View Full Version : Get Ready for ATSC 3.0


etype2
05-16-2015, 04:41 PM
Could be here within 5 years. Paves the way for UHD 4K programming and theoretically up to 8K if there is interest.

http://hdguru.com/new-broadcast-tv-system-might-be-coming-soon/#more-15902

ChrisW6ATV
05-19-2015, 03:44 AM
Thanks, I will read that.

Username1
05-19-2015, 09:31 AM
So I can watch Father Knows Best in 4K, or 8K with surround 3D Super Dolby .....?!?!

Well better signal quality at 60 miles would be nice..... And a nice
Chinese converter to NTSC for my 1985 TV would make me
adopt ATSC 3.0...... COOL ! !

.

OvenMaster
05-20-2015, 01:48 AM
Another full-scale system transition? I'll wager a lot of broadcast outlets will throw in the towel with that fresh financial burden on their backs so soon after ATSC 1.0.

Eric H
05-20-2015, 01:53 AM
"In addition to providing TV viewers with a range of new capabilities and features, ATSC 3.0 is being developed to keep over-the-air (OTA) TV broadcasters competitive with wireless companies like AT&T and Verizon"

Not sure how that'll work but it sounds like a good thing.

etype2
05-20-2015, 10:11 AM
"Where support appears to be growing is on the station ownership group level, where Pearl, a partnership comprising eight major station groups: Gannett, Hearst, Cox, Scripps, Graham Media, Meredith, Raycom and Media General, is actively involved with others in the system development. Pearl represents TV stations in 43 of the top 50 U.S. markets"

There will be resistance, but it's enevitable. ATSC 3.0 is a "catch up" to streaming and physical storage devices. It will keep broadcast TV competitive. I think it will take longer then 5 years though.

NHK of Japan is working hard to leap frog everyone and roll out 8K television in time for their 2020 Olympics. They already successfully tested and transmitted the 2012 Olympics in London.

Jeffhs
05-20-2015, 01:06 PM
I thought ATSC 3.0 was going to affect everything having to do with TV, not just broadcast. I'm glad I'm not watching broadcast anymore (I have a cable connection, but only because it is part of my service package with Time Warner, and because I can't get local TV on my Roku player without it). In other words, if ATSC 3.0 only applies to broadcast TV, the change, if and when it comes, probably will not affect alternative methods of TV viewing such as streaming video, et al.; in fact, I can't imagine how it would, since streaming video, being distributed over the Internet, has nothing to do with OTA or cable TV.

I still have cable connected to my TV, but I probably could disconnect it altogether and my Roku box would still work as it does now. . . . On second thought, I would probably have ghosts and other distortion of my TV picture if I disconnected the cable, since I would then have one open port on the 2-way splitter behind the TV--which would upset impedances, among other things.

I can see how the new standard will affect TV broadcasting, as it will be an upgrade, if you will, of the current ATSC 1.0 platform, but to eventually put the public through another transition is too much. And the advertising the TV stations would put out (again) about the second transition....I hate to think of it. The CBS station in Cleveland made a huge to-do over the first DTV transition in June 2009, referring to it as "The Big Switch", and running those PSAs every chance they got--during commercial breaks, etc. I got tired of them after the first couple of days.

I shudder to think of what the advertising for the second transition might be like. :eek: Seeing how aggressive advertising seems to be these days, however, it wouldn't surprise me if the ads for the second DTV transition are at least as dramatic (if not more so) as the ones for the first switch were.

ChrisW6ATV
05-21-2015, 02:54 AM
I am highly skeptical of the whole plan for over-the-air TV, long term. The biggest problem I see is that most people have already got used to paying for TV "service", independent of whether it has commercials or not. Many younger people (maybe even most of them, scarily) are not even aware of the concept of "free TV", I am afraid.

Even now, the mobile-friendly add-on to our existing digital TV system (ATSC M/H) already includes provision for, and approval of, encrypting those mobile-only channels and requiring payment to watch them. (Here, in the San Francisco area, one or more of my TV tuners comes up with some channels with names like ESPN that I cannot receive; I am guessing that there is already some pay-only service on the air or being tested here.)

With so many people already using cell phones or other Internet-connected devices to watch video (and paying for all of it as they do so, of course, and accepting that as reasonable), I have to wonder how any over-the-air broadcasters would have a plan to counteract that with some flashy, multichannel, mobile-friendly service that was only ad-supported. It just seems unlikely.

MUCH more likely, I fear, is the use of ATSC 3.0 to gradually turn the vast majority of the existing over-the-air channels, bands, and stations into mobile-friendly but full-fledged pay-TV systems, in other words, "cable TV without the cable, but at the same prices", more or less. That is my worst possible nightmare for television.

Username1
05-21-2015, 09:41 AM
I am highly skeptical of the whole plan for over-the-air TV, long term. The biggest problem I see is that most people have already got used to paying for TV "service", independent of whether it has commercials or not. Many younger people (maybe even most of them, scarily) are not even aware of the concept of "free TV", I am afraid.

Even now, the mobile-friendly add-on to our existing digital TV system (ATSC M/H) already includes provision for, and approval of, encrypting those mobile-only channels and requiring payment to watch them. (Here, in the San Francisco area, one or more of my TV tuners comes up with some channels with names like ESPN that I cannot receive; I am guessing that there is already some pay-only service on the air or being tested here.)

With so many people already using cell phones or other Internet-connected devices to watch video (and paying for all of it as they do so, of course, and accepting that as reasonable), I have to wonder how any over-the-air broadcasters would have a plan to counteract that with some flashy, multichannel, mobile-friendly service that was only ad-supported. It just seems unlikely.

MUCH more likely, I fear, is the use of ATSC 3.0 to gradually turn the vast majority of the existing over-the-air channels, bands, and stations into mobile-friendly but full-fledged pay-TV systems, in other words, "cable TV without the cable, but at the same prices", more or less. That is my worst possible nightmare for television.


I agree - Well Said!

We have a few pay-OTA channels here in the NY market already. ATSC -3
will make reception easier because of mobile friendlier signals, and as
said, the younger generation is already aware of and use to a pay
wall for everything, so OTA will most likely become Cable tv without the cable....

.

etype2
05-21-2015, 10:22 AM
I am highly skeptical of the whole plan for over-the-air TV, long term. The biggest problem I see is that most people have already got used to paying for TV "service", independent of whether it has commercials or not. Many younger people (maybe even most of them, scarily) are not even aware of the concept of "free TV", I am afraid.

Even now, the mobile-friendly add-on to our existing digital TV system (ATSC M/H) already includes provision for, and approval of, encrypting those mobile-only channels and requiring payment to watch them. (Here, in the San Francisco area, one or more of my TV tuners comes up with some channels with names like ESPN that I cannot receive; I am guessing that there is already some pay-only service on the air or being tested here.)

With so many people already using cell phones or other Internet-connected devices to watch video (and paying for all of it as they do so, of course, and accepting that as reasonable), I have to wonder how any over-the-air broadcasters would have a plan to counteract that with some flashy, multichannel, mobile-friendly service that was only ad-supported. It just seems unlikely.

MUCH more likely, I fear, is the use of ATSC 3.0 to gradually turn the vast majority of the existing over-the-air channels, bands, and stations into mobile-friendly but full-fledged pay-TV systems, in other words, "cable TV without the cable, but at the same prices", more or less. That is my worst possible nightmare for television.

You make very good points. I to, agree that young people barely watch OTA TV. Also many people are cutting the chord (cable) and using streaming services. This trend will likely increase with more streaming services coming on line. Sony and Apple will introduce new services in September. Yet old folks in the retirement communities where I live, still have their old analogue antennas on their roofs.

I fear as you do that we will lose free TV, but we have the 75 year government mandated business model concept of free OTA in place and Congress upheld the concept that "every household should be able to receive free unobstructed television and radio transmissions". (This came about when condo and apartment owners tried to prevent tenants from installing antennas on their balconies)

My Direct TV bill is getting ridiculous and I too, am thinking about severing my subscription after 20 years with Direct TV. I'm anxious to see the Sony and Apple streaming models. 50 to 85 channels for $50. Being an old guy, was skeptical about streaming, but my wife bought me an Apple TV last Christmas and I have to say it is amazingly good. Video as good as Direct TV and better 7.1 sound. UHD is promised as well. I have not used the Netflix 4K service, but understand it's good.

Having said all this, where dose this leave traditional OTA television? They will either have to catch up with improved service, hopefully for free as always or die off.

NJRoadfan
05-21-2015, 11:57 AM
Have any broadcasters even adopted the features available in ATSC 2.0?

The specs for ATSC 3.0 look interesting (OFDM modulation, h.265 codec), but I can't help but wonder why they don't coordinate with other groups (DVB, ISDB, etc.) and move to one worldwide broadcast standard if they plan on breaking backwards compatibility. At least they are finally adopting OFDM like everyone else uses, which might make it easier to build multisystem tuners/TVs. Hopefully this also means the end of interlaced OTA broadcasts too.

Username1
05-21-2015, 01:00 PM
I agree on the ATSC 2.0, it's specs also say it's backwards compatible with 1.0.
I had always thought that would be the way to go, show an improvement at no
additional cost, then 3.0 would go down easier, because an improvement
was already shown, in the 2.0 switch. Also reception would improve because of
the OFMD, and the ability of booster transmitters to take care of weak areas....

Yes I thought 2.0 would be implemented first.

I think OTA is going to hold on, after all a lot of cable only channels still advertise
their new shows on ABC, NBC, CBS......etc. Same with AMC, and I few others that
escape me right now.... They know where the big number of viewers are.... Still
the networks..... And look at all the HD Antenna outfits that sprang up after
the '09 digital devolution...... I wonder if there will be an upstart antenna installation
service - kinda like Dish and DirecTV have antenna installers.... In a lot of areas
there is a bit of knowledge to get the right stuff.... And most people ain't gunna
handle it themselves.....

.

colorfixer
05-23-2015, 05:36 PM
IMHO: OTA may only survive if they can create some form of compelling product.

In my area, the major networks' affiliates monopolize rights to programming for a huge area and yet DO NOT have an off air signal (Seattle WA affiliates, and I'm in Whatcom county, well out of range of their transmitters). Unless they figure on putting up translators (never have), or their viewer installing 75' towers for aerials, it's only a matter of time. Heck the local tv station KVOS was sold to Michael Dell, who shows no interest in tv but rather selling the RF spectrum for wireless data services. He shut down the entire show and feeds it from somewhere in California, leaving the transmitter and a token office in here town. They don't even make any bones about it, they stopped identifying as "Me TV Bellingham" to "Me TV Seattle".

etype2
04-19-2017, 09:29 PM
ATSC 3.0 front and center at NAB show in Las Vegas April 24 through 27, 2017.

http://atsc.org/news-release/next-gen-tv-hub-showcase-benefits-new-broadcast-tv-standard-2017-nab-show/

etype2
11-16-2017, 05:15 PM
FCC Approves Next-Gen TV For OTA Broadcasting

http://www.tvtechnology.com/atsc3/0031/fcc-approves-nextgen-tv-for-ota-broadcasting/282290

In the Phoenix Valley where I live:

http://www.tvtechnology.com/atsc3/0031/phoenix-to-serve-as-model-market-for-atsc-30/282269

centralradio
11-16-2017, 07:41 PM
Hum .Whos pockets got filled this time.I cant say here.LOL.......

Jon A.
11-17-2017, 10:25 AM
If it ain't broke, break it for a cash grab.

There are a couple of exceptions to this rule I can think of, the Bear and the BUFF. Of course they were never sold to the public.

Titan1a
11-18-2017, 04:22 AM
I read about the possibility of ATSC 3.0 being used for surveillance. No new box, no new set, no new antenna. When the current system expires I'll rely on disc and streaming. Take THAT FCC and broadcast TV!!!

Jeffhs
11-18-2017, 02:16 PM
I read about the possibility of ATSC 3.0 being used for surveillance. No new box, no new set, no new antenna. When the current system expires I'll rely on disc and streaming. Take THAT FCC and broadcast TV!!!

Whatever happens with broadcast TV, now or in the future, won't bother me in the least. I gave up on broadcast TV and cable some time ago, and did not look back. I now watch TV via streaming video (Roku, with the Spectrum TV app for local channels) and DVD/VHS. I don't miss broadcast or cable a bit. I must maintain a cable account, but that is strictly so the Spectrum (formerly Time-Warner Cable) app will receive local TV; however, I don't use the cable at all--I couldn't if I wanted to, since the full-digital switch mandates the use of a cable box ahead of the TV, which I don't want (don't care for the extra charge which would appear on my cable bill). The cable that once was connected to my VCR and cable outlet is now rolled up in a coil in my bedroom closet, unused.

jr_tech
11-18-2017, 07:38 PM
If the new standard is successful, I would suspect that eventually 4k streams would eventually prevail... Of course, Roku and other stream box sellers would likely jump at the chance to sell new boxes... much $$$$ could be made if they force an upgrade, by phasing out lower quality streams. But, that is years away, nevertheless, a distant possibility, IMHO. :scratch2:

jr

mr_rye89
11-19-2017, 11:53 AM
I'm still trying to figure out the appeal of 4K TV. Don't you have to sit 3' away from your 90" 4K TV to tell the difference from a regular 1080p TV?

I'm really suprised they would even bother with a 4K spec'd ATSC standard. Most of the TV broadcasted in my neck of the woods is still 720p or less and looks like crap due to compression artifacts.

old_tv_nut
11-19-2017, 12:12 PM
4k does make improvement in vernier resolution (fine discrimination of object position) even at regular viewing distances, but trials show that this is not as noticeable an improvement as high dynamic range and, secondarily, wide color gamut. So, 4k may be broadcast simply as a numbers race, but it is likely that the real visual improvement will be HDR, which ATSC 3 will also enable.

etype2
11-19-2017, 02:30 PM
Also, WCG, emersive audio, portable on the move A/V, and it allows broadcasters to be on the same playing field with streaming services.

Undoubtedly, there will be charges from “premium” services, but free OTA is still mandated by Congress.

pac.attack76
11-28-2017, 01:25 PM
Oh goody. More junk on the way. I wish they could have left things alone and stayed with ntsc.:thumbsdn:

centralradio
11-28-2017, 02:14 PM
Oh goody. More junk on the way. I wish they could have left things alone and stayed with ntsc.:thumbsdn:

I agree 110 percent.If it aint broke dont fix it..Blame the numnuts with the 1996 telebill disaster .Whats next.The whole country got to ditch their AM/FM radios for crappy digital radio.

Jeffhs
11-28-2017, 10:03 PM
I agree 110 percent.If it aint broke dont fix it..Blame the numnuts with the 1996 telebill disaster .Whats next.The whole country got to ditch their AM/FM radios for crappy digital radio.

The system has been "fixed" already, and the so-called fix was a disaster, IMHO. Whatever was or was not done to AM or FM radio today doesn't matter in the least to me, as I don't listen to radio much anymore. In my area near Cleveland, all anyone can hear from one end of the radio dial to the other is noise. That is, I get plenty of stations, but their idea of music isn't mine. :no:

The stations also carry more commercials than I think they need to, a problem we didn't have 30-40+ years ago when there were definite, strict regulations as to how many commercials any radio or TV station could run in any given hour. When the FCC did away with those rules in the '80s, the stations were (and are, to this day) free to run as many commercials as they want or feel they need. There is at least one FM station in Cleveland that runs commercials and even infomercials (!) all night long, from midnight Saturday until about six o'clock Sunday morning. This has been going on at that station, and most others in this area (including TV stations), for quite some time; this is also why TV stations no longer sign off at 2-3 a.m. local time as they once did.

As to HD (digital) AM and FM radio, I don't know who actually listens to those stations, as there aren't that many radios (except perhaps car stereo systems) that can receive these HD stations anyway. I have a feeling that HD radio will eventually die a quiet death, as did quadraphonic (four-channel) stereo sound broadcasting. There is such a thing as 5.1-channel stereo (CBS-TV is now or was using this system a few years ago, while NBC and ABC may or may not be currently transmitting their programs' audio in MTS stereo; I remember NBC's MTS stereo system, begun in 1986 or so, in which the beginning of every show the network telecast in stereo sound had a disclaimer on the screen: "In ((stereo)) where available", but most MTS stereo TV sound is just that, stereo sound broadcast from TV stations and received, for the most part, over TVs with small transistor-radio speakers, either at both sides of the LCD panel or, as in my own flat-screen set, mounted so that the speakers talk to the shelf or stand the TV is mounted on, not to the viewer.

My point is that four-channel stereo was a flop, as will be HD radio if it survives long enough. I agree that if the system (in this case, the ATSC television standard) isn't broken no one has any right to fix it, but the TV industry has been constantly trying to "reinvent the wheel" for years in the name of making more money (!), a practice that eventually will reach a point of diminishing or even no returns; after all, there is just so much anyone (or any group) can do with TV signals. HDTV itself isn't bad, as it provides viewers with sharper, clearer pictures (shaped like the original broadcast picture, as all HDTVs have square screens) than NTSC analog could ever have delivered, not to mention more channels; however, as I said, I feel eventually the industry is going to run out of ideas, as there is only so much anyone (or any organization, industry, etc.) can do to improve anything. I once read a pie-in-the-sky prediction (I don't remember where) that a system or systems are currently being researched that may eventually enable humans to watch television in their eyes (!), of all places.

I am all for improvements if they will actually make our ATSC TV system better than it is now, but as far as improvements simply for the sake of improvements are concerned, no. I was against HDTV at first, as I do not adjust well to change; however, when I saw how much better my TV picture was on a flat screen, I changed my tune in a hurry and bought a 19-inch flat-screen TV in 2011. I did not care at first for ATSC 3.0; I eventually realized, however, that it will only affect OTA TV reception, not cable, satellite or streaming video (the last being how I watch TV these days). I don't want another converter box on my TV (my Roku player, with the Spectrum TV app, is plenty good enough for me and is, along with DVDs, how I watch TV, now and in the foreseeable future), not to mention an extra charge on my cable bill. I sometimes wish I could do away with my cable account altogether (which would save me quite a bit), but if I did, the Spectrum app on my Roku would no longer receive local TV channels--another not-so-subtle money grab by Spectrum (formerly Time Warner Cable). The company recently converted all its cable systems in this area to full digital, requiring a cable box or streaming-video box to receive anything; yup, you guessed it, yet another cash grab. I would go back to using an OTA antenna were it not for a pesky reception problem I have here; fortunately, my Roku player has solved this problem, and the results are so pleasing I haven't looked back.

centralradio
11-28-2017, 11:28 PM
The system has been "fixed" already, and the so-called fix was a disaster, IMHO. Whatever was or was not done to AM or FM radio today doesn't matter in the least to me, as I don't listen to radio much anymore. In my area near Cleveland, all anyone can hear from one end of the radio dial to the other is noise. That is, I get plenty of stations, but their idea of music isn't mine. :no:

The stations also carry more commercials than I think they need to, a problem we didn't have 30-40+ years ago when there were definite, strict regulations as to how many commercials any radio or TV station could run in any given hour. When the FCC did away with those rules in the '80s, the stations were (and are, to this day) free to run as many commercials as they want or feel they need. There is at least one FM station in Cleveland that runs commercials and even infomercials (!) all night long, from midnight Saturday until about six o'clock Sunday morning. This has been going on at that station, and most others in this area (including TV stations), for quite some time; this is also why TV stations no longer sign off at 2-3 a.m. local time as they once did.

As to HD (digital) AM and FM radio, I don't know who actually listens to those stations, as there aren't that many radios (except perhaps car stereo systems) that can receive these HD stations anyway. I have a feeling that HD radio will eventually die a quiet death, as did quadraphonic (four-channel) stereo sound broadcasting. There is such a thing as 5.1-channel stereo (CBS-TV is now or was using this system a few years ago, while NBC and ABC may or may not be currently transmitting their programs' audio in MTS stereo; I remember NBC's MTS stereo system, begun in 1986 or so, in which the beginning of every show the network telecast in stereo sound had a disclaimer on the screen: "In ((stereo)) where available", but most MTS stereo TV sound is just that, stereo sound broadcast from TV stations and received, for the most part, over TVs with small transistor-radio speakers, either at both sides of the LCD panel or, as in my own flat-screen set, mounted so that the speakers talk to the shelf or stand the TV is mounted on, not to the viewer.

My point is that four-channel stereo was a flop, as will be HD radio if it survives long enough. I agree that if the system (in this case, the ATSC television standard) isn't broken no one has any right to fix it, but the TV industry has been constantly trying to "reinvent the wheel" for years in the name of making more money (!), a practice that eventually will reach a point of diminishing or even no returns; after all, there is just so much anyone (or any group) can do with TV signals. HDTV itself isn't bad, as it provides viewers with sharper, clearer pictures (shaped like the original broadcast picture, as all HDTVs have square screens) than NTSC analog could ever have delivered, not to mention more channels; however, as I said, I feel eventually the industry is going to run out of ideas, as there is only so much anyone (or any organization, industry, etc.) can do to improve anything. I once read a pie-in-the-sky prediction (I don't remember where) that a system or systems are currently being researched that may eventually enable humans to watch television in their eyes (!), of all places.

I am all for improvements if they will actually make our ATSC TV system better than it is now, but as far as improvements simply for the sake of improvements are concerned, no. I was against HDTV at first, as I do not adjust well to change; however, when I saw how much better my TV picture was on a flat screen, I changed my tune in a hurry and bought a 19-inch flat-screen TV in 2011. I did not care at first for ATSC 3.0; I eventually realized, however, that it will only affect OTA TV reception, not cable, satellite or streaming video (the last being how I watch TV these days). I don't want another converter box on my TV (my Roku player, with the Spectrum TV app, is plenty good enough for me and is, along with DVDs, how I watch TV, now and in the foreseeable future), not to mention an extra charge on my cable bill. I sometimes wish I could do away with my cable account altogether (which would save me quite a bit), but if I did, the Spectrum app on my Roku would no longer receive local TV channels--another not-so-subtle money grab by Spectrum (formerly Time Warner Cable). The company recently converted all its cable systems in this area to full digital, requiring a cable box or streaming-video box to receive anything; yup, you guessed it, yet another cash grab. I would go back to using an OTA antenna were it not for a pesky reception problem I have here; fortunately, my Roku player has solved this problem, and the results are so pleasing I haven't looked back.

Thank you Jeff for the great post.I understand what you are saying.

Titan1a
11-29-2017, 02:19 AM
Quadraphonic was beset by multiple incompatible standards. SQ matrix wasn't really ready until nearly the end of the line as was CD-4 or "chain saw" playback using the supersonic sub-carrier. No such thing as high fidelity 8-track tape. Also, I still have a quad open reel TEAC A3340S. Quadraphonic FM was either matrix (SQ, QS, EV4) or the Dorren system using an addition subcarrier requiring double the transmitting power and messing up MUSAK.

Don't forget the debacle of Dolby FM and FMX. The current system of FM is a kludge which degraded it's fidelity. Only TV FM audio was improved with DBX using noise reduction on the L-R audio subchannel.

There's still a battle over which audio multi channel format will be used for movies and home theatre. Optical multi channel disk formats are also silently at war. Why can't somebody get these "jerks" to come up with compatible standards? As long as nobody can make up their minds don't expect multi channel audio to replace stereo in any media. And as long as there's continued inertia in the markets don't expect ATSC 3.

KentTeffeteller
12-07-2017, 11:15 AM
The only Quad FM format which would have been viable would have been QS. It's the only phase coherent, truly backwards compatible matrix of the lot. And the only record format which was broadcast friendly, and encoded records on FM would have stayed encoded and decodeable at the FM receiver end.

KentTeffeteller
12-07-2017, 11:17 AM
Quadraphonic was beset by multiple incompatible standards. SQ matrix wasn't really ready until nearly the end of the line as was CD-4 or "chain saw" playback using the supersonic sub-carrier. No such thing as high fidelity 8-track tape. Also, I still have a quad open reel TEAC A3340S. Quadraphonic FM was either matrix (SQ, QS, EV4) or the Dorren system using an addition subcarrier requiring double the transmitting power and messing up MUSAK.

Don't forget the debacle of Dolby FM and FMX. The current system of FM is a kludge which degraded it's fidelity. Only TV FM audio was improved with DBX using noise reduction on the L-R audio subchannel.

There's still a battle over which audio multi channel format will be used for movies and home theatre. Optical multi channel disk formats are also silently at war. Why can't somebody get these "jerks" to come up with compatible standards? As long as nobody can make up their minds don't expect multi channel audio to replace stereo in any media. And as long as there's continued inertia in the markets don't expect ATSC 3.

And also don't expect ATSC3 to be practical either when Cable TV and Satellite can't even give us pristine 1080p without being downrezzed either.

centralradio
12-07-2017, 08:17 PM
And also don't expect ATSC3 to be practical either when Cable TV and Satellite can't even give us pristine 1080p without being downrezzed either.

At times watching cable TV at this point is like watching TV though a FP PXL2000 camcorder.Its horrible here at times.

KentTeffeteller
12-10-2017, 09:46 AM
And for many who live beyond strongest signal area, that or satellite is your choice if you want much to watch that isn't discs.

rose14
12-14-2017, 03:35 PM
I believe WRAL in North Carolina is test broadcasting the noon news in ATSC 3.0. They were the first station to do local broadcasts in HD .

Jeffhs
12-15-2017, 01:34 PM
I just read two articles about the new ATSC 3.0 television standard. One of them said not to panic when the new standard is enacted, as the existing ATSC 1.0 system will be with us until at least the year 2023; however, after that, everything will change, with new TVs, converter boxes, etc. being required to receive anything at all on TV (not unlike the warning that was issued when TV went from analog to digital in 2009), even if you do not have cable and watch all your TV over the air.

My question, however, is this: Will the new ATSC 3.0 standard affect viewers who watch TV via video streaming devices such as Roku, Apple TV, Google TV, Amazon Fire TV, et al., or is the new standard poised to be just another money grab for broadcasters and TV/converter box manufacturers, as was the DTV transition itself? In other words, will the ATSC 3.0 standard force people to buy all new equipment, including new televisions? I read in the two articles I mentioned that the new standard will not be backward-compatible, whatever that means, so everyone will need to buy a new TV or use a converter box when the new standard goes into effect in 2023 or whenever.

Good grief! I think this whole thing is just going to be another cash grab. The articles I read did mention that the new standard will result in better TV pictures by way of higher image resolution, better sound and so on; however, I think ATSC 3.0, as I mentioned earlier, will be just another money grab, forcing everyone to buy new equipment. The standard's developers need to realize that many people, particularly older people on fixed incomes (such as myself; I am 61 years old and live on Social Security Disability due to a brain injury at birth), will not be able to afford new TVs, at least not until they come down in price after having been on the market awhile, as did large-screen HD and 4K TVs.

Cable operators will provide set-top boxes that will allow older sets to work with the new standard, but these are only stopgap measures until the old set quits, then the viewer will have no choice but to get a new one. The articles I read and mentioned earlier are telling readers not to panic, as the new standards will not go into effect for "at least" another five years, but I just don't know. The first DTV transition, eight years ago, was bad enough; now another one has just been approved that will put the American public through the same monkey business of having to buy new TVs, converters, etc. as we went through then. Good grief, I even read that the new ATSC 3.0 standard will permit broadcasters to air more commercials, only now these annoying things will be aimed at specific states, cities, towns and even individual viewers.

Sheeeeesh! Where will all this end......I'm afraid? :scratch2:

centralradio
12-15-2017, 02:30 PM
I just read two articles about the new ATSC 3.0 television standard. One of them said not to panic when the new standard is enacted, as the existing ATSC 1.0 system will be with us until at least the year 2023; however, after that, everything will change, with new TVs, converter boxes, etc. being required to receive anything at all on TV (not unlike the warning that was issued when TV went from analog to digital in 2009), even if you do not have cable and watch all your TV over the air.

My question, however, is this: Will the new ATSC 3.0 standard affect viewers who watch TV via video streaming devices such as Roku, Apple TV, Google TV, Amazon Fire TV, et al., or is the new standard poised to be just another money grab for broadcasters and TV/converter box manufacturers, as was the DTV transition itself? In other words, will the ATSC 3.0 standard force people to buy all new equipment, including new televisions? I read in the two articles I mentioned that the new standard will not be backward-compatible, whatever that means, so everyone will need to buy a new TV or use a converter box when the new standard goes into effect in 2023 or whenever.

Good grief! I think this whole thing is just going to be another cash grab. The articles I read did mention that the new standard will result in better TV pictures by way of higher image resolution, better sound and so on; however, I think ATSC 3.0, as I mentioned earlier, will be just another money grab, forcing everyone to buy new equipment. The standard's developers need to realize that many people, particularly older people on fixed incomes (such as myself; I am 61 years old and live on Social Security Disability due to a brain injury at birth), will not be able to afford new TVs, at least not until they come down in price after having been on the market awhile, as did large-screen HD and 4K TVs.

Cable operators will provide set-top boxes that will allow older sets to work with the new standard, but these are only stopgap measures until the old set quits, then the viewer will have no choice but to get a new one. The articles I read and mentioned earlier are telling readers not to panic, as the new standards will not go into effect for "at least" another five years, but I just don't know. The first DTV transition, eight years ago, was bad enough; now another one has just been approved that will put the American public through the same monkey business of having to buy new TVs, converters, etc. as we went through then. Good grief, I even read that the new ATSC 3.0 standard will permit broadcasters to air more commercials, only now these annoying things will be aimed at specific states, cities, towns and even individual viewers.

Sheeeeesh! Where will all this end......I'm afraid? :scratch2:

This topic make my blood boil. No offense to you guys.With all the corruptness from the telecommunications corps and the higher up elites,Hollyweird and the fake MSM are pushing it saying its better then ever BS .It will continue forever or until OTA TV is completely will be eliminated.The later is more likely to happen.Radio will be next.

etype2
12-15-2017, 05:25 PM
ATSC was approved by the FCC on November 16, 2017. As Jeffhs said, ATSC 1.0 will be required to be broadcast for 5 years then it goes away as things stand now. ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 will broadcast simultaneously during the next 5 years in the individual markets that adopt ATSC 3.0. ATSC 3.0 IS VOULENTARY. Television manufacturers will incorporate dual tuners for 1.0 and 3.0. on new sets. Converter boxes will be available to receive ATSC 3.0 on existing sets just as digital converter boxes allow OTA 1.0 to be seem on analog sets.

Broadcasters now have the ability to send “premium” OTA 4K broadband services along side the free 4K broadcasts. As it stands now Congress mandates every household to be able to receive free OTA television. ATSC 3.0 claims to be more reliable that can be received from longer distances including deep into concrete buildings. It can be received by mobile devises and fast moving cars and commuter trains. It has multi channel sound beyond 5.1 surround. Wide color gamut and high dynamic range is available for those that care.

Premium services OTT will be go beyond what cable and satellite provide with better quality. This is why the cable companies were fighting the adoption of ATSC 3.0

Electronic M
12-15-2017, 06:07 PM
This will probably force the cable companies to innovate (increase their bandwidth) or cut back channels (to divide existant bandwidth among fewer channels) available. If OTA provides higher bit rates than cable for the same content, then viewers will notice.

centralradio
12-15-2017, 07:38 PM
This will probably force the cable companies to innovate (increase their bandwidth) or cut back channels (to divide existant bandwidth among fewer channels) available. If OTA provides higher bit rates than cable for the same content, then viewers will notice.

We will be loosing channels that are going off the air with the DTV repack.So probably a few channels will be open for them.


ATSC was approved by the FCC on November 16, 2017. As Jeffhs said, ATSC 1.0 will be required to be broadcast for 5 years then it goes away as things stand now. ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 will broadcast simultaneously during the next 5 years in the individual markets that adopt ATSC 3.0. ATSC 3.0 IS VOULENTARY. Television manufacturers will incorporate dual tuners for 1.0 and 3.0. on new sets. Converter boxes will be available to receive ATSC 3.0 on existing sets just as digital converter boxes allow OTA 1.0 to be seem on analog sets.

Broadcasters now have the ability to send “premium” OTA 4K broadband services along side the free 4K broadcasts. As it stands now Congress mandates every household to be able to receive free OTA television. ATSC 3.0 claims to be more reliable that can be received from longer distances including deep into concrete buildings. It can be received by mobile devises and fast moving cars and commuter trains. It has multi channel sound beyond 5.1 surround. Wide color gamut and high dynamic range is available for those that care.

Premium services OTT will be go beyond what cable and satellite provide with better quality. This is why the cable companies were fighting the adoption of ATSC 3.0

Will that sounds promising about better reception or is it another sales pitch to make viewers happy.

Jeffhs
12-15-2017, 08:19 PM
I was asking whether the change to ATSC 3.0 will have any effect on streaming video services such as Roku, Google TV, etc. Since these services have nothing to do with OTA television, I would think the streaming services would continue unfettered just as they are now, regardless of what OTA TV standard happens to be in effect. I saw nothing in either of the two articles I read which would indicate streaming video would be affected in any way once ATSC 3.0 becomes the new standard; if anyone else here has heard or read anything to the contrary, I would appreciate any comments. I am personally sick and tired of all this "reinventing the wheel" every few years (first b&w TV, then color, then MTS stereo TV sound, NTSC to ATSC 1.0, and now this), forcing the public to buy new TVs or converter boxes when the standards change.

The system (ATSC 1.0) is not "broken", so why even attempt to fix it? If such is attempted, I believe the result will be a worse TV system than we have today. The only real reason the FCC wants to change the present DTV standard is, you guessed it, to give cable operators, TV manufacturers and makers of set-top boxes the opportunity to sell more and more of these devices, not to mention new TVs. I don't even want to think of what the FCC may have in mind after ATSC 3.0 has been around a few years; my best guess is they will want to implement yet another standard, say, 10 years from now. If and when that happens, well, here we go again!


BTW, I read the comments regarding the future of OTA AM and FM radio, and honestly, I couldn't care less what happens to either service. AM radio is now mostly talk, while FM stations in most cities play nothing but rock, which in my opinion is just noise. I live 30 miles from Cleveland and 40-50 miles from the city's FM stations, and cannot stand any of the stations' programming; therefore, most of the time I listen to my own cassettes, CDs and mp3 audio files.

I am very disappointed in an Internet music service, known as "The Breeze" (http://www.thebreez.com) from Crown Point, Indiana, which used to play easy listening. The service may still offer this type of music, but to date I haven't been able to stream it on my computer, after months of trouble-free streaming until earlier this year. The company that owns this is known as Radionomy.com; it took over the former owners of The Breeze, but I swear they must have done something to encrypt their streams, since I cannot hear them any longer. This station, as "The Breeze", was my one escape from the constant rock noise blaring from Cleveland's FM stations. ......

Oh well. :sigh:

centralradio
12-15-2017, 09:39 PM
I was asking whether the change to ATSC 3.0 will have any effect on streaming video services such as Roku, Google TV, etc. Since these services have nothing to do with OTA television, I would think the streaming services would continue unfettered just as they are now, regardless of what OTA TV standard happens to be in effect. I saw nothing in either of the two articles I read which would indicate streaming video would be affected in any way once ATSC 3.0 becomes the new standard; if anyone else here has heard or read anything to the contrary, I would appreciate any comments. I am personally sick and tired of all this "reinventing the wheel" every few years (first b&w TV, then color, then MTS stereo TV sound, NTSC to ATSC 1.0, and now this), forcing the public to buy new TVs or converter boxes when the standards change.

The system (ATSC 1.0) is not "broken", so why even attempt to fix it? If such is attempted, I believe the result will be a worse TV system than we have today. The only real reason the FCC wants to change the present DTV standard is, you guessed it, to give cable operators, TV manufacturers and makers of set-top boxes the opportunity to sell more and more of these devices, not to mention new TVs. I don't even want to think of what the FCC may have in mind after ATSC 3.0 has been around a few years; my best guess is they will want to implement yet another standard, say, 10 years from now. If and when that happens, well, here we go again!


BTW, I read the comments regarding the future of OTA AM and FM radio, and honestly, I couldn't care less what happens to either service. AM radio is now mostly talk, while FM stations in most cities play nothing but rock, which in my opinion is just noise. I live 30 miles from Cleveland and 40-50 miles from the city's FM stations, and cannot stand any of the stations' programming; therefore, most of the time I listen to my own cassettes, CDs and mp3 audio files.

I am very disappointed in an Internet music service, known as "The Breeze" (http://www.thebreez.com) from Crown Point, Indiana, which used to play easy listening. The service may still offer this type of music, but to date I haven't been able to stream it on my computer, after months of trouble-free streaming until earlier this year. The company that owns this is known as Radionomy.com; it took over the former owners of The Breeze, but I swear they must have done something to encrypt their streams, since I cannot hear them any longer. This station, as "The Breeze", was my one escape from the constant rock noise blaring from Cleveland's FM stations. ......

Oh well. :sigh:

Sorry about not understanding some of your last post.I dont know much about Roku since I dont have one here.The streaming online here is great.Better if you download the videos .I see already corrupt Hollyweird will more likely have everything encrypt so watching it on TV probably be over .Note on the radio end I dont like the idea that the little people will get screwed with out of a job if they shut down.I do agree on their crappy shot playlists that rotate about 20 songs.Thats on any format including Christmas formats too.My local AM station is a a full service live and local station that plays oldies from the 1940s to the 1980's .News on the hour .No talk shows . Now they are Christmas which I enjoy too.Its even in AM Stereo to boot.LOL............................


Strange if the Breeze stream is encrypt.I wonder if they just change their streaming format.Stations have a habit doing that.

Titan1a
12-15-2017, 10:36 PM
I can see FM going full digital. It just did in Sweden. The end results are the listening audience has dropped from 10% to 25% as receivers are expensive for both autos and homes (is digital FM subject to Doppler problems like TV?). I listen regularly to AM (talk and music) especially at night by skip. I'll throw one hell of a fit should the "clowns" in DC take AM digital. AM is the "last resort" should all other broadcast communication fail. There are hundreds of millions of operable receivers. Change that and I'll pull the plug on all domestic broadcast wireless listening.

Jeffhs
12-16-2017, 02:07 AM
Sorry, but you are still not answering my question. When ATSC 3.0 is enacted, will it affect streaming video services such as Roku, which is already a "converter box" and gets TV programming over the Internet? I would think all that would be needed with these boxes would be for the software to be upgraded for the new standard; they upgrade themselves daily anyway (with a provision to manually upgrade if desired), so any new software will be in place as soon as it is needed.

I hardly think Roku will go out of business in five years (or whatever) just because some new TV standard has been enacted; as I said, when ATSC 3.0 is the new standard for TV broadcasting, taking over completely from ATSC 1.0, Roku's players will keep up with the technology, with little or no interaction required from viewers. Roku cannot afford to let itself become obsolete, as there are probably millions of these players in use worldwide.

Where this idea that "watching TV will be over" eventually, if Hollywood decides to encrypt video streams, ever got started is beyond me. Most Americans do not understand or care about the technical reasons for scrambling video streams or anything else connected with television, so if this ever happens, there will very likely be a huge backlash. Americans like their TV and do not want the government to mess with it.

I do not believe, either, that Hollywood will start encrypting video any time soon. Tell me this: If Hollywood does decide to encrypt video streams, will they be prepared for the sheer number of viewers who will complain loudly and incessantly? I realize that the change to ATSC 3.0 is nothing more than a huge cash grab, but good grief, this is too much. If Hollywood does decide to encrypt video, how on earth will they expect people to watch television, or whatever it may be called in five years, after the standards change? For that matter, will there even be an "ATSC 3.0" standard, say, ten years from now? I believe the FCC just might enact five new standards in that time, each rendering the previous one obsolete and requiring viewers to buy new TVs or converter boxes each time the standards change. People on fixed incomes won't be able to afford that, and will likely stop watching TV, which the networks, local stations, and Hollywood will not like in the least.

Good grief.

centralradio
12-16-2017, 04:45 AM
Sorry, but you are still not answering my question. When ATSC 3.0 is enacted, will it affect streaming video services such as Roku, which is already a "converter box" and gets TV programming over the Internet? I would think all that would be needed with these boxes would be for the software to be upgraded for the new standard; they upgrade themselves daily anyway (with a provision to manually upgrade if desired), so any new software will be in place as soon as it is needed.

I hardly think Roku will go out of business in five years (or whatever) just because some new TV standard has been enacted; as I said, when ATSC 3.0 is the new standard for TV broadcasting, taking over completely from ATSC 1.0, Roku's players will keep up with the technology, with little or no interaction required from viewers. Roku cannot afford to let itself become obsolete, as there are probably millions of these players in use worldwide.

Where this idea that "watching TV will be over" eventually, if Hollywood decides to encrypt video streams, ever got started is beyond me. Most Americans do not understand or care about the technical reasons for scrambling video streams or anything else connected with television, so if this ever happens, there will very likely be a huge backlash. Americans like their TV and do not want the government to mess with it.

I do not believe, either, that Hollywood will start encrypting video any time soon. Tell me this: If Hollywood does decide to encrypt video streams, will they be prepared for the sheer number of viewers who will complain loudly and incessantly? I realize that the change to ATSC 3.0 is nothing more than a huge cash grab, but good grief, this is too much. If Hollywood does decide to encrypt video, how on earth will they expect people to watch television, or whatever it may be called in five years, after the standards change? For that matter, will there even be an "ATSC 3.0" standard, say, ten years from now? I believe the FCC just might enact five new standards in that time, each rendering the previous one obsolete and requiring viewers to buy new TVs or converter boxes each time the standards change. People on fixed incomes won't be able to afford that, and will likely stop watching TV, which the networks, local stations, and Hollywood will not like in the least.

Good grief.

Again I dont know much about Roku but maybe there will be flash updates for them to continue working like you said. .If its streaming off the internet It has nothing to do with OTA signals.As far as I know.I do agree with you latter part of your statement.Yes its a game to keep the money ball rolling.Job security for some.Maybe I 'll get a Roku someday but I dont want to pay for any subscription packages from it.

WISCOJIM
12-16-2017, 09:36 AM
Sorry, but you are still not answering my question. You worry way too much over things you have no control over. Enjoy what you have now, and quit worrying over questions that have no answers.

.

andy
12-16-2017, 11:28 AM
Sorry, but you are still not answering my question. When ATSC 3.0 is enacted, will it affect streaming video services such as Roku, which is already a "converter box" and gets TV programming over the Internet?

Streaming services like Roku won't be affected at all even if all TV broadcasts stopped tomorrow because they get their content form the Internet. They don't even have a tuner. They're just little computers with special software.

old_tv_nut
12-16-2017, 11:29 AM
Sorry, but you are still not answering my question. When ATSC 3.0 is enacted, will it affect streaming video services such as Roku, which is already a "converter box" and gets TV programming over the Internet?


The ATSC 3.0 standard only changes the way TV is broadcast over the air. On-line streaming is and has always been an entirely separate technology. NO change to the OTA standard will directly affect streaming. It's entirely separate technology.

However, there are peripheral effects. ATSC 3.0 includes features for auxiliary streams, for example. This could be data to make clickable icons as part of the program, or provide multiple selectable camera angles in sports. The question then becomes if the streaming services will carry any of the ancillary data, not if they will carry the main program or not, which will still be determined by economic/profit considerations, just as today a cable system may carry only a station's main program and not its subchannels. ATSC 3.0 also has very flexible trade-offs of data rate vs. signal robustness in the broadcast signal, so a single transmitter can emit multiple programs (like ATSC 1.0 does) except that the video resolution and signal robustness may be very different for a stream intended for mobile reception vs. an ultra high definition stream intended for use only with a good antenna. Again, when stations are broadcasting multiple streams, a streaming service may carry only certain ones, and might, for example, down-res ultra HD to regular HD.

Since the interface from the streaming service to your streaming box is QAM, carrying internet protocol data, and the interface from the box to your TV is a HDMI cable, neither of these is affected at all by the signal format that is broadcast through the air.

What gets transferred from over-the-air stations to streaming services will continue to be determined by business considerations, not technical ones.

Jeffhs
12-16-2017, 02:59 PM
The ATSC 3.0 standard only changes the way TV is broadcast over the air. On-line streaming is and has always been an entirely separate technology. NO change to the OTA standard will directly affect streaming. It's entirely separate technology.

However, there are peripheral effects. ATSC 3.0 includes features for auxiliary streams, for example. This could be data to make clickable icons as part of the program, or provide multiple selectable camera angles in sports. The question then becomes if the streaming services will carry any of the ancillary data, not if they will carry the main program or not, which will still be determined by economic/profit considerations, just as today a cable system may carry only a station's main program and not its subchannels. ATSC 3.0 also has very flexible trade-offs of data rate vs. signal robustness in the broadcast signal, so a single transmitter can emit multiple programs (like ATSC 1.0 does) except that the video resolution and signal robustness may be very different for a stream intended for mobile reception vs. an ultra high definition stream intended for use only with a good antenna. Again, when stations are broadcasting multiple streams, a streaming service may carry only certain ones, and might, for example, down-res ultra HD to regular HD.

Since the interface from the streaming service to your streaming box is QAM, carrying internet protocol data, and the interface from the box to your TV is a HDMI cable, neither of these is affected at all by the signal format that is broadcast through the air.

What gets transferred from over-the-air stations to streaming services will continue to be determined by business considerations, not technical ones.

Thank you for your explanation of ATSC 3.0. I realize the standard will not take effect until at least five years from now, but I was simply concerned, much more than I should have been, that I might have to get a new TV when the standard does take over from the current one (ATSC 1.0). My present 19-inch flat screen is almost seven years old and is used daily; it has given me such excellent service (no repairs of any kind required in all that time, and it still gives me an excellent picture using my Roku player, LG DVD player and Panasonic VCR, to say nothing of standard HD TV broadcasts) that I am not even thinking of replacing it at this point in time. My flat screen TV is an Insignia, the house brand of Best Buy. These TVs are by no means top of the line in flat screens, but they are, IMO, very good sets, and I would not hesitate to buy another if I should need to replace mine or just want a larger screen down the road.

etype2
12-16-2017, 07:31 PM
Jeffhs,

https://www.techhive.com/article/3237547/consumer-electronics/4k-broadcast-tv-coming-to-phoenix-first.html

http://www.tvtechnology.com/atsc3/0031/phoenix-to-serve-as-model-market-for-atsc-30/282269

https://www.thebroadcastbridge.com/home/category/playout-and-transmission/entry/10065/phoenix-to-become-atsc-3.0-test-market

ATSC 3.0 is in effect now, not 5 years from now. Did you read my above post? I tried to clarify for you, evidently I was not successful. (Beta testing is underway, we are applying to be a beta tester.)

Jon A.
12-16-2017, 08:27 PM
AM is the "last resort" should all other broadcast communication fail. There are hundreds of millions of operable receivers. Change that and I'll pull the plug on all domestic broadcast wireless listening.
No kidding. Remember AM radio dials with CONELRAD markings? Anyone who has watched Christine has seen them. I rest my case.

Jeffhs
12-16-2017, 09:22 PM
No kidding. Remember AM radio dials with CONELRAD markings? Anyone who has watched Christine has seen them. I rest my case.

I grew up in the Cold War era and remember very well the Conelrad icons on AM radio dials at 640 and 1240, also the Conelrad tests on radio and TV. One of my best (!) memories of the Cold War era (I'll never forget it!) is seeing a Conelrad test on TV in 1963. I was seven years old and just about jumped out of my skin the first time I saw the Conelrad symbol on our 21" Crosley TV. I did not realize this was only a Conelrad test, not "the real deal", and I ran through the living room down the long hall between there and the back of the house, scared out of my wits that the Russians were going to drop a huge bomb on our area of northeast Ohio and blow us all to kingdom come.

BTW, yes, I have seen the movie "Christine", and the tuning scale on the car's radio did in fact have the CD symbols at 640 and 1240, as did all car and home radios made between 1953 and 1963. I have a Zenith C-845 AM-FM table radio, made in 1960, that has these symbols (actually the letters "CD", not the icons themselves) at 640 and 1240 as well. These markings were placed by law on all AM radio dials so that people would not waste valuable time looking for the local Conelrad alert station when local stations went off the air per FCC regulations in effect at the time.

Another reminder of the Cold War era was a YouTube video of a Conelrad radio test gone awry, in Fort Wayne, Indiana. The station was WOWO-1190 and the DJ had just put on a record; suddenly, the sound faded to nothing and a station announcer was heard issuing a Conelrad alert. The alert turned out to have been erroneously broadcast over stations in the Fort Wayne area due to an unfortunate mixup. Do a Google search to see the entire story of this incident, which I am sure anyone who was living in the area at the time will never forget. I live 30 miles outside Cleveland, and grew up in a suburb 15 miles east of the city; however, I don't recall ever hearing any botched Conelrad alerts on local radio stations.

However, in the '70s, someone with a warped sense of humor came up with a musical version of the Conelrad (by then EBS, for Emergency Broadcast System) test, which was later banned and in fact was declared illegal. That the test was sung instead of being read from a script by an announcer was bad enough, but the worst part of that illegal Conelrad test was how it ended: "This concludes this test-----of the Emergency Broadcast System! Did you pass?" I believe that ending, and that the test was made into a singing jingle, was what finally got the jingle banned from American radio, and I don't blame the FCC for doing that, if in fact they did; after all, this was meant to be an emergency alert, meant to be read, not sung, by an announcer. IMO, whomever came up with the idea for this should have been arrested and jailed for attempting to make a mockery of the former Emergency Broadcast System. I'm sure if anyone ever tried to do this with today's Emergency Alert System (EAS), the person would in fact be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Jeffhs
12-16-2017, 09:45 PM
Jeffhs,

https://www.techhive.com/article/3237547/consumer-electronics/4k-broadcast-tv-coming-to-phoenix-first.html

http://www.tvtechnology.com/atsc3/0031/phoenix-to-serve-as-model-market-for-atsc-30/282269

https://www.thebroadcastbridge.com/home/category/playout-and-transmission/entry/10065/phoenix-to-become-atsc-3.0-test-market

ATSC 3.0 is in effect now, not 5 years from now. Did you read my above post? I tried to clarify for you, evidently I was not successful. (Beta testing is underway, we are applying to be a beta tester.)


UntiI I read your post, I didn't know that ATSC 3.0 has already been enacted and is now in use, superseding its predecessor, ATSC 1.0. I read the articles your post links to, and that just reinforces what you said: that ATSC 3.0 is being tested in the Phoenix, Arizona market on that area's television stations. If the Phoenix tests go well, other areas' TV stations may adopt the new standard, although such will be entirely voluntary, not necessarily required by law.

Jon A.
12-17-2017, 12:57 AM
I grew up in the Cold War era and remember very well the Conelrad icons on AM radio dials at 640 and 1240, also the Conelrad tests on radio and TV. One of my best (!) memories of the Cold War era (I'll never forget it!) is seeing a Conelrad test on TV in 1963. I was seven years old and just about jumped out of my skin the first time I saw the Conelrad symbol on our 21" Crosley TV. I did not realize this was only a Conelrad test, not "the real deal", and I ran through the living room down the long hall between there and the back of the house, scared out of my wits that the Russians were going to drop a huge bomb on our area of northeast Ohio and blow us all to kingdom come.
Yeesh, I can certainly see why that would be your clearest Cold War era memory, that would have been like a branding iron to the brain.

BTW, yes, I have seen the movie "Christine", and the tuning scale on the car's radio did in fact have the CD symbols at 640 and 1240, as did all car and home radios made between 1953 and 1963. I have a Zenith C-845 AM-FM table radio, made in 1960, that has these symbols (actually the letters "CD", not the icons themselves) at 640 and 1240 as well. These markings were placed by law on all AM radio dials so that people would not waste valuable time looking for the local Conelrad alert station when local stations went off the air per FCC regulations in effect at the time.
For sure, I'm just saying that Christine is likely to have introduced many people to the CONELRAD symbol, those people just wouldn't have recognized it at first. The symbol made it onto some early 1964 dials as well as deactivation came too late for design changes.

Another reminder of the Cold War era was a YouTube video of a Conelrad radio test gone awry, in Fort Wayne, Indiana. The station was WOWO-1190 and the DJ had just put on a record; suddenly, the sound faded to nothing and a station announcer was heard issuing a Conelrad alert. The alert turned out to have been erroneously broadcast over stations in the Fort Wayne area due to an unfortunate mixup. Do a Google search to see the entire story of this incident, which I am sure anyone who was living in the area at the time will never forget.
No kidding, and they would have at least needed a clean pair of shorts.

I don't know if nukes were a threat up here but my 1955 Pye radio scale lacks the CONELRAD symbol. It's a British design but was made at a plant in Ontario so who knows.

centralradio
12-17-2017, 08:46 AM
I'm waiting for a day that all the DTV's and digital cable boxes become a brick when a special virus effects and corrupts the bios/flash chips in them and make them renderless and no fix available .That would put the numnuts that came up with the system on the spot. lease we have no issues if analog was still here.

dieseljeep
12-17-2017, 12:21 PM
I grew up in the Cold War era and remember very well the Conelrad icons on AM radio dials at 640 and 1240, also the Conelrad tests on radio and TV. One of my best (!) memories of the Cold War era (I'll never forget it!) is seeing a Conelrad test on TV in 1963. I was seven years old and just about jumped out of my skin the first time I saw the Conelrad symbol on our 21" Crosley TV. I did not realize this was only a Conelrad test, not "the real deal", and I ran through the living room down the long hall between there and the back of the house, scared out of my wits that the Russians were going to drop a huge bomb on our area of northeast Ohio and blow us all to kingdom come.

BTW, yes, I have seen the movie "Christine", and the tuning scale on the car's radio did in fact have the CD symbols at 640 and 1240, as did all car and home radios made between 1953 and 1963. I have a Zenith C-845 AM-FM table radio, made in 1960, that has these symbols (actually the letters "CD", not the icons themselves) at 640 and 1240 as well. These markings were placed by law on all AM radio dials so that people would not waste valuable time looking for the local Conelrad alert station when local stations went off the air per FCC regulations in effect at the time.


.
The worst cold war incident was the Cuban Missile Crisis. I was about 17 at the time and was scared sh#tless. Many people say, "You don't know how close we came to all-out Nuclear war".
Now we have this goof-ball with the lousy haircut to worry about. :scratch2:

Electronic M
12-17-2017, 12:25 PM
I'm waiting for a day that all the DTV's and digital cable boxes become a brick when a special virus effects and corrupts the bios/flash chips in them and make them renderless and no fix available .That would put the numnuts that came up with the system on the spot. lease we have no issues if analog was still here.

Unlikely to ever happen. Most boxes are Linux based, Linux is hard to write viruses for and the cable companies are a secretive cabal of encryption and proprietary equipment fetishists....A virus would just about have to be an inside job.

dieseljeep
12-17-2017, 01:41 PM
I'm waiting for a day that all the DTV's and digital cable boxes become a brick when a special virus effects and corrupts the bios/flash chips in them and make them renderless and no fix available .That would put the numnuts that came up with the system on the spot. lease we have no issues if analog was still here.

There's a B in numbnuts! :D

dieseljeep
12-17-2017, 01:45 PM
Unlikely to ever happen. Most boxes are Linux based, Linux is hard to write viruses for and the cable companies are a secretive cabal of encryption and proprietary equipment fetishists....A virus would just about have to be an inside job.
I'm more worried about the OTA set-top boxes and the newer sets that have ATSC capability. :scratch2:

Jon A.
12-17-2017, 04:44 PM
Now we have this goof-ball with the lousy haircut to worry about. :scratch2:
I doubt you all need to worry much about him. I think a war between the US and North Korea would be something like this:

http://videokarma.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=196098&stc=1&d=1513546909

Jeffhs
12-17-2017, 09:34 PM
The chances of HDTVs, set-top boxes, DTV converter boxes, etc. being irreparably damaged or even destroyed by nuclear events and so on are extremely slim. As was mentioned, most STBs, DTV converters, and even HD televisions themselves are powered by Linux, which, again as mentioned, is all but impervious to viruses. When new software is installed on a Linux-based computer, the system always asks for the user's password before initiating the software download; these systems do not allow anything to be downloaded without a password, so, again, the chances of malicious software (malware) being downloaded to a Linux-based system are slim to nonexsistent. This system was incorporated into Linux for just that reason: to prevent rogue software from being downloaded and installed. A recent episode of the NBC-TV series "Chicago Med", in which the hospital's entire computer system was shut down by a rogue virus, was probably based on just such a worst case scenario, and may well have been where VK member Centralradio got the idea for his comments.

andy
12-18-2017, 06:37 PM
Streaming devices like Roku and Apple TV have even shorter lives than broadcast standards. After a few years, they start dropping compatibility with older models. They either don't issue needed software updates, or certain services require more computing power than the older models have.

Titan1a
12-19-2017, 12:06 AM
Meanwhile my "valve" components continue to operate without any possibility of EMP damage. Most of my 'puters are Faraday shielded and unplugged.

centralradio
12-19-2017, 02:13 AM
There's a B in numbnuts! :D

Sorry.Typo.Numbnuts.Blame the eggnog.LOL..............

centralradio
12-19-2017, 02:21 AM
Unlikely to ever happen. Most boxes are Linux based, Linux is hard to write viruses for and the cable companies are a secretive cabal of encryption and proprietary equipment fetishists....A virus would just about have to be an inside job.

Thats good news they are using Linux.They be doomed if they were using Windows.

The chances of HDTVs, set-top boxes, DTV converter boxes, etc. being irreparably damaged or even destroyed by nuclear events and so on are extremely slim. As was mentioned, most STBs, DTV converters, and even HD televisions themselves are powered by Linux, which, again as mentioned, is all but impervious to viruses. When new software is installed on a Linux-based computer, the system always asks for the user's password before initiating the software download; these systems do not allow anything to be downloaded without a password, so, again, the chances of malicious software (malware) being downloaded to a Linux-based system are slim to nonexsistent. This system was incorporated into Linux for just that reason: to prevent rogue software from being downloaded and installed. A recent episode of the NBC-TV series "Chicago Med", in which the hospital's entire computer system was shut down by a rogue virus, was probably based on just such a worst case scenario, and may well have been where VK member Centralradio got the idea for his comments.

Never seen the show.Chicago Med.Not into current TV shows.Just thinking ahead what could happen with anything that is digital.It does not take too much to screw it up.Just dont trust it.

WISCOJIM
12-19-2017, 02:31 AM
A recent episode of the NBC-TV series "Chicago Med", in which the hospital's entire computer system was shut down by a rogue virus, was probably based on just such a worst case scenario, and may well have been where VK member Centralradio got the idea for his comments.The plot of that episode was dealing with ransomware, which is very real and has created serious havoc already. Not just a TV story, this stuff is real life.

.

Jeffhs
12-19-2017, 01:55 PM
Streaming devices like Roku and Apple TV have even shorter lives than broadcast standards. After a few years, they start dropping compatibility with older models. They either don't issue needed software updates, or certain services require more computing power than the older models have.

How many years do these players usually last before the software becomes obsolete and/or the processor becomes too slow to keep up with current standards? I upgraded to Roku 2 from Roku 1 about a year or so ago. Both players are still working very well (I tried my Roku 1 with my 22-year-old Zenith Sentry 2 TV the other day, and it still works great), although my Roku 1 is very slow compared to the newer one. If push comes to shove and I must get a new Roku next year, I will (I might upgrade even sooner, as the Roku Streaming Stick is even cheaper than what I paid for my Roku 2), but it seems I will be stuck in an endless cycle of updates--in another year or two, the Roku Streaming Stick will be rendered obsolete and I'll have to buy a new one (even though the old one may still be working perfectly well, if slowly), the player will work a couple more years, and then...here we go again.

Oh well. :sigh: As I stated earlier, the Roku Streaming Stick will cost me even less than a cable subscription (I don't have cable any longer, but must at least have a cable account so the Spectrum/former Time Warner Cable TV app will receive local TV stations), and I may not have to upgrade again for at least a couple of years, or whenever Roku declares the Streaming Stick obsolete (however, they probably will have a newer version of the stick available by then, so the chances are I will probably have nothing to worry about). If I didn't have a DVD player, I'd upgrade to the Roku version that has a universal TV remote, but that remote presently won't operate auxiliary devices such as DVDs; besides, I already have an RCA universal remote that has operated my entire video system, including the Roku, flawlessly for the last couple of years, so having a universal Roku remote would be redundant, to say the least.

One nice thing about the Roku players, IMO, is the basic ones won't empty your wallet and so can be replaced with newer ones at minimal cost, although the more advanced ones go for over $100. I think a lot of Roku owners who have version 4 and up won't be too happy with having to spend another $100+ when the units eventually go out of date.

Well, that's the way it goes, I guess.

Jon A.
12-19-2017, 07:32 PM
How many years do these players usually last before the software becomes obsolete and/or the processor becomes too slow to keep up with current standards?
I was thinking how it's the same thing with modern computers, after about a decade using them to ride the information superhighway is like driving a car with a plugged cat. Of course the software upgrades cost more than the computers which is one reason I'd prefer to do most other things on a pre-candyland Power Mac given the choice.

andy
12-19-2017, 09:41 PM
How many years do these players usually last before the software becomes obsolete and/or the processor becomes too slow to keep up with current standards? ....

While, the Roku 1 still works, it has limited compatibility. For example, HBO no longer works on the Roku 1. I'n not sure which other services stopped working.

My Tivo series 3 still works fine as a DVR, but it has lost most of the streaming services, it can no longer be programmed via their web site, or app, and Tivo won't let new customers activate them.