Why fix something that is not broken!!!

[tomcat]

I purchased a SDTV thinking I would get Digital reception. I don't call that reception- popping in and out with "Low or now signal" most of the time.

I live in Green Bay with 5 channels and will not be held HOSTAGE by signing up with Cable or a Dish.

The definition of FREE TV is now gone. Make the people in congress who thought it would be fun to elimilate tv from people who make under $30,000 a year!!! $70 for cable tv is TOOOOO HIGH and the government should not FORCE people to get cable.

That's a SCAM!!!!!

 

[Trip]

Welcome.

It works great for me. You come on here without telling us what kind of antenna you have. Nobody can help you without that information. Also, in Green Bay, you should get more than 5.

And it absolutely was broken. Still using 50's technology which was horribly inefficient in terms of spectrum use. Digital technology allows for compression which allows much more efficient use of spectrum.

Any new technology has its faults that must be worked through. You're clearly on a computer, and that's not perfect either. I imagine you're not going to run back to the typewriter next time it freaks out on you. You restart it or figure out what's wrong and have it repaired. Same story for digital TV.

So, what kind of antenna do you have?

- Trip

 

[bicker]

As with anything government does, our best hope is that a healthy majority benefit, and only a small minority are left behind. To expect things that governments do to benefit 100% of everyone is simply not realistic in a pluralistic society. Regardless, I do believe that only very few people will be adversely affected by the DTV transition, and there are many who will benefit, especially those who will benefit from the enhanced public safety and security communications that the DTV transition will facilitate.

 

[Piggie]

As with anything government does, our best hope is that a healthy majority benefit, and only a small minority are left behind. To expect things that governments do to benefit 100% of everyone is simply not realistic in a pluralistic society. Regardless, I do believe that only very few people will be adversely affected by the DTV transition, and there are many who will benefit, especially those who will benefit from the enhanced public safety and security communications that the DTV transition will facilitate.

I have said for years, in a post hurricane environment, that the transition will make it harder to get information. During the last few week long power outages, a lot of people relied on battery operated TVs to watch low band channels that worked over their typical long distances for information. These people didn't have antennas on their homes, but had cable or satellite that died the moment power went out.

Now I have to use at a minimum where I live a small UHF antenna, battery and inverter to run a small preamp, CECB and the same TV I used last time.

No I can't see any answer to this either. That is not my point, low band analog is gone is a couple more days. The way it is.

If the security is from the new public safety spectrum, more rural areas won't see that for a long time. Our area is still 80% VHF for fire and UHF for police despite the available spectrum at 800 MHz to use a more advanced system. They can't afford it. I don't see them jumping on using the new 700 MHz channels any faster.

 

[bicker]

The crux of what you've said is this:

No I can't see any answer to this either.

There are legitimate concerns on all sides of the issue. The purpose of government is to make the best decision overall, given all the considerations. You feel that this endangers public safety for a few people, so much, that that overwhelms the benefits. There is nothing wrong with holding to that opinion. Other folks disagree with you and their perspective prevailed. One of the main characteristics of a pluralistic society is that no person can reasonable expect society, itself, to defer to their personal opinion. There's not much else I can say about that.

 

[staticMHZ]

it's gonna suck not being able to use a battery powered TV with the built in rod antennas they have, mine picks up about 5 analog VHF stations clear as a button with just the rod antenna on it.

of course, you still have radio.

 

[Orrymain]

The problem comes when the many leave the few behind with no thought or concern. It reminds me of Star Trek, when the needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few, only it's not long before they reverse that and decide that the needs of the one are just as important. Unfortunately, Star Trek's society is a long ways away for us. We still abandon the ones.

 

[Piggie]

it's gonna suck not being able to use a battery powered TV with the built in rod antennas they have, mine picks up about 5 analog VHF stations clear as a button with just the rod antenna on it.

of course, you still have radio.

That was what was nice post hurricane. The local stations were constantly running information, so you knew for example on the hour or half hour that WESH or WKMG would run updates.

Yes you can listen to a 5 minute NOAA loop. It's not a deal breaker for me by any means, but it was a cheap convent way to catch the news visually which is of great need if there are other hurricanes looming as you are still cleaning up.

I am not even asking that Low Band is brought back on analog. It's just one of those things that was nice and easy.

=======

Edit. My opinion without further discussion in this thread is we live in a Corporatist Society leaning toward Oligarchy or visa versa. I believe they want us to believe we live in a pluralistic democratic republic. Example: What input did the pluralistic public have on the DTV Transition? None of which I am aware save maybe the last delay.

 

[bicker]

The problem comes when the many leave the few behind with no thought or concern. It reminds me of Star Trek, when the needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few, only it's not long before they reverse that and decide that the needs of the one are just as important. Unfortunately, Star Trek's society is a long ways away for us. We still abandon the ones.

The Star Trek stuff was kind of cutsie in the movie, but our society already has a very clear-cut and highly defensible means of differentiating. The need of the one outweigh the needs of the many, when the needs of the one are civil liberties, and the needs of the many aren't. Otherwise, when there has to be a choice, the needs of the many must prevail.

 

[DTVuser2009]

It seemed that a lot of Star Trek storylines (such as that one in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan) involve a lot of politics that seem to forecast our own not-so-distant future, along with quite a few many tech advances which a good amount exist today. (such as communicators = cellular phones, duty roster pads = PDA/PIM devices, phaser - taser, etc)

I think when Roddenberry made Star Trek he was actually forecasting what we would soon experience, from politics to technology along with many others. sometimes i think whenever it involves many different races they're almost trying to get at animal rights to some extent since they're always preaching 'equality' and don't tell me for a second that the Klingons don't remind you of some sort of primitive animalistic race. lol

Either way, at first my DTV-experience sucked. now it seems i get every channel offered save for one that i hope comes through post-transition. i just hope that this doesn't give the Government more reasons to push their beliefs on us. i forecast some sort of 'Green Car transition' that will really go over the line with me. i just hope that the Government doesn't see this is any way to force other beliefs on us. before long US Government will become so benevolent that the 'Land of the Free' won't exist. we're going to have to let our Government know that their 'mommy knows best' policies should be taken away, since as our own Constitution states, it's FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE. NOT the 'Government.'

Digital TV is a nice advance, but it should've been left to THE PEOPLE to decide. not our Government. but either way, it would've favored the transition so i guess what i just said is a moot point.

 

[bicker]

Actually, the Constitution does not say that. That's actually a reference to a part of a speech given by President Abraham Lincoln (almost a century later), eulogizing veterans who fell at Gettysburg.

Beyond that, do keep in mind that what President Lincoln was talking about was all of the people, together, not every and every person as if they were their own sovereign country. If President Lincoln had meant that, he surely wouldn't have attacked the South for having decided to do their own thing. President Lincoln's message was very clear: That the Union preempts any individual state, and therefore surely any individual city, town, village or citizen. President Lincoln used that principle you highlighted to justify and support his decision to impose a national ethic against slavery (among other things).

So in terms of these things, in reference to the principle you yourself highlighted in quoting Lincoln, you could, I suppose, assert that you should be able to do things your way, but only as long as what you're doing has no impact, whatsoever, on anyone else. That helps protect our right to privacy, and a woman's right to choose. However, with regard to automobiles, the principle you highlighted would not protect you from the "Green Car transition" you referred to, because it holds that you can do what you wish only so long as it it does not increase the risks to our nation's economy, our nation's security, or our nation's environment, through increasing our nation's reliance on foreign fuel sources.

Not saying whether I agree 100% with the principle you highlighted (I do, but that doesn't matter) -- I'm just outlining what the principle you referred to is really all about.

 

[apprisevideo]

no impact, whatsoever, on anyone else

Well I have seen it all now. That last person said, "you should be able to do things your way, but only as long as what you're doing has no impact, whatsoever, on anyone else." I agree completely! Then in the very next sentence they said, "That helps protect our right to privacy, and a woman's right to choose." What is a baby before they are born? A tomato? A rabbit? "no impact, whatsoever, on anyone else"??? How can a baby NOT BE "anyone" before they are born? Please understand they are just as human as "anyone else", and should have all those rights that are given by our creator and protected by the constitution. I also believe that murder is murder. No matter how good or bad the victim may be.
Here it is again, "...but only as long as what you're doing has no impact, whatsoever, on anyone else. That helps protect our right to privacy, and a woman's right to choose (to have her baby killed)."

Now, about DTV! HA HA I am amazed at the hoopla over it all. I have not seen the numbers, but just how many TV sets in America, made before 2007, are only hooked to an antenna? I do not know, but it of course is a minority and small percentage. And if someone knows how to hook their TV to an antenna, they are probably smart enough to put a converter box between the antenna & the TV, using the one? wire??? Then plug the box into electricity! It has been treated like brain surgery, and they act like it is actually a serious problem that is incredibly urgent! In this market, the cable company has used just about every unsold avail for a year now to warn about the upcoming change, yet if you can see the PSA's about the change, then by definition you do not need to do anything! Maybe if you have a TV in the garage that is only using an antenna. yes, we really need to be prepared for what will happen to that TV. In the PSA warnings, they do not mention that battery powered TV's that are used in storms & other electrical outages, are really the only concern that I can see if you have cable or satellite. Well, a converter box that is not also battery powered will not help! Use an inverter and a boat or car battery! My main question is why so much fuss about a very simple solution? Get a converter box if you need one and hook up the one wire and your done!

 

[bicker]

What is a baby before they are born?

It is sufficient to say that reasonable people disagree about this; I think you're horribly misguided, and you probably have similar thoughts about me. Do you want to have that debate, here, though?

My main question is why so much fuss about a very simple solution?

Many people believe that the whole world should conform to their own personal beliefs about how things should be, and so when something external, like this, forces them to do something outside of what they cared to do, they react negatively, even perhaps unreasonably, from other folks' perspective.

 

[DTVuser2009]

Well to me it's akin to the Government coming into my home and telling me what kind of appliance to use. it's a TV for crying out loud. the digital transition does have its benefits but it was forced on everyone without a single vote or any decision by THE PEOPLE.

The Government can and will go farther. i sure don't want them telling me what kind of car i have to own, or what color the house i live in must be painted as. i would hate to live in a society where there are zero choices and everyone drives the same kind of vehicle and lives in the same color house. that's what i am afraid it may become if we keep allowing the government to make choices for us instead of the people making choices for themselves.

 

[Trip]

i sure don't want them [...] what color the house i live in must be painted as.

You don't live in an area with an HOA, do you?

- Trip

 

[bicker]

If we let people make choices without concern for how those choices affect others, then you'll have people stealing, assaulting, etc. Outrageous? No more so than examples about the color of houses.

 

[DTVuser2009]

Well i'm not a sheep, and therefore i don't see your logic. as an individual i'm not supposed to have choices that agree with everyone else's. in fact that does effect everyone. not everyone is the same. that's the very NATURE of individuality, to be different. obviously you missed that very aspect of humanity, to not act in a collective or herd mentality.

I don't expect any choice i make to be in agreement to everyone else. i wear my clothes how i like, drive whatever car works for me, and have my own favorite animal, and i got the decor of my home to reflect who i am personally, and i eat whatever i want to eat. i think being that way is part of the fun of living in America, to have such freedoms to choose, freedoms of expression which, by the way is guaranteed by the 1st Amendment. if you're trying to say it's ok for the Government to take our individuality away then what you're stating is very unpatriotic. because that would be the apitamy of a Dictatorship. no choices; every one has the same things, the same clothes, the same kinds of TVs, the same cars. what a boring society that would be. we'd be a bunch of Borg drones with the Government dictating every choice we make to 'protect us from ourselves' like a corrupt nanny.

Is that the kind of America you want to see?

 

[pennypincher]

Thank you Tomcat for voicing the feeling of many others! I live in a small rural community, where I get fewer digital channels than I did analog channels. I now have a choice of 3 channels to watch.

Before anyone asks about antennas, we researched this issue prior to the switch and bought an antenna recommended for this switch. WASTE OF MONEY!

As for cable, not everyone can afford the extra $100/month. Many people are losing jobs, while others are being forced to take pay cuts. Now, as you said FREE television is essentially gone.

 

[DTVuser2009]

Don't let Digital Television be the Monster in YOUR living room!

lol! i wish i had a choice, i'd still have my CW network.

 

[1inxs]

pennypincher, Welcome to the DTVUSA Forum. Not to sound like a broken record and I know there are others here on the forum that dismiss this option, but contact your local county engineer and ask what you need to do to receive the programming you had prior to the DTV transition. I'm almost positive you will get close to the same quantity of stations as before. If you can't find the county phone number post back with the County you live in and I'll try to help.

Thank you Tomcat for voicing the feeling of many others! I live in a small rural community, where I get fewer digital channels than I did analog channels. I now have a choice of 3 channels to watch.

Before anyone asks about antennas, we researched this issue prior to the switch and bought an antenna recommended for this switch. WASTE OF MONEY!

As for cable, not everyone can afford the extra $100/month. Many people are losing jobs, while others are being forced to take pay cuts. Now, as you said FREE television is essentially gone.