Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Digital TV: Why do we have to have it?

P

Phil Allison

Jan 1, 1970
0
"Natalie"
If you have excellent reception there is no need for a STB,


** If you have a chauffer there is no need to learn how to drive ....

I don't have good reception any more because I've got no outside
antenna, but I was watching a DVD of a TV show I used to watch in my old
place that DID have an outside antenna and excellent reception, no
difference in picture quality at all!


** Just as asinine as the previous one.

None of it changes the absolute crap on TV most of the time.


** Then don't watch the crap - watch only the decent stuff.



............... Phil
 
N

Natalie

Jan 1, 1970
0
Phil said:
Folk with poor antennas ( even indoor ones ) and ghosty/noisy installed
systems in block of units find STBs work like magic.

I didn't.

Natalie
 
M

Mr.T

Jan 1, 1970
0
Who_tat_me said:
That's only reasonably recently and you're looking at the cost for just one
TV. If I was to go "all digital" in my house I'd have to purchase 7 STBs to
retain my current functionality (1 for each TV and 1 for each VCR) Even if I
was to purchased several of the Woolies $70 boxes that's an outlay of
$490.

Even if you did, you can't program the VCR's to change the STB channel when
you're not home!

MrT.
 
F

ferret

Jan 1, 1970
0

How is this NOT a marketing disaster.

The government is not doing a Inquiry into why TOO many people
have changed over to Digital !

The government is concerned the Mandate to cut-off analogue will
expire before the majority have switched over. The impact of
this would be huge dent in spent advertising tax dollars.
 
P

Phil Allison

Jan 1, 1970
0
"ferret"
How is this NOT a marketing disaster.


** That is a different question in a new context - dickhead.

Makers and sellers of STBs have made good money from them - the same
designs are sold in Europe and elsewhere.

The government is concerned the Mandate to cut-off analogue will
expire before the majority have switched over.


** Most folk put off whatever is not urgent - when it gets urgent they
finally do it.

Wait and see what the Senate committee reports.





.............. Phil
 
S

Swampfox

Jan 1, 1970
0
ferret said:
If Digital is so cheap and so good, why after 5 years it still
only has ~660,000 units installed. Considering Australia is usually
quick to jump on technology bandwagon, Phones,Computers, Internet etc..
From a sales point of view its a complete disaster.

Because Aussies are slack.
If it's not broken - don't fix it.
Mobile phones and internet were new products.
Digital TV is an improvement to an existing product so there's really no use
comparing the figures.
If you've seen the difference for yourself, then I'd be surprised if you
wouldn't cough up the money for a SD set top box.
A friend of mine was living near a high rise less than 10k from the centre
of Melbourne and his analogue reception was RS.
Got quoted $850.00 for a high masted aerial, amplifier etc. so he got
himself a $180.00 TEAC box and the problem was solved.
I have a HD box and TV and can honestly say that the picture quality is
astounding, like watching a moving photograph, admittedly at a price.
My point is that the technology is vastly superior and when people become
aware of the improvement they'll take it up.
 
P

Phil Allison

Jan 1, 1970
0
"Swampfox"
My point is that the technology is vastly superior and when people become
aware of the improvement they'll take it up.


** Most folk could not care less about pic quality and sit and watch
atrocious pics with equanimity. However, when the complete absence of a
picture becomes imminent there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth
and a rush to buy the cheapest STBs available.

When FINALLY there is no picture at all to look at THEN even the
slovenliest couch potatoes will be driven to visit the stores - or likely
enterprising dealers will employ folk to drive around the suburbs with van
loads of cheap STBs - selling them door to door for quick cash.




............. Phil
 
W

Who_tat_me

Jan 1, 1970
0
David L. Jones said:
Read - that's completely true.

No it isn't.
So a "good" STB has to have lots of "features" huh?

Generally yes, that is true. .
What are these features the "good" STBs have which the "cheap" STBs do
not?
Does number of features equate to a better quality picture?, or a
better decoder chip?, or a better quality front end?

Yes, yes and yes
Plenty good enough for most people I would think.

Good enough is not necessarily good. It usually means barely adequate.
 
W

Who_tat_me

Jan 1, 1970
0
Swampfox said:
Because Aussies are slack.
If it's not broken - don't fix it.

That's not being slack. That's being practical. If something is working
fine, why replace it?
If you've seen the difference for yourself, then I'd be surprised if you
wouldn't cough up the money for a SD set top box.

Be surprised. I've seen the difference. I still see no point forking out
money for something that I don't need to fork out money for. I have good FTA
reception and Foxtel.
My point is that the technology is vastly superior and when people become
aware of the improvement they'll take it up.

For many people there is no improvement. I live 30km from the main local FTA
Tx site and I see no point to Digital at this time. The main benefit I see
is widescreen but for that to be effective I need at least an 82cm
widescreen TV to replace my 68cm 4:3 TV and that's a bit more than just an
STB.
 
M

Mr.T

Jan 1, 1970
0
Not much help if your not in those areas!
Melb. and Sydney will be the first to switch off. That's a lot of people.
Nearly all TV's still come with an analog only tuner. Even the DVD/HD
recorders people are still buying right now will be obsolete with their
analog tuners. Programming them will be impossible just by adding a STB. The
manufacturers are happy, they get to sell you another set.

MrT.
 
W

Who_tat_me

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mr.T said:
$490.

Even if you did, you can't program the VCR's to change the STB channel
when
you're not home!
Very true, and it means you really need to get rid of the VCR and buy
yourself a PVR which is an extra cost.
 
M

Mr.T

Jan 1, 1970
0
Who_tat_me said:
Very true, and it means you really need to get rid of the VCR and buy
yourself a PVR which is an extra cost.

Even many of the current PVR's have analog tuners!
I'm yet to see a DVD/HD recorder in the local shops with a digital tuner in
fact.
Copyright wars seem to be the problem.

MrT.
 
T

tony_h

Jan 1, 1970
0
AJ said:
People often compare digital and analogue TV to
DVD's and VCRs, and although there may be an improvement going digital
over analogue for TV its nothing like the improvement from VCR's to
DVD and that is because VHS was a lesser picture quality to broadcast
TV.

Ahh, but that is why I entered the world of digital. My Hifi VCR was
starting to produce god-awful recordings in LP (and mediocre in SP) and
someone suggested to try sussing out a PVR out (Mid 2003). I pre-ordered
the Topfield TF5000PVRt, and have never watched a minute of analogue (at
home) since getting it in Nov 2003. This will change the way you watch TV,
really, and to have the identical picture quality as what was broadcasted
saved away on the HDD is fantastic.
So I am a digital convert, digital is the way forward, and a PVR is the way
to enjoy it the most (esp the Topfield, with 70 timer slots,
dual/overlapping recording/timers, records subtitles/teletext & audio
streams so the viewing experience is identical regardless of whether you
watch it live or 2 weeks later).
Regards
Tony
 
A

AJ

Jan 1, 1970
0
Because digital is better.
No ghosting and a far superior picture.
And for most people the cost is minimal.
Set top boxes can be had for less than $200, which is cheaper than the
aerials required for analogue in poor reception areas.
Live program guides, extra channels on SBS and the ABC, better sound etc.
It's simply a better technology.

Just one other point remember is that the digital signal is still
sent across the air on a modulated analogue signal until it reaches
the decoder, so a lot of the same rules for radio still apply. If you
have poor analogue reception then if the digital signal is coming off
the same stick then your digital may also be crap and you may well
still need that better quality antenna. I also kind of thought reading
around the traps that even if your current analague is good, you may
still need a better antenna for digital, same too with the internal
cable quality and their connections within the building wiring.

The difference of course is the digital signal is a lot more tollerant
due to error correction and probably a bit of fudging in the decoders
so you might not notice poor signal quality until you loose the
picture totaly, at least with an analogue signal you can sometimes
still have a watchable picture.
 
C

Chasing Kate

Jan 1, 1970
0
Phil said:
"ferret"

** That is a different question in a new context - dickhead.

Makers and sellers of STBs have made good money from them - the same
designs are sold in Europe and elsewhere.


** Most folk put off whatever is not urgent - when it gets urgent they
finally do it.

Wait and see what the Senate committee reports.

............. Phil






And again WHY does this have to be debated in the Senate?
Seems a waste of time
 
P

Phil Allison

Jan 1, 1970
0
"Chasing Kate"
But is there any logical reason to phase it out?


** There are any number of posts supply the logical reasons.

There are web sites that supply them - I posted one URL.





............. Phil
 
K

Kevin Hendrikssen

Jan 1, 1970
0
Mr.T said:
$490.

Even if you did, you can't program the VCR's to change the STB channel
when
you're not home!

Some (not all) STBs have timers to change channels. More useful if you have
a VCR with a "rec-link" function (e.g. JVC) so you don't have to set timers
on both machines.
 
W

Who_tat_me

Jan 1, 1970
0
Chasing Kate said:
But is there any logical reason to phase it out?

Is there any one reason? No.
Was there any one reason that we got TV in the first place? No.

Basically it comes down to progress. Everything is going to digital
eventually whether you like it or not and digital is better than analogue so
why not?
 
W

Who_tat_me

Jan 1, 1970
0
Chasing Kate said:
And again WHY does this have to be debated in the Senate?
Seems a waste of time
Because the government manages the country and it was the government who put
in place the plans to phase in digital and phase out analogue. Since the
government's plans aren't going according to schedule it seems only logical
that they should investigate the reasons why those plans are going the way
that they want them to so that they can determine what action to take.
 
W

Who_tat_me

Jan 1, 1970
0
Michael A. Terrell said:
You won't see one until there is a fast enough A/D converter to
handle twice the highest frequency you want to receive.
Why would you need an A/D converter to record a digital broadcast?
 
Top