Comments on: Analog TV shutdown is a mistake http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/ Can you think of a better name? Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:36:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: guest http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-395292 guest Sat, 31 Dec 2011 01:56:48 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-395292 After the switch over in Montreal....I lost 3 channels with my new flat screen t.v. I'm surprised I don't get Global in both my flat screen t.v's....the new one bought just after Boxing Day. And no....I don't have cable or satellite. I still use my rabbit ears for both new t.v's. After the switch over in Montreal....I lost 3 channels with my new flat screen t.v. I'm surprised I don't get Global in both my flat screen t.v's....the new one bought just after Boxing Day.
And no....I don't have cable or satellite. I still use my rabbit ears for both new t.v's.

]]> By: bobbee http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-321441 bobbee Tue, 06 Sep 2011 00:47:01 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-321441 We live in a deep valley 60km NW of Toronto. Before conversion to digital we received three good channels (CBLT ch 5, Global ch 6, CKVR ch 3). Many years ago I installed a UHF yagi on my 60 ft tower to try to receive some of the UHF channels off the CN tower. The only thing I got was reflection from a hill to my northwest. I just found out that with conversion to digital, channels were reallocated. CBLT is now Ch 20, CKVR is now Ch 10, I haven't yet found Global's Brantford transmitter listed. Now that CBC is on UHF, have we lost it? We live in a deep valley 60km NW of Toronto. Before conversion to digital we received three good channels (CBLT ch 5, Global ch 6, CKVR ch 3). Many years ago I installed a UHF yagi on my 60 ft tower to try to receive some of the UHF channels off the CN tower. The only thing I got was reflection from a hill to my northwest. I just found out that with conversion to digital, channels were reallocated. CBLT is now Ch 20, CKVR is now Ch 10, I haven't yet found Global's Brantford transmitter listed. Now that CBC is on UHF, have we lost it?

]]> By: GUEST 123 http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-319489 GUEST 123 Thu, 01 Sep 2011 17:49:08 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-319489 I am an engineering technologist and work in the the electronics/telecom industries. I still agree with you I think its a total crock, yeah so some people may get better pictures. Did anyone stop to think that the system we adopted was the one JAPAN rejected 12 years ago? So I GUESS its GREEN throwing out all of those old sets not to mention the thousands of dollars WASTED in transmitter equipment! I think this was all done as a cash grab by TV and broadcast manufacturers as well as greedy gov'ts who stand to make A TON of money auctioning off frequency bands!!! Maybe its time they clued in that they work for US not the other way around. I get more and more disgusted with things the older I get. I am an engineering technologist and work in the the electronics/telecom industries.
I still agree with you I think its a total crock, yeah so some people may get better pictures. Did anyone stop to think that the system we adopted was the one JAPAN rejected 12 years ago? So I GUESS its GREEN throwing out all of those old sets not to mention the thousands of dollars WASTED in transmitter equipment! I think this was all done as a cash grab by TV and broadcast manufacturers as well as greedy gov'ts who stand to make A TON of money auctioning off frequency bands!!! Maybe its time they clued in that they work for US not the other way around.
I get more and more disgusted with things the older I get.

]]> By: Even more details about Montreal’s digital TV transition – Fagstein http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-317088 Even more details about Montreal’s digital TV transition – Fagstein Sun, 28 Aug 2011 11:02:39 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-317088 [...] 2009, when the United States was set to do its digital transition, I argued that it seemed unnecessary. I understood the need to vacate part of the TV broadcast spectrum to sell off for better uses, but [...] [...] 2009, when the United States was set to do its digital transition, I argued that it seemed unnecessary. I understood the need to vacate part of the TV broadcast spectrum to sell off for better uses, but [...]

]]> By: CBC gets to keep some analog TV running – Fagstein http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-311404 CBC gets to keep some analog TV running – Fagstein Wed, 17 Aug 2011 03:20:20 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-311404 [...] 2009, I argued that the digital TV transition is a counterproductive waste of money. Two years later, with the deadline only two weeks away, this seems even more clear. Broadcasters [...] [...] 2009, I argued that the digital TV transition is a counterproductive waste of money. Two years later, with the deadline only two weeks away, this seems even more clear. Broadcasters [...]

]]> By: Fagstein http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-196830 Fagstein Mon, 30 Aug 2010 08:40:18 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-196830 <blockquote>Is it so that we can be spied on?</blockquote> Considering that digital television is unidirectional (meaning there's no way for data to go from your television set back to their transmitter), I don't see how it can be used for spying.

Is it so that we can be spied on?

Considering that digital television is unidirectional (meaning there's no way for data to go from your television set back to their transmitter), I don't see how it can be used for spying.

]]> By: Eye Wanda http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-196673 Eye Wanda Sun, 29 Aug 2010 21:37:34 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-196673 What is the REAL reason for the "change over"? Have you asked yourself the question WHY is analogue television being switched off eventually, and we are only allowed digital TV? Why are we not allowed to keep analogue because the two work perfectly OK together at the moment? Is it so that we can be spied on? What is the REAL reason for the "change over"? Have you asked yourself the question WHY is analogue television being switched off eventually, and we are only allowed digital TV? Why are we not allowed to keep analogue because the two work perfectly OK together at the moment?

Is it so that we can be spied on?

]]> By: OTA Burnaby http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-157334 OTA Burnaby Mon, 07 Jun 2010 01:57:27 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-157334 "The big problem though is the "cliff effect", where the signal degrades enough that the digital receiver can't make heads or tails out of it anymore. Stations that you receive snowy might not pass this threshold and would be lost" That is true, but the digital cliff can work to your benefit also, in that video quality can be the same whether you are 10 miles or 100 miles from the transmitters. Yes, if you live past the digital cliff, reception can be impossible, but there are ways to increase its range. I am one of those people that has benefited greatly from the conversion to digital of the Canadian and US stations, and love the VASTLY superior video/audio quality. The fact it is free and 100% legal is just makes it even more amazing. My location in Burnaby BC, is aprox 114 miles from the major networks in Seattle Washington. When the US stations were analog only, the reception at my location was an unwatchable snowy mess, with only the faintest trace of video and just hiss for audio. Since the digital conversion, I now receive all the 3 major US networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) in perfect jaw dropping HD quality with 5.1 surround sound. Hi-Def TV was built for big events such as sports and even the local news takes on a whole new world when seen in the best quality, which is OTA HD. The problem that I see with OTA is two fold: 1. TV stations failure to see the potential for this new technology 2. Lack of interest, plus some ignorance by average Canadian Both the Canadian consumer and Canadian TV stations are both typically content to depend on the same operating model that has been used since the late 1960's, ie. cable/satellite companies to pipe the signals into peoples homes. The TV broadcasters are sitting on a very valuable commodity, namely a portion of the RF spectrum. Since they are not making any new frequencies, and with the advent of OTA HD providing the highest possible video quality (better than cable or satellite), the Canadian broadcasters should make more of an effort to maximize its potential. If OTA HDTV was better promoted and better utilized, it could benefit both the broadcasters and Canadian public. The OTA broadcasters are sitting on a fabulous product that could be used to increase overall viewership, and thus increase revenues from advertising. The Canadian public gets the highest quality TV picture, and the costs are paid by business advertising. Many people will always want their 300 channel universe so cable/satellite will continue to be the prime delivery method. Where the increased overall viewership would come from, is the likes of myself, who drifted away from TV completely in favor of the internet. Yes, most TV shows can be found on the internet, but you can not beat a high bitrate 1080i channel viewed on a 52" HDTV for quality, and we are MANY years away from the internet being able to provide enough bandwidth to allow large numbers of people to STREAM high quality live HDTV "The big problem though is the "cliff effect", where the signal degrades enough that the digital receiver can't make heads or tails out of it anymore. Stations that you receive snowy might not pass this threshold and would be lost"

That is true, but the digital cliff can work to your benefit also, in that video quality can be the same whether you are 10 miles or 100 miles from the transmitters.
Yes, if you live past the digital cliff, reception can be impossible, but there are ways to increase its range. I am one of those people that has benefited greatly from the conversion to digital of the Canadian and US stations, and love the VASTLY superior video/audio quality. The fact it is free and 100% legal is just makes it even more amazing.

My location in Burnaby BC, is aprox 114 miles from the major networks in Seattle Washington. When the US stations were analog only, the reception at my location was an unwatchable snowy mess, with only the faintest trace of video and just hiss for audio. Since the digital conversion, I now receive all the 3 major US networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) in perfect jaw dropping HD quality with 5.1 surround sound. Hi-Def TV was built for big events such as sports and even the local news takes on a whole new world when seen in the best quality, which is OTA HD.

The problem that I see with OTA is two fold:

1. TV stations failure to see the potential for this new technology
2. Lack of interest, plus some ignorance by average Canadian

Both the Canadian consumer and Canadian TV stations are both typically content to depend on the same operating model that has been used since the late 1960's, ie. cable/satellite companies to pipe the signals into peoples homes. The TV broadcasters are sitting on a very valuable commodity, namely a portion of the RF spectrum. Since they are not making any new frequencies, and with the advent of OTA HD providing the highest possible video quality (better than cable or satellite), the Canadian broadcasters should make more of an effort to maximize its potential.

If OTA HDTV was better promoted and better utilized, it could benefit both the broadcasters and Canadian public.
The OTA broadcasters are sitting on a fabulous product that could be used to increase overall viewership, and thus increase revenues from advertising.
The Canadian public gets the highest quality TV picture, and the costs are paid by business advertising.

Many people will always want their 300 channel universe so cable/satellite will continue to be the prime delivery method. Where the increased overall viewership would come from, is the likes of myself, who drifted away from TV completely in favor of the internet. Yes, most TV shows can be found on the internet, but you can not beat a high bitrate 1080i channel viewed on a 52" HDTV for quality, and we are MANY years away from the internet being able to provide enough bandwidth to allow large numbers of people to STREAM high quality live HDTV

]]> By: CRTC has decided: It’s time to pay for free TV – Fagstein http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-126342 CRTC has decided: It’s time to pay for free TV – Fagstein Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:18:48 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-126342 [...] I've already argued that this is an unnecessary move and will be unnecessarily expensive for both br.... The reason is simple: The reason for doing this is to liberate TV channels above 52, and conversion to digital is unnecessary to accomplish this goal, because no Canadian market has more than two dozen television stations (including U.S. border stations), which could be reassigned to a lower channel if they're currently above 52. [...] [...] I've already argued that this is an unnecessary move and will be unnecessarily expensive for both br.... The reason is simple: The reason for doing this is to liberate TV channels above 52, and conversion to digital is unnecessary to accomplish this goal, because no Canadian market has more than two dozen television stations (including U.S. border stations), which could be reassigned to a lower channel if they're currently above 52. [...]

]]> By: Fagstein http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-125604 Fagstein Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:48:52 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-125604 Yes, but you will need to buy a digital converter box. Yes, but you will need to buy a digital converter box.

]]> By: Elaine http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-125460 Elaine Sun, 21 Mar 2010 05:55:18 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-125460 We live just outside of Prince Albert SK Canada on an acreage. We only use rabbit ears on top of our television for reception. After August 2011 will we still be able to get coverage with the rabbit ears? Thank you. We live just outside of Prince Albert SK Canada on an acreage. We only use rabbit ears on top of our television for reception.

After August 2011 will we still be able to get coverage with the rabbit ears?
Thank you.

]]> By: Dave http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-114458 Dave Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:20:56 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-114458 I'm surprised there's been no comments on CTV Montreal going "HD!!!". But only on CABLE......... I find it ironic that CTV Montreal chose one of the "evil cable companies" for their first digital venture, while flipping the bird to people who watch via antenna. You can probably attribute this decision to the "low-hanging-fruit" method, but IMHO, if you're a feudin' with someone, you don't smooch their butt. I'm surprised there's been no comments on CTV Montreal going "HD!!!".

But only on CABLE.........

I find it ironic that CTV Montreal chose one of the "evil cable companies"
for their first digital venture, while flipping the bird to people who watch
via antenna.

You can probably attribute this decision to the "low-hanging-fruit" method,
but IMHO, if you're a feudin' with someone, you don't smooch their butt.

]]> By: CBC fee-for-carriage solution isn’t really one – Fagstein http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-101223 CBC fee-for-carriage solution isn’t really one – Fagstein Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:42:54 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-101223 [...] already argued that this digital transition is completely unnecessary, and that goes double for remote areas with few television stations. But the CRTC is going ahead [...] [...] already argued that this digital transition is completely unnecessary, and that goes double for remote areas with few television stations. But the CRTC is going ahead [...]

]]> By: OScar http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-94544 OScar Fri, 25 Sep 2009 01:21:00 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-94544 I live near downtown Toronto and most of the GTA digital signals are good, except that I do get bad reception occasionally in the Evening and weekends. I do not get CITS & CBLFT (no loss really). I live near downtown Toronto and most of the GTA digital signals are good, except that I do get bad reception occasionally in the Evening and weekends. I do not get CITS & CBLFT (no loss really).

]]> By: Dan http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-75891 Dan Thu, 07 May 2009 22:35:31 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-75891 Can we go back to black and white TV? Can we go back to black and white TV?

]]> By: Ron http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-62265 Ron Mon, 09 Feb 2009 12:03:31 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-62265 I don't see what the number of stations has to with digital TV. We can still have less channels and use even less bandwidth if you reduced the number of channels to 40 using digital. Digital TV works and looks better on a digital TV, so maybe flat screen TV are also a mistake. On a 52" TV 480p looks 10 time better than the analog channel . I live in southern Ontario and could only get a couple of clear channels and a bunch of snowy ones. now I get them all crystal clear and couple more. One post above mentions the cliff effect. You get a perfect picture with a bad or great signal or not at all once the signal is to weak. That’s something to rave about not complain about. I don't see what the number of stations has to with digital TV. We can still have less channels and use even less bandwidth if you reduced the number of channels to 40 using digital. Digital TV works and looks better on a digital TV, so maybe flat screen TV are also a mistake. On a 52" TV 480p looks 10 time better than the analog channel .

I live in southern Ontario and could only get a couple of clear channels and a bunch of snowy ones. now I get them all crystal clear and couple more. One post above mentions the cliff effect. You get a perfect picture with a bad or great signal or not at all once the signal is to weak. That’s something to rave about not complain about.

]]> By: steve81 http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-58148 steve81 Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:40:06 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-58148 Most stations in the Toronto area are available digitally over the air (OTA). Not so for Montreal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_television_in_Canada#Deployment For people that have an HDTV with an ATSC tuner, digital OTA is great. No need to pay for cable if all you need is the basic channels. In Montreal, you can only get Radio-Canada, CBC and TQS... if you are lucky. Unless it changed recently, Radio-Canada/CBC digital are broadcast from the antenna on top of the CBC tower, so if you're on the other side of Mount Royal, you can't get it. TQS digital transmission in Montreal is also weak as well and they plan to change that with the 2011 switch. Some people in Montreal have hooked up big roof antennas in order to get digital TV from Burlington/Plattsburgh: http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=95756 Works for some people. Most stations in the Toronto area are available digitally over the air (OTA).
Not so for Montreal:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_television_in_Canada#Deployment

For people that have an HDTV with an ATSC tuner, digital OTA is great. No need to pay for cable if all you need is the basic channels. In Montreal, you can only get Radio-Canada, CBC and TQS... if you are lucky. Unless it changed recently, Radio-Canada/CBC digital are broadcast from the antenna on top of the CBC tower, so if you're on the other side of Mount Royal, you can't get it. TQS digital transmission in Montreal is also weak as well and they plan to change that with the 2011 switch.

Some people in Montreal have hooked up big roof antennas in order to get digital TV from Burlington/Plattsburgh:
http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=95756
Works for some people.

]]> By: Fagstein http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-58006 Fagstein Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:14:31 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-58006 Cable isn't affected by any of this. Nothing will change there. Cable isn't affected by any of this. Nothing will change there.

]]> By: mart http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-57998 mart Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:30:53 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-57998 We have basic free cable package that Vide@tron forgot to cut when previous tenants moved out 5 years ago. Is our adapter going to obsolete in 2011? We have basic free cable package that Vide@tron forgot to cut when previous tenants moved out 5 years ago. Is our adapter going to obsolete in 2011?

]]> By: The End of Analog TV — Super Bon! http://blog.fagstein.com/2009/01/09/analog-tv-shutdown-is-a-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-57986 The End of Analog TV — Super Bon! Sat, 10 Jan 2009 14:42:17 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/?p=3614#comment-57986 [...] Fagstein has an excellent post on the end of analog TV signals in the US, and the same fate that will fall upon Canadians in 2011. [...] [...] Fagstein has an excellent post on the end of analog TV signals in the US, and the same fate that will fall upon Canadians in 2011. [...]

]]>