johnnymk

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...ntil-2012.html

Cue the scary music. According to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, "If the cable companies had their way, you, your mother and father, or your next door neighbor could go to sleep one night after watching their favorite channel and wake up the next morning to a dark fuzzy screen."

Martin's talking about the digital TV transition that will happen in February 2009. While the federal government has worked out a plan to help buy digital-to-analog converter boxes for Americans who rely on over-the-air broadcasts and still have analog TV sets, the rules for cable operators were not finalized until yesterday.

The FCC voted 5-0 to require that cable operators must continue to make all local broadcasts available to their users, even those with analog televisions.

After broadcasters stop transmitting in analog, cable operators will have two signals to work with: digital standard definition (SD) and digital high definition (HD). Neither will work with analog TV sets, which the FCC estimates are still in use in 40 million American homes.

After yesterday's ruling, cable operators will have two choices come February 2009. They can either convert the digital SD signal to analog SD and pipe it across their lines (which means using more bandwidth and carrying three versions of a single channel) or they can offer digital SD only and roll out converter boxes to all their subscribers (which could be expensive).

The National Cable & Telecommunications Association applauded the decision, thanking the FCC for "engaging so constructively and fairly with our industry." It did express worries about "the special circumstances of very small systems," which could face severe cost pressures by complying. The FCC will allow small operators (with a capacity of 552MHz or less) to request a waiver from the must-carry rules.

Thanks to the various FCC actions, analog TV owners are guaranteed a few more years of life out their TVs, though the new cable rules only last until 2012. At that point, the FCC will review them again and decide if they need to be renewed.

BigJon

I guess I'm still confused by this whole thing. I am assuming that "analog TV" is basically watching TV with bunny ears and "digital TV" is watching it via a digital cable box. But...just a couple of months ago we had cable but not "digital cable"...so would that have made us effected by this change?

__________________

Markel

I carry basic Comcast cable (analog) because it's virtually free (since I have Comcast internet and phone). I use it mainly for watching the Cubs (and Bears) and a few other (often Discovery Channel) shows - just use my PC as the screen. I'm glad I won't have to worry about changing to digital cable (and a digital TV card for my PC) for a while.

__________________
stay low... keep moving...

VTGreg

I guess I have a hard time with the FCC forces the cable companies to be 100% digital broadcast by 2009 and then forcing the cable companies to take a financial hit to support analog going forward.

Could the cable companies not do what they currently do with digital cable and provide settop boxes at a charge?

I think anyone who is purchasing a tv now or purchased within the last year two is culpable if they decided to purchase a tv that wasn't digital ready. For those with older tv's, I can understand the concern but there is an option to purchase a converter or a new tv.

__________________
It only ends once... Anything that happens before that is just progress.

Courage is not the absence of fear but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear.

zippyjuan

Analog TV includes your over the air channels (some are in the process of changing to digital) and basic cable channels.
If your TV is say about three years or more old, it probably does not include a digital TV tuner in it and by 2009, broadcasters are ordered to switch off their analog signals and only use digital meaning if you have one of those older TVs, you will not be able to watch anything without a converter box.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...4/b3968030.htm

__________________
I add new pictures to my photo gallery pretty regularly. You can see them here if you are interested: http://www.pbase.com/jeffryz

Napoleon54

TV is becoming such a huge waste of money. Used to be all you needed was any crummy old set and a pair of bunny ears to catch the evening news. I can respect that. But the standard is quickly becoming an über fancy set, satellite/ cable service with a bazillion channels, DVR, on demand, PPV, etc. I just don't understand how nuts people are going for it and how much they're willing to pay for it all. Is entertaining ourselves all THAT important/difficult/expensive/complicated??? I could easily keep myself happily supplied with used books for a year for half the cost of a single month of satellite/cable service.

People around the world are starving.

__________________
There is all the difference in the world between treating people equally and attempting to make them equal. - Friedrich Hayek