Broadband Users are Better Prepared for Digital Transition > What Was Wrong With Analog TV?

What Was Wrong With Analog TV?

You can fit more digital channels into the same spectrum space as 1 analog channel.
The signal is superior, traveling farther distance without degradation. Higher video resolution and better sound.

When my CRT TV started to have just one thin line in the middle showing a picture I got a USB 2 digital tuner for my PC using my 22 in LCD monitor (Dell 2005FPW.)

Its almost distracting having the higher detail, you start staring at pores on peoples faces I can live with that.

PS- I see commercials every day about the digital transition.
--
‘Do ye, quieting in your bosoms your strong hearts,
Who of many good things have had your fill even to surfeit,
With what is moderate nourish your mighty desire; for neither will
We yield, nor shall you have all else as you wish.’
Solon

From dtv.gov

An important benefit of the switch to all-digital broadcasting is that it will free up parts of the valuable broadcast spectrum for public safety communications (such as police, fire departments, and rescue squads). Also, some of the spectrum will be auctioned to companies that will be able to provide consumers with more advanced wireless services (such as wireless broadband).

Consumers also benefit because digital broadcasting allows stations to offer improved picture and sound quality, and digital is much more efficient than analog. For example, rather than being limited to providing one analog program, a broadcaster is able to offer a super sharp “high definition” (HD) digital program or multiple “standard definition” (SD) digital programs simultaneously through a process called “multicasting.” Multicasting allows broadcast stations to offer several channels of digital programming at the same time, using the same amount of spectrum required for one analog program. So, for example, while a station broadcasting in analog on channel 7 is only able to offer viewers one program, a station broadcasting in digital on channel 7 can offer viewers one digital program on channel 7-1, a second digital program on channel 7-2, a third digital program on channel 7-3, and so on. This means more programming choices for viewers. Further, DTV can provide interactive video and data services that are not possible with analog technology.

reply to gaforces

After 40 something years of snow and interference, I can do without that.
I'm right on the outside edge of coverage between San Francisco and into coverage for the antennas on the summit of Loma Prieta.
I have a better powered directional antenna now so I suppose it would be better on analog too, but I'm not going back.
In an emergency, I guarantee you I wont be watching TV to get info. I will be firing up the CB radio and an emergency am/fm radio receiver off my 12v battery's.

reply to gaforces
First, High definition is always digital. Digital is not always high definition. Most people as of yet don't have high definition TVs so they will see Standard Definition TV with their existing sets using a Digital to Analog converter.

Digital Standard Definition TV in 4:3 aspect ratio has the same appearance as the regular analog TV minus the ghosting, snowy images and static noises. However, if the reception is poor, one may encounter various other artifacts such as blockiness and stuttering.

There is a big difference in distance related reception quality. I live about 22 miles from the broadcast towers and could only get a very poor Analog signal without a huge antenna. I currently get a perfect digital picture with a set of powered rabbit ears.

Most stations are broadcasting both a digital and a high definition signal along with their analog signal at this time. There are still a few that are not and some only broadcasting a high definition signal.

High Definition (Digital) TV prices are dropping a rock and there are a few 480i 4x3 digital TVs available but not many as there will be no reason for them to exist as HD prices continue to fall.

reply to benc
I generally agree but in this case I think the requirement is reasonable.

Digital is more efficient then analog. This is an important advantage. DTV allows channels currently allocated to TV to be used for other purposes. For broadcasters and customers it allows multiple programs and/or higher definition video over existing 6 MHz RF channels.

There is a lot of competition for access to RF spectrum so on balance using less for TV facilitates creation of other services.

/tom

reply to benc
billions of dollars in spectrum sales and reduced broadcast costs for the corps. also allows broadcasters to condense their service areas to profitably populated areas; adverts pay by number of people who can view them.

So, the usual reasons. Money, money, money. From a policy perspective it would be successful if regulators had forced the maintenance of coverage into rural areas ... but ...

reply to benc
For goodness sake:

...blow out the candles and install electricity

...tear down the outhouse and install indoor plumbing

...put the mule out to pasture and buy an automobile

...be bold - take one big giant step into the 21st century!



(Just kidding)
--
Life is simply one damned thing after another.

reply to b10010011
This is what concerns me.

I have cable in my home, with a digital box (from the cable company) on one TV and a DVR on the other. So no trouble there.

However, my family has a cottage in a very remote part of Michigan. There's no cable service. Installing satellite would cost an arm and a leg. For the last 40 years, we've gotten by on pictures out of Traverse City that are usually pretty snowy.

We'll have no trouble buying a converter box for the old TV we have up there, but I'm concerned that it'll be useless since we already seem to be on the fringe of the TV signal's range.

I guess we'll see how things work out. Maybe the picture will be better. Maybe not. Maybe we'll just stick with reading books from the library instead (which is honestly what we do most of the time anyways).