NTSC shut down in 2009

[Captain Video]

Originally Posted by Adam

What's wrong with living in the past? I've been trying to do so for some time now, I drive a '72 Buick, watch a '61 Zenith, and I still got one of those rotary phones.
As far as the digital TVs, I have no plans of ever buying a new TV, they're just not for me. Most of my daily watching sets are from the 60s, most of the time I watch b/w, but I have a few old color sets that get a very good picture when I want to watch in color.

I second your thoughts. I have a 1976 VW Beetle, I have two rotary phones ( a bakelite one from the 50's and a plastic one from the 70's, which I use for nostalgic reasons, since is exactly like the one we had when I was a little boy ), and the only reason I don't use any of my tube TV's is due to lack of funds to do a proper restoration - but I do however still use a 1986 set that is mine since I was 9. 20 years of ininterrupted use! I think that there's really nothing wrong with living in the past. It's a matter of personal choice, and we are also preserving things for future generations.

If a lot of people are satisfied with NTSC I don't think it should be extinguished. If equally a lot of people want to go digital, I don't know why the two systems couldn't co-exist. Here in Brazil we will start the transition to digital open the air TV next year. We will use the Japanese standard, because ( our government has told us ) that it is the only standard that allows for "mobility" - to watch TV in a car or a train. Is there any truth in this claim? Aren't the American or European digital standards also capable of receiving good images while the viewer is moving?

We will also completely shut down analog TV after some time. That is something that makes me feel uncomfortable, because I know that with digital either you will have good quality of image, or no image at all. I had a Directv subscription a few years ago, and I remenber that during storms we had complete loss of signal. Sometimes, even a very cloudy sky was enough to cripple the signal.

[vintagecollect]

...

[colorfixer]

Just go to any box store website and search for an ATSC/QAM set top box.. I was unable to locate even one. Sams' Club was the only one, and alas they are out of stock. Best Buys, Berzerkit City, Sprawlmart, nada, nicht, nothing.

Went into a retailer locally who promptly told me I had to buy satellite or a new TV "'cos dey ain't got no mo' tv transmitters'". Hmmmn.

I find it entertaining that there are so many "HD ready" sets still available in Canada without digital tuners, and with no set top boxes in the box stores, even in Washington, these things will be as useless as tits on a bull?

I just won't buy one of these things unless I actually get to see it in person and see it work.

[fujifrontier]

me too

[andy]

I read something a year or two ago about how major manufacturers are reluctant to sell HDTV tuners because it directly competes with the sale of new sets. There are some off brand tuners at Fry's, but they were still around $250 last time I looked.

[Carmine]

We will use the Japanese standard, because ( our government has told us ) that it is the only standard that allows for "mobility" - to watch TV in a car or a train. Is there any truth in this claim? Aren't the American or European digital standards also capable of receiving good images while the viewer is moving?

I believe the Japanese HD system is analog, which would explain why it works.

(I was going to say "moblie", but then I realized I had said enough, lol)

[colorfixer]

The idea of boxes killing TV sales off, now that makes sense! But, for the past few years, the HD displays they've sold the poor suck -er customers won't really work as HD tvs without a HD source.

K, now get this: the box stores up here all sell digital cable terminals from the cable company (and motorola/gi), and the Canadian version of Dishnetwork, Expressvu's HD receiver.

Why these and no "free to air" ATSC boxes at the big box stores? The sales staff/store receives commissions on every subscriber terminal/receiver sold, and residuals (a small % of your bill goes to the retailer who suckered you into the terminal). There is no *incentive* to sell you one, as there would be with a subscriber terminal, and or the lesser prize -a new tv. What will screw them in the end is that the ATSC tuners are now standard equipment in the current year's tv.

Until someone at Fry's (tried that one eagerly as I read the prior post, plus I like wandering their seas of cheese for NTE components), BB, CC, or ? figure out that people like me would rather watch a crt, and have already "early adopted" an HD capable display (my 40" wega in the living room), or own a "legacy" display (new vernacular for analog tv), I guess, I'll be the new minority.

In Canada, Walmart, and the other big discount small business killers have shelves of chinese tvs all without ATSC tuners. Only Walmart has HD tvs with digital tuners, which they have no doubt imported sets originally destined for the U.S. Not a single SD or "legacy" (I hate that term) TV I have seen there have an ATSC tuner.

Here's the reason:
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/inter.../sf08702e.html
and
http://testunix.mediaforce1.com/CDTV/en/index.htm

How Long will Conventional Analogue TV Signals Be Available?

Since the transition to digital TV will take a long time to complete, you'll be able to watch analogue broadcasting for years. As a point of reference, it took 13 years for sales of color televisions to surpass black-and-white sales. In comparison, digital television represents a change of even greater complexity. The earliest that Canadian analogue stations may be allowed to shut down has yet to be determined but it is likely to be much beyond the year 2009, when analogue television broadcasting is expected to terminate in the US. Because analogue broadcasting will be with us for some time, current models of HDTV receivers also receive and display analogue TV signals.

[Bobby Brady]

[QUOTE=Captain Video]I second your thoughts. I have a 1976 VW Beetle, I have two rotary phones ( a bakelite one from the 50's and a plastic one from the 70's, which I use for nostalgic reasons, since is exactly like the one we had when I was a little boy ), and the only reason I don't use any of my tube TV's is due to lack of funds to do a proper restoration - but I do however still use a 1986 set that is mine since I was 9. 20 years of ininterrupted use! I think that there's really nothing wrong with living in the past. It's a matter of personal choice, and we are also preserving things for future generations.
QUOTE]

I have been accused of "living in the past" for driving two different '74 Toronados, both having 8-track tape decks, that are original looking down to the exact style of Firestone tire used in '74. I have a neat '72 RCA home entertainment center that I use to play records like Gary Pucket's greatest hits; Aretha Franklin; Roy Orbisson; The Beatles; The Carpenters; Ozzy Osbourne's Crazy Train; Robert Goulet; Connie Francis; Vicki Carr; Porter Wagner and Dolly Parton; Jerry Butler; Andy Williams; The original soundtrack to Hair; The O'jays; Cat Stevens; Marvin Gaye; Dion; The Stylistics; The Fleetwoods; Bob Dylan; Elvis; Wayne Newton; Charlie Rich; Fleetwood Mac; Glenn Cambpell; Bill Haley and the Comets; Joe Cocker; Tammy Wynette; Frank Sinatra; Patsy Cline; Billy Swan's I can help; plus more others than I can remember now. I check out new music but every good new song is a rehashed old one that is never quite as good. I will not use a cell phone except when absolutely needed as I believe the fact that it warms the head is enough for me not to trust the "independant studies". I always try to talk about the past to learn how best to live now and to enjoy how much better more people were towards eachother. I even almost bought some vintage, lovely, colored toilet paper for when guests come over! However, I watch a 27" Sony for general use. I have an 8-track tape adapter to connect my Sirius radio in my car. I use the Sirius on my '72 RCA to hear Howard Stern.
I keep all the good from the past for my own comfort and pleasure but also to demonstrate to people the fact that all the stuff we needed was made by the early 70's and since then people have been "re-inventing the wheel" over and over and over again.
I try to get people to consider that maybe, just maybe, it would be worthwhille to stop following fashionable trends for long enough to do more for our fellow man.
Now, I hope that is not considered political as I have been warned that we are not to discuss religion or politics or anything that would not be wellcome in your average church.
In case I get banned for saying too much I just want most people here to know I appreciate thier intentions and I wish them well in this wild world we all are responsible for.

[Captain Video]

[QUOTE=Bobby Brady
I I will not use a cell phone except when absolutely needed as I believe the fact that it warms the head is enough for me not to trust the "independant studies". [/QUOTE]

I never had any wish or desire to have a cell phone...I simply have no need for one. I only have a cell phone because my wife has given me one, because she really thinks I must have one.

For me, the only really great modern thing, that I think is really a great invention, is the DVD player.

[andy]

Don't get me started about cell phones. I'm the only person under 30 I know who doesn't carry one. I have a pre-paid one that was a gift from my brother, but I hardly ever use it. With a little planning, it is possible to get through life without constantly talking on the cell phone.

I have an original Motorola brick phone that I would activate if I could, but no one will activate analog phones any more. I'd love to see people's reactions to it.

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by Captain Video

I never had any wish or desire to have a cell phone...I simply have no need for one. I only have a cell phone because my wife has given me one, because she really thinks I must have one.

For me, the only really great modern thing, that I think is really a great invention, is the DVD player.

I don't need a cell phone either, but I got one some three years ago for emergencies--say, if my landline goes down or if I am away from home and need to call for help. I have Cingular wireless with thousands of rollover minutes I have never used, and probably will not use before they expire at the end of the year.

I think DVD players are great. I have one, an inexpensive CyberHome unit, that I got as a Christmas present almost two years ago. The only thing I don't like about it is the fact that it will not work with my All For One universal remote. Shortly after getting the player, I joined Netflix.com and signed up for the 3-a-month plan (their second cheapest). My plans for when the analog TV stations go dark in just over two years are to get basic cable for the TV (for news and sports) and use the DVD for movies. I don't subscribe to those high-priced cable movie channels, either; never have, since I've had cable (well, I did have HBO for one month back in the '80s, but discontinued it when I found the programming was not to my liking). No need to have HBO or any of cable's pay movie channels now anyway, with my DVD player and Netflix.

BTW, that brings up an interesting question. With DVDs being so popular these days, I wonder if they might eventually put the pay-cable movie channels out of business.

[Pete Deksnis]

Originally Posted by Carmine

...my friends have a joint-owned primitive hunting cabin up in the woods... including an old 25" console RCA. As it stands, you can pull a few stations pretty decent with an antenna, but with all/nothing digital that isn't going to happen.

Not just in the boonies. The big city has the same problem. They're a zillion ATSC transmitters in and around NYC. The biggest names can give ATSC a bad name. Here's a page on my site; the result of frustrated ATSC viewing over the years.

http://home.att.net/~pldexnis/potpou...TSCvsNTSC.html

Pete

[Chad Hauris]

I don't see anything wrong with cell phones: mine has helped out a lot especially while traveling.
Personally I enjoy being able to use old TV's, cars, etc. but I would not like to live in the past! I can remember times when I could only pick up one TV channel, had no internet access, cell phone, air conditioning, satellite TV, DVD player, microwave oven and probably other things and I would not want to give up their convenience now that I have them.

[Captain Video]

Originally Posted by Pete Deksnis

Not just in the boonies. The big city has the same problem. They're a zillion ATSC transmitters in and around NYC. The biggest names can give ATSC a bad name. Here's a page on my site; the result of frustrated ATSC viewing over the years.

http://home.att.net/~pldexnis/potpou...TSCvsNTSC.html

Pete

The signal quality of that ATSC broadcast gave me the creeps! I was reminded of the time when I was a Directv subscriber and that sort of thing happened in a cloudy or rainy day...makes me thing what is in store for us down here when digital TV starts next year...

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by Pete Deksnis

Not just in the boonies. The big city has the same problem. They're a zillion ATSC transmitters in and around NYC. The biggest names can give ATSC a bad name. Pete

Pete, I live in a small town 35 miles from downtown Cleveland. The TV transmitters serving the area are about ten or 15 miles further west of town. However, I have Time-Warner digital cable hooked up to a 19" RCA CTC185 TV, and get excellent pictures on all stations. I wonder about one station, however (WKYC channel 3, the NBC affiliate for Cleveland and northeast Ohio), that claims to broadcast its news in high-definition (the station makes a big deal of it every now and then, and always all but screams it out just prior to the start of every newscast, 6, 7 and 11 p.m., not to mention its so-called "midday" newscast which airs at 11:30 a.m. five days a week). The picture on my set looks just like the standard 4:3 TV we've all been watching for over fifty years, not in letterbox format, so yes, I do wonder what on earth they mean when they say the broadcast is presented in HD. The station even puts a transparent logo in the lower right corner of all TV screens in its area; the logo plainly shows the number 3, a small peacock logo next to the number, and the letters HD to the right of the peacock. If this is their idea of broadcasting their news "in HD" I have to wonder just how they are doing it.

I do not intend to get a high-definition TV any time soon, for the reasons you mentioned and because flat-panel sets are not all that reliable, not to mention that my present set is working extremely well, despite the fact that it is seven years old. (I also have a Zenith Sentry 2 19" TV that has 11.5 years on it and also makes an excellent picture, with its original CRT.)

I have read in various articles on TV technical websites and even in discussion forums such as AudioKarma.org that LCD sets lose about 50 percent of their brightness within five years, plasma sets are prone to heat-related problems, and DLP FPs develop mechanical problems after a given length of time, not to mention the fact that, since the video driver ICs are molded into the cable that connects an LCD/plasma panel to the main chassis, if even one of those chips goes bad, or even if the cable develops a short or a bad connection, etc., the entire panel must be replaced.

High-definition television, IMHO, has a long way to go before it is, as the expression goes, really "ready for prime time", if it ever will be. It certainly isn't yet. Most people still don't have it and may not for some time; I personally know only one person in my area (my barber) who has HDTV in his house. He says he likes it, but as bad as some HD signals are, even with cable (he has Time-Warner cable, as does everyone in northeast Ohio these days) I doubt if he gets really good HD reception on more than one or two over-air stations.

I agree with you that there is no excuse for a network flagship station such as New York's WNBC to broadcast such terribly substandard HD signals to its affiliates as it apparently does. (I wonder if the other network flagship stations' HD feeds are as bad.) Is the picture of The Today Show on your website from an over-the-air HD broadcast or from a cable signal? If the station's own network feed is poor, I guess that doesn't really matter, but I'm curious. However, since WNBC is the flagship station for the entire NBC television network, it has a duty and a responsibility to supply the network with the best HD signal it is capable of producing. Without getting controversial about it, I think NBC has gone so far downhill in all areas, not just signal quality, since GE bought it from RCA two decades ago that it is not funny. The only program I really follow on NBC anymore as a rule, other than NBC Nightly News, is Law and Order; even at that I watch the cable reruns of the show on Bravo, TNT, etc. more than I watch the current season's episodes.