|
|
Cable analog after 2008?
I understand that broadcast TV will be going all digital by law in 2008 or
2009. But what about cable channels? My cable is analog on channels 1-100 and pretty poor pictures. The digital standard definition above 100 is really nice. Im a bit worred about getting a nice new HDTV bigsreen that looks even worse then my old TV on channels 1-100. My wife will have a field day. |
Cable analog after 2008?
Break the old TV first.
Second let your wife pick out the replacement. You go with her to guide her and provide the necessary info when she has a question. Third since she made the decision wives typically don't complain. |
Cable analog after 2008?
"trs80" wrote in message ... I understand that broadcast TV will be going all digital by law in 2008 or 2009. But what about cable channels? My cable is analog on channels 1-100 and pretty poor pictures. The digital standard definition above 100 is really nice. Im a bit worred about getting a nice new HDTV bigsreen that looks even worse then my old TV on channels 1-100. My wife will have a field day. My cable system (Comcast) just finished with an ADS implementation (Analog/Digital Simulcast) so those with their cable boxes, or those with TV's that have QAM tuners get all the stations digitally. Initially the quality wasn't obviously better and there was some pixelation, but after a couple of weeks of tuning the whole system, I will say that the ADS has improved the overall viewing experience. I will say that the 1-100 stations definintely appear crisper, not only to me but to my wife. |
Cable analog after 2008?
trs80 wrote:
I understand that broadcast TV will be going all digital by law in 2008 or 2009. But what about cable channels? My cable is analog on channels 1-100 and pretty poor pictures. The digital standard definition above 100 is really nice. Im a bit worred about getting a nice new HDTV bigsreen that looks even worse then my old TV on channels 1-100. My wife will have a field day. The current cutoff date for analog over the air broadcasts is Feb. 17, 2009. The cutoff date does not apply to cable, but it will have an impact as the local station will then only have a digital HD or SD signal to provide to the cable systems. The regulatory and technical issues are still being hashed out in Congress, the FCC and the industry. It can get complicated. But what is expected to occur is that the cable franchises will generate an analog version of the digital signal and send that out to the remaining analog channels. How they handle 16:9 to 4:3 issues remains to be seen. But the cable companies want to do away with the analog channels entirely because they hog much of available bandwidth. They can typically squeeze 2 HD channels + 2 digital SD channels or around 10 to 12 digital SD channels into the 6 MHz bandwidth taken up by one analog channel. 2012 has been tossed around as the earliest shutdown date for the remaining analog cable channels. What the cable companies are aiming to do is to start cutting down the number of analog channels. Probably cut down in stages from 70 or 80 analog channels to 60, then to 40 or 50 to a core set of analog channels for the holdouts who refuse to get a digital STB or new TV with a built-in QAM tuner. What Comcast has been doing for many of their cable systems is converting to Digital Simulcast of the analog channels. That is they are working towards to sending out digital SD versions of all the channels on the analog tier. Subscribers with digital STBs (either SD or HD versions) then get the digital version of the channel, not the analog, when they select one of the channels on the analog tier. Digital simulcast should, in theory, make for better picture quality on your HD set for the "analog" tier channels. But SD blown up to a big screen is going to look crappier compared to the SD picture on a smaller 27" or 32" 4:3 set, period. BTW, if your current analog channels currently look that bad, you may want to ask for a service call. May be a weak signal line. I hope this post helps more than it confuses! Alan F |
Cable analog after 2008?
thats was a great input. thanks!
I see no mention by COx of any impending conversion of the analog channels. So its probably a couple years away for them. "Alan Figgatt" wrote in message ... trs80 wrote: I understand that broadcast TV will be going all digital by law in 2008 or 2009. But what about cable channels? My cable is analog on channels 1-100 and pretty poor pictures. The digital standard definition above 100 is really nice. Im a bit worred about getting a nice new HDTV bigsreen that looks even worse then my old TV on channels 1-100. My wife will have a field day. The current cutoff date for analog over the air broadcasts is Feb. 17, 2009. The cutoff date does not apply to cable, but it will have an impact as the local station will then only have a digital HD or SD signal to provide to the cable systems. The regulatory and technical issues are still being hashed out in Congress, the FCC and the industry. It can get complicated. But what is expected to occur is that the cable franchises will generate an analog version of the digital signal and send that out to the remaining analog channels. How they handle 16:9 to 4:3 issues remains to be seen. But the cable companies want to do away with the analog channels entirely because they hog much of available bandwidth. They can typically squeeze 2 HD channels + 2 digital SD channels or around 10 to 12 digital SD channels into the 6 MHz bandwidth taken up by one analog channel. 2012 has been tossed around as the earliest shutdown date for the remaining analog cable channels. What the cable companies are aiming to do is to start cutting down the number of analog channels. Probably cut down in stages from 70 or 80 analog channels to 60, then to 40 or 50 to a core set of analog channels for the holdouts who refuse to get a digital STB or new TV with a built-in QAM tuner. What Comcast has been doing for many of their cable systems is converting to Digital Simulcast of the analog channels. That is they are working towards to sending out digital SD versions of all the channels on the analog tier. Subscribers with digital STBs (either SD or HD versions) then get the digital version of the channel, not the analog, when they select one of the channels on the analog tier. Digital simulcast should, in theory, make for better picture quality on your HD set for the "analog" tier channels. But SD blown up to a big screen is going to look crappier compared to the SD picture on a smaller 27" or 32" 4:3 set, period. BTW, if your current analog channels currently look that bad, you may want to ask for a service call. May be a weak signal line. I hope this post helps more than it confuses! Alan F |
Cable analog after 2008?
|
Cable analog after 2008?
whosbest54 wrote:
In article , says... The current cutoff date for analog over the air broadcasts is Feb. 17, 2009. The cutoff date does not apply to cable, but it will have an impact as the local station will then only have a digital HD or SD signal to provide to the cable systems. The regulatory and technical issues are still being hashed out in Congress, the FCC and the industry. It can get complicated. But what is expected to occur is that the cable franchises will generate an analog version of the digital signal and send that out to the remaining analog channels. How they handle 16:9 to 4:3 issues remains to be seen. But the cable companies want to do away with the analog channels entirely because they hog much of available bandwidth. They can typically squeeze 2 HD channels + 2 digital SD channels or around 10 to 12 digital SD channels into the 6 MHz bandwidth taken up by one analog channel. 2012 has been tossed around as the earliest shutdown date for the remaining analog cable channels. What the cable companies are aiming to do is to start cutting down the number of analog channels. Probably cut down in stages from 70 or 80 analog channels to 60, then to 40 or 50 to a core set of analog channels for the holdouts who refuse to get a digital STB or new TV with a built-in QAM tuner. Congress and/or the FCC should require the cable systems to continue to carry a lifeline tier at a regulated cost of at least the few local channels and public service channels in analog for many years. This will help mimimize the need to buy millions of TVs or STBs in 2009. There are cost and environmental considerations when you look at replacing millions of analog sets that are perfectly good for many more years. The subsidy for STBs for OTA only TVs will also be woefully inadequate and limited per household. Some of these people might be willing to continue to use older sets with lifeline cable. I expect that we will see a reduced core set of analog only channels on most cable systems for well past the 2012 cutoff for the customers who stick with their older analog cable-ready TVs. But the analog only TVs will be fading fast from the stores after March 1, 2007. So by 2012, all of those sets will be at least 5 years old. What goes into the core set besides the local broadcast stations will be a hard-fought issue. Personally I think the local public service channels should be among the first channels taken off the analog tier as hardly anybody ever watches them. What Comcast has been doing for many of their cable systems is converting to Digital Simulcast of the analog channels. That is they are working towards to sending out digital SD versions of all the channels on the analog tier. Subscribers with digital STBs (either SD or HD versions) then get the digital version of the channel, not the analog, when they select one of the channels on the analog tier. Digital simulcast should, in theory, make for better picture quality on your HD set for the "analog" tier channels. But SD blown up to a big screen is going to look crappier compared to the SD picture on a smaller 27" or 32" 4:3 set, period. BTW, if your current analog channels currently look that bad, you may want to ask for a service call. May be a weak signal line. Our cable system has been doing this for years. The digital versions of the analog stations look poorer to me on a HD set than the analog versions. The color and sound are fine, but the detail isn't there. The picture lacks fine details and edges as compared to analog. And this is via a component cable. whosbest54 Many postings that I have seen from people with HD TVs and cable systems (almost all Comcast) that have switched to ADS have reported improvements in the picture quality. But if a local system really cranks on the digital compression to squeeze more channels into the digital line-up, you can get poorer picture quality. But if the cable system can free up bandwidth by shutting down some of the analog channels and implementing local switching, they might cut back on the too-aggressive compression. If I were, I would complain to your cable company. If people don't complain, they will think no one cares if they compress the hell of the digital channels. Alan F |
Cable analog after 2008?
On 2 Jun 2006 02:40:25 +0200, whosbest54 wrote:
Congress and/or the FCC should require the cable systems to continue to carry a lifeline tier at a regulated cost of at least the few local channels and public service channels in analog for many years. This will help mimimize the need to buy millions of TVs or STBs in 2009. There are cost and environmental considerations when you look at replacing millions of analog sets that are perfectly good for many more years. The subsidy for STBs for OTA only TVs will also be woefully inadequate and limited per household. Some of these people might be willing to continue to use older sets with lifeline cable. Why should congress be requiring cable companies to do anything? For that matter, why should congress/the FCC be requiring broadcast stations to switch to digital modulation? I understand that there isn't perfect competition at this time, but if congress (which should be doing better things with their time) decides to mandate an analog tier, they should also mandate an analog tier for DirectTV and Dish, as well as the phone companies who are starting to run fiber to the home (but only in the affluent neighborhoods, and without franchise agreements). How about free set top boxes? Free HBO? Congress is already doing everything they can to keep the broadcasters from having to change their way of doing things, lest they end up looking bad in an election year (broadcaster to congressman: "Gee, that mole looks really ugly. I'd hate to have to set up my camera on that side of you all the time...") |
Cable analog after 2008?
"Rick" wrote in message ... Break the old TV first. Second let your wife pick out the replacement. You go with her to guide her and provide the necessary info when she has a question. Third since she made the decision wives typically don't complain. These simple laws hold true for most anything. Great advice. |
Cable analog after 2008?
"Eric" wrote in message ... On 2 Jun 2006 02:40:25 +0200, whosbest54 wrote: Congress and/or the FCC should require the cable systems to continue to carry a lifeline tier at a regulated cost of at least the few local channels and public service channels in analog for many years. This will help mimimize the need to buy millions of TVs or STBs in 2009. There are cost and environmental considerations when you look at replacing millions of analog sets that are perfectly good for many more years. The subsidy for STBs for OTA only TVs will also be woefully inadequate and limited per household. Some of these people might be willing to continue to use older sets with lifeline cable. Why should congress be requiring cable companies to do anything? For that matter, why should congress/the FCC be requiring broadcast stations to switch to digital modulation? Because they want to free up that bandwidth. The newest mind control devices use ALOT of bandwidth. |
Cable analog after 2008?
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 05:37:32 -0600, Eric
wrote: On 2 Jun 2006 02:40:25 +0200, whosbest54 wrote: Congress and/or the FCC should require the cable systems to continue to carry a lifeline tier at a regulated cost of at least the few local channels and public service channels in analog for many years. This will help mimimize the need to buy millions of TVs or STBs in 2009. There are cost and environmental considerations when you look at replacing millions of analog sets that are perfectly good for many more years. The subsidy for STBs for OTA only TVs will also be woefully inadequate and limited per household. Some of these people might be willing to continue to use older sets with lifeline cable. Why should congress be requiring cable companies to do anything? For that matter, why should congress/the FCC be requiring broadcast stations to switch to digital modulation? I understand that there isn't perfect competition at this time, but if congress (which should be doing better things with their time) decides to mandate an analog tier, they should also mandate an analog tier for DirectTV and Dish, as well as the phone companies who are starting to run fiber to the home (but only in the affluent neighborhoods, and without franchise agreements). How about free set top boxes? Free HBO? .... DirecTV and Dish Network send everything in digital format. The satellite box converts the digital signal to NTSC for your TV receiver. |
Cable analog after 2008?
I thought it was supposed to happen in 2007?
Has this changed? "trs80" wrote in message ... I understand that broadcast TV will be going all digital by law in 2008 or 2009. But what about cable channels? My cable is analog on channels 1-100 and pretty poor pictures. The digital standard definition above 100 is really nice. Im a bit worred about getting a nice new HDTV bigsreen that looks even worse then my old TV on channels 1-100. My wife will have a field day. |
Cable analog after 2008?
Gonzo wrote:
I thought it was supposed to happen in 2007? Has this changed? The 2007 date was always provisional on a certain percentage of TVs in a market being able to receive digital signals. But it was a muddled situation as there was no consensus on how to come up with the percentage, given that most people now get their TV via cable or satellite. The crux of the stated purpose for the switch to digital TV broadcasting is to take away UHF channels 52 to 69. The frequency space for four of the UHF channels - 24 MHz of bandwidth in all - will be reserved for new emergency, rescue, and police communication systems. In the wake of Katrina, the pressure to re-assign these frequencies sooner rather than later grew. And the TV broadcasters wanted a firm cutoff date for everybody as they are spending money to maintain 2 broadcast channels - the analog and the digital. So after a LOT of political maneuvering and compromise (House initially voted for Jan. 1, 2009; Senate April, 2009), they probably flipped a coin and picked Tuesday, February 17, 2009 as the analog shutdown date. Not a bad date to pick as putting in February means that people getting ATSC receivers/converters at the last minute won't be going up against the Xmas rush or the holiday period or rushing to buy one just before the Superbowl. Alan F |
Cable analog after 2008?
In article ,
"Gonzo" wrote: I thought it was supposed to happen in 2007? I think 2007 is when 100% of new television sets have to have ATSC tuners, not the analog broadcast cutoff date. |
Cable analog after 2008?
Bruce Tomlin wrote:
In article , "Gonzo" wrote: I thought it was supposed to happen in 2007? I think 2007 is when 100% of new television sets have to have ATSC tuners, not the analog broadcast cutoff date. 2009 is the planned date for analog cutoff. Chip -- -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ -------------------- Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB |
Cable analog after 2008?
A Fri, 02 Jun 2006 05:37:32 -0600, Eric
escribió: why should congress/the FCC be requiring broadcast stations to switch to digital modulation? There isn't enough bandwidth (including buffers on each side of it for harmonics) for an analog signal on the frequency that the broadcast stations will have available to them past February 2009. So, in essence, the government isn't mandating broadcasters "switch to digital modulation" -- the government is taking away the broadcast stations' license to use the analog broadcast frequency, something which they're well within their rights, as our trustees, to do. If the broadcasters want to continue broadcasting, their option is limited to what is being offered, just like we, as customers, are limited when we go to buy something, by the options presented to us by the marketplace. -- bicker® |
Cable analog after 2008?
On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 07:54:02 -0400, *bicker*
wrote: A Fri, 02 Jun 2006 05:37:32 -0600, Eric escribió: why should congress/the FCC be requiring broadcast stations to switch to digital modulation? There isn't enough bandwidth (including buffers on each side of it for harmonics) for an analog signal on the frequency that the broadcast stations will have available to them past February 2009. So, in essence, the government isn't mandating broadcasters "switch to digital modulation" -- the government is taking away the broadcast stations' license to use the analog broadcast frequency, something which they're well within their rights, as our trustees, to do. If the broadcasters want to continue broadcasting, their option is limited to what is being offered, just like we, as customers, are limited when we go to buy something, by the options presented to us by the marketplace. Channel allocations will remain at 6Mhz. The frequencies are not changing. Some TV broadcast channel frequencies will be used for other services. Harmonics don't propagate into adjacent channels. There are no buffers in TV frequency allocations. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:37 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com