The digital TV switchover is tomorrow. Are we ready? Recent news reports suggest that number of people left on analog broadcast has been cut roughly in half since the last deadline, from around 6 million to around 3 million. Have we gotten most of the people who *want *to switch, such that ones who are left are simply the unreachable? Or are we leaving a lot of people behind?
Hawaii was the first to switch over.
I was surprised to see the number of people who were surprised to find that their TV didn’t work anymore.
And the number of people who complained that they were never told about it.
And the number who thought they didn’t need it if they didn’t have cable.
And the number of people who thought they could just go down to the store and buy something, what? they didn’t know.
And the number of people who thought the cable company could come in the next day and install cable.
Any Dopers lose their TV reception today?
Well I’m one of those losers who never made the switch before the original deadline, and as of today I have one with a converter and two tvs without. The ones without have zero reception as of this morning.
The one with a converter is acting weird too.
We so rarely watch anything beyond Sesame Street I don’t much care. I had forgotten about the switch until I saw this thread.
I’m sick to death of hearing about it; I’m going to be even more sick of hearing lame-o’s carp about not knowing anything about it. Having said that, I do think that if the gov is forcing the change, the converters should be free.
Yes, but not the way you think. I rescanned my HDTV this morning like everyone told me I should do, only to find that I’m no longer receiving my local CBS station. It’s a reception problem.
They could mail them out with income tax forms. 
(I’m sure someone posts something similarly clueless in every thread about digital conversion … but anyway:)
Apparently, I don’t get around enough. I really thought something like 99.9999% of all American households above a very minimal economic threshhold had cable.
How the heck do people even get minimally decent reception with rabbit ears? I haven’t seen a non-cable semi-clearish picture on a TV since the early 1980s. And I’ve seen people throw fairly substantial money at the problem, and still come up with a very “meh” result.
Television They say cable penetration is 56 percent.
That’s just for cable - it doesn’t include satellite subscribers. In 2006, 88% of TV watchers had either cable, satellite, or both.
ETA: By 2008, it apparently topped 90% (actual article is linked, but requires subscription).
My TVs got all the local channels perfectly fine with rabbit ears as long as I had the kind with the circular antenna included. I don’t pay for cable because we watch less than five hours of television a week so I can’t justify the bill. I can’t really afford it either.
I just tested out my oldest daughter’s brand new digital television. I reinstalled the channels and they are all there, but they aren’t coming in clearly at all. The three major network channels look like they’re underwater.
This is exactly why I bitched about this. I knew it would not be so great and wonderful. We don’t watch much tv but she does. She put forth the effort and she’s still screwed unless I’ve done something wrong…which I suppose could be the case.
To try to get this out of IMHO territory, was there anything that could have been done to cut down the 2.5 million people (last I saw) who hadn’t converted yet? I doubt it myself. They delayed once, delaying again would probably convince people it would never happen. I assume that there are enough converter coupons, right?
I got my coupons way back in the beginning when they first offered them.
They expired before I ever found a converter, and we are not a small town here. Not even Best Buy had them, but from what I was told this was intended to push newer televisions.
I found one in January this year and I was really pleased and felt silly for stressing over the seventy bucks I spent. I got channels I never knew we could pick up with broadcast.
Of course this morning I can’t even get the big three to come in clearly with that converter. Or my daughter’s new hd tv, but no sense repeating my frustration.
This is why I threw in the “economic threshhold” caveat – the market saturation has to be near 100% among people who feel like they (a) can afford cable and (b) can justify the expense.
Of course, that’s kind of circular: among people who both want cable/satellite and who self-report that they can afford it, what percentage actually have cable/satellite television in their homes? Of course it’s a near-100% percentage – such a question selects out the main two reasons someone wouldn’t have cable/satellite TV.
My experience with digital is that it is either there, or it isn’t. Either a nice picture or nothing.
For some thing this may be true, but definetly not for digital cable tv. We had a loose connector (really the pin was broken off) and the picture was snowy and shaky. I kept telling my wife the same thing. It’s digital, either its there or it isn’t, it must be the TV. Replaced the TV. Same problem. Found the problem when we tried to replace the cable box. Perfectly good TV was already gone to the recycling center.
I believe the output of your digital cable box, like my digital satellite receiver, is analog.
I’m tired of hearing this. It may be true on some theoretical level but when the signal goes from “there” to “not there” and back a few times a second the net result is bad reception.
This was the connector going INTO the cable box from the wall outlet. If the signal is going from off to on and back again ten times a second, you get a bad picture.
What I’m seeing is something that looks like the beginning of daydream sequences on television shows. I’m sure there’s a name for that.
Or like I said, under water.
IOW, there IS something there and I suppose if I was desperate I’d squint with one eye closed and hope I could follow along by sound.
Every once in a while it goes out completely and I get a “weak signal” message.