The Terrifying Switch to DTV (was Re: ISPs, Newsgroups, etc. ...OH MY!!!)

[Leo Mauler]

--- On Sat, 7/5/08, Jon Pruente <jdpruente at gmail.com> wrote:

> >> NOW, with DTV becomming *law* the poorest must pay
> >> just to get what is SUPPOSED to be FREE and has been 
> >> since its inception.
> >
> > What has been legislated is that free, broadcast
> > television move to the new technology.  It will still 
> > exist, with new options for quality and diversity.
> > You should look at what local, free broadcast stations
> > are doing with the new technology.  We are getting 
> > more for free, not less. 
> > Yes, you need a $40 converter, and probably an antenna, 
> > which are not free, but no subscription is required.

> Back in the 50's TV weren't cheap to buy and colors TVs 
> even more expensive.  Did people get over having to buy 
> a new TV to get COLOR?  Yep.  Will people get over
> having to buy a (relatively) cheap convertor and not 
> even need a whole new TV?  Yep.

There's a difference between *wanting to* buy a new TV to get color, instead of having to watch the color programming on a B&W TV (and *being able to do so*), and *having to* buy a new TV/convertor just to watch TV.

The difference is that what is happening now is like suddenly requiring everyone who owns a PC to buy a Mac to be able to get on the Internet.  What happened in the 1950s was that (to extend the above analogy) PCs could still get on the Internet, but Macs could get faster Internet.  The PC could still get on the Internet by itself without anything extra, and for all practical purposes had the same basic Internet as the Mac.

One detail I think needs to be answered is the fact that a weak analog signal was still viewable, even if you had to get your little brother to stand on a chair next to the TV and grab the antenna while he stuck out his leg.  Will a weak digital signal be viewable, or will so many packets be lost that the signal becomes completely unwatchable?  Will "one bar" be as impossible to use on your TV as it is on your wireless phone?

Because if weak digital signals aren't watchable, then we're *losing* a lot in the switchover.  We will have gone from *some* TV in remote areas to *NO* TV in remote areas.  Shrinking the broadcast region is a loss, no matter how much you try to tart up the switchover as a "gain".