Breaking news: Senate approves 4 month delay in DTV transition

[andy]

000

[MRX37]

I don't know, but it'll give us some breathing room probably. More time to save up for a convertor box.

[mhardy6647]

It's just about reached the level of farce now, hasn't it?

[slow_jazz]

Why doesn't this surprise me....

[Carmine]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!



OK, I think this is funny-as-hella!



The whole idea was stupid.



This should have been market-driven. This is what happens when regulators are bought & paid for by lobbyists.



I could care less that the mega-monopoly-telecoms won't be able to sell me more subscription BS mobile TV crap, nor that China won't be able to dump more of their disposable garbage into our landfills.



I know it's only temporary... It still makes me laugh, and/or smile.



I have the converter boxes. They suck.



When the last of the $40 coupons expire, those pieces of junk will retail for $19.99, but for now Best-Buy, Funai and the Chi-comms are getting rich from our tax dollars. (same lobbyists that pushed this stupid mandate)





Anything that shows the stupidity of eliminating ALL of the TV spectrum is cool with me. As others have stated, VHF should have been kept and given to a special class of low-power ham-type operators.

[MRX37]

Originally Posted by Carmine

As others have stated, VHF should have been kept and given to a special class of low-power ham-type operators.

I like this idea.

[wa2ise]

Originally Posted by Carmine

Anything that shows the stupidity of eliminating ALL of the TV spectrum is cool with me. As others have stated, VHF should have been kept and given to a special class of low-power ham-type operators.

Actually, hams occasionally use part of their 70cm band for TV work. Around 432Mhz. Which could be received by a TV set set to "cable" mode, channel 59 or so.

[NowhereMan 1966]

The government could mess up a two car funeral so I'm not surprised. If I had my way, I'd let the market decide after allocating so many channels to DTV and keeping so many channels analogue. Better yet, TV stations would just use unused channels for their DTV broadcasts like they do now.

However, they don't listen to people like me, I'm just a poor working class, Pittsburgh Hunky who delivers auto parts and likes electronics and role playing games in my space time.

Since it is a done deal now, let's just do it.

[Carmine]

Originally Posted by NowhereMan 1966

The government could mess up a two car funeral so I'm not surprised. If I had my way, I'd let the market decide after allocating so many channels to DTV and keeping so many channels analogue. Better yet, TV stations would just use unused channels for their DTV broadcasts like they do now.

However, they don't listen to people like me, I'm just a poor working class, Pittsburgh Hunky who delivers auto parts and likes electronics and role playing games in my space time.

Since it is a done deal now, let's just do it.

I basically agree with everything you have said, except I think anything that highlights the stupidity of this mandate-monopoly is good.

[NowhereMan 1966]

Originally Posted by Carmine

I basically agree with everything you have said, except I think anything that highlights the stupidity of this mandate-monopoly is good.

Agreed, I'm just saying that since that was the plan anyways, even if many disagree with it, like in a football game, the QB might call a play you might not like but you have to follow and make it work. I think the first extension from 2006 to 2009 was a good idea, but you can only kick this can down the road only so far.

[jhal]

Hell, by the time June 17th (or whatever the date is) rolls around, most of the converter boxes will be broken or starting to break. They are so cheap, with their hot running little power supplies, that people will be wanting another set of coupons to replace them.

[Brian]

The gov't has a reason for the box program and a problem as a result of the failure. In the Constitution there is a little clause related to comdemnation and just compensation. With the shutting off of the frequencies, the citizen has been depived of his property through a taking of the use of the television. By offering the box certificate program it has a defense against a claim of taking through government action by millions of owners. The problem is twofold: 1) the boxes are selling for more than the coupon amount and hence there is still the isue of compensation and with the failure of so many not using the coupon for whatever reason whether the lack of boxes, the lack of education or the expiration of the coupon, the defensive position is weakened.

While the extension of the program and delay in turning off the channels may be to give the public more time and allow the coupon system to work, there is another reason for Congress to consider extending the timeframe. Imagine a couple of hundred million persons deciding to ask the Federal courts to have the Federal government pay for the loss of their televisions. Not that would be an employment stimulus act for so many out of work lawyers.

[NowhereMan 1966]

Originally Posted by Brian

The gov't has a reason for the box program and a problem as a result of the failure. In the Constitution there is a little clause related to comdemnation and just compensation. With the shutting off of the frequencies, the citizen has been depived of his property through a taking of the use of the television. By offering the box certificate program it has a defense against a claim of taking through government action by millions of owners. The problem is twofold: 1) the boxes are selling for more than the coupon amount and hence there is still the isue of compensation and with the failure of so many not using the coupon for whatever reason whether the lack of boxes, the lack of education or the expiration of the coupon, the defensive position is weakened.

While the extension of the program and delay in turning off the channels may be to give the public more time and allow the coupon system to work, there is another reason for Congress to consider extending the timeframe. Imagine a couple of hundred million persons deciding to ask the Federal courts to have the Federal government pay for the loss of their televisions. Not that would be an employment stimulus act for so many out of work lawyers.

Good points there, I wonder if they have to compensate the TV stations since they have to buy digital equipment and so on. I doubt they would do that although I think there could be a backdoor method like being able to claim the loss on their taxes and so on. I'm not getting political, just commenting on how the mechanics of such a system should or would work.

[richms]

The frequancy is not the users property tho, its the broadcasters, and they are compensated in additional spectrum to use.

Government should only exist to maximize the use of the limited resource that is UHF spectrum, and the best way to do that is to put the most content in it which is digital. Sadly you are stuck with mpeg2 which is vastly inferior to mpeg4 but I doubt that a push that would render everyones existing digital tvs obsolete wouldnt have gone down at all well.

Thankfully here in NZ they waited and all the terrestrial digital is h264 and in HD only for the channels that choose to be HD, so there isnt the dual-casting like in Australia of a HD and SD version of the same channel.

[radiotvnut]

Well, it looks like our local ABC affiliate did a last minute flip-flop. They said on the 5 o'clock news that they were keeping analog "indefinitely" because of the converter box funding shortage and because the FCC was wanting at least one station per market to keep analog for emergency purposes.

I don't know what the local NBC, CBS, or PBS stations plan to do.