The End of Analog TV in America Is Near

[Filip Norrgard]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7593620/' target='_blank'>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7593620/</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Depending on the outcome of discussions in Congress, television as we know it may end at exactly midnight Dec. 31, 2006. That’s the date Congress targeted, a decade ago, for the end of analog television broadcasting and a full cutover to a digital format. If enforced, that means that overnight, somewhere around 70 million television sets now connected to rabbit ears or roof-top antennas will suddenly and forever go blank, unless their owners purchase a special converter box."</i><br /><br />I have a feeling that the deadline will be pushed back a little, but we will have to see. In the small country I live in, the analog TV broadcasts will come to a stop in August 2007 when almost the whole country should be covered by digital TV broadcasts. That is after a few years of active marketing and informing the general population on digital set-top boxes and the end of analog TV. <br /><br />In US, according to the article, there seems to be little (if any) active informing of the end of analog TV and that is where the bug will bite. What do you think? Is the end of 2006 too soon for pulling the plug on analog TV in the US?

[sojourner753]

I'm still unclear about this whole digital tv issue.
I'm currently building an HTPC and am probably not going to put a digital capture card in it.

Does that mean that at the end of 2006 I will be unable to pick anything up? Or will I just not be able to record at the same quality.

I'm currently receiving my TV via Cable but its analog. :?

[Filip Norrgard]

I'm still unclear about this whole digital tv issue.
I'm currently building an HTPC and am probably not going to put a digital capture card in it.

Does that mean that at the end of 2006 I will be unable to pick anything up? Or will I just not be able to record at the same quality.
I guess your question properly illustrates the lack of information about the switch to all digital TV broadcasts in the US. :)

But, I suspect that you would have to buy a digital tuner card to be able to watch TV after analog is dead. When that happens, that is.

[alanjrobertson]

Here in the UK the plan is for a more gradual phased switchover. One Welsh village has already switched (as a pilot site), but the rest are aimed at changing over between 2008-2012 (the last places being those on the South Coast of England where there are UHF interence issue with France).

The switchover is to be handled by SwitchCo - http://www.switchco.co.uk/pressrelease.htm

With the US changeover does this also include cable and satellite or is it terrestrial only? Over here satellite went digital-only a number of years ago and cable is almost there (all new connections are digital only but I don't think they've quite stopped transmitting analgoue signals in addition yet). However a difference here compared to the USA (and I'm not sure how Finland compares in this regard, Filip) the vast majority of viewers don't have cable or satellite and use analogue TV (I get the impression that in the USA a majority receive TV via cable). A large number are gradually changing to DTT ('Freeview' - http://www.freeview.co.uk) but we'll need to get some more changed over before the switchover can become a reality. A big problem is that analogue sets are still being sold - they really need to try and drive the sales of digital sets. HDTV is close to launch now by Sky (I think they're aiming for the start of next year).

Cheers

Alan

[Don Tolson]

I'm still unclear about this whole digital tv issue.
I'm currently building an HTPC and am probably not going to put a digital capture card in it.

Does that mean that at the end of 2006 I will be unable to pick anything up? Or will I just not be able to record at the same quality.

I'm currently receiving my TV via Cable but its analog. :?

Maybe I'm being naive here, or don't understand the technologies, but my understanding is, that you will only be in trouble (like having a blank screen) if you are gathering your TV signals from an antenna (like the rabbit ears or rooftop job described in the article). If you are on cable, you should be fine, since the cable company will be receiving their signal digitally, then sending it along to you in either analog format or digital -- depending upon your current subscription.

The big issue here (especially in the US) is the approximately 70 million people who are NOT hooked up to cable. The main discussion is one of why should they now have to pay to see something they could receive for free in the past? And doesn't this create something of a monopoly for the cable companies, since there is little competition between them in the same geographical area (at least in Canada).

[alanjrobertson]

Do the viewers gain any extra features/channels for switching to DTT? Certainly here it's a big increase in channels (from 5 on analogue to over 30 channels on DTT, with another 5 or so channels available if you pay £8/month). The cost of the set-top converter boxes is also very low - about £35-£45. The DTT PVRs are becoming increasingly popular too - about £150-£200. Unfortunately TiVo pulled out of the UK market a couple of years ago so they're only available to those of us who subscribed whilst they were still available. The new boxes aren't that bad though - a lot of them have dual digital tuners. Microsoft Media Centres are also becoming a little bit more popular (although obviously cost quite a bit more).

[Filip Norrgard]

With the US changeover does this also include cable and satellite or is it terrestrial only?
I understood it so that all (cable, satellite, terrestrial) analog TV broadcasts om the US would meet the cable cutter by end of next year, but I might be wrong here...

However a difference here compared to the USA (and I'm not sure how Finland compares in this regard, Filip) the vast majority of viewers don't have cable or satellite and use analogue TV (I get the impression that in the USA a majority receive TV via cable).
I think the most TV viewers here are terrestrial closly followed by cable. In fact, many have gotten digital set-top boxes to their summer cottages first, and then (after seeing the quality of the reception) to their primary homes as the reception tends to be better in the towns than out in the middle of the Finnish forests.

[Jeremy Charette]

Maybe I'm being naive here, or don't understand the technologies, but my understanding is, that you will only be in trouble (like having a blank screen) if you are gathering your TV signals from an antenna (like the rabbit ears or rooftop job described in the article). If you are on cable, you should be fine, since the cable company will be receiving their signal digitally, then sending it along to you in either analog format or digital -- depending upon your current subscription.

The big issue here (especially in the US) is the approximately 70 million people who are NOT hooked up to cable. The main discussion is one of why should they now have to pay to see something they could receive for free in the past? And doesn't this create something of a monopoly for the cable companies, since there is little competition between them in the same geographical area (at least in Canada).

Simple answer: no.

Those who get their TV over the air will be able to get local channels (ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX/PBS/etc) with an antenna. Starting in 2007 however, you will need a digital TV antenna, and a digital to analog converter box if you still have an analog TV.

I think a huge growth market in the next 2 years will be digital-analog TV signal convertors, for those who don't want to buy a new TV, or can't afford one.

Of course, this date has to get announced right when I'm considering using SnapStream to build a PVR! Argh!!!

[stevehiner]

I read somewhere on another forum that the digital switch in the US will only take place if at least 85% of the viewers have digital sets.

I sure hope that's true since I just added 2 PVR-150s to my PC and I'm building a separate HTPC. I don't want to spend the money on a digital tuner, especially one that has hardware encoding.

[BugDude10]

Here's my less-than-complete understanding the of the plan in the US...

By the end of 2006, every station is supposed to be broadcasting in HD; I don't think that means that they're all required to stop broadcasting in analog. However, I think that there is a deadline for the end of analog broadcasts (so that the US government can take back the analog frequencies to sell, I believe), but that may not be for another couple of years.

If you have cable, satellite, or antennae, you still need an HD TV or HD-ready TV + an HD receiver to get the HD signals (or an HD-to-analog converter). I don't know how long the cable &amp; satellite companies plan to send both analog and HD signals to their subscribers. Those without cable or satellite will be able to receive HD broadcasts from their local stations, just like they get programming now.

The hitch in the US is going to be consumer acceptance, and whether enough people have bought HD sets. (I haven't, yet: there isn't enough programming yet, and I'm not ready to pay so much extra for what programming is available, and HDTVs are still too expensive, in my opinion. I'm willing to ride the back-end of this wave.) With prices continuing to fall, and more programming becoming available, perhaps late-2006 is possible...

Of course, I could be wrong. :)