the most part, it's really no big loss.

gadgetere

May 10th, 2009, 12:44 am

Wow, it's a free country that the government is forcing to go digital for some unknown reason, FORCING a technology to become obsolete.

Do you even see the irony in your post? Freedom=status quo of allowing people to CHOOSE between analog and digitalHDTV is turning into a cruel joke. Most of the time my ND (no def) cable channels are clearer and sharper than HD. And on the HD channels the size of the screen shrinks about eight inches on either side. And if the program you're watching, wasn't filmed for HD, the picture is worse than NoDef pictures.

Dump High Def and bring back analog television!

Before I got HDTV, I had a 36" analog. Granted it was bulky and weighed a ton, but the pictures were always crystal clear and it was simple to use -- just plug in play. Also it didn't have an enormous gob of funny cables draped off the back of it.

HDTV -- Pffft!There are a lot of people who feel like this. Tens of millions even.

Our NBC affiliate estimates that "two percent of viewers will lose the signal next June". Two percent is TENS of THOUSANDS of citizens.

That's a lot. It's not acceptable.

We don't have the technology to allow analog shutoff; but no one has the money to counter the DTV payoffs already made to our congressmen.

And supposed "consumer advocates" and "defenders of individuals" like Sean Hannity, are completely quiet.

Sigh...

AutoRacer55

May 10th, 2009, 12:58 am

There are a lot of people who feel like this. Tens of millions even.

Our NBC affiliate estimates that "two percent of viewers will lose the signal next June". Two percent is TENS of THOUSANDS of citizens.

That's a lot. It's not acceptable.

We don't have the technology to allow analog shutoff; but no one has the money to counter the DTV payoffs already made to our congressmen.

And supposed "consumer advocates" and "defenders of individuals" like Sean Hannity, are completely quiet.

Sigh...

Tens of thousands, while we have over 300 million people in the country.

Carry on.

gdoane

May 10th, 2009, 2:56 am

There are a lot of people who feel like this. Tens of millions even.

Tens of millions of people can be wrong. Look at how many people made the mistake of voting for Barack Obama. We'd have been better off electing his everpresent teleprompter.

Our NBC affiliate estimates that "two percent of viewers will lose the signal next June". Two percent is TENS of THOUSANDS of citizens.

Okay, let's do the math here. The NBC affiliate nearest you is probably NBC-5 KXAS TV out of Dallas/Fort Worth.

In order for tens of thousands of citizens to comprise 2% of viewers, you'd need at least 20,000 x 50 = 1 MILLION viewers for NBC-5 KXAS TV.

The entire population of Dallas County is only 2.3 Million people. I seriously doubt that half of the county watches NBC.

I live in Maricopa County, seriously bigger than Dallas County (3.9 Million people) and the NBC affiliate here wouldn't be losing any tens of thousands of viewers either. Heck, most of the viewers here stuck with rooftop antenna reception don't speak english anyways.

That's a lot. It's not acceptable.

It's nothing. More people died last year in car accidents than are going to lose tv reception this year.

We don't have the technology to allow analog shutoff; but no one has the money to counter the DTV payoffs already made to our congressmen.

I have the technology. If you don't it's because you haven't bought it like you need to.

And supposed "consumer advocates" and "defenders of individuals" like Sean Hannity, are completely quiet.

Sigh...

Sean Hannity loses no audience from this. His TV show is on Fox News Channel, a cable-only network. His radio show is broadcast on AM radio. This has no effect on Sean Hannity or his audience.

King Cantona

May 10th, 2009, 5:58 am

There are a lot of people who feel like this. Tens of millions even.

Our NBC affiliate estimates that "two percent of viewers will lose the signal next June". Two percent is TENS of THOUSANDS of citizens.

That's a lot. It's not acceptable.

We don't have the technology to allow analog shutoff; but no one has the money to counter the DTV payoffs already made to our congressmen.

And supposed "consumer advocates" and "defenders of individuals" like Sean Hannity, are completely quiet.

Sigh...

It's already started over here and in my area it changes in November but we're all geared up for it here, I bought my technophobic dad a digital TV last Christmas. I manage with a converter box...

gadgetere

May 10th, 2009, 11:01 am

Tens of millions of people can be wrong. Look at how many people made the mistake of voting for Barack Obama. We'd have been better off electing his everpresent teleprompter.There's no proof he was actually elected; it's a known fact that ACORN falsified at least hundreds of thousands of registrations in at least 16 states. Besides, all we have to do is get that birth certificate under examination; once that's done, then we'll have President Biden (or Pelosi). But we could scream for another election...

With respect, I'm surprised to see you not supporting BO; people are generally polarized on their issues --- like socialized medicine, bigger government/more government control, DTV...
Okay, let's do the math here. The NBC affiliate nearest you is probably NBC-5 KXAS TV out of Dallas/Fort Worth.

In order for tens of thousands of citizens to comprise 2% of viewers, you'd need at least 20,000 x 50 = 1 MILLION viewers for NBC-5 KXAS TV.

The entire population of Dallas County is only 2.3 Million people. I seriously doubt that half of the county watches NBC.

I live in Maricopa County, seriously bigger than Dallas County (3.9 Million people) and the NBC affiliate here wouldn't be losing any tens of thousands of viewers either. Heck, most of the viewers here stuck with rooftop antenna reception don't speak english anyways.I don't live in Texas; but there is an idea called "Tyranny of the majority". Nationwide millions of people will not have television. And EVERYONE pays more --- buying boxes, paying for satellite/cable, etcetera.

If we pay more, it's a "tax".
It's nothing. More people died last year in car accidents than are going to lose tv reception this year.Hmmmm; then lets' rescind all of the "Americans with Disabilities" legislation.

There aren't very many wheel-chair people, are they? They don't count either in your system; you can't have it both ways.
I have the technology. If you don't it's because you haven't bought it like you need to. No you don't.
You don't have a pocket tv.
You don't have a portable that works longer than a couple hours in a blackout.
....(assuming you've kept it CHARGED)...
You don't have a radio that receives TV sound.

This whole thing is driven by profiteering corporations, and no one has succeeded in denying that.

THAT is why Sean Hannity should be SCREAMING. But he's not.

Why not?
Sean Hannity loses no audience from this. His TV show is on Fox News Channel, a cable-only network. His radio show is broadcast on AM radio. This has no effect on Sean Hannity or his audience.After FM goes "hd", do you think that AM will not follow?

He'd better start screaming NOW.

gadgetere

May 10th, 2009, 11:04 am

Tens of thousands, while we have over 300 million people in the country.

Carry on.That many in this STATE. We ~3.5 million in this STATE.

But you know that there are 57 states in America.

(...intentional sarcasm against BO...)

gadgetere

May 10th, 2009, 11:26 am

Yes, it has. It's a strobe light. Prove it to yourself. Take a pencil or pen and wave it between your eye and a TV screen. The strobe effect you see is causing your eyes to strain. Try the same thing with a good HDTV and the strobe effect isn't there. I see --- so I've been getting all these HEADACHES and I just don't REMEMBER them.

Golly --- I hope that's not been happening while I'm DRIVING...
Analog CRT TV's are pieces of junk from the 1940's. They're heavier, bulkier, hog more electricity, hog more bandwidth, hog more space and cause more health problems than HDTV does.You know, one of my pocket TV's, has a CRT. It's very sharp and clear.

Wait --- it won't work in a month, and there's no replacement for it, is there???
That's probably because you've never applied for a frequency with the FCC only to hear howls of laughter. WE NEED MORE FREQUENCIES. When I moved to Phoenix in 1974, we had 300,000 people. Now we have THREE MILLION people and since the population has grown ten times over we need ten times the cops, ten times the firemen, ten times the ambulances and thirty times the frequencies to support police, fire and ambulance service. You do remember that "EMERGENCY SERVICES" was not the first reason for "needing frequencies"? They came up with that AFTER there wasn't a line forming to buy the frequencies.
Modern HDTV emits zero x-ray and any x-ray emission is too much.Straight-line-risk-probability function. You have more danger from MICROWAVE OVEN emissions than from analog x-rays.

You're also ignoring the lead, cadmium, lead, copper, lead, tin, lead, and a lot of other very toxic chemicals that will now leach into our aquifers from land fills from trashed sets.

Did I mention "lead"???
Most people who have a seizure have to be told by somebody else that they had one. The electrical storm in the brain kind of shuts down the memory keeping storage process so victims often don't remember the attack. Now you have me worried; has this been happening while I'm driving, or while I'm at work, and people just haven't been telling me about it?

(That's silly....)
My youngest brother has epilepsy. It scares the Hell out of me because with a family history of it, I'm at risk for it myself. Then buy him an HDTV.

Just don't buy ME one...

You keep provin' my point...
It doesn't need to be near the TV at all to affect it. If you're an avid shortwave listener you can hear the racket on the 41 Meter band caused by all the cheap analog TV's.Hmmm; it's not affecting my AM radio, so you're saying I should become a SHORTWAVE listener so I could understand why analog is shutting OFF???
The colorburst frequency in an analog television is 3.579545 MHz and it's so ungodly sloppy that it splatters clear up to the fourth harmonic. The second harmonic is flat dead in the center of the 41 meter international shortwave band. It affects the 80 Meter, 40 Meter, 20 Meter and 10 Meter international communications bands.Goodness --- how have we survived that last sixty YEARS?
We need to ditch those awful things.When there is suitable technology, then we can change. There's not, and you know it.

Those "awful things" have features that Government is STEALING...
Not really, no and here's the reason why. A COMPUTER DOES NOT HAVE AN ANTENNA ATTACHED TO IT.My computer has an antenna. It's called "power wire". And "mouse wire". And "internal circuits". Televisions have broadband antennas, often a log periodic dipole array which is a GAIN ANTENNA and the emissions of a sloppy television full of unfiltered oscillators are carried up the coax (or worse, twin lead balanced) line to the antenna where they're shared with the WHOLE WORLD.Last time I heard, local oscillators are only a couple milliwatts, and only one frequency.
Others dictated the NTSC standard and you went along with that to the point you're trying to defend the dinosaur. Non-sequitur. When "others dictated the ntsc standard", there was nothing else in PLACE.

It was an increase in use, not a decrease.
DTV is a decrease in function.
The damage done to the credibility of the government is huge. The government lied and said the switch would happen February 17th, 2009 and now they're saying the switch will happen June 12th, 2009. If they lie to us again and again, that damages their already thin credibility. So what? Many don't want to lose what they've always enjoyed, to "more government control".
The FCC has already sold off the frequencies. The auctions started June 2008 so people have already bought the frequencies that these analog TV broadcasts are hogging up. They need to get off the pot and let the people who spent real money use those real frequencies.I've said it before, and I'll say it again --- it's only the stroke of a pen.
(That almost rhymed, didn't it?)

"People who have spent real money", have bought the congressmen. THAT is where the "real money" has been spent.

This is all about profit (from forced sales on US), and everyone knows it...

gdoane

May 10th, 2009, 12:05 pm

There's no proof he was actually elected; it's a known fact that ACORN falsified at least hundreds of thousands of registrations in at least 16 states. Besides, all we have to do is get that birth certificate under examination; once that's done, then we'll have President Biden (or Pelosi). But we could scream for another election...

Biden is a continuation of the theme for vice-presidents making the President safe through an "Oh My God Not HIM" result if something bad happens to the sitting President. Bush41 Pioneered the concept with Dan Quayle, Clinton copied it with Al Gore, and Bush 43 kept it going with Dick Cheney.

Over the past three decades, the Vice Presidential picks have all been "OH MY GOD NOT HIM" types.

With respect, I'm surprised to see you not supporting BO; people are generally polarized on their issues --- like socialized medicine, bigger government/more government control, DTV...
I don't live in Texas; but there is an idea called "Tyranny of the majority". Nationwide millions of people will not have television. And EVERYONE pays more --- buying boxes, paying for satellite/cable, etcetera.

I don't really CARE about television, as most of my viewing is video games and prerecorded DVD's because I like control over my content. The last good television show worth watching was Gilligan's Island forty years ago.

If we pay more, it's a "tax".
Hmmmm; then lets' rescind all of the "Americans with Disabilities" legislation.

I think we should rescind the "Americans with Disabilities" BS. Handicapped parking is just an excuse for fatassed people who really need more exercise to waddle shorter distances to get another Big Mac.

If you weigh 500 pounds then what you need isn't the parking spot ten feet from the door. You need to be parking a mile away and walking that lard off, tubbo.

The Americans With Disabilities Act is sheer stupidity. TWENTY HANDICAPPED PARKING SPOTS AT HOME DEPOT. What the HELL? Are there a LOT of people putting up drywall from their wheelchairs?

The GYM is even more hilarious. Handicapped people gonna get on the treadmill and run five miles or what?

I say put all the handicapped parking at Weight Watchers and Jenny Craig where it freakin' BELONGS!!

There aren't very many wheel-chair people, are they? They don't count either in your system; you can't have it both ways.

They don't count in my system. If you're trying to appeal to my sense of mercy, don't bother. I don't have one.

No you don't.
You don't have a pocket tv.

Actually, I do have such a device. I don't use it much because my cell phone kicks its ass with streamed video on demand. My iPod is even better with its you-tube application and my wi-fi network.

You don't have a portable that works longer than a couple hours in a blackout.
....(assuming you've kept it CHARGED)...
You don't have a radio that receives TV sound.

I have a full-powered internet capable cell phone with a car charger and ten hours of talk time plus a spare battery. I pay about $130 per month to keep that toy and it will beat any hand-held little TV into the dirt as far as gathering information goes.

Here's what I can do to beat your silly little handheld TV. I can take my cell phone, bluetooth it to my HP Pavilion laptop, link up to the internet with my unlimited data connection, go straight to the NOAA website and view LIVE satellite weather imaging while you're looking at a dinky 3" portable TV screen hoping for a clue.

This whole thing is driven by profiteering corporations, and no one has succeeded in denying that.

I don't want to deny that. Profit is good. If there were no profit in TV then there wouldn't BE any TV.

THAT is why Sean Hannity should be SCREAMING. But he's not.

Why not?
After FM goes "hd", do you think that AM will not follow?

Channel 144 on Sirius Satellite radio, twice a day is where you'll find Sean Hannity. Our esteemed host is, as usual, ahead of the curve here. Streaming internet, podcasts, whatever the media brings Sean Hannity is on it.

He'd better start screaming NOW.

Or what? Tens of thousands of pocket tv watchers who couldn't ever tune in his show before might stop watching something they've never been able to view in the first place?

Ex_Spy_Guy

May 10th, 2009, 12:09 pm

sux that technology becomes obsolete

shame you live in a free country

meh

lol fairness doctrine

OldBuzzard

May 10th, 2009, 12:27 pm

...
At SOME POINT IN TIME I'll have pocket tv's. ...

You know, there is this 'new" :rolleyes: thing on the internet called GOOGLE. You should try it some time.

http://www.radioshack.com/family/index.jsp?categoryId=2032170&allCount=26&fbc=1&f=Brand%2F1000101%2F&fbn=Brand%2FAccurian

http://www.insignia-products.com/pc-235-14-insignia-7-portable-standard-definition-digital-lcd-tv.aspx

http://www.gadgetcraver.com/epoq7portablehdtvdigitaltvwithmediacardreader-p-192.html

And if you have a laptop:

http://www.plextor.com/english/products/px-HDTV500U.html

gdoane

May 10th, 2009, 4:25 pm

I see --- so I've been getting all these HEADACHES and I just don't REMEMBER them.

Golly --- I hope that's not been happening while I'm DRIVING...
You know, one of my pocket TV's, has a CRT. It's very sharp and clear.

Oh, you do drive? Funny, I'd have pegged you for the leader of the Horseless Carriage Transition Resistance Front.

Wait --- it won't work in a month, and there's no replacement for it, is there???

It'll work just fine in a month. Just slap on a cheap converter box and proceed to watch more channels than that little hunk of junk ever got before.

You do remember that "EMERGENCY SERVICES" was not the first reason for "needing frequencies"? They came up with that AFTER there wasn't a line forming to buy the frequencies.

Anybody with an emerging technology wants those frequencies. Whether it's Lo-Jack or On-Star, GPS or Wi-Fi, Bluetooth or RFID, emerging technologies are SCREAMING for frequencies and TV channels at a whopping 6 MHz of bandwidth are the grossest pigs at the party so it's time to throw those hogs out.

Straight-line-risk-probability function. You have more danger from MICROWAVE OVEN emissions than from analog x-rays.

Nobody watches a microwave oven for two solid hours at a time. The only people who would set a microwave to run for two hours would be undertakers trying to modernize the cremation process.

You're also ignoring the lead, cadmium, lead, copper, lead, tin, lead, and a lot of other very toxic chemicals that will now leach into our aquifers from land fills from trashed sets.

From sets which would have landed there eventually anyway. There hasn't been an American TV manufactured since a Korean company bought out Zenith in 1995. Until now, that is. Olevia TV of Tempe, AZ is making HDTV's. If you want to buy an American-made TV set, then you're getting an HDTV because those are the only kind of sets made in America in over ten years.

Did I mention "lead"???
Now you have me worried; has this been happening while I'm driving, or while I'm at work, and people just haven't been telling me about it?

With as hard as you are to get through to, people could be telling you about it and you've just been ignoring it.

(That's silly....)
Then buy him an HDTV.

Just don't buy ME one...

Oh heck no! I wouldn't dare buy you anything more newfangled than one of them there kaleidyoscopies so you won't worry about losing the signal someday.

You keep provin' my point...
Hmmm; it's not affecting my AM radio, so you're saying I should become a SHORTWAVE listener so I could understand why analog is shutting OFF???
Goodness --- how have we survived that last sixty YEARS?
When there is suitable technology, then we can change. There's not, and you know it.

There's plenty of suitable technology. I'm pretty sure people were living in tornado alley a hundred years before the first televised weather forecast got it wrong.

Those "awful things" have features that Government is STEALING...

Those features weren't worth the price of the bandwidth being hogged. The Federal Government has a fiduciary responsibility to manage public resources responsibly and television channels taking up 6 MHz of bandwidth apiece is NOT a responsible allocation of limited resources.

My computer has an antenna. It's called "power wire". And "mouse wire". And "internal circuits". Last time I heard, local oscillators are only a couple milliwatts, and only one frequency.

Most modern oscillators are phase locked loops and generate square waves. Do you know what a square wave is? It's the primary frequency and an infinite number of odd harmonics. It's pure nastiness when it comes to interference issues.

A wire hooked to a computer is not an outdoors gain antenna like a TV has either.

Non-sequitur. When "others dictated the ntsc standard", there was nothing else in PLACE.

That should tell you it was created of a monopoly and not the best available choice then.

It was an increase in use, not a decrease.
DTV is a decrease in function.
So what? Many don't want to lose what they've always enjoyed, to "more government control".
I've said it before, and I'll say it again --- it's only the stroke of a pen.
(That almost rhymed, didn't it?)

It's a lot more than that. It's broken contracts, wasted money and tattered government credibility.

"People who have spent real money", have bought the congressmen. THAT is where the "real money" has been spent.

This is all about profit (from forced sales on US), and everyone knows it...

Nobody is forcing anything. Just stop watching TV and nothing happens and there are no costs to you.

gadgetere

May 11th, 2009, 12:03 am

You know, there is this 'new" :rolleyes: thing on the internet called GOOGLE. You should try it some time.

http://www.radioshack.com/family/ind...and%2FAccurian (http://www.radioshack.com/family/index.jsp?categoryId=2032170&allCount=26&fbc=1&f=Brand%2F1000101%2F&fbn=Brand%2FAccurian)Did you read the customer reviews?
...battery only lasts about 2 hours, will only charge while plugged in and off, and will not charge with car apdater. Last year during the hurricane we were out of power for 11 days. It would be hard to charge this up, so I guess I just have to sit in the car to watch it.

Isn't that just what I said? With respect --- what good does it do to argue against me, when you're supporting exactly what I said???

And a seven inch screen ain't exactly "pocket"...

Dem

May 11th, 2009, 1:00 am

AutoRacer55

May 11th, 2009, 2:10 am

gadgetere

May 11th, 2009, 8:26 am

I like this thread. I find it quite funny that people are actually upset about the transition from Analog to Digital.

It's also kinda funny how anybody could think an old analog tv is better than a modern HDTV.Give me a break --- if you've read the thread, then you know that analog is PORTABLE. DTV is not. (Just read the last couple of posts.)

Digital is not clearer for the vast majority. Oh many people THINK it's clearer, but if placed in a "blind taste test", will fail.

Many people who don't live directly in cities, won't have tv at all (unless they buy cable or satellite). Surely you recognize that "a little snow", is better than "no picture at all"?

And you must like commercials; digital is EXPENSIVE, so now we're seeing nearly an HOUR of commercials on a two hour movie. Used to be only 30-40 minutes.

You really think "digital" is "better"??? That suprises ME...

gadgetere

May 11th, 2009, 8:27 am

Watching sports is much more fun in HD.Yeahhh, that's right; when that BALL goes off the SCREEN ('cause it's not full height), it's so much better.

You should see sports-movies in IMAX.

Wait --- Imax is FULL SCREEN! (Essentially...)

Gray

May 11th, 2009, 8:31 am

I'd have to be AWFULLY fast to pull that off; not to mention "clairvoyant" to predict when the cuss word was coming...

We watched "Matchmaker"; once I switched on the device, the movie was much more enjoyable without all the swearing...

The "on/off" switch, only works if it shuts off most movies...

IOW, "V-chip"...

Have you considered becoming Amish?

gadgetere

May 11th, 2009, 8:39 am

Oh, you do drive? Funny, I'd have pegged you for the leader of the Horseless Carriage Transition Resistance Front.Once again what does this have to do with the discussion? Please tell me the connection between "horseless carriage", and "analog tv". I've made an excellent case as to the features we'll be LOSING when analog is gone.

This is "ridicule", and shows you don't have a valid response.
It'll work just fine in a month. Just slap on a cheap converter box and proceed to watch more channels than that little hunk of junk ever got before.You want me to run a CONVERTER BOX on my pocket tv?

That's really silly...
Anybody with an emerging technology wants those frequencies. Whether it's Lo-Jack or On-Star, GPS or Wi-Fi, Bluetooth or RFID, emerging technologies are SCREAMING for frequencies and TV channels at a whopping 6 MHz of bandwidth are the grossest pigs at the party so it's time to throw those hogs out.Ah --- so --- once again, the MASSES have to SUFFER so that certain BUSINESS can make MONEY.

Just like our homes can be STOLEN to build stores and condos.

How do you feel about that "condo-issue" in Connecticut? You think the Supreme Court did the right thing, don't you???
Nobody watches a microwave oven for two solid hours at a time. The only people who would set a microwave to run for two hours would be undertakers trying to modernize the cremation process. I have a microwave pressure cooker; it runs 25 minutes for barbecue ribs. Besides, the power levels (1500 watts) mean that a minute of microwaving is far more of a danger than hours (days!) of tv viewing....
From sets which would have landed there eventually anyway. There hasn't been an American TV manufactured since a Korean company bought out Zenith in 1995. Until now, that is. Olevia TV of Tempe, AZ is making HDTV's. If you want to buy an American-made TV set, then you're getting an HDTV because those are the only kind of sets made in America in over ten years.But never before will so many sets land at ONCE, in such concentrations...
With as hard as you are to get through to, people could be telling you about it and you've just been ignoring it.You could "get through to me" better, if you had valid arguments.

You've overturned nothing I've said, and often unwittingly endorsed me...
There's plenty of suitable technology. I'm pretty sure people were living in tornado alley a hundred years before the first televised weather forecast got it wrong.A lot of people DIED, too...
Those features weren't worth the price of the bandwidth being hogged. The Federal Government has a fiduciary responsibility to manage public resources responsibly and television channels taking up 6 MHz of bandwidth apiece is NOT a responsible allocation of limited resources.Matter of OPINION. That's the thing about politics --- even if more than half the people want digital (or don't care because they have cable), the "tyranny of the majority" cannot trample the rights of the minority.
Most modern oscillators are phase locked loops and generate square waves. Do you know what a square wave is? It's the primary frequency and an infinite number of odd harmonics. It's pure nastiness when it comes to interference issues. I'm well aware of the harmonics from square waves, and phase-locked-loops. Also aware that the emitted power from the local oscillator is very, VERY low...
It's a lot more than that. It's broken contracts, wasted money and tattered government credibility.We have a government that is corrupt, congressmen taking money from lobbies PACS and special interest groups. They have no credibility.
Nobody is forcing anything. Just stop watching TV and nothing happens and there are no costs to you.Ahhh --- nice. Another shout of:
"YOU don't HAVE to watch television".

What other rights and privileges do you think I don't need???

Sigh...

gadgetere

May 11th, 2009, 8:41 am

Have you considered becoming Amish?Thank you for your comment.

As I said before (and mean this respectfully), ridicule shows you don't have a valid response.

:-)

Gray

May 11th, 2009, 8:46 am

Thank you for your comment.

As I said before (and mean this respectfully), ridicule shows you don't have a valid response.

:-)

...but...ridicule is all I have to offer you.

Seriously , though your complaint against profanity has zero merit.

That is what ratings are for. If the ratings indicate profanity then do not watch it.

You seem to want to change the way media is delivered and blame the technology.

The rating systems exist that can help even old prudes avoid words that hurt their feelings.

gadgetere

May 11th, 2009, 8:58 am

Seriously , though your complaint against profanity has zero merit.

That is what ratings are for. If the ratings indicate profanity then do not watch it.You miss the point; I should be allowed to watch stuff in whatever way I wish.
You seem to want to change the way media is delivered and blame the technology. No, I want to KEEP they way I've BEEN WATCHING it.
The rating systems exist that can help even old prudes avoid words that hurt their feelings.Wow. First, you say "prude" like it's a bad thing.

Second --- you're endorsing the "YOU DON'T HAVE TO WATCH TV" dictate. If you really believe that, then I can't argue you out of it, nor could I argue you out of Marxism or Socialism (two positions that also exert government control).

Third --- would you be ok with your four-year-old spouting those "acceptable-to-you" four letter words?

Betting your answer is "yes". And I'm CERTAIN your WIFE'S answer is "NO"...

Gray

May 11th, 2009, 9:02 am

You miss the point; I should be allowed to watch stuff in whatever way I wish.
No, I want to KEEP they way I've BEEN WATCHING it.
Wow. First, you say "prude" like it's a bad thing.

Second --- you're endorsing the "YOU DON'T HAVE TO WATCH TV" dictate. If you really believe that, then I can't argue you out of it, nor could I argue you out of Marxism or Socialism (two positions that also exert government control).

Third --- would you be ok with your four-year-old spouting those "acceptable-to-you" four letter words?

Betting your answer is "yes". And I'm CERTAIN your WIFE'S answer is "NO"...

You have issues that cannot be addressed here.
First the world is what it is and all of the kvetching and moaning helps not.

Second, I would have a thing called standards and not let a child watch something that is to mature for their young minds.

Finally, if the media does not meet your high standards then YOU DO NOT HAVE TO WATCH IT.

StoneScratcher

May 11th, 2009, 9:32 am

Oh, so you want to talk about what we're losing?

We're losing the crummy 30 frame per second flicker for a smoother progressive scan image. No big loss there. Losing eyestrain means losing headaches.

We're losing the lost signal time in the retrace blanking pulse which was a ridiculous waste of bandwidth based on tube technology limitations from the 1940's. We're losing waste.

We're losing a major source of X-Ray radiation in American homes by getting rid of high-voltage CRT sets. Cancer is a nice feature to lose, ain't it?

With a refresh rate over 72 Hz, HDTV loses the flicker that can trigger epileptic seizures. There's another fine feature lost.

We're losing noisy EMF fields from millions of old TV flyback transformers which pollute the RF spectrum so badly you can HEAR it when you get an AM radio near the back of a television set.

We're losing a common source of static electricity in American homes. Static electricity is often responsible for destroying CMOS based electronic devices like iPods, cell phones, handheld video game systems, and such devices which mysteriously stop working. If you can feel a static electricity shock, that's about 5,000 volts. If you can hear the "crack" of a static electricity shock, that's about 10,000 volts. There is commonly over 20,000 volts of static electricity on the screen of any CRT display over 19".

What we're losing in the migration to digital TV are a whole bunch of household hazards.

The EMF field around a traditional TV is nearly off the charts. My 32" Sony Trinitron CRT TV set I measured with an RF noise floor at 2 Meters (150 MHz) pushing -100dBm from two Meters away. That KILLS RF reception. It's like hearing in a noisy room and TV's do that to your radios. Radios like your cell phone, like your cordless phone, like your wi-fi network, those are all radios.

I'm not going to miss these lost "features" a bit.

Thanks! Great information.

Losing all that static though, how will my great grandmother communicate to my cat now? :think:

gdoane

May 11th, 2009, 11:05 am

Once again what does this have to do with the discussion? Please tell me the connection between "horseless carriage", and "analog tv". I've made an excellent case as to the features we'll be LOSING when analog is gone.

This is "ridicule", and shows you don't have a valid response.

"WE" are not losing any features, YOU are losing features. I'm losing nothing and you're digging for the features you've "lost" like portability.

Portability is ridiculous in TV sets because you can't watch TV and walk at the same time because what you should be watching is where you're going.

The ridicule is because you're making silly arguments. Rush Limbaugh calls it DEMONSTRATING ABSURDITY BY BEING ABSURD.

I'm simply demonstrating your absurdity.

You've claimed that digital doesn't support closed captioning. That's false, digital supports FOUR CHANNELS of closed captioning and an additional four channels of teletext.

You've claimed that battery life is better for analog than it is for digital. Again, that's ludicrous. The power demands for tube technology are always going to be greater than native digital displays. When you've got to come up with 20,000 volts from a flyback transformer and eat the losses inherent in an inductive field, that's going to cost you bigtime in wasted energy.

You want me to run a CONVERTER BOX on my pocket tv?

That's really silly...Have you even seen a converter box? They're about the size of an average paperback novel. Paperback books are generally considered "portable."

Ah --- so --- once again, the MASSES have to SUFFER so that certain BUSINESS can make MONEY.No masses are suffering. Just the below-average peons who can't afford $50 for a converter box and who cares about them? TV is supported by advertising and those cheapskates aren't buying much of anything anyway so they're not putting in their fair share.

Just like our homes can be STOLEN to build stores and condos.They can't be stolen. Eminent domain requires fair compensation. This isn't Mexico trying to take the Alamo.

How do you feel about that "condo-issue" in Connecticut? You think the Supreme Court did the right thing, don't you???I never agree with the Supreme Court; I think they're a bunch of liberal idiots who haven't made one correct decision in my entire lifetime.

I have a microwave pressure cooker; it runs 25 minutes for barbecue ribs. Besides, the power levels (1500 watts) mean that a minute of microwaving is far more of a danger than hours (days!) of tv viewing....1500 watts is a bit high for a typical microwave oven. 1,000 is a bit more typical, about five times what my analog Sony Trinitron 32" CRT consumes while running (200 watts).

Power alone does not account for most of the dangers in RF emissions. Indeed, the "F" in RF stands for FREQUENCY, and frequency certainly plays a significant part in any discussion of RF.

So, what's the most dangerous RF frequency? If you're a typical human being at 5'6" in height, your body wavelength is about 180 MHz (986/frequency in MHz = wavelength in feet)

Analog Television Channels 7-13 occupy the band between 170 MHz and 216 MHz. Those are the most dangerous frequencies for human beings between the heights 4'8" and 5'10"

Those frequencies for high-powered broadcast TV stations couldn't have been picked worse if they were TRYING to kill people.

Your microwave oven isn't much of a threat unless you're only 10 inches tall and could fit in one.

The old allocations were made out of ignorance. They need to be fixed.

But never before will so many sets land at ONCE, in such concentrations...Actually, more is better because the economies of scale make salvage (thereby reducing waste) a far more profitable proposal.

It's better to have all the sets hit the dump at once because it's easier to salvage a truckload than a trickle.

You could "get through to me" better, if you had valid arguments.I do have valid arguments. You're the one making claims like no closed captioning on digital TV.

You've overturned nothing I've said, and often unwittingly endorsed me...
A lot of people DIED, too...It's called mortality. Humans have a 100% mortality rate. People die all the time. It's not that big a deal.

Matter of OPINION. That's the thing about politics --- even if more than half the people want digital (or don't care because they have cable), the "tyranny of the majority" cannot trample the rights of the minority.Television is a luxury, not a right. Bandwidth is a limited natural resource requiring resource management.

OldBuzzard

May 11th, 2009, 11:44 am

Did you read the customer reviews?
...battery only lasts about 2 hours, will only charge while plugged in and off, and will not charge with car apdater. Last year during the hurricane we were out of power for 11 days. It would be hard to charge this up, so I guess I just have to sit in the car to watch it.

Isn't that just what I said? With respect --- what good does it do to argue against me, when you're supporting exactly what I said???

And a seven inch screen ain't exactly "pocket"...

And I suppose that you had your old one turned on full time for all 11 days, right?

Tell me, what argument would you have come up with if one of those would have been capable of 2 weks continious operation on one charge? I'm sure you can come up with one, since you don't like digital in any form.

You are acting like a two year old that can't have his way.

Digital is here. Man up and deal with it.

Dem

May 11th, 2009, 1:06 pm

Give me a break --- if you've read the thread, then you know that analog is PORTABLE. DTV is not. (Just read the last couple of posts.)
Amazon has three Portable DTVs. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw_1_11?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=portable+digital+tv&x=0&y=0&sprefix=portable+di

Digital is not clearer for the vast majority. Oh many people THINK it's clearer, but if placed in a "blind taste test", will fail.
HD is clearer, its why there is such a demand for it.

Many people who don't live directly in cities, won't have tv at all (unless they buy cable or satellite). Surely you recognize that "a little snow", is better than "no picture at all"?
So? It's not that expensive to change. Around $50 for standard cable.

And you must like commercials; digital is EXPENSIVE, so now we're seeing nearly an HOUR of commercials on a two hour movie. Used to be only 30-40 minutes.
So? A little sacrifice for a better picture seems like a fine trade off. And from my experience, commercial lengths haven't change much, some channels like TNT actually have fewer commercials during their movies.

Dem

May 11th, 2009, 1:10 pm

Watching sports is much more fun in HD.
Yup, I'm still pleasantly surprised every time I turn on the HDTV in the living room, after watching the analog TV in my room.

Dem

May 11th, 2009, 1:39 pm

gadgetere, You do know movies are filmed in widescreen, right?

You've seen this before: This presentation has been formatted for viewing on your television
Thats because they are either squeezing the image or cutting some of it, so it will fit a standard TV.

Also:

Analog TVs send a signal telling the television's electron gun how to "paint" lines on the screen. The problem is that the signal degrades in transmission, affecting the amount of fine detail in the image. Digital sets send this same information in bit (http://www.howstuffworks.com/bytes.htm) streams (lines of data made up of ones and zeroes). The advantage is that these digital signals do not degrade, so the picture is much better on a digital set.
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/tv-buying-guide13.htm

gadgetere

May 11th, 2009, 11:46 pm

You have issues that cannot be addressed here.
First the world is what it is and all of the kvetching and moaning helps not. I see; so we shouldn't be politically active, shouldn't march and rally and lobby for what we believe in?

I ask you to accept that other people have things that are important to them, that you may not necessarily agree with; just as I won't agree with all that YOU find important.

...but I will fight for your right to do them, as long as they aren't illegal or immoral.

It's not too much to ask for the same for me, from you...
Second, I would have a thing called standards and not let a child watch something that is too mature for their young minds.Exactly what is it about "profanity", that is "mature"? When I was in Junior High and in the Gym locker-room, a lot of them cussed.

...didn't make them mature...
...just like SMOKING didn't make them mature either...

Is it possible that "cussing", is really (and I don't mean this disrespectfully) adolescents struggling to BE "mature"?
Finally, if the media does not meet your high standards then YOU DO NOT HAVE TO WATCH IT.It's not acceptable to tell a lot of Americans "just don't WATCH it". There is nothing illegal nor unreasonable to want to cut out the cuss words.

A lot of us (who consider ourselves "mature"), just don't like to hear it...

gadgetere

May 11th, 2009, 11:58 pm

gadgetere, You do know movies are filmed in widescreen, right?

You've seen this before: Quote:
This presentation has been formatted for viewing on your television
Thats because they are either squeezing the image or cutting some of it, so it will fit a standard TV. Yes, I know; my eyes are symmetrical --- so full screen fits my eyes better. The Macula is the center of visual acuity --- to really see "wide screen", I have to keep bouncing my eyes back and forth to take it all in.

The best movie theater in town (as they say on the website), is IMAX; it's essentially "full screen", not "wide". 5x7 is much closer to 3x4 than it is to 16x9.

I do like gadgets; I have a pair of "I-Glasses", which contain tiny video monitors; it's like watching an 80" movie screen.

...and the format is the pleasing 3x4...

When a movie is "formatted to fit my screen", the compensate for two widescreen people talking (by shifting back and forth). I always zoom widescreen movies to "full". The scene almost NEVER suffers; I can think of "X-Men" (Dr. Xavier and Magneto talking), and "Silverado" (cowboy shoots two bad-guys on each side of the bar door at once) where I couldn't see enough; but every other movie was better "full".

Analog TVs send a signal telling the television's electron gun how to "paint" lines on the screen. The problem is that the signal degrades in transmission, affecting the amount of fine detail in the image. Digital sets send this same information in bit (http://www.howstuffworks.com/bytes.htm) streams (lines of data made up of ones and zeroes). The advantage is that these digital signals do not degrade, so the picture is much better on a digital set.

Not really; what they don't tell you is that if the digital signal isn't STRONG, the sound cuts out, and you get "tiles" (little squares of frozen color) popping up all over the screen.

And THEN, the digital signal goes BLACK. Analog is watchable without complaint at 50% snow, and I've enjoyed programs at more than 90% snow (very distant stations).

In so many ways, analog is better.

Dem

May 12th, 2009, 12:03 am

It's not too much to ask for the same for me, from you...
[color=Red]Exactly what is it about "profanity", that is "mature"? When I was in Junior High and in the Gym locker-room, a lot of them cussed.

...didn't make them mature...
...just like SMOKING didn't make them mature either...

Is it possible that "cussing", is really (and I don't mean this disrespectfully) adolescents struggling to BE "mature"?
It's not that the profanity itself that is mature, it's the person being able to handle profanity without freaking out that is mature.

gadgetere

May 12th, 2009, 12:04 am

Amazon has three Portable DTVs. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw...ix=portable+di (http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw_1_11?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=portable+digital+tv&x=0&y=0&sprefix=portable+di)

Quote:
Digital is not clearer for the vast majority. Oh many people THINK it's clearer, but if placed in a "blind taste test", will fail.
HD is clearer, its why there is such a demand for it.The "portables' aren't really "portable".

And I'm' very slightly near-sighted; I can't see any difference, nor have I met anyone who can see the difference on a set that's not "big-screen".

To a lot of people, it's not "sharper". We can see individual strands of hair on analog; on digital, we can see individual strands of hair.
So? It's not that expensive to change. Around $50 for standard cable.That's $50 per MONTH. $600 per year. Can't justify spending that much money; I don't make that much.
So? A little sacrifice for a better picture seems like a fine trade off. And from my experience, commercial lengths haven't change much, some channels like TNT actually have fewer commercials during their movies.You can't compare commercial time on cable, which is a PAY SERVICE. Over-the-air stations have significantly increased commercial time --- I've stopwatched them...

gadgetere

May 12th, 2009, 12:06 am

It's not that the profanity itself that is mature, it's the person being able to handle profanity without freaking out that is mature.What if I'm just offended by it? I know, "don't watch the movie".

What if the movie is enjoyable sans cussing?

gadgetere

May 12th, 2009, 12:12 am

And I suppose that you had your old one turned on full time for all 11 days, right?Darned near it; my company closed, so I had "vacation". We sat in front of the fireplace with kerosene lamps, watching the pocket TV.

We cooked over the fireplace too; it was very tasty --- just the right hint of "smoke flavor"...
Tell me, what argument would you have come up with if one of those would have been capable of 2 weeks continious operation on one charge?There's the problem; "digital" requires so much processing, it hogs current. Thus, "high capacity" (and very expensive) "lithium batteries", and "short run time". I'm sure you can come up with one, since you don't like digital in any form.You have FAITH in me?

I'm honored... :P
You are acting like a two year old that can't have his way.And you are qualified to judge me like that?

Why?
Digital is here. Man up and deal with it.As I've said before, I don't know why those who LIKE "dtv", are so hostile towards those who do NOT. I mean, if analog continues, how will it hurt you?

Dem

May 12th, 2009, 12:13 am

Yes, I know; my eyes are symmetrical --- so full screen fits my eyes better. The Macula is the center of visual acuity --- to really see "wide screen", I have to keep bouncing my eyes back and forth to take it all in.
You have to go back and forth to watch widescreen? Maybe you are just sitting a little too close to the TV.

The best movie theater in town (as they say on the website), is IMAX; it's essentially "full screen", not "wide". 5x7 is much closer to 3x4 than it is to 16x9.
Thats because Imax screens are huge!

When a movie is "formatted to fit my screen", the compensate for two widescreen people talking (by shifting back and forth). I always zoom widescreen movies to "full". The scene almost NEVER suffers; I can think of "X-Men" (Dr. Xavier and Magneto talking), and "Silverado" (cowboy shoots two bad-guys on each side of the bar door at once) where I couldn't see enough; but every other movie was better "full".
Personal preference than. I quite enjoy watching movies in widescreen.

Not really; what they don't tell you is that if the digital signal isn't STRONG, the sound cuts out, and you get "tiles" (little squares of frozen color) popping up all over the screen.

And THEN, the digital signal goes BLACK. Analog is watchable without complaint at 50% snow, and I've enjoyed programs at more than 90% snow (very distant stations).

In so many ways, analog is better.
Do not degrade, you either have a signal or you don't. If you are getting a crappy signal, it's because who ever is providing the signal is doing a poor job of it.

Dem

May 12th, 2009, 12:27 am

The "portables' aren't really "portable"
What do you mean those aren't portable? It's smaller than a laptop, and those are considered "portable".

And I'm' very slightly near-sighted; I can't see any difference, nor have I met anyone who can see the difference on a set that's not "big-screen".
I'm very near sighted and I can see the difference as day and night.

As for only being able to see the difference on a big screen. It all depends on how far you sit away from a TV.

To a lot of people, it's not "sharper". We can see individual strands of hair on analog; on digital, we can see individual strands of hair.
Do you have an HDTV set? Have you seen HD programming?

That's $50 per MONTH. $600 per year. Can't justify spending that much money; I don't make that much.
Not my problem.

You can't compare commercial time on cable, which is a PAY SERVICE. Over-the-air stations have significantly increased commercial time --- I've stopwatched them...
You said commercial time would increase with digital. Cable is digital. So are commercials going to increase or what?

Dem

May 12th, 2009, 12:32 am

What if I'm just offended by it? I know, "don't watch the movie".

What if the movie is enjoyable sans cussing?
It is not my fault you are unable to watch a piece of art without censoring it.

People are offending by nudity as well, should we start censoring the works of Michelangelo as well to accommodate those people?

Also, Die Hard wouldn't be the same without Bruce Willis saying yippee ki yay ************.

brody

May 12th, 2009, 1:24 am

I just wish someone could explain why my Comcast Basic Cable bill has gone from $47/mo to $57/mo since December.

Gray

May 12th, 2009, 8:29 am

I just wish someone could explain why my Comcast Basic Cable bill has gone from $47/mo to $57/mo since December.

I have about 150 channels with comcast for about $15.

Legally.

Because My....gasp!!!!.... DIGITAL TV has a QAM tuner.

:))

So much for getting screwed by digital.

Here's your sign.

sironin

May 12th, 2009, 4:06 pm

I just wish someone could explain why my Comcast Basic Cable bill has gone from $47/mo to $57/mo since December.

Well if you were on an introductory rate or a contract rate, that might be why. It is usually fairly easy to fix by calling them up and asking for their accounts retention people. This may involve agreeing to another x-many month contract (which you may not want to do if you're moving or anticipate switching).

gadgetere

May 13th, 2009, 7:40 pm

What do you mean those aren't portable? It's smaller than a laptop, and those are considered "portable".I have a couple 5" b&w sets, that I don't consider really portable; as I've said, most of my tv viewing is walking around. A pocket tv, or a radio that receives tv sound is portable.

The pseudo-portable digital sets only run a couple hours on a charge; per that customer review I cited previous post, you can't recharge the tv while watching it.
I'm very near sighted and I can see the difference as day and night.Have you ever done a "blind taste test"? No one in stores that I've met (and I'm a bit extroverted), can tell the difference...
As for only being able to see the difference on a big screen. It all depends on how far you sit away from a TV.If I sit 3 feet from a digital set, I can see it's sharper; but with analog I can resolve individual hairs --- I don't need to see any clearer; from 6-10' I can't tell the difference at all...

...neither could anyone else at the "DTV Workshop" I crashed...
Do you have an HDTV set? Have you seen HD programming?No I've never seen it.
C'mon, I said "I can't see the difference"; obviously I've seen it.
Not my problem.Neither is leaving analog ON.

If you get to watch what you want (digital), why can't _I_ watch what I want (analog)?

That's rather the point, isn't it? Personal freedoms...
You said commercial time would increase with digital. Cable is digital. So are commercials going to increase or what? I don't have cable, so I don't know; but cable is PAY TV --- on "over-the-air", ONLY commercials pay for broadcast.

As broadcast costs increase (and they DO with "dtv"), more commercials at more expense MUST occur.

My stopwatch says they have. Up from 40 minutes commercials per two-hour-movie, to roughly an HOUR.

We'll just have to keep HUGGING ourselves and chanting "this is better."
"This is better."
"This is better."
"This is ...."

gadgetere

May 13th, 2009, 7:44 pm

It is not my fault you are unable to watch a piece of art without censoring it.Profanity is ART?

Picture me at the Check-Casher's; from the car out front the store windows were fairly shaking.

Boom! Ba-boom! Boom! BA-BOOM!"

I said, "Who's doing that horrible noise?!"
A kid turned and said, "It's not noise."

I said, "It is if I don't wanna HEAR it..."

(...he said, "oh". His car...)

Maybe you think we should get rid of the laws banning LOUD MUSIC? Hey, that's art, isn't it?
People are offending by nudity as well, should we start censoring the works of Michelangelo as well to accommodate those people?I suppose you want graphic sex to be allowed on tv too? No disrespect intended; but that's art, isn't it?
Also, Die Hard wouldn't be the same without Bruce Willis saying yippee ki yay ************.It would be perfectly acceptible for me [b]to hear the sound cut out (from my TVGuardian), and see the caption "yippee ki yay, idiot"...

:)

gadgetere

May 13th, 2009, 7:49 pm

I just wish someone could explain why my Comcast Basic Cable bill has gone from $47/mo to $57/mo since December. Oh --- hey --- maybe...

...it's because...

they have to pay...

...for...

...DIGITAL???

Bwaaaaahahahahahahaha!

(You all know I'm right...)
:lol:

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

May 13th, 2009, 8:05 pm

I have a couple 5" b&w sets, that I don't consider really portable; as I've said, most of my tv viewing is walking around. A pocket tv, or a radio that receives tv sound is portable.

*edited for brevity*

We'll just have to keep HUGGING ourselves and chanting "this is better."
"This is better."
"This is better."
"This is ...."

:eh:

I don't know any person (except the actual blind) who can't tell the difference between 480i standard definition and 720p/1080i high definition. It's not even remotely close. Your technology is becoming obsolete. The market disagrees with your points (some of which clearly are not factual). Quit asking politicians to solve your problems.

gadgetere

May 16th, 2009, 2:45 pm

I don't know any person (except the actual blind) who can't tell the difference between 480i standard definition and 720p/1080i high definition.No one I've met in stores, can.

And the CBS affiliate ran a "workshop" at a store, which was nothing more than a sales-pitch. They had two images displayed on hi-def screens; one "hi def", the other "standard". No one in the room could tell which was which. It's not even remotely close.Resolution is only one of the "bogus claims". Analog sound is better (that's not arguable, the promoters really need to be SUED), and reception range is VASTLY better with analog. Your technology is becoming obsolete.You're right --- my technology is DECREASING.

I'll never again have television away from home.
Never have it in an emergency.
Never have it AT home, without sophisticated antennas (not to mention a dozen CONVERTERS.)

This is not "better". The market disagrees with your points (some of which clearly are not factual).A lot of people agree with me; they just don't know where to go. Quit asking politicians to solve your problems.It's not a matter of "asking them to solve our problems", but rather to stop CREATED our problems.

...besides, the liberal perspective (of which DTV seems indissolubly tied) is "more and more government will solve all our problems".

Why doya think so many voted for the bomma?

gdoane

May 16th, 2009, 10:42 pm

No one I've met in stores, can.

And the CBS affiliate ran a "workshop" at a store, which was nothing more than a sales-pitch. They had two images displayed on hi-def screens; one "hi def", the other "standard". No one in the room could tell which was which.

Nobody in the room was a gamer then, because I can tell not only the difference in resolution but which input is being used from a video game console. RF, Composite, S-Video, Component or VGA, I can easily spot them all because the differences are readily apparent in text and graphics.

All it would take a knowledgeable person to tell the difference is to wait for a high-contrast incident (text, primary colors adjacent, etc.) and look for the artifacting which occurs at lower resolutions.

Resolution is only one of the "bogus claims". Analog sound is better (that's not arguable, the promoters really need to be SUED), and reception range is VASTLY better with analog. You're right --- my technology is DECREASING.

Actually, the best range in Ham Radio is found in CW (Morse Code) which is a DIGITAL transmission mode. The very first electronic communications in the world were digital.

I'll never again have television away from home.

Get a decent cell phone and you'll have YOUTUBE away from home.

Never have it in an emergency.

It's no good in an emergency. If a hurricane is coming and you're watching TV instead of getting out of Dodge then you're going to be using that stupid TV for a flotation device and it won't work.

Never have it AT home, without sophisticated antennas (not to mention a dozen CONVERTERS.)

Antennas are sophisticated? REALLY? The antenna I'm currently using for my digital TV is a common LPDA, a log periodic dipole array, horizontally polarized and broadband. The LPDA antenna is a variant of the Yagi family of antennas invented in 1926. It's not exactly newfangled technology.

This is not "better". A lot of people agree with me; they just don't know where to go. It's not a matter of "asking them to solve our problems", but rather to stop CREATED our problems.

This is a significant improvement. You're just not looking at the big picture. You're not seeing further than your own TV screen. This is a significant reallocation of precious bandwidth which is needed for emerging technologies. Wi-Fi. Bluetooth. GPS. All of these in our lifetimes and more miracles to come if we make room for them.

This digital switch makes that room. We need to make room for miracles. If that means dinosaurs go extinct then so be it.

Safiel

May 17th, 2009, 12:12 am

Hoobeedoo Bejesus

May 17th, 2009, 12:30 am

I really can't believe the OP. This thread is all kinds of silly. Especially since it is on the Intarweb.

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

May 17th, 2009, 12:42 am

No one I've met in stores, can.

And the CBS affiliate ran a "workshop" at a store, which was nothing more than a sales-pitch. They had two images displayed on hi-def screens; one "hi def", the other "standard". No one in the room could tell which was which.

The CBS affiliate showed one high definition display with a high definition program on one, and a standard definition display with a standard definition program on the other?

I have a feeling you are doing what many in the media are doing when they confuse digital and high definition. A 480i digital signal and 480i analog signal will look almost identical if they are both good signals. A 720p or 1080i signal will look significantly different than a 480i analog or digital signal.

Resolution is only one of the "bogus claims".

It's not bogus, it's just clear you don't have any understanding of it.

Analog sound is better (that's not arguable, the promoters really need to be SUED), and reception range is VASTLY better with analog.

As far as standard sound I hear no difference, but analog has never sent out 5.1 surround which digital does. Reception range just depends on the station. I have digital stations that come in perfect that would have been extremely fuzzy on analog, and I have digital stations that I get no signal from which were watchable on analog. Much of what you are complaining about isn't the technology itself but instead your perceived side-effects.

You're right --- my technology is DECREASING.

That's life. Some people wish they didn't have to buy a DVD player to watch new release movies. Some people wanted their radio shows to stay on the air, but as TV gained popularity some of them disapeared.

I'll never again have television away from home.

It must truly not be that important to you or you would spend the money on it.

Never have it in an emergency.

In an emergency do you need a TV? Get a radio. Analog radio still exists.

Never have it AT home, without sophisticated antennas (not to mention a dozen CONVERTERS.)

Digital signals are broadcast over UHF and VHF just like analog. You don't need any "sophisticated antennas". As far as converter boxes go, it stinks but how many TV's do you need converter boxes for? With the government coupon you get 2 boxes which after tax would cost you less than $30 total. Almost anyone I've meet who still only has analog over-the-air tv only has at most 2 televisions. There are always exceptions, like you, but exceptions don't make the rules. Politically I'm an exception and I realize it.

This is not "better". A lot of people agree with me; they just don't know where to go. It's not a matter of "asking them to solve our problems", but rather to stop CREATED our problems.

In my opinion "the people" you are talking to that would go to a CBS demonstration on analog and digital are numerically insignificant. I believe without the government mandate the digital transition would have happened anyways. Instead of focusing on the real government created problems with this issue you are bringing up subjects that truly aren't factual (like screen resolution and "sophisticated" antennas). People would be more receptive to your points if they were true.

...besides, the liberal perspective (of which DTV seems indissolubly tied) is "more and more government will solve all our problems".

Why doya think so many voted for the bomma?

The digital television transition should be the least of our concerns.

hillplus

May 17th, 2009, 1:25 am

Or you could join us in the grown up world and listen to a few wordy dirties on occasion. If you don't like profanity, don't watch the shows.

My grown up world doesn't include curse words. I have grown out of that juvenile activity.

gdoane

May 17th, 2009, 5:43 am

The only thing I hate is that they stupidly delayed the cutoff date from February to June. The sooner analog is gone the better.

I am already starting to get the many new channels that will be available due to the presence of the digital "sub channels."

Oh, they'll delay it again. No doubt in my mind because our cowardly politicians waffle more than all the maple syrup in the world could cover.

We saw the same thing with the U.N. Iraq resolutions. Our modern politicians deliver ultimatums that aren't ultimate. They're jokes and when the government loses credibility, laws lose credibility. The result is chaos and war.

What I would like to see is a politician stand up and say CUT OVER HAPPENS IN JUNE. NO WHINING. NO EXCEPTIONS. SUCK IT UP.

We don't have any leaders with the guts to do that. That's a real problem because it makes law seem all wishy-washy and that's detrimentalt to getting laws respected.

gadgetere

May 17th, 2009, 2:09 pm

My grown up world doesn't include curse words. I have grown out of that juvenile activity.OH I wish they had "reputation" comments here --- that was EXCELLENT!!!

Bravo!
:clap: :clap: :clap:

gadgetere

May 17th, 2009, 2:25 pm

The CBS affiliate showed one high definition display with a high definition program on one, and a standard definition display with a standard definition program on the other? They didn't say exactly what the set was (sets were); both were hi-def, and it was s'posed to be CLEAR that one was better.

...it wasn't...
I have a feeling you are doing what many in the media are doing when they confuse digital and high definition. A 480i digital signal and 480i analog signal will look almost identical if they are both good signals. A 720p or 1080i signal will look significantly different than a 480i analog or digital signal.Doesn't matter; my eyes aren't high resolution.

...and if you're Human, neither are yours...
It's not bogus, it's just clear you don't have any understanding of it.Is that your "official opinion"? I understand it fine...
As far as standard sound I hear no difference, but analog has never sent out 5.1 surround which digital does.Analog works with surround-sound decoders. The "lie" is that "Digital is hi-fi, surround sound quality".

...so is analog... Reception range just depends on the station.No it doesn't; the new frequencies are UHF --- they don't travel as far. Even WITH the higher-power transmitters. (Part of why we see more commercials)...
I have digital stations that come in perfect that would have been extremely fuzzy on analogI don't even notice 50% snow on analog. Unless I get right up next to the set. and I have digital stations that I get no signal from which were watchable on analog.That's one of my complaints... Much of what you are complaining about isn't the technology itself but instead your perceived side-effects."Perceived"?

I'm just perceiving that I won't have pocket sets?
Won't have radios with tv sound?
Won't have tv in a power-outage?

Yup, that is my perception...
That's life. Some people wish they didn't have to buy a DVD player to watch new release movies. Some people wanted their radio shows to stay on the air, but as TV gained popularity some of them disapeared.Apples and oranges. Old format players still WORK.

Tv's WON'T.

And regarding the line "tv's WILL work with recorded media", the "recorded media" is an ADDITION to the device; the device itself won't work as designed and as it always has. Apples-n-oranges.
It must truly not be that important to you or you would spend the money on it.Two things:
2. I don't have lots of money to spend.
1. They don't MAKE real portable sets. Technology doesn't exist.
In an emergency do you need a TV? Get a radio. Analog radio still exists.Hmmm; in 1993 the church 1/2 block from my house blew up from the tornado. In 1999 a tornado passed right over my house at midnight.

I guess you're right --- I can SEE the path of tornadoes on my RADIO.
:rolleyes:
Digital signals are broadcast over UHF and VHF just like analog. You don't need any "sophisticated antennas".The folks have converter boxes; the CBS channel cuts out on sound, and tiles badly. That's WITH a large attic antenna. As far as converter boxes go, it stinks but how many TV's do you need converter boxes for?As we've discussed, every house will need at least 4-5; everyone has recorded one channel while watching another (that's two boxes), and has other rooms with tv's.

We're repeating ourselves... With the government coupon you get 2 boxes which after tax would cost you less than $30 total.And when the power fails NO BOX will work. Almost anyone I've meet who still only has analog over-the-air tv only has at most 2 televisions.AND at least one recorder... There are always exceptions, like you, but exceptions don't make the rules. Politically I'm an exception and I realize it.And we're s'posed to be protected from "the tyranny of the majority"...

Don't forget, we're also fighting for the low/fixed income people, seniors, retirees, single-parents, etcetera...
In my opinion "the people" you are talking to that would go to a CBS demonstration on analog and digital are numerically insignificant. I believe without the government mandate the digital transition would have happened anyways. Instead of focusing on the real government created problems with this issue you are bringing up subjects that truly aren't factual (like screen resolution and "sophisticated" antennas). People would be more receptive to your points if they were true.Just because you call some points "not true", doesn't mean they're not; and many points are undeniable.
The digital television transition should be the least of our concerns.Nevertheless, it's a concern; we should fight against government dictatorship wherever it rears its ugly head...

gadgetere

May 17th, 2009, 2:36 pm

Nobody in the room was a gamer then, because I can tell not only the difference in resolution but which input is being used from a video game console. RF, Composite, S-Video, Component or VGA, I can easily spot them all because the differences are readily apparent in text and graphics.So this is good for GAMERS?

What about all us NON-gamers?
All it would take a knowledgeable person to tell the difference is to wait for a high-contrast incident (text, primary colors adjacent, etc.) and look for the artifacting which occurs at lower resolutions.Gosh, if I have to LOOK for the difference, what's the point?
Actually, the best range in Ham Radio is found in CW (Morse Code) which is a DIGITAL transmission mode. The very first electronic communications in the world were digital. No they're not --- they're "continuous wave".

"Digital" means some analog format is reconstructed by digital encoding...
Get a decent cell phone and you'll have YOUTUBE away from home.Will you be willing to pay for the phone and for my service???
It's no good in an emergency. If a hurricane is coming and you're watching TV instead of getting out of Dodge then you're going to be using that stupid TV for a flotation device and it won't work.Are you willing to assert that no one in Katrina would have benefited from tv?

Do you deny that watching tornado-paths here, is helpful?
Antennas are sophisticated? REALLY? The antenna I'm currently using for my digital TV is a common LPDA, a log periodic dipole array, horizontally polarized and broadband. The LPDA antenna is a variant of the Yagi family of antennas invented in 1926. It's not exactly newfangled technology.I suppose a COAT-HANGER would be great, if we happen to get the length and phasing right...

...errr, if the signal is strong... [/This is a significant improvement. You're just not looking at the big picture. You're not seeing further than your own TV screen. This is a significant reallocation of precious bandwidth which is needed for emerging technologies. Wi-Fi. Bluetooth. GPS. All of these in our lifetimes and more miracles to come if we make room for them.I see; so I have to SUFFER, so that other companies can TAKE what I used to enjoy, just so they can make tons of money???

Real question --- how do you feel about those in Connecticut whose homes were stolen (sanctioned by the US Supreme court) just so someone else could profit with condos? What about Georgia where homes were stolen to build a Wal-Mart?
This digital switch makes that room. We need to make room for miracles. If that means dinosaurs go extinct then so be it.If it means we LOSE FEATURES, and possibly RISK INJURY, then accept the fact that in a free society (as America USED to be) we have the right to assemble peaceably and to petition Congress for a redress of grievances".

The rights of the many do not invalidate the rights of the few.

gdoane

May 17th, 2009, 6:09 pm

So this is good for GAMERS?

What about all us NON-gamers?

What's good for gamers is good for everybody. Most advances in computer technology (which you're using if you're reading this) were made by gamers for games.
Gosh, if I have to LOOK for the difference, what's the point?

The point is less eyestrain and better eye health. Your eyes have to last you a lifetime and a 30 Frame per second flicker is harmful to your eyes. It stresses them and causes eyestrain headaches which degrades overall body health.

No they're not --- they're "continuous wave".

Yes they are. I've built a TNC, a Terminal Node Controller, an HK-232 Heathkit from scratch. Over 400 electronic components and IC Chips soldered into place by my own two hands and it can and will do CW. As well as packet radio, teletype, weatherfax and slow-scan TV. CW is a digital mode.

You REALLY don't want to get into an RF technology argument with me because if you do and you aren't sitting on a BSEE or better I'll mop the floor with you in this field of expertise. I've been working in RF comms professionally for 25 years. I'm not some newbie marvelling at the wonders of a transistor here.

"Digital" means some analog format is reconstructed by digital encoding...

Not necessarily. The STS-3/OC-3 SONET radios I work on (California Microwave CM-11) never see analog. EVER. The inputs are fiber optic OC-3. The outputs are 11 GHz STS-3 Microwave. NOTHING about those machines are analog. You can't even work on those things without a computer running the show.

Will you be willing to pay for the phone and for my service???

You can obviously afford the internet. Pay your own freight. You wouldn't like my cell phone anyway, it has Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, irDA, EVDO and all kinds of digital cooties to scare a technophobe to death.

Are you willing to assert that no one in Katrina would have benefited from tv?

Katrina blew the TV towers down. Goodlife is a moderator on this board and a friend of mine. I've been to her house north of New Orleans and seen the destruction with my own eyes. TV would not have helped. The only answer to a Category FIVE hurricane is this: RUN LIKE HELL AND DON'T LOOK BACK. Do you really need TV to tell you that?

Do you deny that watching tornado-paths here, is helpful?

Yes, I do deny that. Here's the reason why:

Up until the fourth grade in school, I grew up in Tornado Alley, specifically in a sleepy little town south of Wichita, Kansas called Wellington. As a student in Wellington's primary schools, I was taught tornado survival skills, including going into the basement or the strongest room in the house (usually the bathroom) and hiding my face between my knees balled up like a hedgehog.

Never once in all my years of survival training in southern Kansas public schools did any teacher or authority figure tell me to watch TV when a tornado is a-coming my way. In fact, YOU would be the first person I've ever heard propose that course of action as a good idea.

Here's my disaster plan. Me in a 2008 Ford F-150 doing 75 MPH on Interstate 10 getting the heck outta Dodge (or Phoenix, as it may be). Do you see a lot of TV in that disaster plan? I'm cutting and running like a Democrat outta Iraq.

I suppose a COAT-HANGER would be great, if we happen to get the length and phasing right...

Phasing doesn't enter into the equation with a loop dipole style antenna which a coat hanger would be. The problem with loop dipoles are they're directional (bi-directional actually)so unless you know your signal source direction they're not an optimal design.

...errr, if the signal is strong... I see; so I have to SUFFER, so that other companies can TAKE what I used to enjoy, just so they can make tons of money???

Them making money is what produced the stuff you used to enjoy. Do you really think the airwaves are a charity soup kitchen?

Here's a challenge for you. Show me, if you can, how to set up a television broadcasting station and get it on the air legally for less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS. I actually know about two-thirds of the game and I couldn't do it for ten times that price.

When you're talking about broadcasting and radio technology, you don't even enter the game unless you've got $10 Million on the table. That's chump change in wireless tech.

Real question --- how do you feel about those in Connecticut whose homes were stolen (sanctioned by the US Supreme court) just so someone else could profit with condos? What about Georgia where homes were stolen to build a Wal-Mart?

Real answer --- the homes weren't stolen, the owners were justly compensated and you're spinning like a top. My home here was seriously threatened by a proposed freeway extension, the "Paradise Freeway" which probably will happen someday but not today. The City of Phoenix will hand me a check for $300,000 to demolish my house and take my land, and you'll find me at U-Haul, a Phoenix-based company by the way.

If it means we LOSE FEATURES, and possibly RISK INJURY, then accept the fact that in a free society (as America USED to be) we have the right to assemble peaceably and to petition Congress for a redress of grievances".

The rights of the many do not invalidate the rights of the few.

When exactly did we start talking about rights? Television is a right now? OMG! Millions of cop cars have back seats with no TV!! Rights are being VIOLATED here! We need to totally rewrite the Miranda cards!

"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney one will be provided to you at government expense."

You'd add to that "Oh, and if you want to watch MTV, here's the remote control dude!"

You've crossed into one of my pet peeves here. Defining luxury items as "rights" is a crock and I won't accept it.

I have a very narrow view of what rights are. Right such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion impose NO BURDEN upon others. You can speak, but no one has to listen. You can write, but no one has to read. You can worship, but no one has to build you a church.

NO BURDEN.

Rights which convey a burden unto others are not rights at all in my book.

My problem with your expressed "right" is that it costs money and resources. Real money. Real resources. You don't work in the radio spectrum so you don't understand the resource. I do. The HMS Titanic probably wouldn't have resulted in a single death had the radio worked that night and international protocols had been in place.

I know emergency radio communications like the back of my hand. TV ain't in the emergency comm paradigm. I can tell you the frequency of a crashed airplane ELT transmitter, it's 121.5 MHz off of the top of my head. Military ELT squawks at 243 MHz and 121.5, do the math and you'll see they're harmonics.

I've been in the cockpit of an F-14 fighter and at the helm of a US Navy hydrofoil (USS Pegasus). Amazingly, I've never seen a TV in such places. I didn't know TV's were that freaking important. I actually see TV's declining in importance as emerging technologies make them irrelevant like 3G, EVDO, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth compete to provide real and timely information.

Analog TV is a dinosaur. It's dying. Cremate it already.

AutoRacer55

May 17th, 2009, 10:32 pm

My grown up world doesn't include curse words. I have grown out of that juvenile activity.

When's the last time you hit your thumb with a hammer and went:

"Golly gee whiz, that hurt very much bad!"

instead of

"aww **** why the **** did I do that! Damn!"

gadgetere

May 18th, 2009, 9:09 am

You REALLY don't want to get into an RF technology argument with me because if you do and you aren't sitting on a BSEE or better I'll mop the floor with you in this field of expertise. I've been working in RF comms professionally for 25 years. I'm not some newbie marvelling at the wonders of a transistor here.Oh, golly --- I DO have a "BSEE". And registered with the local professional engineers. And have several grad-school classes.
I've been in the cockpit of an F-14 fighter and at the helm of a US Navy hydrofoil (USS Pegasus). Amazingly, I've never seen a TV in such places.I've seen a TV in a passenger seat on a commercial jet; watching one of OUR stations, from above Texas. But darnit, they overflew the signal just before the climax of the movie... I didn't know TV's were that freaking important. I actually see TV's declining in importance as emerging technologies make them irrelevant like 3G, EVDO, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth compete to provide real and timely information.Yeah, and you're gonna see all THAT decline as the economy stumbles and people don't have the extra MONEY to pay for those...
Real answer --- the homes weren't stolen, the owners were justly compensated and you're spinning like a top. My home here was seriously threatened by a proposed freeway extension, the "Paradise Freeway" which probably will happen someday but not today. The City of Phoenix will hand me a check for $300,000 to demolish my house and take my land, and you'll find me at U-Haul, a Phoenix-based company by the way.In the third place, if someone doesn't WANT to move just so ANOTHER person can TAKE their property and make MONEY, there is no longer any freedom in America.

In the second place, those people in Connecticut CHOSE their location because they LIKED it; no way they'll ever afford anything even close in location, view, etcetera.

In the FIRST place, if you think cities pay "fair market value", then with respect you're naive. They wanted to rip out nearly 30 homes by my Mom, paying a whopping $58,000; for homes valued at $100,000 to over $200,000. Historically, people have to go to COURT and FIGHT to get "fair value". And usually find themselves at the mercy of governing-officials (who often have a STAKE in taking the land).

It's no longer "free America", and many don't realize it...

Analog TV is a dinosaur. It's dying. Cremate it already."Dinosaur" --- extinct, replaced by something better.

...only it's not...

Let's replace it, when we have something to replace it with.

We don't have the technology to allow analog shutoff. No way no how...

gadgetere

May 18th, 2009, 9:13 am

When's the last time you hit your thumb with a hammer and went:

"Golly gee whiz, that hurt very much bad!"

instead of

"aww **** why the **** did I do that! Damn!"There's a story about the linemen who were "called on the carpet", for profanity on the job. When asked to give an account of the incident, one of them said:

"I was climbing the pole after Hank, to fix the line; Hank dropped a five-pound wrench on my head. I looked up and said,

' Really, Hank, you MUST learn to be more careful.' "

sironin

May 18th, 2009, 9:56 am

Here's a challenge for you. Show me, if you can, how to set up a television broadcasting station and get it on the air legally for less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS. I actually know about two-thirds of the game and I couldn't do it for ten times that price.

When you're talking about broadcasting and radio technology, you don't even enter the game unless you've got $10 Million on the table. That's chump change in wireless tech.

This reminded me of the proliferation of short range FM broadcast equipment found in cars that don't come equipped with a cd player or mp3 line-in jack. It would seem to me that a rebroadcasting mini-tower with a range of a few meters might be an ideal solution to people with large amounts of analog tvs. That way, instead of getting converter boxes for each one, they could just get one for the tower (or whatever form a small short range rebroadcasting device might have).

gdoane

May 18th, 2009, 9:56 am

Oh, golly --- I DO have a "BSEE". And registered with the local professional engineers. And have several grad-school classes.

However did you survive the transition from tubes to cmos?

I've seen a TV in a passenger seat on a commercial jet; watching one of OUR stations, from above Texas. But darnit, they overflew the signal just before the climax of the movie...

I thought you said you weren't in Texas?

Overflew the signal? A commercial jet? The signal is traveling at the speed of light, 670.6 Million MPH. A fast commercial jetliner can't even touch 670 MPH, much less a million times that speed and you saw one outrace the signal?

Yeah, and you're gonna see all THAT decline as the economy stumbles and people don't have the extra MONEY to pay for those...

Our economy isn't based on money any longer, it's based on credit.

Besides, television is paid for by advertising products to people with money. If people without money are watching TV then they're freeloading scum who take and don't give back.

In the third place, if someone doesn't WANT to move just so ANOTHER person can TAKE their property and make MONEY, there is no longer any freedom in America.

If somebody can impede progress over his trivial WANTS then he's standing in the way of bettering our nation for his own selfish ends and he should be thrown in the deepest, darkest prison.

In the second place, those people in Connecticut CHOSE their location because they LIKED it; no way they'll ever afford anything even close in location, view, etcetera.

It's Connecticut. I live in Arizona. We actually have one of the seven wonders of the natural world here, it's called the Grand Canyon. What's Connecticut got on the list? Senator Joe Lieberman?

In the FIRST place, if you think cities pay "fair market value", then with respect you're naive. They wanted to rip out nearly 30 homes by my Mom, paying a whopping $58,000; for homes valued at $100,000 to over $200,000. Historically, people have to go to COURT and FIGHT to get "fair value". And usually find themselves at the mercy of governing-officials (who often have a STAKE in taking the land).

The government has a fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers to keep from overcompensating land owners for pie-in-the-sky inflated values. They're spending other people's money and have a duty to see that taxpayers aren't getting ripped off.

It's no longer "free America", and many don't realize it...
"Dinosaur" --- extinct, replaced by something better.

...only it's not...

Let's replace it, when we have something to replace it with.

We don't have the technology to allow analog shutoff. No way no how...

I have the technology to allow it. Heck, I found out last week that PBS in Arizona (KAET Channel 8) went digital on April 29th, 2009. It took me TWO WEEKS to even notice they weren't broadcasting analog anymore because it didn't matter to my TV's hooked up to Cable.

I'm trying to picture your emergency here. I've got a mental image of you playing dodge the tornado with a handheld TV in your hand showing you which way to run and probably getting run over by a truck because you're not watching where you're going.

WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY. And the money. I just bought a 19" Sony Bravia which is a fine HDTV (720p capable and looking at it I fully believe it) for a crummy $250.

You're sitting on a BSEE degree and you can't afford $250? You should be making WELL over $120,000 per year with such papers. If you don't have a $50 per hour job with those credentials then you're grossly underselling your skills and training.

gdoane

May 18th, 2009, 10:36 am

This reminded me of the proliferation of short range FM broadcast equipment found in cars that don't come equipped with a cd player or mp3 line-in jack. It would seem to me that a rebroadcasting mini-tower with a range of a few meters might be an ideal solution to people with large amounts of analog tvs. That way, instead of getting converter boxes for each one, they could just get one for the tower (or whatever form a small short range rebroadcasting device might have).

Holy Heterodyne, Batman!

Do you realize what a mess a broadband class C amplifier hooked to a tower antenna would make of the RF spectrum?

Your cordless phone? Hang it up. Cell Phone? Ditto. Wi-Fi? Bye-Fi! You can't go throwing RF energy clean across the spectrum without impacting everything that uses it.

To make a receiver/rebroadcast box that receives digital and retransmits NTSC would cost a hundred times what a QAM TV would run retail.

blackcatrun

May 18th, 2009, 10:52 am

sironin

May 18th, 2009, 3:22 pm

Holy Heterodyne, Batman!

Do you realize what a mess a broadband class C amplifier hooked to a tower antenna would make of the RF spectrum?

Your cordless phone? Hang it up. Cell Phone? Ditto. Wi-Fi? Bye-Fi! You can't go throwing RF energy clean across the spectrum without impacting everything that uses it.

To make a receiver/rebroadcast box that receives digital and retransmits NTSC would cost a hundred times what a QAM TV would run retail.

Many of those FM rebroadcasting devices cost more than simply hooking a cd player up to a car's audio system. I didn't say it had to make any sense. I'm sure someone would buy it anyway. Probably the kind of someone whom doesn't have a cell phone, or wi-fi, but happens to own a ton of analog TVs and is being a Luddite about the switch to digital.

chip

May 18th, 2009, 3:35 pm

Um CC is mandatory on all digital television receivers and digital to analog converter boxes. (http://www.ezdigitaltv.com/Converter_Box.html)

brouski

May 18th, 2009, 3:41 pm

Many of those FM rebroadcasting devices cost more than simply hooking a cd player up to a car's audio system. I didn't say it had to make any sense. I'm sure someone would buy it anyway. Probably the kind of someone whom doesn't have a cell phone, or wi-fi, but happens to own a ton of analog TVs and is being a Luddite about the switch to digital.

I've tried these before for my iPod, and the FM band is just too damn cluttered these days. The problem is compounded by everyone using the same empty frequency, so on the highway I get to hear what the cars around me are listening to.

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

May 18th, 2009, 3:51 pm

Many of those FM rebroadcasting devices cost more than simply hooking a cd player up to a car's audio system. I didn't say it had to make any sense. I'm sure someone would buy it anyway. Probably the kind of someone whom doesn't have a cell phone, or wi-fi, but happens to own a ton of analog TVs and is being a Luddite about the switch to digital.

But what if it's an emergency, you are in your car, and in the past you were dodging tornadoes by tracking them on your analog television set? You will now get hit by a tornado due to the lack of analog television signal. This is an outrage!

sironin

May 18th, 2009, 3:58 pm

I've tried these before for my iPod, and the FM band is just too damn cluttered these days. The problem is compounded by everyone using the same empty frequency, so on the highway I get to hear what the cars around me are listening to.

:))

Thank you for illustrating my point. (You could always just install a line-in jack for your iPod, it isn't very hard to do).

sironin

May 18th, 2009, 4:01 pm

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

May 18th, 2009, 4:12 pm

Car? I can't afford a car! What am I supposed to do with my horse! This is an outrage!

Ride a bike with a tv antenna, converter box, and tv set.

sironin

May 18th, 2009, 4:25 pm

Ride a bike with a tv antenna, converter box, and tv set.

Oh I see how it is now. What, my feet aren't good enough for getting from place to place now? :rolleyes:

:)) :))

gadgetere

May 24th, 2009, 1:13 am

This reminded me of the proliferation of short range FM broadcast equipment found in cars that don't come equipped with a cd player or mp3 line-in jack. It would seem to me that a rebroadcasting mini-tower with a range of a few yards might be an ideal solution to people with large amounts of analog tvs. That way, instead of getting converter boxes for each one, they could just get one for the tower (or whatever form a small short range rebroadcasting device might have).Thought of that; one would need a separate converter box for EACH CHANNEL, or a bi-directional receiver (your pocket tv would have to be able to TRANSMIT, so that you could change channels on your "rebroadcasting tower").

Not feasible...

gadgetere

May 24th, 2009, 1:33 am

The switch from analog to digital is for the money. Get everyone to change recieve it free for a short time then they shut it off and make one pay for the service. They will tout the shows one likes to watch or news ect...for a fee after they get the converters in use and the signal changes for good. Is there any place on the web where this is discussed? The technology is certainly possible. Cable-boxes are bidirectional; and they are addressable.

One "conspiracy theory" is that the digital boxes can transmit; if they can, then we will be under complete surveillance. The novel "1984" would be real. I've been inside an "Insigna" box, did not find a camera; microphone is still technologically possible.

In life it is just as much a crime to be "too naive", as it is to be "too paranoid". The balance is somewhere in between.

But the prospect of the boxes being "addressable" --- necessary for the "surveillance conspiracy", and absolutely necessary for the "pay-conspiracy". It's very possible with current technology; and would suck badly.

Let's say that "Cat" is right; and this is an aspect I've never considered before. By the time the "news" is delivered that people would have to start PAYING to see ANY television, it would be too late to turn the analog transmitters back on. They will have been disassembled.

I dont even care myself. I have good regular TV's that have not recieved any signals in years, a good radio is used more by me. I have a DVD player if I want a movie I buy one once in a while. Obviously if we fail to delay analog shutoff further, I'll begin watching pre-recorded shows. There are a LOT of them out there for sale.
So far I think from my lack of embracing the new gotta have tech I have saved about 10 to 14 thousand in five years.

Money I used for other more pressing needs first then wants.THe appropriate response in a free society is NOT to just "clam up and survive", we should revolt and take BACK the government. This applies to much more than just the "dtv" thing.

That's why we're starting to have "TEA parties"...

brody

May 24th, 2009, 1:36 am

I just wish someone could explain why my Comcast Basic Cable bill has gone from $47/mo to $57/mo since December.
Well if you were on an introductory rate or a contract rate, that might be why. It is usually fairly easy to fix by calling them up and asking for their accounts retention people. This may involve agreeing to another x-many month contract (which you may not want to do if you're moving or anticipate switching).
Yeah, seems like I do remember them saying that my introductory rate would expire after 19 years.

gadgetere

May 24th, 2009, 1:39 am

But what if it's an emergency, you are in your car, and in the past you were dodging tornadoes by tracking them on your analog television set? You will now get hit by a tornado due to the lack of analog television signal. This is an outrage!I agree. But they'll probably argue that the "new pseudo-portable units" will work in cars.

Does anyone have experience with receiving dtv in a moving vehicle? A lot of people I know already have problems with "tiling" and "dead sound" with their STATIONARY sets. I can only imagine what multi-paths and reflections will do to viewability...

Pocket analog sets work fine in a moving vehicle...

gadgetere

May 24th, 2009, 1:57 am

However did you survive the transition from tubes to cmos?With respect --- when will you admit that ridicule damages rather than promotes your argument?
I thought you said you weren't in Texas? Wellll, they have these things called "hubs"; one of 'em is in Dallas. You can't fly anywhere without passing through hubs like Dallas and Chicago...
Overflew the signal? A commercial jet? The signal is traveling at the speed of light, 670.6 Million MPH. A fast commercial jetliner can't even touch 670 MPH, much less a million times that speed and you saw one outrace the signal?Inverse square law; we reached a distance where the set wasn't able to receive the signal. But for awhile I was receiving it crystal clear from nearly 300 miles away.
Our economy isn't based on money any longer, it's based on credit. No, it's based on debt. That's the thing --- if we don't minimize our personal debt, we can face bankruptcy, foreclosure, and a myriad of other economic "setbacks".
Besides, television is paid for by advertising products to people with money. If people without money are watching TV then they're freeloading scum who take and don't give back.Sigh. A pack of gum (advertised) costs less than the set to VIEW it on.

...you know this...
If somebody can impede progress over his trivial WANTS then he's standing in the way of bettering our nation for his own selfish ends and he should be thrown in the deepest, darkest prison.Remind me not to vote for you, should you run for any office.

It was "progress" to rip off those ocean-front homeowners in Connecticut, to build condominiums.

"Progress" is not always "progress", if people are hurt...
It's Connecticut. I live in Arizona. We actually have one of the seven wonders of the natural world here, it's called the Grand Canyon. What's Connecticut got on the list? Senator Joe Lieberman? What's your point? That people in Connecticut don't MATTER to you?
The government has a fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers to keep from overcompensating land owners for pie-in-the-sky inflated values. They're spending other people's money and have a duty to see that taxpayers aren't getting ripped off.As I said, the city was offering $58,000 dollars here, for houses valued at $100,000 to over $200,000. Historically "eminent domain" seizures do NOT pay "fair market value". Not unless there is a SUIT filed in COURT...
I have the technology to allow it. Heck, I found out last week that PBS in Arizona (KAET Channel 8) went digital on April 29th, 2009. It took me TWO WEEKS to even notice they weren't broadcasting analog anymore because it didn't matter to my TV's hooked up to Cable.I asked you before about those in Connecticut --- respectfully asked, do you care about others' rights, if you're not directly impacted?
I'm trying to picture your emergency here. I've got a mental image of you playing dodge the tornado with a handheld TV in your hand showing you which way to run and probably getting run over by a truck because you're not watching where you're going.I can think of several OTHER scenarios.

Specifically --- an F5 tornado in May, 1999, Oklahoma city; accompanied by more than a DOZEN smaller tornadoes. People evacuating their homes, and sitting by the thousands in mall parking lots watching their hand-held sets to see where the cells were going.

That HAPPENED.
WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY. And the money. I just bought a 19" Sony Bravia which is a fine HDTV (720p capable and looking at it I fully believe it) for a crummy $250. Cool; will you buy me one?
You're sitting on a BSEE degree and you can't afford $250? You should be making WELL over $120,000 per year with such papers. If you don't have a $50 per hour job with those credentials then you're grossly underselling your skills and training."Ad Hominem"? With respect, there are better debating approaches than "ad hominem", "ridicule", and "put-downs".

...it doesn't serve you...

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

May 24th, 2009, 1:59 am

Fail.

gdoane

May 24th, 2009, 5:56 am

With respect --- when will you admit that ridicule damages rather than promotes your argument?

Humor is an effective tool in any discussion. I'm not about to abandon it just because you don't find it funny.

Wellll, they have these things called "hubs"; one of 'em is in Dallas. You can't fly anywhere without passing through hubs like Dallas and Chicago...

Actually I can because I live in Phoenix, AZ which happens to be a "hub" itself. I don't have to pass through a hub when I are a hub.

Inverse square law; we reached a distance where the set wasn't able to receive the signal. But for awhile I was receiving it crystal clear from nearly 300 miles away.

300 miles away isn't any inverse square law, that's Earth Curvature. The signal source fell below the horizon.

No, it's based on debt. That's the thing --- if we don't minimize our personal debt, we can face bankruptcy, foreclosure, and a myriad of other economic "setbacks".

There's nothing wrong with debt unless it's on a depreciating asset or it's more than you can handle.

Sigh. A pack of gum (advertised) costs less than the set to VIEW it on.

There are about 300 Million people in the USA and 844 per 1000 population own televisions. That means about fewer than 16% of Americans have found buying a Television to be unaffordable.

...you know this...
Remind me not to vote for you, should you run for any office.

It was "progress" to rip off those ocean-front homeowners in Connecticut, to build condominiums.

"Progress" is not always "progress", if people are hurt...

People are always hurt in "progress". The Personal Computer was progress but it sucks to be a person in the typewriter biz when that got invented. The automobile was progress but it sucks to be a buggy whip maker when that got invented. Progress usually does gore an ox or two in the process.

What's your point? That people in Connecticut don't MATTER to you?

No, my point is that I recognize the reality of growing pains. Progress isn't a painless process.

As I said, the city was offering $58,000 dollars here, for houses valued at $100,000 to over $200,000. Historically "eminent domain" seizures do NOT pay "fair market value". Not unless there is a SUIT filed in COURT...

Yeah, well these folks were paying property taxes lower than the actual property values were then and they weren't complaining about their underpayment of taxes due, were they?

I asked you before about those in Connecticut --- respectfully asked, do you care about others' rights, if you're not directly impacted?

I'm a firm believer in rugged individualism. The primary defender of others' rights lay in other hands. I'm not about to help people who refuse to take part in their own rescue.

I can think of several OTHER scenarios.

Specifically --- an F5 tornado in May, 1999, Oklahoma city; accompanied by more than a DOZEN smaller tornadoes. People evacuating their homes, and sitting by the thousands in mall parking lots watching their hand-held sets to see where the cells were going.

If these people were at the Mall then why didn't any of them have the clever idea of going into the Radio Shack where they have TV's running?

That HAPPENED.

So did the USSR and that was a bunch of people being stupid and doing stupid things.

Cool; will you buy me one?

Nope! The "rugged individualism" thing. Your wants are not my obligations. You can buy your own luxury items. TV is a total 100% luxury item, same as anything people were living without 6,000 years ago.

It's not as if Television is included in the Bill of Rights. It's a luxury item and the people who can't afford it probably shouldn't be wasting time watching it instead of bettering their circumstances anyway.

"Ad Hominem"? With respect, there are better debating approaches than "ad hominem", "ridicule", and "put-downs".

...it doesn't serve you...

Humor does serve me well, though. I have a very dry sense of humor, almost British style. Monty Python cracks me up.

WhiteHatBobby

May 24th, 2009, 7:42 am

gadgetere

May 24th, 2009, 2:00 pm

Humor is an effective tool in any discussion. I'm not about to abandon it just because you don't find it funny.Denigration isn't funny; as the saying goes, "ridicule reveals there is no legitimate argument".
Actually I can because I live in Phoenix, AZ which happens to be a "hub" itself. I don't have to pass through a hub when I are a hub.Ah --- now you know why I visit Dallas so much.

But if anyone here is going to be flying through Dallas, arrange for at least a 4-hour layover, and visit the C.R.Smith American Airlines Museum; just out of the South Exit, on FAA road. Well worth the trouble. That aluminum piano --- I remember people gathered around it on a 747, playing and singing.
300 miles away isn't any inverse square law, that's Earth Curvature. The signal source fell below the horizon.
You're probably right that "curvature" and "obstructions" outweigh signal-strength; but from 40,000 feet I'm leaning more towards "signal-strength"...
There's nothing wrong with debt unless it's on a depreciating asset or it's more than you can handle.The average American owes at least 8,000 in debt; many are up to 25,000 and beyond. I love the calls I get to "consolidate my debt".

"Would you like to consolidate your debt and reduce your charges?"
"Sure!"
"How many credit cards to you have?"
"Uhm, 5, no 6."
"What are the balances?"
"All but one have zero balances."
"And the one?"
"Negative five bucks."
<<click!>>
"Hello?"

There are about 300 Million people in the USA and 844 per 1000 population own televisions. That means about fewer than 16% of Americans have found buying a Television to be unaffordable.It's not just "buying a television"; it's buying five or SIX televisions. And the new flat-screens cost a lot...
People are always hurt in "progress". The Personal Computer was progress but it sucks to be a person in the typewriter biz when that got invented. The automobile was progress but it sucks to be a buggy whip maker when that got invented. Progress usually does gore an ox or two in the process.OK, once again --- progress is when benefits outweigh the costs.

1. Typewriters still WORK. You can buy paper, ribbons, even CARBON paper.
1b. Word processors have spell-checkers, and editing; benefits.
2. Buggies still WORK. The Amish drive them all the time.
2b. Cars go FASTER, and give people much more range.
2c. Cars are easier to feed and clean. Benefits.
3. TV's will NOT work. Each requires ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT to display "digital". NOT a benefit.

The "digital benefits" are useless to most people; we can't see higher resolution, we know the sound is NOT better, those who want more channels already subscribe to cable. The loss of "portability" is a cost that far outweighs the supposed benefits.
No, my point is that I recognize the reality of growing pains. Progress isn't a painless process. A person saves all his life for his dream, then buys it and retires in the perfect spot --- then another PRIVATE ENTITY comes and TAKES his dream, and you call it "GROWING PAINS"?

I call it "unamerican". If you really feel that way, then perhaps a Communist Country would be more to your liking. (No disrespect intended.)

We need to leave the "communist/dictatorship" principles to Russia and China, and stop bringing them here.
Yeah, well these folks were paying property taxes lower than the actual property values were then and they weren't complaining about their underpayment of taxes due, were they? I assure you the "assessed value" for taxes, exceeds the "assessed value" for buyout.

Two different standards.
I'm a firm believer in rugged individualism. The primary defender of others' rights lay in other hands. I'm not about to help people who refuse to take part in their own rescue.Then accept your position of not TRAMPLING on others' rights, TOO...

You love "digital television"; if analog continues, will you still be able to enjoy your "digital" equipment? Yes.
When analog is forced off, will I still be able to enjoy my equipment? No.

So the one position (dictatorship-shutoff) tramples rights, the other (extended analog) does not. How is that acceptable?
If these people were at the Mall then why didn't any of them have the clever idea of going into the Radio Shack where they have TV's running? Hmmmm...
...because...

Radio Shack...

...didn't have...

...POWER.
So did the USSR and that was a bunch of people being stupid and doing stupid things.And yet you view "government taking homes to give to other PRIVATE CITIZENS"

That's much more "Soviet", than "American".
Nope! The "rugged individualism" thing. Your wants are not my obligations. You can buy your own luxury items.And once again, continuing analog does not harm you. TV is a total 100% luxury item, same as anything people were living without 6,000 years ago.Unless I'm mistaken (and I'm not), the Flintstones HAD television; they watched it all the time.

But if it's "luxury", allow me the luxury to WATCH it.
It's not as if Television is included in the Bill of Rights. It's a luxury item and the people who can't afford it probably shouldn't be wasting time watching it instead of bettering their circumstances anyway.Faulty argument. There's apparently nothing in there about the right to own LAND, either; or rather --- nothing to prevent the COURTS from redefining anything from "eminent domain" to "reasonable cause for search and seizure".

The biggest problem in America today, is that "inalienable rights", have become fully "alienable"... It's only a matter of what one judge decides...
Humor does serve me well, though. I have a very dry sense of humor, almost British style. Monty Python cracks me up.I enjoy Monty Python, have the entire "flying circus" shows; laugh my head off at "Faulty Towers" (have all 12 episodes).

But we don't find references to "horse and buggy", and "eight-track", and "vacuum tubes", funny...

gadgetere

May 24th, 2009, 2:10 pm

The cable company will be the only way to get network affiliates now. We are too far from the Columbia, Charleston, or Augusta stations because of the locations of their transmitters are at least 60 miles away and the digital channels are too weak.A lot of people are in that position; but they don't know where to go to fight it. I suspect the cable companies are part of the DTV lobby.

Contact your congressmen, and tell them "do NOT shut off analog". Tell your friends; and at the least, sign the petition.

gdoane

May 24th, 2009, 3:10 pm

Denigration isn't funny; as the saying goes, "ridicule reveals there is no legitimate argument".

It's not denigration to point out the absurdity of insisting on the old ways when the new ways are so much better.

Ah --- now you know why I visit Dallas so much.

I figured it was because you were a Cowboys fan.

But if anyone here is going to be flying through Dallas, arrange for at least a 4-hour layover, and visit the C.R.Smith American Airlines Museum; just out of the South Exit, on FAA road. Well worth the trouble. That aluminum piano --- I remember people gathered around it on a 747, playing and singing.

Airline Karaoke. Now there's an aviation idea that never took off.

You're probably right that "curvature" and "obstructions" outweigh signal-strength; but from 40,000 feet I'm leaning more towards "signal-strength"...

Among one of the many hats I've worn, I've been a military air traffic control radio technician. The AN/GRT-21 VHF aircraft band transmitter puts out a mere 5 watts and can hit any aircraft in line of sight, even the Space Shuttle in orbit. I've seen 'em do it. It's not about power at all, it's about line of sight.

The average American owes at least 8,000 in debt; many are up to 25,000 and beyond. I love the calls I get to "consolidate my debt".

"Would you like to consolidate your debt and reduce your charges?"
"Sure!"
"How many credit cards to you have?"
"Uhm, 5, no 6."
"What are the balances?"
"All but one have zero balances."
"And the one?"
"Negative five bucks."
<<click!>>
"Hello?"

That's a misleading statistic because a few Americans owe a lot while most Americans owe nothing. The few make the average look pretty bad. It's like having Bill Gates with $60 Billion in his pocket and two worthless bums in a room. The average net worth among the three in the room is $20 Billion but it's really only one guy has the money.

I don't owe any debt except for a mortgage and that's going to be paid off in less than 10 years.

It's not just "buying a television"; it's buying five or SIX televisions. And the new flat-screens cost a lot...

You've only got one pair of eyes so you only need one television set. It's not as if you need to replace them all in one shot. The wise thing to do would be to replace one a year and save money as the price of the new technology goes down as it always does.

OK, once again --- progress is when benefits outweigh the costs.

1. Typewriters still WORK. You can buy paper, ribbons, even CARBON paper.
1b. Word processors have spell-checkers, and editing; benefits.
2. Buggies still WORK. The Amish drive them all the time.
2b. Cars go FASTER, and give people much more range.
2c. Cars are easier to feed and clean. Benefits.
3. TV's will NOT work. Each requires ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT to display "digital". NOT a benefit.

The benefits GREATLY outweigh the costs as 69 analog TV channels representing some 400+ MHz of bandwidth is reclaimed for less frivolous purposes than Andy Griffith reruns.

http://www.newser.com/story/21960/fcc-airwaves-auction-sets-record.html

The auction of that space was good for $20 BILLION. If somebody has to buy a $50 converter box so the government can raise $20 Billion for the public good then the benefit greatly outweighs the cost.

The "digital benefits" are useless to most people; we can't see higher resolution, we know the sound is NOT better, those who want more channels already subscribe to cable. The loss of "portability" is a cost that far outweighs the supposed benefits.

The benefits have yet to be realized because some idiots extended the shut-off date and the new technologies like the world has never dreamed of haven't yet had a go at bearing fruit.

It's going to be GLORIOUS! EVDO and 3G with more bandwidth will bring faster and better handheld internet to Americans. New wireless technologies will bring us smart appliances, smart cars, better personal communications, better public safety communications and all the jobs and growth which that means.

The delayed shutoff is standing in the way of growth and progress and wealth beyond dreaming.

A person saves all his life for his dream, then buys it and retires in the perfect spot --- then another PRIVATE ENTITY comes and TAKES his dream, and you call it "GROWING PAINS"?

Yep. Too bad, sucks to be a dinosaur retiring in the tarpits but it happens.

I call it "unamerican". If you really feel that way, then perhaps a Communist Country would be more to your liking. (No disrespect intended.)

Communist countries stand in the way of communications progress. China still censors the internet. America takes communications progress full speed ahead here. We're taking 400+ MHz of wasted space that makes no progress and no money and reclaiming it for technologies that will create progress and wealth.

King Cantona

May 24th, 2009, 4:01 pm

Well with Digital TV instead of the 5 networks we used to have, we have a load of other free channels in perfect quality, I can't speak for the US but I love it in the UK...

gadgetere

May 25th, 2009, 11:15 pm

It's not denigration to point out the absurdity of insisting on the old ways when the new ways are so much better. Who are you to make the judgment of "absurd"? As I said, virtually all of my tv enjoyment is mobile; in a couple weeks I'll never have television away from home again.

Clearly "portability" is a desirable feature --- therefore, not "absurd".
I figured it was because you were a Cowboys fan.I must confess, I find the cheerleaders more attractive than the team...
Airline Karaoke. Now there's an aviation idea that never took off. Nice pun --- "took off".
It was fun; so was the upstairs lounge. I'd never before seen a hassock with a seat belt...
That's a misleading statistic because a few Americans owe a lot while most Americans owe nothing. The few make the average look pretty bad. It's like having Bill Gates with $60 Billion in his pocket and two worthless bums in a room. The average net worth among the three in the room is $20 Billion but it's really only one guy has the money.I've not heard news reports about "most people not having debt". I've heard the opposite...
I don't owe any debt except for a mortgage and that's going to be paid off in less than 10 years. Clearly you make more money than most. But to those who have lost their job, or low-income, or fixed income (single parents, elderly, the retired) --- this is a hardship.
You've only got one pair of eyes so you only need one television set. It's not as if you need to replace them all in one shot. The wise thing to do would be to replace one a year and save money as the price of the new technology goes down as it always does. Ah --- so --- it's all right if the "government" dictates what I buy, if I spread it out over several years?

WHEN they have "pocket sets" that work as well as the analog ones, we'll talk. And you know very well that such sets will always have problems with tiling and audio cut-out...

The benefits GREATLY outweigh the costs as 69 analog TV channels representing some 400+ MHz of bandwidth is reclaimed for less frivolous purposes than Andy Griffith reruns. You miss the point of a "government of the people, by the people, for the people"; if the people want to watch Andy Griffith reruns, they can.
The auction of that space was good for $20 BILLION. If somebody has to buy a $50 converter box so the government can raise $20 Billion for the public good then the benefit greatly outweighs the cost.Really. And what is the cumulative cost to EVERYONE, for forced sales?

Ya' think it would EXCEED 20 billion? (In a heartbeat....)
The benefits have yet to be realized because some idiots extended the shut-off date and the new technologies like the world has never dreamed of haven't yet had a go at bearing fruit."Idiots"? It was extended because too many people didn't WANT to go buy ALL NEW STUFF.
It's going to be GLORIOUS! EVDO and 3G with more bandwidth will bring faster and better handheld internet to Americans. New wireless technologies will bring us smart appliances, smart cars, better personal communications, better public safety communications and all the jobs and growth which that means.For the vast majority, the only exposure they get will be when they PAY for those subscription services.
The delayed shutoff is standing in the way of growth and progress and wealth beyond dreaming. "Wealth"? For the few profiteers.

The problem is that we now have exactly two choices:

PAY for new equipment and subscription services

....or don't watch television...

This is not "freedom".
Yep. Too bad, sucks to be a dinosaur retiring in the tarpits but it happens.In a free society, a man dreams and saves all his life for a specific retirement home; one on the ocean. It is exactly what he wants. Now ANOTHER PARTY can come in and YANK his home away from him, he has to file suit to get even "fair compensation"; but he will never be able to buy anything even close. His dream is GONE --- and that's all you can say to him?

There are no words to respond to you. Nothing I say will have meaning.
Communist countries stand in the way of communications progress. China still censors the internet.What's the difference? China censors the internet, dictates how many children each can have, where people go what they do. America is becoming a place where the government dictates where and how we live, what we do, and where we go .

What's the difference? America takes communications progress full speed ahead here. We're taking 400+ MHz of wasted space that makes no progress and no money and reclaiming it for technologies that will create progress and wealth.And so much for "we the people".

"We the people" must give way for "they the PROFITEERS".

It ain't right. It ain't acceptable. It ain't American.

....sigh...

chip

May 25th, 2009, 11:26 pm

Again

CC is mandatory on all digital television receivers and digital to analog converter boxes. (http://www.ezdigitaltv.com/Converter_Box.html)

gadgetere

May 26th, 2009, 8:47 am

CC is mandatory on all digital television receivers and digital to analog converter boxes. (http://www.ezdigitaltv.com/Converter_Box.html)Hi, Chip. The device works by intercepting the CC signal embedded in the NTSC signal. I'll take your word for CC being there on the output of converter boxes; but the company no longer makes stand-alone boxes, they say because it no longer works with "digital tv".

If a "converter box" has video out that contains CC, and audio out that can be connected through the TVGuardian, then the box would work. Maybe they mean that if one uses a digital television there's no way for the "Guardian" to receive CC and control the sound and video.

I hooked up a "Picture-In-Picture" unit to the large living-room TV; there are four sources of signal --- the unit itself has a tuner, there are two VCR's (one is now a VHS/DVD deck), and the television itself has audio/video in and out. It's really useful when you're watching two programs (think "holiday parades"), or watching one program and recording another. With the recording as the PIP, you can edit out commercials without interrupting the program you're WATCHING.

The PIP box has audio and video out, works well with the TVGuardian.

...and in a couple weeks, will never function again --- all video receivers will be shut off.

This is the big complaint; we can talk about supposed "benefits" all day. But what it means for each citizen, is more cost.

In a free society, the government, is us; why don't we have any say in this?

The only answer, is "it isn't free any more"...

...sigh...

sironin

May 26th, 2009, 9:10 am

Thought of that; one would need a separate converter box for EACH CHANNEL, or a bi-directional receiver (your pocket tv would have to be able to TRANSMIT, so that you could change channels on your "rebroadcasting tower").

Not feasible...

Well if you only have 10 broadcast stations and over 10 tv's, that seems like the economical solution. I only have about 6 broadcast channels even partially worth my attention, but then again I've bought a tv in the last two years so I don't need a converter.

Also, it's not too horribly complicated to build or buy an RF remote that could change channels for you instead.

sironin

May 26th, 2009, 9:12 am

Yeah, seems like I do remember them saying that my introductory rate would expire after 19 years.

Comcast raised my rate every year for five years in a row. Apparently they were trying to get rid of me. I don't really miss them.

gdoane

May 26th, 2009, 12:09 pm

Who are you to make the judgment of "absurd"? As I said, virtually all of my tv enjoyment is mobile; in a couple weeks I'll never have television away from home again.

Clearly "portability" is a desirable feature --- therefore, not "absurd".

On this we can agree. Portability is desirable.

What we'll disagree on is I'll tell you that my iPod touch will blow any portable TV you've got clean out of the water. If it's got an internet connection, Wi-FI? OH MY GOD. There's NOTHING it can't do. Literally NOTHING. And it's only $250. And smaller than most men's wallets.

And even if my iPod touch is out of touch, my Alltel Motorola Q phone can full-stream video on demand. That's a bit more pricey though, the phone is about $500. But there's almost nowhere it won't work.

I must confess, I find the cheerleaders more attractive than the team...
Nice pun --- "took off".
It was fun; so was the upstairs lounge. I'd never before seen a hassock with a seat belt...

I've always kind of wondered about what's so manly in watching guys in tight pants running around a field myself. Maybe it's a guilty pleasure.

I've not heard news reports about "most people not having debt". I've heard the opposite...
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/SavingandDebt/P70581.asp

About 40% of credit cards are paid off monthly. Mine always are.

Clearly you make more money than most. But to those who have lost their job, or low-income, or fixed income (single parents, elderly, the retired) --- this is a hardship.

I make more than about 80% of Americans do, what the IRS calls "Top Quintile" but I've also been at the bottom making the money a Navy recruit makes too.

This isn't a hardship. Most people don't even notice it because homeowners associations don't allow rooftop TV antennas anyway.

You keep harping about portability, so let's talk about antennas. You're obviously at my level of expertise in radio communications, so you know that the lower the frequency is, the bigger the antenna needs to be.

The lowest analog TV channel frequency is right at about 60 MHz, and as any radio technician like me could tell you off of the top of his head, wavelength is 300/Frequency in MHz which means Channel 2 TV is FIVE METERS.

That's a pretty big antenna. If you wanted a full wavelength antenna then you're talking about a 16-foot piece of metal. Fortunately, 1/4-wave antennas work okay but still, even at that you're talking about FOUR FEET of iron.

The reason homeowners associations have almost universally banned rooftop TV antennas is because they're big and ugly. It's a horizontal log periodic dipole array with 16 elements ranging from four feet to 8 inches. The ideal TV antenna is not portable.

I'm sure your scenario of dodging tornados with a TV screen in hand watching the weather track in hand is a total life saver, but if you've got an antenna in your hand while thunder and lightning is coming down then you're about to discover electricity Benjamin Franklin style.

If you want to hold up a big piece of metal in a storm to watch portable TV outdoors... video it. I've never actually seen a person struck by lightning before but I've heard about it. I understand that it's often lethal so most accounts are second hand.

Ah --- so --- it's all right if the "government" dictates what I buy, if I spread it out over several years?

With what the government costs me in taxes, I could replace every TV and computer monitor in this house twenty times over every year. Suck it up. I pay about $12,000 per year to the IRS and I don't even own anything worth $12,000.

WHEN they have "pocket sets" that work as well as the analog ones, we'll talk. And you know very well that such sets will always have problems with tiling and audio cut-out...

You've never seen an iPod Touch, have you? Or an iPhone? Or a Motorola Q series? I can blow your silly analog set out of the water. I can get video on demand. I can e-mail the station. I've got two-way comms and you're in the rain holding a big antenna hoping lightning doesn't strike.

You miss the point of a "government of the people, by the people, for the people"; if the people want to watch Andy Griffith reruns, they can.
Really. And what is the cumulative cost to EVERYONE, for forced sales?

There are 844 TV sets per 1000 population in the USA according to the 2009 "World Almanac and Book of Facts".

That's 252 Million TV sets in America if you do the math with a 300 Million population of the USA.

I can buy an HDTV for $250. I know I can because I did it. Sony Bravia, 19". It's in my game room. Cute little thing. Hasn't managed to tick me off yet and that's saying a lot for cheap electronics.

Ya' think it would EXCEED 20 billion? (In a heartbeat....)

Not really and here's the reason why. There are about 252 Million TV sets in use in America. 90% of those are connected to cable TV leaving 25 Million sets still hooked to rooftop antennas. DO THE MATH. $20 Billion divided by 25 Million? You come up with $800.

Do you have a TV worth $800?

The government taking $800 from you is nothing worth complaining about. They take five times that much away from me every year so your whining gets no sympathy.

"Idiots"? It was extended because too many people didn't WANT to go buy ALL NEW STUFF.

No, it was because too many people have no understanding of technology and applied for "vouchers" they didn't need.

For the vast majority, the only exposure they get will be when they PAY for those subscription services.
"Wealth"? For the few profiteers.

And YAHOO for profit! Do you oppose profit? Do you wish for nothing to profit? How exactly is your non-profit world going to work? I do believe in charity and giving, but to give you've got to receive. I'm an unabashed capitalist and a registered Republican.

The problem is that we now have exactly two choices:

PAY for new equipment and subscription services

....or don't watch television...

You had to buy new equipment to watch TV in the first place.

The oldest TV in your house is probably less than ten years old. Electrolytic capacitors don't last longer than that.

This is not "freedom".
In a free society, a man dreams and saves all his life for a specific retirement home; one on the ocean. It is exactly what he wants. Now ANOTHER PARTY can come in and YANK his home away from him, he has to file suit to get even "fair compensation"; but he will never be able to buy anything even close. His dream is GONE --- and that's all you can say to him?

Dreams change, my friend. They change. If you'd have asked me what I wanted to be while I was in the 8th grade, I'd have told you I wanted to be a translator for international relations. I've studied 6 years of Spanish and 3 years of French towards that very end. Then I discovered electronics, and realized my love for communications didn't lie merely in speaking. Oh, heck no! I've learned Spanish and French and even Morse Code, but REAL communications lay in electronics!

My dream changed a lot. I'm not doing anything close to what I thought I'd be doing. I'm in communications, but not the kind I thought I'd be in. I'm not a translator. I make 911 calls work.

So what do I say to a guy who sees his dream change? Welcome to the real world.

There are no words to respond to you. Nothing I say will have meaning.

Nothing you say will defend your wasteful 60-year-old caveman technology! You CANNOT possibly defend 6 MHz of bandwidth over 69 channels Analog when QAM technology can use the same bandwidth with 10 times more efficiency.

You're defending horse-drawn carts on the freeway here. Your loveable NTSC standard was written in 1941. Do you see any cars on the freeway from 1941? No? Because they're OBSOLETE.

What's the difference? China censors the internet, dictates how many children each can have, where people go what they do. America is becoming a place where the government dictates where and how we live, what we do, and where we go .

Really? You think the Government could tell me I can't live in Phoenix, Arizona? Would you be willing to be the agent knocking on my door telling me this?

I don't think so, for two reasons. Number one is you (and most Americans) would believe that it's UNAMERICAN to bang on doors ordering people out of their houses. So you wouldn't do it. Number two is I have a gun. Which I will use to defend my freedom. And yes, I would do it.

What's the difference? And so much for "we the people".

If "we the people" got everything we wanted I damned sure wouldn't be living in a land where a jackass Kenyan bastard child like Obama is the President. Sometimes you lose the election. That's life. We'll get rid of Obama in 3 years flat.

"We the people" must give way for "they the PROFITEERS".

It ain't right. It ain't acceptable. It ain't American.

....sigh...

It's PROGRESS. It's VERY AMERICAN. Americans invented the TV because we had the bandwidth to make it happen. Now new inventions need bandwidth. The old needs to make way for the new.

Thus has it always been.

Dem

May 26th, 2009, 4:49 pm

For the vast majority, the only exposure they get will be when they PAY for those subscription services.
So the crux of your argument is that you don't want to pay to watch television?

gdoane

May 26th, 2009, 9:44 pm

So the crux of your argument is that you don't want to pay to watch television?

The way I understand it, this guy wouldn't be happy even if you bought him six new TV sets, a full-on subscription to digital cable and a box of Twinkies to boot because HE HATES DIGITAL.

He claims that the video isn't any better because the human eye is "low resolution". Yah, right. Try selling a 640x480 computer monitor these days (the old VGA standard) and see how many those bricks you sell.

He claims that the audio isn't any better either. The only way that could be true is if you actually use the TV speakers for your sound system.

All of these sour grapes gripings about "portability" and "emergency" and denials of improvements (of which there are many) add up to a guy who just can't stand a little bit of changing technology.

ogibillm

May 26th, 2009, 9:58 pm

All of these sour grapes gripings about "portability" and "emergency" and denials of improvements (of which there are many) add up to a guy who just can't stand a little bit of changing technology.

http://www.michaelspornanimation.com/splog/wp-content/M/dana-carvey-grumpy.jpg
"In my day we didn't have fancy digital television. If we wanted to watch tv we had to sit 6 inches away from the 3 inch black and white screen while we watched the snowy analog broadcast of what might have been I Love Lucy and the radiation poured into our eyes. And that's the way we liked it! We loved it! Whoopee, I've got giant eye tumors! Bah!"

gdoane

May 26th, 2009, 10:42 pm

http://www.michaelspornanimation.com/splog/wp-content/M/dana-carvey-grumpy.jpg
"In my day we didn't have fancy digital television. If we wanted to watch tv we had to sit 6 inches away from the 3 inch black and white screen while we watched the snowy analog broadcast of what might have been I Love Lucy and the radiation poured into our eyes. And that's the way we liked it! We loved it! Whoopee, I've got giant eye tumors! Bah!"

Uh-oh! Now you did it! Ridicule means you have no real argument you know.

That guy's a whippersnapper compared to Analog TV. The standard came to be in 1941. If NTSC had a social security number it would be getting monthly checks by now.

AutoRacer55

May 27th, 2009, 1:36 pm

This thread's more painful to read than watching Rosie O'Donnell playing basketball naked.

sironin

May 27th, 2009, 3:39 pm

This thread's more painful to read than watching Rosie O'Donnell playing basketball naked.

On analog or on digital? :)) :))

AutoRacer55

May 27th, 2009, 3:53 pm

On analog or on digital? :)) :))

Worse, in person.

gdoane

May 27th, 2009, 4:26 pm

This thread's more painful to read than watching Rosie O'Donnell playing basketball naked.

I thought tennis was the sport of choice for gay women?

AutoRacer55

May 27th, 2009, 7:06 pm

I thought tennis was the sport of choice for gay women?

Tennis Lesbians 5?

gadgetere

May 27th, 2009, 8:35 pm

So the crux of your argument is that you don't want to pay to watch television?ONE argument. Try 'splainin' to those who cannot afford it --- senior citizens, retirees, single parents, anyone on fixed/low income.

The only response has been a nasty,
"You don't HAVE to watch TV!"

Another argument is portability; most of my tv "watching" is portable. I have receivers that provide the sound, and CAN watch/listen-to Andy Griffith.

...and news...

...and tornado reports...

Yes, I've watched tornado reports AT WORK, and have been able to inform my colleagues. I remember when a giant "battleship wall cloud" was parked just out west of the company; two of us sat behind the plate glass windows and watched some wispy clouds chase themselves in a small circle right above us.

And I had the tv. Also had the tv when the Space Shuttle blew up. And when someone bombed Oklahoma city. And when two inhuman monsters flew planes into the World Trade Center.

I'm not looking forward to never being able to do that again...

gadgetere

May 27th, 2009, 8:43 pm

Uh-oh! Now you did it! Ridicule means you have no real argument you know.Exactly. You're learning. :)
The way I understand it, this guy wouldn't be happy even if you bought him six new TV sets, a full-on subscription to digital cable and a box of Twinkies to boot because HE HATES DIGITAL.And WHY do I hate it? Let's review.
1. No portability, even in emergencies.
2. At home, I would have to buy a converter for my living room set.
....2b and my VCR/DVDR...
....2c and my PIP receiver...
....2d and my bedroom set...
....2e and my guest room set...
....2f and my kids room set...
....2g and my bathroom set...
3. I can't see any improvement. Neither can most others.
4. I can't hear any improvement. Neither can ALL others.
5. I can't see as well with the wide aspect ratio, as I can with standard. I find myself wanting to reach out and stretch the picture to full...
He claims that the video isn't any better because the human eye is "low resolution". Yah, right. Try selling a 640x480 computer monitor these days (the old VGA standard) and see how many those bricks you sell.How many computer monitors do you watch from across the room? Non sequitur. As valid a complaint as "horse-n-buggy", or "8-track".
He claims that the audio isn't any better either. The only way that could be true is if you actually use the TV speakers for your sound system.I can't hear the very high frequencies any more; and no one who has exceeded "teen years", can either...

Analog is hi-fi, surround-sound, DBX encrypted; it's very noise-free and high quality. All of these sour grapes gripings about "portability" and "emergency" and denials of improvements (of which there are many) add up to a guy who just can't stand a little bit of changing technology.You have yet to prove invalid any argument I've made.

Take the five points in this post; undeniable...

Dem

May 27th, 2009, 9:02 pm

ONE argument. Try 'splainin' to those who cannot afford it --- senior citizens, retirees, single parents, anyone on fixed/low income.

The only response has been a nasty,
"You don't HAVE to watch TV!"

Another argument is portability; most of my tv "watching" is portable. I have receivers that provide the sound, and CAN watch/listen-to Andy Griffith.

...and news...

...and tornado reports...

Yes, I've watched tornado reports AT WORK, and have been able to inform my colleagues. I remember when a giant "battleship wall cloud" was parked just out west of the company; two of us sat behind the plate glass windows and watched some wispy clouds chase themselves in a small circle right above us.

And I had the tv. Also had the tv when the Space Shuttle blew up. And when someone bombed Oklahoma city. And when two inhuman monsters flew planes into the World Trade Center.

I'm not looking forward to never being able to do that again...
Television is a privilege not a right.

If your worried about emergency radio, just get this: http://www.amazon.com/Kaito-KA500-Powered-Emergency-Weather/dp/B001F0MNRM/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1243468749&sr=8-3

As for portability, we have already shown you portable digit sets. They are out there, just because those sets aren't to your liking, doesn't mean they don't exist.

Dem

May 27th, 2009, 9:06 pm

Exactly. You're learning. :)
And WHY do I hate it? Let's review.
1. No portability, even in emergencies.
2. At home, I would have to buy a converter for my living room set.
....2b and my VCR/DVDR...
....2c and my PIP receiver...
....2d and my bedroom set...
....2e and my guest room set...
....2f and my kids room set...
....2g and my bathroom set...
3. I can't see any improvement. Neither can most others.
4. I can't hear any improvement. Neither can ALL others.
5. I can't see as well with the wide aspect ratio, as I can with standard. I find myself wanting to reach out and stretch the picture to full...
1) There is portability
2) Wow, you have a bathroom tv?
3) I can, and so can most people. It's why there is a demand for HD content.
4) I can't, but I know many who can hear an improvement.
5)Not a problem, just make it full screen.

gadgetere

May 27th, 2009, 9:25 pm

On this we can agree. Portability is desirable.

What we'll disagree on is I'll tell you that my iPod touch will blow any portable TV you've got clean out of the water. If it's got an internet connection, Wi-FI? OH MY GOD. There's NOTHING it can't do. Literally NOTHING. And it's only $250. And smaller than most men's wallets.$250 is not the final cost; how much per month is your wi-fi?

Will it work away from your house?
And even if my iPod touch is out of touch, my Alltel Motorola Q phone can full-stream video on demand. That's a bit more pricey though, the phone is about $500. But there's almost nowhere it won't work.AND, monthly subscription fees. You do know that joblessness is expected to exceed 20% next year???
I've always kind of wondered about what's so manly in watching guys in tight pants running around a field myself. Maybe it's a guilty pleasure.It's called "living vicariously". All those couch potatoes who get winded walking to the street, "participating" in the only way they can...
I make more than about 80% of Americans do, what the IRS calls "Top Quintile" but I've also been at the bottom making the money a Navy recruit makes too. Did I mention joblessness is predicted to exceed 20% next year? Yep, ah did...
This isn't a hardship. Most people don't even notice it because homeowners associations don't allow rooftop TV antennas anyway. Huh??? Most people have an antenna in their attic, or use the set-top antenna. And many of them are not going to receive anything after June.
You keep harping about portability, so let's talk about antennas. You're obviously at my level of expertise in radio communications...Bet you have me beat... so you know that the lower the frequency is, the bigger the antenna needs to be. The "helical array" I mentioned is only feasible at UHF frequencies...
The lowest analog TV channel frequency is right at about 60 MHz, and as any radio technician like me could tell you off of the top of his head, wavelength is 300/Frequency in MHz which means Channel 2 TV is FIVE METERS.What's that in feet?
That's a pretty big antenna. If you wanted a full wavelength antenna then you're talking about a 16-foot piece of metal. Fortunately, 1/4-wave antennas work okay but still, even at that you're talking about FOUR FEET of iron.

The reason homeowners associations have almost universally banned rooftop TV antennas is because they're big and ugly. It's a horizontal log periodic dipole array with 16 elements ranging from four feet to 8 inches. The ideal TV antenna is not portable. The people who NEED rooftop antennas, don't live anywhere near homeowner associations. But many IN town, will need an antenna after June.

"Tough Luck" you'll say...
I'm sure your scenario of dodging tornados with a TV screen in hand watching the weather track in hand is a total life saver, but if you've got an antenna in your hand while thunder and lightning is coming down then you're about to discover electricity Benjamin Franklin style. Nonsense; in the second place, the antenna is only 1.7 foot long. In the first place, the car forms a "Faraday cage".

It's always fun hearing someone asserting that "rubber tires will insulate you from lightning". Of course I try not to insult them; but ask:
"That's a common misconception; but do you think that a bolt of lightning that has just blasted through three miles of air, will be put off by four inches of rubber?"
If you want to hold up a big piece of metal in a storm to watch portable TV outdoors... video it. I've never actually seen a person struck by lightning before but I've heard about it. I understand that it's often lethal so most accounts are second hand.I was at a garage sale; they had a four-foot mast on their garage, with an antenna. I said, "That's a lightning hazard".

She said, "It hasn't been struck yet."

Scary thing, is people like that VOTE...
With what the government costs me in taxes, I could replace every TV and computer monitor in this house twenty times over every year. Suck it up. I pay about $12,000 per year to the IRS and I don't even own anything worth $12,000. Tell me where I can buy a truly portable tv (or even audio-only) receiver.

...there isn't one...
No, it was because too many people have no understanding of technology and applied for "vouchers" they didn't need. Here, nearly 20% were predicted to "lose television" if the shutoff happened 2/17.

Most didn't want digital.
And YAHOO for profit! Do you oppose profit? Do you wish for nothing to profit? How exactly is your non-profit world going to work? I do believe in charity and giving, but to give you've got to receive. I'm an unabashed capitalist and a registered Republican. I can't argue with you; you find nothing wrong with a private person/corporation stealing a retiree's home.

Nothing I could say would impress you.
You had to buy new equipment to watch TV in the first place.Over a period of THIRTY YEARS.

Hey --- great idea. Let's delay the shutoff for the same thirty years.
The oldest TV in your house is probably less than ten years old. Electrolytic capacitors don't last longer than that. Not true; I'm watching one right now that's around 25 years old. Console color. Has a "comb filter"; I'm told if the comb filter ever dies, I'll have to trash the set --- they don't make 'em any more.

...but they rarely die...

Dreams change, my friend. They change. If you'd have asked me what I wanted to be while I was in the 8th grade, I'd have told you I wanted to be a translator for international relations. I've studied 6 years of Spanish and 3 years of French towards that very end. Then I discovered electronics, and realized my love for communications didn't lie merely in speaking. Oh, heck no! I've learned Spanish and French and even Morse Code, but REAL communications lay in electronics! "Dreams change"? Rather a cold-hearted thing to say to the elderly couple as they get kicked out of their dream-retirement-home.
My dream changed a lot. I'm not doing anything close to what I thought I'd be doing. I'm in communications, but not the kind I thought I'd be in. I'm not a translator. I make 911 calls work.

So what do I say to a guy who sees his dream change? Welcome to the real world. Words fail me; the most fundamental right of a free people, is owning property --- but now the US Supreme Court says "we can take it if someone bigger than you wants it".

....and you see nothing wrong with that...

sigh...
Nothing you say will defend your wasteful 60-year-old caveman technology! You CANNOT possibly defend 6 MHz of bandwidth over 69 channels Analog when QAM technology can use the same bandwidth with 10 times more efficiency.And when they can give us pocket-sets that do the same thing, let's talk...
You're defending horse-drawn carts on the freeway here.No horse; defending pocket sets, retirees, low-income folks, the jobless, etcetera... Your loveable NTSC standard was written in 1941. Do you see any cars on the freeway from 1941? No? Because they're OBSOLETE. Hmmm; cars are basically the same as they were in the 20's. Four wheels, engine, steering wheel. What if the government BANNED all cars and said "You have to take PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION"?

They can't ban the cars, until they have something that works as well.
Just like they shouldn't ban usable television until they have something that works as well...

gadgetere

May 27th, 2009, 9:26 pm

Really? You think the Government could tell me I can't live in Phoenix, Arizona? Would you be willing to be the agent knocking on my door telling me this? Give them time; they're already working towards the "one world government". In 5/2005 they snuck in "Real ID", a national standard identification (that associates finger prints). Many officials are screaming for a single global currency. It's not just an empty fear.
I don't think so, for two reasons. Number one is you (and most Americans) would believe that it's UNAMERICAN to bang on doors ordering people out of their houses. So you wouldn't do it. Number two is I have a gun. Which I will use to defend my freedom. And yes, I would do it. Your gun is useless against a squad of goons. Ever see the video of the 85-year-old-woman in New Orleans, who was slammed to the floor by her local police?

They didn't like her gun. The THUGS had guns, but citizens trying to DEFEND themselves AGAINST THE THUGS get slammed to the floor by the COPS.
If "we the people" got everything we wanted I damned sure wouldn't be living in a land where a jackass Kenyan bastard child like Obama is the President. Sometimes you lose the election. That's life. We'll get rid of Obama in 3 years flat.He didn't win. In the second place, at least sixteen states had "stuffed ballot boxes", thanks to ACORN.

In the first place, he's not even an American citizen. Go search "World Net Daily", October 23; reporting on how his birth certificate was SEALED and NOT AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION.

Towards the end:
"In a startling revelation, Obama's grandmother was quoted as saying, 'He was born in Mombossa Kenya; I was there.' "

....less than two weeks later (November 3rd), she was DEAD...

And his birth certificate is still sealed. World Net Daily has bunches of stories on his birth certificate.
It's PROGRESS. It's VERY AMERICAN. Americans invented the TV because we had the bandwidth to make it happen. Now new inventions need bandwidth. The old needs to make way for the new.

Thus has it always been.It's progress to LOSE features? It's progress to [b]lose your home to a DEVELOPER or a DEPARTMENT STORE?

No it's not. But I'll never convince you...

gadgetere

May 27th, 2009, 9:34 pm

1) There is portabilityNo there's not; those "pseudo-portables" are a foot wide, only run for a couple hours, and apparently don't recharge while playing. There are no audio-only receivers; someone here tried to link to one, and I proved it was NTSC 2-13.

...analog...
2) Wow, you have a bathroom tv?Yup, a little 5" b&w. Love to watch/listen while I'm gettin' ready for work...
3) I can, and so can most people. It's why there is a demand for HD content.Many THINK they can; but under a "blind taste test", they can't...
4) I can't, but I know many who can hear an improvement.Thanx for that.
5)Not a problem, just make it full screen.Naw, it still cuts off heads and T-shirts. I read T-shirts; it's fun.

Monday a girl had one on that said: "I'm blonde; what's your excuse?"

Dem

May 27th, 2009, 9:46 pm

No there's not; those "pseudo-portables" are a foot wide, only run for a couple hours, and apparently don't recharge while playing. There are no audio-only receivers; someone here tried to link to one, and I proved it was NTSC 2-13.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=portable+digital+tv&x=0&y=0

Those first 3 tvs are less than a foot wide.

Much more portable than my laptop.

Many THINK they can; but under a "blind taste test", they can't...
I know I can. I am still completely amazed every time I turn on my HD tv. The picture is absolutely beautiful.

gadgetere

May 27th, 2009, 9:54 pm

Those first 3 tvs are less than a foot wide.

Much more portable than my laptop.They're nearly a foot diagonally. No way you can put them in your pocket. And they all use lithium-ion batteries, run a couple hours, etcetera....
I know I can. I am still completely amazed every time I turn on my HD tv. The picture is absolutely beautiful.If you haven't read the first of the thread --- on 4-5 occasions, I've talked with people as they drool over "Blue-Ray/HDTV" displays. I'll say:

"Do me a favor; take ten small steps back, the distance to your couch --- and tell me if it's any clearer than what you have at home."

They did; to a person they all frowned and said, "No!"

Dem

May 27th, 2009, 10:03 pm

They're nearly a foot diagonally. No way you can put them in your pocket. And they all use lithium-ion batteries, run a couple hours, etcetera....
It's still portable. There are various technologies that are considered portable, that cacn't fit in my pocket. Laptop, Kindle, PSP, etc.

If you haven't read the first of the thread --- on 4-5 occasions, I've talked with people as they drool over "Blue-Ray/HDTV" displays. I'll say:

"Do me a favor; take ten small steps back, the distance to your couch --- and tell me if it's any clearer than what you have at home."

They did; to a person they all frowned and said, "No!"
I can't do this now, since I'm in the process of moving. But from experience, you can tell the difference from close to six to seven feet away. How far do you want to stand away from the tv when I get the chance?

gadgetere

May 28th, 2009, 12:33 am

It's still portable. There are various technologies that are considered portable, that cacn't fit in my pocket. Laptop, Kindle, PSP, etc.Well, "considered" portable, doesn't mean it really is. Those sets really run off of a cord; sure they'll do a couple hours on a full charge, but my pocket sets go anywhere, and will do 12 hours or more. The best pocket sets don't have built-in lights, but use sunlight (view the screen in the mirror).
I can't do this now, since I'm in the process of moving.They say you find out who your REAL friends are, when you MOVE... :P But from experience, you can tell the difference from close to six to seven feet away. How far do you want to stand away from the tv when I get the chance?How good is your vision? I'm slightly nearsighted; no restrictions on my driver's license, but from the couch I can't even read the weather crawls. Unless your vision is 20/20, or 20/15, you're not gonna be able to see the difference from 6-10 feet.

I crashed a "seminar" a tv station here threw at a store (it was nothing but a sales-pitch); they had two images up on two HD tv's, one in standard resolution, and one in hi-def; no one in the room could tell the difference. No one, GUESTS --- the salesmen already knew which was which...

"Look at the EYES", one salesman said...

AutoRacer55

May 28th, 2009, 12:42 am

$250 is not the final cost; how much per month is your wi-fi?

Will it work away from your house?

Free. Pick up Wi-Fi from any public hotspot.

Heck I use it at college all the time, and it's 90 min. away from the house.

Dem

May 28th, 2009, 12:57 am

Well, "considered" portable, doesn't mean it really is. Those sets really run off of a cord; sure they'll do a couple hours on a full charge, but my pocket sets go anywhere, and will do 12 hours or more. The best pocket sets don't have built-in lights, but use sunlight (view the screen in the mirror).
They are portable. Just not pocket sized, which is what you want, but, they are portable.

As for the light issue, I detest any portable device that doesn't have a backlight. Makes the product useless in the dark.

:P How good is your vision? I'm slightly nearsighted; no restrictions on my driver's license, but from the couch I can't even read the weather crawls. Unless your vision is 20/20, or 20/15, you're not gonna be able to see the difference from 6-10 feet.
It's been close to seven years since I have had my vision checked. But I think my eyesight is 20/20, or 20/25 corrected.

I crashed a "seminar" a tv station here threw at a store (it was nothing but a sales-pitch); they had two images up on two HD tv's, one in standard resolution, and one in hi-def; no one in the room could tell the difference. No one, GUESTS --- the salesmen already knew which was which...

"Look at the EYES", one salesman said...
Meh, the people I hang around with can all tell the difference (except for one). Maybe it's because we are all big on picture quality.

gdoane

May 28th, 2009, 2:34 am

$250 is not the final cost; how much per month is your wi-fi?

Will it work away from your house?

Wi-Fi doesn't cost anything other than initial equipment and setup. The Wi-Fi is coming from a Netgear WGR-614 wireless router that I picked up a couple of years ago for $60.

Of course Wi-Fi will work away from my house. Every library in Phoenix is a Wi-Fi hotspot and the entire city of Tempe has full public Wi-Fi coverage.

AND, monthly subscription fees. You do know that joblessness is expected to exceed 20% next year???

If the "experts" knew what they were talking about they'd have seen this credit crisis coming from a mile away. I don't think anybody can rightly say what's going to happen next year.

It's called "living vicariously". All those couch potatoes who get winded walking to the street, "participating" in the only way they can...
Did I mention joblessness is predicted to exceed 20% next year? Yep, ah did...
Huh??? Most people have an antenna in their attic, or use the set-top antenna. And many of them are not going to receive anything after June.

Maybe when the TV gets shut off the couch spuds will finally get more exercise.

And most TV's aren't even SOLD with antennas anymore because they're going to be hooked to cable or satellite, not antennas.

Bet you have me beat... The "helical array" I mentioned is only feasible at UHF frequencies...
What's that in feet?

You know as well as I do that UHF starts at 300 MHz which is 1 Meter or just over 3 feet.

The people who NEED rooftop antennas, don't live anywhere near homeowner associations. But many IN town, will need an antenna after June.

They could get Satellite or Cable or simply use the internet.

"Tough Luck" you'll say...
Nonsense; in the second place, the antenna is only 1.7 foot long. In the first place, the car forms a "Faraday cage".

You really shouldn't be watching TV while you drive. It's actually illegal in Arizona to do that.

It's always fun hearing someone asserting that "rubber tires will insulate you from lightning". Of course I try not to insult them; but ask:
"That's a common misconception; but do you think that a bolt of lightning that has just blasted through three miles of air, will be put off by four inches of rubber?"

That's really not how lightning works. To understand it, it helps to think of "fingers" of ionization reaching both downward and upward, and when these "fingers" touch each other that's what completes the electrical conductivity path. Disturb the ionization fingers, dissipate the charge and lightning won't build enough potential to form an ionized path.

That's why lightning rods are sharp and pointy. The idea of a lightning rod is to avoid being struck by lightning. They work by the sharp pointy tip failing to have enough surface area to build enough of a charge for an ionized lightning path. The small surface area acts as a safety valve to get rid of the charge potential while keeping the discharge rate low enough that lightning doesn't develop.

I was at a garage sale; they had a four-foot mast on their garage, with an antenna. I said, "That's a lightning hazard".

She said, "It hasn't been struck yet."

Scary thing, is people like that VOTE...

I've got my antenna mast on my roof grounded with #6 clad copper to an 8' ground rod. If you know what you're doing with antennas (I do) then they're safe enough.

Tell me where I can buy a truly portable tv (or even audio-only) receiver.

...there isn't one...

You don't need one. Better weather information is broadcast on NOAA at 162.55 MHz in most parts of the nation. TV stations get their information from that. Why not get the info from the horse's mouth?

Here, nearly 20% were predicted to "lose television" if the shutoff happened 2/17.

Most didn't want digital.

Most didn't want TV then.

You cannot be talking about fans of TV if they've got crummy old TV sets, no cable TV, no satellite, just a set of rabbit ears and watching whatever offal the major networks spew out.

It's not much of a loss these days. I can't think of one single network TV show this year that I could even stand to watch. They're all so stupid that my TV is just playing DVD's anymore.

I can't argue with you; you find nothing wrong with a private person/corporation stealing a retiree's home.

Nothing I could say would impress you.

The retiree isn't doing anything productive. He can go retire anywhere.

Over a period of THIRTY YEARS.

Hey --- great idea. Let's delay the shutoff for the same thirty years.
Not true; I'm watching one right now that's around 25 years old. Console color. Has a "comb filter"; I'm told if the comb filter ever dies, I'll have to trash the set --- they don't make 'em any more.

...but they rarely die...

You're talking about lightning hazards and you're running a cathode ray tube set that's 25 years old? How about FIRE HAZARD?

A typical CRT set runs about 1,000 volts per diagonal inch to make the cathode ray hit the screen, so a common 19" TV is probably running about 19,000 volts of static potential give or take a couple thousand volts.

These thousands of volts of static cling attract dust. Dust has two major properties, one is that it's actually not a bad thermal insulator and two is that it's explosively combustible. These properties combined mean older sets are dangerous. People don't open them up to clean the dust out because there are warning labels telling them not to.

This wasn't much of a problem in the old vacuum tube sets because those were so unreliable that a technician would be in there fixing something every few years but nowadays, dust accumulates for decades and it's a hazardous situation.

"Dreams change"? Rather a cold-hearted thing to say to the elderly couple as they get kicked out of their dream-retirement-home.
Words fail me; the most fundamental right of a free people, is owning property --- but now the US Supreme Court says "we can take it if someone bigger than you wants it".

....and you see nothing wrong with that...

I see nothing wrong with eminent domain. A greater evil would be to allow stubborn old geezers to stymie city planners just because they want to be cantankerous and pushy.

sigh...
And when they can give us pocket-sets that do the same thing, let's talk...

Nobody gives anybody anything. If you want it then go buy it yourself.

No horse; defending pocket sets, retirees, low-income folks, the jobless, etcetera... Hmmm; cars are basically the same as they were in the 20's. Four wheels, engine, steering wheel. What if the government BANNED all cars and said "You have to take PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION"?

In other words, people who contribute nothing.

And cars are not the same as they were in the 20's. Cars in the 20's didn't have airbags, safety belts, anti-lock braking systems, safety glass, low tire pressure indicators, bluetooth handsfree cell phone interfaces or iPod docking stations.

The government has BANNED 20's vehicle technology. Try and manufacture a Model T today and see how fast the NHTSA shoots it down.

They can't ban the cars, until they have something that works as well.

Sure they can. Why can't they? It's a done deal, they can obviously do what you're claiming they can't.

Just like they shouldn't ban usable television until they have something that works as well...

What they have blows analog TV so far out of the water that it will change TV forever. You just refuse to accept that this is better and you're standing in the way of progress for no better reason than you're stubborn and inflexible. The old technology needs to go. It eats up too much bandwidth and the only people watching it don't have any money to support the services they use anyway.

Rockominal

May 28th, 2009, 2:41 am

Nothing you say will defend your wasteful 60-year-old caveman technology!

I got a newsflash for you. Color television even operating in the NTSC realm is hardly "caveman" technology. It has been an extremely involved affair and the present ATSC technology that you now enjoy, owes a debt of gratitude for riding in on the backs of geniuses that helped to bring it about. You can thank David Sarnoff for having the insight to know that the NTSC system was the way to go. You can also thank RCA (Sarnoff) for the groundbreaking event of the first color broadcast and reception. Sure, Sarnoff took advantage of the inventive genius of others, but that's what you have to do to start a company that is indeed a historic American legacy.The front end of the receiver had gone through trial and error of the tedious and yet precise adjustments of the IF section to larger scale integration, surface acoustical wave filter, phase lock loop, etc.
After RCA invented it, others like GE put theirs on the market which was sad in comparison. The best innovation in picture tube technology was later made by Sylvania when they were under the GTE banner, known as the Superset. They claimed their picture was better than Sony, and it was. It wasn't "60 years" ago when RCA signed on with the first VHS recorder either. Alot of dealers rejected it because they thought it wouldn't beat Sony's beta. P.S.: JVC has had the unmitigated gall to advertise their claim to the "first" VHS when RCA STILL has the original patent to the head switching system, without which, VHS wouldn't even exist. I'll throw that in in case anyone wants to debate the issue. I don't even want to begin to describe what it takes to manufacture the PIL (in line) picture tube which is made in my state at Marion, Indiana. Indeed, alot of work and creative genius took place before your digital world could even begin to transpire. Therefore, I don't know what cavemen you're talkin about. :think:

http://www.ambestsquad.com

Gray

May 28th, 2009, 8:27 am

Wi-Fi doesn't cost anything other than initial equipment and setup. The Wi-Fi is coming from a Netgear WGR-614 wireless router that I picked up a couple of years ago for $60.

Of course Wi-Fi will work away from my house. Every library in Phoenix is a Wi-Fi hotspot and the entire city of Tempe has full public Wi-Fi coverage.

Here is irony...America spends BILLIONS laying cable networks.

Third world countries cannot afford that so they go straight wireless.

:))

gadgetere

May 28th, 2009, 10:36 pm

Dem

May 28th, 2009, 10:59 pm

@Rock, just because a lot of work went into a technology, doesn't mean it's old. Take a look at this: http://www.livescience.com/common/media/video/player.php?videoRef=250507bendable_tv Can't do that with analog.

He's just being derogatory to me, 'cause he thinks it's silly to want my "portable tv" to continue. He sees nothing wrong with taking stuff from people (like portable tv, or their homes), because of "progress" (meaning --- others need our stuff more than we do [to make PROFIT]). So it's impossible really to argue. (No insult meant to Gdoane....)
They have portable digital tvs. Just because you can't fit one in your pocket, doesn't mean it's not portable.

gdoane

May 28th, 2009, 11:26 pm

I got a newsflash for you. Color television even operating in the NTSC realm is hardly "caveman" technology. It has been an extremely involved affair and the present ATSC technology that you now enjoy, owes a debt of gratitude for riding in on the backs of geniuses that helped to bring it about. You can thank David Sarnoff for having the insight to know that the NTSC system was the way to go.

Europe never went with the NTSC (Never The Same Color) technology because the PAL/SECAM standard was (and is) superior in every respect. NTSC's 525 lines and 30 FPS is a poor match for motion pictures while PAL's 625 lines gave more resolution, better color and the 25 FPS was a better match for the Motion Picture standard of 24 FPS.

DEBT OF GRATITUDE? It messed up the world of entertainment!

The reason I know most of this off of the top of my head is because I'm a hardcore gamer. I've got imported video games that most Americans have never heard of and to do that, you have to know what the television standards are in order to figure out how you're going to CONVERT the stupid things.

That and I'm a professional electronics technician by trade.

The different standards were (and are) an artificial impediment to information technology. PAL/SECAM won't work on NTSC. NTSC isn't compatible with 16:9 aspect ratio motion pictures so you get crummy letterboxing or pan-and-scan, neither one of which work very well and you have frame repeats to deal with the 30-FPS to 24 FPS discrepancy too.

Debt of gratitude for a MESS like that?

You can also thank RCA (Sarnoff) for the groundbreaking event of the first color broadcast and reception. Sure, Sarnoff took advantage of the inventive genius of others, but that's what you have to do to start a company that is indeed a historic American legacy.The front end of the receiver had gone through trial and error of the tedious and yet precise adjustments of the IF section to larger scale integration, surface acoustical wave filter, phase lock loop, etc.

Which you wouldn't have to do if RCA didn't get silly and make the new technology backwards compatible with the old B&W technology to get the chroma in the line frequency bandwidth.

This standard should have been changed over 40 years ago. Backwards compatibility has been crippling the standards for two generations.

After RCA invented it, others like GE put theirs on the market which was sad in comparison. The best innovation in picture tube technology was later made by Sylvania when they were under the GTE banner, known as the Superset. They claimed their picture was better than Sony, and it was. It wasn't "60 years" ago when RCA signed on with the first VHS recorder either. Alot of dealers rejected it because they thought it wouldn't beat Sony's beta.

Yeah, right, you believe that? You can't COPY PROTECT Betamax. That's why Betamax died. The best thing to ever happen to VHS was Copyguard. Motion picture studios signed on to VHS because Beta wouldn't protect their intellectual properties from piracy.

Sony actually learned that lesson well because their Blu-Ray wound up beating HD-DVD in the end.

P.S.: JVC has had the unmitigated gall to advertise their claim to the "first" VHS when RCA STILL has the original patent to the head switching system, without which, VHS wouldn't even exist. I'll throw that in in case anyone wants to debate the issue. I don't even want to begin to describe what it takes to manufacture the PIL (in line) picture tube which is made in my state at Marion, Indiana. Indeed, alot of work and creative genius took place before your digital world could even begin to transpire. Therefore, I don't know what cavemen you're talkin about. :think:

http://www.ambestsquad.com

As noted above, I blame this "creative work and genius" for a lot of the reason we're in this mess today because of their unabashed support for backwards compatibility at the expense of technological progress.

It's 2009 and we're still stuck on a standard that supports black and white TV. That is certifiably insane. Backwards compatibility takes too much effort and costs new technologies too much to do anything but be a roadblock to technological advancements.

Goodbye, NTSC and thanks for getting the heck out of the way finally.

Dem

May 28th, 2009, 11:37 pm

The reason I know most of this off of the top of my head is because I'm a hardcore gamer. I've got imported video games that most Americans have never heard of and to do that, you have to know what the television standards are in order to figure out how you're going to CONVERT the stupid things.
What games does Europe have that we don't have? I never realized that Europe may have games that we don't have, I've always thought what was released there was also released here.

gdoane

May 28th, 2009, 11:38 pm

Here is irony...America spends BILLIONS laying cable networks.

Third world countries cannot afford that so they go straight wireless.

:))

Let 'em. It means they'll lose the war because the first thing to be jammed in a war zone is going to the the 2.4 MHz band and Wi-Fi will be history.

The internet was designed for WAR. It came to be as ARPANET designed from the ground up to be an uninterruptible communications network.

That is to say, there's no one thing you could do to destroy it. No tower to blow up. No building to cut the power to. No single point of failure. Virtually impregnable to an enemy assault.

If these idiot fleabag Third World nations cheap out the job and lean on the 2.4 Ghz Wi-Fi for their sole access points, then it won't be any problem at all to jam their entire data comm networks when we feel like kicking their insolent little butts.

First enemy targets are command and control. Let 'em depend on Wi-Fi. See how fast we jam that when we want their government to toe the line.

gadgetere

May 28th, 2009, 11:43 pm

Wi-Fi doesn't cost anything other than initial equipment and setup. The Wi-Fi is coming from a Netgear WGR-614 wireless router that I picked up a couple of years ago for $60. How does your router connect to the internet? I bet you're paying at least $30 per month...
Of course Wi-Fi will work away from my house. Every library in Phoenix is a Wi-Fi hotspot and the entire city of Tempe has full public Wi-Fi coverage. I see; so if I'm DRIVING, I can just "hop" from library to library and try to follow the program (libraries are several miles apart).

I didn't realize how much sense that made...
If the "experts" knew what they were talking about they'd have seen this credit crisis coming from a mile away. I don't think anybody can rightly say what's going to happen next year.It may actually be planned; there really is a "one world government" conspiracy...
Maybe when the TV gets shut off the couch spuds will finally get more exercise. Unlikely. They'll just buy cable...
And most TV's aren't even SOLD with antennas anymore because they're going to be hooked to cable or satellite, not antennas. I haven't bought a tv in (gosh), 15 years! How time flies!

...but it came with a basic antenna, with the 75-ohm "F" connector. Seems they didn't care about impedance matching...
You know as well as I do that UHF starts at 300 MHz which is 1 Meter or just over 3 feet.Right; but imagine the size of the helices for VHF...

They could get Satellite or Cable or simply use the internet. What if they can't afford it? "Jobless". "Retired". "Fixed-income". "Single-parent". Most won't do the luxuries...
You really shouldn't be watching TV while you drive. It's actually illegal in Arizona to do that. I'm very talented (and sometimes a passenger).

...it really should be illegal to use a CELL PHONE while driving. One of my biggest gripes...

That's really not how lightning works. To understand it, it helps to think of "fingers" of ionization reaching both downward and upward, and when these "fingers" touch each other that's what completes the electrical conductivity path. Disturb the ionization fingers, dissipate the charge and lightning won't build enough potential to form an ionized path. And "lightning rods" will prevent a strike in the first place. As you said, "dissipate the charge"...
That's why lightning rods are sharp and pointy. The idea of a lightning rod is to avoid being struck by lightning. They work by the sharp pointy tip failing to have enough surface area to build enough of a charge for an ionized lightning path. The small surface area acts as a safety valve to get rid of the charge potential while keeping the discharge rate low enough that lightning doesn't develop.Well, the sharp point concentrates the voltage (more volts per square inch). So electricity drains into it more easily.

Some way, some how, we have to find a way to STORE and USE lightning. Imagine all the power that's being wasted...
I've got my antenna mast on my roof grounded with #6 clad copper to an 8' ground rod. If you know what you're doing with antennas (I do) then they're safe enough.Even though lightning rods prevent strikes, it's possible for a lightning cell to form up the street, and drift down to your lightning rod. So a one-inch copper braid is useful to carry the current from a direct hit.

...hopefully the copper thieves won't see it...

You don't need one. Better weather information is broadcast on NOAA at 162.55 MHz in most parts of the nation. TV stations get their information from that. Why not get the info from the horse's mouth?TV stations have radar, with "rotation indicators". Weather radio doesn't.
Most didn't want TV then. Not true.
You cannot be talking about fans of TV if they've got crummy old TV sets, no cable TV, no satellite, just a set of rabbit ears and watching whatever offal the major networks spew out. We had about TWELVE STATIONS; 4-5 were UHF, with varied programming.
It's not much of a loss these days. I can't think of one single network TV show this year that I could even stand to watch. They're all so stupid that my TV is just playing DVD's anymore.What?! You weren't a fan of "Pushing Daisies"?
The retiree isn't doing anything productive. He can go retire anywhere. It doesn't matter whether you or I consider him "unproductive", or "can go elsewhere"; it matters a lot to the retiree.

That's the thing --- who should decide what a citizen is ALLOWED? What does "freedom", mean?
You're talking about lightning hazards and you're running a cathode ray tube set that's 25 years old? How about FIRE HAZARD? None of my sets have ever caught fire.
A typical CRT set runs about 1,000 volts per diagonal inch to make the cathode ray hit the screen, so a common 19" TV is probably running about 19,000 volts of static potential give or take a couple thousand volts.

These thousands of volts of static cling attract dust. Dust has two major properties, one is that it's actually not a bad thermal insulator and two is that it's explosively combustible. These properties combined mean older sets are dangerous. People don't open them up to clean the dust out because there are warning labels telling them not to. I always ignore the "NO USER SERVICEABLE PARTS INSIDE" stickers...
This wasn't much of a problem in the old vacuum tube sets because those were so unreliable that a technician would be in there fixing something every few years but nowadays, dust accumulates for decades and it's a hazardous situation.Most of that "dust", is skin cells...
:eek:
I see nothing wrong with eminent domain. A greater evil would be to allow stubborn old geezers to stymie city planners just because they want to be cantankerous and pushy.No, it's "just because they want to keep the retirement home they saved all their LIVES for".

When "eminent domain" ceases to be for the public good and begins to be a device for private profiteering, it's no longer a free country.
In other words, people who contribute nothing. Who's to decide what person has value? It's not up to me to say "Joe Smith isn't worth anything because he doesn't contribute".

Joe thinks he's worth something...
And cars are not the same as they were in the 20's. Cars in the 20's didn't have airbags, safety belts, anti-lock braking systems, safety glass, low tire pressure indicators, bluetooth handsfree cell phone interfaces or iPod docking stations. Hmmm; my car has seat-belts, and safety glass...
The government has BANNED 20's vehicle technology. Try and manufacture a Model T today and see how fast the NHTSA shoots it down.You missed my point; a "Model T" can still be DRIVEN today, on the SAME ROADS as the other cars.

...tv's, won't...
Sure they can. Why can't they? It's a done deal, they can obviously do what you're claiming they can't.Not legally. Just like the Fourth Amendment guarantees we can't be STOPPED and our papers SEARCHED for nothing. Technically. But the courts have re-defined what "reasonable cause" is, so now we CAN be stopped at road blocks and our papers searched.

America is no longer a representative republic --- it's an oligarchy...
What they have blows analog TV so far out of the water that it will change TV forever.In your opinion. But in free society, one man's opinion is not more valuable than another's.

...didn't used to be, anyway... You just refuse to accept that this is better and you're standing in the way of progress for no better reason than you're stubborn and inflexible. The old technology needs to go. It eats up too much bandwidth and the only people watching it don't have any money to support the services they use anyway.I gave the reasons --- the features we're losing.

The reasons stand.

gadgetere

May 28th, 2009, 11:51 pm

I haven't bought a tv in (gosh), 15 years! How time flies!Hmmm; not exactly true. 2-3 years ago I bought several wrist TV's (color, the entire thing is in about 2 inches!). And I've bought several other pocket sets; oh --- did buy a 19" lcd with built-in dvd player, from ebay...

But a CRT set, uh-uh; not for a long time.

gadgetere

May 28th, 2009, 11:54 pm

NTSC's 525 lines and 30 FPS is a poor match for motion pictures while PAL's 625 lines gave more resolution, better color and the 25 FPS was a better match for the Motion Picture standard of 24 FPS.It flickers. I was amazed when I was in England and no one could see what was so obvious to me. They've grown up with it, and "tune it out".

Dem

May 28th, 2009, 11:56 pm

I see; so if I'm DRIVING, I can just "hop" from library to library and try to follow the program (libraries are several miles apart).
Get one of these, and you can get internet anywhere.

http://www.wireless.att.com/businesscenter/promotionpage/laptopconnectcard.jsp?WT.svl=calltoaction&bref=EBR7450000d23941

gdoane

May 29th, 2009, 12:00 am

What games does Europe have that we don't have? I never realized that Europe may have games that we don't have, I've always thought what was released there was also released here.

Oh no. Not even close. It takes a lot to do game localization and translation, and buying the rights to music and artwork internationally as well. It's a very, very involved (and expensive) affair because when you're talking about copyrights in music, video and authorship internationally it's a very big deal.

Okay, here's an example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headhunter_(video_game)

Headhunter was released in the USA (on the PS2) but it's native to the Dreamcast controller. The PS2 version isn't a very good game because the controls are those stupid pressure-sensitive analog and don't have the throw it takes to really control an analog game.
I think it's funny because the game is set in California, USA and it gives an outlook on what they think of us. Of course the USA version is edited so as not to tick off American buyers.

You could possibly find it for the PS2 and play it, but it wouldn't be the game I've got.

Whenever there are translations (and there always are in international ports) there will always be a loss of quality.

Entire characters deleted, wine turned to tea, I've seen these happen in RPG's and fighting games. I want the whole game, not the watered-down made for USA kiddie ESRB rated stupidity. I consider video games an art form and I want to see all of the art as the team of artists released it, not some pablum suitable for a 12-year-old.

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

May 29th, 2009, 12:04 am

You missed my point; a "Model T" can still be DRIVEN today, on the SAME ROADS as the other cars.

...tv's, won't...

Analog TV still works. It just won't pick up an analog signal, just like it wouldn't in rural Montana or Wyoming the past 50 years. 15 years ago when analog was the only technology for free over the air television there were places with your little portable tv that wouldn't pick up a signal. What then? Government paying for large outdoor antennas for those folks? But that brings up another problem, a large antenna doesn't work very well on top of your station wagon plugged into your portable tv while you are driving, following the radar of the tornado on your analog set...

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

May 29th, 2009, 12:05 am

Gene, you hear about the new law in Quebec about not allowing any video games to be sold that didn't have a French translation? Stupid...

Dem

May 29th, 2009, 12:28 am

Oh no. Not even close. It takes a lot to do game localization and translation, and buying the rights to music and artwork internationally as well. It's a very, very involved (and expensive) affair because when you're talking about copyrights in music, video and authorship internationally it's a very big deal.

Okay, here's an example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headhunter_(video_game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headhunter_%28video_game))

Headhunter was released in the USA (on the PS2) but it's native to the Dreamcast controller. The PS2 version isn't a very good game because the controls are those stupid pressure-sensitive analog and don't have the throw it takes to really control an analog game.
I think it's funny because the game is set in California, USA and it gives an outlook on what they think of us. Of course the USA version is edited so as not to tick off American buyers.

You could possibly find it for the PS2 and play it, but it wouldn't be the game I've got.

Whenever there are translations (and there always are in international ports) there will always be a loss of quality.
Hmm, I've never thought of Europe as having a large game market. It seems to me that they always get the shaft when it comes to release dates, although things seem to be getting better in that department.

Entire characters deleted, wine turned to tea, I've seen these happen in RPG's and fighting games. I want the whole game, not the watered-down made for USA kiddie ESRB rated stupidity. I consider video games an art form and I want to see all of the art as the team of artists released it, not some pablum suitable for a 12-year-old.
I totally agree here.

gdoane

May 29th, 2009, 1:46 am

Gene, you hear about the new law in Quebec about not allowing any video games to be sold that didn't have a French translation? Stupid...

Oh, I'm completely familiar with the Francophone issue.

French is dying out because very little entertainment is made in the French language. The problem is that localization to French markets are a money-losing proposition because Canada (and France, actually) are nearly fluent in English so there's no serious incentive to translate.

You pay full-on translation and localization costs and gain what in sales, 10% for the people who can't import the game in English and play it a year earlier from a neighboring nation?

It's business suicide.

Businessmen do not commit acts of suicide voluntarily.

The deal with the Canadians is that they were ticked off that there were French translations of video games (for France, done for the PAL/SECAM market) but CANADIAN translations (Canada uses NTSC, same as the USA and Japan (kinda, Japan is a bit different but functionaly same) were always devoid of French.

The translations would be there but not for NTSC. Canadians were stuck in a twilight zone of having games translated for SECAM (French standard) but not getting the translations because they used the American (NTSC) standard.

So the law they passed basically says if there's a translation for SECAM that there needs to be a translation to NTSC because Francophones are desperately trying to save their language from becoming a dead lingo.

Whether you wish them luck or not, you must recognize that Canada really, really screwed up badly by adopting the NTSC standard while the SECAM (French) standard was incompatible.

gdoane

May 29th, 2009, 1:59 am

Hmm, I've never thought of Europe as having a large game market. It seems to me that they always get the shaft when it comes to release dates, although things seem to be getting better in that department.

I totally agree here.

Europe is good for Rare and Psygnosis, both top quality software sources. The USA does have some good sources (notably Electronic Arts and Midway/Williams) but if you look at which nations produce the game, you'll also be looking at where the money is coming from at the same time.

As the saying goes, follow the money. The entertainment biz is all about money so the product never falls far from the tree. You'll find entertaiment sold where it's made max sales all the time every time.

Dem

May 29th, 2009, 2:10 am

Europe is good for Rare and Psygnosis, both top quality software sources. The USA does have some good sources (notably Electronic Arts and Midway/Williams) but if you look at which nations produce the game, you'll also be looking at where the money is coming from at the same time.
I had no idea Rare was European, looked it up, and sure enough, British company. No idea who Psygnosis is.

Now that I think about, Europe has some decent developers. Lionhead studios, Creative Assembly, Ubisoft Paris.
As the saying goes, follow the money. The entertainment biz is all about money so the product never falls far from the tree. You'll find entertaiment sold where it's made max sales all the time every time.
Never thought of that before.

gdoane

May 29th, 2009, 2:21 am

I had no idea Rare was European, looked it up, and sure enough, British company. No idea who Psygnosis is.

Now that I think about, Europe has some decent developers. Lionhead studios, Creative Assembly, Ubisoft Paris.

Never thought of that before.

Psygnosis is British too, their most famous game is still probably "Lemmings" and Sony Entertainment bought them at the launch of the Sony PlayStation to have an in-house developer.

I'm not a normal gamer who plays a game and forgets about it, I research the whole history because as I said before, I consider it an art. It's the same as researching an artist to me.

I'm hoping that new TV standards means more universality overall because there's a ton of goods out there that were wasted and will remain wasted forever.

brody

May 29th, 2009, 3:18 am

Wookinstien

May 29th, 2009, 4:41 am

Well get ready only 14 days left. You can still sign up for satellite tv I've seen ads for $9.95 a month.

As for me who works in Master Control of a TV station I will be glad to turn off that old rust bucket and stop converting our digital signal to analog for broadcast. The converting causes a 2 sec. delay which plays hell with trying to switch network programs.

So long Analog you will not be missed...

Wookinstien

May 29th, 2009, 5:51 am

What's good for gamers is good for everybody. Most advances in computer technology (which you're using if you're reading this) were made by gamers for games.

The point is less eyestrain and better eye health. Your eyes have to last you a lifetime and a 30 Frame per second flicker is harmful to your eyes. It stresses them and causes eyestrain headaches which degrades overall body health.

Yes they are. I've built a TNC, a Terminal Node Controller, an HK-232 Heathkit from scratch. Over 400 electronic components and IC Chips soldered into place by my own two hands and it can and will do CW. As well as packet radio, teletype, weatherfax and slow-scan TV. CW is a digital mode.

You REALLY don't want to get into an RF technology argument with me because if you do and you aren't sitting on a BSEE or better I'll mop the floor with you in this field of expertise. I've been working in RF comms professionally for 25 years. I'm not some newbie marvelling at the wonders of a transistor here.

Not necessarily. The STS-3/OC-3 SONET radios I work on (California Microwave CM-11) never see analog. EVER. The inputs are fiber optic OC-3. The outputs are 11 GHz STS-3 Microwave. NOTHING about those machines are analog. You can't even work on those things without a computer running the show.

You can obviously afford the internet. Pay your own freight. You wouldn't like my cell phone anyway, it has Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, irDA, EVDO and all kinds of digital cooties to scare a technophobe to death.

Katrina blew the TV towers down. Goodlife is a moderator on this board and a friend of mine. I've been to her house north of New Orleans and seen the destruction with my own eyes. TV would not have helped. The only answer to a Category FIVE hurricane is this: RUN LIKE HELL AND DON'T LOOK BACK. Do you really need TV to tell you that?

Yes, I do deny that. Here's the reason why:

Up until the fourth grade in school, I grew up in Tornado Alley, specifically in a sleepy little town south of Wichita, Kansas called Wellington. As a student in Wellington's primary schools, I was taught tornado survival skills, including going into the basement or the strongest room in the house (usually the bathroom) and hiding my face between my knees balled up like a hedgehog.

Never once in all my years of survival training in southern Kansas public schools did any teacher or authority figure tell me to watch TV when a tornado is a-coming my way. In fact, YOU would be the first person I've ever heard propose that course of action as a good idea.

Here's my disaster plan. Me in a 2008 Ford F-150 doing 75 MPH on Interstate 10 getting the heck outta Dodge (or Phoenix, as it may be). Do you see a lot of TV in that disaster plan? I'm cutting and running like a Democrat outta Iraq.

Phasing doesn't enter into the equation with a loop dipole style antenna which a coat hanger would be. The problem with loop dipoles are they're directional (bi-directional actually)so unless you know your signal source direction they're not an optimal design.

Them making money is what produced the stuff you used to enjoy. Do you really think the airwaves are a charity soup kitchen?

Here's a challenge for you. Show me, if you can, how to set up a television broadcasting station and get it on the air legally for less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS. I actually know about two-thirds of the game and I couldn't do it for ten times that price.

When you're talking about broadcasting and radio technology, you don't even enter the game unless you've got $10 Million on the table. That's chump change in wireless tech.

Real answer --- the homes weren't stolen, the owners were justly compensated and you're spinning like a top. My home here was seriously threatened by a proposed freeway extension, the "Paradise Freeway" which probably will happen someday but not today. The City of Phoenix will hand me a check for $300,000 to demolish my house and take my land, and you'll find me at U-Haul, a Phoenix-based company by the way.

When exactly did we start talking about rights? Television is a right now? OMG! Millions of cop cars have back seats with no TV!! Rights are being VIOLATED here! We need to totally rewrite the Miranda cards!

"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney one will be provided to you at government expense."

You'd add to that "Oh, and if you want to watch MTV, here's the remote control dude!"

You've crossed into one of my pet peeves here. Defining luxury items as "rights" is a crock and I won't accept it.

I have a very narrow view of what rights are. Right such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion impose NO BURDEN upon others. You can speak, but no one has to listen. You can write, but no one has to read. You can worship, but no one has to build you a church.

NO BURDEN.

Rights which convey a burden unto others are not rights at all in my book.

My problem with your expressed "right" is that it costs money and resources. Real money. Real resources. You don't work in the radio spectrum so you don't understand the resource. I do. The HMS Titanic probably wouldn't have resulted in a single death had the radio worked that night and international protocols had been in place.

I know emergency radio communications like the back of my hand. TV ain't in the emergency comm paradigm. I can tell you the frequency of a crashed airplane ELT transmitter, it's 121.5 MHz off of the top of my head. Military ELT squawks at 243 MHz and 121.5, do the math and you'll see they're harmonics.

I've been in the cockpit of an F-14 fighter and at the helm of a US Navy hydrofoil (USS Pegasus). Amazingly, I've never seen a TV in such places. I didn't know TV's were that freaking important. I actually see TV's declining in importance as emerging technologies make them irrelevant like 3G, EVDO, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth compete to provide real and timely information.

Analog TV is a dinosaur. It's dying. Cremate it already.

All I have to say is
http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj241/Wookinstien/adwd.jpg

Bravo!

My Boss the Chief Engineer here at my station agrees with everything you have said. He is still laughing at the StopHD website.

gdoane

May 29th, 2009, 10:08 am

I've been playing vidya games for nearly 40 years now.

Since the advent of the first person shooter (Wolfenstein/Doom), IMO the "art" has been going downhill.

Basically all that is available for consoles these days are FPSs and sports titles.

One day you will get tired of buying what is essentially the same game over and over again.

EDIT: Make that 30 years - but it still seems like 40.

In American gaming, that's true. American companies don't know how to make good games so all we get are first person shooters, sports titles and movie license games.

The puzzle game genre is simple enough and we got beat in that by Russia's "Tetris". Alexey Pajitnov, the inventor of Tetris, did eventually wind up working for Microsoft in Redmond, Washington though.

America used to be very good at simulator games (flight sims, driving sims, space sims) but those didn't sell very well. Or worse, they were made arcade-friendly to appeal to a broader audience.

American entertainment is absolutely awful. It's sex and violence, violence and sex because that's what sells. Maybe with everything in High Definition the audience can see all of the ugliness.

That's why the Wii connected in the USA and is the top-selling platform. It doesn't do FPS very well and its sports titles aren't traditional licensed garbage paying the NFL/NHL/NBA and wasting money on buying a license from unionized sporting leagues.

The Wii is a party game machine, it thrives on mini-games and fills the vacuum left by the American entertainment industry which marches to the drumbeat of sex and violence, violence and sex.

You have to import entertainment to get away from the crummy Hollyweird mentality. American entertainment used to be decent and worth the watching but no more. Now we have Reality TV and live news broadcasts of deadly car chases.

I think one of the most disgusting moments in American Television was the O.J. Simpson trial. It indicted the entire American entertainment culture because not only did Americans sponsor the violence of football which created this monster, but then the dog and pony show trial was giving the NFL killer even better ratings than any NFL game he was in.

American entertainment now is all about the money. There is no art to it. Go film a cop on the job or throw some dolts on an island to vote each other off, no story, no script, no art but big money.

And we wonder why child stars go certifiably insane. Artists in Hollywood find no art. Of course they go crazy.

sironin

May 29th, 2009, 10:39 am

Psygnosis is British too, their most famous game is still probably "Lemmings" and Sony Entertainment bought them at the launch of the Sony PlayStation to have an in-house developer.

I'm not a normal gamer who plays a game and forgets about it, I research the whole history because as I said before, I consider it an art. It's the same as researching an artist to me.

I'm hoping that new TV standards means more universality overall because there's a ton of goods out there that were wasted and will remain wasted forever.

Psygnosis is now known as SCE Studio Liverpool (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psygnosis). I really liked their box art back when they were Psygnosis though. Novastorm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novastorm)was a great game from the late DOS era when games began being published on CD.

Dem

May 29th, 2009, 11:05 am

gadgetere

May 29th, 2009, 10:14 pm

Well get ready only 14 days left. You can still sign up for satellite tv I've seen ads for $9.95 a month.And that's still $120 per year, and will never work "mobilely". Money better spent in building the "video library", where the SECOND (and subsequent) times watching the movie, are free...
As for me who works in Master Control of a TV station I will be glad to turn off that old rust bucket and stop converting our digital signal to analog for broadcast. The converting causes a 2 sec. delay which plays hell with trying to switch network programs.I would endure the two seconds, if it means my sets still work...
So long Analog you will not be missed...Maybe not by you, but by a lot of others...

gadgetere

May 29th, 2009, 10:49 pm

Analog TV still works. It just won't pick up an analog signal...The comparison was "cars". Suppose you had an old car, and the only way to keep it on the road was to pull it with a WRECKER? That's the same as with "analog tv's"; they do NOT work as before, you have to pull them along with a second (and highly non-portable) receiver.

...old cars work on modern roads just fine... just like it wouldn't in rural Montana or Wyoming the past 50 years. 15 years ago when analog was the only technology for free over the air television there were places with your little portable tv that wouldn't pick up a signal. What then?People who moved IN to those places, knew the tv wouldn't work. They made a choice.

...we're not being ALLOWED a choice, are we? Government paying for large outdoor antennas for those folks? But that brings up another problem, a large antenna doesn't work very well on top of your station wagon plugged into your portable tv while you are driving, following the radar of the tornado on your analog set...That's true; that's why we SHOULD NOT SHUT OFF analog.

gadgetere

May 29th, 2009, 10:57 pm

Get one of these, and you can get internet anywhere.No. You have to find the available wireless networks, negotiate the connection (the library has "agreement screens" you have to accept), and then connect. I used to watch/listen to news-at-noon, and varied programs (loved the old re-runs of things like Daniel Boon, Bonanza, etcetera). Did that at WORK. Yes they have a wireless network, but it's secure, each person has to log in; and all activity is closely monitored. "Surf" too much, and you WILL be fired.

I got everyone in my family receivers that connect to the car radio; receives channels 2-69. Converts the sound to AM530.

All "mobile tv" ends, June 12. "Wireless" won't work in the car. Not without expensive cell-phone subscriptions. AND expensive high-capacity batteries.

The profiteers don't care that there is no technology to replace what they're killing; Congress can be bought. And even if analog-lovers are in the minority, "tyranny of the minority" reigns...

gdoane

May 29th, 2009, 11:06 pm

The comparison was "cars". Suppose you had an old car, and the only way to keep it on the road was to pull it with a WRECKER? That's the same as with "analog tv's"; they do NOT work as before, you have to pull them along with a second (and highly non-portable) receiver.

...old cars work on modern roads just fine... People who moved IN to those places, knew the tv wouldn't work. They made a choice.

No, they don't. I had a 1964 Corvair in the 1980's when Virginia banned the sale of leaded fuel. A 1964 Corvair without leaded gasoline will self-destruct without the lubrication of leaded gasoline. You can't gas up an old car anywhere anymore (leaded gasoline was banned nationwide in 1996 Clean Air Act). Older cars made for leaded gasoline trying to burn the gas for sale today will have their valve seats eaten alive in no time flat resulting in catastrophic engine failure.

...we're not being ALLOWED a choice, are we? That's true; that's why we SHOULD NOT SHUT OFF analog.

The RF spectrum is regulated as a natural resource. You're not allowed a choice in any other natural resource so why should you get one in the RF spectrum? You don't own that.

Dem

May 29th, 2009, 11:49 pm

No. You have to find the available wireless networks, negotiate the connection (the library has "agreement screens" you have to accept), and then connect. I used to watch/listen to news-at-noon, and varied programs (loved the old re-runs of things like Daniel Boon, Bonanza, etcetera). Did that at WORK. Yes they have a wireless network, but it's secure, each person has to log in; and all activity is closely monitored. "Surf" too much, and you WILL be fired.

I got everyone in my family receivers that connect to the car radio; receives channels 2-69. Converts the sound to AM530.

All "mobile tv" ends, June 12. "Wireless" won't work in the car. Not without expensive cell-phone subscriptions. AND expensive high-capacity batteries.

The profiteers don't care that there is no technology to replace what they're killing; Congress can be bought. And even if analog-lovers are in the minority, "tyranny of the minority" reigns...
You don't understand what that is. It's an EVDO card, you can go on the internet anywhere. You don't need a hotspot, the card talks directly to the satellite.

All old technology has to die sometime. And you still have the choice to buy a converter box if you wish.

gadgetere

May 30th, 2009, 12:32 am

Get one of these, and you can get internet anywhere.For free? And how good is the reception in a moving car? And if I wanted to lug around a laptop, I wouldn't object to the "pseudo-portable" dtv receivers.
All old technology has to die sometime.WHEN there is something as good to replace it.

How many times has that homely woman on the "dtv commercials" said "It's BETTER"? If we LOSE features, it's NOT better. And you still have the choice to buy a converter box if you wish.Converter box for the living room set. One for the vcr/dvdr. One for the bedroom tv. One for the guestroom tv. One for the kid's tv. One for the bathroom tv. OH --- one for the PIP unit. Ridiculous.
No, they don't. I had a 1964 Corvair in the 1980's when Virginia banned the sale of leaded fuel. A 1964 Corvair without leaded gasoline will self-destruct without the lubrication of leaded gasoline.That can't be true; what's so special about a '64 Corvair? We have early 60's cars running around here every day. Today I saw a MODEL T turning into DirectTV. Black. Looked "stock".

There are additives for gas, that fulfill lubrication... You can't gas up an old car anywhere anymore (leaded gasoline was banned nationwide in 1996 Clean Air Act). Older cars made for leaded gasoline trying to burn the gas for sale today will have their valve seats eaten alive in no time flat resulting in catastrophic engine failure.What's different about those valve seats, than today's?

There are old cars on the road. My brother has a '38 Buick, all original; it drives fine. Hasn't self-destructed yet...
The RF spectrum is regulated as a natural resource. You're not allowed a choice in any other natural resource so why should you get one in the RF spectrum? You don't own that.Think about what you said --- "allowed". This country is supposed to be "of the people, by the people, for the people". Land is a natural resource, too --- but it can be taken away from us if someone else just WANTS it.

Governmental regulations historically exist to prevent people from getting hurt; that's why there is a "seatbelt law".

.... but digital tv will hurt people, in loss of service, and increased risk in emergencies.

No one has successfully overturned the arguments against analog shutoff...

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

May 30th, 2009, 12:40 am

Still at it eh? Don't you get bored of discussing digital TV?

gadgetere

May 30th, 2009, 12:18 pm

Still at it eh? Don't you get bored of discussing digital TV?Bored? I had 40 years of channel 6 news at noon. YEARS of enjoying tv while walking around --- shopping, at work, in the car. It all ends June 12 --- probably never will exist again.

I watched with great intensity tornadoes, their lives and paths, in the middle of storms; found it kinda useful to know where they were going. At least THREE passed either right over or near my house. I am NOT looking forward to DYING just because I'm not ALLOWED to watch the weather in a POWER FAILURE!

"Bored"? I'm not bored --- I'm furious. And so are a lot of other people. If someone like Sean Hannity would AIR this discussion, including the website with its petition, everyone would be AMAZED at how many people would join the protests. But now, they don't know where to TURN.

Why is it that Sean and others refuse to cover it?

The whole "DTV" push, is all about making money; from forced sales on US.

:mad:

Wookinstien

May 31st, 2009, 4:24 am

12 days and counting!!!

Goodbye Analog!

Wookinstien

May 31st, 2009, 4:29 am

Bored? I had 40 years of channel 6 news at noon. YEARS of enjoying tv while walking around --- shopping, at work, in the car. It all ends June 12 --- probably never will exist again.

I watched with great intensity tornadoes, their lives and paths, in the middle of storms; found it kinda useful to know where they were going. At least THREE passed either right over or near my house. I am NOT looking forward to DYING just because I'm not ALLOWED to watch the weather in a POWER FAILURE!

"Bored"? I'm not bored --- I'm furious. And so are a lot of other people. If someone like Sean Hannity would AIR this discussion, including the website with its petition, everyone would be AMAZED at how many people would join the protests. But now, they don't know where to TURN.

Why is it that Sean and others refuse to cover it?

The whole "DTV" push, is all about making money; from forced sales on US.

:mad:

http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj241/Wookinstien/Drama.jpg

gdoane

May 31st, 2009, 8:26 am

Bored? I had 40 years of channel 6 news at noon. YEARS of enjoying tv while walking around --- shopping, at work, in the car. It all ends June 12 --- probably never will exist again.

My cell phone sucks and it can get tv channels broadcast live on the internet. The Motorola Q phone I carry has been discontinued for about 2 years.

You can't safely watch TV while walking around anyway. What do you do, walk into poles and stumblebum into people because you're not watching where you're going?

I watched with great intensity tornadoes, their lives and paths, in the middle of storms; found it kinda useful to know where they were going. At least THREE passed either right over or near my house.

So move away from where tornadoes happen. I live in Phoenix, AZ. No tornadoes. No hurricanes. No earthquakes. No mudslides. No natural disasters of any sort. Tornadoes only happen in three States (Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas) so using them as a reason to keep analog is pretty much discounting the 47 other States that don't have tornadoes.

I am NOT looking forward to DYING just because I'm not ALLOWED to watch the weather in a POWER FAILURE!

You can buy a decent generator for about $100 per kilowatt. A $100 generator would easily run a DTV television for as long as you can keep it gassed up.

"Bored"? I'm not bored --- I'm furious. And so are a lot of other people. If someone like Sean Hannity would AIR this discussion, including the website with its petition, everyone would be AMAZED at how many people would join the protests. But now, they don't know where to TURN.

Why is it that Sean and others refuse to cover it?

It doesn't actually affect Sean Hannity. His television presence is on Fox News, a cable-only channel and his radio show is on AM broadcast (mostly) so the switch affects his access to his audience in no way.

The whole "DTV" push, is all about making money; from forced sales on US.

:mad:

You oppose making money?

What's wrong with making money? Nothing here is being forced. Television is a luxury item. Heck, most days my TV's don't even get turned on even though I have full-on digital cable TV with four tiers of premium programming.

I watch probably less than 10 hours of television per month. I don't need it and I don't even like it much. Most television fare is utter garbage, not worthy of my time or attention.

What is being lost, really? I can't think of one major network that I've actually watched yet this year. The only thing worth watching is Fox News. Everything else: GARBAGE.

Tulsa

May 31st, 2009, 9:30 am

So move away from where tornadoes happen. I live in Phoenix, AZ. No tornadoes. No hurricanes. No earthquakes. No mudslides. No natural disasters of any sort. Tornadoes only happen in three States (Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas) so using them as a reason to keep analog is pretty much discounting the 47 other States that don't have tornadoes.

While I'm not advocating analog TV, you really need to check this site out. Tornadoes happen in all 50 states.

All US Tornadoes (http://www.tornadoproject.com/alltorns/ustorns.htm)

gadgetere

May 31st, 2009, 10:14 am

My cell phone sucks and it can get tv channels broadcast live on the internet. The Motorola Q phone I carry has been discontinued for about 2 years. Pocketable cell phones exist; the same level of use is available as existed in the 90's. Pocketable tv's are being shut off.

RE "receiving tv on your cell phone" --- how long does the phone run? The pseudo-portable dtv's only run a couple hours, then the high-capacity battery must be recharged. With its 12-hour-plus battery life, my favorite pocket tv is usable for DAYS.

We shouldn't END a technology, until the replacement-technlology can at least DO what the previous one did.
You can't safely watch TV while walking around anyway. What do you do, walk into poles and stumblebum into people because you're not watching where you're going?More than 90% of programming is perfectly enjoyable "sound only". At work, of course I was listening and not actually watching. Those devices I got for everyone in my family (that put tv audio on the car radio) --- receive tv channels 2-69. I could be watching a movie, then go run a pressing errand, and not miss the end of the movie.

But it was a "nice luxury" to be able to watch approaching tornadic storms. I DID that at work, when the sirens were going off and no one cared that I was watching tv. I also turned on a pocket tv at work when they blew up the Murrow building in Oklahoma City; a dozen people gathered around to look at it, and I didn't get in trouble.
So move away from where tornadoes happen.Not feasible. I'm not "independently wealthy" (one of the complaints against DTV). I live in Phoenix, AZ. No tornadoes. No hurricanes. No earthquakes. No mudslides. No natural disasters of any sort. Tornadoes only happen in three States (Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas) so using them as a reason to keep analog is pretty much discounting the 47 other States that don't have tornadoes.Tornadoes happen in Colorado, Pennsylvania, Florida, and many other states. Earthquakes happen in California, Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and many other states. Hurricanes happen on most any coastal state, especially the South-East ones. Hawaii has experienced a hurricane, and a tsunami Not to MENTION volcanoes.

Plenty of reason to "keep analog".
You can buy a decent generator for about $100 per kilowatt. A $100 generator would easily run a DTV television for as long as you can keep it gassed up.If it's a problem to run one of the "pseudo-portable" sets, and to run a CONVERTER attached TO one of my pocket sets, how much more objectionable is it to run a GENERATOR too?
It doesn't actually affect Sean Hannity. His television presence is on Fox News, a cable-only channel and his radio show is on AM broadcast (mostly) so the switch affects his access to his audience in no way. He's supposed to be a "spokesman for citizen rights". Most congressional abuse doesn't affect his broadcasting; but he covers it.

And if we sleep through the "analog shutoff", the next fight WILL be "HD RADIO"; where you have to buy CONVERTERS for every RADIO you have.
You wanna suggest THAT won't affect Hannity's listeners?
You oppose making money? When a government can be co-opted by "profiteering special interest lobbies", and citizens are only given the choice to "either pay up or DO WITHOUT", then YES I oppose the conniving bribers forcing the whole country to pay them.
What's wrong with making money? Nothing here is being forced. Television is a luxury item.Another "You don't HAVE to watch TV" argument. Well, CARS are a luxury, not a right --- try telling Californians "You don't HAVE to drive a car!"

(Do it from a distance; they'll be after you...) Heck, most days my TV's don't even get turned on even though I have full-on digital cable TV with four tiers of premium programming. Why should your viewing habits be dictated to the rest of us?
I watch probably less than 10 hours of television per month. I don't need it and I don't even like it much. Most television fare is utter garbage, not worthy of my time or attention. That's true, it is; but a lot of us like to watch the news, weather, world events.

...and not always watching at HOME...
What is being lost, really? I can't think of one major network that I've actually watched yet this year. The only thing worth watching is Fox News. Everything else: GARBAGE.As I said, news, world events, weather, and yes movies and shows.

gadgetere

May 31st, 2009, 10:18 am

While I'm not advocating analog TV...Why not? ... you really need to check this site out. Tornadoes happen in all 50 states. Thank you. "Tornado Alley" is Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri.

They can happen any where, any time; Tulsa's big tornadoes were June 8 1975, and December 6 1976.

Oklahoma City had their F6 (and lots of smaller ones) in May of 1999...

gadgetere

May 31st, 2009, 10:22 am

"Oh the drama!"
Drama: (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/drama)any situation or series of events having vivid, emotional, conflicting, or striking interest or results: the drama of a murder trial.

Yup, you're right --- "DRAMA". The drama of having more of our freedoms taken from us, so that a few can make serious profit.

So --- what will everybody's attitude be if the rumor about "subscription only DTV", comes true?

That would certainly be "drama"...

Wookinstien

June 1st, 2009, 1:37 am

Drama: (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/drama)any situation or series of events having vivid, emotional, conflicting, or striking interest or results: the drama of a murder trial.

Yup, you're right --- "DRAMA". The drama of having more of our freedoms taken from us, so that a few can make serious profit.

So --- what will everybody's attitude be if the rumor about "subscription only DTV", comes true?

That would certainly be "drama"...

IF subscription DTV comes around you have full rights to say I told ya so.

But before that I expect to see Bigfoot on DTV farting dixie.

Rockominal

June 1st, 2009, 5:09 am

Bravo! Excellent post!

He's just being derogatory to me, 'cause he thinks it's silly to want my "portable tv" to continue.

Of course you do. You don't care about Pal or Secam's compatability with a 16/9 ratio because what the heck would you even care about the aspect ratio of a 13" or 10" set?
It's about as easy to carry along with you to the airport as somebody's laptop. As far as B&W TV is concerned, the color killer circuit has been working fine for years, so I don't get the "backwards" compatability point. :wall:

Wookinstien

June 1st, 2009, 5:13 am

11 days... Woo Hoo! Can't wait!

Rockominal

June 1st, 2009, 5:16 am

We shouldn't END a technology, until the replacement-technlology can at least DO what the previous one did.

Well put. That ought to be a thesis or an opening statement somewhere for a book available to the public. :clap:

Rockominal

June 1st, 2009, 5:49 am

Yeah, right, you believe that? You can't COPY PROTECT Betamax. That's why Betamax died. The best thing to ever happen to VHS was Copyguard. Motion picture studios signed on to VHS because Beta wouldn't protect their intellectual properties from piracy.

Actually, the reason I "believe that" is because I was there. Sony and their die hard fans tried to hang onto Beta for dear life. RCA went with Matsu****a because Bell and Howell cost too much to make the original deck. The general public wasn't concerned about their one of a kind "cult" classics that you speak of because the MTV music and video bootleg generation didn't exist then. That ought to be even obvious now since Hollywood Video down the street from me is still doing excellent. People actually enjoyed belonging to a tape club, and simply getting out to go somewhere just to look. They still do. I don't see them going out of business and I think that's great.
Anyways, f.y.i., women in America have made this country's economic world go around. The reason VHS destroyed Beta was because now women at work could watch 4 to six hours of soap operas after they got home. It was/is practical and easy for them to simply put a tape in for daily pre- programming. If they couldn't do it, they would just tell their husband/boyfriends what time the shows came on and have it done for them. The money made from soap operas would literally bulldoze over anything else coming out of the motion picture industry. When Sony finally got into it, it was too late and their product was a disaster. RCA, Panasonic and JVC put them to shame. So did the even cheaper Korean Goldstar and Samsung units. That fact ALONE drowned Beta and their avante-garde videophile followers.

gdoane

June 1st, 2009, 7:13 am

Pocketable cell phones exist; the same level of use is available as existed in the 90's. Pocketable tv's are being shut off.

No, they aren't. You can still use them with VCR's, Video Games, DVD's and other stand alone. Just the RF broadcast is being shut off because hardly anybody ever watches it.

RE "receiving tv on your cell phone" --- how long does the phone run? The pseudo-portable dtv's only run a couple hours, then the high-capacity battery must be recharged. With its 12-hour-plus battery life, my favorite pocket tv is usable for DAYS.

I'd shoot my cell phone if it only lasted for 12 hours. It's rated for 480 hours standby.

We shouldn't END a technology, until the replacement-technlology can at least DO what the previous one did.

Nobody even WANTS what the previous one did, namely waste precious bandwidth on a signal that too few people watch to make still viable.

More than 90% of programming is perfectly enjoyable "sound only". At work, of course I was listening and not actually watching. Those devices I got for everyone in my family (that put tv audio on the car radio) --- receive tv channels 2-69. I could be watching a movie, then go run a pressing errand, and not miss the end of the movie.

My DVR allows the same thing except I actually get to WATCH the show. You can get a TiVO or a DVR or even a VCR.

But it was a "nice luxury" to be able to watch approaching tornadic storms. I DID that at work, when the sirens were going off and no one cared that I was watching tv. I also turned on a pocket tv at work when they blew up the Murrow building in Oklahoma City; a dozen people gathered around to look at it, and I didn't get in trouble.

My work actually has a converter box for SDTV installed already. I know because I'm the one who put it in. It sure is nice having all of those extra channels.

Not feasible. I'm not "independently wealthy" (one of the complaints against DTV).Tornadoes happen in Colorado, Pennsylvania, Florida, and many other states. Earthquakes happen in California, Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and many other states. Hurricanes happen on most any coastal state, especially the South-East ones. Hawaii has experienced a hurricane, and a tsunami Not to MENTION volcanoes.

Several DTV channels are Weather Channels. They broadcast weather 24/7 all day every day. It's a vast improvement over the 4 minutes off a newscast weather usually gets.

Plenty of reason to "keep analog".
If it's a problem to run one of the "pseudo-portable" sets, and to run a CONVERTER attached TO one of my pocket sets, how much more objectionable is it to run a GENERATOR too?

It's not objectionable at all. I see it all the time at campgrounds.

He's supposed to be a "spokesman for citizen rights". Most congressional abuse doesn't affect his broadcasting; but he covers it.

It's a political talk show. Of course he'd cover acts of Congress.

TV has nothing to do with citizens rights. Thomas Jefferson never watched TV. George Washington never watched TV. If a right didn't exist when the Constitution was written then it can't really be a right.

And if we sleep through the "analog shutoff", the next fight WILL be "HD RADIO"; where you have to buy CONVERTERS for every RADIO you have.
You wanna suggest THAT won't affect Hannity's listeners?

That's very unlikely because commercial broadcast radio isn't the bandwidth hog that wasteful TV channels were. A 6 MHz wide channel is a big fat target. A 1 MHz wide AM broadcast band really isn't, especially considering it's down in the MF band and prone to skip so stations have to cut power after sundown.

When a government can be co-opted by "profiteering special interest lobbies", and citizens are only given the choice to "either pay up or DO WITHOUT", then YES I oppose the conniving bribers forcing the whole country to pay them.

The whole country doesn't have to pay them. Only the people who don't have Cable TV, Dish or newer TV's are even affected. Most Americans won't notice anything.

Another "You don't HAVE to watch TV" argument. Well, CARS are a luxury, not a right --- try telling Californians "You don't HAVE to drive a car!"

Californians are already fine with the toughest emissions standards (and most expensive cars) in the USA today. They wouldn't mind.

(Do it from a distance; they'll be after you...) Why should your viewing habits be dictated to the rest of us?
That's true, it is; but a lot of us like to watch the news, weather, world events.

...and not always watching at HOME...
As I said, news, world events, weather, and yes movies and shows.

With DTV, that can be done even more because the typical station broadcasts TRIPLE the programming on DTV than they did on crummy old obsolete analog.

gadgetere

June 1st, 2009, 8:30 am

Of course you do. You don't care about Pal or Secam's compatability with a 16/9 ratio because what the heck would you even care about the aspect ratio of a 13" or 10" set?It's pretty ridiculous watching a new-format program on a standard set; people are very small.
It's about as easy to carry along with you to the airport as somebody's laptop. As far as B&W TV is concerned, the color killer circuit has been working fine for years, so I don't get the "backwards" compatability point.When TV went color, black and white still worked fine. They said "B&W sets won't exist in less than 10 years" --- they were wrong. B&W sets were still MADE up until a year or two ago. They were great for bathrooms, kitchens, anywhere a tiny set was needed.

I don't think they make a B&W dtv.

With respect, Sean exposes himself as NOT "citizen/consumer advocate", by his flat ignoring of the harm being done.

gadgetere

June 1st, 2009, 8:32 am

Well put. That ought to be a thesis or an opening statement somewhere for a book available to the public.:)

Wookinstien

June 1st, 2009, 8:34 am

With DTV, that can be done even more because the typical station broadcasts TRIPLE the programming on DTV than they did on crummy old obsolete analog.

True we have three sub channels now. 20-1 Is ABC, 20-2 is the CW Network, and 20-3 is Telemundo

And our signal reaches much farther and is clean all the way to the limit, people comment on how they could not get our analog signal, but the digital is clean.

Also our power use at the transmitter is down 30%.

But I don't want to confuse the OP with the facts.

gadgetere

June 1st, 2009, 8:34 am

11 days... Woo Hoo! Can't wait!Pretend that you don't work in broadcasting --- what will you GAIN in 11 days, that you don't have NOW?

While you're gloating, millions of people will be losing tv altogether; they don't have the signal strength, nor the cash to buy all new equipment. America was not built on a "forget you I don't care" attitude...

gadgetere

June 1st, 2009, 8:36 am

True we have three sub channels now. 20-1 Is ABC, 20-2 is the CW Network, and 20-3 is Telemundo

And our signal reaches much farther and is clean all the way to the limit, people comment on how they could not get our analog signal, but the digital is clean.

Also our power use at the transmitter is down 30%.

But I don't want to confuse the OP with the facts.Hmmm; perhaps I'm DREAMING that the dtv converter at my Folks' house, cuts out on sound and "tiles" terribly. You know full well that anything less than strong signal, won't be received at all. A little snow was better than blank-screen...

You're right, we'll just keep hugging ourselves and chanting,

"This is BETTER".

This is better.
This is BETTER.
This is better...

...sigh...

Wookinstien

June 1st, 2009, 8:44 am

Pretend that you don't work in broadcasting --- what will you GAIN in 11 days, that you don't have NOW?

While you're gloating, millions of people will be losing tv altogether; they don't have the signal strength, nor the cash to buy all new equipment. America was not built on a "forget you I don't care" attitude...

I will gain a cleaner signal, more channels, more reliable transmission.

Did you get your FCC coupon for the converter. I did I spent a whopping 9 bucks for my converter.

gadgetere

June 1st, 2009, 8:50 am

No, they aren't. You can still use them with VCR's, Video Games, DVD's and other stand alone. Just the RF broadcast is being shut off because hardly anybody ever watches it. Do you realize how silly it sounds to say "hook up a vcr to a pocket TV"?
I'd shoot my cell phone if it only lasted for 12 hours. It's rated for 480 hours standby.We're not TALKING "standby". We're talking "WATCHING TV". Besides --- how much does a new battery cost?
Nobody even WANTS what the previous one did, namely waste precious bandwidth on a signal that too few people watch to make still viable. Really? They WANT "no pocket tv"? No "emergency tv"?

They LIKE 50% more COMMERCIALS? How do you speak for everyone else?
My DVR allows the same thing except I actually get to WATCH the show. You can get a TiVO or a DVR or even a VCR.Do Tivo's or DVR's work without subscription?

There is no real portable tv; certainly no pocket units. "Cell-phone-tv" isn't the same.
My work actually has a converter box for SDTV installed already. I know because I'm the one who put it in. It sure is nice having all of those extra channels. Do you think it's common for companies to have tv-sets? We're not even allowed to have "You-Tube".
Several DTV channels are Weather Channels. They broadcast weather 24/7 all day every day. It's a vast improvement over the 4 minutes off a newscast weather usually gets. WRONG. When we have a tornado cell, all programming ends and network stations broadcast CONTINUOUS storm coverage. Maps, radar, warnings, everything.

...all gone June 12th...
It's not objectionable at all. I see it all the time at campgrounds. Oh --- I have to go to a CAMPGROUND now to watch tv?
Sigh...
It's a political talk show. Of course he'd cover acts of Congress.

TV has nothing to do with citizens rights. Thomas Jefferson never watched TV. George Washington never watched TV. If a right didn't exist when the Constitution was written then it can't really be a right.Nonsense --- you can't really believe that. The PRINCIPLES were established --- like the Fourth Amendment.

We really CAN be stopped and searched now for no reason. We're losing all of them, because we're sitting on our rears letting it happen.
That's very unlikely because commercial broadcast radio isn't the bandwidth hog that wasteful TV channels were. A 6 MHz wide channel is a big fat target. A 1 MHz wide AM broadcast band really isn't, especially considering it's down in the MF band and prone to skip so stations have to cut power after sundown.Wanna bet? It's not ABOUT "bandwidth", it's about control and profit.

Watch and see. Errr, listen (radio).
The whole country doesn't have to pay them. Only the people who don't have Cable TV, Dish or newer TV's are even affected. Most Americans won't notice anything.They'll notice the extra COMMERCIALS. They'll notice that all the sets which are NOT hooked up to cable, stop working. They'll notice that when they travel, their pocket sets no longer work.
Californians are already fine with the toughest emissions standards (and most expensive cars) in the USA today. They wouldn't mind.Californians don't have much CHOICE. They did an initiative petition (Prop13 I think), revoking rights for illegal invaders; non-citizens don't HAVE citizen rights --- one judge just ruled "Uhm, no, you can't do that".

It's not a representative republic any more; it's an oligarchy, rule of kings/judges. And there seems nothing we can do about it.
With DTV, that can be done even more because the typical station broadcasts TRIPLE the programming on DTV than they did on crummy old obsolete analog.You said most people already HAVE cable/satellite; why do they care about additional channels?

And what good are additional channels if I don't have the portable equipment to WATCH them?

gadgetere

June 1st, 2009, 8:53 am

I will gain a cleaner signal, more channels, more reliable transmission.Yup, you're right. The sou....

...er than when it wa...

...so much bet...

We can al....

...never cuts out, except whe...

...and the PICt....

...never tiles or tears, it's ju...

:(

gdoane

June 1st, 2009, 8:59 am

True we have three sub channels now. 20-1 Is ABC, 20-2 is the CW Network, and 20-3 is Telemundo

That's a pretty odd matchup. Most of the stations around here just run a cropped, a full-screen and a weather/news feed.

And our signal reaches much farther and is clean all the way to the limit, people comment on how they could not get our analog signal, but the digital is clean.

I was looking at some of the coverage maps and the coverage with less than half the Effective Radiated Power and there's nothing but gains and power savings. This conversion gets rid of a lot of brute force which is going to save energy bigtime.

http://www.tvconversionhelp.com/2008/12/30/fcc-releases-dtv-coverage-maps-for-all-full-service-tv-facilities/

Lots of places that never could get a channel before suddenly can. That's a major issue in a place with a topology like Phoenix, surrounded by mountains and little stray mountains in the Valley of the Sun as well.

Also our power use at the transmitter is down 30%.

But I don't want to confuse the OP with the facts.

One of the stations here looks like it's going to go from a 300kW blowtorch all the way down to 22kW and keep the same coverage. If that's not a typo that's flat out amazing.

Watch the power companies say they have to raise their rates because the sets and transmitters are using half the power now.

blackcatrun

June 1st, 2009, 9:00 am

I will gain a cleaner signal, more channels, more reliable transmission.

Did you get your FCC coupon for the converter. I did I spent a whopping 9 bucks for my converter.

Wonderful...so when you get your bill to use your cheap converter box{which will be coming} how much are you going to cheer then?

Gray

June 1st, 2009, 9:09 am

Wonderful...so when you get your bill to use your cheap converter box{which will be coming} how much are you going to cheer then?

Huh?

If you do not know about something ask.

Or do some reading.

gdoane

June 1st, 2009, 9:10 am

Hmmm; perhaps I'm DREAMING that the dtv converter at my Folks' house, cuts out on sound and "tiles" terribly. You know full well that anything less than strong signal, won't be received at all. A little snow was better than blank-screen...

You're right, we'll just keep hugging ourselves and chanting,

"This is BETTER".

This is better.
This is BETTER.
This is better...

...sigh...

Not all receivers perform equally. Several factors affect reception, such as misadjusted antennas, poor/damaged transmission lines, poor connections, faulty or cheap equipment and interference.

It's a case of you get what you pay for. If you buy a lousy receiver you're going to get lousy reception. If the installation is lousy, same deal.

blackcatrun

June 1st, 2009, 12:39 pm

Huh?

If you do not know about something ask.

Or do some reading.

Yes I am sure you will argue up and down they wont charge a fee to these converter boxes.

However I was reading this change well before the vote hit the house floor.

The converter box is free for the time being. However it is subject to change and a fee {use tax} to be introduced at a later date.

{Congress wanted to charge for the signal to the converter boxes but the admendment was removed for the time being and will be reintroduced at a later date.} They sighted the change over being far to complicated to start charging the boxes once hook up was accomplished and al signals converted to a digital format, until the system was well in place to charge that tax.

Gray

June 1st, 2009, 6:00 pm

Yes I am sure you will argue up and down they wont charge a fee to these converter boxes.

However I was reading this change well before the vote hit the house floor.

The converter box is free for the time being. However it is subject to change and a fee {use tax} to be introduced at a later date.

{Congress wanted to charge for the signal to the converter boxes but the admendment was removed for the time being and will be reintroduced at a later date.} They sighted the change over being far to complicated to start charging the boxes once hook up was accomplished and al signals converted to a digital format, until the system was well in place to charge that tax.

Blind raving paranoia. ..and uninformed at that.
What about all of the millions of TVs that do not require the box? All of the new ones coming out?

gdoane

June 1st, 2009, 8:24 pm

Blind raving paranoia. ..and uninformed at that.
What about all of the millions of TVs that do not require the box? All of the new ones coming out?

It's not feasible for lots of different reasons.

#1: Congress has no idea who and who doesn't have a converter box. If any idiot from the government asks, just say "GET A WARRANT". I'm not telling any creep from our worthless crooked government what I've got. It's none of their business.

#2: If the signal is encrypted to prevent "unauthorized" reception it'll be hacked so fast as to be useless. The circuit is a published standard, the ATSC standard. It's so difficult to encrypt a known standard signal that nobody has ever managed to develop a method that hasn't been hacked.

#3: Tens of millions of TV's don't even have (or need) converter boxes because they're hooked to cable TV, satellite dish or other analog signal sources.

#4: Doing so would harm viewership and cause entertainment related businesses to fail, resulting in lost jobs and a harm to the economy.

There's no way it can be done, no way it would be done and the TV industry would fight it like they're in a fight for their lives, because that's exactly what it would be.

Wookinstien

June 2nd, 2009, 1:41 am

That's a pretty odd matchup. Most of the stations around here just run a cropped, a full-screen and a weather/news feed.

We had our radar on 20-3, but the FCC regs state you must run 6 hours of public service with each station and we did not have the equipment to automate a psa rotation.

The network line up is a result of the stations we have here at the station. Going digital is going save us the power and maintaince of running three transmitters.

I was looking at some of the coverage maps and the coverage with less than half the Effective Radiated Power and there's nothing but gains and power savings. This conversion gets rid of a lot of brute force which is going to save energy bigtime.

http://www.tvconversionhelp.com/2008/12/30/fcc-releases-dtv-coverage-maps-for-all-full-service-tv-facilities/

Lots of places that never could get a channel before suddenly can. That's a major issue in a place with a topology like Phoenix, surrounded by mountains and little stray mountains in the Valley of the Sun as well.

One of the stations here looks like it's going to go from a 300kW blowtorch all the way down to 22kW and keep the same coverage. If that's not a typo that's flat out amazing.

Watch the power companies say they have to raise their rates because the sets and transmitters are using half the power now.

The utility companies will always find a way to screw the little guy.

We have the largest wind farms in the country and our rates went up.

gdoane

June 2nd, 2009, 1:59 am

We had our radar on 20-3, but the FCC regs state you must run 6 hours of public service with each station and we did not have the equipment to automate a psa rotation.

I'd argue that it's only one station, so the regs apply to only one channel.

That's the way it's currently set up on trunked radio sites. FCC regs require a base station Identifier, but only on the lowest frequency. Trunked radio sites usually go highest frequency to lowest, and most of the regs apply to the lowest frequency as far as identifiers go. Which I think is still ridiculous because the low speed handshake on any channel during a transmission will tell you EXACTLY whose system it is anyway.

The network line up is a result of the stations we have here at the station. Going digital is going save us the power and maintaince of running three transmitters.

That's fine as long as you have a hot standby system. Anything happens to that box then you lose all three channels, and with it all three revenue streams. One of my pet peeves in communications is the Single Point Of Failure. Sometimes they're simply unavoidable but if there is one, I want a spare and I want to know where it is.

The utility companies will always find a way to screw the little guy.

We have the largest wind farms in the country and our rates went up.

We have the largest Nuclear Plant in the USA (Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station) and most of the power goes to California because they don't want a nuke in their back yard. So instead it's in my back yard and they get the cheap juice.

Of course, if anything happens to the power grid, California is screwed.

Wookinstien

June 2nd, 2009, 2:14 am

I'd argue that it's only one station, so the regs apply to only one channel.

We tried that, but Uncle Charlie said "Each sub-channel is a seperate station."

That's the way it's currently set up on trunked radio sites. FCC regs require a base station Identifier, but only on the lowest frequency. Trunked radio sites usually go highest frequency to lowest, and most of the regs apply to the lowest frequency as far as identifiers go. Which I think is still ridiculous because the low speed handshake on any channel during a transmission will tell you EXACTLY whose system it is anyway.

That's fine as long as you have a hot standby system. Anything happens to that box then you lose all three channels, and with it all three revenue streams. One of my pet peeves in communications is the Single Point Of Failure. Sometimes they're simply unavoidable but if there is one, I want a spare and I want to know where it is.

We have the largest Nuclear Plant in the USA (Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station) and most of the power goes to California because they don't want a nuke in their back yard. So instead it's in my back yard and they get the cheap juice.

Of course, if anything happens to the power grid, California is screwed.

That is my main worry. Currently we have no backup transmitter, that I know of , but our Chief is a crafty one so you never can tell.

AeroEngineer

June 2nd, 2009, 2:20 am

America used to be very good at simulator games (flight sims, driving sims, space sims) but those didn't sell very well. Or worse, they were made arcade-friendly to appeal to a broader audience.

Russians dominate the flight sim genre now.

gdoane

June 2nd, 2009, 2:23 am

We tried that, but Uncle Charlie said "Each sub-channel is a seperate station."

Uncle Charlie makes no sense with half the stuff anymore. We still have to broadcast Morse Code identifiers and probably less than 5% of Americans even know Morse Code. I can but I'm not normal.

That is my main worry. Currently we have no backup transmitter, that I know of , but our Chief is a crafty one so you never can tell.

I always have a plan "A", "B", "C" and "D" worked up. They say that necessity is the Mother of Invention, but I don't really want to find that out first hand. Besides, in the comm biz, you never look good for fixing anything. You look bad that anything broke in the first place.

Wookinstien

June 2nd, 2009, 7:37 am

Oh by the way...

10 days!

until the demise of analog.

:mrgreen:

gdoane

June 2nd, 2009, 9:48 am

Oh by the way...

10 days!

until the demise of analog.

:mrgreen:

I will be celebrating the recovery of 400+ MHz of wasted bandwidth.

Besides, I'm a conservative and this hits the poor and women the hardest. What's not to love about that? :D

Wookinstien

June 3rd, 2009, 1:37 am

I will be celebrating the recovery of 400+ MHz of wasted bandwidth.

Besides, I'm a conservative and this hits the poor and women the hardest. What's not to love about that? :D

:)):))

blackcatrun

June 3rd, 2009, 9:45 am

It's not feasible for lots of different reasons.

#1: Congress has no idea who and who doesn't have a converter box. If any idiot from the government asks, just say "GET A WARRANT". I'm not telling any creep from our worthless crooked government what I've got. It's none of their business.

#2: If the signal is encrypted to prevent "unauthorized" reception it'll be hacked so fast as to be useless. The circuit is a published standard, the ATSC standard. It's so difficult to encrypt a known standard signal that nobody has ever managed to develop a method that hasn't been hacked.

#3: Tens of millions of TV's don't even have (or need) converter boxes because they're hooked to cable TV, satellite dish or other analog signal sources.

#4: Doing so would harm viewership and cause entertainment related businesses to fail, resulting in lost jobs and a harm to the economy.

There's no way it can be done, no way it would be done and the TV industry would fight it like they're in a fight for their lives, because that's exactly what it would be.

I like how folks get caught up in the bark but fail notice thats it is a tree.

Recievers have a serial chip meaning an number that communicates with the company. Cable Television stations can shut off a signal from the pole. Every single modern technoligy that uses the airwaves has an ID chip installed. Phones, Ipods,every gadget that comunicates with anything outside it's self.

Cable is a diffrent story.
The federal government is already "use taxing" cable television and Dish recievers. All are ID by serial chips. To make it clear the last cable bill increase was partly for that use tax.
Like all broadcasting services shutting off the signal is done remotely by computer using that chip. At the pole an ID chip is installed in the wire to shut off cable service with out sending a truck to the location.
The new converter boxes have that ID serial chips and can communicate with a signal recieved by the television. They do intend to place a use tax on these recievers..the means to do so is built right in. They cant be removed without disable of the device from what I have tryed this far.

In case you missed the recent announcement about the new internet Czar "keeping us safe on the internet" Was to install these new taxes on home enterianment in broad terms.

Free any thing from uncle should be a clear warning they intend to get the money back later.

Gray

June 3rd, 2009, 10:04 am

I like how folks get caught up in the bark but fail notice thats it is a tree.

Recievers have a serial chip meaning an number that communicates with the company. Cable Television stations can shut off a signal from the pole. Every single modern technoligy that uses the airwaves has an ID chip installed. Phones, Ipods,every gadget that comunicates with anything outside it's self.

Cable is a diffrent story.
The federal government is already "use taxing" cable television and Dish recievers. All are ID by serial chips. To make it clear the last cable bill increase was partly for that use tax.
Like all broadcasting services shutting off the signal is done remotely by computer using that chip. At the pole an ID chip is installed in the wire to shut off cable service with out sending a truck to the location.
The new converter boxes have that ID serial chips and can communicate with a signal recieved by the television. They do intend to place a use tax on these recievers..the means to do so is built right in. They cant be removed without disable of the device from what I have tryed this far.

In case you missed the recent announcement about the new internet Czar "keeping us safe on the internet" Was to install these new taxes on home enterianment in broad terms.

Free any thing from uncle should be a clear warning they intend to get the money back later.

That is the most asinine crap I have ever heard.

gdoane

June 3rd, 2009, 4:32 pm

I like how folks get caught up in the bark but fail notice thats it is a tree.

Recievers have a serial chip meaning an number that communicates with the company. Cable Television stations can shut off a signal from the pole. Every single modern technoligy that uses the airwaves has an ID chip installed. Phones, Ipods,every gadget that comunicates with anything outside it's self.

TV's do not transmit. They only receive. Could you imagine the heterodyne of 100 Million TV sets transmitting at once? You'd never be able to decode anything out of that.

The government has no way of tracking which ID chip went where, what TV channel (if any) the things are tuned to, who has paid for which ID number or anything.

The government can't even track individuals on the internet and you think they can track TV sets? They don't have the competence, the ability or the motive to find where all the new TV's and converter boxes went.

Cable is a diffrent story.
The federal government is already "use taxing" cable television and Dish recievers. All are ID by serial chips. To make it clear the last cable bill increase was partly for that use tax.

Look, I'm an electronics technician with an FCC license (a couple, actually) and 25 years of experience in the field and I've never heard of this magical "serial chip". What are you talking about? ESN (Electronic Serial Number) is the closest thing I can imagine you're calling a "serial chip".

Like all broadcasting services shutting off the signal is done remotely by computer using that chip. At the pole an ID chip is installed in the wire to shut off cable service with out sending a truck to the location.

A CHIP INSTALLED IN THE WIRE??

Do you happen to know a supplier of tin foil hats? Because this right here is tin foil hat party time.

Wookinstien

June 5th, 2009, 4:37 am

7 days!!

Goodbye analog!

gdoane

June 5th, 2009, 10:03 am

7 days!!

Goodbye analog!

It's down to a three-bit countdown now!

111
110
101
100
011
010
001
000

:D

AutoRacer55

June 5th, 2009, 1:44 pm

It's down to a three-bit countdown now!

111
110
101
100
011
010
001
000

:D

There are 10 kinds of people. Those who understand binary, and everybody else.

gdoane

June 5th, 2009, 5:44 pm

There are 10 kinds of people. Those who understand binary, and everybody else.

Pretty soon everything is going to be digital. Some kids can't read analog clocks anymore. My youngest nephew couldn't even figure out what my 8-track player did. I had to tell him it's an iPod from the 1970's.

gadgetere

June 6th, 2009, 1:04 am

TV's do not transmit. They only receive. Could you imagine the heterodyne of 100 Million TV sets transmitting at once? You'd never be able to decode anything out of that. All cable boxes transmit. At some point in time (usually in the middle of the night), the cable company transmits one serial number; one box switches on and says "GDOANE watched three pay-per-view movies". The company says "OK, we'll charge him; now he paid his bill this month, stay turned on."

Simplistic, but that's roughly the communication.

It is technologically possible for a dtv to transmit; there are conspiracy theories that the boxes are surveillance devices. I've had one apart, and did not find a camera; but microphones (and speech recognition software) are within the realm of possible.

A surveillance network would function on a "cellular format", one set transmitting at a time (when the remote controller tells it to). Audio would be stored up, looking especially for trigger words like "bomb" and "hijack" etcetera. This may be why DTV is endorsed by the Department of Homeland Security.

The popular understanding is that something called "ECHELON" scans all email looking for exactly those key words. It is within the realm of possibility.
The government has no way of tracking which ID chip went where, what TV channel (if any) the things are tuned to, who has paid for which ID number or anything.Everyone who bought a converter with the card, can be tracked. If CAT is right (and the approach is very possible), then all receivers will shut off, and you would have to provide a device serial number, then your box can be switched back on.
The government can't even track individuals on the internet and you think they can track TV sets? They don't have the competence, the ability or the motive to find where all the new TV's and converter boxes went. As I said, all boxes can conceptionally be switched off; then those who pay, get switched back on.

...the boxes/sets wouldn't even have to transmit for that to work...
Look, I'm an electronics technician with an FCC license (a couple, actually) and 25 years of experience in the field and I've never heard of this magical "serial chip". What are you talking about? ESN (Electronic Serial Number) is the closest thing I can imagine you're calling a "serial chip". As I described, every unit can have a unique serial number; imagine weeks (months) of warning people:
"Upgrade to digital subscriber service before February 17, 2011, or your box will become just a box".

Sound familiar?
A CHIP INSTALLED IN THE WIRE?? He's probably thinking of the distribution amps out on the poles; I haven't heard of them being addressable --- but I've certainly heard of digital cable boxes being addressable.

AND they DO TRANSMIT...
Do you happen to know a supplier of tin foil hats? Because this right here is tin foil hat party time.Once again, snideness doesn't serve you; I just explained how Cat could be 100% right.

...if he is, I expect some really sincere apologies to many of us here...

gadgetere

June 6th, 2009, 1:11 am

Pretty soon everything is going to be digital. Some kids can't read analog clocks anymore. My youngest nephew couldn't even figure out what my 8-track player did. I had to tell him it's an iPod from the 1970's.Not true; all Humans are analog.

TV begins as analog. It gets converted to digital. Then it has to get converted back.

Even the non-technological understand that the twice-converted signal can never be as good as the original...

gadgetere

June 6th, 2009, 1:20 am

7 days! Good bye analog!All really portable tv is ending. All tv in power-failure emergencies is ending. Many people in the fringe will lose tv altogether.

...millions...

And all you can do is gloat? With respect --- do you have the capacity to sympathize with people who are injured?

Somehow I'm reminded of a movie, "Don't Cry It's Only Thunder". There was a soldier who was completely self-focused, running his black-market schemes. Then his buddy was badly wounded; made him promise to "take care of my kids".

His buddy died, and suddenly this immature soldier had an orphanage to take care of. He learned a lot of things very fast.

It's really a tear-jerker....

2Parties1GlobalistGoal

June 6th, 2009, 1:33 am

I can't wait until the analog to digital television version of that movie comes out.

gadgetere

June 6th, 2009, 1:59 am

I can't wait until the analog to digital television version of that movie comes out.Wow --- you're right. I can't find it on dvd.

:-/

gdoane

June 6th, 2009, 2:24 am

All cable boxes transmit. At some point in time (usually in the middle of the night), the cable company transmits one serial number; one box switches on and says "GDOANE watched three pay-per-view movies". The company says "OK, we'll charge him; now he paid his bill this month, stay turned on."

Simplistic, but that's roughly the communication.

Cable boxes do not transmit.

Wanna tell me which part of the RF Spectrum the Cable Box transmits on? I can do DC to 23 GHz and tell you if it's true or not. Cable is a CLOSED SYSTEM. There are no transmissions.

To be clear, a transmission is an antenna emitting an E and H field electromagnetic signal.

Cable is a closed network. If I don't pay then I don't watch. That's a fair deal.

It is technologically possible for a dtv to transmit; there are conspiracy theories that the boxes are surveillance devices. I've had one apart, and did not find a camera; but microphones (and speech recognition software) are within the realm of possible.

It's not even LEGAL for a DTV to transmit. And a few moments with an RF wattmeter would prove the case if a box were transmitting or not. If one tried, my crummy old HP8920B RF Test set would be on its butt and on its frequency so fast in Auto mode it wouldn't get away with it.

No, it's not possible. Because a guy like me would find out about it in no time flat.

A surveillance network would function on a "cellular format", one set transmitting at a time (when the remote controller tells it to). Audio would be stored up, looking especially for trigger words like "bomb" and "hijack" etcetera. This may be why DTV is endorsed by the Department of Homeland Security.

Okay, solve the following problems.

Remote controller:

1: Does not know which channel the set is tuned to.

2: Does not know when the set is on.

3: Does not know where the set is located.

Now, to be fair, I do know what I'm talking about here. I'm an expert in trunked radio, and I work on systems that can handle a few thousand (about 65,000) at a time.

You're talking about a system that can track tens of millions. INSANITY.

End User:

1: Has a duplexer so his transmitter doesn't blow the Hell out of his receiver using only one antenna. Or a T/R switch. Your choice, find one.

2: Actually has a cable box instead of a straight cable ready VCR or TV or DTV and doesn't even bother with a cable box.

3. Is in range of the MASTER CONTROL SIGNALS so that the boxes know that they've been ordered to be shut off.

The popular understanding is that something called "ECHELON" scans all email looking for exactly those key words. It is within the realm of possibility.

Echelon is a filter developed exactly BECAUSE government realized its limitations. You're proving my point for me.

Everyone who bought a converter with the card, can be tracked. If CAT is right (and the approach is very possible), then all receivers will shut off, and you would have to provide a device serial number, then your box can be switched back on.

Let's do the math here, okay?

100 million TV sets in the USA.

All need to provide a device serial number.

Let's be really nice to the Federal government and say they've got fabulously quick service in 10 seconds flat.

So, we're talking about a BILLION seconds, aren't we?

How long is a BILLION seconds?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_years_is_in_one_billion_seconds

That's basically 32 years.

Or you could do it in 10 seconds flat for each phone call, if you had 100 Million government employees.

NOT FEASIBLE.

As I said, all boxes can conceptionally be switched off; then those who pay, get switched back on.

Not all TV's have boxes. My little Sony Bravia doesn't have or need one. How are you going to switch that off?

...the boxes/sets wouldn't even have to transmit for that to work...
As I described, every unit can have a unique serial number; imagine weeks (months) of warning people:
"Upgrade to digital subscriber service before February 17, 2011, or your box will become just a box".

Sound familiar?

The time factor (years and/or half a billion call takers with full on admin rights to the network) make this scenario ridiculously challenging.

He's probably thinking of the distribution amps out on the poles; I haven't heard of them being addressable --- but I've certainly heard of digital cable boxes being addressable.

Of course they are, they're on a DIGITAL NETWORK. Mine certainly is.

That is NOT transmitting. It's a CLOSED NETWORK, same as the Ethernet pipes in my house both wired and wireless.

AND they DO TRANSMIT...
Once again, snideness doesn't serve you; I just explained how Cat could be 100% right.

...if he is, I expect some really sincere apologies to many of us here...

Again, TRANSMIT means antenna emissions, E and H fields, on frequency.

Give me that frequency and I'll investigate it for you. Right or wrong, if something in my house is transmitting in the RF spectrum then I have a duty as a property owner to know about it and to maintain the transmitter within FCC regulations.

gadgetere

June 6th, 2009, 11:20 am

Cable boxes do not transmit.

Wanna tell me which part of the RF Spectrum the Cable Box transmits on? I can do DC to 23 GHz and tell you if it's true or not. Cable is a CLOSED SYSTEM. There are no transmissions. From Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/transmit):
Transmit
...7.to send a signal by wire, radio, or television waves.

Last time I checked, cable tv transmits their signals by wire. To be clear, a transmission is an antenna emitting an E and H field electromagnetic signal.

Cable is a closed network. If I don't pay then I don't watch. That's a fair deal.
They used to have telegraph wires across the whole country; telegraphs were "closed systems, weren't they?

From dictionary.com:
Telegraph:
1.an apparatus, system, or process for transmitting messages or signals to a distant place, esp. by means of an electric device consisting essentially of a sending instrument and a distant receiving instrument connected by a conducting wire or other communications channel.

It's not even LEGAL for a DTV to transmit. And a few moments with an RF wattmeter would prove the case if a box were transmitting or not. If one tried, my crummy old HP8920B RF Test set would be on its butt and on its frequency so fast in Auto mode it wouldn't get away with it.I'm not sure what the Patriot Act calls "legal" or not. Pragmatically, you'd be hard-pressed to DETECT such a transmitter, if it existed.

...it would only transmit for a brief moment, and then only occasionally...
No, it's not possible. Because a guy like me would find out about it in no time flat. Why don't you consider this a "project"; turn on your RF test set, and connect it to a microprocessor-based system that could catch a transmittion burst of perhaps less than a second, that only occurs every other few weeks (or months).

There are also different approaches possible; 100% surveillance might not be the goal; if the system can transmit, perhaps only certain people will be monitored (those already under suspicion from other venues). Or perhaps certain key words will trigger it --- "bomb", "terrorist", "airplane", "hijack", etcetera...

Do you agree that email is monitored? I've never heard anyone dispute that.