Digital TV switch a conspiracy?!?

[JoeyDonuts]

Uggg. I feel dirty after typing in the thread title. Anyway:

http://www.digitalmegahouse.com/digitaltvscam.html

Gimme a friggin' break.

I hope this doesn't get any traction. This is just total lunacy, but I see it getting more and more steam built up as Feb 2009 gets closer and all the old and rural folks who aren't savvy suddenly lose their Matlock and local news.

[PhantomWolf]

Actually funny thing, my gf works for a major cable company in the States (the reason I'm here currently, no not the company, my gf. :p) We were actually talking about this the other day. It seems that they get a number of calls from people thinking that there is some sort of conspriacy behind it. Apparently the real reason is that digital takes up less bandwidth than analogue and so by switching the broadcasting systems to digital they can free up a lot of bandwidth for other uses. Apparently it's just that simple, they need the bandwidth....

[JoeyDonuts]

There's a ton of advantages. With multicasting, there's going to be even more free TV channels available over the air then ever before. Not to mention high definition...an absolute must for sports. I can't watch football in 4:3 anymore. Just can't.

Of course all of this is going to be completely lost on someone who believes the over-the-air antenna converter box subsidized by the government is some sort of Big Brother monitoring device. Oddly enough, if you have cable of any sort, you're good to go already.

I guess it sort of follows that any sort of massive undertaking by the government that affects everybody is going to be labeled a conspiracy by the people who really want to believe it, and no amount of evidence or lack thereof is going to convince them.

[fagin]

Switchover is happening in the UK too. Boxes are really cheap, especially on Ebay. Loads of channels, admittedly mainly junk. Built in 2 week TV guide. Generally much better picture quality.
No downside.

[peteweaver]

Generally much better picture quality. except when signal is poor and you get digital break up. And a box on your screen saying no signal.

With analogue PAL you get a snowy picture but sound remains good.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Apparently it's just that simple, they need the bandwidth....
...to broadcast more signals to the chips they implanted in all our brains to control us.

[cwalner]

I like these two quotes from the link
Who is behind it? the Government & the Electronic Media, this is why you might only Read about it in the Newspaper & not see it on TV!
It will no longer be the case where you could just buy a second hand TV from Cash Converters for $50 just to watch the News!
Why would you want to watch TV News if they are in on the conspiracy.

Also remind me to never use this dictionary. I hate circular defenitions
According to the Australian Macquarie Concise Dictionary, a Conspiracy is
/ noun any theory which proposes a large-scale conspiracy against the general public by those in power.
hmm a conspiracy is any theory which proposes a large-scale conspiracy.
how ... illuminating? insighful? wait I got it. Useless!
I will assume, based on the fact that most Ausies I have met are not complete morons, that this is not the standard use dictionary for that country.

[moon1969]

Rupert Murdoch and Ted Turner are trying to brainwash people?

[sleeplessdwarf]

This CT isn't near as bad as I thought it would be. There is actually one out there that is much worse. According to AJ the TVs flicker rate has always had a purpose in mind control. Supposedly, it puts you into a meditative state. And everything from the scrolling words at the bottom, to the multiscreen view of other tvs in the background further this state. I will search for the name, but I read an article from a former top advertiser who went anti-globalist/green lover who seems to sy the same thing. about commercials. The absolutely worst of it all is a youtube vid that goes into bluebeam project, then to what will happen to people who are chipped and have a HDTV.

I will admit that while the CT was obviously never one that seemed to even have a real beginning anywhere, that damn video gave me the creeps. :D

I found it! You guys will laugh I promise.

[sleeplessdwarf]

But I do not have 15 post yet :mad:

so I guess I will try to give a very close search for you if you decide to enjoy the vid for amusement.

Type "blue beam project exposed!" and it should be the first one by truther4life. 5:03 should be the length. Enjoy. :boxedin:

[Marquis de Carabas]

KXJGldPkgpM

[sleeplessdwarf]

Thanks Carabas. Anyway, when I spoke of the scroll bar and multiscreens I was obviously talking about news channels. And according to AJ the new sexy host on theses channels are very important as well. I believe he said many times that he has trained himself to not fall into the state, but he catches himself glued to the hot chicks
that seem to lick their lips at him. Now I dont know what news he is watching, but I could only wish that Rachel Maddow would lick those lips at me. :D

But seriously, there are many that believe these things, and I realize now how terrifying the world these people live in. I would lose my mind if I thought my tv was out to get me.

[abenja1]

This CT isn't near as bad as I thought it would be. There is actually one out there that is much worse. According to AJ the TVs flicker rate has always had a purpose in mind control. Supposedly, it puts you into a meditative state. And everything from the scrolling words at the bottom, to the multiscreen view of other tvs in the background further this state. I will search for the name, but I read an article from a former top advertiser who went anti-globalist/green lover who seems to sy the same thing. about commercials. The absolutely worst of it all is a youtube vid that goes into bluebeam project, then to what will happen to people who are chipped and have a HDTV.

I will admit that while the CT was obviously never one that seemed to even have a real beginning anywhere, that damn video gave me the creeps. :D

I found it! You guys will laugh I promise.

What Mr. Jones forget to mention as he lives in his own demented world, is that he has a show that is on TV. So basically every program on TV is brainwashing except AJ's of course. :rolleyes:

[sleeplessdwarf]

I think Mr. Jones wanted to take advantage of the brainwashing. I mean he can only scare so many people into buying gold, water filters, am radios, and dry food.

[Skeptic Guy]

Actually funny thing, my gf works for a major cable company in the States (the reason I'm here currently, no not the company, my gf. :p) We were actually talking about this the other day. It seems that they get a number of calls from people thinking that there is some sort of conspriacy behind it. Apparently the real reason is that digital takes up less bandwidth than analogue and so by switching the broadcasting systems to digital they can free up a lot of bandwidth for other uses. Apparently it's just that simple, they need the bandwidth....

Basically, that's it as far as the terrestrial broadcast spectrum is concerned. Cable and DTH have been digital for years and as such, if you have either of those platforms, you are already set.

I work in the industry and I can tell you that the networks and cable brands were not too keen on the conversion to digital. Mainly because of HD. What brand of HD? 720P, 1080P, 1080i? Content producers had to accommodate for all standards and aspect ratios (4:3, 16:9). You'll notice that all the important graphic information fits in the 4:3 aspect ratio because not everyone will have a new 16:9 TV monitor. You can't charge more for HD content, yet. There aren't as many HD viewers as there are SD so you can't charge advertisers more for the time.

If it's a conspiracy, no one talked to me.

[defaultdotxbe]

i dont know about australia and the UK but in the US each household can get up to 2 coupons for 40 dollars off a converter

[gtc]

i dont know about australia and the UK but in the US each household can get up to 2 coupons for 40 dollars off a converter

Australia is a way behind the US and the UK but a large proportion of people in rural areas have already gone digital in order to get the full range of metropolitan channels. I think there is talk of a subsidy closer to switch off for low income people.

[PhantomWolf]

I can't remember exactly when, but our (NZ) change over is still about 5 years off.

[JoeyDonuts]

Basically, that's it as far as the terrestrial broadcast spectrum is concerned. Cable and DTH have been digital for years and as such, if you have either of those platforms, you are already set.

I work in the industry and I can tell you that the networks and cable brands were not too keen on the conversion to digital. Mainly because of HD. What brand of HD? 720P, 1080P, 1080i? Content producers had to accommodate for all standards and aspect ratios (4:3, 16:9). You'll notice that all the important graphic information fits in the 4:3 aspect ratio because not everyone will have a new 16:9 TV monitor. You can't charge more for HD content, yet. There aren't as many HD viewers as there are SD so you can't charge advertisers more for the time.

If it's a conspiracy, no one talked to me.

We're getting about 30 confused calls idea from viewers in our rural areas and people who don't have HD yet...all because Entertainment Tonight and The Insider have branded all of their shows as being "IN HD." Their graphics framing are not within 4:3 safe title either. It doesn't say HD where Available or anything helpful.

Pretty odd considering we catch it off an SD transponder, and air it in SD. It's like the producers think the switch has already happened, and none of the viewers/stations/digitalmediadistribution/satellite workers have told them.

Anyway, Feb. 17th is gonna be a massive cluster-f. I'm picturing angry pitchfork toting mobs of retirees protesting outside our station.

[asmodean]

Switchover is happening in the UK too. Boxes are really cheap, especially on Ebay. Loads of channels, admittedly mainly junk. Built in 2 week TV guide. Generally much better picture quality.
No downside.

Same in Sweden. Though, the bad thing here is that it was pushed a bit before the tech was ready, so for instance, now when the last few annalogue transmitters goes offline, all setop-boxes are outdated and need to be switched to get newer radio access technologies, compression algorithms and whatnot.

Apart from that, the only real drawbacks seems to be a lot higher sensitivity to bad reception conditions.

[zaphod2016]

Switchover is happening in the UK too. Boxes are really cheap, especially on Ebay. Loads of channels, admittedly mainly junk. Built in 2 week TV guide. Generally much better picture quality.
No downside.

Downside: it demands that people who are not especially tech-savvy go and buy a new converter box, to receive the same shows they watched yesterday without the box.

This is why people like my mom are screaming about it. Not that she is right, mind you, but there is a logic of sorts behind the paranoia.

[PhantomWolf]

I have to wonder if there was the same sort of paranoia when they switched from B&W to Colour

[Elizabeth I]

I think Mr. Jones wanted to take advantage of the brainwashing. I mean he can only scare so many people into buying gold, water filters, am radios, and dry food.

And string! Don't forget plenty of string!!!

i dont know about australia and the UK but in the US each household can get up to 2 coupons for 40 dollars off a converter

AND if you already have cable you don't have to do anything at all

[parky76]

wait a second. when my box is off...this little red light keeps looking at me!!! is that the red lidless eye of Sauron??????

and when it is on....a little green eye keeps winking at me. is that the green eye of Freemasonry?

[parky76]

I have to wonder if there was the same sort of paranoia when they switched from B&W to Colour

"Colored" tv? well thats just another Commy word for integration, I reckon.

:D

[ktesibios]

I have to wonder if there was the same sort of paranoia when they switched from B&W to Colour

I doubt it, as the NTSC color system was designed so that color broadcasts could be watched (in monochrome) on an unmodified standard B&W receiver and B&W broadcasts on a color receiver.

Now if the CBS color-sequential system had been adopted instead of the one developed by RCA, there might have been some brouhaha. The CBS system was utterly incompatible with existing B&W receivers, although CBS did design some color receivers so that they could be switched into a mode that allowed them to receive standard monochrome broadcasts.

Had the CBS system become the standard, there would have been no choice but for broadcasters to replace millions of dollars worth of perfectly functional production and transmission plant and viewers to replace perfectly functional receivers. For the FCC of that day, that was "don't go there" territory.

Since I've done entirely without a TV for nine years now and my workplaces are outfitted with HD-compatible digital satellite TV, the changeover is no skin off my personal behind, and if it causes even one couch potato to pull his nose out of the screen and read some bleedin' books, it will all have been worth it.

[JoeyDonuts]

Wonder if they're gonna come up with a new fancypants "Indian Head" test pattern.

Probably not. Not really necessary - that thing was only to calibrate the old old RCA monoscopes.

[Travis]

I doubt it, as the NTSC color system was designed so that color broadcasts could be watched (in monochrome) on an unmodified standard B&W receiver and B&W broadcasts on a color receiver.

Now if the CBS color-sequential system had been adopted instead of the one developed by RCA, there might have been some brouhaha. The CBS system was utterly incompatible with existing B&W receivers, although CBS did design some color receivers so that they could be switched into a mode that allowed them to receive standard monochrome broadcasts.

Had the CBS system become the standard, there would have been no choice but for broadcasters to replace millions of dollars worth of perfectly functional production and transmission plant and viewers to replace perfectly functional receivers. For the FCC of that day, that was "don't go there" territory.

Since I've done entirely without a TV for nine years now and my workplaces are outfitted with HD-compatible digital satellite TV, the changeover is no skin off my personal behind, and if it causes even one couch potato to pull his nose out of the screen and read some bleedin' books, it will all have been worth it.

What if the book he decides to read is The Turner Diaries? Or stuff written by DRG? We might be better off with such people watching Regis & Kelly.

[Skeptic Guy]

We're getting about 30 confused calls idea from viewers in our rural areas and people who don't have HD yet...all because Entertainment Tonight and The Insider have branded all of their shows as being "IN HD." Their graphics framing are not within 4:3 safe title either. It doesn't say HD where Available or anything helpful.

Pretty odd considering we catch it off an SD transponder, and air it in SD. It's like the producers think the switch has already happened, and none of the viewers/stations/digitalmediadistribution/satellite workers have told them.

Anyway, Feb. 17th is gonna be a massive cluster-f. I'm picturing angry pitchfork toting mobs of retirees protesting outside our station.

I guess they didn't think the HD "bug" was worth saving in the old aspect ratio.

You may have posted this earlier, but do you work at a terrestrial broadcast station or cable station? I know that your girlfriend works at a cable station. If cable, have you upgraded your subscribers to a digital cable box?

[cwalner]

I have to wonder if there was the same sort of paranoia when they switched from B&W to Colour

I also seriously doubt this because of several interesting pieces of Star Trek trivia. Spock was originally going to be red, but changed to green, so he did not show up as black on Black & White. (They had no problems dealing with racial issues on the show, but did not want Spock to be the character for that). Also the odd seeming lighting effects used on original Trek are designed for Black & White, not color.

Both of these indicate that while Star Trek was filmed in color (one of the earlier TV series that was), they did this with an awareness that most of thier viewers would still be watching on B&W screens. This seems to invalidate the idea of lack of backward compatability we are facing with the upcoming Analog to Digital transition.

[JoeyDonuts]

You may have posted this earlier, but do you work at a terrestrial broadcast station or cable station? I know that your girlfriend works at a cable station. If cable, have you upgraded your subscribers to a digital cable box?
I'm going to throw this out there for fear of my significant other reading the forums on a whim and summarily impaling my head with a rolling pin.

You have confused half of me with half of someone else. EDIT: (Solved it. PhantomWolf's gf works at the cable co. See above.) I DO work at a terrestrial broadcast station, but I don't have a girlfriend. As a matter of fact I've been married for 7 years to a woman who has never even worked in the business. You have gotten your wires crossed, sir. Blame it on sunspots.

[gtc]

I'm going to throw this out there for fear of my significant other reading the forums on a whim and summarily impaling my head with a rolling pin.

You have confused half of me with half of someone else. I DO work at a terrestrial broadcast station, but I don't have a girlfriend. As a matter of fact I've been married for 7 years to a woman who has never even worked in the business. You have gotten your wires crossed, sir. Blame it on sunspots.

Oops.

[Walter Bellhaven]

The real conspiracy here is, why does the government WANT everyone to continue watching TV? (offering the coupons for converter boxes). 2/17/09 could be looked at as an OPPORTUNITY to improve your life by not watching anymore pointless TV.

But no, they want you to continue watching TV so you can see all the shows telling you how to act hip, and the commercials telling you how much your life sucks because you don't own their products. Were are they getting the money for these coupons from anyway?

[moon1969]

It probaly woul be in Italy since Silvio Berlusconi owns almost all media in Italy.

[Spud1k]

It's pretty straightforward really. The UK government wants to stop analogue broadcasting so it can sell the bandwidth to mobile phone companies. This may have qualified as a minor conspiracy if it wasn't for the fact that they've never pretended otherwise.

[JoeyDonuts]

It's pretty straightforward really. The UK government wants to stop analogue broadcasting so it can sell the bandwidth to mobile phone companies. This may have qualified as a minor conspiracy if it wasn't for the fact that they've never pretended otherwise.

Ding Ding Ding! And the +10 Medal of Obviousness goes to...Spud! It has some great buffs, like being able to make conspiracy nuts befoul their knickers with nothing more than a simple wag of the finger.

[eromitlab]

We're getting about 30 confused calls idea from viewers in our rural areas and people who don't have HD yet...all because Entertainment Tonight and The Insider have branded all of their shows as being "IN HD." Their graphics framing are not within 4:3 safe title either. It doesn't say HD where Available or anything helpful.

Pretty odd considering we catch it off an SD transponder, and air it in SD. It's like the producers think the switch has already happened, and none of the viewers/stations/digitalmediadistribution/satellite workers have told them.

Anyway, Feb. 17th is gonna be a massive cluster-f. I'm picturing angry pitchfork toting mobs of retirees protesting outside our station.

Afraid you may be right. It's been a constant pain in the you-know-what. My station has been doing news stories, phone banks, sending engineers to station events to answer people's questions, running editorials, producing promo spots, having us put closed captioning on promo spots, running promo spots in Spanish, having us put Spanish closed captioning on the Spanish promo spots... and it's still 3 1/2 months off. As far as being a huge public uproar, I'm hoping that it'll turn out to be more like the Y2K furor and less like cutting in over the Olympic gold medal volleyball match or an Alabama football game with a tornado warning.

[Spud1k]

Ding Ding Ding! And the +10 Medal of Obviousness goes to...Spud! It has some great buffs, like being able to make conspiracy nuts befoul their knickers with nothing more than a simple wag of the finger.

Thanks! Always wanted one of those. :D

[JoeyDonuts]

Afraid you may be right. It's been a constant pain in the you-know-what. My station has been doing news stories, phone banks, sending engineers to station events to answer people's questions, running editorials, producing promo spots, having us put closed captioning on promo spots, running promo spots in Spanish, having us put Spanish closed captioning on the Spanish promo spots... and it's still 3 1/2 months off. As far as being a huge public uproar, I'm hoping that it'll turn out to be more like the Y2K furor and less like cutting in over the Olympic gold medal volleyball match or an Alabama football game with a tornado warning.

If you watch television for more than 30 minutes at a time you're going to see some sort of PSA or ticker about DTV. Not to mention all of the billboards, posters up in government and post offices - and in the end it is not going to be enough. People are still going to be left in the dark without a signal on 17FEB09 and folks are going to panic. I personally am encouraging my entire family to get wised up on the stuff, and I'm encouraging all of my tech-savvy friends to look after their older relatives.

I'm thinking at this point the best way to reach the elderly in small towns would be to take out space on the front page of the local newspaper. Old folks who don't watch TV or watch very little almost without fail read their local paper every day.

It does make me wonder - Are there any technology impaired or Luddite conspiracy nuts who are going to notice no analog signal on 17FEB09 and go into a panicked frenzy?

I did have this idea just now. The FCC should change their requirements to allow TV stations to broadcast a static image on the old analog channel for a week or two after the shut-off, something to the effect of "Per FCC mandate, the television station that was broadcasting on this channel has been converted to digital. To find out how to upgrade your set to receive this channel, call 1800DTVANSWERS. This message will display until 24FEB2009." I think if they did that, they could get a lot closer to getting everybody up and digital.

[Old Bob]

Australian Mobil phones changed from analogue to digital because the armed forces wanted the analogue system. Is the reason for the tv change similar.

[gtc]

Australian Mobil phones changed from analogue to digital because the armed forces wanted the analogue system. Is the reason for the tv change similar.

I am not sure that is correct. My understanding is that analogue mobile phone was in the range 825 to 845 MHz and I am pretty sure this has been re-allocated to new mobile phone services. The military might have used some, but not all of it. You could email the ACMA and ask them yourself. They keep a public registry of who has been allocated what part of the spectrum.

However, I am not sure that they have decided exactly what to do with the analogue TV spectrum that won't be used. Some of it will be used for new digital TV services and filling in some of the black spots that don't currently get good TV services. I have also heard that they might be looking at using some of the spectrum for internet services. I haven't heard anything about the military wanting the spectrum. Again, you could email the ACMA (http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/HOMEPAGE/PC=HOME) and ask them.

[Walter Ego]

I also seriously doubt this because of several interesting pieces of Star Trek trivia. Spock was originally going to be red, but changed to green, so he did not show up as black on Black & White. (They had no problems dealing with racial issues on the show, but did not want Spock to be the character for that). Also the odd seeming lighting effects used on original Trek are designed for Black & White, not color.

Both of these indicate that while Star Trek was filmed in color (one of the earlier TV series that was), they did this with an awareness that most of thier viewers would still be watching on B&W screens. This seems to invalidate the idea of lack of backward compatability we are facing with the upcoming Analog to Digital transition.

Actually, by the time Star Trek premiered in 1966, all the networks had gone to full color programming in prime time though it was some years later before most people owned color TV sets.

All three broadcast networks were airing full color prime time schedules by the 1966–67 broadcast season, and ABC aired its last new black and white daytime programming in December 1967.[39] But the number of color television sets sold in the U.S. did not exceed black and white sales until 1972, which was also the first year that more than fifty percent of television households in the U.S. had a color set.[40] This was also the year that "in color" notices before color television programs ended, due to the rise in color television set sales.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_television

[Alareth]

Australian Mobil phones changed from analogue to digital because the armed forces wanted the analogue system. Is the reason for the tv change similar.

One of the primary reasons that cellular service went to digital was logistics. An analog tower could only support a handfull of calls at any given time. As the number of cell users increased, the towers couldn't support the capacity needed.

Digital systems could support more simultaneous users.

[fitzgibbon]

Switchover is happening in the UK too. Boxes are really cheap, especially on Ebay. Loads of channels, admittedly mainly junk. Built in 2 week TV guide. Generally much better picture quality.
No downside.

Actually one if you're one of those oddballs who wants to pick up the terrestrial broadcasters over-the-air signal. If you were on the edge of their analogue signal, you may find yourself without said station after the switch-over. With digital television, either you get it or you don't; no half-measures.

That, my friend, is the conspiracy! No more Torontonians able to source WUTV or WNED without paying Rogers, Cogeco or Ma Bell. It's highway robbery, I tells ya! :)

[fitzgibbon]

I work in the industry and I can tell you that the networks and cable brands were not too keen on the conversion to digital. Mainly because of HD. What brand of HD? 720P, 1080P, 1080i?

I guess it depended on what the predominance of their programming is. If it's drama/narrative, there'd be the desire to do 720p to have the cheap film-look (not to mention the lower bandwidth requirements). Sports? No joy save for 1080i for the you-are-there sensation. I saw a demo of Sony's 1" HD format back in the day and it honestly felt like falling into the monitor, the images were that sharp. I haven't had any opportunity to play with 1080i just yet but I imagine the results are similar.

[defaultdotxbe]

I guess it depended on what the predominance of their programming is. If it's drama/narrative, there'd be the desire to do 720p to have the cheap film-look (not to mention the lower bandwidth requirements). Sports? No joy save for 1080i for the you-are-there sensation. I saw a demo of Sony's 1" HD format back in the day and it honestly felt like falling into the monitor, the images were that sharp. I haven't had any opportunity to play with 1080i just yet but I imagine the results are similar.
i assume you mean 1080p there

should be much like 1080i, but with less motion blur (which means great for sports)

[fitzgibbon]

i assume you mean 1080p there

should be much like 1080i, but with less motion blur (which means great for sports)

No, I meant 1080i. The progressive formats are very filmish in their output, Sports on Fox HD seem wrong somehow.

[defaultdotxbe]

No, I meant 1080i. The progressive formats are very filmish in their output, Sports on Fox HD seem wrong somehow.
ah, i had thought you meant progressive because you had already mentioned 1080i

personally i have very little experience with any HD format, aside from occassionally playing xbox on an older plasma TV and setting up a DLP tv with (non-hd) satellite TV at a store i used to work at, lol

other than that its just book smarts for me, lol

[JoeyDonuts]

Most TV stations are probably going through what we're going through with the transition. A lot of folks think that on Feb 17th, all programming is going to be hi-def. Not so fast. I don't know a single local ad agency that's generating HD commercials right now. So like it or not, most stations are trying to figure out how they're going to balance full HD network and syndicated programming with the upconversion of local SD programming...commercials, special interest programs and the like. I think it will likely be years from now before we see full HD programming.

[gtc]

Do you broadcast seperate HD and SD channels (I think that is the right word)? In Australia our commercial stations operate one of each (with marginally different content) and as of next year they will broadcast two SD channels and one HD channel.

[JoeyDonuts]

We do operate one digital and one analog signal as of right now. There's a lot of confusion with the switch coming up. All the FCC requirement says is that stations have to use Digital transmission, that is to change from an analog NTSC signal to a digital carrier that conforms to the new ATSC standard. Now the thing is, digital programming is not necessarily HD. There is a lot of programming out there that is in Standard Definition - (480i). After the digital TV switch there will still be a whole lot of programming that is still in this standard. The difference is that this signal will be upconverted to whatever video format the station is using (in our case 1080i). There is almost no improvement to the original 480i image when it's upconverted to digital, at least none that I can see. Indeed, on a lot of newer TVs upconverted 480i stuff looks absolutely atrocious, much worse than a standard CRT. Obviously this is going to vary by set, but that's the gist of it. Digital TV is not automatically HD.

[Uncle Vanya]

Many, many moons ago, the radio spectrum was a wild and untamed zone, akin to the Western frontier of old, and everyone who wanted some obscenely large block of spectrum would get it from the FCC, after all, theres so much of it, why conserve it?

Fast forward to now, the radio spectrum (at least in the US) is a mess, literally. Switching from analog to digital allows for rebanding of various TV stations, recently the 380-400 MHz UHF band became available for public safety and such because some TV stations that were hanging out there were booted off. This whole analog to digital business also co-incides with a push from the FCC to get people off wideband radio channels to narrowband channels, because... you know... 20 kHz of BW for a voice channel is silly and pretty dumb.

Basically the FCC is trying to turn the radio spectrum into less of a damn clusterf---- (at least in the US), which I wholeheartedly support.

[gtc]

We do operate one digital and one analog signal as of right now. There's a lot of confusion with the switch coming up. All the FCC requirement says is that stations have to use Digital transmission, that is to change from an analog NTSC signal to a digital carrier that conforms to the new ATSC standard. Now the thing is, digital programming is not necessarily HD. There is a lot of programming out there that is in Standard Definition - (480i). After the digital TV switch there will still be a whole lot of programming that is still in this standard. The difference is that this signal will be upconverted to whatever video format the station is using (in our case 1080i). There is almost no improvement to the original 480i image when it's upconverted to digital, at least none that I can see. Indeed, on a lot of newer TVs upconverted 480i stuff looks absolutely atrocious, much worse than a standard CRT. Obviously this is going to vary by set, but that's the gist of it. Digital TV is not automatically HD.

Right. There is an ad campaign on at the moment trying to clear up that confusion.

Australia will still broadcast the analogue signal for a few years yet as well as the two SD digital channels and the HD channel per network. It looks like we are going down the multi-channel path but not to the same extent as the UK.

[JoeyDonuts]

because... you know... 20 kHz of BW for a voice channel is silly and pretty dumb.

Not if your equipment is REALLY out of spec.

[CORed]

Sodium layer?
Crematorias?

And all those scary pictures of cell towers.

[CORed]

I have to wonder if there was the same sort of paranoia when they switched from B&W to Colour

Not in US, anyway. Besides, the signal was compatible. Color programs would show in black and white on a black and white TV, and vice versa. It was a pretty gradual change in the US. Some shows were broadcast in the color starting in the '60's, even though not that many people had color sets. Eventually everything was in color, but Black and white sets still worked. Besides, we didn't have the internet, so nutty conspiracy theories didn't spread as fast.

[JoeyDonuts]

Not in US, anyway. Besides, the signal was compatible. Color programs would show in black and white on a black and white TV, and vice versa. It was a pretty gradual change in the US. Some shows were broadcast in the color starting in the '60's, even though not that many people had color sets. Eventually everything was in color, but Black and white sets still worked. Besides, we didn't have the internet, so nutty conspiracy theories didn't spread as fast.

Exactly. The NTSC standard carried a "color subcarrier" which was essentially an additional signal inside the 6 Mhz channel that would tell the set color information. If you had a black and white set, you wouldn't receive and decode this, but you would still get the waveform for "luminance."

Going to digital is going to be different because there is no middle ground. You either have a digital ATSC tuner or you don't. I think I've got my family just about taken care of, except for one stubborn old grandma who doesn't understand that she won't get anything at all after the switch.

GM: "This TV's worked fine for 30 years, I don't need....."
Me: "Grandma, the problem's not with your TV. All you need to do is just get an additional box so you can keep..."
GM: "I'M NOT BUYING ANYTHING! I'll just sue them down at the courthouse."

Me: *punches self in head*

We're just going to have to install it when she's asleep.

[PhantomWolf]

We're just going to have to install it when she's asleep.

Get her cable for Christmas. ;)

[JoeyDonuts]

Get her cable for Christmas. ;)

The idea of PAYING for television sends her into a biscuit-chucking rage.

[Spud1k]

So getting her to move to the UK is out of the question I guess..

;)

[Klimax]

GM: "I'M NOT BUYING ANYTHING! I'll just sue them down at the courthouse."

Me: *punches self in head*

We're just going to have to install it when she's asleep.

I would just wait... This could be interesting... (Yes in this particular case I would be such bad*** ; we will get to this point in our region in two years)

[Sunstealer]

Downside: it demands that people who are not especially tech-savvy go and buy a new converter box, to receive the same shows they watched yesterday without the box.

This is why people like my mom are screaming about it. Not that she is right, mind you, but there is a logic of sorts behind the paranoia.This is not helped by the adverts that run on UK TV, most notably the BBC. The adverts say if your telly doesn't have a tick against digital then you won't be able to watch TV, but they don't tell people that a set top box or "digibox" will work with your old telly. If I didn't know any better it would mean that I would need a new TV which is obviously more expensive than a digibox. It's misleading and uninformative at best and therein lies the problem.

[INRM]

PhantomWolf,

Apparently it's just that simple, they need the bandwidth....

What do you need the extra bandwidth for? Does this have to do with the fact that most people get their news off the internet?


Marquis de Carabas,

...to broadcast more signals to the chips they implanted in all our brains to control us.

When exactly were these supposed "chips" installed in our brains? :rolleyes:


asmodean,

Apart from that, the only real drawbacks seems to be a lot higher sensitivity to bad reception conditions.

HDTV's are more sensitive to bad reception conditions? That's just dandy...


Old Bob,

Australian Mobil phones changed from analogue to digital because the armed forces wanted the analogue system. Is the reason for the tv change similar.

Why would the military want analogue over digital?


gtc,

However, I am not sure that they have decided exactly what to do with the analogue TV spectrum that won't be used.

Huh? What are they going to do with all this unused broadcast spectrum?


CORed,

Sodium layer?

What's a sodium layer? I don't know if that sounds totally retarded, but I honestly don't know...


INRM

[Uncle Vanya]

PhantomWolf,



What do you need the extra bandwidth for?

We're not talking about bandwidth in the sense you may know it (throughput on the inter-tubes) but the literal width of a freq. band in the RF spectrum. As I mentioned earlier, the RF spectrum is very unstructured* and frequencies are all over the place, and there's not anywhere close to enough of them to go around. The lower bandwidth of digital TV channels also allows radio systems to operate on the "TV White Space" (open frequency gaps in between TV channel freqs.) The digital TV switch also removed TV stations from the 700 MHz band (Ch 52 and up IIRC) opening up even more RF spectrum (Verizon bought up a lot of 700 MHz real estate for I'm guessing cellular applications, not sure).

So, thats a long answer to a short question, in summary, there's not enough RF spectrum at the moment to house everyone who needs it, the extra bandwidth is for them.


*VHF and UHF is very unstructured, by the time the FCC started doling out 700 and 800 MHz band freqs, they wised up.

[INRM]

Out of curiousity, can HDTV be screened, analyzed and inspected via deep-packet inspections like computers?

Not to sound stupid or anything.


Uncle Vanya

Understood


INRM
BTW: What person or what company held the original patent on HDTV technology?

[JoeyDonuts]

Out of curiousity, can HDTV be screened, analyzed and inspected via deep-packet inspections like computers?

Meh...it's possible, although I'm not sure what good it would do you. We're talking about digital video here. It is made up of 1s and 0s just like anything else, and there are "non video" parts of data that will be used for closed captioning, and metadata for proprietary "number rights."

Are you getting at something here? Subliminal messages perhaps?

I would advise that if you wanted to screen, analyze, and inspect an HDTV signal your best bet would be to watch a television equipped with an ATSC tuner.

[JoeyDonuts]

We're not talking about bandwidth in the sense you may know it (throughput on the inter-tubes) but the literal width of a freq. band in the RF spectrum. As I mentioned earlier, the RF spectrum is very unstructured* and frequencies are all over the place, and there's not anywhere close to enough of them to go around. The lower bandwidth of digital TV channels also allows radio systems to operate on the "TV White Space" (open frequency gaps in between TV channel freqs.) The digital TV switch also removed TV stations from the 700 MHz band (Ch 52 and up IIRC) opening up even more RF spectrum (Verizon bought up a lot of 700 MHz real estate for I'm guessing cellular applications, not sure).

So, thats a long answer to a short question, in summary, there's not enough RF spectrum at the moment to house everyone who needs it, the extra bandwidth is for them.


*VHF and UHF is very unstructured, by the time the FCC started doling out 700 and 800 MHz band freqs, they wised up.

Don't forget about Digital ENG as well. After we went COFDM, our ENG channel width shrank from 12Mhz to 8 Mhz. Don't need as much guard band with a digital "pedestal." Although we are having a little bit of trouble with other stations in our area doing ENG that are using hi-power when they don't need to be. That nasty little overage tends to spill into our assigned channel. I haven't seen it knock off any of our digital shots yet, but it's a nuisance all the same and usually results in me having to yell at someone at the offending TV station over our intra-city relay circuit that all the folks who do ENG in our area listen to. (which is a great tool to have, BTW.)

Anyway...multiply that 4Mhz "savings" by the 10 ENG channels, and you have about 40MHz of BW ready for other stuff. I have to say, I do love digital.

[Uncle Vanya]

INRM
BTW: What person or what company held the original patent on HDTV technology?

If I'm not mistaken, and feel free to tell me that I'm wrong, HD technology is just higher resolution with a different style of screen refresh (progressive rather than interlaced). There's a set of standards for HDTV (ATSC) so it's not really "patented."

HDTV standards from How Stuff Works. (http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/hdtv2.htm)

[Uncle Vanya]

Meh...it's possible, although I'm not sure what good it would do you. We're talking about digital video here. It is made up of 1s and 0s just like anything else, and there are "non video" parts of data that will be used for closed captioning, and metadata for proprietary "number rights."

Are you getting at something here? Subliminal messages perhaps?

I would advise that if you wanted to screen, analyze, and inspect an HDTV signal your best bet would be to watch a television equipped with an ATSC tuner.

It would be possible but not terribly useful, you would need a CTP router to convert the signal to packets. Then what you would get is a whole bunch of packets that your packet sniffer can't make heads or tails of, since its in a proprietary format. I don't think it would do much good either way.

[Marquis de Carabas]

Marquis de Carabas,



When exactly were these supposed "chips" installed in our brains? :rolleyes:
The same day they removed our sense of humor chips.

[TheDoLittle]

Marquis de Carabas,
When exactly were these supposed "chips" installed in our brains? :rolleyes:
INRM
The same day they removed our sense of humor chips.

I remember the day they removed mine. I have Poncherello shaped scar on the top of my head to remind me.