Are your televisions prepared for 2009?

[bicker]

I posted this on another website, and it got such a strong response that I thought I'd post it around a bit more widely. It is about some changes that are coming down the pike and some that are possibly coming down the pike that affect most folks, but these are changes that a good number of people (about 1/3 on the other website) didn't know about...



A few important changes are coming down the pike, and I'm wondering how many folks are aware of them, and also wonder how the changes will affect people.

First: On February 17, 2009, all television stations which broadcast the kind of television signals that we've been using for over 50 years (NTSC or "analog"), will be required to cease operating. Instead, most stations will begin (or continue) broadcasting a new type of signal (ATSC or "digital"), which televisions produced prior to 1996 were incapable of utilizing, and only a small percentage of the televisions produced over the last ten years are capable of utilizing. (Basically, if you paid less than $500 for your television, prior to this year, it is quite likely that your television will not be able to receive television broadcasts after February 2009.)

Estimates are that only about 30% of homes rely exclusively on NTSC/analog broadcast to receive television, but many more homes, perhaps the vast majority, have at least one television that is used to receive over-the-air, NTSC/analog broadcasts, at least on occasion -- and of course those televisions will no longer be able to do so in another couple of years.

(Next year, the government will issue two $40 coupons to each household requesting them, to help defray the costs associated with purchasing digital converter boxes to receive ATSC/digital broadcasts.)

Second: Last month, the people of the City of Chicago were the first to be affected by the digital conversion affecting cable television. The cable system there went "all-digital". And Friday night, the FCC issued a set of waivers that were directly aimed at prompting cable systems nationwide to follow the same path, thereby making any non-digital televisions unable to receive even cable television, without a converter box. For the cable systems that choose to take advantage of the waiver (a list which includes the potential powerhouse, Verizon), the deadline is December 31, 2009.

Some more background on this last part: There was a battle raging within the FCC over the past six months between the contingent that thought it was better to force the cable companies to continue providing analog signals to customers, such as you, for a significant period of time, versus those who felt it would be better in the long-run to push cable in the same direction as over-the-air broadcasts, i.e., from analog to digital. They even issued contradictory proposals. The proposal to foster analog long-term was defeated. And Friday night, the FCC granted a series of waivers rewarding cable companies that elected to pursue new technology, requiring them to abandon providing analog signals through their cable by December 31, 2009 in order to take advantage of the benefits of the waiver.


:marg:

So the question to you is: Are your televisions prepared for 2009? If you routinely use televisions for receiving broadcasts over-the-air, do all those televisions have digital tuners in them (you can tell because you enter channel numbers with dashes in them, like "38-1"), or do you have a digital tuner converter box for each one? If not, what are your plans in that regard? If all of your televisions are connected to cable, do they all have QAM tuners (again, you can tell you're using a QAM tuner because the channel numbers have dashes in them), or do you have a cable converter box for each one? If not, what are your plans in that regard? (Note that there is no coupon program to support purchase of QAM converter boxes, but many ATSC converter boxes, especially the ones that cost a lot more than $40 each, will support QAM conversion as well.)

[DizneyRox]

2009 is actually a long way away...

I would suspect I would have gone through a couple TVs between now and then, at least in terms of smaller TVs. Any big screen TV purchases would be foolish without checking into the technology first anyway, so if someone gets burned, it's their fault.

On a side note, there really isn't much worth watching on TV these days anyway...

[bicker]

Wow. You're going to go through a couple of televisions in less than two years???

[Tinkermom]

Wow. You're going to go through a couple of televisions in less than two years???

My thoughts also!

DH and I had his grandmother's small color tv in our bedroom for the last 15 years. The tv itself was at least 30+ years old. About 6 months ago we got a new one when we remodeled our bedroom. Our main tv in the family room is new also because the one we had for 8+ years finally died. We have another tv in our finished basement that is also 8+ years old that the kids use to play Playstation.

We do not wish to spend our money just to upgrade our tv's every couple of years(would rather go to WDW!;)). TVs are so expensive! I like to get as many years out of them as possible ! Although, it seems that tv's do not last as long as they used to. DH's grandmother's tv was still working just fine, we were just ready to upgrade that one.:D

I hope that the 2 new tvs that we got this past year will work in 2009. I assume they will. I am not thrilled with the fact that so many people may be affected by this changeover. Not everyone can afford a new tv...

[bicker]

Which televisions did you purchase Lisa? If you let me know the model numbers, I can check the specs for you. Generally speaking, if the new televisions are much wider than square than your older televisions were, then they're probably okay. If they're still just a small amount wider than square, then they probably are not capable of receiving digital signals.

There does seem to be an intent, from consumer electronics makers, to push the industry towards televisions that do get replaced more frequently, like personal computers.

[Cinderelley]

Well, our TVs numbers don't have dashes in them, so I'm assuming they won't work. I don't watch TV, and I wish DH didn't watch so much, so I'll be on :cloud9:when ours quits working. :thedolls: Now 2009 seems so far away. :D

[dw2649]

I just had most of the cable wiring in my parents house replaced with new RG-6 wiring so all I need is 2 set top boxes (for the tv's that don't have them already) and we will be ready for the conversion. I actually heard from one the field techs who visited my parent's house to replace the wiring that most likely by Feb. 2009, or by the end at the very latest, comcast in my aread (SF Bay Area) will be entirely digital and analog will be shut off much like what happened in chicago. Most of the Bay Area system has already been rebuilt within the last 5 years or so, and the areas that have not been rebuilt will be very shortly. I think going digital makes sense because Analog is no longer the future of television, digital is. It does not make sense to spend millions and millions of dollars (think $50+ million, b/c that is how much I have heard it will cost comcast to invest in equipment to downgrade digital signals to analog ones) investing in something that may only last you a couple of years, 10 at most. I actually think that within the next 5 years everyone will be digital. Most people by that point probably won't even need set top boxes because the digital tuners will be built-in internally to the television. That is just my humble opinion and prediction.

Also, by removing the analog signal in my area (thereby removing 70-80 channels and switching them all to digital), Comcast will have enough bandwith (or room) to add 300+ digital channels, 100+ HD channels, or higher speeds for internet users. Most likely it will be a combination of the three things that I listed above.

[kakn7294]

I'm blonde and not fully understanding this. If I have "digital cable" with a cable box, will my tv's still work regardless of how old they are? I'd rather pay a small rental fee monthly for the boxes than try to replace 5 tv's - I can't afford that! My DD's watch a tv that is my grandmother's old floor console. We don't buy a new tv every year - they stick around until they don't work anymore.

[tink2006]

I just had most of the cable wiring in my parents house replaced with new RG-6 wiring so all I need is 2 set top boxes (for the tv's that don't have them already) and we will be ready for the conversion.

Does everybody need this RG-6 wiring? We recently went digital in our area and when they installed the boxes they did not change the wiring. All our televisions our analog.

Thanks

[dw2649]

Does everybody need this RG-6 wiring? We recently went digital in our area and when they installed the boxes they did not change the wiring. All our televisions our analog.

Thanks

No you do not need RG-6 wiring. if you have old RG 59 it will probably be just fine. I had ours replaced because the line was 10+ years old and had corroded around the connections so much (due to its location on the rooftop) that we were having major signal issues with our HDTV so the comcast guy recommended that we rewire the area. it cost me $19.99 for each line that I had rerun from the main splitter in the house.

[bicker]

I actually heard from one the field techs who visited my parent's house to replace the wiring that most likely by Feb. 2009, or by the end at the very latestMakes sense. By then, just turning off cable won't be an option, since those televisions won't work over-the-air either.


I think going digital makes sense because Analog is no longer the future of television, digital is.It is more than that. I don't remember if I mentioned this earlier, but one, static-prone, analog channel eats up 6 MHz of bandwidth, while the same amount of bandwidth can provide 10, absolutely perfect quality SD digital channels.


Most people by that point probably won't even need set top boxes because the digital tuners will be built-in internally to the television. That is just my humble opinion and prediction. I think that's not going to work out. Providing cable service is becoming too expensive (not the technology -- the content) to let people distribute it throughout their homes for free. Most likely, everything will be encrypted, and/or will require a cable company-issued set-top box or CableCard to access. Very few televisions are being produced with CableCard slots, and some of the cable television technology that will be deployed in the next year or two could make obsolete the existing televisions and other devices that have their own digital tuners. Some of this new distribution technology could even make devices that support CableCards obsolete. The days of buying a television to last you 20-30 years is over. Televisions are becoming like computers -- you'll need to purchase a new one every three or four years to take advantage of any new services offered, and many of the old services as well.

[bicker]

I'm blonde and not fully understanding this. If I have "digital cable" with a cable box, will my tv's still work regardless of how old they are?Yes. Each television with a cable box will work. Other televisions in your home, of course, won't work without a cable box (or QAM tuner).


I'd rather pay a small rental fee monthly for the boxes than try to replace 5 tv's - I can't afford that!I really think that they should simply STOP putting tuners in televisions. Televisions should JUST be display devices, and people should just get used to the tuner ALWAYS being outside the television. That way, when one technology advances, you only need to replace that portion of your investment, instead of having to replace both any time either technology advances.

Cable boxes should be around $3-$5 per month to rent.

[bicker]

Does everybody need this RG-6 wiring?It sure helps keep the service reliable. You can wait and see, and only replace your wiring when you notice that channels aren't tuning in correctly. (Just don't be surprised if you miss a few shows while doing your experiment. :))

I figure about half of the folks who have their homes wired with the thinner RG-59 wiring will need to replace at least some inside wiring to get reliable service.

[gueli]

Notes from a 'cable guy'

Rg-59 wire looses more signal over its length than rg-6, especially as you get to higher frequencies. Rg-6 cable, that is properly shielded, will help by having stronger signals by the time you reach the TV or Cable modem.
Buying, what I refer to as junk cable, rg-6 cable that does not have at least 80% aluminum braiding (for those who will rewire by themselves) will cost the customer more in the long run.

You are right about cable-card possibly being obsolite before it is introduced on a wide scale. Part of the exemption includes the idea that companies that sell converters(cable boxes) can sell them directly (probably through electronic stores) to customers, thus no need to pay the local cable company the fee's per box. (customer beware though- if you buy it, and it breaks (lets say via lightning strike), it is your problem...)
Some techno bable:
Cablevision (New York, NJ & connecticut area's) currently is about 6 months ahead of the technology, in other words we are pushing the envelope. We use about 750 MHz worth of bandwith on the foward, and are/will be using 4 to 6 seperate return frequencies to help accomadate all the modem, set top box and telephone traffic. I cannot state what our offical company line on cable cards access equipment is, but what I can tell you is this- sets with cable cards, cannot have all the functions that our set top boxes employ (PPV, free video on demand (Pay per view (ppv) is our not free video on demand), or recieve specific programming guides (like search for when a show is on).
Yes, 1 6 MHz channel (analog) can support as many as 12 Digital Channels (compression has its downfalls- we currently only use about 6-8 digital channels per frequency) , but HD uses a lot more space. The newest rage is switched video (where you do not have dedicated space for a channel, but rather when someone wants to watch that channel the space is allocated to it), where it is possible to offer more channels without the need to increase bandwidth. I question weather cable card access will be able to handle switched video (my understanding is that switched video needs an upstream & downstream signal, where cable cards only recieve the downstream signal)...
:mickey:

[DizNee143]

nothing new to me...i already knew about this...and the way i feel is...ill worry about it when it gets here...
my tvs should work..but if they dont..ill go with out a tv for a bit until i can buy myself a new one...no biggie! :mickey:

[bicker]

(customer beware though- if you buy it, and it breaks (lets say via lightning strike), it is your problem...)Not only that, but it is "your problem" even if technology changes render your privately-owned box obsolete.


Yes, 1 6 MHz channel (analog) can support as many as 12 Digital Channels (compression has its downfalls- we currently only use about 6-8 digital channels per frequency) , but HD uses a lot more space.Well, just to clarify: HD uses a lot more space than SD (i.e., the digital version of today's analog channels), but HD uses the same amount of space as today's analog channels. So eliminating 10 analog channels means the cable company could provide 10 new HD channels (or 100 new SD channels, or some sliding-scale combination of the two).


The newest rage is switched video (where you do not have dedicated space for a channel, but rather when someone wants to watch that channel the space is allocated to it), where it is possible to offer more channels without the need to increase bandwidth. I question weather cable card access will be able to handle switched video (my understanding is that switched video needs an upstream & downstream signal, where cable cards only recieve the downstream signal)...
:mickey:That's not really the case. CableCards, even the earliest versions, can handle both upstream and downstream signal. The issue is that CableLabs has not been willing to certify host applications for upstream signal. In other words, while the CableCard can handle the upstream signal, there needs to be hardware in the device that has the CableCard slot that supports upstream communications, and none of them have been able to get their devices certified by CableLabs with such additional hardware.

The cable companies are getting around this problem by supporting the upstream communications necessary for SDV (and Video On Demand, as well) with hardware besides the CableCard (typically a DOCSIS modem).

[princessjojo]

Wow. You're going to go through a couple of televisions in less than two years???

My thoughts, too. Though we have purchased additional televisions for both of the boys, we are still using the same television that I used in college (15yrs ago) and it still works great!

I had heard about the conversion and we have put off put off buying one for this very reason. Another thing is that we ar either moving or building after June 2008 so we will incorporate this techno. upgrade in the other things we have to prepare for. We were actually thinking of hardwiring a new construction home to combine internet, security, cable, etc to all new highend services.

Until the change affects us, there's no need to fix it if it ain't broke.

[MsMin]

I asked our cable guy and he said that right now we are renting a digital box to convert the analog and that (at that time) he said by 08 we would convert to digital and the ppl w/ analog would need the converter for digital. He made it sound simple...
They did rewire my cable but I didn't ask if it was Rg-6. b/c I wasn't getting all of the HD channels and he said it was the wiring. He recommended that I get the wiring service from Cox for $4 a month and they would rewire the house for free - then he said in a couple months d/c the wiring service if I didn't want it! He said it would save me lots of $$. It almost sounds like cheating now that I look at it from this perspective. He said the wiring was old but the house is only 7 yrs old so that's relative to the fast changing tech world I suppose.
Maybe it's our humidity but tv's don't last long down here... I have a couple of old 19" that I have to get rid of but haven't checked out the e-waste system yet. Even goodwill won't take them and they work!

[magicofdisney]

I posted this on another website, and it got such a strong response that I thought I'd post it around a bit more widely. It is about some changes that are coming down the pike and some that are possibly coming down the pike that affect most folks, but these are changes that a good number of people (about 1/3 on the other website) didn't know about...
I'm really surprised that many ppl were unaware of this considering how long this information has been out there.

We use DirecTV for our viewing pleasure ;) and by its very nature, all TVs must have a receiver. So no worries on our end. We do have one HDTV monitor, but the rest of our TVs are analog, but like I said they're connected to a DirecTV receiver.

[JPL]

Maybe it's our humidity but tv's don't last long down here... I have a couple of old 19" that I have to get rid of but haven't checked out the e-waste system yet. Even goodwill won't take them and they work!

I have noticed I have a few older TVs that still work great and one that's about 10-15 years old even gets a better picture than my 3 year old TV. I think the manufacturers started making them less durable so you have to replace them more often.

[Scar]

I think the manufacturers started making them less durable so you have to replace them more often.Yup, it’s called “planned obsolescence”. Every once in a while I’ll see a refrigerator from the ‘50’s still working, but it’s been a long time since I’ve seen one from the ‘70’s. I think I remember hearing light bulbs being the first product to do this.

[bicker]

A lot of this is prompted by the tendency for customers to make purchasing decisions primarily on price. Suppliers have often attracted more customers while retaining revenues by cutting costs and cutting prices. By contrast, many suppliers who maintained costs and maintained quality were punished by consumers, and either eventually switched strategy or failed.