Broadcast TV switch to digital

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

But were they really?

Yes.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by stevew

The coupon program was an abject failure. For starters, they issued way too many coupons in the beginning. Which lead to not enough boxes. And because of the demand many people were unable to use theirs before it expired. Then you had a ton of people buying the boxes who didn't need them. We would get 3 to 4 dozen in and they would be gone in a day.

People were constantly mad that we were out of stock. And everyone else was out. Way too much of a hassle. Plus the shitty magnavox ones broke at a much higher rate than other electronic items.

This would hav worked much better as a mail in rebate program or as a one coupon at a time thing

Or no fuckin coupons at all for that manner. This whole thing is just a big clusterfuck

It's not really the governments problem that the companies producing the boxes didn't have them ready in time... IMO.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yes.

No?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

No?

Yes!

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yes!

Hehe, I love to argue today

[ISiddiqui]

This is not an argument, it's contradiction .

[sterlingice]

Seriously? I can't believe you guys are getting pissed off at this. It's not like it's not going to happen, it's that they're going to wait a couple of months.

For months, anyone paying attention has known this was going to get delayed- they've been talking about it for months. If there's one thing people will get pissed off about irrationally, it's their tv. So, with the economy falling apart around our ears, other huge problems lurking around every turn, Obama has the most political capital he's ever going to see, and most of it coming from a popular mandate from "common people. The last thing he wants to do is waste all of that on people getting pissed because they, their cable company, and Congress can't get their $#!+ straight about this and then go off and blame him because we all know that's how it would go down. In his mind, better to solve the bigger problems now while he has a chance and then we can sqabble about tv in a few months. And, frankly, I sure as hell agree with him.

Also, doesn't it make more sense to do this in the summer, when shows are on summer break (except for cable networks)?

SI

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Seriously? I can't believe you guys are getting pissed off at this. It's not like it's not going to happen, it's that they're going to wait a couple of months.

For months, anyone paying attention has known this was going to get delayed- they've been talking about it for months. If there's one thing people will get pissed off about irrationally, it's their tv. So, with the economy falling apart around our ears, other huge problems lurking around every turn, Obama has the most political capital he's ever going to see, and most of it coming from a popular mandate from "common people. The last thing he wants to do is waste all of that on people getting pissed because they, their cable company, and Congress can't get their $#!+ straight about this and then go off and blame him because we all know that's how it would go down. In his mind, better to solve the bigger problems now while he has a chance and then we can sqabble about tv in a few months. And, frankly, I sure as hell agree with him.

Also, doesn't it make more sense to do this in the summer, when shows are on summer break (except for cable networks)?

SI

Do you know anything about this transition? It has nothing to do with cable companies and everything to do with the FCC and US Government wanting to make money on the currently used analog frequencies.

Anyway it has already been delayed 3 times, it was supposed to happen in 2006. Now delaying the inevitable is going to cost many local broadcast stations millions.

[sterlingice]

Both placed I've lived in the last year (I realize small sample size) have already switched all of their signals over to digital.

Also, how does this cost local broadcast stations if they've already changed over? It costs millions to keep an analog transmitter they already had in place running for another 4 months?

SI

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Both placed I've lived in the last year (I realize small sample size) have already switched all of their signals over to digital.

Also, how does this cost local broadcast stations if they've already changed over? It costs millions to keep an analog transmitter they already had in place running for another 4 months?

SI

Local stations can't stop broadcasting analog signals till the drop off date. I think you are confusing what the DTV transition is.

The only city I know that has changed over is Charleston, you might be confusing DTV with your cable company going to an all digital format, which has nothing to do with DTV.

[ISiddiqui]

Here is the problem, there are a good number of cable areas that are putting their switch from analog to digital on hold until after the OTA transition in order to prevent confusion.

By further delay, my local Comcast is keeping more channels analog and therefore, doesn't have the room to add more HD channels.

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Also, how does this cost local broadcast stations if they've already changed over? It costs millions to keep an analog transmitter they already had in place running for another 4 months?

Because they have to run both analog and digital? PBS has already stated this delay is going to cost them tens of millions of dollars.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Seriously? I can't believe you guys are getting pissed off at this. It's not like it's not going to happen, it's that they're going to wait a couple of months.

For months, anyone paying attention has known this was going to get delayed- they've been talking about it for months. If there's one thing people will get pissed off about irrationally, it's their tv. So, with the economy falling apart around our ears, other huge problems lurking around every turn, Obama has the most political capital he's ever going to see, and most of it coming from a popular mandate from "common people. The last thing he wants to do is waste all of that on people getting pissed because they, their cable company, and Congress can't get their $#!+ straight about this and then go off and blame him because we all know that's how it would go down. In his mind, better to solve the bigger problems now while he has a chance and then we can sqabble about tv in a few months. And, frankly, I sure as hell agree with him.

Also, doesn't it make more sense to do this in the summer, when shows are on summer break (except for cable networks)?

SI

It's exactly why I'm pissed. This is not life or death. People aren't going to lose their homes over this. So after we've spent $160 million on a government party we spend another $22 million to delay the inevitable? Why spend $22 million on something that doesn't provide shelter, food, or clothing? Wouldn't it be better spent in Wilmington?

[Greyroofoo]

I'm loving the hd reception

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Here is the problem, there are a good number of cable areas that are putting their switch from analog to digital on hold until after the OTA transition in order to prevent confusion.

By further delay, my local Comcast is keeping more channels analog and therefore, doesn't have the room to add more HD channels.



Because they have to run both analog and digital? PBS has already stated this delay is going to cost them tens of millions of dollars.

DTV transition has nothing do with cable companies changing to all digital.

[ISiddiqui]

Once again:

there are a good number of cable areas that are putting their switch from analog to digital on hold until after the OTA transition in order to prevent confusion.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Once again:

They can only transition the channels over "broadcast" to digital only at this time. No cable company can transition broadcast (ABC, NBC, CBS, etc) channels will 2012.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

They can only transition the channels over "broadcast" to digital only at this time. No cable company can transition broadcast (ABC, NBC, CBS, etc) channels will 2012.

Huh?

Not Found

Is the FCC making cable companies switch to digital service?
No. Cable companies are not required to switch to digital service. Cable companies may choose to make their service all or partly digital, but they are not required to change from the analog service they offer today. In fact, the FCC requires cable companies to continue to provide local stations in analog as long as they provide any analog service, even after February 17, 2009.

So basically they can go all digital today if they want, but they are purposely not going that route until after the OTA conversion to avoid any confusion. Of course, they may say screw it, we were doing it to be nice, but it doesn't matter now.

Furthermore, there are more than just broadcast channels on cable which are in analog. Some cable companies are voluntarily suspending switching them over as well during the period.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Seriously? I can't believe you guys are getting pissed off at this. It's not like it's not going to happen, it's that they're going to wait a couple of months.


SI

If you had to deal with the hypothetical customer questions aspect of this for over the past year I'm sure you would feel differently. I was so happy it was finally going to happen. I see why they aren't doing it, but it needs to happen sooner rather than later. Boxes have been available for 6 months now. And every TV sold since fall of 2007(at least) has been compatible.

Delaying it cause of no coupons is stupid.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Seriously? I can't believe you guys are getting pissed off at this. It's not like it's not going to happen, it's that they're going to wait a couple of months.

I'm pissed because, like PurdueBrad, I'm annoyed by all the GD commercials about this shit.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Huh?

Not Found



So basically they can go all digital today if they want, but they are purposely not going that route until after the OTA conversion to avoid any confusion. Of course, they may say screw it, we were doing it to be nice, but it doesn't matter now.

Furthermore, there are more than just broadcast channels on cable which are in analog. Some cable companies are voluntarily suspending switching them over as well during the period.

You are having trouble understanding me, probably since I work in the industry and sometimes use the terms we use internally. Cable companies are required to have analog versions of broadcast channels till at least 2012 (this is a fact).

I realize that there are more then broadcast channels on cable, which is why I'm telling you cable companies CAN transition all the channels that are not included in their most basic broadcast plan, today if they want to. They cannot however take analog broadcast channels off their cable plant till at least 2012.

FCC: Cable companies must support analog until 2012

FCC: Cable companies must support analog until 2012

12 September 2007 19:38 by James "Dela" Delahunty | 9 comments
FCC: Cable companies must support analog until 2012 While the United States prepares to switch to digital broadcasts in February 2009, new rules from the FCC for cable companies will mean some viewers with analog TVs will be fine for a few more years. The FCC voted 5-0 to require that cable operators must continue to make all local broadcasts available to their users, even if they have analog TVs.

After the transition to digital, cable providers will have two signals to work with, digital standard definition (SD) and digital high definition (HD). To keep providing for the analog users, the cable companies will have two choices, either provide its subscribers with converter boxes or convert the digital SD signal to analog SD and provide it across the lines.

The converter box option is potentially very expensive and the analog signal option means the use of more bandwidth. The National Cable & Telecommunications Association applauded the FCC's decision but expressed concerns about the special circumstances of very small systems which could face severe cost pressures by complying.

[ISiddiqui]

But some cable companies, like Comcast in my area, are NOT converting more analog channels (or, if you will, moving them to a digital tier) until the whole OTA broadcast thing is over to prevent confusion. They were planning on moving a swath of them to digital in March of 2009. Now, who knows.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

But some cable companies, like Comcast in my area, are NOT converting more analog channels (or, if you will, moving them to a digital tier) until the whole OTA broadcast thing is over to prevent confusion. They were planning on moving a swath of them to digital in March of 2009. Now, who knows.

Right I know, that is what I'm trying to make sure people understand, there was someone commenting that cable companies are the cause of this and I was explaining that they have nothing to do with DTV. Whether a cable company moves their channels that are "over/above" broadcast has nothing to do with DTV, has to do with the cable company. From what I know, we at TWC in Los Angeles, aren't planning on doing any of those types of changes till 2012, even though freeing up that bandwidth from channel 30-79 would give us the opportunity to provide customers with about up to 200 more HD channels (up to 4 HD channels per 6 MHz wide analog channel, roughly 300 MHz)... So now we can blame the limits of HD expansion on analog .

[twothree]

Originally Posted by stevew

If you had to deal with the hypothetical customer questions aspect of this for over the past year I'm sure you would feel differently. I was so happy it was finally going to happen. I see why they aren't doing it, but it needs to happen sooner rather than later. Boxes have been available for 6 months now. And every TV sold since fall of 2007(at least) has been compatible.

Delaying it cause of no coupons is stupid.

Thanks to the House, it is back to the February 17th date. A very good thing, that I am also happy to see happen.

[ISiddiqui]

Ooooh, link?

[ISiddiqui]

Found it:

DTV-Delay Bill Fails To Pass In House - 2009-01-28 18:02:08 - Broadcasting & Cable

[DanGarion]

AWESOME!

[JediKooter]

This should clear up some confusion on this issue:

[Cringer]

All this BS over TV. It's real nice my daughter now picks up the local channels perfectly clear on her bedroom TV with her new tv/monitor she got for Christmas. It's still TV, life goes on without it. People who have to go without for a day/week/month can get their news from their neighbor. Acting like this country will cease to be able to function because of this is just dumb.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Cringer

People who have to go without for a day/week/month can get their news from their neighbor.

Why would you do that if you have internet access?

In all seriousness though, both severe weather information & school closure information are a couple of things that are primarily delivered by TV that could be missed by some people.

[Raiders Army]

I'm glad this didn't get baracked.

[SteveMax58]

FYI on how does it cost millions to keep analog OTA running...it costs broadcasters (depending on transmitter strength and local energy costs, etc.) in the neighborhood of $35k/month to transmit that signal. That does not include any other operational and facility-based efficiencies that are gained by shutting off the analog transmission. So in a sense...it's environmentally friendly to shut that crap off ASAP!!!

With all of the coordination for broadcasters that will be switching over to OTA frequencies that are currently occupied by analog, obviously the impact to CATV Ops, and the (once again) message that the government's dates are never set in stone...this needs to just happen for every reasonable person's sake.

[Young Drachma]

Digital Television Beckons, but Many Miss the Call - NYTimes.com

[JPhillips]

So 155 out of 178 Republicans voted against the delay in the House, forcing it to go through a much longer process. I guess they're going to vote against everything the majority supports.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

So 155 out of 178 Republicans voted against the delay in the House, forcing it to go through a much longer process. I guess they're going to vote against everything the majority supports.

But this is one where common sense prevailed...

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by DanGarion

But this is one where common sense prevailed...

Exactly.

[DanGarion]

I'm sorry to say, I understand that congress is supposed to be representative of the people, but most of the people in power have their own agendas and never listen to the people that they are supposedly in power to represent. A large majority of the people have already converted and are ready, there is no reason to stop the DTV Transition.

[JPhillips]

I wouldn't argue the timing of the transition, hell I wrote a paper in 93 or 94 about the coming era of DTV and it's still not here yet. I just find it odd that so many Republicans chose to vote no without showing even the slightest interest in the matter. I haven't heard a single principled defense, they're just going to vote no on anything the majority supports. This issue seems like a pretty easy way to build some bi-partisan credibility especially when the Senate passed it 100-0.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

This should clear up some confusion on this issue:

Heh, I think I had that cable box with the silver dial.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

In all seriousness though, both severe weather information & school closure information are a couple of things that are primarily delivered by TV that could be missed by some people.

Missed this until now. We are in that boat. We don't get any local TV stations, so it's a little pain in the ass for us but it's no big deal. The Saturday after Christmas I woke up in the middle of the night and saw a crapload of heat lightning. A few minutes later thunder started rolling like Lily Allen's calves. I looked at Weatherbug on my phone and saw we had a tornado warning. After that, I checked the internet and saw a little more.

Anyhow, after it was all over I went to Wal-Mart and bought a NOAA radio for $20.

This week with the ice storm our kids' school called not once, not twice, but three times to let us know that the schools were closed. They were also on the radio and the internet.

I don't think this is a problem. For old people they should be used to getting their news over the radio. If they don't get the warnings...well, they'll die sooner than most anyhow.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

... A few minutes later thunder started rolling like Lily Allen's calves...

Admit it- you made this entire post for this joke

SI

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Admit it- you made this entire post for this joke

SI

Ah, just a target of opportunity. Actually, the thundering of her thighs is the more common saying.

I would've said something about the thunder sounding like the rumbling of DanGarion's stomach in the middle of the night, but I didn't want to steal lynchjim's thunder.

[Raiders Army]

And it's delayed. If two years wasn't enough to prepare you, what does four more months do?

Congress postpones digital TV transition to June - News- msnbc.com

[ISiddiqui]

Though, apparently, I read that the bill includes a provision saying that broadcasters may switch earlier than the June date if they want to. So that's good news.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

And it's delayed. If two years wasn't enough to prepare you, what does four more months do?

Congress postpones digital TV transition to June - News- msnbc.com

Damn, I just bought my girlfriend a converter yesterday.

The thing is, many people who have over-the-air analog signals just don't care that much about TV. I think some of them secretly want their TV to go away.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

I looked at Weatherbug on my phone and saw we had a tornado warning. After that, I checked the internet and saw a little more.

You do realize that those two sentences highlight the difference between you & the people I was mostly talking about, right? There's still a decent chunk of the population that still have flashing VCR clocks.

For old people they should be used to getting their news over the radio.

Good luck with that in more markets than I can count these days.

Look, even if I'm not a fan of the mandate to switch I still think any further delay is pretty silly. What hasn't been rectified by now isn't like to happen in four more weeks or four more months or most likely even in four more years. My point was mostly that it isn't quite as cut & dried about other options as it was being presented.

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

You do realize that those two sentences highlight the difference between you & the people I was mostly talking about, right? There's still a decent chunk of the population that still have flashing VCR clocks.



Good luck with that in more markets than I can count these days.

Look, even if I'm not a fan of the mandate to switch I still think any further delay is pretty silly. What hasn't been rectified by now isn't like to happen in four more weeks or four more months or most likely even in four more years. My point was mostly that it isn't quite as cut & dried about other options as it was being presented.

And most of those people probably don't contribute much to society...

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Though, apparently, I read that the bill includes a provision saying that broadcasters may switch earlier than the June date if they want to. So that's good news.

Is it really? I thought the whole purpose of the government controlling this thing was to make it less confusing and creating a standard. Since broadcasters can switch, it makes it more confusing. ABC may be switching over, but FOX, CBS, and NBC aren't going to until two months from now.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

You do realize that those two sentences highlight the difference between you & the people I was mostly talking about, right? There's still a decent chunk of the population that still have flashing VCR clocks.

Yes I understand the difference. The point of the post was that you can pick up a good NOAA radio for $20 and the argument that people need TV to know about the weather is false.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

The point of the post was that you can pick up a good NOAA radio for $20 and the argument that people need TV to know about the weather is false.

And my point was that there are people out there who don't even know such things exist, never mind that the default setting for most of the ones I've encountered eventually becomes "OFF" since they tend to either miss the info you need/want or give you warnings 100 miles away that have zero to do with you.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

Is it really? I thought the whole purpose of the government controlling this thing was to make it less confusing and creating a standard. Since broadcasters can switch, it makes it more confusing. ABC may be switching over, but FOX, CBS, and NBC aren't going to until two months from now.

Government isn't controlling the switch as an imposition to broadcasters. The only way the switch was ever going to happen was a government mandated deadline. The broadcast companies were fine keeping all the extra bandwidth to broadcast both analog and digital.

[cuervo72]

Exactly - they want the bandwidth back.