| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
NTSC tuners to be extinct ... when?
Alan F wrote:
Matthew L. Martin wrote: Do you really know anything? You keep using weasel words to qualify virtually everything you post. Oh. Yeah. You are an ignorant, self centered blow hard. Matthew How is this response helpful? If you are irritated at Phil's questions, ignore them. How are poor old phil's responses helpful? Matthew -- I'm a consultant. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one. Which one do you want? |
NTSC tuners to be extinct ... when?
On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:07:40 GMT Alan F wrote:
| wrote: | | I believe that if the cable systems provided a basic digital STB for free | as part of the basic package, they could get away with cutting off all of | the analog channels. People might not like that, but I think they could | satisfy government agencies that are mandating the basic level of service | that the service is still being provided at no greater cost. | | Providing digital SD STB boxes for a nominal fee or no fee at all is | part of the conversion cost. But local governments have a say in this | and the cable companies will have to deal with local elected county & | city boards who want to placate their older voters. And it's not hard for cable companies to pre-spin this to get what they want. They simply announce the change and the $2.00/month cost for the STB. Then when the government entity bitches about this, they offer to make the basic STB available at no cost to basic service subscribers. Cable gets what they want, and government looks like the saviour of the people. The cable company executives know this would be demanded by governments, so they would not take this path unless and until they know they will benefit overall from this at the point of providing that box for free. Maybe that won't work in 2007. It is more likely to as time goes on for a few reasons. One of those is that more people will be getting digital cable ready TVs. That means fewer basic STBs to put in at the cable company's cost. | For an article on how the conversion was done in Puerto Rico last | year, see | http://www.multichannel.com/index.as...leid=CA6429802. | The transition effort was less for Liberty Cablevision, because they had | scrambled all their analog channels, forcing everyone to get analog | STBs. The reason for the scrambling was to cut down on cable theft. This | is a unspoken motive for cable companies to go digital with encryption | for all the national cable channels, especially in the big cities. But | they will retain a analog core of the broadcast networks and local | access/government channels as a sop to the customer base & local elected | officials. But they can also do this with digital. Then there is the decision to do the basic channels encrypted or not. They have to balance cable theft with basic STB costs to make that decision. With encryption they will need to provide the free basic STB to all basic customers. Without encryption they can avoid the cost of the free basic STB to customers that already have digital cable ready TVs (a number that is gradually growing), at the expense of cable thieves stealing service. My bet is they will go the way of unencrypted basic and let basuc customers use their TV directly as much as possible, since for many or most cable systems, basic service is provided at a loss. Cable thieves would be able to get a service level that the cable company would have lost money on (then the only real loss is the damage the thieves might cause). | OTOH, an analog VSB demodulator and NTSC decoder are very cheap chips, at | least for a while. | | I don't see why the cost of NTSC chipsets would go up. They are cheap | which is one reason I expect NTSC tuners will stay in TVS for a few | years pass 2009. I suspect they will be reduced to minimal production in a few years as the remaining NTSC countries switch over to digital (whether that be to ATSC or something else). | I'm sure they will try to get those on the 700 MHz spectrum moved first. | But as I understand it, "flash cut" will be the word of the day for low | powered stations. I suspect the pressure will be most on the urban ones | and less on the rural ones initially. Low power stations also operate | on a less protected basis. If the Feb. 17, 2009 changes result in a low | power station causing interference to a high power station, the low power | station goes off the air. I don't remember where class A falls in this. | Rural translators in the mountainous rural areas are the ones most likely | to be tolerated on analog past Feb. 17, 2009. | | The law requires that all stations cease broadcasting on UHF 52 to 69 | by midnight of February 17, 2009. So any low power station or translator | in what is called "out of core" band will have to move or shut down. | These stations will almost certainly be required to go digital with a | new in core channel or go off the air. But the FCC is still working it's | way through the conversion process and rules for all the Class A, low | power stations, and translators. Certainly those on 52-69 will be the first priority to get moved or shutdown. But I also know some were left running for a while back when 70-83 was taken away. Interference will likely be considered in the decisions. If some 1 watt channel 57 translator beaming down into a remote isolated valley with a population of 30 people is left running well into the spring of 2009, I doubt there will be any real impact. | Since a number of Class A stations are network affiliates, I can see | where the FCC will focus on requiring all of them to go digital by the | cutoff date along with the out of core stations. | | If you want to read some of public documents behind this, go to | http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/. The third periodic review of May 18, 2007 is | the key one. The FCC is also taking comments for the Third DTV Periodic | Review NPRM (proceeding 07-91) if you want to send them your thoughts on | the matter. The FCC is is getting protests from low power stations | owners who want to delay the digital conversion because of financial | hardship. One problem is that the whole conversion process left the low power stations without planning guidance for a long time. They surely knew they would have to convert, but there was little or no idea when, exactly. Then decisions started to be made with much shorter time frames. I do feel they should be allowed the time to do the conversions, even if on a flash cut basis. The ones on channels 2-51 could go longer and the ones on 52-69 need to get off pretty damned fast (as assignment rollouts in other services take place). Sharing does already exist between two-way mobile and broadcast in 14-20. Some of the 52-59 spectrum could be done that way on a temporary basis as two-way services are rolled out. Some smaller city that is not having its 700 MHz two-way service turned on in February 2009 could leave a low power station on the air until it is ready to roll out. It just needs to be far enough from another that is doing so to avoid interference. -- |---------------------------------------/----------------------------------| | Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below | | first name lower case at ipal.net / | |------------------------------------/-------------------------------------| |
NTSC tuners to be extinct ... when?
"Alan F" wrote in message news:[email protected] Bill R wrote: N. Morrow wrote: In the US, ATSC tuners are gradually making an appearance in TV's, DVR's, etc. (per the governmental guidelines) along with NTSC tuners. Retailers are now posting disclaimers alongside the NTSC-only sets. When will the trend shift the other way? When will these gizmos only be built with ATSC tuners? How close will we get to the Feb. 2009 NTSC cutoff deadline before this happens? I think that some of the 2008 models will be ATSC/QAM only. Remember that NTSC is NOT going away on some cable systems for quite a few more years. That is why I think that we will still see some NTSC/ATSC/QAM models for a few more years. Because of the prevalence of analog cable, I expect NTSC tuners will be around in new TVs for a few years past 2009. Yes, cable companies have already started in some location to cut the number of analog channels from the typical ~70 channels to a local core set of 30 or so. But that core set is likely to stay around for some years pass 2009. Also, the February 17, 2009 analog cutoff in the congressional bill only applies to full power TV stations. There are 1000s of low power and Class A stations and translators in the US. It is up to the FCC to decide when to force all these stations and translators to go digital. February, 2009 is regarded as too soon by many to complete the upgrade of all the translators to digital, especially the translators located in remote areas. The FCC has not announced a final plan for low power stations, but it looks as if they will push to get as many of them to switch to digital on Feb. 17, 2009 as they can. But not all of the low power stations will have the money to do the digital upgrade quickly. Since many of these low power stations are religious stations, they may get sympathetic ears in the current White House and Congress. So NTSC will likely continue for some rural areas after Feb, 2009. Feb., 2009, and "current White House and Congress" are antonymous. If I had to guess, they will keep NTSC tuners in most new TVs until at least 2011 or 2012. Probably longer. Alan F |
NTSC tuners to be extinct ... when?
"Alan F" wrote in message news:[email protected] wrote: I believe that if the cable systems provided a basic digital STB for free as part of the basic package, they could get away with cutting off all of the analog channels. People might not like that, but I think they could satisfy government agencies that are mandating the basic level of service that the service is still being provided at no greater cost. Providing digital SD STB boxes for a nominal fee or no fee at all is part of the conversion cost. But local governments have a say in this and the cable companies will have to deal with local elected county & city boards who want to placate their older voters. For an article on how the conversion was done in Puerto Rico last year, see http://www.multichannel.com/index.as...leid=CA6429802. The transition effort was less for Liberty Cablevision, because they had scrambled all their analog channels, forcing everyone to get analog STBs. The reason for the scrambling was to cut down on cable theft. This is a unspoken motive for cable companies to go digital with encryption for all the national cable channels, especially in the big cities. But they will retain a analog core of the broadcast networks and local access/government channels as a sop to the customer base & local elected officials. OTOH, an analog VSB demodulator and NTSC decoder are very cheap chips, at least for a while. I don't see why the cost of NTSC chipsets would go up. They are cheap which is one reason I expect NTSC tuners will stay in TVS for a few years pass 2009. I'm sure they will try to get those on the 700 MHz spectrum moved first. But as I understand it, "flash cut" will be the word of the day for low powered stations. I suspect the pressure will be most on the urban ones and less on the rural ones initially. Low power stations also operate on a less protected basis. If the Feb. 17, 2009 changes result in a low power station causing interference to a high power station, the low power station goes off the air. I don't remember where class A falls in this. Rural translators in the mountainous rural areas are the ones most likely to be tolerated on analog past Feb. 17, 2009. The law requires that all stations cease broadcasting on UHF 52 to 69 by midnight of February 17, 2009. So any low power station or translator in what is called "out of core" band will have to move or shut down. These stations will almost certainly be required to go digital with a new in core channel or go off the air. But the FCC is still working it's way through the conversion process and rules for all the Class A, low power stations, and translators. Since a number of Class A stations are network affiliates, I can see where the FCC will focus on requiring all of them to go digital by the cutoff date along with the out of core stations. If you want to read some of public documents behind this, go to http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/. The third periodic review of May 18, 2007 is the key one. The FCC is also taking comments for the Third DTV Periodic Review NPRM (proceeding 07-91) if you want to send them your thoughts on the matter. The FCC is is getting protests from low power stations owners who want to delay the digital conversion because of financial hardship. Alan F Obviously politics (in this case plutocracy) have the most to do with the situation. For the mere economic impact of the first few months of deploying the military abroad, every analog TV set in America could have been replaced. I'd have said vouchered, but that doesn't seem to work too well as government programs go. The latter (new TVs) would not be as profitable as the former (war). Or, instead, we could send 6 people in diapers to Mars;-0) Jesting aside, let's not forget that we the people are going to sell the spectrum made available for at least the price of a few months worth of all out war. Which would benefit we the people more? More war, more TVs, or more tax cuts? Placards anyone? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:03 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com