Death of OTA Broadcasting

Wes Newell wrote:

Analog TV does have the advantage (if you can call it that) that even if
the signal is weak, you will get something. If it's that bad, it's

You know the more I read abt this stuff the more I'm
inclined to just buy the cheapest and smallest 13"
combo TV/DVD player and forget abt digital and PVR's an
all of it. And get my analog signal via rabbit ears

I'm sure digital video is very nice but just seems so
"up in the air yet".

I don't watch much TV anyway. So maybe its just best to
wait a few years yet

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" wrote:

You mean, you don't have the choice of
watching that "something" with snow, herringbone, whatever--because with
digital, it just AIN'T THERE. Period.

Is this REALY true of digital?

That it's either THERE or it is NOT there?

Joe Moore wrote:

It's like the difference between reading a book with faded print but
legible words and reading a book with missing words, sentences, or
paragraphs at random intervals. In the first case, you can follow the
story. In the second case, you can't.

Excellent comparison!

But is this REALLY true of analog vs digital OTA?

I've never done digital OTA before so don't know

Can you advise?

"Wes Newell" wrote

Screw analog. It sucks. I wish they'd dump it today.

I agree.

Anal log here in N. Jersey is ghost-ridden and unwatchable, and digital is
rock-solid, 100 times easier to receive. [$20 CM 3021]

"Mark Crispin" wrote

Instead of having multipath, they have distance reception problems and
lose the signal due to impulse noise if a motor is running nearby. Problem
reports are pouring in from all over the UK and Australia.

Those pesky seven-watt refridgerator bulbs have proven to be very difficult.

http://groups.google.com/groups/sear...ge&qt_s=Search

Question for the group....

If I buy this small 17" LCD TV monitor for use in an
RV.... will it be useless in a few more years?

Does it NOT have a digital tuner in it and will be
useless?

http://tinyurl.com/hepv6

On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Bruce Tomlin wrote:
Right. It can't be because OTA receivers are more expensive in the US
because they have to receive High Definition content, and therefore need
more memory and processing power.

Actually, my latest visit to Best Buy showed an entire row of SD ATSC TVs
for sale, with analog TVs on the clearance row.

Nobody seemed to be much interested in the SD TVs. The difference between
those and HDTV were painfully obvious.

But remember, in Psycho Bob Miller's wonderful world of Europe, SD is the
ONLY choice!

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, skip wrote:
I agree with you. I looked at cable ND dIRECT TV . i CAN NOT IMAGINE HVING
TO LEASE A RECEIVER.

Why? The lease costs are the same as owning the receiver: first receiver
has no monthly fee, each additional receiver is $5/month.

The main difference is that you don't have to buy the receiver any more,
and you aren't stuck with a worthless brick when you terminate your
service. You also can get receiver upgrades without being stuck with a
worthless brick.

I switched to leasing once I realized that it was a good deal for the
customers. As far as I can tell, the reason why DirecTV wants leasing is
that it allows them to do mandatory upgrades without having to support old
equipment, which they can't do with customer-owned equipment; they
definitely aren't making money out of it.

The main negative to leasing is for those people who have dual-use DVRs
(both DirecTV and OTA); if you terminate your DirecTV service you have to
give the DVR back and can't use it for OTA only.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Wes Newell wrote:
Yeah, I want a cheap small TV (about 20") with an ATSC tuner in
it.

Go to Best Buy. They're on sale now.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

wrote in message
...
"Elmo P. Shagnasty" wrote:

You mean, you don't have the choice of
watching that "something" with snow, herringbone, whatever--because with
digital, it just AIN'T THERE. Period.

Is this REALY true of digital?

That it's either THERE or it is NOT there?

In extreme cases, yes.

Believe me, I'm no spring chicken, I've been fiddling with TVs all my life.
Digital TV is usually amazingly easy to receive if you put *some* effort
into it.