 Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL | Per pre TV It will pay by them makeing you pay $5 - $7 per tv for a box. | |
|
 | 
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-01
IA
| Re: Per pre TV said by Joe12345678  :It will pay by them makeing you pay $5 - $7 per tv for a box. More than that. People affected by this switch have no cable/satellite services at all. | |
|
| 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Netcong, NJ | ...or $45 for an OTA converter box (one-time vs. recurring). | |
|
| | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Per pre TV With a $40 coupon no less 
I've already used my coupons.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| 
CableTool
Poorly Representing MYSELF.
Premium
join:2004-11-12
| said by Joe12345678 :It will pay by them makeing you pay $5 - $7 per tv for a box. You dont need a converter if you have cable. They will provide the analogs for the next few years without a box.
--
CableTechs.org/"Horrible People with Integrity" | |
|
| | neufuse
join:2006-12-06
Indiana, PA | Re: Per pre TV yet around here they aready are planning on taking us back to 24 analogs only and the rest all digital... go figure... right now we have 80 analogs... the 24 would just be broadcast networks aka abc,cbs,nbc and local access only... | |
|
| | 
jimbo48
join:2000-11-17
Hayward, CA
 ·EarthLink
| And they have provided that promise "in writing" to supply analog feeds of their current line up for a few years more. I would venture so say Nope- they're going to reduce the basic packages that are available without a converter box to nothing but worthless shop from home networks and other crap. The few channels that are even remotely popular will all of a sudden become "digital only" and you'll need to upgrade your plan to digital to receive them.
Caveat emptor | |
|
| | |
CableTool
Poorly Representing MYSELF.
Premium
join:2004-11-12 | Re: Per pre TV Dam forward moving technology!!! I wish everything was still black and white... | |
|
jgantert
join:2004-06-02
Columbia, MD | Huh? I don't get it. Buy the converter box, and you get a crystal clear picture with lots of sub channels. Who needs cable TV? This is the best time to make the switch to free TV! | |
|
| 
needforspeed59
Cruise Ship Just Passing Through
join:2001-05-02
Glendale, AZ | Re: Huh? What's to get? Most people want more than OTA offers. Some don't. It's a choice.
--
Great success! High five! | |
|
| | jgantert
join:2004-06-02
Columbia, MD | Re: Huh? Yeah, but people with OTA analog only right now should love digital OTA only, its a much clearer picture, and lots of sub channels!
So what I don't get is why would everyone all of the sudden switch to cable TV? | |
|
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| Re: Huh? said by jgantert : So what I don't get is why would everyone all of the sudden switch to cable TV? Because they are technophobic and are afraid of the new fangled box, and the cable man will save them. | |
|
| |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
·DSL EXTREME
| Personally, there's only about 10-12 channels that my family watches that are non OTA. Most of them require a higher tier on cable, satellite or Uverse, making them quite pricey. I.e. $65-70/month for 12 channels = $$$$$
Only channels I'd 'like'
Me: FX, Sci-fi, Discovery science, TNT, FX
Kids: PBS-Kids, Cartoon Network
Wife: WE, Oxygen, Hallmark
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| me2000
join:2003-06-23
Waukegan, IL | A lot of people won't be able to pick up the OTA digital channels with just bunny ears...
So who's going to opt installing an outdoor antenna just so they can get a few channels when they can easily just switch to cable and get hundreds? | |
|
| | jgantert
join:2004-06-02
Columbia, MD
| Re: Huh? So there's that many out there that can get OTA analog but not OTA digital? I thought most OTA users already had an outdoor or attic antenna installed.
For me, OTA analog came in fuzzy, but OTA digital locks in fine. I'm pointed toward DC, about 25 miles away with a rooftop antenna. | |
|
| | |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Huh? With OTA analog, I get ~7 channels, mostly fuzzy
With OTA digital, I get 36 channels clear
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | | 
funchords
Robb
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Hillsboro, OR
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
·Comcast
| Re: Huh? said by en102 :With OTA analog, I get ~7 channels, mostly fuzzy With OTA digital, I get 36 channels clear WOW! I thought you'd only get the same channels that were broadcasting in analog. So what are the other 29 channels? I'm in Portland, Oregon -- where do I find out what's available OTA digital here (I don't have a digital set)?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
HTTP is the new Bandwidth Hog...
| |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | 
Madness
Wish I Knew
join:2000-01-05
Quincy, MA
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Huh? »www.titantv.com : This is another good one. Punch in your zip code and it will give you the DTV listings for your area.
For me, out of a possible ~40 channels, I'm getting 25 (most clearly) w/ the Digital Stream box from RadioShack and a cheap pair of rabbit ears. On analog, I was lucky to pull in maybe 8 channels that were (at minimum) watchable.
My curiosity is piqued so now I DO want to put an antenna up outdoors. Maybe I, like some, just don't want to shell out ~40/month for basic cable. | |
|
| BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| said by jgantert :I don't get it. Buy the converter box, and you get a crystal clear picture with lots of sub channels. Who needs cable TV? This is the best time to make the switch to free TV! While I don't watch most cable channels there are some that I do. So unless they start broadcasting OTA( never will happen ) then most people will stick with cable/satelite. The channels you get OTA are the networks which I haven't watched in about a dozen years. | |
|
spdickey
join:2002-11-17
Pacific Palisades, CA
| Grandma's with remotes The market switching back to cable will be elderly who don't know how to hook up a digital converter and deal with zero in home customer support from Best Buy and Circuit City and those who just don't want to bother and take cable up on their free install, analog only offer for now.
When cable goes 100% digital in a couple of years the fun will begin when every non-QAM ready TV will need a cable box on it . | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
edit:
May 18th, @05:47PM
| Re: Grandma's with remotes said by spdickey :When cable goes 100% digital in a couple of years the fun will begin when every non-QAM ready TV will need a cable box on it . Its strange that people talk about analog TVs being plugged into the cable wire and getting a usable amount of channels. In NYC, everything except OTA and Public Access is scrambled, is this just a NYC/urban thing, and all suburban cable systems have everything except premium scrambled?
On the other hand, going to QAM cable boxes will be simple, when there are only 5-10 channels to watch, or 0, your probably going to call tech support | |
|
| | spdickey
join:2002-11-17
Pacific Palisades, CA
edit:
May 22nd, @05:05PM
| Re: Grandma's with remotes said by patcat88 Its strange that people talk about analog TVs being plugged into the cable wire and getting a usable amount of channels. In NYC, everything except OTA and Public Access is scrambled, is this just a NYC/urban thing, and all suburban cable systems have everything except premium scrambled?
Here in deepest Los Angeles (on one of the cities oldest cable systems built by Theta Cable), we get in the clear analog channels 2-78. Plenty enough for most. All premiums are digital, as well as duplicates of most of the analogs. | |
|
| 
skizzors
@rr.com
| said by spdickey :When cable goes 100% digital in a couple of years the fun will begin when every non-QAM ready TV will need a cable box on it . CableLabs and cable box vendors are currently working on creating small digital boxes that can go on the outside of a house, or on the inside, that take the digital channels, convert them to analog, and put them out on the coax.
Cable companies are basically looking for a cheap enough box that they can give to analog only customers and deliver analog channels through their digital service.
1-way QAM ready TV's aren't even going to be useful in the future as SDV comes online in more and more areas. | |
|
| | ncbill
Premium
join:2007-01-23
Winston Salem, NC
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Grandma's with remotes I wouldn't be surprised to see another FCC mandate around 2012 that required all broadcast channels to be transmitted clear QAM.
said by skizzors :said by spdickey :When cable goes 100% digital in a couple of years the fun will begin when every non-QAM ready TV will need a cable box on it . CableLabs and cable box vendors are currently working on creating small digital boxes that can go on the outside of a house, or on the inside, that take the digital channels, convert them to analog, and put them out on the coax. Cable companies are basically looking for a cheap enough box that they can give to analog only customers and deliver analog channels through their digital service. 1-way QAM ready TV's aren't even going to be useful in the future as SDV comes online in more and more areas. | |
|
LurkerLito
join:2004-06-08
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Digital is great but it sucks too IMO cable companies should by law be giving their "standard"/"basic" plan cable packages free in unencrypted QAM form so that TVs bought today with ATSC/QAM tuners built in can receive their regular channels they have gotten for years without a box and a rental fee. People should only need to rent a "box" for their PPV or "paid" commercial-less channels like it has been for years with analog cable.
It really ticks me off that I have to rent a box for the digital version of some stations now that my cable company is taking them off the analog section. It's the analog station line up that's keeping me from moving to FIOS TV. Once they move to a "every tuner needs a box" system, then I will no longer have any incentive to stay with my cable company any longer. They have like 3 or 4 stations left that I care about that I can record with my mythTV box. If anymore of them move I'll be getting rid of my cable company. | |
|
| 
hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
clubs:
| Re: Digital is great but it sucks too "IMO cable companies should by law be giving their "standard"/"basic" plan cable packages free in unencrypted QAM form so that TVs bought today with ATSC/QAM tuners built in can receive their regular channels they have gotten for years without a box and a rental fee."
I assume that you would also force DISH companies to do the same by law.
Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
| |
|
| |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Digital is great but it sucks too Cable has local franchise agreements... Dish/DTV do not.
If I'm not mistaken, DTV boxes allow for hookup of OTA.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | |
hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
clubs:
| Re: Digital is great but it sucks too said by en102 :Cable has local franchise agreements... Dish/DTV do not. If I'm not mistaken, DTV boxes allow for hookup of OTA. and the ability to use local infrastructure then gives poliyicians the right to tell them how to run their business eh?
Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
| |
|
| | | |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Digital is great but it sucks too Somewhat... franchise agreements were a bit of a payoff... and its not like these companies didn't make money. Some of it was legit, to keep cable companies 'honest' and supporting what they sell.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | | PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| said by hobgoblin :and the ability to use local infrastructure then gives poliyicians the right to tell them how to run their business eh? Um, yea. If you make use of public property to run your business, then the public should get compensated; most franchise authorities have chosen policies like this as the form of that compensation. | |
|
| | | | |
hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
clubs:
| Re: Digital is great but it sucks too said by PDXPLT :Um, yea. If you make use of public property to run your business, then the public should get compensated; most franchise authorities have chosen policies like this as the form of that compensation. A franchise fee is compensation. Messing with companies policies is not compensation. Its meddling with shareholders profits.
Hob
--
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
| |
|
| | | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by hobgoblin :said by en102 :Cable has local franchise agreements... Dish/DTV do not. If I'm not mistaken, DTV boxes allow for hookup of OTA. and the ability to use local infrastructure then gives poliyicians the right to tell them how to run their business eh? Hob When those same franchise agreements had "exclusivity" clauses, then yes, the local government has a right to tell the cable company how to run their business. | |
|
| | crginc
Premium
join:2003-03-28
Thousand Oaks, CA
| Typically cable TV bandwidth is 750 MHz with approximately 550 MHz (though channel 78) is analog and channels 79 - 125 being digital with as many as 13 SD stations on one main channel (multiple sub channels) and 3 HD stations on a main channel with subs.
Historically the advantage of cable over satellite, etc. is in a home with multiple TVs, all one has to do is buy a cable ready set and plug it into an cable outlet and receiver channels 2 - 78 with expanded service (now called basic). If one wants premium channels in say a family room only one set top box is required. This is primary advantage of cable over any other TV delivery service.
Now if I were a cable operator I would just convert as many of the analog signals as legally possible to digital but not scramble them. Still offer expanded/basic service only in digital. This would immediately free up plenty of bandwidth to compete with satellite and phone companies.
This could be called customer retention as if the cable industry forces everybody to rent a box for every TV, they have lost their primary advantage of being wired almost into every newer home in the USA!
If my local cable company (Time Warner) forces me to rent a box for every TV in the house, cable will lose its advantage for me and millions of others. Satellite and other provides will be equally attractive or unattractive depending on your view. | |
|
InGreenwood
@rr.com | Amused I see my Cable Company advertising the DTV transition on cable channels, as if OTA users would see them there. They need to be advertising on OTA stations, that is where their new customers would be. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
·Verizon Online DSL
| OTA vs Cable and Sat It will be interesting to see how the Digital transition plays out.
Currently we have a rather old Over the Air (OTA) outdoor antenna and rotor. At first I though OTA would not be practical due to our fringe location and early test results indicating modulation scheme chosen for DTV was very sensitive to ghosting.
Much to our surprise OTA seems to work well. I looked at Cable and Satellite but given the limited amount of TV we watch (no one in our family is a sports fan) the $40-50 monthly cost and need for set top box at each location is off putting.
We are going to invest a few hundred dollars to upgrade our outdoor antenna to receive local NH and MA OTA channels and forgo the monthly cost of Cable or Sat.
Adding to the FUD are rumors Cable operators, desperate to squeeze as many channels as possible into limited Cable bandwidth, recompress High Definition channels resulting in loss of quality, forcing many video purists to opt for OTA.
/tom | |
|
jjoshua
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ
·Comcast
| Good luck to the cable companies I have MythTV so I rarely watch live tv. I currently have Comcast service and I use 2 analog and 2 QAM tuners to record all of my shows.
If Comcast gets rid of basic analog service and/or unencrypted QAM, I'll probably switch to satellite and OTA. There is no way that I'm going to pay extra $ for converter box to increase Comcast's revenue.
At that point, my internet service would probably be cheaper if I switched to Fios. More loss for Comcast. | |
|
|
CableTool
Poorly Representing MYSELF.
Premium
join:2004-11-12
| Re: Good luck to the cable companies said by jjoshua :If Comcast gets rid of basic analog service and/or unencrypted QAM, I'll probably switch to satellite and OTA. There is no way that I'm going to pay extra $ for converter box to increase Comcast's revenue. So youll shell out the money for a DISH converter? I dont get it?
It any event if you read whats posted youll notice the analogs are staying for the next few years at least.
--
CableTechs.org/"Horrible People with Integrity" | |
|
| |
jjoshua
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ | Re: Good luck to the cable companies I can buy a dish converter. Not very expensive at all. | |
|
| | |
CableTool
Poorly Representing MYSELF.
Premium
join:2004-11-12
| Re: Good luck to the cable companies said by jjoshua :I can buy a dish converter. Not very expensive at all. A couple hundred at least to increase DISHES revenue.. In comparison to NO BOX AT ALL for your cable ready sets.. or 5.00 a month to lease a box if you want one?
Economics 101. Return on investment.
--
CableTechs.org/"Horrible People with Integrity" | |
|
| | | | 
MisterMarcus
join:2001-11-10
San Diego, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Good luck to the cable companies To me it can cut both ways.
I can:
1: Buy an OTA set up with a one-time fee to get those channels that are broadcast which likely will not include the shows I care about - but hey, I'm saving money!!
2: Lease with DirecTV and end up paying month over month for shows that I know I like now, but may not always.
In one case it's a one-time expense that you may regret later. In the other it's a recurrent expense that is exorbitant, but ultimately can be ceased. Whether that recurrent expense over time exceeds the one-time is a moot point. It's all about choice.
I chose the second option - because I don't want to be stuck with lackluster channels. | |
|
gomer1701ems
join:2001-08-23
Minneapolis, MN | SNL "An SNL Kagan study conservatively estimates...."
Am I the only one that thought "Saturday Night Live" when I saw that?
--
"Don't argue with stupid people; they will beat you with experience." | |
|
| 
OSUGoose
join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH
clubs: | Re: SNL No, i did at well | |
|
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
rid0617
join:2003-07-20
Greer, SC
·AT&T Southeast
·AT&T DSL Service
| I did "So who's going to opt installing an outdoor antenna just so they can get a few channels when they can easily just switch to cable and get hundreds?"
I did and do not regret it. There were not that many channels we watched other than OTA. Every night prime time we're always on networks and the TV isn't turned on during the day. $45 for an outside antenna which is cheaper than one months cable. We get 52 channels including digitals. Can only watch one channel at a time anyway. I cut the cable and will never look back again and they are begging hard for me to come back. | |
|
ARGONAUT
got ping?
join:2006-01-24
New Albany, IN | A digital benefit "speed" For cable companies to go all digital Docsys 3.0 will need full implementation to handle bandwidth needs.
That's more net speed! | |
|
JPL
Premium
join:2007-04-04
West Chester, PA
| Some things to consider First, I think there's a lack of understanding of this stuff out there. The fact that there are dozens of digital subchannels isn't something that's exactly common knowledge if you receive all your stuff via analog broadcast today. Second, I think there's a lack of understanding of this transition in general. Many people know SOMETHING is happening, but if you asked them to articulate it, I'd bet that most couldn't (I've read information in magazines and news articles that got pieces of the story wrong). I don't blame most consumers for this, btw. I think the FCC has done an abysmal job of education.
Next, there's a lack of understanding of digital broadcast in general. The fact that you get a clearer picture and sound isn't something, again, that's common knowledge. I have a coworker who just used an antenna. I told him to pick up a converter box, and he's be amazed at: 1) just how many channels he gets, and 2) just how clear the picture is.
As for people having hangups about hooking up boxes to their TVs? I don't buy that. Most people who just use an antenna have a VCR, e.g. Having one more box isn't going to strain their technical abilities. Also every TV made as of March 1, 2007 has a built-in ATSC tuner, so there are plenty of SD TVs out there that don't need a converter box at all.
One other issue, however, is the fact that reception of digital is different than reception of analog. The fact that digital is an 'all or nothing' broadcast format will cause people who can now receive analog channels to not be able to get some digital channels at all - I had that issue. I'm able to get all of my locals just fine in analog, but I can't seem to get in my local Fox affiliate digitally over the air. It sounds like the cable companies are banking on the fact that people will go so frustrated with figuring all this stuff out that they'll just jump at pay TV services just so they can keep getting TV. While I think there will be some of that, I think that the numbers listed are an over-estimation.
Even people who don't have the necessary expertise have family and friends that do - I'll give a prime example. Someone mentioned grandparents with remotes. My wife's grandparents (aged 93 and 92) are currently HD. They have a 32" LCD HD TV, hooked up with just basic cable - so they can get their locals in HD. Did they know anything about HD and about QAM tuners? Nope. But I did. So when they called and said 'we really like your TV... order us one...' not only did I do that for them, but I made sure that the TV had a built-in QAM tuner, and I then came over and set everything up for them. | |
|
| Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
·Comcast
| Re: Some things to consider  Several years ago I visited in a home about 45 Miles from New York City, near the Delaware Water Gap. Although my host was at a 950 Foot Elevation on the side of a hill facing NYC they could not receive any UHF Broadcasts. The only channels they could receive were channels 2 through 13. The people now living in that house will be very disappointed if they are receiving channels 2 through 5 over the air. I also have found out that one of the stations serving my new home in Central Florida are transmitting their digital signal from a different location than the analog signal. Where I am located the two signals come from two different directions. I am disappointed that the coupons for digital converters cannot be used to subsidize the purchase converters with QAM as well as ATSC signal processors. | |
|
SKYWARP
join:2005-02-02
Portland, OR
·Comcast Formerly ..
| Adding Subs The main push will be to pick up limited basic subs. People who are OTA TV watchers are going to be looking for an easy answer.
Without having to change anything about their TVs, no additional equipment, they will be able to get good picture on their local channels with basic cable at around $7 to $18 per month.
Not too bad if you are an 80 year old lady who won't be able to figure out a new remote control and a box.
Cable companies will pick up a lot of basic subs. Not super for revenue, but good for connects. (which is what wallstreet often looks at) | |
|
Alexianna
@wvnet.edu | Cable vs. digital conversion box Hi,
I have a question, if I drop my cable and get a digital conversion box, will I get some of the same channels?
Thanks,
Alex | |
|
|
|
|
Cable Companies Hope DTV Transition Will Pay
What ever happened to the cable reception act?
Back in 1992 the Federal Legislature passed the 1992 Cable Act: