Well, this is the last straw...

[Jeffhs]

Have any of you heard from your area's cable-TV provider that they are going to force their subscribers to use cable boxes in order to receive anything at all? I was talking to a customer service representative at Time Warner Cable yesterday and was told that, some time before this year is over, they are going to be doing just that.

To add insult to injury, this representative also told me that the day will come when OTA TV antennas will not work anymore, and everyone, with no exceptions, will be forced to get cable and to use a box if they want TV reception.

How on earth can cable TV operators like Time Warner get away with that? More important, how can they say that regular TV antennas will not work any longer after a certain date? TV stations will be broadcasting their signals over the air for years to come, so I don't see how the cable company can tell me that I will no longer be able to use an antenna after such-and-such a date.

Time Warner Cable is in the process of merging with Comcast; however, they have already adopted one of CC's policies (to eventually force everyone to use cable boxes), and I don't like it one bit, since I do not want a cable box on my TV. It upset me so much that I ordered a Roku streaming video box for my TV, and may well cancel my cable service when (or shortly after) the Roku box arrives.

As the subject line says, this is the last straw. When my cable provider tells me I will not be able to use a TV antenna to receive OTA television signals from local stations after a certain date (which was not mentioned by the representative I spoke with), I have to wonder. Where do these people get off saying things like that? Do they not understand that TV stations still broadcast signals over the air, and those signals are still receivable by the same kind of television antennas people have used since the medium's beginnings in the late 1940s?

The representative I spoke with also told me that this is an FCC rule, that all cable companies will be forcing their subscribers to use cable boxes and will be unable to use TV antennas. Is this true, or is Time Warner Cable just telling me that for no reason other than to upset me enough so that I will cancel my service?

[Kamakiri]

I don't think stations would have made such a substantial investment in digital broadcasting if there were going to be NO OTA programming. Think about it. More and more people are ditching cable altogether, which is where the network affiliates have the advantage.

As far as Time Warner, I've got them too. I still have analog cable through the lower channels, up to about 65 or so. If they end up going all digital requiring a box, that's fine.....I'll just hook up my agile modulator to a box, and little will change in the way I view TV.

[colectorad]

Scare tactics.

[zeno]

Its BS to get you to quietly take the box. Probably all
scripted & read off the computer. If OTA was going away
you would here about it everywheres. Stations sell for BIG
bucks in a good market.
You could make a case that they will go away but no time soon
& not by the FCC.

73 Zeno

[WISCOJIM]

Jeff - cable companies are businesses. The goal of a business is not to do things for free, it is to make money.

If the FCC no longer requires them to provide analog service to homes, why should they? If they drop analog service, the FCC rules require the cable provider to offer set top boxes "either for free or at an affordable cost".

If you want free OTA, use an antenna.

Yes, it is probably only a matter of time before OTA goes away, but as of now there is no current legislation to end it. It will probably be more of a cost vs. demand issue. Although there has been a recent movement away from cable and satellite TV, it has not been a huge migration into OTA viewing. The big move is to streaming from the internet.

http://www.fcc.gov/guides/advisory-a...on-subscribers

.

[centralradio]

CC cable went to all digital here in Dec 2012.They gave me 2 dta boxed for free and charge me 50 cents a piece for the other 3 plus the big box for about $2.50.

I dumped the extended basic and just have about 25 channels for about $33 bucks.I mostly stream TV online from the channels I dont get anymore and stuff from the local stations and networks.

[Boobtubeman]

I remember a Dishnet rep trying to convince me that $250 a year to get VH1classic was a better deal than paying $25 a year to receive it Via my 10' dish... Of course he was making $75 a person to tell them ANYTHING to convert to Dishnet... I got a good laugh out of the whole conversation as he tried RELENTLESSLY to convince me to buy his turd...

SR

[Dude111]

Good for you for not giving in!!

[Beachboy]

Our locally-owned small town telephone/cable/internet company recently ditched the analog system and went to requiring everyone to have cable boxes. Obviously, one way to collect an additional $8 per month per TV hooked to cable. But worse, the cable boxes do not have an RF output, only composite and component (in addition to HDMI for those opting for HD service). Thus, anyone with an older TV with RF-only inputs are immediately out of luck. Yeah, I know you can get an RF adapter, but those are getting harder to find, and how many older people will junk their CRT TV's and be forced into buying a new flat screen model? Another thing to consider --- my cable boxes appear to use around 25 watts round the clock, and with 3 of those running in my house, that adds up to another 54 KWH of electrical usage per month.

[Jeffhs]

After thinking about it a couple of days, I've decided that I will keep my cable for the time being. However, a day or so ago, I ordered a Roku streamimg video box directly from the company's website, http://www.roku.com, and will use it to get programming I would ordinarily watch on the cable. I see on the Roku website that the service has most of the channels my cable service (Time Warner) carries, plus a few channels exclusive to Roku itself. The company says its streaming video boxes are "America's favorite" video player, and I will be waiting for the box to arrive here (it should be here some time this week) so I can see if these players are really that good.

This will be my first experience with streaming video as opposed to cable, so it will be interesting to see the differences, if any, between the two services. One I think I'll like is that many of Roku's channels are free, whereas cable rates increase every year. There is no fee to own the Roku box; after the initial purchase ($49.95), plus any accessories purchased with it (HDMI cable, etc.) the box is yours to keep, with no other fees whatsoever. However, as Beachboy noted, the HD cable boxes and even the small digital transfer adapters from the cable providers do have a rental fee after the first year. In my area the rental fee on the DTAs is $2.75 per month, whereas the large HD cable boxes are $11 and change per month.

I was not aware that the newest HD cable boxes have only composite video and HDMI outputs, with no RF antenna connector as the older boxes have. I wonder if this is a cost-cutting measure, or if it is a method the cable providers are using to force their subscribers to upgrade from CRT to flat screen. I think it's the latter, as the older CRT sets do not work with digital signals without a cable box or an ATSC->NTSC converter box and an antenna, and are thus obsolete. The Roku box has composite video outputs and comes with a composite cable for use with older CRT sets having these jacks, but the HDMI cable is not included and must be purchased separately.

I had no idea that the cable boxes use as much electricity as Beachboy noted. Being solid-state, I would expect these boxes to use very little power, but if you have several of them operating around the clock (or at least several hours a day), the power usage will add up in a hurry. I think BB mentioned he has perhaps four or more of these boxes running a good part of the day, so it follows the electricity bill will be higher at the end of the month as opposed to having only one box, used only a few hours a day.

Like it or not, that's the way cable TV is going--full digital, with the subscribers being forced to use cable boxes to receive anything (just connecting the cable to the antenna port on the back of your TV won't work anymore in many areas; VK member radiotvnut in Missouri can vouch for that, as that state's cable service, from Comcast, has been fully digital, no analog whatsoever, for quite some time). If you don't like that (I don't), there are alternatives, such as the Roku box and Apple TV's streaming video box, as I mentioned. However, for folks with older TVs having only coaxial antenna connectors or 300-ohm terminals, some of the cable boxes will not work since they do not have RF outputs, only composite and/or HDMI. This will, again, pretty much force these people to either go without TV or to get a new flat screen. The newest flat-screen TVs have 4K video resolution and even curved screens (think Samsung), so upgrading from an old CRT set to a flat set may be the best bet if the old TV is starting to show its age or simply doesn't work well (or at all) anymore.

My Insignia 19" flat TV is almost four years old and works great; I expect to have no trouble with it when the new Roku box arrives. Who knows, I may decide some day to drop cable, but for now I'll keep it and use it alongside the video streaming box to pick up channels the Roku box does not get. I'll post my test results here or perhaps in a new thread. I think I'm going to like the Roku box, though. It has received glowing reviews, which is a big reason I decided to purchase one in the first place. A video streamer that has been referred to as "America's favorite" by the very company that manufactures it, based on rave reviews, can't be all bad.

[earlyfilm]

Originally Posted by Jeffhs

Have any of you heard from your area's cable-TV provider that they are going to force their subscribers to use cable boxes in order to receive anything at all? I was talking to a customer service representative at Time Warner Cable yesterday and was told that, some time before this year is over, they are going to be doing just that.

Wow! You are lucky to have had analog TV and clear QAM this long. in most places analog cable is already dead and it has been dead since the OTA programing changed to Digital.

If any one complains of analog TV interference to their newly purchased airwaves, the FCC forces the source, usually a cable company still using analog, to cease causing the interference. Now, the FCC does not say they have to discontinue analog, but they do have to stop this stray interference. Remember back in the analog era, when one could point a broadband antenna at a cable junction point and using a cable ready TV or VCR often pick up their signal free? The cable company could replace their analog system with a better shielded one, but it is much less expensive to simply convert to digital and keep using the old wiring.

The real reason for switching to only digital outputs on the cable box, is to stop the customers from copying the programs, unless they purchase their expensive cable boxes. Now their expensive boxes only time delay, they do not allow the user to make a copy for their own use.

As for using Roku as a solution, that requires having high speed internet. There places within 80 miles of Washington, DC where the only internet available is still dial up! We have become addicted to cable. . . . . . .

Originally Posted by Jeffhs

To add insult to injury, this representative also told me that the day will come when OTA TV antennas will not work anymore, and everyone, with no exceptions, will be forced to get cable and to use a box if they want TV reception.

This has happened where I live. Before the digital conversion the ABC and CBS network stations were the strongest signals that I had. On the day of the conversion both were gone. They are two of the rare TV stations that made the choice to keep their analog channels, 7 and 9, and now using the most powerful mid-band TV antenna that will fit in my attic, and I have a two story house, they cannot be received.

James

[WISCOJIM]

Originally Posted by earlyfilm

Wow! You are lucky to have had analog TV and clear QAM this long. in most places analog cable is already dead and it has been dead since the OTA programing changed to Digital.

Not quite. The change to digital OTA broadcasting was in 2009, but the FCC still required cable companies to continue to offer the analog version of the local channels until 2012.

Originally Posted by earlyfilm

This has happened where I live. Before the digital conversion the ABC and CBS network stations were the strongest signals that I had. On the day of the conversion both were gone. They are two of the rare TV stations that made the choice to keep their analog channels, 7 and 9, and now using the most powerful mid-band TV antenna that will fit in my attic, and I have a two story house, they cannot be received.

You made the wrong assumption here. Channels 7 (WJLA) and 9 (WUSA) did not remain analog. They both went digital. What they did was elect to keep their broadcasts in the VHF spectrum on channels 7 & 9 rather than make the switch to UHF channels. Most previously analog VHF stations switched to the UHF band for their digital broadcasts, which is the "rare" part of those particular station's choices.

.

[WISCOJIM]

Originally Posted by Jeffhs

I ordered a Roku streamimg video box directly from the company's website, http://www.roku.com, and will use it to get programming I would ordinarily watch on the cable.

Be aware that a lot of the programming you had to pay for on cable, you will also have to pay for to watch on a Roku box. You may not be able to get your favorite programs for free.

.

[andy]

...

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by WISCOJIM

Be aware that a lot of the programming you had to pay for on cable, you will also have to pay for to watch on a Roku box. You may not be able to get your favorite programs for free.

.

Please reread my post. I said "most" of Roku's channels are free; I never said "all". (Please go to www.roku.com to verify this.) I do not watch any of the premium or pay-per-view channels on my cable. The only fee I pay to Time Warner is the monthly rate for the service.