Feb 17th... not so fast

[fybush]

DTV is FAR from acceptable in it's current form. The over the air signals are terrible, the sub channels are mediocre to non-existent on most commercial broadcasters. This is NOT how a terrestrial broadcaster SERIOUSLY competes with cable/satellite, etc. Part of that is the network's fault (Fox and NBC have a smorgasbord of extra cable networks they could be offering as affiliate DTV sub-channels. Why not?)

Because they can make far more money from per-subscriber fees from cable, telco and satellite - fees that they can guarantee by using carriage negotiations for their broadcast signals as leverage.

Fact is, over the air, free TV is far from dead and when times are tight, it's always on the rebound. It would be wise to slow down and consider EVERYTHING.....

Your sincere concern is duly noted.

Do you understand, however, that the analog OTA TV infrastructure that was built over the last 65 years or so has already been largely dismantled? Do you have any idea how many analog signals are already dark, and how many more are operating at significantly reduced power because their transmitters have already been converted for on-channel DTV use? Any clue how many DTV stations - even the ones operating on their "maximized post-transition" facilities - still aren't operating with optimal antenna placement or directionality because they can't get there until the analog antennas are off the top of their tower?

The train left this particular station a long time ago.







[/quote]