I have some issues with your article on the end of analogue tv. I will start with the technical stuff. “Subscription tv providers have already gone digital” is not entirely true. TWC’s basic and standard tiers are analogue, not digital. Your TWC/KMBC examples confused me and I work in the industry. After February, 09, KMBC’s digital signal will be seen in analogue on the TWC’s basic tier the same way we see KMBC’s analogue signal now. And, according to the trades, TWC will be required to carry KMBC’s digital signal on both their digital tier and converted to analogue on their basic tier for several years.
Groups involved in the DTV transition have been trying to educate people on how to use the QAM decoders on current digital tuners by explaining that digital and scrambled are not synonymous and the QAM decoders can receive non-scrambled digital signals. When you casually throw these terms around in explaining how the cheap converters one can purchase with the $40 coupons “descramble the digital signals”, you are not helping any.
I can’t believe you are encouraging multicasting. I guess if you watch mostly premium channel programming you don’t have any empathy to those who don’t choose to spend their money on premium channels and get their HD programming from the networks, which by the way, you can receive with a digital tv over cable without paying for the digital tier. Even one extra channel affects the HD channel. And you can’t have an HD channel if you are multicasting several channels.
DTV was created by the industry to get higher resolution signals to the consumer. Multicasting was not part of the original plan. The government has stepped in to get the transition completed without dragging on for years. Speaking for myself, I do remember the excitement the first time I powered up my first digital OTA tuner connected to my old analogue tv. I was surprised how much was already on in digital, how I was receiving it with rabbit ears, the clear picture without analogue cable’s snow. It was the most excitement I had felt since first getting cable tv. That old tv was quickly replaced with an HDTV.
Dave DeLeersnyder
UMKC Video Net
Dave: Actually, multicast WAS an original codec of ATSC, and
remains so to this day. I have no idea where you're getting that bit
of revisionist history from, nor what you mean by "the original plan"
— I mean, if you want to play that game, we can go back to when
Congress was envisioning an ANALOG standard for HDTV, a la NHK. As we
know, digital descrambling intervened courtesy of the satellite
industry, and the rest was history. Again a case of the market tail
wagging the FCC dog, which was my point.
As for the argument that one more DTV signal hampers the HDTV signal
... well, then you really are a good-enough-for-government type,
because the inflexibility of the ATSC creates just such a false
choice. Apple and others have been developing new video compression
methods that can squeeze 720p down to a fraction of the space it takes
up under ATSC, which would leave plenty of room for multicast,
datacast (I didn't even get into THAT), and even a second 720p. Of
course, ATSC would have to be revised to allow for that ... but my
guess is people will be receiving TV channels from their computer via
wireless home network (or TiVo) before the industry gets around to
changing the standard.
As for my improper use of the word "descramble," maybe I confused some
the engineers in the room, but I doubt anyone else knows a QAM from a
qualm. I think the idea that you have to pay to get TNT HD as opposed
to KMBC-DT is a common sense one that directly flows from the present
situation. I don't understand at all how these technical distinctions
you want me to make will make things simpler for my readers. They
read these chicken little forecasts and say, my gosh, what now? My
answer: Do nothing. And chalk up one more needless scare to the
government.