43 replies to this topic

[Mitch0129]

That means he was stuck with only soap operas to watch during the day, no ESPN, ESPN2, Fox Sports Net, or any of the sports channels. I never saw someone so eager to get out of the hospital!

EEK! I don't blame him for wanting out!

It is totally hilarious and we still get a good laugh when we talk about it. I did not mention that he was in traction (he had fractured his hip in a car accident) so he could not even leave his bed, much less the room. Otherwise, he would have been wandering the halls and flirting with the nurses. To appreciate this story, you have to know about this guy. In the dictionary entry for "Typical sports-loving, Mr. Macho, American male" there is a picture of him. He is the type of guy who would rather walk barefooted on a hot pile of rocks than watch a chick-flick.

So whenever any of us guys visited him in the hospital, he was always grousing that "this s**ks, there is nothing on TV!". One night, we decided to sneak some "contraband" (beer and pizza) into his room. We were caught by one of the nurses but I guess when she saw four good-looking, charming guys and we watching Monday Night Football, she just shook her head. Before she left, she did advise us to "take the evidence with us" when we left.

Edited by Mitch0129, 08 August 2008 - 01:29 PM.

[pir8]

I doubt i will ever get cable as I'm never home long enough to get my moneys worth of it. Luckily they are going to broadcast over the air the local stations in Digital, which is what I'll generally watch anyway. Also the last TV I bought already has Digital capability so I'm OK as long as it stays working.

[drbill]

Given what is usually broadcast on TV, I think they should pay us to watch it! Of course there are exceptions... like "Dive Dry with Dr. Bill!"

I am not yet certain whether I will be able to receive off-the-air digital TV signals out here on Catalina. My standard def reception is fairly good. TV is still "free" if you can receive the off-the-air signal at reasonable strength. If I can't, I'll still use my TV's... but only to watch DVD's!

[Racer184]

If you can watch tv now, you will be able to watch tv after February if you have the right tv (or convertor).
There are no tv stations going 'off the air' because of this change. They are changing to digital transmission as required by the feds. In fact there are going to be many MORE tv stations. The cost of electricity for ATSC transmissions is much lower than the 'old' NTSC. With ATSC they can broadcast 4 or 5 channels of programming with the one antenna and one tv transmitter and still pay a lot less in electricity.

It is more typical to transmit one hi-def channel and 1, 2 or 3 more 'standard definition' channels simultaneously.

[Fordan]

If you can watch tv now, you will be able to watch tv after February if you have the right tv (or convertor).
There are no tv stations going 'off the air' because of this change. They are changing to digital transmission as required by the feds. In fact there are going to be many MORE tv stations. The cost of electricity for ATSC transmissions is much lower than the 'old' NTSC. With ATSC they can broadcast 4 or 5 channels of programming with the one antenna and one tv transmitter and still pay a lot less in electricity.

There are stations that will be shutting down rather than spend the money to convert to digital and the new antenna it generally requires. I discovered a couple in upstate NY (Syracuse) when setting my grandmother and uncle up with their converter boxes. Also, low power and translator stations are exempt from the switchover.

And while there'll be more TV channels, I'd argue there aren't going to be more TV stations. You may see multiple channels coming from the same TV station, as stations can take the 6Mhz/19.39Mbps and split it up how they like. That's enough bandwidth to support a HD channel and some lower quality channels.

Haven't seen anything on the power use of a ATSC vs NTSC transmitter; it's not clear to me why it'd be different, as both are sending out a 6Mhz chunk of RF out...

Edit: nevermind, found a source: http://en.wikipedia....ving_advantages

Edited by Fordan, 10 August 2008 - 10:56 PM.

[Bubble2Bubble]

Fordan,
Thanks for that link

I have a roof top antenna but I will still be out of range for the new signal. I'm currently looking into ways I can receive/legally my local free channels from the satellite feed from a one time purchase of equipment?...the search is on...I have until Feb 2009 to find the solution for m home.

Yet, a Centris study released in February 2008 revealed "serious 'gaps' in digital TV signal coverage across the country "when taking into account 'outdoor receiving antenna sensitivity and multipath interference.'" As a result, the Centris study states, "certain households - for example: those that are not elevated; are surrounded by trees; or have set-top antennas instead of roof-top antennas; among other factors - are at higher risk of having limited or no signal coverage. Centris surveys reveal that 75% or more of over-the-air households have only set-top antennas."[3]

Mike

[Bubble2Bubble]

It looks like there might be a 3 or 4 month extension on the free tv controversy ?. I don't think that they took in consideration the fact that so many rural areas where gona be affected by this change over, basically if you don't live with-in 65 miles of a Big City you wont get reception regardless of getting a converter or getting a tv with the converter built in. being forced to purchase a Sat so I can watch local news is going to cut right in on my scuba funds for 2009 and beyond. Besides starting this post I don't know what else I can do about fighting this change-over to Digital Tv ?

Mike

[hambergler]

The digital conversion is going to happen, Bubski, whether you want it to or not. It's been in the works for over 10 years, and has already been delayed for about 5 years. VHF bands devoted to TV video and audio transmissions are supposedly being given over to local public service entities who need these frequencies.

I've been getting DirecTV for about ten years, lately with HD capability both over the air and off satellite, and I'd never go back to "regular" TV. I'd miss my History and History International, Discover and Science, TLC, Food, Military, and Skin-emax too much!! all in glorious HD, of course...

[Bubble2Bubble]

Hamburgler

Your right things are gona change, I know it, but I think our new President understands that when they pull the plug on free tv that there is gona be a bunch of one tooth hillbillies in front of the White House riding there JD tractors saying “ain't right” then saying “pass the jug” nutting worse than a drunken hillbilly with a pitch-fork “trust me” My local broadcaster can tell me over the tv that the tornado is coming from Billy Bobs ranch and to expect large heifers to be hitting my house soon..or they can broadcast that the tornado is coming from Jimmy Joes farm and only need to expect sheep and goats flying thru the air..similar to a bug zapper in summer. I know they want to clean-up the air waves but at a cost of 48 million so far I think that money could have been better spent by cleaning up the air IMHO. The bigger picture is that people around here and elsewhere having to spent $29 a month in this economy for basic tv might not give them enough money to buy the persciption drugs they need to survive.

Hamburgler I hope to see you at the Coral Spawning Event this Aug in Fl...You wont find that on the Skin-emax channel


Bubski

[BeachJunkie]

If their priorities are so scewed that they would pass on prescription drugs for daytime soap operas and that weird guy with the mustache telling them the uneventful local news while wearing his suit from 1976, they deserve to die from whatever ails them. I call it darwinism. If $29 a month is going to break someone that bad, they have some serious budgeting issues.

I went years without television. My mother was very anti tv/video games when I was growing up. So, my brother and I played outside, played sports, built forts, rode bikes and stayed healthy. If all the kids these days had their playstations and xbox 360's restricted to 1 hour a day and schools started the whole mandatory physical education stuff again, you better believe the obesity rate would drop.

I haven't changed much. I have only had tv once since joining the army and thats cause my fiance needed something to do while I was off playing rambo. Even then I didn't watch it much. I'm very prone to procrastination and have a wicked lazy streak in me. Having tv would only make that worse. I'll stick to netflix. its 5 bucks a month and works just fine for me.

[peterbj7]

This whole process started in the UK years ago, but the government stipulated that there must be free terrestrial digital TV and radio all over the country. So there's still no need to pay a fortune (easily $100/month) for cable or satellite. I've never bought either and I never will.

[Fordan]

This whole process started in the UK years ago, but the government stipulated that there must be free terrestrial digital TV and radio all over the country. So there's still no need to pay a fortune (easily $100/month) for cable or satellite. I've never bought either and I never will.

Free? Doesn't the UK still have a yearly television license requirement?

The US has free broadcast TV now and will still have free broadcast TV after the digital transition. From my experience setting up my grandmother & uncle's converter boxes, if you have a watchable analog signal you'll have a watchable digital signal with much better picture quality. They're 50 miles from the nearest broadcasting city, and get most channels digitally on rabbit ears.

Bubble2Bubble, have you actually tried a converter box before assuming it wouldn't work? (and where did the $48 million number come from? The government's already spent $1.34 billion just in converter box coupons.)

In any case, I see little reason for delaying the transition. It's not like it's was a secret, and people have had enough time to figure out what they're going to do. Maybe toss some more money into converter box coupons, but even that's questionable since the programs been out for over a year.

[Bubble2Bubble]

Fordan,
Good Question..Yes I was probably one of the first ones to try the new converter box's. I even read the instructions. The nearest Big City that broadcasts is Shreveport La and that's over 120 miles away, needless to say my tv reception is poor to medium at best, It all depends on the clouds in the area and storms etc.... Where did I get the 48 million number ? Well on My Free Tv of course
Its possible I got the numbers backwards and its 48 million coupons handed out already at a cost of "$1.34 billion" But you brought up a good point because you installed the converter box's for your grandmother & uncle and that was another point in the news broadcast..that some people are still Technology challenged and I think that was the major point of attempting to delay this change. Its possible like many others have said that this new change over has been out for years but I have only seen it publicly announced in the last year or less. It sounds like the UK got it right the first time

Bubski

[WreckWench]

A few interesting observations:

1. DFW area has reported a shortage of the convertor boxes and advised people if they hadn't gotten one yet...they probably will not be able to get one at all let alone in time for the cut over.

2. As a user for the last 6 months or so I find a number of the primary channels fade in and out or simply display NO SIGNAL. This is VERY frustrating and I've noticed the problem has gotten worse and not better. Are there possible b/w issues with more users? (I am not home enough to warrent cable etc and the box was $40 compared to the price of a new tv)

3. There are extra channels...but most are extra weather related channels...better than waiting until late at night to get the latest weather info or self help channels like ION which does play 3 hours of NCIS on Mondays! (Since I never really got to see the show as much as I liked, I can tape 3 episodes and get caught up sans the commercials!)

4. I suspect the cutover may be delayed as it seems that too many are not ready for the Feb deadline.

[peterbj7]

Free? Doesn't the UK still have a yearly television license requirement?

Sorry yes, I meant it is marginally free. If you own a TV you have to pay the license fee, even if you're permanently connected to a cable or satellite company.

A problem we had/have in the UK is that digital reception is poor in many marginal areas. The same is true of digital phones. Analogue services may not be as clear, but they're accessible anywhere.