Is all current television equipment becoming worthless?

Page 4 of 7  
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

More BS.

"Not always" doesn't mean "never".

Yes. Those times come when the cost-benefit ratio of the new technology begins to exceed that of the old technology. With DTV that'll be... when the old technology is forced to disappear by mandate. As long as the old technology in question is allowed to exist, it will ALWAYS be cheaper and simpler to mass produce an NTSC television than an ATSC.

That's because the cost-benefit ratio of the new shoes is far better than the cost-benefit ratio for the old ones.

How much do you think the converter is going to increase the resale value of my television? Get serious. You added the stuff because it pleases you, but mostly because adding it puts money in your pocket when you move. Your converter box is only going to be taking money OUT of my hands.
--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Actually we all would be better off if they gave us $40 to not watch TV.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote in

Not the same thing;those were MARKET decisions,not forced by government.
Suppose you just bought a new car.Then the FEDs decide that ALL cars must be electric drive by 2009(thanks to enviro-nuts and Kyoto ;-} ). Your car must *come off the road*,or be converted to all-electric drive,no gasoline or diesel will be sold after that date. Are you going to be happy about that?

Jeez,some people on fixed incomes are already eating dog food so they can afford their meds,or doing with half a presecription because they can't afford a full purchase.
I've got three TVs;am I going to get THREE vouchers? No.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Jim, remember you've got until 2009, this is (almost) 2006. How old are those TV's? In 2009, they will all be 3 years older and, as pointed out by many, if you really want to extend their life, you can, by buying some inexpensive equipment.
You don't buy a car expecting it to last forever do you?
Be thankfull you live in the USA where mostly bad, (but sometimes good) tv is still free.
If you lived in England, the TV police would be cruising around your house in mobile radio-detection vans ready to rip you off (for black & white) or rip-you-off bigtime (for colour TV) with a hefty yearly fee.
Beachcomber
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 03:37:29 GMT, not snipped-for-privacy@xxx.yyy (Beachcomber) wrote:

I bought a tv around 1980. It still works, but the old click tuner was getting flakey. Last year I bought a new 20" tv for $90 and I love the picture. I expected this set to also last 25 years, and figured that set would outlast me, since I am old. I am one of those people on a fixed income and spending $30 is asking alot. But like I said in another post, I am sure it will be MUCH more. FIVE converters, New antenna, etc.... More like $500 in the end, just to be able to use the sets I now have. I can not fanthom spending $1000 or more for a lousy tv set. To me, tv is for watching the news, and something to keep the house lively when I am on the computer or doing other stuff. Most of the programming is crap, but I still like having that box turned on. I have no interest in satellite tv at the prices they charge, and cable is not an option where I live. Right now, I have all the bills I can handle with the basics, such as utilities, mortgage, and insurance. This internet is my only luxury and because I live in a rural area I am paying DSL prices for dialup, but thats all there is.
I should also mention that I have a relative that is disabled and much older than myself. She will NOT be able to watch tv at all. I know that for fact. She can not operate a vcr, she wont be able to deal with a converter. She is alone enough as it is, and is depressed. This will only add to get lonliness and depression. All she can do is turn the tv on and off, and change channels and volume. The last time she hit the wrong buttom on her remote, she was without tv for 6 weeks till she finally asked me about it. She was embarassed and thought she broke the tv. I went there and found she had lost the presets on the channels. They are set automatically, but she could never do it.
Once again, this is not just a cut and dry matter of paying $30 and plugging in a few wires.
Mark
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Mark:
I hear you. The needs of our senior citizens are important considerations. I'm getting up there in years myself and I wonder about such things myself. Fortunately, as a group, old people still vote and the politicians still listen sometimes.
As I said in a previous post... I think anyone living in a rural area that is currently trying to pull in tv signals form 50-80 miles with a huge antenna and a rotator may pay a premium price to switch over to digital tv.
I think there are many hidden costs when you live in a rural area regardless of age. You pay more for less Internet service, higher gas prices for longer trips, and probably you have less access to acceptable medical services.
As a group, I really don't think that senior citizens are going to be faced with expenses for $1000 to continue to watch free tv. There would be riots in the nursing homes if this were the case.
I'm certain that there will be inexpensive solutions. Just like if today, if you want an inexpensive computer, you can find a used one for $100 or so. It may not be fast or run the latest operating system, but you still will be able to connect to the Internet and do what you need to do. I really think that by 2009, the whole thing may be a non-issue.
Beachcomber
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"FIVE converters, New antenna, etc.... More like $500 in the end, just to be able to use the sets I now have. I can not fanthom spending $1000 or more for a lousy tv set. "
Let's not make this worse than it is. You say you have 3 TV's and 2 VCR's. As was pointed out previously, typically you would need only 3 digital tuners. The tuners output an NTSC signal to the TV/VCR. $1000 for a lousy TV set is way off the mark. The end of NTSC broadcast is set for 3 years from now. Yet, right now, I'm looking at an ad in today's paper where for $1000 you can buy a 51" Hitachi Projection HDTV. Online you can find a 27" CRT HDTV for as little as $300. By March, all TV's 27" and up must have a digital tuner built in. And by 2009 you will of course get a lot more for a lot less.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote in

As with cable boxes,they only output ONE channel,so you cannot record one channel and watch a second at the same time.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"As with cable boxes,they only output ONE channel,so you cannot record one channel and watch a second at the same time."
Yes that's true. But the poster was claiming that with 3 TV's and 2 VCR's he would need 5 digital tuners. At the very least, with one tuner for each TV, he could watch any program on one and record any other one on the other TV/VCR. Folks like me with cable have managed to work with this restriction for years, it's nothing new.
Plus, I'm having a hard time buying the story that someone with 3 TV's and 2 VCR's is so economically disadvantaged that paying $80-150 for two digital tuners come 2009 is such a big deal.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 10:28:35 -0800, trader4 wrote:

My cable boix allows me to record one show and watch another, or record two and watch direct (only analog channels).

Agreed.
My bet is that they'll be cheaper than that by 2009, and built into everything. Will VCRs even exist in 2009? ;-)
--
Keith

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

Good point... They might be so rare that most stores will no longer carry VHS tapes and those that do might charge a hefty fee for them.
Beachcomber

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
not snipped-for-privacy@xxx.yyy (Beachcomber) wrote in wrote:

Then it is essentially multiple receivers in one box,(or a "block converter");I believe any basic DTV receiver box will not be that way.

Maybe they got them as GIFTS.What's it matter HOW they got them? There are quite a number of people who work more than one job just to feed,clothe and house themselves,and people on fixed incomes,retirees.

Yes,but government is not forcing tape makers to stop making tapes,or VCR makers to convert to Hard drive/DVD recorders. They also have not forced cable companies to comply with their OTA standards. The manufacturers decide on their own according to their market research and product demand.
Government assigns freq,power limits,and BW allocation,but should not have any say on what system is used,as long as the users stay with their assigned BW and power limits.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 02:27:49 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

Yes, the cable box has two tuners in one box. THere is no reason such things won't exist for HDTV.

Maybe they'll get HDTV tuners from the same place.

Do you think the broadcasters should cram analog TV into their alloted HDTV channel? Do you think broadcasters should be able to broadcast PAL TV? The government owns the airwaves and certainly does have the right to force standards. Whether HDTV is a good idea or not is another issue (no use for it personally).
--
Keith

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

If their market wants it,yes.

If the market was there,why not? In this case,the gov't is trying to create a NEW market,and doing it by first shutting down an older one already in place and working well.

Wrong,the PEOPLE own the airwaves.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 17:09:37 +0000, Jim Yanik wrote:

Not hardly. Think compression.

The government has interests in satandards. There was good reason for NTSC.

Wrong. The government is the agent of the people. The government owns the airwaves. Don't like it? Vote 'em out. *We* have no power, except through the government.

I see you didn't care to comment...
--
Keith


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

I don't think they own them, but they do control them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Back in the days before the de-Regulation of the Broadcast Industry, the concept was that "the people" owned the radio spectrum and that the FCC was the gov. agency charged with stewardship to insure that this resource was managed for maximum benefit for all.
At some point about 10-15 years ago, this changed, and Congress and the FCC decided that spectrum allocations could be bought and sold by private individuals and organizations. The billions of dollars that they took in was used to make payments against the national debt.
This is why we have, in the larger markets, a Cingular, a Nextel, a Sprint, etc.
Beachcomber
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Some people never realize that having control over the government is largely a pervasive myth.

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

You really hate that Constitution, don't you?
--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 01:35:38 GMT, not snipped-for-privacy@xxx.yyy (Beachcomber) wrote:

That happened with beta. You may still be able to find tapes on the internet. I haven't looked, since I no longer have any need for them.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
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.