Comments

Product News
Digital TV Switch May Cut Off 6 Million Sets
image
February 11, 2008 | by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
A new study says that DTV signals and set-top boxes are not as strong as some think.
View this entire articleView this entire article
Back to top
12 Comments (displaying chronologically) Post a comment
Posted by Steve  on  02/11  at  07:17 PM

Who is Centris and what facts are on their study… they are full of crap as regular antenna is subject to the same interference.. digital travels farther

Posted by AllanJ  on  02/11  at  11:20 PM

It’s my impression that blue screen and freeze frame dropouts become annoying on digital broadcats at about 2/3 the mileage range that fuzziness becomes annoying on analog broadcasts.

Posted by Don R.  on  02/12  at  04:30 PM

A new study says that 1/2 of all studies need to be restudied.

What the article fails to mention is:

If the person is only receiving TV via OTA, they are likely not currently watching snow.  Which means they have some sort of antenna already, be it indoor, outdoor whatever.  The converter box will connect to this existing antenna fine.

I usually like EH, but here they’ve missed it. 

D

Posted by Jay  on  02/12  at  07:23 PM

What nobody is seemingly talking about though is the fact that most people with an antenna currently view VHF programming. These frequencies will no longer carry TV signals as this band is being phased out. Digital is transmitted in the UHF region so unless one already has a UHF antenna installed, he will need to replace his VHF antenna with a UHF one or he will indeed receive nothing.

Posted by Don R  on  02/12  at  07:57 PM

Jay,
That is technically incorrect.  VHF is NOT being phased out.  Digital is and will continue to be VHF/UHF. In my market in particular, a channel 9 will remain.
Keep your rabbit ears!
Don

Posted by Frank  on  02/13  at  04:16 AM

Don R “they have some sort of antenna already”

The article actually specifies an OUTDOOR antenna. The assumption they make is that people who depend on OTA have an indoor antenna/rabbit ears. Which is still a wrong assumption. But it is relevant. With analog an indoor antenna is perfectly fine to get channels in most situations But with digital you really do need an outdoor antenna. I, for one, am only able to get one (yes one) digital channel with an indoor antenna.

Posted by J Kessler  on  02/13  at  08:42 AM

People living in the valleys of mountainous areas who don’t have the choice to go with cable or satellite due to either cost or lack of availability are likely to be left out by this transition.

Lots of folks here in upstate NY are living with marginal analog signals. Even my cable company is having trouble getting a reliable digital signal from the local broadcasters.

Though I love a good HD digital signal, I hate the poor reliability of the system. Even the best digital channels exhibit dropouts from time to time.

Posted by Nic S  on  02/13  at  10:35 AM

Don R,

You hit the nail right on the head. These doomsayer studies are driving me up the wall too.

With a vocher a box will cost 20.00, installation should take ten minutes at the most and you’ll have a cleaner picture and more channels.

Don’t worry be Happy..

N

Posted by Don R  on  02/13  at  12:21 PM

Frank,
You may just need a different antenna.
While certainly every receive situation is different.  For indoor antennas, there are some unamplified, simple log periodics (that also have rabbit ears for VHF) that do a good job.  Especially in metropolitan areas.  The article makes way too broad of an assumption with respect to transferability of an indoor antenna.  Also - there are some good panel antennas that can be used indoorrs. 
Additionally, it doesn’t back up precisely why these people suddenly need an outdoor antenna.  Nor does it address what quality of indoor was used for the tests.  Nor does it address details of receiver hardware, which generation chipset etc, etc, etc.
While the headlines of such “studies” are attention grabbing, they need to be analyzed appropriately.

Don R

Posted by Lenny H  on  02/27  at  02:33 PM

We live about 35 miles from the nearest transmitter that broadcasts the ABC affiliate currently in both analog and digital.  This particular station we can receive a pretty decent picture in analog with a roof top antenna on VHF channel 4.  They are currently broadcasting their digtal channel on channel 13.  I used to lve about 5 blocks west of where I currently live and could receive this digital signal just fine.  Now I can’t.  the problem?  A big Mountain is in the way.  I would need a 200 foot tower to clear the mountain that is betwen here and the transmitter atop another mountain.  This particular station has no tralators to repeat its signal in this area.  The other network affiliates don’t come in at all on their primary channels in analog or digital any where around here becasue they are broadcast from a different spot.  those stations have translators but the translatiors are not mandated to be changed out to digital until 2012.
This further confuses the situation.  We are not a isolated area in this scenario.

Posted by tessa  on  12/18  at  04:02 PM

To bring up an old but relevant topic. We actually just created a video on this because a lot of the channles are testing out their digital formats this week:

http://www.howcast.com/videos/109035-How-To-Prepare-For-the-Switch-To-Digital-TV

Posted by Regcure Registry Optimizer  on  04/24  at  11:15 PM

i’ve got the same problem, and i found the solution here to fix blue screen, just for reference.

Page 1 of 1 pages


Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

  • News
  • Cool Homes
  • Blogs
  • Photo Galleries