|
|
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you
would think that US TV stations would run a daily counter ... as a public reminder. Technically it is only ~2.2x as long as the US Hostage Crisis in Iran in remaining days for NTSC. Remember that the US ABC Net ran a Iran Hostage day counter during the program 'Nightline" -- and the counter ran for some 434 days appx. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
Max Power wrote:
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a daily counter ... as a public reminder. Technically it is only ~2.2x as long as the US Hostage Crisis in Iran in remaining days for NTSC. Remember that the US ABC Net ran a Iran Hostage day counter during the program 'Nightline" -- and the counter ran for some 434 days appx. Please find your meds, bob. Matthew -- I'm a contractor. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one. Which one do you want? |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
cross posting deleted
"Max Power" wrote in message ... US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a daily counter ... as a public reminder. Technically it is only ~2.2x as long as the US Hostage Crisis in Iran in remaining days for NTSC. Remember that the US ABC Net ran a Iran Hostage day counter during the program 'Nightline" -- and the counter ran for some 434 days appx. Great idea. Another annoying distraction from the programming and way to burn images into displays. Leonard -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 23171 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Try SPAMfighter for free now! |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Max Power" wrote in message ... US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a daily counter ... as a public reminder. Technically it is only ~2.2x as long as the US Hostage Crisis in Iran in remaining days for NTSC. Remember that the US ABC Net ran a Iran Hostage day counter during the program 'Nightline" -- and the counter ran for some 434 days appx. I believe that most TV broadcasters want to scuttle the turnover to ATSC. Right now, most stations have digital broadcasts only because of the FCC mandate. They are probably hoping that if enough of the public ignore the cutoff, and the date (Feb. 2009) approaches, they can use the ensuing outcry over lost TV to delay the turnover. The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
In article ,
"Blue Cat" wrote: "Max Power" wrote in message ... US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a daily counter ... as a public reminder. Technically it is only ~2.2x as long as the US Hostage Crisis in Iran in remaining days for NTSC. Remember that the US ABC Net ran a Iran Hostage day counter during the program 'Nightline" -- and the counter ran for some 434 days appx. I believe that most TV broadcasters want to scuttle the turnover to ATSC. Right now, most stations have digital broadcasts only because of the FCC mandate. They are probably hoping that if enough of the public ignore the cutoff, and the date (Feb. 2009) approaches, they can use the ensuing o to delay the turnover. The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. Do you have any figures comparing the number of analog OTA viewers to those using cable and satellite? I would guess that only those viewers would produce an "outcry over lost TV". -- Tom Stiller PGP fingerprint = 5108 DDB2 9761 EDE5 E7E3 7BDA 71ED 6496 99C0 C7CF |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
Tom Stiller wrote:
In article , "Blue Cat" wrote: I believe that most TV broadcasters want to scuttle the turnover to ATSC. Right now, most stations have digital broadcasts only because of the FCC mandate. They are probably hoping that if enough of the public ignore the cutoff, and the date (Feb. 2009) approaches, they can use the ensuing o to delay the turnover. The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. Do you have any figures comparing the number of analog OTA viewers to those using cable and satellite? I would guess that only those viewers would produce an "outcry over lost TV". The numbers that were publicized over a year ago as the result of a major FCC sponsored survey is that around %15 of households with a TV are OTA only. However, there are millions of households which have cable or satellite for the their primary TV(s), but have secondary TVs in the bedroom, kitchen, basements which are OTA only. Those TVs will need a converter box as well if they are to continue to receive OTA channels. IIRC, the estimates were from 50 to 70 million TVs in the US are OTA only, but some of these are now ATSC capable TVs. With the FCC mandate about to kick on on March 1, 2007 for all TVs, regardless of screen size to have an ATSC tuner if they have an NTSC tuner, the selection of small TVs with digital ATSC tuners is going to finally increase. The FCC mandate controls TVs shipped across state lines, so after March 1, no chain can move new TVs without an ATSC tuner across a state line. So expect big clearance sales on soon to be obsolete small and portable TVs with analog tuners in February. I expect over the next 2 years the more well off households will be replacing the old small TV in the kitchen or bedroom for watching the news or the late shows with much more compact flat panel LCD HD TV with ATSC tuners and throwing out the old TV. This will cut down the number of converters needed. The major TV broadcasters are not going to scuttle the conversion at this point. They have spend a lot of money to provide a digital signal and running up electric bills and equipment costs to broadcast both on analog and digital. It is not cheap to broadcast up to a 5000 Kilowatt analog signal. The analog shutdown will reduce their monthly operating costs, once they have gone to the hassle and expense of digital broadcast. Some small market station owners have been dragging their heels on offering a full power digital signal, but they are getting there. The most likely source of any movement to delay the February, 2009 analog shutdown will the consumer interest or various public association such as AARP. But even with a Democratic congress, I doubt if it going to get delayed, except perhaps for a few months for some of the low power and translator stations out there. Hurricane Katrina revealed the need for new common emergency, fire, police and government communication systems and that will only happen when the upper UHF channels 60 to 69 are taken away from TV broadcasting. Four of the 6 MHz UHF channels are to be re-assigned to emergency services. The aftermath of hurricane Katrina was a driving force behind Congress settling on the Feb. 17, 2009 date over a year ago. I do think that the government and industry have done a terrible job of publicizing and explaining the analog shutdown. But there appears to be a growing awareness in the press and among the people at large about the impending analog shutdown. Still a lot of confusion over the whole thing, in large part, because most people have no idea how TV works in the first place. Alan F |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. Are there any low cost, under $50, STB's? I would but a couple right now if available. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
On Jan 29, 9:04 am, "Blue Cat" wrote:
The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. I have neither cable nor satellite. Personally, I refused to buy a HDTV unless it had a ATSC tuner in it. My options were very limited until last. I now have two HDTVs/ There is a demand for ATSC converters if the price is reasonable. One TV store owner told me that the wholesale price of TV's increased about $40 when the ATSC requirement started last year. Given that, I think that the retail price of a converter should be well under $100, but they aren't. I don't even know anyone that sells them. I purchased a 20" HDTV with ATSC tuner in December for $400. That price is surely going to drop after March, 2007. If the price of a converter is $200, it seems more efficient to throw/give the NTSC TV away even though it's only 4 years old. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 17:48:01 +0000, Al Schmidt wrote:
The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. Are there any low cost, under $50, STB's? I would but a couple right now if available. No. And I wouldn't look for any cheap ones til the end of 2008. There are cheap ATSC tuners however. I've got 5 in my PC's. The cheapest was $17.50. All of the last 4 or 5 I bought were under $25. -- Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Max Power" wrote in message
... US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a daily counter ... as a public reminder. ============================ A reminder?!? Hell, most people don't even know it is going to happen. They need to be informed before being reminded. =============================== |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Blue Cat" wrote in message
.. . The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. ===================== There is no lack of demand - there is a lack of supply! |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Al Schmidt" wrote in message
news:[email protected] The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. Are there any low cost, under $50, STB's? I would but a couple right now if available. ==================== Me too! I have been watching - but nothing........ |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Blue Cat" wrote in message .. . "Max Power" wrote in message snip I believe that most TV broadcasters want to scuttle the turnover to ATSC. Right now, most stations have digital broadcasts only because of the FCC mandate. They are probably hoping that if enough of the public ignore the cutoff, and the date (Feb. 2009) approaches, they can use the ensuing outcry over lost TV to delay the turnover. The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. I am disappointed that a promising STB entry, the Samsung DTB-H260F does *not* put the on-screen graphics on the 480I output. I would already have at least one of them -- except for that flaw. I want to eventually put OTA DTV on all my sets, but I'm not off to a good start. (I have only one done so far and it's an old STB, not one with 5G chips. "Sal" |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Richard C." wrote in message . .. "Max Power" wrote in message ... US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a daily counter ... as a public reminder. ============================ A reminder?!? Hell, most people don't even know it is going to happen. They need to be informed before being reminded. =============================== True. I was in my local drug store and happened to see the manager near their display of small TV sets. I asked if the headquarters people had said anything about the soon-to-be-obsolete TV's that were for sale. I had to explain to her about the transition (and I think she was disbelieving the whole idea). I asked how they would handle irate customers whose TV's would suddenly quit working. She said, "Well, if they still have their receipts, we'll give them their money back." Yeah, right. Related: How many motor homes, RV's, camping trailers are in use in North America? How many of these are being used in places where they have no cable TV hookup? (Yes, TV isn't part of the RV experience to all RV'ers, but I think most expect to do some TV watching.) Just wondering. They can't all have satellite. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
In article , "Sal M. Onella" wrote:
"Blue Cat" wrote in message . .. "Max Power" wrote in message snip I believe that most TV broadcasters want to scuttle the turnover to ATSC. Right now, most stations have digital broadcasts only because of the FCC mandate. They are probably hoping that if enough of the public ignore the cutoff, and the date (Feb. 2009) approaches, they can use the ensuing outcry over lost TV to delay the turnover. The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. I am disappointed that a promising STB entry, the Samsung DTB-H260F does *not* put the on-screen graphics on the 480I output. I would already have at least one of them -- except for that flaw. I want to eventually put OTA DTV on all my sets, but I'm not off to a good start. (I have only one done so far and it's an old STB, not one with 5G chips. "Sal" That box was primary meant to be used to add tuner capabilty to a tunerless HDTV monitor.The 480i output on that unit was solely for recording purposes only. Its not the type you guys are discussing , the $50 converters for those of us who want to add ATSC to our standard NTSC sets |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Sal M. Onella wrote:
Related: How many motor homes, RV's, camping trailers are in use in North America? How many of these are being used in places where they have no cable TV hookup? (Yes, TV isn't part of the RV experience to all RV'ers, but I think most expect to do some TV watching.) Just wondering. They can't all have satellite. Most RV camping is done in areas where local OTA analog TV either does not exist or is extremely limited. Most RV campgrounds have campground cable TV; and those that don't are typically in remote areas where there isn't much (if any) local OTA analog TV. Even in remote areas, the upper-tier campgrounds have cable. Most RVers have satellite. Newer RVs are sold with satellite dishes on the roof instead of TV antennas. At a campground, you see far more satellite dishes than raised OTA TV antennas. Bottom line: the number of RVers who depend upon OTA analog TV are a small (and shrinking) minority. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
In article , Mark Crispin wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Sal M. Onella wrote: Related: How many motor homes, RV's, camping trailers are in use in North America? How many of these are being used in places where they have no cable TV hookup? (Yes, TV isn't part of the RV experience to all RV'ers, but I think most expect to do some TV watching.) Just wondering. They can't all have satellite. Most RV camping is done in areas where local OTA analog TV either does not exist or is extremely limited. Most RV campgrounds have campground cable TV; and those that don't are typically in remote areas where there isn't much (if any) local OTA analog TV. Even in remote areas, the upper-tier campgrounds have cable. IMHO, it aint camping if you have water and CATV hookups!!!!!! Get out into the wild For F#[email protected] Sake. Most RVers have satellite. Newer RVs are sold with satellite dishes on the roof instead of TV antennas. At a campground, you see far more satellite dishes than raised OTA TV antennas. Bottom line: the number of RVers who depend upon OTA analog TV are a small (and shrinking) minority. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Blue Cat wrote:
I believe that most TV broadcasters want to scuttle the turnover to ATSC. You also believe in the repayment of the French War Debt, Al Gore's inaugural ball, and the triumphant arrival of the SS Titanic in New York Harbor? Right now, most stations have digital broadcasts only because of the FCC mandate. Gee, then why are the stations in Seattle bragging about their HD local newscasts? They are probably hoping that if enough of the public ignore the cutoff, and the date (Feb. 2009) approaches, they can use the ensuing outcry over lost TV to delay the turnover. In your dreams. The prime example of this public apathy is the lack of demand for ATSC set top boxes that will receive the ATSC signals for legacy TVs. Mostly because people are buying new LCD TVs with built in ATSC tuners rather than worry about a tuner for old, heat-generating, power-wasting, space-consuming, toxic waste generating CRT TVs. Nor is there much need for an ATSC tuner for a legacy TV today. The legacy TV works fine to receive analog, and will continue to work fine with cable or satellite. It only becomes an issue in 2009, and by that time the products will have the advantage of two more years of engineering progress. The only need for an ATSC tuner today is for HD monitors which don't have tuners; and the costs for today's ATSC tuners reflects that. In 2009, ATSC tuners will be both cheaper and better. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Mark Crispin" wrote in message ... On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Blue Cat wrote: I believe that most TV broadcasters want to scuttle the turnover to ATSC. You also believe in the repayment of the French War Debt, Al Gore's inaugural ball, and the triumphant arrival of the SS Titanic in New York Harbor? He could be living in a Sinclair market... |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Mark Crispin" wrote in message snip The only need for an ATSC tuner today is for HD monitors which don't have tuners; and the costs for today's ATSC tuners reflects that. I disagree with that for my situation. In San Diego, I can get OTA DTV from the LA market most of the time with a good roof antenna, sometimes just with a simple bow-tie. However, there is JUST ONE station from LA carried on our cable system, despite its being a very big, very high-quality system. I want my legacy TV's to be able to get LA at my whim. People in or between other city pairs are apt to be of the same mind. The rest of your post was right on. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Mark Crispin" wrote in message ... snip Bottom line: the number of RVers who depend upon OTA analog TV are a small (and shrinking) minority. -- Mark -- Thanks. I stand corrected. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Sal M. Onella wrote:
In San Diego, I can get OTA DTV from the LA market most of the time with a good roof antenna, sometimes just with a simple bow-tie. However, there is JUST ONE station from LA carried on our cable system, despite its being a very big, very high-quality system. I want my legacy TV's to be able to get LA at my whim. People in or between other city pairs are apt to be of the same mind. You should be happy that the US choose the 8-VSB (ATSC) system for digital TV, and NOT one of the COFDM-based modulations. Although there is no guarantee that you'll be able to receive ATSC signals from LA in San Diego, at least you have a fighting chance. One of the features of ATSC is its superior performance over longer distances. It is reasonable to assume that equipment and performance will continue to improve over time. The various COFDM-based modulations used in Europe and Asia are all short-range. I have digital TV coverage maps for Japan, and in places the coverage range is as little as 10km (6 miles) from the transmitter. The longest distance coverage that I saw was about 40km; that wouldn't even get you out of LA! You'll occasionally hear from cranks and crackpots who claim that COFDM is "better" because it reportedly works better in cars or trains. Japan's mobile digital TV craps out once the vehicle gets much above 20km/h; I know this first-hand. Another crank argument is because of a silly pseudo-test years ago, when one of the Crank Brigade had trouble using an indoor loop antenna to receive ATSC inside a Manhattan apartment. If the Crank Brigade had had their way, not only would you not be able to get LA TV in San Diego, you wouldn't be able to get Orange County TV either; Orange County would be a completely different set of stations since you wouldn't pick up LA in Anaheim. The northern part of San Diego County would be yet another market. So you'd be 3-4 markets away from LA. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
Mark Crispin wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Sal M. Onella wrote: In San Diego, I can get OTA DTV from the LA market most of the time with a good roof antenna, sometimes just with a simple bow-tie. However, there is JUST ONE station from LA carried on our cable system, despite its being a very big, very high-quality system. I want my legacy TV's to be able to get LA at my whim. People in or between other city pairs are apt to be of the same mind. You should be happy that the US choose the 8-VSB (ATSC) system for digital TV, and NOT one of the COFDM-based modulations. Although there is no guarantee that you'll be able to receive ATSC signals from LA in San Diego, at least you have a fighting chance. One of the features of ATSC is its superior performance over longer distances. Yes ATSC is slightly more optimised for distance, but at the same time it NEEDS to be since you need a huge single transmitter to serve a wide area. With COFDM DVB-T you have the benefit of single frequency networks which can use multiple transmitter sites on the same frequency to fill in all the blackspots in coverage with overall less power wasted. It is reasonable to assume that equipment and performance will continue to improve over time. It damn sure needs to improve since ATSC was inferior from day 1. The various COFDM-based modulations used in Europe and Asia are all short-range. I have digital TV coverage maps for Japan, and in places the coverage range is as little as 10km (6 miles) from the transmitter. The longest distance coverage that I saw was about 40km; that wouldn't even get you out of LA! Stop spreading BS. The coverage is only small due to lower power levels. Here in Australia the COFDM DVB-T transmissions have adequate coverage of 140+km (usually only limited by the height of the transmitter and terrain obstructions) with viewers with high gain antennas can receive it past 200km. Have a look at the coverage map: http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...=2969&presdir= You'll occasionally hear from cranks and crackpots who claim that COFDM is "better" because it reportedly works better in cars or trains. Japan's mobile digital TV craps out once the vehicle gets much above 20km/h; I know this first-hand. Another crank argument is because of a silly pseudo-test years ago, when one of the Crank Brigade had trouble using an indoor loop antenna to receive ATSC inside a Manhattan apartment. If the Crank Brigade had had their way, not only would you not be able to get LA TV in San Diego, you wouldn't be able to get Orange County TV either; Orange County would be a completely different set of stations since you wouldn't pick up LA in Anaheim. The northern part of San Diego County would be yet another market. So you'd be 3-4 markets away from LA. -- Mark -- You're more than welcome to keep your inferior ATSC standard just like your crap NTSC standard within U.S. borders (along with a long list of incompatible standards and the imperial unit measurement system). The rest of the world will adopt the best system for digital terrestrial TV which is COFDM DVB-T. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"davmel" wrote in message
... Mark Crispin wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Sal M. Onella wrote: In San Diego, I can get OTA DTV from the LA market most of the time with a good roof antenna, sometimes just with a simple bow-tie. However, there is JUST ONE station from LA carried on our cable system, despite its being a very big, very high-quality system. I want my legacy TV's to be able to get LA at my whim. People in or between other city pairs are apt to be of the same mind. You should be happy that the US choose the 8-VSB (ATSC) system for digital TV, and NOT one of the COFDM-based modulations. Although there is no guarantee that you'll be able to receive ATSC signals from LA in San Diego, at least you have a fighting chance. One of the features of ATSC is its superior performance over longer distances. Yes ATSC is slightly more optimised for distance, but at the same time it NEEDS to be since you need a huge single transmitter to serve a wide area. With COFDM DVB-T you have the benefit of single frequency networks which can use multiple transmitter sites on the same frequency to fill in all the blackspots in coverage with overall less power wasted. It is reasonable to assume that equipment and performance will continue to improve over time. It damn sure needs to improve since ATSC was inferior from day 1. The various COFDM-based modulations used in Europe and Asia are all short-range. I have digital TV coverage maps for Japan, and in places the coverage range is as little as 10km (6 miles) from the transmitter. The longest distance coverage that I saw was about 40km; that wouldn't even get you out of LA! Stop spreading BS. The coverage is only small due to lower power levels. Here in Australia the COFDM DVB-T transmissions have adequate coverage of 140+km (usually only limited by the height of the transmitter and terrain obstructions) with viewers with high gain antennas can receive it past 200km. Have a look at the coverage map: http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...=2969&presdir= You'll occasionally hear from cranks and crackpots who claim that COFDM is "better" because it reportedly works better in cars or trains. Japan's mobile digital TV craps out once the vehicle gets much above 20km/h; I know this first-hand. Another crank argument is because of a silly pseudo-test years ago, when one of the Crank Brigade had trouble using an indoor loop antenna to receive ATSC inside a Manhattan apartment. If the Crank Brigade had had their way, not only would you not be able to get LA TV in San Diego, you wouldn't be able to get Orange County TV either; Orange County would be a completely different set of stations since you wouldn't pick up LA in Anaheim. The northern part of San Diego County would be yet another market. So you'd be 3-4 markets away from LA. -- Mark -- You're more than welcome to keep your inferior ATSC standard just like your crap NTSC standard within U.S. borders (along with a long list of incompatible standards and the imperial unit measurement system). The rest of the world will adopt the best system for digital terrestrial TV which is COFDM DVB-T. That's funny, through all the years of reading your forums, I had the impression your bit-starved Australian system was considered pretty much a laughing stock. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, davmel wrote:
Yes ATSC is slightly more optimised for distance, but at the same time it NEEDS to be since you need a huge single transmitter to serve a wide area. With COFDM DVB-T you have the benefit of single frequency networks which can use multiple transmitter sites on the same frequency to fill in all the blackspots in coverage with overall less power wasted. Correction: With COFDM DVB-T you need to use single frequency networks with multiple transmitter sites on the same frequency to fill in all the blackspots in coverage. This is because COFDM modulations waste much more power when they try to cover a large area. Of course, these SFNs aren't actually deployed. The Australian maps make that quite clear. It is reasonable to assume that equipment and performance will continue to improve over time. It damn sure needs to improve since ATSC was inferior from day 1. Which is why there are far more HDTV broadcasters using ATSC than any COFDM modulation. In the language of COFDM, "inferior" means "better". The various COFDM-based modulations used in Europe and Asia are all short-range. I have digital TV coverage maps for Japan, and in places the coverage range is as little as 10km (6 miles) from the transmitter. The longest distance coverage that I saw was about 40km; that wouldn't even get you out of LA! Stop spreading BS. The coverage is only small due to lower power levels. Golly gee, most US digital TV broadcasters are also at lower power levels. I guess that lower power levels is only an excuse when it's COFDM. Here in Australia the COFDM DVB-T transmissions have adequate coverage of 140+km (usually only limited by the height of the transmitter and terrain obstructions) with viewers with high gain antennas can receive it past 200km. Have a look at the coverage map: http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...=2969&presdir= I would expect that Melbourne would have a powerful transmitter (although note that shadow near Pakenham; must be a mountain there). It is a major metropolis. But when we look elsewhere, we see such maps as: http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...d=148&presdir= OK, I picked an obviously dinky town. But what about Canberra, with this somewhat underwhelming coverage area? http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...d=885&presdir= And what the hell is "adequate" supposed to mean? Digital either works or it doesn't. There's no such thing as being "a little bit pregnant". Perhaps by "adequate" they mean "a signal occasionally shows up". What happens when you open a refrigerator door? Or the furnace kicks in. Love those impulse noise effects. Got to see them first-hand in Japan. You're more than welcome to keep your inferior ATSC standard just like your crap NTSC standard within U.S. borders (along with a long list of incompatible standards and the imperial unit measurement system). We will, quite happily. We have quite a bit of HDTV now, and are thoroughly enjoying it. In the Australian digital TV forums, you Aussies seem to be complaining a lot about the lack of true HDTV...and reception difficulties. Seattle, a third-rate US city, has 14 (or 16, depending upon you count) digital broadcasters, offering 8 HDTV channels and 26 SD channels of programming. Tokyo, a first-rate Japanese city, has only 7 (or 8). How many digital broadcasters do you have in Australia, eh? NTSC has better color (particularly green) than PAL. PAL was a clever workaround for the inferior vacuum tube tuners prior to the mid 1970s. With modern electronics, that phase change just steals bandwidth. Then there's that flickery 50Hz, which is a lot more noticable than the extra 100 lines. We don't use Imperial units. The similarly-named American units are all defined in metric terms, and are different from Imperial units. For example, an American foot is exactly 30.48cm (although for most purposes 305mm is good enough). But it does **** off your manufacturers when they want to produce something for the US market; they have to pay for a completely separate set of tooling. That is only the reason why you care. The rest of the world will adopt the best system for digital terrestrial TV which is COFDM DVB-T. The Japanese, Chinese, and Brazilians don't agree. They choose a COFDM based system, but it isn't DVB-T. It's the NTSC vs. PAL vs. SECAM catfight all over again; and for all the same reasons. If the US had chosen DVB-T, Australia would have chosen ATSC. It's all about protectionism. The US market is the largest market in the world and is price-sensitive. Every manufacturer sells cheaper in the US than in their home country. Australians (and Japanese and Chinese and Europeans) pay more so that Americans pay less. If American HDTVs worked in Australia there would be one hell of a grey market importing cheap TVs. Ever notice DVD regions? Ever notice how Americans rarely seem to care about multi-region DVD players? We get them at a (much) lower price than you. Even foreign-produced movies are cheaper in the US than in their country of origin. It was a nice flame you sent. Better luck next time. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, David wrote:
That's funny, through all the years of reading your forums, I had the impression your bit-starved Australian system was considered pretty much a laughing stock. Of course it is, but you don't want to confuse him with too many facts. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"davmel" wrote in message ... You're more than welcome to keep your inferior ATSC standard just like your crap NTSC standard within U.S. borders (along with a long list of incompatible standards and the imperial unit measurement system). Funny thing about measurement systems. I watched a feed from Oz of a golf tournament once where the announcer described a 300 meter drive, followed by a 140 meter iron to the green, followed by a 10-foot putt. A nice multi system approach!! :-) Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://davidclary.com |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Mark Crispin" wrote in message ... snip You'll occasionally hear from cranks and crackpots who claim that COFDM is "better" because it reportedly works better in cars or trains. Japan's mobile digital TV craps out once the vehicle gets much above 20km/h; I know this first-hand. Another crank argument is because of a silly pseudo-test years ago, when one of the Crank Brigade had trouble using an indoor loop antenna to receive ATSC inside a Manhattan apartment. I'm a bit off-topic with this next, but maybe you know: Some public transit vehicles in and around San Diego are demonstrating live video from somewhere. It's news, weather and features, all fast paced and light. It doesn't seem to have sound or to need it, but does seem to be motion video and it seems to work OK, even at 50 MPH. It's only on a few vehicles and I really have just caught it a few times. I know Qualcomm has an experimental digital transmitter on UHF Ch 53 and this could be the service. Can you shed any light on it? (I haven't done any research at the transit authority's website. Full details might be there in plain sight.) Thanks. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
David wrote:
That's funny, through all the years of reading your forums, I had the impression your bit-starved Australian system was considered pretty much a laughing stock. I would hardly call it bit starved. With a 23Mbps transport stream you won't get more than a 13-15Mbps HD video channel plus a 6-7Mbps SD video channel plus a 1.5Mbps video programme guide plus multiple dolby digital and MPEG audio streams. Do the broadcasters in the U.S. transmit multiple SD channels plus a HD channel 24/7? If they did they would also have a 'bit-starved' video stream. We have a nice hybrid system with multiple widescreen standard definition channels like the Europeans plus HD video like other markets such as the U.S on the same terrestrial transport stream. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
Mark Crispin wrote:
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, davmel wrote: Yes ATSC is slightly more optimised for distance, but at the same time it NEEDS to be since you need a huge single transmitter to serve a wide area. With COFDM DVB-T you have the benefit of single frequency networks which can use multiple transmitter sites on the same frequency to fill in all the blackspots in coverage with overall less power wasted. Correction: With COFDM DVB-T you need to use single frequency networks with multiple transmitter sites on the same frequency to fill in all the blackspots in coverage. This is because COFDM modulations waste much more power when they try to cover a large area. Of course, these SFNs aren't actually deployed. The Australian maps make that quite clear. Really? The maps show the coverage of that single transmission site, NOT the full SFN coverage area. Take these two overlapping sites for example: http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...=5441&presdir= http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...=5438&presdir= They BOTH operate on the SAME frequency. You'll find that all the infill coverage transmitters operate on the same SFN frequency. It is reasonable to assume that equipment and performance will continue to improve over time. It damn sure needs to improve since ATSC was inferior from day 1. Which is why there are far more HDTV broadcasters using ATSC than any COFDM modulation. That will change dramatically when Europe and Asia provide more HD programming using DVB-T. This map of digital terrestrial standards shows that most of the world's population is certainly not going with ATSC: http://www.paradiso-design.net/revim...B-T_032006.gif In the language of COFDM, "inferior" means "better". If most of the world's population has an "inferior" standard that provides lower cost equipment through greater unit volumes then I suspect most end users would prefer that system. Unless of course a certain standards committee bribes government officials in that country to adopt a "better" standard that favours domestic manufacturers and patent holders at the expense of end users. The various COFDM-based modulations used in Europe and Asia are all short-range. I have digital TV coverage maps for Japan, and in places the coverage range is as little as 10km (6 miles) from the transmitter. The longest distance coverage that I saw was about 40km; that wouldn't even get you out of LA! Stop spreading BS. The coverage is only small due to lower power levels. Golly gee, most US digital TV broadcasters are also at lower power levels. Yeah, but since you can't have single frequency networks you need to waste an enormous number of TV channel spectrum to avoid interference. I guess that lower power levels is only an excuse when it's COFDM. Here in Australia the COFDM DVB-T transmissions have adequate coverage of 140+km (usually only limited by the height of the transmitter and terrain obstructions) with viewers with high gain antennas can receive it past 200km. Have a look at the coverage map: http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...=2969&presdir= I would expect that Melbourne would have a powerful transmitter (although note that shadow near Pakenham; must be a mountain there). It Yes, that's the southern end of the Dandenong Ranges. is a major metropolis. But when we look elsewhere, we see such maps as: http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...d=148&presdir= Yep, that transmitter covers the twin towns of Albury/Wodonga quite adequately and matches the analogue coverage there for that infill transmitter. The main transmitter site for that area is a bit further south and covers a much larger area: http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...=5472&presdir= OK, I picked an obviously dinky town. But what about Canberra, with this somewhat underwhelming coverage area? http://www2b.abc.net.au/reception/fr...d=885&presdir= If you check the scale on that map the coverage area extends out close to 200km (hardly underwhelming) And what the hell is "adequate" supposed to mean? Digital either works or it doesn't. There's no such thing as being "a little bit pregnant". It means a typical house with an external medium gain antenna pointed in the right direction will pick up the signal reliably. The signal can be picked up much further than those maps show by using a tall mast and high gain antenna. Perhaps by "adequate" they mean "a signal occasionally shows up". What happens when you open a refrigerator door? Or the furnace kicks in. Love those impulse noise effects. Got to see them first-hand in Japan. Broad spectrum impulse noise will affect all transmissions including analogue/ATSC/DVB-T etc., that's why you use decent quality coax. I happen to live North of Pakenham which you pointed out earlier and the only time I've had signal dropouts or any interference was when lightning directly HIT the transmitter site. I'm amongst the overwhelming majority that couldn't fault the DVB-T transmissions. Sure you'll here people whinge about digital TV in oz, but you should expect crap signal quality if you use a rabbit ears antenna in some canyon. You're more than welcome to keep your inferior ATSC standard just like your crap NTSC standard within U.S. borders (along with a long list of incompatible standards and the imperial unit measurement system). We will, quite happily. We have quite a bit of HDTV now, and are thoroughly enjoying it. In the Australian digital TV forums, you Aussies seem to be complaining a lot about the lack of true HDTV...and reception difficulties. Pretty much the only gripe we have is that one of our broadcasters (Ch 7) considers 576p to be HD as a pathetic attempt to circumvent the government requirement for all digital licence holders to broadcast in HD. However Ch 7 have no interest in HD so they get by with the loop hole that 576p is HD which ****es off a lot of viewers since they have the rights to a lot of NBC and other network content. Seattle, a third-rate US city, has 14 (or 16, depending upon you count) digital broadcasters, offering 8 HDTV channels and 26 SD channels of programming. Tokyo, a first-rate Japanese city, has only 7 (or 8). How many digital broadcasters do you have in Australia, eh? A grand total of 5 but given that our population of 20million is spread out over an area the size of the U.S. the market can't sustain more tv networks with the available advertising revenue. I for one would prefer quality over quantity. It's preferable to having 500 channels of crap like in the U.S. NTSC has better color (particularly green) than PAL. PAL was a clever workaround for the inferior vacuum tube tuners prior to the mid 1970s. With modern electronics, that phase change just steals bandwidth. Then there's that flickery 50Hz, which is a lot more noticable than the extra 100 lines. Interesting that you point out a better particular colour for NTSC which stands for Never Twice the Same Colour. We don't use Imperial units. The similarly-named American units are all defined in metric terms, and are different from Imperial units. For example, an American foot is exactly 30.48cm (although for most purposes 305mm is good enough). But it does **** off your manufacturers when they want to produce something for the US market; they have to pay for a completely separate set of tooling. That is only the reason why you care. The rest of the world will adopt the best system for digital terrestrial TV which is COFDM DVB-T. The Japanese, Chinese, and Brazilians don't agree. They choose a COFDM based system, but it isn't DVB-T. It's the NTSC vs. PAL vs. SECAM catfight all over again; and for all the same reasons. And not surprisingly the countries that had PAL are going with DVB-T and the ones that had NTSC are going in the direction of ATSC. If the US had chosen DVB-T, Australia would have chosen ATSC. It's all about protectionism. Rubbish. The only highly protected market left is the USA. The US government is a proxy for the wealthy lobby groups that line the pockets of senators with cash so that their particular standard or technology it adopted rather than what is best for the population. Australia would never have gone with ATSC, we just followed what the Europeans did just like almost every other standard. That's just a result of having a history as a British colony WITHOUT a revolution! The US market is the largest market in the world and is price-sensitive. ROTFL. Is that what they're teaching you in Geography these days? You might want to check on the population of China and India which are certainly NOT adopting ATSC. Every manufacturer sells cheaper in the US than in their home country. You'll find hardware in China/Japan/Taiwan (where almost all electronic hardware is now built) to be MUCH cheaper than in the U.S. thanks to protectionist import tariffs. Australians (and Japanese and Chinese and Europeans) pay more so that Americans pay less. If American HDTVs worked in Australia there would be one hell of a grey market importing cheap TVs. You must be living in a fantasy land, we import equipment cheaply from places like China where it's manufactured, not from secondary markets like the U.S. where the manufacturing base has died. Ever notice DVD regions? Ever notice how Americans rarely seem to care about multi-region DVD players? That's because you've been distracted by all the crap that comes out of Hollywood to notice all the great content that comes from international sources. Most Americans wouldn't bother with content if it wasn't in English (with or without subtitles). We get them at a (much) lower price than you. Even foreign-produced movies are cheaper in the US than in their country of origin. That's only the result of price fixing by the movie studios and their distributors. They charge whatever price a market will bear. As a general rule I would much prefer a 576 line PAL region 2 or 4 DVD to a 480 line NTSC version, but the exact choice would come down to which version was mastered better. It was a nice flame you sent. Better luck next time. The flame wars have only just begun..... |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
I beleive that signal - I've only seen it on the trolley - is transmitted on
top of the power line feed (hard wired, not 'transmitted' per se). TTUL... John "Sal M. Onella" wrote in message ... "Mark Crispin" wrote in message ... snip You'll occasionally hear from cranks and crackpots who claim that COFDM is "better" because it reportedly works better in cars or trains. Japan's mobile digital TV craps out once the vehicle gets much above 20km/h; I know this first-hand. Another crank argument is because of a silly pseudo-test years ago, when one of the Crank Brigade had trouble using an indoor loop antenna to receive ATSC inside a Manhattan apartment. I'm a bit off-topic with this next, but maybe you know: Some public transit vehicles in and around San Diego are demonstrating live video from somewhere. It's news, weather and features, all fast paced and light. It doesn't seem to have sound or to need it, but does seem to be motion video and it seems to work OK, even at 50 MPH. It's only on a few vehicles and I really have just caught it a few times. I know Qualcomm has an experimental digital transmitter on UHF Ch 53 and this could be the service. Can you shed any light on it? (I haven't done any research at the transit authority's website. Full details might be there in plain sight.) Thanks. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"davmel" wrote in message
The flame wars have only just begun..... Good, we like it. The USA's HDTV broadcasting system is *light-years* more advanced than any cofdm-using country. line the pockets of senators with cash so that their particular standard or technology it adopted rather than what is best for the population. LOLOL...... yet another bob miller shill. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
David wrote:
"davmel" wrote in message The flame wars have only just begun..... Good, we like it. The USA's HDTV broadcasting system is *light-years* more advanced than any cofdm-using country. Which is why so many people are watching OTA terrestrial HDTV in the USA..... NOT. The light years you speak of are an indication of how old and already obsolete the ATSC system is. But don't worry it will only be a matter of time before the standard is just a foot note in history just like the long list of USA centric communications standards. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"davmel" wrote in message
... David wrote: "davmel" wrote in message The flame wars have only just begun..... Good, we like it. The USA's HDTV broadcasting system is *light-years* more advanced than any cofdm-using country. Which is why so many people are watching OTA terrestrial HDTV in the USA..... NOT. The uptake has been slow, but steady. As expected. This article, posted by the Australian organisation "Fairfax Digital" claims their DTV system is an "utter failure" and a "turkey". http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...337221919.html I sure hope they get it straightened out someday. . . |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
David wrote:
"davmel" wrote in message ... David wrote: "davmel" wrote in message The flame wars have only just begun..... Good, we like it. The USA's HDTV broadcasting system is *light-years* more advanced than any cofdm-using country. Which is why so many people are watching OTA terrestrial HDTV in the USA..... NOT. The uptake has been slow, but steady. As expected. This article, posted by the Australian organisation "Fairfax Digital" claims their DTV system is an "utter failure" and a "turkey". http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...337221919.html I sure hope they get it straightened out someday. . . Technically the digital TV system is great in Australia, but some of the existing broadcasters pressured the government to impose ridiculous limitations on the what channels and content can be broadcast with the digital TV services. The requirement for simulcasting what is on the analogue channels as both an SD AND a HD digital channel has only been lifted this year, but the broadcasters still haven't made any changes to reflect this. Most of the regulatory restrictions will only be removed in 2009. Until then most viewers have little incentive to change to digital TV other than improved picture and sound quality, there is no significant additional content to warrant changing over until their old equipment breaks down. In the USA there is much greater incentive to move to high quality HDTV over the awful NTSC 480 line analogue services, but most people have opted for sat or cable based systems instead. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"davmel" wrote in message
... David wrote: "davmel" wrote in message ... David wrote: "davmel" wrote in message The flame wars have only just begun..... Good, we like it. The USA's HDTV broadcasting system is *light-years* more advanced than any cofdm-using country. Which is why so many people are watching OTA terrestrial HDTV in the USA..... NOT. The uptake has been slow, but steady. As expected. This article, posted by the Australian organisation "Fairfax Digital" claims their DTV system is an "utter failure" and a "turkey". http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...337221919.html I sure hope they get it straightened out someday. . . Technically the digital TV system is great in Australia, but some of the existing broadcasters pressured the government to impose ridiculous limitations on the what channels and content can be broadcast with the digital TV services. The requirement for simulcasting what is on the analogue channels as both an SD AND a HD digital channel has only been lifted this year, but the broadcasters still haven't made any changes to reflect this. Most of the regulatory restrictions will only be removed in 2009. Until then most viewers have little incentive to change to digital TV other than improved picture and sound quality, there is no significant additional content to warrant changing over until their old equipment breaks down. In the USA there is much greater incentive to move to high quality HDTV over the awful NTSC 480 line analogue services, but most people have opted for sat or cable based systems instead. Yes, certain people here use that observation as an argument that we should switch to a more profitable mobile-advertising cofdm-type system. BTW, wasn't there an Australian DTV system that was overhauled once before or was it some British DTV system that had to be completely scrapped? |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
"Mark Crispin" wrote
Davmel wrote: Stop spreading BS. The coverage is only small due to lower power levels. Golly gee, most US digital TV broadcasters are also at lower power levels. I guess that lower power levels is only an excuse when it's COFDM. That point always has been one of bob's major stumbling blocks. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turnedoff, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
In article , davmel wrote:
David wrote: "davmel" wrote in message The flame wars have only just begun..... Good, we like it. The USA's HDTV broadcasting system is *light-years* more advanced than any cofdm-using country. Which is why so many people are watching OTA terrestrial HDTV in the USA..... NOT. The light years you speak of are an indication of how old and already obsolete the ATSC system is. But don't worry it will only be a matter of time before the standard is just a foot note in history just like the long list of USA centric communications standards. At least the USA was out there seting standards, unlike Australia. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
David wrote:
"Mark Crispin" wrote Davmel wrote: Stop spreading BS. The coverage is only small due to lower power levels. Golly gee, most US digital TV broadcasters are also at lower power levels. I guess that lower power levels is only an excuse when it's COFDM. That point always has been one of bob's major stumbling blocks. Here in the UK the amount of homes with terrestrial digital had reached almost 9 million (and growing!) six months ago http://www.tiny.cc/dymOd. Set-top boxes can retail at under 20UK pounds, also virtually every TV manufactured in at least the last 15 years (along with DVDs, satellite, video equipment etc) is fitted with one to three SCART sockets, which when used in conjunction with a standard lead will almost instantly convert it into an RGB stereo monitor (it also controls w/s a/v switching) allowing any digi-box to plug straight into any TV, therefore obtaining maximum audio and video performance. As regards transmission power the VHF spectrum for TV transmissions was abandoned in the 1980s, local to where I live there are two UHF relay transmitters serving tens of thousands of people with reliable multi-channel digital TV reception, output power 20 'Watts' each. |
US ATSC conversion: with 700 some odd days until NTSC is turned off, you would think that US TV stations would run a dayly counter...
Ivan wrote:
Here in the UK the amount of homes with terrestrial digital had reached almost 9 million (and growing!) six months ago http://www.tiny.cc/dymOd. And none of those homes, except the lucky few hundred within range of the London trials, is receiving HDTV. Set-top boxes can retail at under 20UK pounds And none of them is outputting HDTV to its owner. In the US, an overwhelming majority of affiliates for all six national commercial-broadcast networks (CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox, WB, and UPN), as well as the national public-broadcast network PBS, has switched to HDTV via ATSC. Having begun this transition in 1998-1999, US is seven or eight years ahead of Europe in terms of over-the-air/terrestrial HDTV deployment and several years ahead of Japan and Australia. *All* first-run half-hour comedies, one-hour dramas, and theatrical movies on the broadcast networks, with the notable exception of most reality shows (except American Idol, whose audience is probably as large as every other reality shows' combined), have been shown in full widescreen HDTV for some time, in many cases for years (Smallville since its launch in 2001; The Tonight Show with Jay Leno since 1999 (!), etc., etc.) Other than the reality shows and daytime soap operas (which will likely transition last because their inexpensiveness is a large part of their appeal to networks, and new HDTV sets and cameras cost money), the last remaining first-run categories that have not yet yet fully converted over are syndicated shows and the morning and late-night talk shows. In terms of cable and satellite (the way 88% of US households receive their television programs), each of the five major national premium-movie networks offers at least one 24-hour HDTV channel. About 10 other 24-hour national HDTV cable channels exist. -- URL:http://www.pobox.com/~ylee/ PERTH ---- * Homemade 2.8TB RAID 5 storage array: URL:http://groups.google.ca/groups?selm=slrnd1g04a.5mt.ylee%40pobox.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:55 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com