Guess I've been under a Rock

[FLbjbud]

Post Script: Fair warning, after I read this I realized it is a bit of a Rant as well. Not exactly organized thought but conveys my point.

Ok, so I was listening to the radio today and I heard a public announcement about those fools on Cap Hill requiring everyone in the US to convert to Digital TV if you use "rabbit ears"; well that would be me. I'm poor :wink:, only one TV in the house on Direct TV.
WTF???
Something about a box? A $40 coupon?
Which brings me to how much do they freaking cost?

If the gov is giving you a coupon that covers $40, how much are they total? More importantly, however, who is footing the bill for that sh*t?
Oh wait, a guess: taxpayers.

Why exactly, shouldn't they be more concerned about other matters? Like War? What's it to them that I get nothing but crap on one TV and the other isn't much better.

 

[JustAsking]

Post Script: Fair warning, after I read this I realized it is a bit of a Rant as well. Not exactly organized thought but conveys my point.

Ok, so I was listening to the radio today and I heard a public announcement about those fools on Cap Hill requiring everyone in the US to convert to Digital TV if you use "rabbit ears"; well that would be me. I'm poor :wink:, only one TV in the house on Direct TV.
WTF???
Something about a box? A $40 coupon?
Which brings me to how much do they freaking cost?

If the gov is giving you a coupon that covers $40, how much are they total? More importantly, however, who is footing the bill for that sh*t?
Oh wait, a guess: taxpayers.

Why exactly, shouldn't they be more concerned about other matters? Like War? What's it to them that I get nothing but crap on one TV and the other isn't much better.

NC,
I hear ya, man. But the deadline is more than a year away. And the converters are probably going to be around $60. With the $40 voucher it will be about $20. The technology inside those boxes are pretty straightforward and pretty cheap.

More importantly the US TV broadcasting format is over 60 years old and it is one of the worst in the world for resolution and quality. Today's technology has outpaced the analog broadcasting standards by miles and it is time to retire that old NTSC dinosaur. The technological leap is so far that it is impossible to make the new standard work with the old standard like they did when color tv came in.

Also, by next year digital TVs should be even cheaper than they are today. The cost is dropping quickly, and the picture quality is incredible compared to the old stuff.

As for the gov't taking a part, there is a good reason for this. The radio/tv broadcasting spectrum is part of the public commonwealth. The gov't regulates it for the same reason that the gov't regulates interstate commerce. There are plenty of examples why gov't regulation of certain standards have been a huge boon to commerce and the economy. Besides weights and measures, the width of railroad tracks are a good example. Gov't regulation of telecommunication and broadcast standards has mostly been a good thing for the country.

I am pretty much a libertarian about most things, but in this area, I am glad we have regulation of broadcast standards. My chief complaint is that they move to slowly, not that they move too fast.

 

[2322]

If you have DirecTV you do not need to worry about this because your box is provided by DirecTV. The box you now have receives digital signals from DirecTV and changes them to analog to view on your TV set.

In other words, you already have a box which will allow you to view digital signals. It's when you leave DirecTV (or DiSH or any cable TV provider) and intend to use an antenna that you will need the box the FCC is talking about.

If you use an antenna with your satellite service to receive local broadcasts then you will need a box. If you never intend to use an antenna and only satellite or cable, then you need never worry about getting the right box for your TV set. Your TV will die before the cable and satellite companies cease to make boxes which are compatible with your current analog TV.

 

[FLbjbud]

I later found this website: https://www.dtv2009.gov/

Thanks guys. I was under the impression that it was sometime this year that the switch was going to take place, but I see now that it's not to happen until 2009. Two of the three in our house are the old floor models from the 80's, one of which is the one on Direct TV. So depending on how much new TVs come down I may just get new ones and throw out the old ones.

 

[dreamer20]

If you have DirecTV ...The box you now have receives digital signals from DirecTV and changes them to analog to view on your TV set...It's when you leave DirecTV (or DiSH or any cable TV provider) and intend to use an antenna that you will need the box the FCC is talking about...

Your TV will die before ...satellite companies cease to make boxes which are compatible with your current analog TV.

Apparently where local channels are concerned that statement may no longer be true. In March 2010 Directv claimed local channels were included with their fee increase, but refused this programming service for persons possessing older model receivers, like mine. They stated I should ditch my well functioning receiver, get the newest model receiver, a slimline dish and a HDTV set instead to obtain the new HD broadcast service. I'm hesitant to do this as a cousin's new model receiver and a friend's, for reasons unknown, melted down and hence were ruined. So I'll keep what I have for the time being.

 

[SpeedoMike]

I'm surprised that a satellite provider would do anything which might cause customers to stop the service! people I know still use analog TV sets with satellite or a converter box for local broadcast signals. they just don't get all the "benefits", if any, of digital TV.

Digital is grossly over rated and the biggest result to conversion from analog was the phenomenon of selling a massive number of new TVs to people who had perfectly good analog sets which became worthless.

 

[midlifebear]

edited stuf

Digital is grossly over rated and the biggest result to conversion from analog was the phenomenon of selling a massive number of new TVs to people who had perfectly good analog sets which became worthless.

Ah, yes, it is true SpeedoMike. But those 525 interlaced line displays pale in comparison to a 1080i HD flat screen. Porn on Blue Ray CDs is so much more tasty! :smile:

 

[HazelGod]

But those 525 interlaced line displays pale in comparison to a 1080i HD flat screen. Porn on Blue Ray CDs is so much more tasty! :smile:

I'll see your i and raise you my p. :tongue:

I have to nix the porn on Blu-ray...it's too real. I don't wanna see ingrown hair bumps on the coochie lips or pimples on the bootie. I would prefer those explicit details be obscured by the camera.

 

[dreamer20]

I'm surprised that a satellite provider would do anything which might cause customers to stop the service! people I know still use analog TV sets with satellite or a converter box for local broadcast signals. they just don't get all the "benefits", if any, of digital TV.

Digital is grossly over rated and the biggest result to conversion from analog was the phenomenon of selling a massive number of new TVs to people who had perfectly good analog sets which became worthless.

For them increased monthly revenues, HDTV sales and the new model satellite sales took precendence over a service they once provided their customers. They'll soon cause me to defect to DishNetwork.