I know that after the deadline in Feb. 2009 all OTA viewers will need to have digital TV sets or converter boxes, but how will that affect cable viewers? Will cable channels have to be digital as well? Will we still be able to use older cable ready sets, or will cable viewers also have to get converter boxes for older TVs? Or will digital broadcast channels be converted to analog? Will digital subchannels be required to be carried by cable systems as well? Also, how will this affect satellite TV? I want to set an antenna to get local digital TV, but I know that a lot of my viewing will still be cable. Any ideas? Thanks!
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Question about cable and satellite TV after the digital conversion deadline
- Thread starter anotherguyTN
- Start date
anotherguy said:
Cable systems will be free to downconvert DTV stations to analog. I don't think they're *required* to - but given the number of subscribers they'd lose by going digital-only I think you can assume they'll downconvert.
Right now it's not decided whether subchannels will be required to be carried. I doubt you'd be surprised to know the stations believe subchannels should be required and cables systems believe they shouldn't.
Satellite: same as cable.
w9wi said:
From what I understand, cable companies either have to downconvert or offer a digital signal that can be recievable on older TV's.
Most medium and large cable systems will most likely go 100% digital by 2010 (where you will have to have a digital converter or CableCard compatable TV set to recieve anything). Smaller systems (the handful of 35 channel systems that still remain) will most likely downconvert.
In most major markets, the broadcast signals are recieved via a seperate fiber-optic link direct from the studios. These signals do not go anywhere near the transmitter sites, so these signals will remain active. So no additional equipment will be needed by the cable companies to downconvert...because the TV station will do it for them.
Our cable company is already adding digital subchannels to a ch. 300 tier. Only 5 channels are offered. i just have basic cable analog with the digital box.
Well, isn't "digital" cable already digital? Wouldn't the same be said for the satellite systems? I would think that the converter you get with those systems would already be enough. That, or that's what you would most importantly have to replace after the switch. I think getting a D/A converter would only apply if you're receiving an OTA signal, which is what I was doing for the past seven years until we got DirecTV.
I
imhomerjay
Guest
FloydB said:
Exactly. I don't know what the latest stats are, but really, the majority of cable (digital or analog service) and satellite homes have to have older, analog TVs, so no matter how the signal gets there, the converter box has to have some way of being transmitted to the TV in an analog format. What I like about the cable option is that for the set I have in my spare bedroom, I can get analog service and receive the local broadcast channels (I couldn't care less about the sub-channels, but that's fine if they're part of the mix) with no box. If I go with satellite or AT&T, I have to have a box--and I really don't need that on a spare set.
Only if you're an old fogey like me and don't plan on embracing HDTV until you must, I think the digital sub-channels will only be a bit of a plus for satellite viewers like myself because many stations offer local weather and/or radar on one of their sub-channels. A plus since satellite viewers of The Weather Channel don't get local "Weather on the 8s".
Regarding this thread, I have a related question: An appliance store salesman told me today that CRT (tube-type) televisions will eventually be a thing of the past. I have indeed read that Sony is no longer manufacturing CRT TVs, but will ALL manufacturs be abandoning CRTs in the near future?
Eric
Regarding this thread, I have a related question: An appliance store salesman told me today that CRT (tube-type) televisions will eventually be a thing of the past. I have indeed read that Sony is no longer manufacturing CRT TVs, but will ALL manufacturs be abandoning CRTs in the near future?
Eric
eacalhoun1 said:
HDTV is brilliant but the thing is, and most people don't realize, is that it is worthless if you are up close. My bedroom TV is about 3 feet from my bed. At that distance and for the display size, HDTV isn't effective, it's not much, if any better, than Standard Definition Digital TV.
CRTs are better at displaying a high resolution on a smaller screen. You never see a laptop as good as a CRT. Even a 19" computer monitor with LCD isn't as good as a CRT. But a CRT is bulky and the difference for most people is such that they prefer the LCD.
CRT is too bulky a lot of folks so it probably will go away eventually, but not quickly. Remember cell phones are worse than landlines and MP3 is worse than CD (even I can tell that and I got a tin ear) so consumers will trade quality if the alternative is convenient. Especially when the difference between the two is not great.
- Status