TV: Why digital is necessary

[radiopilot]

You didn't say that... try saying this comment to the below post and see the angry replies you'll get!

http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/

or

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/FMtuners/

You'll be in for a surprise.. I'm a member of this forum and I'd bet if they saw this comment, they'll be on you like fleas on a dog!

Radiopilot

You know, like the people that you see to this day walking out of stores with NTSC-only televisions. They're the ones who will be in for a surprise in two years.

That's a dumb statement as you don't know if these people even want to pick up air signals, has it occured to you that maybe these people buy these NTSC-only TV's for playing video games, DVD's, cable and or digital satelite and at a great price, hell I bought 3 of them two 27inch and 1- 36 inch for my kids video games/ watching DVD's, etc.!

Who cares what happens 2 years from now... I don't even watch TV except for an occasional DVD, and I'm sure I'm not in the minority here.

Radiopilot

 

[awj223]

That's a dumb statement as you don't know if these people even want to pick up air signals, has it occured to you that maybe these people buy these NTSC-only TV's for playing video games, DVD's, cable and or digital satelite and at a great price, hell I bought 3 of them two 27inch and 1- 36 inch for my kids video games/ watching DVD's, etc.!

Who cares what happens 2 years from now... I don't even watch TV except for an occasional DVD, and I'm sure I'm not in the minority here.

Radiopilot

I have an old 486 computer out in the garage. Want to buy it?

EVERYTHING is moving to HDTV, OTA or not. Video game systems are all 720p, 1080i, or 1080p with the exception of the Nintendo Wii, which is likely to be the last ever NTSC system. DVD will be replaced by either HD-DVD or Blu Ray. In 2 years, those TVs are going to be useless except for watching old movies and playing old video games, and you'll have to be buying TVs yet again.

 

[clouseau]

... I don't even watch TV except for an occasional DVD, and I'm sure I'm not in the minority here.

Radiopilot

Two words for you my friend.

REALITY CHECK!

Really dude. If what you say is true, you ARE in the minority.

No kidding... Really.

Clouseau

 

[Black_Shire]

... I don't even watch TV except for an occasional DVD, and I'm sure I'm not in the minority here.

Radiopilot

Two words for you my friend.

REALITY CHECK!

Really dude. If what you say is true, you ARE in the minority.

No kidding... Really.

Clouseau

I don't watch any television either, except for the occasional tape or DVD of an old show. -- Black Shire

 

[clouseau]

I don't watch any television either, except for the occasional tape or DVD of an old show. -- Black Shire

I don't doubt that for a moment, there are those that don't. Do you claim you're not a minoirity, though?

There's psople who ar in front of the tube all day and those who don't watch at all. I think you'd agree, the "Don't watch at all" are NOT the norm.

Clouseau

 

[radiopilot]

I don't watch any television either, except for the occasional tape or DVD of an old show. -- Black Shire

I don't doubt that for a moment, there are those that don't. Do you claim you're not a minoirity, though?

There's psople who ar in front of the tube all day and those who don't watch at all. I think you'd agree, the "Don't watch at all" are NOT the norm.

Clouseau

Right! We're the ones with some intellect not to be in front of the BOOB TUBE all day... too bad that doesn't apply to you... Sorry that you spend all day on some sorry radio station programming crap, only to then go home to spend the rest of the day in front of the moronic TV absorbing more stupidity and senseless programming!

Good for you Clouseau.... ;D

Radiopilot

 

[clouseau]

I don't watch any television either, except for the occasional tape or DVD of an old show. -- Black Shire

I don't doubt that for a moment, there are those that don't. Do you claim you're not a minoirity, though?

There's psople who ar in front of the tube all day and those who don't watch at all. I think you'd agree, the "Don't watch at all" are NOT the norm.

Clouseau

Right! We're the ones with some intellect not to be in front of the BOOB TUBE all day... too bad that doesn't apply to you... Sorry that you spend all day on some sorry radio station programming crap, only to then go home to spend the rest of the day in front of the moronic TV absorbing more stupidity and senseless programming!

Good for you Clouseau.... ;D

Radiopilot

Sorry, you'll need to find someone else or some thread else to bait. I'm done here.

Clouseau

 

[Black_Shire]

I don't watch any television either, except for the occasional tape or DVD of an old show. -- Black Shire

I don't doubt that for a moment, there are those that don't. Do you claim you're not a minoirity, though?

There's psople who ar in front of the tube all day and those who don't watch at all. I think you'd agree, the "Don't watch at all" are NOT the norm.

Clouseau

We non-watchers are not the majority, but I think we are a larger minority than many people (including a lot of non-watchers themselves) think. I have come across several people of different ages who simply have no interest in current television programming who either don't watch at all or only watch VHS tapes or DVDs.


-- Black Shire

 

[radiopilot]

I don't watch any television either, except for the occasional tape or DVD of an old show. -- Black Shire

I don't doubt that for a moment, there are those that don't. Do you claim you're not a minoirity, though?

There's psople who ar in front of the tube all day and those who don't watch at all. I think you'd agree, the "Don't watch at all" are NOT the norm.

Clouseau

We non-watchers are not the majority, but I think we are a larger minority than many people (including a lot of non-watchers themselves) think. I have come across several people of different ages who simply have no interest in current television programming who either don't watch at all or only watch VHS tapes or DVDs.


-- Black Shire

In 1995 when my children were 8 and 5 respectively I had cable, the programs on Discovery, The Learning Channel and some other programs were good to watch, rarely did anyone at home sit to watch the junk programming, my kids watched kids shows and cartoons, but when the kids got older their grades started fluctuating somewhat b's, c's, etc., so we had the cable turned off and soon enough my kids were back on track with A's and A+ grades, now are on the Beta Club, National Honor Society, my daughter graduated Salutoriian and is in her 2nd year of Medical School on full scholarship, my son is a music major on several major chamber orchestras here in Savannah and is also a National Honor Society member and Science Society member... and I wonder had I kept the cable and these children spent countless hours watching mindless crap on the TV... where would they be now?

TV in my time was decent at least that's what we thought, today if you watch the Dicovery channel it's full of motorcycle building nonsense, home repair, beauty shows, etc. it's all crap... the Learning channel is the same thing... I know because as I stay in other cities to work I do get to see what's on the TV and as I see the nonsense the only one that really stands out is the Education and History channel, besides some Public TV programming... everything else is not worth the effort to use the remote to turn on the TV!

So my answer is YES there are alot like us that believe we are in the minority or majority depending on how you look at it....

Radiopilot

 

[rwells2265]

EVERYTHING is moving to HDTV, OTA or not. Video game systems are all 720p, 1080i, or 1080p with the exception of the Nintendo Wii, which is likely to be the last ever NTSC system. DVD will be replaced by either HD-DVD or Blu Ray. In 2 years, those TVs are going to be useless except for watching old movies and playing old video games, and you'll have to be buying TVs yet again.

And except for those with Dish, DirecTV or digital cable .... and ass/u/me'ing the so-called "converter boxes" go on the market.

Analog TVs still have life in 'em yet. I have a sizable DVD and VHS collection of movies, vintage TV, etc., and have Dish Network (for what little I watch of it as it is now!), so I'm in no hurry to drop the bucks on an HDTV. We bought a 27" Sony about a year ago (CRT), and the picture is fantastic.

Which leads me to my skepticism about Blu-Ray and HD-DVD ..... the difference between DVD and VHS is far more dramatic than going from DVD to the 'higher digital' forms. What's more, count me as one of the "old farts" who much prefers classic entertainment - movies, TV - than much of what one sees today. HD is good for current and recent movies, and for whatever TV programs are produced in that form. And where I believe HDTV will gain the most is televised sports and video gaming. But what's the difference between Jake and Elwood Blues on DVD and, say, a Blu-Ray disc? Very little; the classic films weren't made for this technology.

I might be wrong, but I suspect 2009 is going to bring some real surprises. All it's gonna take is for a member of Congress to start running ads saying "TV is about to be taken away from you!" Analog to high-def isn't as big a change as some think ... this is nowhere near evolutions of the past -- 78 to LP to CD, or changes in game systems and video. My 15-year-old son, I'm sure, will soon be lusting after an HD set ... while I'll be content to wait awhile. Good luck convincing folks like my parents, though (active and retired, both in their 60s). They're completely happy with good ol' NTSC.

I'm betting our grocery money on analog tellys being relevant well into next decade. They're in no danger of becoming boat anchors or joining your old 486 in the garage.

.02

--Russell

 

[rwells2265]

TV in my time was decent at least that's what we thought, today if you watch the Dicovery channel it's full of motorcycle building nonsense, home repair, beauty shows, etc. it's all crap... the Learning channel is the same thing... I know because as I stay in other cities to work I do get to see what's on the TV and as I see the nonsense the only one that really stands out is the Education and History channel, besides some Public TV programming... everything else is not worth the effort to use the remote to turn on the TV!

So my answer is YES there are alot like us that believe we are in the minority or majority depending on how you look at it....

Majority or minority, who cares -- I know what I like. And channels like TLC and Discovery, having strayed far from their original missions, makes Public TV even more of an oasis. These days, PBS and some shows on RFD-TV are about the only things I watch.

Radiopilot, what you illustrated is one of several reasons I am not eager to make the switch to HDTV. I don't like much of what's on in NTSC, so why should I want to watch the same infomercials, reality junk, intrusive animated promo bugs, and stomach-turning "CSI" graphic violence, with its 20 minutes of commercials, product-placement and whatever new forms of "gonzo" advertising the networks are devising to thwart DVR owners.

I mean, if I want to watch crap in high definition, I'll go out in my backyard and watch some REAL crap (from our dog) in the ultimate video format: my own eyes!! ;D

--Russell (also in Savannah)

 

[KML0224]

I sell TVs where I work. It's so funny watching somebody buying a 13" Durabrand TV for $49 and some change! I can her that customer now..."HDT-what? Is that some fancy-schmansy new gizmo?" Seriously, I've told several customers about the 2009 analog cut-off date and some are aware of it. The only question about it all is this: If the customer doesn't use a cable converter at that point, will their service provider downconvert the digital signals to a 480p picture so the customer can still use their current TVs?

 

[AKLes]

The federal subsidy for set-top converters already exists. I believe there is still some squabbling over the final amount to be handed out. Without this there would be rioting in the streets and a definite change in who holds office.

Unless something magic happens, cable and satellite providers will find it far less expensive to upgrade head-end equipment to allow existing customer-end equiment to continue to function. Of course they'll initially offer expensive optional equipment for those willing to pay to see "the very best".

Ultimately they'll turn all that around by raising the price for continuing analog service so it's much more expensive to not go digital.

The entire motivation behind the adoption of a digital standard was that TV manufacturers had made the fatal mistake of building sets that last too long and were not being replaced. You can believe they won't make that mistake in the "new" generation. Look for the life expectancy of your new digital TV to be no longer than 7 days after the warranty (growing ever shorter) will expire.

 

[Markxxx]

What bugs me is the potential for abuse, not actual but potential. Analog is not as efficent for transmitting so it makes sense to change it. But cable companies "sell" things without giving info. I know people who get HDTV channels with no HDTV. Then you're paying for NOTHING in effect.

Digital cable is NOT digital TV, but the cable company won't tell you this. You have to find out on your own.

Some people can't tell DTV or "enhanced" TV from HDTV. Outside of sports and a nature show, HDTV isn't that great. I mean Seinfeld is no funnier if I could see George better.

Equally frustrating is the multi formats, consumers feel angry what they buy may not be the best and may be outmoded in a few years.

I have bought the Beatles records, 8-Tracks, Casette tape, CD and now I need to downlod the MP3. How many times am I gonna have to buy that damn "Meet the Beatles" album.

To be fair it's not TV alone, there are so many formats from computer operating systems to computer browsers to cell phone and so on.

It will take time for the DTV conversion. After analog goes expect a time when the FCC will have to "re-arrange" channels so everyone is broadcasting clear and not interfering. How many times did we have to rearrange and reassign channels in the 40s and 50s. Lots of times. Then we'll have to sort out the rest like we did with color TV, then UHF, the OTA subscription TV, then cable.

I don't see converters being too much of an issue, mainly because at my Wal-Mart I saw a 25" Magnavox that can get analog and DTV (of course not in HDTV but a converter can't either) for $89.00. If the converter is going to be $50.00 buck why not just spend the extra $40 and get a new TV.

 

[dhett]

It will take time for the DTV conversion. After analog goes expect a time when the FCC will have to "re-arrange" channels so everyone is broadcasting clear and not interfering. How many times did we have to rearrange and reassign channels in the 40s and 50s. Lots of times. Then we'll have to sort out the rest like we did with color TV, then UHF, the OTA subscription TV, then cable.

The FCC has already analyzed for interference between stations. That's why some stations had so much difficulty getting their digital assignments approved, while others will be forced to give up their VHF channels for UHF channels at the end of the DTV conversion. There may be an occasional adjustment for stations forced to accept bad channel assignments, like WBBM Chicago or KVBC Las Vegas, but I doubt there will be widespread channel swapping.

 

[TexasTom]

Outside of sports and a nature show, HDTV isn't that great. I mean Seinfeld is no funnier if I could see George better.

I disagree. Many types of programs benefit from a better picture. The most obvious examples would be programs that are visually striking, such as "Lost" or "Smallville", both of which look great in HD.

Even comedies look better in HD, even if the extra resolution isn't "necessary" to appreciate the humor. Taking the example you give, would Seinfeld be less funny if you could only see George in black and white? Does that mean that color broadcasting isn't that great because it would still be funny in black and white?

 

[AKLes]

A major improvement in television would be clean-up of the audio.

Particularly on CBS network programs.

I have experienced the same thing on CBS affilliate stations in Sacramento, San Francisco, Providence, Anchorage and it's always the same. Keep remote in hand to control audio levels which are totally out of network or station control. Pump the audio from the TV through an external amplifier with at least bass and treble controls to compensate for the muddy sound of missing highs.

Or....watch the same shows in reruns on cable channels where they seem to have mastered audio.

Not a new problem, I've experienced it for at least nine years on 20 or more different TVs of different size, manufacture and quality.

 

[R.D.P.]

Since going back to Direct TV, I've found some entertaining and educational programming to watch and enjoy.

Not all TV programming is bad.  You can still find something awesome and wonderful to watch, if you have the right resources to watch it from.

(Pefered Resources include Direct TV)

Concerning my TV, I'm not going to ditch it.  Direct TV already has a digital signal coming through my decoder box, although they still don't offer the local channels from Montgomery Alabama.

Oh well!  I don't watch local TV that much anyway.  Too much boredom and trash on it.  I'd rather avoid it.  Even if Direct TV were to someday offer the Montgomery Alabama channels, I'd keep them away from my TV.  I have no interest in them.

Direct TV is an awesome satellite provider.  They have the best Satellite service, of any provider, in my opinion.  Fewer tech issues, a cheaper fee and a better variety of programs, is what lead me back to them.

R.D.P. <><

P.S. Since going back, I'm now finding myself no longer wanting to watch the News, Wrestling and other "Trashy" programs.  Man I feel so much better, since giving those things up. I'm not to let the bad things, of this world, drag me down any longer.  Thank God for Word Pictures, Dr. Ravi Zacharias, Dr. John MacArthur, Dr. D. James Kennedy, Dr. R.C. Sproul and Dr. William R. Crews.  I watch those Preachers, every chance I get.

 

[robbbc]

I am lost to the major improvement that Digital TV is. Last time I went into Best Buy the gargantuan TVs had mediocre picture quality. DLP, LCD, and Plasma don't look anywhere near as good as good old analog CRT and if you can find a digital CRT you will find it can barely work without a cable box and a sound system hooked up to it. If someone wants to make a killing they will come up with an inexpensive 36 inch Digital Cable Ready Stereo HDTV CRT set. Barring that let's all get ready for replacement TV costs.

Also, the stations that are trying to hold on to lo-VHF need to get a grip. Hi-VHF even has problems getting picked up with a UHF antenna. If we just put everyone in UHF land we would be better off.

 

[anotherguyTN]

I sell TVs where I work. It's so funny watching somebody buying a 13" Durabrand TV for $49 and some change! I can her that customer now..."HDT-what? Is that some fancy-schmansy new gizmo?" Seriously, I've told several customers about the 2009 analog cut-off date and some are aware of it. The only question about it all is this: If the customer doesn't use a cable converter at that point, will their service provider downconvert the digital signals to a 480p picture so the customer can still use their current TVs?

Kevin,
I've noticed that in my local Wal Marts that they have signs on the 13 to 20 inch sets saying that they are SDTVs now. Yet the ones I see on display are the same old models that were already there. Are the newer models going to be SDTVs as the older sets sell out, or this misleading advertising on Wal Mart's part? If it's the latter, then either someone is passing on false information or whoever sets the ads has no idea what SDTV really means.