Digital Dilema

Southern Man said:
You must have a crappy converter box, or you were too stupid to reprogram your TV for the new channels. When I got mine I hooked it up, reprogrammed and I got more stations, all at much better quality. And I used my old antenna, a $30 indoor thing sold by radio shack. *shrug*
Click to expand...

Factoid. the digital signals to not travel as far or something.
There is no fuzzy picture that you used to watch, just no picture at all if you had a bit fuzzy analog channels before.
 
Demwit said:
Factoid. the digital signals to not travel as far or something.
There is no fuzzy picture that you used to watch, just no picture at all if you had a bit fuzzy analog channels before.
Click to expand...

No, not at all. The channels are quite resistant to going out. If you had white noise, it goes black.
 
Watermark said:
LOL @ proles who can't afford cable
Click to expand...

Ahhh, but that is the point isn't it? Since all those wide screen TV's weren't flying off the shelves, and folks weren't buying into cable like the projections indicated, you now have all the retailers making a little profit selling those converters and sophisticated antennas.
 
Damocles said:
Get cable and welcome to the 20th. Some day you might want to go all the way into the new century.
Click to expand...

Stop and think for a moment: if digital is so damned superior to analog, then why would the military want to use it at all?

See, that was the original proposal by Slick Willy when he put forth this whole scheme......sell the analog broadcast "space" to the military and such.

It just doesn't make sense.

As for the snarky "20th century" crack......why should I have to pay for something that I've done without for decades WITHOUT COMPLAINT? I use to get a kick out of hearing people bitch about "nothing on" television even though they had cable.....or finding out that the adult movie they wanted to watch has been "edited" under censorship laws. See, I wasn't a sucker for the next shiny thing out there...but it seems that the collusion between gov't and big business are determined to make me one.
 
Southern Man said:
You must have a crappy converter box, or you were too stupid to reprogram your TV for the new channels. When I got mine I hooked it up, reprogrammed and I got more stations, all at much better quality. And I used my old antenna, a $30 indoor thing sold by radio shack. *shrug*
Click to expand...

You are a prime example of an ignorant man who is proud of it. There is an entire world outside your little sphere of existence...perhaps you should ask for details before braying like an ass about things you know absolutely nothing about.

Here, let me spell it out for you: I live in a suburb of New York City.....before 9/11 my analog television had NO MAJOR PROBLEMS. After 9/11, the majority of broadcast stations relocated to the Empire State (transmissions lost from the Twin Towers). The MOST problems I had were a loss of signal from the broadcast station once in awhile, and some static on bad weather nights that resulted in just a simple antenna adjustment. Since the "conversion", I end up either perfect pictures or a series of breakups, loss of signal, loss of audio....this occurs frequently, it's the exception if it goes hours without incident. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN WITH ANALOG.

Do a little research, genius. I'm not alone....I've got friends throughout the state who will tell you the same thing...and we all don't have the same converter box. A simple google search will confirm similar problems throughout the country.

I find it fascinating that neocon parrots like yourself who are always squawking about "nanny gov't" are so willing to accept a gov't mandate to fork out more money for a service that has done well by them for decades for free. PT Barnum was right.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Stop and think for a moment: if digital is so damned superior to analog, then why would the military want to use it at all?

See, that was the original proposal by Slick Willy when he put forth this whole scheme......sell the analog broadcast "space" to the military and such.

It just doesn't make sense.

As for the snarky "20th century" crack......why should I have to pay for something that I've done without for decades WITHOUT COMPLAINT? I use to get a kick out of hearing people bitch about "nothing on" television even though they had cable.....or finding out that the adult movie they wanted to watch has been "edited" under censorship laws. See, I wasn't a sucker for the next shiny thing out there...but it seems that the collusion between gov't and big business are determined to make me one.
Click to expand...
The reason it is superior is because it allows far more information to be sent in the same packet sizes. Each channel now has the capacity to broadcast four different signals. Soon, as each network begins to work within the new benefits, where you had one channel you will have four with different selections, maybe one for Spanish, maybe one for a kid-friendly show when they normally wouldn't show them.

As far as the military using it, as far as I understand, it is ambulance and police that will get these frequencies to use so they can have more room and work better together. Since they will be transmitting largely voice the limitations will not effect them as much.
 
Damocles said:
The reason it is superior is because it allows far more information to be sent in the same packet sizes. Each channel now has the capacity to broadcast four different signals. Soon, as each network begins to work within the new benefits, where you had one channel you will have four with different selections, maybe one for Spanish, maybe one for a kid-friendly show when they normally wouldn't show them.

Again, if you are NOT getting a good signal, all this if for nothing. Unless you're in a prime zone next to the broadcaster, digital stinks. Also, who said I wanted all those extras? I had VHF, UHF...daily news broadcasts, PUBLIC Broadcast, etc. that carried all that you mentioned. I can only watch so much TV and so many programs.

As far as the military using it, as far as I understand, it is ambulance and police that will get these frequencies to use so they can have more room and work better together. Since they will be transmitting largely voice the limitations will not effect them as much.
Click to expand...

Which makes my point, again! If digital is all that superior, then why not make sure police and ambulence (as you say) are mandated for it's usage alone? Why use an "inferior" signal? Remember, one of the major fuck ups during 9/11 was that many of the firemen and emergency service guys in the Towers lost their signals because their hand helds were digital......something they had lobied against and were turned down by America's Mayor. You see, the fireman PREFERRED ANALOG. Giuliani's refusal to change the mandate essentially got many of them killed.

Bottom line: we're forced to buy a product that did not live up to the hype....unless of course, you buy cable or satellite....a little detail that was left out of the promos.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Which makes my point, again! If digital is all that superior, then why not make sure police and ambulence (as you say) are mandated for it's usage alone? Why use an "inferior" signal? Remember, one of the major fuck ups during 9/11 was that many of the firemen and emergency service guys in the Towers lost their signals because their hand helds were digital......something they had lobied against and were turned down by America's Mayor. You see, the fireman PREFERRED ANALOG. Giuliani's refusal to change the mandate essentially got many of them killed.

Bottom line: we're forced to buy a product that did not live up to the hype....unless of course, you buy cable or satellite....a little detail that was left out of the promos.
Click to expand...
Because it is unnecessary for them to have that much room. The old analog signal channels are plenty, however they simply were unable to carry the same amount of information as on a digital channel.

I understand your resistance to change and conservatism. But things move on... you should too.
 
I miss the old analog cell phones. You would get warning by getting a staticy signal before you got dropped. With digital it is either there or gone. Same with digital TV.

Plus on 2 of my channels there is some strange buzzing interference that comes and goes. I reported it to the FCC but they did not seem to care.
 
Damocles said:
Because it is unnecessary for them to have that much room. The old analog signal channels are plenty, however they simply were unable to carry the same amount of information as on a digital channel.

You just contradicted yourself and ignored my example. If Analog works for our security and safety services and personel, then digital is (for their purposes) inferior! The example of the 9/11 fire fighters proves that. Any use of digital for video broadcasts for our police, fire, security services will fall under the same flaws as the consumer.

Digital carries a lot more video broadcasts....but you have to be hooked into cable to guarantee this service. If not, and you're not within a sweet spot of the broadcast station, THEN DIGITAL BECOMES INFERIOR TO ANALOG. And forcing people to buy into a service that they might not want since they are being served to satisfaction is wrong. All the so called anti big gov't people should have caught on to this...but neocons were never known for their individual intelligence.

I understand your resistance to change and conservatism. But things move on... you should too.
Click to expand...
You should move on from the condescending attitude...especially when proven wrong on several contentions, and then trying to ignore it to continue your mantra.
 
Taichiliberal said:
You should move on from the condescending attitude...especially when proven wrong on several contentions, and then trying to ignore it to continue your mantra.
Click to expand...
They aren't sending pictures you maroon. It works fine for voice, but will not carry the same amount of information as the digital signal. This gives them more channels than they had before that will work for their use.

Quit trying to play "gotcha" you're embarrassing yourself again. And you should really stop taking every post so personally. Again, I understand you are conservative on this issue, but it's been decided.

You are stuck in "the old days were good enough"... The world is moving on.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Stop and think for a moment: if digital is so damned superior to analog, then why would the military want to use it at all?

See, that was the original proposal by Slick Willy when he put forth this whole scheme......sell the analog broadcast "space" to the military and such.

It just doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...


ZOMG just stop now!

The electromagnetic spectrum isn't necessarily analog or digital. They could very well broadcast digital signals in the old spectrum. This is an epic science fail of massive proportions.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Which makes my point, again! If digital is all that superior, then why not make sure police and ambulence (as you say) are mandated for it's usage alone? Why use an "inferior" signal? Remember, one of the major fuck ups during 9/11 was that many of the firemen and emergency service guys in the Towers lost their signals because their hand helds were digital......something they had lobbied against and were turned down by America's Mayor. You see, the fireman PREFERRED ANALOG. Giuliani's refusal to change the mandate essentially got many of them killed.

Bottom line: we're forced to buy a product that did not live up to the hype....unless of course, you buy cable or satellite....a little detail that was left out of the promos.
Click to expand...

OMG you retard. They CAN use digital with that signal! And they should! Just stop now. You have no idea what you're talking about. You have nothing but retarded conspiracies to prove your point.
 
Damocles said:
Because it is unnecessary for them to have that much room. The old analog signal channels are plenty, however they simply were unable to carry the same amount of information as on a digital channel.

I understand your resistance to change and conservatism. But things move on... you should too.
Click to expand...

There is no 'analog signal' or 'digital signal'. A signal is a signal. Analog or digital are ways in which the signal will be broadcast. The old spectrum may very well start being broadcast in digital.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top