NTSC tuners to be extinct ... when?

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?

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.
--
Bill R.

Remove nospam_ in e-mail address to reply by e-mail

"N. Morrow" wrote in message
et...
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?

=========================
Mine have been unused (=extinct) for several years.

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.

If I had to guess, they will keep NTSC tuners in most new TVs until at
least 2011 or 2012. Probably longer.

Alan F

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:23:10 GMT Alan F wrote:

| 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.

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. It will cost
the cable company more to provide the free basic digital STB, but it will
benefit them to recover more channel space to add more programming other
customers may be willing to pay more for. Those core 30 analog channels
could become 75 HD programs or 300 SD programs or some combination thereof.
The "basic digital STB" would only output SD, downconverting HD where the
basic channel is provided in HD (instead of wasting spectrum feeding an
SD duplicate to these STBs). Output would be A/V, maybe S-video, and RF.
It would still allow the use of an old TV with NTSC RF-only input, but the
cable system itself could go all-digital. If the cable systems chose to
make that basic digital STB also have HDMI or component outputs (even if
downconverted), then we could eliminate NTSC support in new TVs.

OTOH, an analog VSB demodulator and NTSC decoder are very cheap chips, at
least for a while.


| 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.

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.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:23:10 GMT Alan F wrote:

| 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.

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.

Of course they could. And perhaps in your world such a proposition might
make sense, but here in this world the FCC (after being prompted by
Congress) ruled that cable operators are *not allowed* to do that.

The world would be a much better place if only poor old phil were
allowed to make all of the decisions.

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.

Keep on demonstrating that you are ignorant. It is those government
agencies that have prohibited the forced use of STB for cable ready TVs.

It will cost
the cable company more to provide the free basic digital STB, but it will
benefit them to recover more channel space to add more programming other
customers may be willing to pay more for.

Ever taken an economics course? It sure doesn't look it.

Those core 30 analog channels
could become 75 HD programs or 300 SD programs or some combination thereof.
The "basic digital STB" would only output SD, downconverting HD where the
basic channel is provided in HD (instead of wasting spectrum feeding an
SD duplicate to these STBs). Output would be A/V, maybe S-video, and RF.
It would still allow the use of an old TV with NTSC RF-only input, but the
cable system itself could go all-digital. If the cable systems chose to
make that basic digital STB also have HDMI or component outputs (even if
downconverted), then we could eliminate NTSC support in new TVs.

All on the backs of the cable and satellite operators. Of course this
would take a government mandate that would have to overturn the existing
regulations that prohibit forced use of STBs for cable ready TVs.

OTOH, an analog VSB demodulator and NTSC decoder are very cheap chips, at
least for a while.

What in the world would make them expensive going forward?

| 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.

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.

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

--
I'm a consultant. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one.
Which one do you want?

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:23:10 GMT Alan F wrote:

| 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.

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.

Of course they could. And perhaps in your world such a proposition might
make sense, but here in this world the FCC (after being prompted by
Congress) ruled that cable operators are *not allowed* to do that.

Is your world the same one where CableCARDs are in every home, and
operating in every TV with zero problems and without the cable operator
jacking up the rates to cover the cost of them?

Polarhound wrote:
Matthew L. Martin wrote:
wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:23:10 GMT Alan F
wrote:

| 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.

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.

Of course they could. And perhaps in your world such a proposition
might make sense, but here in this world the FCC (after being prompted
by Congress) ruled that cable operators are *not allowed* to do that.

Is your world the same one where CableCARDs are in every home, and
operating in every TV with zero problems and without the cable operator
jacking up the rates to cover the cost of them?

Nope. I don't know why you would think that. Just what is the connection
between cable cards (required only for decryption) and a forced STB to
get basic service?

Matthew

--
I'm a consultant. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one.
Which one do you want?

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

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.

Alan F