[manimal]

so i'm at sears the other day getting the kids portraits done and i decide to go an oogle over the flat screen selections. the salesman comes up and starts in on his bit and we eventually get onto the topic of the HDTV format and blah, blah, blah.

anyway, he proceeds to tell me that THIS YEAR, all cable/local/satellite channels will only be able to be viewed on a 16:9 HDTV fomat. i call his bluff and he is adamant about it and then proceeds to tell me that they're going to can all of their smaller, non-hdtv models when this switch happens. i again tell him he's full of it because media companies would lose A LOT of money when the majority of the nation is unable to view their shows and commercials.

so is there any merit to this guys story at all... i mean, i can see an eventual change-over within a decade or so but simply flipping a switch and oops...your tv doesn't get cable anymore sounds a bit stupid.

 

[dwaugh]

Isn't that out of, well, normal proportions? Wide screen TV's already bug me because the picture is stretched out. Why do you want that?

 

[manimal]

that's what i thought. but i think he was more trying to sell me on the HDTV thing, saying that if you're tv wasn't hdtv ready then you'd be SOL and you'd "have to throw your old tv away". does the guy think we're that stupid?

 

[skinny mike]

so i'm at sears the other day getting the kids portraits done and i decide to go an oogle over the flat screen selections. the salesman comes up and starts in on his bit and we eventually get onto the topic of the HDTV format and blah, blah, blah.

anyway, he proceeds to tell me that THIS YEAR, all cable/local/satellite channels will only be able to be viewed on a 16:9 HDTV fomat. i call his bluff and he is adamant about it and then proceeds to tell me that they're going to can all of their smaller, non-hdtv models when this switch happens. i again tell him he's full of it because media companies would lose A LOT of money when the majority of the nation is unable to view their shows and commercials.

so is there any merit to this guys story at all... i mean, i can see an eventual change-over within a decade or so but simply flipping a switch and oops...your tv doesn't get cable anymore sounds a bit stupid.

he was trying to get you to buy one. some salesmen will go to great lengths just to make a sale.

 

[SkaredShtles]

<snip> saying that if you're tv wasn't hdtv ready then you'd be SOL and you'd "have to throw your old tv away". does the guy think we're that stupid?

You should've told him that you'd throw your old TV away and not buy a new one.

 

[narlus]

that would be unpossible.

 

[Salami]

Wide screen TV's already bug me because the picture is stretched out.

That is because a wide screen (16:9) TV is stretching a normal (4:3) picture to fit. If the picture is broadcast in 16:9 and you watch it on a wide screen TV it will appear normal but with a wider picture like in a movie threater.

 

[Salami]

that would be unpossible.

That's a nice pile of **** you have there. All you need is fork sticking in it and a napkin with a brown smugde and handwriting that says "Mmmmm, good!".

 

[Wumpus]

Digital TV changeover suggested for 2009
[SIZE=-2]Published: July 12, 2005, 4:42 PM PDT[/SIZE]


WASHINGTON--Millions of American television sets that receive only analog over-the-air broadcasts could go dark if not upgraded by Jan. 1, 2009.

That deadline was suggested in a pair of hearings here Tuesday by members of the U.S. Senate's Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

The committee is readying legislation expected this year that would require all American televisions to run on digital signals by the end of 2008. That would free up the analog, or 700 MHz, spectrum for other uses such as broadband services and communications for emergency workers.

transition to an all-digital world may be popular in Washington, but a slew of unanswered questions promises to keep politicians sparring for months, if not through next year. Among them: Will households with only analog TVs be given digital converter boxes? Who will pick up the tab? And how many homes still rely solely on broadcast TV, anyway?

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called the proposed transition "the most critical communications issue facing the 109th Congress."

"The bombings last week in London reinforced the immediate need for this spectrum," McCain said, noting that Scotland Yard had to "borrow spectrum" in order to meet its needs.

Under current law, analog television would be cut off on Dec. 31, 2006, or when 85 percent of households are capable of receiving digital signals, whichever comes sooner. Last month, the Federal Communications Commission proposed to move up to March 2006 the date by which all televisions with screen sizes of 25 to 36 inches must contain digital tuners. All televisions, VCRs and DVD players would have to carry the technology by 2007.

Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who is chairman of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, suggested that Congress should set another "hard date" after which it would be illegal to sell analog TV sets in the United States.

The transition to digital TV would hit hardest people who rely solely on analog-based televisions--that is, "over the air" broadcasts received with an antenna. Those viewers would have to purchase televisions equipped with digital tuners or digital-to-analog "set-top" conversion boxes to place atop their analog televisions.

All of the industries represented on the panels, ranging from cable to satellite to broadcast to electronics manufacturers, testified that they are ready to make the shift at the end of 2008. But they're still arguing over the details.

http://news.com.com/Digital+TV+changeover+suggested+for+2009/2100-1028_3-5785519.html

 

[SkaredShtles]

That's a nice pile of **** you have there. All you need is fork sticking in it and a napkin with a brown smugde and handwriting that says "Mmmmm, good!".

Huh?

I thought it was a Teddy Bear......

 

[manimal]

Digital TV changeover suggested for 2009
[SIZE=-2]Published: July 12, 2005, 4:42 PM PDT[/SIZE]


WASHINGTON--Millions of American television sets that receive only analog over-the-air broadcasts could go dark if not upgraded by Jan. 1, 2009.


http://news.com.com/Digital+TV+changeover+suggested+for+2009/2100-1028_3-5785519.html

hmmm, so i guess he had the general idea but he was throwing in the tidbit that all tv's would have to be HD -AND- in the widescreen format by the end of this year. i think it's safe to say that nowhere near 85% of the population has a digital tv set yet. if all it requires is a digital tuner then i'm good, i think, as i bought a 27" flat screen about 6 months ago.

does this mean that we'll all have to have digital cable too, or will my standard coax connection with the basic 20-ish channels still work?

my understanding of that article is that they're trying to limit the "airwave" tv channels for other use...is this correct?

 

[Salami]

Huh?

I thought it was a Teddy Bear......

I think it is a teddy bear made out of ****.

 

[Salami]

does this mean that we'll all have to have digital cable too, or will my standard coax connection with the basic 20-ish channels still work?

The way I understand it is:

In order to receive "broadcast over the air stations" the TV will have to have the correct built in or add on tuner to view the stations. I would assume it would be the same for a coax cable connection. There are supposed to be converters available to watch the new signal on an older TV.

If the "tuning" is to be done with a satellite or digital cable box I believe the only reguirement of the TV is it be HD ready.

 

[Wumpus]

I believe most cable is already digital. The cable box is the converter. No need for an HD tv at all.

 

[surfinguru]

OMG...I have to chime in on this. The sales guy is an asshat. Total BS bro. The FCC is only mandating that all brocasts be digital by whatever the latest date is. It's a moving target at best. Most of the big cable co's and all that are working on it, but it's still going to be a long time before we actually see it happen. All tv's 16x9...HAHAHA that's some funny ****! It would be a cool thing, but there are just WAY too many regular 4x3 tv's still floating around out there for that to happen.

You want to educate yourself? Go here and read the forums--->AVS Forum

 

[DS Dom]

Its definatly not true. I was talking to a professor of mine last year about something similar because HDTV was actually supposed to be the new standard for 'regular tv' and 'regular tv' was supposed to end in 2003... that obviously did not happen. It will happen, but i have a hard time beliving any set date

 

[TN]

Isn't that out of, well, normal proportions? Wide screen TV's already bug me because the picture is stretched out. Why do you want that?

for movies...widescreen = no pan & scan. The movie is meant to be seen the way the director shot it...on film (in most cases).

But yeah, i think he was just trying to sell a $2k tv & was talking out of his ass.

 

[SPUTNECK]

Yeah that salesman was was an ass-hat. I absolutely hate folks using scare tactics to drive sales. Its not good for the industry. The date for the "digital switchover" was originally set for 2006 way back in 1999. Its been changed several times.....notice I didn't say "HDTV switchover"....there is a difference between them, even though HDTV uses digital transmission.

The nation can't really switch over until an acceptable amount of market penetration occurs with digital ready sets and enough widescreen content is out there to drive it. So its a catch22 kinda, "why buy a tv with little content to drive it, why crate content for a small number of sets?"..........Right now there are only a handful of HD Content providers (INDH, HD Net, Dicovery HD, etc, etc), but that list is growing, ESPN-HD finally got into our market and I get to watch my beloved Georgia Bulldogs between the hedges and you can see the blades of grass, and its just like being there...except I don't feel nearly as drunk as back then.

The main issue is the actual "HD Standard". That has not really been settled yet. There is "grand poohbah" HD format of 1080i, there is also 720p and 720i, 480p(dvd widescreen), and some other euro standards out there. The FCC has been unable to set a standard due to....well....helll I really don't know, but more than likely the expense of overhauling content providers infrastructure.....and trust me, it can get expensive for 1080i...but it looks awsome.

The main item ultimately is this..analog vs digital tuner...if you were to get a new TV, get one with a digital tuner, or just get a "monitor" with component video hoookups....and then you will be future proofed for a while...those sets, actually, really good ones can be picked up for $800 and up at any circuit city, best buy, blah, blah..then as the technology from the content/tuner side changes, all you have to do is update your tuner or cable box and your good.

On the area of 16x9 TV's, you can set up all kinds of viewing options to make sure they are presenting the correct aspect for the content...I think this has alrady been addressed here.

My perspective...I think that the format for Digital Television and HDTV will settle down to 720p or i. I think the digital cutoff for tuning options will be somewhere around 2011...but consumer prices will need to average around $1200 for a full kit to drive that.

Why do I know these things? I'm the Design Director at WRAL-TV in Raleigh, the world's first HDTV local content provider. I was hired in 1999 and was one of the lead supervisors who switched this TV station to full 1080i daily production in 2001(sniffing glue really helped during those times). I've had an HDTV in my home since late 2001...and its amazing...the 16x9 is 16x9, the 4x3 stuff is 4x3....its all good.

If you have any other questions you can reach me here, just let me know you're from ridemonkey in the subject line....wsreeves@wral.com.