Analog TV Obsolescence

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

<http/www.tvtechnology.com/features/Masked-Engineer/AnalogObsolescence.shtml>

Kirk Bayne
alt.video.digital-tv Home Page
<http/www.geocities.com/lislislislis/avdtv.htm>

 

[Richard]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"K. B." <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote in message
news:417b2520.1622495@netnews.worldnet.att.net...
> <http/www.tvtechnology.com/features/Masked-Engineer/AnalogObsolescence.shtml>
>
> Kirk Bayne
> alt.video.digital-tv Home Page
> <http/www.geocities.com/lislislislis/avdtv.htm>


That Mr. Masked is just a big know-it-all who just happens to be right all
the time. I knew a kid like that when I was in the 3rd grade.

Richard.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Richard (rfeirste@nycap.rr.com) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
> "K. B." <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote in message news:417b2520.1622495@netnews.worldnet.att.net...
> > <http/www.tvtechnology.com/features/Masked-Engineer/AnalogObsolescence.shtml>
>
> That Mr. Masked is just a big know-it-all who just happens to be right all
> the time.

....except when he is really, really wrong, like when he says about digital
TV in the US:

"Only about 600 stations are licensed to transmit it."

The current count of licensed digital TV stations has been over 1000 for
a year. I don't know what it's up to by now.

His other statements in the article are just as dumb:

"Almost no broadcasters have been mentioning it."

Most every prime-time program from all OTA networks has a "also available
in HDTV" banner at the beginning. Fox, in particular, is really pushing
HDTV with the NFL and the baseball playoffs. The announcers talk about
it, and there are commercials about it.

"Almost no viewers can tune it in."

Nearly 80% of the population of the US can get 3 or more OTA digital
stations...all they need is a receiver. Yeah, that may have been his
point--only 2-3 million receivers have been sold--but what he says comes
off more like digital TV doesn't work.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http/www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/LoveRanking.jpg
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
spam@ftc.gov |

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Richard (rfeirste@nycap.rr.com) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>
>>"K. B." <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote in message news:417b2520.1622495@netnews.worldnet.att.net...
>>
>>><http/www.tvtechnology.com/features/Masked-Engineer/AnalogObsolescence.shtml>
>>
>>That Mr. Masked is just a big know-it-all who just happens to be right all
>>the time.
>
>
> ...except when he is really, really wrong, like when he says about digital
> TV in the US:
>
> "Only about 600 stations are licensed to transmit it."
>
> The current count of licensed digital TV stations has been over 1000 for
> a year. I don't know what it's up to by now.
>
> His other statements in the article are just as dumb:
>
> "Almost no broadcasters have been mentioning it."
>
> Most every prime-time program from all OTA networks has a "also available
> in HDTV" banner at the beginning. Fox, in particular, is really pushing
> HDTV with the NFL and the baseball playoffs. The announcers talk about
> it, and there are commercials about it.
>
> "Almost no viewers can tune it in."
>
> Nearly 80% of the population of the US can get 3 or more OTA digital
> stations...all they need is a receiver. Yeah, that may have been his
> point--only 2-3 million receivers have been sold--but what he says comes
> off more like digital TV doesn't work.
>

Mario doesn't make many mistakes.

The number of licensed stations is around 600 not over 1000. Most
stations are still operating with STA's. Broadcasters whose customers go
to digital lose that customer for purposes of advertising revenue.
Nielson does not count digital yet. Broadcasters are not eagerly
advertising their digital yet. They are doing the minimum.

Few people can receive OTA HD because there are few receivers sold and
far fewer being used. A topic on AVSForum points this out.
http/www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=c3cb306e5da36cfa9e6f40da50387b9b&threadid=460418&perpage=20&pagenumber=1

Funny that it has not been flamed and deleted. I guess reality is
starting to overwhelm. OTA digital is stagnant in the US, has been from
day one and will be until 5th gen receivers flood the market.

The reality is that until 5th gen there was no business plan for
broadcasters or anyone else with digital OTA in the US.

It has ALWAYS been ALL about having plug and play receivers that were
affordable. That has been the ONLY serious issue that has held OTA
digital broadcasting back.

The UK will have sold 6 million digital COFDM receivers by the end of
the year. Italy is going strong (with subsidy) after only a few months,
Japan sales are wild considering that they only have three cities up.
They have sold two million OTA receivers and 90% of those receivers come
in INTEGRATED HDTV sets.

Japan did this in just the last nine months. Australia is ahead of us in
receiver sales. The US is in last place anyway you count it in digital OTA.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
> Mario doesn't make many mistakes.

Oh, look, Bob once again proves that anything he says, the opposite is
always true.

> The number of licensed stations is around 600 not over 1000.

The number of stations licensed by the FCC to transmit digital signals is
currently 1663.

> Most
> stations are still operating with STA's.

That still means they are licensed. I receive quite a few stations that
are broadcasting with STAs on digital (and even a few on analog).

My local PBS had a flood that knocked out their main digital transmitter,
and they are working to get it back into operation. They requested (and
got) an STA so that they can transmit from another location while the
repairs are in progress. Since they didn't want to permanently move their
facilities, they only needed an STA, *not* a new license.

There are stations that have STAs because they can't get their antenna to
the height they told the FCC they would have it at in a construction
permit, but are eventually planning to get it moved. There is nothing
wrong with broadcasting under an STA...it just means the station isn't
complying with what it told the FCC it was going to do, and the FCC has
agreed that this is OK for a while.

This how FCC regulations work, but Bob doesn't understand this, just like
he doesn't understand everything else concerning broadcast TV.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http/www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/LoveRanking.jpg
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
spam@ftc.gov |

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>
>>Mario doesn't make many mistakes.
>
>
> Oh, look, Bob once again proves that anything he says, the opposite is
> always true.
>
>
>>The number of licensed stations is around 600 not over 1000.
>
>
> The number of stations licensed by the FCC to transmit digital signals is
> currently 1663.
>
>
>> Most
>>stations are still operating with STA's.
>
>
> That still means they are licensed. I receive quite a few stations that
> are broadcasting with STAs on digital (and even a few on analog).
>
> My local PBS had a flood that knocked out their main digital transmitter,
> and they are working to get it back into operation. They requested (and
> got) an STA so that they can transmit from another location while the
> repairs are in progress. Since they didn't want to permanently move their
> facilities, they only needed an STA, *not* a new license.
>
> There are stations that have STAs because they can't get their antenna to
> the height they told the FCC they would have it at in a construction
> permit, but are eventually planning to get it moved. There is nothing
> wrong with broadcasting under an STA...it just means the station isn't
> complying with what it told the FCC it was going to do, and the FCC has
> agreed that this is OK for a while.
>
> This how FCC regulations work, but Bob doesn't understand this, just like
> he doesn't understand everything else concerning broadcast TV.
>
I fully understand what an STA is having used them. They are a Special
Temporary Authority not a license. In the parlance, when broadcasters
talk of a station being licensed, they do not mean that they have
Special Temporary Authority. In fact to say a station is licensed is to
preclude an STA, you can't have both on the same frequency. An STA last
for six months and is secondary to anyone who has a license. This
authority can be revoked instantly with no reason given.

The following FCC abbreviations are widely used: "AP" = applications,
"LI" = License, "CP" = "Construction permit", "CPM" = construction
permit modified and "AL" = allocation, "STA" = Special Temporary Authority

When an STA expires the holder does not then have a license, they have
nothing. Either an entity possesses a license or an STA, not both and
one has nothing to do with the other. We have had an STA and we have had
an experimental license and we have licenses, they are different.

VERY SPECIFICALLY there are 651 Licensed (or on Official Program Test
Authority) DTV stations on the air as of August 25, 2004 according to
the FCC.

http/www.fcc.gov/mb/video/files/dtvonair.html

At the bottom of that page NOTE!!! The FCC says...

NOTE: THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OTHER DTV STATIONS ON THE AIR PERIODICALLY
UNDER EXPERIMENTAL OR SPECIAL TEMPORARY AUTHORITIES (STA'S) WITH LESS
THAN FULLY AUTHORIZED FACILITIES.

If you want to argue semantics you can with the FCC. They may have a
reason for specifically calling one thing a license and another an
"Authority".

Unless of course you consider that a dog is also a cat.

Mario doesn't make many mistakes. He didn't this time either.