qworster
join:2001-11-25
Los Angeles, CA
1 edit | Hello??
What if the converter boxes wind up costing 100 dollars? Why should people have to PAY so the Govt. can make money? I would consider this a form of taxation! |
|
Hall
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH | The frequencies that analog TV is currently carried on is going to be sold (rented ?) by the gov't to entities for non-TV usage, hence the part of the story that mentions $10b from auction. In theory, it will cost taxpayers ZERO. |
|
DVOOR8
join:2001-12-24
USA
 ·Optimum Online
| reply to qworster
said by qworster  :What if the converter boxes wind up costing 100 dollars? Why should people have to PAY so the Govt. can make money? I would consider this a form of taxation! Sounds like the government has been bought and paid for. Frickin politicians getting paid by lobbyists for the cable/TV/satellite industry. |
|
Greg_Z
Premium
join:2001-08-08
Springfield, IL
·Comcast
| reply to qworster
Then those people do not need them, nor a TV and can go back to spending time with their families, or reading a good book. Evil concept, but television is the devil.
--
I threw out the map a long time ago. Now I follow my own direction! |
|
elister
join:2006-07-17
Seattle, WA
| reply to qworster
»www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···82107049
80$ and you can get an FCC waiver to offset that by 100$. So that poor old man in Texas can get a set top box can make 20$ on the deal.
This device is basically for standard TVs, its not for HDTV sets. |
|
plat2on1
join:2002-08-21
Hopewell Junction, NY
clubs:
| said by elister :» www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···8210704980$ and you can get an FCC waiver to offset that by 100$. So that poor old man in Texas can get a set top box can make 20$ on the deal. This device is basically for standard TVs, its not for HDTV sets. and that is $80 right now...in two years when they are required they will probably cost a 1/4 of that |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to Hall
Get an HD antenna. |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| 
$35.00 and they suck |
said by en102 :Get an HD antenna. HD antennas dont exist. they're just jazzy looking rabbit ears and DONT WORK any better than a dollar store set of rabbit ears.
And with digital TV's its all or nothing
got iffy signal? no snowy but watchable picture. forcing digital is bad for those with only indoor antennas.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
Fluker
join:2005-04-07
West Lafayette, IN
| have you ever actually seen an hdtv signal OTA?
It just plays like a scratched dvd, or satelite during a light storm.
You'll see artifacts and some jumping, but it's not quite on or off like a light switch.
analog is such a waste of potential bandwidth. A signal that had some snow is FLAWLESS in digital. |
|
Fluker
join:2005-04-07
West Lafayette, IN | reply to plat2on1
exactly.
DVD players can be had for $30 right now and they have somewhat complex moving parts.
I doubt it will be long before there's an inline box with a RF remote selling for $25 |
|
bi0tech
join:2003-06-19
| reply to dvd536
More misunderstanding.
You are correct that there is no HD antennas. Thats more of a marketing concept.
Rabbit ears are used for VHF reception. Digital stations in most areas of the US are broadcasting on UHF. For lowest cost this would be a 'bowtie' style antenna.
You will generally be able to pick up more analog signals on the edge of usable then digital. But the quality is usually so low I don't particularly agree that its better in anyway. Where as the digital signals that are received by a low cost antenna suited to the location (UHF/VHF/directional/multi-direction) are all good quality. So if really want an extra few channels that sort of resemble a picture with sound, then yes a digital upgrade is probably bad for you. |
|
jgelow
join:2005-05-28
Moreno Valley, CA | reply to Fluker
It depends on how far away you are from the broadcaster. I set my mother-inlaw's tv with a decent ota ant and the picture was dead on. I was jealous since I couldn't get a signal like that unless I pay for it through sat or cable. |
|
ricep5
Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL
 ·AT&T Southeast
 ·AT&T CallVantage
·VoicePulse
·Comcast Formerly ..
| reply to Hall
said by Hall :The frequencies that analog TV is currently carried on is going to be sold (rented ?) by the gov't to entities for non-TV usage, hence the part of the story that mentions $10b from auction. In theory, it will cost taxpayers ZERO. I have bad news....govt. spectrum auctions are a form of deferred taxation.
How do you think these companies afford to bid, because they know they can pass it on. Thats right, the very people who actually use it. In most cases that is you and me.
So while the press rags on about how spectrum auctions bring revenue to the govt., in essence, its an indirect tax. Govt. gets the money right away, the citizens pay a little later. |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| reply to Fluker
said by Fluker :have you ever actually seen an hdtv signal OTA? It just plays like a scratched dvd, or satelite during a light storm. You'll see artifacts and some jumping, but it's not quite on or off like a light switch. analog is such a waste of potential bandwidth. A signal that had some snow is FLAWLESS in digital. Hmmm...My neighbor is a broadcast engineer and his testing makes him an advocate of Digital OTA vice digital over AT&T cable. But time will tell when we all have to shift.
And yes, digital is more efficient, but conversely is less fringe area friendly.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
scooper
join:2000-07-11
Youngsville, NC
1 edit | reply to plat2on1
That box »www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···82107049
isn't bad for the price - but the coupon boxes will be even more stripped that that. No component or digital audio out. And they SHOULD include a channel 3/4 builtin modulator for older TVs |
|
Hall
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH
·EarthLink
·AT&T Midwest
·Earthlink Cable Mo..
| reply to elister
said by elister : 80$ and you can get an FCC waiver to offset that by 100$. So that poor old man in Texas can get a set top box can make 20$ on the deal. I'm pretty sure the coupons won't be for $100. I recall $40 or $50 being the planned value. You also won't be able to buy something for less than that and apply the full coupon value, i.e. "make money". If you have a $40 coupon and buy a $30 box, it's called even.
»www.ntia.doc.gov/dtvcoupon/index.html
»www.ntia.doc.gov/dtvcoupon/faq.html |
|
Heterman
Premium
join:2004-02-28
Fayetteville, AR | reply to scooper
If they're going to be that stripped, then there will have to be a modulator included. How else is the signal going to be displayed? |
|
dangarion
join:2003-05-26
Santa Ana, CA
| reply to qworster
said by qworster :What if the converter boxes wind up costing 100 dollars? Why should people have to PAY so the Govt. can make money? I would consider this a form of taxation! Are you a moron? Why should the government have to give people money to buy a converter box to get TV signal? People should feel lucky they are getting that much. There is not law that states the government has to provide people subsidies to get television service. |
|
Fluker
join:2005-04-07
West Lafayette, IN | reply to Heterman
I was thinking that it won't be long before there is a little deal the size of an ipod that just goes behind the TV and has a non line of sight RF remote.
Who even needs to know it's there? |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to Fluker
said by Fluker :have you ever actually seen an hdtv signal OTA? It just plays like a scratched dvd, or satelite during a light storm. You'll see artifacts and some jumping, but it's not quite on or off like a light switch. OTA HDTV is in the uhf band - you just need a good uhf antenna. I got one for about $25, it's small and worked like a champ.
with regard to quality, I never had problems with picture quality except during storms. In fact, OTA HD looks better than satellite or cable because it's not compressed as much. |
|
