the way things were

Taichiliberal

Taichiliberal

Shaken, not stirred!
Use to be you went to the department/appliance store and bought a TV. You went home, plugged it in and had a choice of UHF or VHF channels (depending on how good your antenna was). That was IT. Commercials paid for programs, they had to EARN your viewership. 'Nuff said! :|
 
Taichiliberal said:
Use to be you went to the department/appliance store and bought a TV. You went home, plugged it in and had a choice of UHF or VHF channels (depending on how good your antenna was). That was IT. Commercials paid for programs, they had to EARN your viewership. 'Nuff said! :|
Click to expand...

You can still watch those shows. :D
 
Matt Dillon said:
You can still watch those shows. :D
Click to expand...

Not quite. While current TV's from various companies can offer a plethora of "free movies" not formerly available on the old analog...they can only be accessed if you have a home PC to link with. Otherwise, using a internal antenna gets you LESS than you use to. Sad.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Not quite. While current TV's from various companies can offer a plethora of "free movies" not formerly available on the old analog...they can only be accessed if you have a home PC to link with. Otherwise, using a internal antenna gets you LESS than you use to. Sad.
Click to expand...

I have been watching reruns of Leave it to Beaver.
 
BidenPresident said:
I have been watching reruns of Leave it to Beaver.
Click to expand...

My Pop's has a Roku TV, I have a Samsung. Without paying for anything (outside the usual fees for my PC internet access), it's a real toss up as to who can actually see what and on what channel.

Ahh, for the good old days when EVERYONE had a common reference in their media choices.
 
Taichiliberal said:
My Pop's has a Roku TV, I have a Samsung. Without paying for anything (outside the usual fees for my PC internet access), it's a real toss up as to who can actually see what and on what channel.

Ahh, for the good old days when EVERYONE had a common reference in their media choices.
Click to expand...

I do not think it was superior. Just different.
 
BidenPresident said:
I do not think it was superior. Just different.
Click to expand...

Put it this way.....on the analog, once you got the aerial just right, you had picture and sound. It may get fuzzy and require adjustments, but you didn't lose picture and sound as you do with digital. Also, it use to drive me nuts before digital became mandatory and you would have cable shows advertised on "regular" TV. Now, although you get "free" access to a boat load of 5 year old movies and beyond, you STILL need to subscribe to various carriers to see certain programs you use to get for free.

Case in point: for some strange reason, for the last 2 months and counting I can't get the ABC Channel 7 or Channel 11 (the CW, I believe) clearly anymore. They just come in short spurts and then blink out....channels that I've NEVER had a problem with since I was a child. Of course, both networks offer access if I "subscribe" to their direct carriers. :|
 
Taichiliberal said:
Use to be you went to the department/appliance store and bought a TV. You went home, plugged it in and had a choice of UHF or VHF channels (depending on how good your antenna was). That was IT. Commercials paid for programs, they had to EARN your viewership. 'Nuff said! :|
Click to expand...

Buying a stereo back then was a little more complicated but your point is made.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Use to be you went to the department/appliance store and bought a TV. You went home, plugged it in and had a choice of UHF or VHF channels (depending on how good your antenna was). That was IT. Commercials paid for programs, they had to EARN your viewership. 'Nuff said! :|
Click to expand...

We just bought our first "smart" tv. Don't watch much tv in our house but thought we would come t the 21st century. Let me tell you tones of channels but can't find any worth watching. Great picture though. Not like the old days you're talking about.
 
Yakuda said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
For better or worse? From necessity or greed?
Click to expand...

Why would it be greedy to advance technology?
Click to expand...

No, but when that technology is used for greedy purposes, then you have a problem...as we do now. Thing is, you have a generation or two who are clueless as to life beyond their birthday. They accept what they are told.

When the switch from analog to digital was mandated, the "reason" given was that the analog airwaves were to be used for military purposes and emergency status communications.

That was weird, given that the spiel to sell digital was that it carried a hell of a lot more information. What wasn't mentioned was it's susceptibility to interference...total loss of signal as oppose to "picture fuzziness/distortion" without audio loss in analog. Also, no mention of a need for a home PC link up to get all those nifty perks...or the myriad of paid subscriptions needed.

That's why I stand by the OP. Hell, if you wanted to see a movie, you went to the theatre or drive-in (while they lasted). Or you rented a video (cassette or DVD).
Just saying.
 
Yakuda said:
We just bought our first "smart" tv. Don't watch much tv in our house but thought we would come t the 21st century. Let me tell you tones of channels but can't find any worth watching. Great picture though. Not like the old days you're talking about.
Click to expand...

Oh I'll concede better picture quality....assuming the link with your PC doesn't delay or freeze or crap out. I can't tell you how many times I've completely lost a channel that I grew up tuning in and watching!
 
Taichiliberal said:
No, but when that technology is used for greedy purposes, then you have a problem...as we do now. Thing is, you have a generation or two who are clueless as to life beyond their birthday. They accept what they are told.

When the switch from analog to digital was mandated, the "reason" given was that the analog airwaves were to be used for military purposes and emergency status communications.

That was weird, given that the spiel to sell digital was that it carried a hell of a lot more information. What wasn't mentioned was it's susceptibility to interference...total loss of signal as oppose to "picture fuzziness/distortion" without audio loss in analog. Also, no mention of a need for a home PC link up to get all those nifty perks...or the myriad of paid subscriptions needed.

That's why I stand by the OP. Hell, if you wanted to see a movie, you went to the theatre or drive-in (while they lasted). Or you rented a video (cassette or DVD).
Just saying.
Click to expand...

Every type of tech has been used by someone somewhere for greedy purposes

It’s not the fault of the technology itself
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
No, but when that technology is used for greedy purposes, then you have a problem...as we do now. Thing is, you have a generation or two who are clueless as to life beyond their birthday. They accept what they are told.

When the switch from analog to digital was mandated, the "reason" given was that the analog airwaves were to be used for military purposes and emergency status communications.

That was weird, given that the spiel to sell digital was that it carried a hell of a lot more information. What wasn't mentioned was it's susceptibility to interference...total loss of signal as oppose to "picture fuzziness/distortion" without audio loss in analog. Also, no mention of a need for a home PC link up to get all those nifty perks...or the myriad of paid subscriptions needed.

That's why I stand by the OP. Hell, if you wanted to see a movie, you went to the theatre or drive-in (while they lasted). Or you rented a video (cassette or DVD).
Just saying.
Click to expand...



Every type of tech has been used by someone somewhere for greedy purposes

It’s not the fault of the technology itself
Click to expand...

You're repeating a moot point, of which I already addressed. The OP stands.

P.S. The more you remove shared points of general public reference, the more isolated and self absorbed/selfish people will become. This can lead to more violent altercations in public.
 
Taichiliberal said:
You're repeating a moot point, of which I already addressed. The OP stands.

P.S. The more you remove shared points of general public reference, the more isolated and self absorbed/selfish people will become. This can lead to more violent altercations in public.
Click to expand...

You mean like leftists do everyday?
 
Yakuda said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
You're repeating a moot point, of which I already addressed. The OP stands.

P.S. The more you remove shared points of general public reference, the more isolated and self absorbed/selfish people will become. This can lead to more violent altercations in public.
Click to expand...



You mean like leftists do everyday?
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: GTFU, will ya please?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top