digital tv

Page 2 of 4  
Jon Danniken wrote:

Chicago last year claiming the "government required them to do it". We used to have Adelphia and Comcast bought the part that includes our area. The first thing they did was to drop existing analog channels and carry them as digital only. In some areas they are now dropping 1/2 of the analog to force people into getting converter boxes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"George" wrote:

The more I understand Comcast, the more I am coming to understand that they are primarily a marketing company. The rest of their business, TV, cable internet, and phone, are nothing more than features to support the marketing.
Jon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

What they mean is that cable subscribers don't need to do anything specific to the transition to DTV broadcasting of the local STATIONS. Which I believe is true. Cablevision has conveyed the same message. Cablevision like most other cable companies has been gradually shifting to digital transmission of more channels. And as they do that, channels that were transmitted as analog now need either a digital cable box or cable card to receive. That has been going on here for several years. And that is the message you are seeing regarding AMC, History Channel, etc. Those are cable channels and have nothing to do with the DTV broadcast transition. If you didn't have a digital cable box or cable card, you got that message on Cablevision a couple years ago.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There's some stuff I record off of the history channel, comedy central, travel channel, TNT, etc. that I can't get off the air. That's about all I'm keeping cable for. If cox moves them to encrypted digital, then I'm dumping them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jon Danniken wrote:

They are only required to provide OTA channels unecrypted. They aren't required to do anything with analog regarding keeping it up or not.
They have to decide if turning off analog channels is a good business plan or not since it would require users to do something. In the case of cable the user would need to get a converter box or a new TV. So the user just might decide to move to a satellite provider since they are forced into doing something.
A nearby regional cable provider is doing extensive advertising right now to attract such users: "get local channels on our cable for $10/month, no converter box and everything will be the same"

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"The 1992 Cable Act is very clear," said FCC spokeswoman Mary Diamond in a statement. "Cable operators must ensure that all local broadcast stations carried pursuant to this Act are 'viewable' by all cable subscribers.
But that requirement can be met by handing out cable boxes for free, transmitting in clear QAM, or transmitting analog clear.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Does that cable act say anything about handing out cable boxes for free?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Of course not. It's up to the cable company to decide how to comply with the requirement.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Neville wrote:

The Cable Bill says that the local channels have to be available to all _subscribers_, not to anybody who manages to tap into the cable somehow.
If one needs a cable box to view the service, then any _subscriber_ will have one.
But this has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what was required to happen on the 17th and which Obama has put back to June. That affects over the air broadcasters whose signal you recieve with an antenna, it has no effect at all on cable.
--
--
--John
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The newspaper today said that some broadcasters are going ahead with the Feb 17th date.
Cheri
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The site at https://www.dtv2009.gov/ has a list of channels, but it's not in a standard format.
BTW, that site is currently NOT showing the countdown (of days until the transition).
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Robert Neville" wrote:

So *that's* the deal; it just applies to the locals Thanks for the information, Robert, it is appreciated.
Jon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
    I doubt if you will need anything. That appears to be what TW is saying around here. I would give your local office a call or just wait and see.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
pacca wrote:

Time will tell. People talk like they will die without their TV's for a while. You may find you really don't need the idiot box after all. That's what congress fears, hence the delay. (Advertising lobby)
--
<<//--------------------\>>
Van Chocstraw
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I doubt it. THE demographics of those w/o digital access at this time tend toward older, rural, poor. Not exactly a great demographic for the advertisers. Most of the people raising cain on Capital Hill are those who "advocate" for the poor or the AARP-types for the older people.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I loved your reply Kurt, as I happen to be one of those FEW, older, rural, poor, AARP types. I wonder when you will need to toss all that new digital equipment for the newer non-compatible, turn on the wall vision, or 3D or the following golly-gee-whiz, non-compatible hologram or the latest and greatest thing-ah-ma-bob? Sorry I don't mean to offend but to me this is all a bunch of millions $$$$ for the new class of billionaires. But. I'm old! What do I know of such things?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sudy Nim wrote:

Older, poorer, rural types tend to watch way more TV as only means of entertainment. TV technology is in transition. Don't invest too much into durrent technology.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tony Hwang wrote:

Existing technologies will die. An ip (internet) connection can do much better, directly from program creator to viewer. You don't think the phone companies are pulling fiber to the home so you can get your email faster do you? It's the syndicate takes on the monopoly.
-- larry / dallas
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The problem with individual IP connections is that it doesn't scale very well.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Current technology is not very reliable. I've been recording all my digital tv shows on wax cylinders. I know for a fact that these can last for up to 100 years.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.