Then why are you so upset about it? Do you get your tv via over-the-air antenna? If not, why do you give a fuck when they switch the signal from analog to digital?
As long as analog continues, the bandwidth is not available for other purposes. Times change. Technology changes.
How long do you believe analog broadcasting should continue? Forever? Because if not forever, I guarantee you that on your chosen changeover date of July 28, 2076, someone will be complaining about it.
This isn’t a rich versus poor thing, it’s a “where is the cutoff point for rolling out a new technology, given that it’s impossible to include 100% of the people” thing.
-
What are the actual number of people who honestly cannot afford a converter box - not who choose not to get one or who decided smokes were more important than one, but who cannot afford it, and
-
What is the cutoff line, exactly, for switching over? 1%? 0.01%? So long as one Obama voter cannot afford it?
For ALL things in life like this there is a cutoff point - SOME people are always going to be left out. That sucks if you’re one of them, but to what extent can the public policy of a national broadcast infrastructure bend to the will of a shrinking group of people?
I say the switchover time should not be delayed, and that is opinion based on following this issue for years. Present factual arguments to convince me, and I will change my opinion, I promise you.
Sorry, but it really is a rich vs. poor thing. If you aren’t poor, the cost of a converter box probably isn’t a big deal, but if you are poor, it is. You can argue about whether they could afford it if they cut this, that and the other out of their lives, but the point is that if you’re poor paying that much hurts.
If you’re struggling to put food on the table for your family or pay the heating bill, a converter box is a significant expense. I’m sure there are people who’d say “Well, if you’re that poor then you don’t have the luxury to worry about watching T.V.” But life is hard enough when you’re poor. How quick would you be to give up one of the few forms of entertainment you can reasonably afford?
Sorry, what? Digital TV transmitters will have significantly smaller coverage footprints due to signal loss. Whereas an analog TV would show some ghosting, snow or static, the digital TV will simply cut out entirely. Either you are getting enough 1s and 0s for the BER correction or you’re not.
Second, most of these stations will be transitioning to UHF frequencies. Some will stay VHF. It should be patently clear that for a given transmit power, VHF waves will propagate much further than UHF. There are limited instances where UHF will perform better (especially true in hilly areas), however most transmitters were engineered long ago to deal with this problem (which is simple-- put the transmitting antennas up high).
I am not exactly certain what you mean by digital reception improving-- can you clarify for me?
You can build an antenna for under 5 or 10 dollars that’ll work just as well as the store-bought. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but with the coupon and DIY antenna, upgrading our old TV cost under $20 (we’ve never had cable so signed up for the coupons awhile ago). Much cheaper than a new TV.
While it may be possible that Obama’s position on this matter is not optimal, it is more likely that he knows more than we do and has made a wiser decision than we would.
(I voice this opinion to prove that those who call me an Obama sycophant are wrong.)
Voiced with irony intended, I hope?
Right now I spend about $500 more a month than I’m bringing in to the household and my savings are nearly gone. Do you think I’m going to buy food… or a converter box? When TV flips to digital I will have no more TV because I simply can’t afford even a converter box. I’m hardly the only one in this position. Contrast this to 18 months ago when I didn’t give a damn because I had steady employment and a very nice deluxe satellite TV package. As I said, things have changed for a number of people in this country.
Okay, but what if this change in situation had happened a couple of months after the switch? Would you then demand that we go back to analog signal?
What irony? This is not the first time I’ve been critical of Obama.
Do you anticipate your position being significantly different in 3 months, or will you be back to oppose the switch then, too? 6 months? A year?
Can someone explain exactly what the benefit is of stopping analog transmission? I’ve seen a few vague references to “the bandwidth is needed for other purposes,” but I am unclear on what purposes. If I knew why it was necessary for analog transmissions to stop, I might feel less irked about the whole thing.
We are one of the troglodyte households that has been receiving over-the-air transmissions up to this point. We got our converter box. And found out that the channel we watch the most (PBS; yes, really) doesn’t come in at all via digital transmission. It comes in perfectly, sharp as a tack, via analog transmission; with the digital box, it’s a black screen. I have contacted the TV station to ask if they have troubleshooting ideas, and they said it’s a common problem because the digital signal is more sensitive to buildings being in the way, etc. We’re going ahead and paying for a basic cable package, but it’s money I’d rather be spending on other things. Yes, yes, “it’s just TV,” it’s not a necessity of life, we’d probably all be better off if we chucked the idiot box out the window and spent more time reading books, blah blah, but the point is, I have a TV, it works fine, and in about a month it’s going to be a doorstop if we don’t start paying the cable company a monthly fee.
So yeah, if I knew why exactly this was such a critical issue, I might feel less irritable about the whole thing.
Asked and answered.
Unfortunately not although I try to remain optimistic that one of them hundreds of job applications I’ve filled out in the past year will result in my being hired.
In six months, if things don’t change, it might be a moot point if we’re homeless.
Of course, if the damn coupon I ordered shows up in the mail that might well make a difference. That’s part of the problem - people ordered those vouchers and they never showed up. I’m told one was sent to me, it just hasn’t arrived yet. Or someone stole it out of my mailbox.
It’s not so much that I’m opposed as that a delay would be of convenience to me in that I get a few more months of TV as opposed to not having TV. Given my precarious finances I have very few entertainment options open to me. Yes, there’s the library and that does work for me. Saying “read books” is more problematic for my husband as his diabetes has affected his vision. Yes, there are “books on tape” but we have no tape player and our CD player stopped working last month. That’s one of the sucky things about poverty, stuff breaks and you have a choice between eating and replacing the stuff. Of course, I’m sure someone will be by shortly to say it’s unreasonable for poor people to expect to have a little entertainment in our lives, we should sit in a cold, dark house with nothing to do and feel like lesser human beings for our lack of money.
My husband is largely housebound during the winter, the TV keeps him up to date on things and yes, does entertain him while I’m out looking for work, doing the errands, or on the occasional days I secure some sort of gainful employment. I’m sure it’s hard for many people who are better off to understand but yes, losing the TV would be a hardship for him.
Doesnt Obama have a few more important things to worry about?
Honestly, if he’s spent more than a few minutes lately thinking about this issue, I am not impressed.
That’s not at all what was being suggested. Broadcast TV is one of the few free (directly, anyway) sources of entertainment one can enjoy in the home today. For the first time since your initial purchase of the set, you’re being asked to purchase a $20-$50 converter to continue enjoying the convenience and entertainment of TV.
That might not be in your entertainment budget. If it’s not, then that truly is unfortunate and I’m sorry you may have to go without TV until such a time when your entertainment budget allows it.
With all due respect, that’s not a hardship – it’s an inconvenience. TV is by no means a necessity, and while the lack thereof may significantly change the way you get your news or entertainment, it is possible to survive and be happy without.
The point is, at some point in time, people are going to get left behind. The change is coming, whether it be in February, May, or months beyond. Delaying the switch is going to end up being more trouble than it’s worth – because inevitably, when that time does come, people are going to cry foul again. People will be unhappy again. It may take some time for your entertainment budget to include the purchase of a converter box, but that’s up to you and your financial situation to prioritize.
Perhaps when the switch is made, we’ll find the distinction between “can’t afford it” and really, truly, honestly can’t afford it. Those who “can’t afford it” will finally have to buy a converter, and having done so, won’t have a need for the coupon they applied for. Theirs will expire, freeing up more to be sent to those who really, truly, honestly can’t afford it.
A one time cost of 40$ can be absorbed by almost anyone, particularly since they have had an entire year to plan for this. There are not too many people with a roof over their heads who cannot manage to put up one dollar a week.
So the 40$ models would have been free?
And you were the one arguing that a driver’s license should be more expensive in the same post that you were talking about how you bear the cost of keeping up your pilot license.
So, do you buy food or do you buy airplane time? And why the fuck should I finance a DTV converter box for you?
Unless you’re Rip Van Winkle you knew this one was coming, and you failed to plan ahead. This does not equate to the responsibility of someone else to take care of it for you.
100% agree.
Here’s your “change” folks. Aren’t you glad you voted for him now? Recession, war, unemployment, converter boxes. Oh yeah… tackling the tough issue first.
Sorry for the hijack. We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread of virulent outrage over something mostly unimportant. G’day.
This whole switchover thing has been a disaster. The government should never have signed off on a plan that required consumers to spend one red cent. Further than that, backwards compatibility should have been mandated, just like in every previous technology change.