According to CNN...

Besides upgrading the head end plants, the cable companies can free up
a lot of bandwidth by taking away analog cable channels. Turn off 10
analog channels and they have bandwidth for 20+ HD channels and a bunch
of digital SD channels. So expect to start seeing some of the least
watched analog channels to be switched entirely to the digital tier this
year.

Here in Southern California TWC-Land, they just did a much ballyhooed
reshuffling in an endeavor to bring all their Southern California systems'
channel line-ups in line with each other so no matter where you go in SoCal,
everything is on the same TW cable channel. That's fine, I have no problem
with that. However, now, just about everything on channels 1-99 are
duplicated on the digital tier. Not only that, but on one of the channels
they waste for TWC information, they have a perpetual interview program
wherein they discuss this. One of the things a TWC rep touts is now, all
the channels in the line-up are digital...well, what he really means is, the
channels 1-99 are now digitized but that's a detail.:-)

My point is, instead of a few hundred different channels as I had prior to
this much ballyhooed reshuffling, now, close to a hundred of those channels
are duplicates, albeit, "true digital" on my digital tier but duplicates
nonetheless. None of our local VHF channels are duplicated but 5 of the 7
such channels are included in my HDTV tier anyway. For some reason they
don't include KTLA Channel 5 in the HDTV tier, well, I only watched
Smallville, so I guess that's not a big sacrifice and they don't include
KCOP channel 13 in that tier either; not sure if poor old channel 13 is even
broadcasting in HD!

But, in line with what you said, I wrote them about this issue of having my
cable channel choices severely reduced since their much ballyhooed
reshuffling and pointing out to them if they took all those duplicates off
of my lineup, they'd have plenty of bandwidth for additional HDTV channels
and might even be able to bring back some of the SD digital channels I lost
in this recent reshuffling. Below is a portion of their canned response:

"Thank you for taking the time to request a new channel. Your suggestion
will be considered the next time we make a line-up change, as we track the
incoming requests on a regular basis. We appreciate your feedback because it
enables us to provide a product you can enjoy."

I do realize, if they change the lineup to suit me, all those basic cable
only folks would be out of luck but if SDV would resolve that issue, I'm all
in favor of it!:-)

Nomad in Sunny SoCal where, lately, we have had record setting single digit
over night temps


"Alan F" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Mikepier wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 08:23:04 -0500, Agent_C
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 01:09:54 -0500, Bob wrote:

Is this an answer to a question that was never asked???

Weren't you at least a little but curious???

A_C

Nope not even the least bit curious, way too liberal and anti American
for me. Think they are drinking the same water as ole Jimmy is over
there at the Carter Center. Haven't watched even a minute of CNN in
over 10 years.

Bob

Nomad wrote:

Besides upgrading the head end plants, the cable companies can free up

a lot of bandwidth by taking away analog cable channels. Turn off 10
analog channels and they have bandwidth for 20+ HD channels and a bunch
of digital SD channels. So expect to start seeing some of the least
watched analog channels to be switched entirely to the digital tier this
year.


Here in Southern California TWC-Land, they just did a much ballyhooed
reshuffling in an endeavor to bring all their Southern California systems'
channel line-ups in line with each other so no matter where you go in SoCal,
everything is on the same TW cable channel. That's fine, I have no problem
with that. However, now, just about everything on channels 1-99 are
duplicated on the digital tier. Not only that, but on one of the channels
they waste for TWC information, they have a perpetual interview program
wherein they discuss this. One of the things a TWC rep touts is now, all
the channels in the line-up are digital...well, what he really means is, the
channels 1-99 are now digitized but that's a detail.:-)

My point is, instead of a few hundred different channels as I had prior to
this much ballyhooed reshuffling, now, close to a hundred of those channels
are duplicates, albeit, "true digital" on my digital tier but duplicates
nonetheless. None of our local VHF channels are duplicated but 5 of the 7
such channels are included in my HDTV tier anyway. For some reason they
don't include KTLA Channel 5 in the HDTV tier, well, I only watched
Smallville, so I guess that's not a big sacrifice and they don't include
KCOP channel 13 in that tier either; not sure if poor old channel 13 is even
broadcasting in HD!

But, in line with what you said, I wrote them about this issue of having my
cable channel choices severely reduced since their much ballyhooed
reshuffling and pointing out to them if they took all those duplicates off
of my lineup, they'd have plenty of bandwidth for additional HDTV channels
and might even be able to bring back some of the SD digital channels I lost
in this recent reshuffling. Below is a portion of their canned response:

What you have is analog digital simulcast (ADS) and that is a good
thing. That means that all those with digital set top boxes (and QAM
tuners with cable cards) are no longer dependent on the analog channels.
This a major step to weaning people off of analog channels. Dropping the
analog channels is now only an issue with those who still use the analog
cable ready input on their TVs. Still a lot of people, but now they can
start taking away the less popular analog channels and tell people that
if they want them, it's time to go digital. (Yes and make more $$$ in
the process, but a cable company is in it for the profit).

The digital SD channels do not take up that much space. With QAM256,
they can squeeze 12 to 15 digital SD channels into the 6 MHz bandwidth
taken up by 1 analog channel. So the digital simulcast only takes up the
bandwidth taken by 5 or 6 analog channels. And you should be getting
better picture quality for the one-time analog only channels. Rather
than writing them a letter criticizing them for this, if you want more
HD channels and better looking SD, you should have written them a letter
of thanks for the ADS.

As for KTLA 5 not being on HD tier, that is may be a question of who
own KTLA 5 and whether they are demanding extra fees from TWC for the
rights to carry their digital signal. Some quick research indicates the
KCOP-DT is broadcasting digitally, but not in HD. If you want to get
these digital stations, if you are not blocked by local terrain, put up
an antenna (if you have a ATSC tuner in the TV or get the Samsung
DTB-H260F).

Alan F

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:53:31 -0500, Bob wrote:

Nope not even the least bit curious, way too liberal and anti American
for me. Think they are drinking the same water as ole Jimmy is over
there at the Carter Center. Haven't watched even a minute of CNN in
over 10 years.

I was expecting a bad Gay joke, based on the typo.

Instead; 'liberal', 'anti AmUrican', Carter bla bla bla.

If you Rednecks only knew how dumb and ignorant you sounded....

A_C

Yes, I agree, this is a step in the right direction and perhaps they wanted
to finish the work of getting all their systems aligned before moving
forward with changes, new channels, for those of us already paying for
additional tiers. (Please understand, some of what I posted or the tone
anyway was a bit tongue in cheek) No question we're getting better picture
on the one time analogue only channels. I certainly didn't mind having them
being added to the digital tier so much as objecting to the loss of some
other channels and the loss of variety or channel choices that we seem to be
enduring in what may be an interim period.

KTLA is owned by Tribune and there has been an ongoing dispute between them
and TW. KCOP is now owned by Fox though it is not a Fox affiliate.

I live in the San Fernando Valley part of Los Angeles and I live in an
apartment complex. An indoor antenna just won't work here and if I could go
by way of roof antenna, I probably would have switched to satellite. My
unit isn't faced in the right direction for a dish so it would have to be on
the roof and although the law says they aren't supposed to be able to deny
me this type of accommodation, I don't wish to get in a hassle with the
building management or owner over this; they already expect those who do
have satellite dishes on their balconies to keep them at a level where they
cannot be seen from the outside. Right now, they consider me a good tenant
and if I move, I want the reputation to follow me. Apartment space in SoCal
is at a premium and vacancies in good buildings go fast and as such, they
diligently check your references.

Nomad


"Alan F" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Nomad wrote:

Besides upgrading the head end plants, the cable companies can free up

a lot of bandwidth by taking away analog cable channels. Turn off 10
analog channels and they have bandwidth for 20+ HD channels and a bunch
of digital SD channels. So expect to start seeing some of the least
watched analog channels to be switched entirely to the digital tier this
year.


Here in Southern California TWC-Land, they just did a much ballyhooed
reshuffling in an endeavor to bring all their Southern California
systems' channel line-ups in line with each other so no matter where you
go in SoCal, everything is on the same TW cable channel. That's fine, I
have no problem with that. However, now, just about everything on
channels 1-99 are duplicated on the digital tier. Not only that, but on
one of the channels they waste for TWC information, they have a perpetual
interview program wherein they discuss this. One of the things a TWC rep
touts is now, all the channels in the line-up are digital...well, what he
really means is, the channels 1-99 are now digitized but that's a
detail.:-)

My point is, instead of a few hundred different channels as I had prior
to this much ballyhooed reshuffling, now, close to a hundred of those
channels are duplicates, albeit, "true digital" on my digital tier but
duplicates nonetheless. None of our local VHF channels are duplicated
but 5 of the 7 such channels are included in my HDTV tier anyway. For
some reason they don't include KTLA Channel 5 in the HDTV tier, well, I
only watched Smallville, so I guess that's not a big sacrifice and they
don't include KCOP channel 13 in that tier either; not sure if poor old
channel 13 is even broadcasting in HD!

But, in line with what you said, I wrote them about this issue of having
my cable channel choices severely reduced since their much ballyhooed
reshuffling and pointing out to them if they took all those duplicates
off of my lineup, they'd have plenty of bandwidth for additional HDTV
channels and might even be able to bring back some of the SD digital
channels I lost in this recent reshuffling. Below is a portion of their
canned response:

What you have is analog digital simulcast (ADS) and that is a good
thing. That means that all those with digital set top boxes (and QAM
tuners with cable cards) are no longer dependent on the analog channels.
This a major step to weaning people off of analog channels. Dropping the
analog channels is now only an issue with those who still use the analog
cable ready input on their TVs. Still a lot of people, but now they can
start taking away the less popular analog channels and tell people that
if they want them, it's time to go digital. (Yes and make more $$$ in
the process, but a cable company is in it for the profit).

The digital SD channels do not take up that much space. With QAM256,
they can squeeze 12 to 15 digital SD channels into the 6 MHz bandwidth
taken up by 1 analog channel. So the digital simulcast only takes up the
bandwidth taken by 5 or 6 analog channels. And you should be getting
better picture quality for the one-time analog only channels. Rather
than writing them a letter criticizing them for this, if you want more
HD channels and better looking SD, you should have written them a letter
of thanks for the ADS.

As for KTLA 5 not being on HD tier, that is may be a question of who
own KTLA 5 and whether they are demanding extra fees from TWC for the
rights to carry their digital signal. Some quick research indicates the
KCOP-DT is broadcasting digitally, but not in HD. If you want to get
these digital stations, if you are not blocked by local terrain, put up
an antenna (if you have a ATSC tuner in the TV or get the Samsung
DTB-H260F).

Alan F

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 18:39:28 -0500, Agent_C
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:53:31 -0500, Bob wrote:

Nope not even the least bit curious, way too liberal and anti American
for me. Think they are drinking the same water as ole Jimmy is over
there at the Carter Center. Haven't watched even a minute of CNN in
over 10 years.

I was expecting a bad Gay joke, based on the typo.

Instead; 'liberal', 'anti AmUrican', Carter bla bla bla.

If you Rednecks only knew how dumb and ignorant you sounded....

A_C



It matters not how dumb I sound to a fool, but yea I guess I am
just dumb and stupid enough to undestand what the founding
fathers had in mind and how well it worked for almost 200 years until
you liberal fools got a foothold. If you can't see what's been
destroying this country for the last several decades I can't halp ya.
You sir are the fools. Trust me I do know what I'm talking about. You
can put 90+% of the problems we are dealing with right at the
doorsteps of the modern liberal and their stupidity and ignorance.
Government schools and democrats beholded to teachers unions
for a start. If you don't think Jimmy Carter is a fool you must be
deaf and blind! Get a clue or this country like most great
civilazations will come to end from within some day sooner than
you might think, dumbass!

Bob

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 19:39:11 -0500, Bob wrote:

Get a clue or this country like most great
civilazations will come to end from within some day sooner than
you might think, dumbass!

Would somebody shake the double-wide and wake Bob up please?

He'll be late for the lynching; and he's got a book burning first
thing in the morning.

A_C

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 20:00:34 -0500, Agent_C
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 19:39:11 -0500, Bob wrote:

Get a clue or this country like most great
civilazations will come to end from within some day sooner than
you might think, dumbass!

Would somebody shake the double-wide and wake Bob up please?

He'll be late for the lynching; and he's got a book burning first
thing in the morning.

A_C

Keep it up, you could not be more wrong or look like a bigger fool.

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 03:43:21 -0500, Bob wrote:

Keep it up, you could not be more wrong or look like a bigger fool.

Look up the word 'projection'. It defines you.

A_C