Technology that refuses to die

Post Reply New Topic

the person with average visual acuity will need a wall-sized display to see all of what ultraHD promises.

It happened in Britain and lots of people ended up having to watch a different ITV region to the one they previously watched, although there is almost no difference between them now.



Too many retired people in some countries - like Britain. The BBC is effectively subsidised by the TV licence and was a driving force behind digital terrestrial. Ironically anybody over 75 can get a free TV licence so those who probably watch the most BBC don't pay for it. Another irony is that digital terrestrial benefits localised TV channels yet ITV ended up merging into one company (with the exception of Scotland and Ulster) and as previously stated there is almost no difference between regions now.

We have to pay through the nose for cable (which carries cable-cast AND internet). We can watch broadcast T.V. for the just the cost of electrical power to run our T.V. sets.

ruveyn

Is DSL, Wi-Fi, or mobile broadband available in the US?



In most of Europe a TV licence is legally required to watch terrestrial TV broadcasts but it isn't required for the internet with the exception of Denmark. This has to be factored into the cost equation. There have been cases of British people with internet at home giving up the TV and saving money on the TV licence.

So I wonder if everybody is going to have to pay for a colour license, even if they only have black & white TV's as the boxes output in color.

The problem is that higher resolution = lower range.

DTV in the US has a max range of 200 miles (average). If you live in mountains, cut that by over 50%. Without a strong signal, you don't get jack. Analog had a longer range because you could get an acceptable picture at a much weaker signal strength.

Rural areas always suffer unless they upgrade infrastructure, and frankly, the service providers don't see enough $$$ to justify it. So, if government doesn't subsidize it, it won't happen.

Radio won't die because it's a cheap and proven media. For many purposes, phasing it out would be a disaster for public safety concerns.

I live approx. 50 miles [as the crow flies] from my nearest PBS station [KCTS-9, seattle] and even with a signal-boosted deep fringe antenna [aimed right at the broadcast tower clusters] mounted atop a tree 100' above the ground, I still get only intermittent reception.

Before the switch to digital high definition I got this horrible analog picture full of snow. But when I bought my first high definition television in 2004 I was able to watch the Olympics for free in stunning high definition. What most people called obsolete technology was in actuality a major advancement in high technology. At that time in 2004 most of the cable and satellite refused to offer any high definition service.

you were fortunate to live within the DTV reception area.

When the new ultra-high definition broadcasting specifications are finalized, free digital broadcasting will be expanded to mobile devices. So how will this be possible if the naysayers tell everyone you need a rooftop antenna ?

can you tell me how this is going to work?

New broadcasting towers will have to be built but wait a minute over the air broadcasting is obsolete right ? I guess all those IPAD users will have to carry around bulky satellite dishes or purchase miles of cable.

OTA broadcasting is important for national security, it cannot be allowed to wither away. it is akin to morse code for the digital age, a fallback in emergencies.

Fear not. OTA radio broadcasts are not going away anytime soon. Radio is alive and well. OTA T;V. may be in trouble though.

ruveyn

Without over the air broadcasting we would not have high definition televisions.

Back in the 1980's broadcasters could have cared less about high definition television until their bandwidth was threatened to be auctioned off to the cell phone companies. Broadcasters immediately proposed high definition television simply to hog as much bandwidth as possible. Today broadcasters are proposing 200 inch ultra-high definition displays with insane amounts of resolution just so they can keep their bandwidth.

OTA tv got into logistical trouble with the required migration away from analog towards digital, which requires taller antenna towers for equivalent coverage. somebody shoulda thought of a better way.