is OTA TV doomed?

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" wrote in message
...
In article [email protected],
Wes Newell wrote:

Mark my words. OTA HDTV will never go away in my lifetime. You can take
that to the bank.

Well, we'll see.

But remember: Congress merely mandated digital transmission. It didn't
mandate HD.

Woop di doo!

If they weren't going to HD they would not have started so early in the
game.

Newsflash for ya: Broacasters actually WANT to reach the advertising
clients with HD OTA and what better way to do that than with HD.

Which advertisment will stand out the most, an HD one or a SD one? I
swear, common sense would befuddle those educated well beyond their
intelligence.

FYI, the market will dictate that HD OTA will rule!

The Thumper Brigade and cable & satelite companies can bitch all they want.
We don't care. We are going back to the good old days of free OTA TV, HD or
not regardless.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
In article ,
"Matthew L. Martin" wrote:

One particular piece of "more is better" failed. Before its time,
perhaps? Meanwhile, satellite (hundreds of channels) and digital cable
(hundreds of channels) came into being and were successful. USDTV was
just another delivery method that failed, for reasons outside of the
"more is better" mentality.


You snipped the bit about _EVERY_ pay OTA scheme failing. I wonder why
that is?

Go ahead, look it up. Every single attempt to get paid by viewers for
OTA transmission has failed. Don't you think that has something bearing
on your prediction?

Frankly, not really. I'm not worried about little guys; I'm looking at
the existing broadcasters with major networks behind them.

Once those guys wake up and decide it can be done, they'll try.

The networks, the post houses, the broadcasters and others have spent
billions collectively so that they can turn it off and go back to SD ?
Who's going to watch that if HD is available somwhere else ? More IS
better. More detail, more color and more channels of audio.

GG

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
In article ,
"Matthew L. Martin" wrote:

I didn't say that mentality didn't exist. I said that the facts
show that the business case based on that mentality has already
failed.
It has, has it.

Well, we don't yet live in a world where digital transmission is
mandated, do we.

How does that change that "more is better" (USDTV) failed?

One particular piece of "more is better" failed. Before its time,
perhaps? Meanwhile, satellite (hundreds of channels) and digital
cable (hundreds of channels) came into being and were successful.
USDTV was just another delivery method that failed, for reasons
outside of the "more is better" mentality.


You snipped the bit about _EVERY_ pay OTA scheme failing. I wonder why
that is?

Go ahead, look it up. Every single attempt to get paid by viewers for
OTA transmission has failed. Don't you think that has something bearing
on your prediction?

Matthew

Lets see XM and Sirius are doing pretty well and plan on offering video
soon. They are both OTA subscription services and some of the first
since digital.

TopUpTV in the UK is doing OK. They are subscription DTV OTA. France
will begin an OTA HDTV subscription service soon.

OTA subscription services are just beginning. Can't judge digital OTA
subscription services by past failures of analog TV subscription services.

Nor by one digital OTA subscription service that has not totally failed
yet. USDTV is still operating in bankruptcy and there is at least one
entity looking to invest in it.

Bob Miller

Gonzo wrote:
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" wrote in message
...
In article [email protected],
Wes Newell wrote:

Mark my words. OTA HDTV will never go away in my lifetime. You can take
that to the bank.
Well, we'll see.

But remember: Congress merely mandated digital transmission. It didn't
mandate HD.

Woop di doo!

If they weren't going to HD they would not have started so early in the
game.

Newsflash for ya: Broacasters actually WANT to reach the advertising
clients with HD OTA and what better way to do that than with HD.

Then why are so few ads produced in HD?


Which advertisment will stand out the most, an HD one or a SD one? I
swear, common sense would befuddle those educated well beyond their
intelligence.

FYI, the market will dictate that HD OTA will rule!

Then why have the broadcasters been so intent, spent so much money on
multicast must carry? Seems they are obsessed with this. So you say they
won't use it if they get it? Seems strange.

Bob Miller

The Thumper Brigade and cable & satelite companies can bitch all they want.
We don't care. We are going back to the good old days of free OTA TV, HD or
not regardless.

G-squared wrote:
Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
In article ,
"Matthew L. Martin" wrote:

One particular piece of "more is better" failed. Before its time,
perhaps? Meanwhile, satellite (hundreds of channels) and digital cable
(hundreds of channels) came into being and were successful. USDTV was
just another delivery method that failed, for reasons outside of the
"more is better" mentality.

You snipped the bit about _EVERY_ pay OTA scheme failing. I wonder why
that is?

Go ahead, look it up. Every single attempt to get paid by viewers for
OTA transmission has failed. Don't you think that has something bearing
on your prediction?
Frankly, not really. I'm not worried about little guys; I'm looking at
the existing broadcasters with major networks behind them.

Once those guys wake up and decide it can be done, they'll try.

The networks, the post houses, the broadcasters and others have spent
billions collectively so that they can turn it off and go back to SD ?
Who's going to watch that if HD is available somwhere else ? More IS
better. More detail, more color and more channels of audio.

GG

More money is what broadcasters and their investors want. If they can
get more eyeballs by multicasting and thereby more money multicasting wins.

And it is the programming that people want most. A bit better resolution
and most people won't know the difference when watching whatever on
their 42" ED plasma.

If they can make one dollar more with five channels than with one HD
guess which way they will go. They can force cable to carry all five SD
channels via must carry of multicasting law and sell them the same
programs in HD for cables HD tier. Cable will want the HD and pay for it
while being forced to carry the multicast five SD channels.

And broadcasters can also sell HD OTA while delivering one SD program to
satisfy Congress.

What broadcasters will not do is give away HD free OTA for very long. At
least not long after they get multicast must carry.

Bob Miller

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 16:43:05 -0500, me wrote:

Wes Newell wrote:

fios internet

what is fios Internet?

You really need to learn how to use a serach engine like yahoo or google.

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=fio...&cop=&ei=UTF-8

--
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

Bob Miller wrote:
snip
Then why are so few ads produced in HD?

We've been transferring old '70s shows at work in preparation for DVD
distribution. Some of the old reels include commercials from the day
rather than a 1 minute black slug (breaks were a lot shorter then).
Some of those spots look absolutely AWFUL.
So SD spots now in an HD show mean what? Advertisers think they can
sell their product with SD spots. So what?



Which advertisment will stand out the most, an HD one or a SD
one? I
swear, common sense would befuddle those educated well beyond
their
intelligence.

FYI, the market will dictate that HD OTA will rule!

Then why have the broadcasters been so intent, spent so much money
on
multicast must carry? Seems they are obsessed with this. So you say
they
won't use it if they get it? Seems strange.

Bob Miller
snip

In LA, several broadcasters are doing BOTH Bob. HD content with SD as
well. Both KNBC and KABC are doing 2 SD streams as well as their HD.
KNBC runs 'RAW' news - before it's edited down and weather. KABC reruns
their local news in SD (their local news is HD) and the weather radar.
The rerun news is cool if you missed it earlier. KTLA (WB) runs HD and
SD 'The Tube'. KCET and KOCE (PBS) run HD and SD. Wouldn't those be
valid reasons to want 'must carry' ?

GG

On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:33:04 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
wrote:

In article ,
Roger wrote:

provider I anticipate as the big day draws near, the cable and satellite
providers will be doing a big campaign with special deals to encourage
people to solve the "cut off problem" by subscribing to their respective

Sure they will as they have so much more to offer, but there are
drawbacks. I can get the local channels off satellite or cable, BUT I
can only get one of each while OTA I get as many as 4 channels from
each local channel. Not all of these are going HD, just digital and
SD. Cable charges extra for the digital channels whether HD or SD..

(a prime example of the "more is better" mentality. Matthew, are you
listening? Probably not--you'd be loathe to admit that the mentality
exists...)

Not at all.... You are confusing "more, better programs" with more
programs are better. Two quite different things.

On one hand we have networks trying to please a demographic that will
make them the most money. In addition they have to water down their
programming and time delay live broadcasts "just-in-case" they have to
do some censoring to please the FCC and some easily offended viewers.

This leaves them offering mediocrity when those who want quality
programming, or programming that interests them. The broadcast
networks can only offer programs that we find on the National
Geographic channel as the occasional special. If they offer science
fiction it'll be aimed at the general audience rather than those who
have a strong interest in it. So they'll still miss many of the people
who like sci-fi.

OTOH and in the other direction if you receive satellite you will have
noticed many if not most of the specialized channels are trying to
appeal to a broader audience so they can be compared to the "big
broadcast boys". Several channels have reinvented them selves three
or four times such as G4, AKA the Tech Channel, and several other
incarnations with each trying to reach a broader demographic and more
listeners. So, many of the hundreds of channels on satellite are
giving away one of the prime reasons many of us went to satellite in
the first place. More variety that gave us a chance to find quality
programs in which we were interested.

Probably the one thing that gives Pay per view the biggest likely hood
of success in the future is the deluge of commercials on the "regular
channels" that are supported by advertising. Not only are you seeing
up to 20 minutes of adds per hour on some channels during prime time,
you are also stuck with the banner adds (with sound effects) across
the bottom of the screen. Granted these are *usually* adds for the
channels own programs coming up, but not always. Oft times the banner,
or gaudy station ID Icon will cover text across the bottom of the
screen.

The local broadcast network outlets which are usually affiliates are
running "up to" 4 digital channels. The definition of these channels,
at least around here, changes often. The primary channels will
usually have one 1080i channel with the rest being some combination
from SD through 720. Typically, at present the 1080i is usually the
same programming as on the analog station but it looks far, far
better. They sometimes bring on specials that are in HD as well as
the network channel.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 19:25:45 -0400, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

In article [email protected],
Wes Newell wrote:

As you can see (look at dates in filename) I've programs recorded from 2
ago i haven't watched yet. And this is the off season. When the new shows
start up in the fall, I get very selective on what I record, otherwise I'd
have over 20 hours a day of TV to watch just from OTA. So, you tell me why
I should pay for cable/sat.:-)

There *is* content on cable you can't get OTA--and some of it is VERY
good.

And there's content on OTA you can't get on cable. So what. A person can
only watch so much TV.

That's the best of both worlds: cable and DVR. You aren't stuck
watching their stuff on their schedule, and you can pick and choose only
the really, truly good stuff. No compromises. With OTA, it's
compromise. You get OK stuff, but only a very little bit of it is very
good (How I Met Your Mother--an absolutely stunningly good show). Mostly
what you watch is just OK stuff.

WTF are you talking about. With 4 HDTV tuner cards in my server I'm not
stuck on anyones schedule. And I pick what I want to watch now. And it
doesn't cost me a monthly fee either. An dso I only watch just OK stuff
huh. You don't have a clue what I watch. How fricking stupid are you to
even make such a statement. I've seen some cable shows. They sucked. My
opinion is that the good stuff is on the free networks and the cable stuff
on whole I wouldn't even consider OK.

You can't find Mythbusters (or, previously, Junkyard Wars) on OTA.

Good, because if you like them, I'd probably hate them.

Nor will you find Modern Marvels, much of which is great stuff.

In your opinion.:-)

So the extra $20/month I pay for cable TV (vs. just cable internet
alone) is a MUCH more cost-effective way to do it, because of the
quality issue.

Well, I'm real happy you're happy with your cable. Cable and quality don't
even belong in the same sentence with TV or internet service. When's the
last time your cable dns server crashed? My brother got so tired of the
problems he had with cable he cancalled it all and got sat and fios
internet.:-)

--
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

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 20:28:14 -0400, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:

In article ,
"Gonzo" wrote:

FYI, the market will dictate that HD OTA will rule!

Can't wait to see how it comes out.

Don't worry--if HD OTA flops, I'll come back and shove your words down
your throat.

Well just how many years are you going to wait? We've had OTA HDTV here
for about 6 years now. Not a single station that was doing HD has stopped.
Several have moved from 720p to a full 1080i though. Fox, just recently.
That tends to show the trend is not what you perceive it to be. If there's
words to be eaten, then maybe you need to start exercisering your jaw.

--
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