Comments on: 3 million analog viewers will let TVs go dark

A survey by ABI Research finds that 20 percent of TV viewers--3 million Americans--who rely on analog over-the-air reception will let their sets go "dark" in February.

[sportsfan206]

OMG, this is freaking TV people, why are we acting like this is vital to national security or something? Now, I watch TV all the time, so I am not an anti-TV person, but the way we are treating this is rediculous. Seriously, go get a stupid box for free or buy a new TV for $150 bucks or less. That's what it will cost... that's it. $0 or $150 if you want to upgrade your TV set... That fact that some can't seem to figure this out just tells me how stupid or useless many people are. How else can you explain why people are so upset about something that is free.

[Lerianis]

TV is vital to national security. It is also vital to Amber Alerts (which broadcast the PICTURE of the missing child as well) and weather reports, which can give you the EXACT OR NEAR EXACT area where the storm is.

[AnthonyNYC]

I agree with you 100%, people are both lazy and stupid, how else do you explain the voting process in this country. LOL
But seriously, I have 3 neighbors ove 80 years old which I already helped get coupons and switched them myself to digital. They are thrilled with the extra channels and crystal clear pictures, and that is using old rabbit ears on some.
Anyone left in the dark come febuary is definitely in the idiot colum in my opinion.
Since as you say choice to switch is either free or $150. ;)

[sportsfan206]

Actually it's not vital Lerianis, you just think it is. First off, it's called radio, read into it. Second, the TV infrasturcture is in place, and we are talking about OTA signals, not TV itself. Forgive me if I don't think the people who sit at home and watch OTA signals are vital to Amber Alerts. Third, weather reports? For someone in a rural area (me being one of them) the radio is a much more reliable mode of alerting people to tornados or other storm updates. Anyone who is sitting around watching for exact storm locations is rediculously stupid, as they are wasting time getting to a safe location. Other forms of mass notification are required, since TV is a voluntary activity, you cannot even begin to rely on it for Alerting people to situations. This would mean they would have to be in a house, or a store and actually watching TV to get the alert. Radio is more portable, most people have in in their car for getting updates as they leave the area, and public horns and mass notification devices alert all others not listening. People think TV is vital, but it isn't at all.

[AnthonyNYC]

Exactly!
And with most people having cell phones nowadays, Getting an emercy text from Govt warning of emergency in my area, is much more effective, and I believe they are working on implementing this system. That is much more useful than assuming someone is home sitting in front of tv when bad weather is coming. People basically watch tv at night on prime time, 8-11pm, most storms arrive at other times for tv to be helpful for bad weather reports.

[xXTSFXx]

Who cares. Its just TV... Most sitcoms are a wast of peoples time in my opinion. Let em ditch TV maybe they can get off the couch and find a better hobby.

[joevai52]

I signed up just so I could comment on this, not that it will make a difference. I'm just tired of reading everyone's answers for what people can do to still get TV. Many of your answers are simply not possible for many people; I can personally name several friends who will probably have zero or maybe one channel after the switch, even if they get an external antenna and a converter box for their old televisions. There are people in rural areas of this country (and by rural, I don't mean a town of 100,000 people since some of you don't seem to believe any such areas exist) which do not have cable service but are currently in range of TV broadcast signals. After the switch, they will be out of range of the new signal unless something is done to extend the range of the signal. They're only option to continue to get "free" TV is to pay for a satellite service. I have several good friends who simply cannot afford to spend money every month on that. Oh, by the way, there is no broadband internet available in many rural areas (except possibly via satellite, which is very expensive and worthless), so watching streaming video over their internet connection is out of the questions. What will the government do to help these people who currently get fine TV reception but will get screwed once the switch is made to DTV?

Remember that in many rural areas, people will be out of range of DTV signals, and that many people are living below the poverty line in these same areas. They many suggestions that I have read on this site (many of which I use myself) are just not feasible for many rural, lower-income people.

[AnthonyNYC]

I don't understand what you mean about "they get fine TV reception but will get screwed once switch is made to digital". How are they getting fine analog reception if they are so rural that you claim they will not be close enough to tower to receive a digital signal?
Are they getting a barely visible snowy analog picture now?
Is that what you mean by fine?

Because if anything, a digitl transmission will probably go farther than an analog one, as long as they have a good roof antenna, and are in range to receive an analog signal now, getting a digital signal will be no different.
Did anyone say a digital signal was weaker in reach as current analog signals?

I suspect only people not able to get a digital signal are ones currently recieving a poor analog signal at this time.
They make antennas with 70-150 miles range, and you can add boosters too, where in the boondocks are these out of reach people you talk about?
Does the post office deliver to them?
I am curious, perhaps there isn't enough of them for tv stations to justify putting up tv towers to advertise to them.
TV is a business, not a right mandated by the government.
No?

[AnthonyNYC]

This is rediculous, there will be no crisis, why doesn't the FCC mandate stations go dark for 5 minutes every day leading up to febuary cut off, followed by instructions on how to permanently prevent this?
That will get peoples attention, and only affect those in need, not bombard the rest of us who already have digital convertors hooked up or are using cable.
Also once people finally see how clear digital signal is, and how many more stations are available, there will be an net increase in viewership of terestial transmission.
I for example have paid for cable for 20 years now, but am borderline in cancelling cable for terestial tv once the actual switch is made, especially if it means a few more stations once the analog frequencies are freed up.
$100 for cable each month is getting rediculous. I will keep cable for broadband access but tempted to drop all tv services come febuary unless they drastically lower their prices and get competitive with free, now that free will be just as good quality (HD) as cable.
Also i wish HBO and Showtime would transmit a scrambled signal over terestial air, needing a descrambling box at tv, and thus not needing cable at all!
That would be ideal.
Or else, i just will wait a year to get all hbo programming I miss on dvd from netflix rentals.

AnthonyNYC

[phughes3]

Interestingly, I ordered the discount cards early in the year to purchase the converter box. They are dated with a three month window to receive the $40.00 discount. Problem: No one in Nashville, Tennessee had the box within the dates I could get the discount. Another federal government flaw...not making sure the product is available at the listed providers. I am not a cable user and I deplore the rate hikes that these media pirates have been allowed to plunder the nation with. As a radio broadcaster, I can confirm that a digital signal will just stop rather than fade (at least with digital radio) when you are in a poor signal area. So rural and fringe locations may need a bigger antenna or signal booster. I ponder the question of a national emergency without analog over-the-air transmission.

[tyanny]

As soon as your government got involved with their "FREE" vouchers, the stores just raised the prices of the boxes $20. (at the beginning of this boondogle the vouchers would have actually resulted in a free box but no more) Our vouchers have expired now anyway and we can't legally get more from the nice government.

[bhopal39]

Don't get fooled into paying an outrageous price for some labeled as an HDTV antenna. Here's an interesting and informative link on selecting an HDTV antenna.

http://www.hdtvantennalabs.com/hdtv-antenna-guide.php

[trevertoys]

What I want to know is what do we do with our hand held and emergency broadcast portable TVs that obviusly will not be digital ready for February 9th. How do you get this type of TV to work? Thanks! Jim

[AnthonyNYC]

Jim, the answer to your question is, toss them in the trash and wait for new digital versions of battery powered portable tv's to be sold. Same with radios that get old analog tv audio, it will not work anymore.
There are currently no battery operated converters and even if there was, it would be inconvenient, no?

Think of it as stimulationg the economy, too bad it isn't our economy as we no longer produce radios and tv's in America.
Anyway, don't depend on analog battery tv for emergency anymore.

[trevertoys]

With the Digital switch February 9, 2009 what will happen to portable, battery operated radios that have TV bands for receiving TV audio? Will we still be able to receive this audio signal? Thanks! Jim

[LarryH]

It appears that the survey may be flawed or at least incomplete. It states that the only options are to A) purchase a DTV converter box, B) go with cable/satellite or C) go dark. There are other options. How about those of us who have a TV that can already receive digital signals but just use the over-the-air signals? I have a 27" CRT TV that has a built-in digital tuner and we have been all digital for about a year since all the local analog stations now have their digital channels active. We also added a small 15" HDTV in the kitchen that uses the digital OTA signals. Finally, our PC has a digital tuner that we feed with digital OTA channels so we can record programs in HD.

I have asked the survey company for details on their survey but they seem to only want to talk with someone from the media.

[AnthonyNYC]

I don't know if Broadcast Stations will lose actual percentage of viewers after digital conversion or not, maybe the month after yes, but eventually as people buy converters and as they discover how clear the new tv they just bought looks with terestial antenna, they might actually not add cable or satiliite?

In these tough economic times, i am considering doing the opposite now, getting rid of cable for terrestial broadcasts!
Especially if they offer HDTV stations. I will use my digital tuner in my PC and Windows Media Center built into Vista to record shows and replace the cable company DVR. If this saves me $100 a month, i can live without hbo and showtime and cable. For the $1200 a year I save, I can just buy the DVD set of Dexter, True Blood etc... at the end of the year.
Just a thought so far, haven't dropped cable just yet.
:)

[hyghwayman]

Make your own OTA HDTV Antenna
by hyghwayman - 10/22/08 11:06 PM

Before you buy a antenna, you may want to build your own antenna like I did. I have tried all sorts of commercial store bought antennas and must say my home made antenna beats the pants off of all of them.

Lumelab has a dedicated thread with 51 pages of info and discussion on the topic. DIY HDTV Antenna http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=9613
(Update) You will need to register w/ Lumenlab to see the thread.

AVS Forums also has a thread. How to build a UHF antenna... http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=798265

Antenna Design http://www.lumenlab.com/forums/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=31497



http://hthut.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!2243ABF263B6C3B5!209.entry

hyghwayman