hdtv is a bust.some shows can't air because of it.

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Waterperson77, Feb 18, 2004.

  1. The FCC required all tv shows tto broadcast digitally as of January 1, 2004.

    As soon as this happened, a local show here that is supposed to be airing can't
    even air because of it.

    It's been off over a month now because of it, and is still off, although it's
    supposed to be on.

    At first I thought it might have been cancelled, but it wasn't. The production
    company said the reason it's been off is because they're "experiencing
    technical difficulties.

    It turns out that the problem is that the production company's tape format is
    not compatible with WB's new tape format that the WB is requiring all of their
    affiliates to use now, now that digital tv broadcasting is a must.

    That's according to the production company itself.

    I was wondering what kind of "technical difficulties" would knock a show off
    the air for over a month.

    Now I know.

    At first I was wondering what was going on, since I've never ever in my whole
    entire life seen or even heard of technical difficulties at tv stations lasting
    that long. Usually only minutes or hours, a day at the max, but this was over a
    month.

    Now I know the problem is because of "digital tv broadcasting being required by
    the FCC"

    And the production companiy's equipment isn't compatible with WB's new format.
    So even though the show wasn't cancelled, and is supposed to be airing, it
    can't because the production company's tape format isn't compatible with WB's
    new tape format.

    And the production company can't afford the new tape format, since it's a
    smaller production company, and so the show isn't able to air even though it's
    supposed to be airing, because of that.

    so that's what the "technical difficulties" they were and are experiencing are.

    over the air digital tv broadcasting is a bust.

    tv shows that are supposed to be currently be airing aren't even able to air
    because of it.

    not even on the analog station because of it, (even though the show is produced
    on analog tape), since the tape isn't compatible with WB's new tape format.

    The FCC's required digital broadcasting is making shows that are supposed to
    air on analog stations not able to air at all on either the digital station or
    the analog station.

    I can't pick up the digital signal from that station anyway even though I pick
    up the analog signal fine.

    I don't get watchable reception on any digital station. And I have tried
    several different antennas, both non-HDTV ones AND ones made specificaly for
    HDTV, both outdoor antennas and indoor antennas.

    Ironically, the best digital HDTV reception I got out of any of them was with
    an anaog indoor non-HDTV rabbit ears antenna that had only one ear because the
    other ear was broken off of it. (Insert Van Gogh jokes here).

    Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because the digital tv stations aren't
    even watchable while the analog ones are completely watchable. ( You can't even
    follow a story with digital, while you can with analog. I know. I've tried
    both from here.)

    Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because digital tv prevents tv
    programs that are supposed to air from airing, while with analog, they usually
    air when they're supposed to, while with digital, the shows can't even air.

    with techinal difficulties lasting for months because of digital tv while
    technical difficulties on a completely analog system last only a day at the
    most (usually, although there's probably some exceptions to that that lasted
    longer).

    therefore, analog tv is far superior to digital tv.
    Waterperson77, Feb 18, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. that is, the show isn't even able to air on the analog tv station it's supposed
    to be airing on, because the production company's tape format isn't compatible
    with WB's new tape format that WB requires all of their affiliates to use now,
    now that all tv stations have to broadcast digitally, as required by the FCC,
    as of January 1, 2004. (which is the exact time that started the show that
    is supposed to be airing as not being able to air any more, even though it's
    supposed to be on.
    Waterperson77, Feb 18, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Waterperson77

    Mark B. Guest

    Just what show would that be?



    "Waterperson77" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The FCC required all tv shows tto broadcast digitally as of January 1,

    2004.
    >
    > As soon as this happened, a local show here that is supposed to be airing

    can't
    > even air because of it.
    >
    > It's been off over a month now because of it, and is still off, although

    it's
    > supposed to be on.
    >
    > At first I thought it might have been cancelled, but it wasn't. The

    production
    > company said the reason it's been off is because they're "experiencing
    > technical difficulties.
    >
    > It turns out that the problem is that the production company's tape format

    is
    > not compatible with WB's new tape format that the WB is requiring all of

    their
    > affiliates to use now, now that digital tv broadcasting is a must.
    >
    > That's according to the production company itself.
    >
    > I was wondering what kind of "technical difficulties" would knock a show

    off
    > the air for over a month.
    >
    > Now I know.
    >
    > At first I was wondering what was going on, since I've never ever in my

    whole
    > entire life seen or even heard of technical difficulties at tv stations

    lasting
    > that long. Usually only minutes or hours, a day at the max, but this was

    over a
    > month.
    >
    > Now I know the problem is because of "digital tv broadcasting being

    required by
    > the FCC"
    >
    > And the production companiy's equipment isn't compatible with WB's new

    format.
    > So even though the show wasn't cancelled, and is supposed to be airing,

    it
    > can't because the production company's tape format isn't compatible with

    WB's
    > new tape format.
    >
    > And the production company can't afford the new tape format, since it's a
    > smaller production company, and so the show isn't able to air even though

    it's
    > supposed to be airing, because of that.
    >
    > so that's what the "technical difficulties" they were and are experiencing

    are.
    >
    > over the air digital tv broadcasting is a bust.
    >
    > tv shows that are supposed to be currently be airing aren't even able to

    air
    > because of it.
    >
    > not even on the analog station because of it, (even though the show is

    produced
    > on analog tape), since the tape isn't compatible with WB's new tape

    format.
    >
    > The FCC's required digital broadcasting is making shows that are supposed

    to
    > air on analog stations not able to air at all on either the digital

    station or
    > the analog station.
    >
    > I can't pick up the digital signal from that station anyway even though I

    pick
    > up the analog signal fine.
    >
    > I don't get watchable reception on any digital station. And I have tried
    > several different antennas, both non-HDTV ones AND ones made specificaly

    for
    > HDTV, both outdoor antennas and indoor antennas.
    >
    > Ironically, the best digital HDTV reception I got out of any of them was

    with
    > an anaog indoor non-HDTV rabbit ears antenna that had only one ear because

    the
    > other ear was broken off of it. (Insert Van Gogh jokes here).
    >
    > Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because the digital tv stations

    aren't
    > even watchable while the analog ones are completely watchable. ( You can't

    even
    > follow a story with digital, while you can with analog. I know. I've

    tried
    > both from here.)
    >
    > Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because digital tv prevents tv
    > programs that are supposed to air from airing, while with analog, they

    usually
    > air when they're supposed to, while with digital, the shows can't even

    air.
    >
    > with techinal difficulties lasting for months because of digital tv while
    > technical difficulties on a completely analog system last only a day at

    the
    > most (usually, although there's probably some exceptions to that that

    lasted
    > longer).
    >
    > therefore, analog tv is far superior to digital tv.
    >
    >
    Mark B., Feb 18, 2004
    #3
  4. (Waterperson77) wrote:

    >The FCC required all tv shows tto broadcast digitally as of January 1, 2004.


    Well, you're wrong there for a start.

    >It turns out that the problem is that the production company's tape format is
    >not compatible with WB's new tape format that the WB is requiring all of their
    >affiliates to use now, now that digital tv broadcasting is a must.


    That doesn't make a lick of sense.

    And the lack of specifics in your article brands it as completely phony.


    --
    Reply address munged. You can figure it out.
    CAndersen (Kimba), Feb 18, 2004
    #4
  5. Look up the word REDUNDANCY in the dictionary. While you have a valid
    point of view, it is not necessary to write a thousand word post to
    put across 50 words worth of information.

    Russ


    On 18 Feb 2004 09:19:33 GMT,
    (Waterperson77) wrote:

    >The FCC required all tv shows tto broadcast digitally as of January 1, 2004.
    >
    >As soon as this happened, a local show here that is supposed to be airing can't
    >even air because of it.
    >
    >It's been off over a month now because of it, and is still off, although it's
    >supposed to be on.
    >
    >At first I thought it might have been cancelled, but it wasn't. The production
    >company said the reason it's been off is because they're "experiencing
    >technical difficulties.
    >
    >It turns out that the problem is that the production company's tape format is
    >not compatible with WB's new tape format that the WB is requiring all of their
    >affiliates to use now, now that digital tv broadcasting is a must.
    >
    >That's according to the production company itself.
    >
    >I was wondering what kind of "technical difficulties" would knock a show off
    >the air for over a month.
    >
    >Now I know.
    >
    >At first I was wondering what was going on, since I've never ever in my whole
    >entire life seen or even heard of technical difficulties at tv stations lasting
    >that long. Usually only minutes or hours, a day at the max, but this was over a
    >month.
    >
    >Now I know the problem is because of "digital tv broadcasting being required by
    >the FCC"
    >
    >And the production companiy's equipment isn't compatible with WB's new format.
    > So even though the show wasn't cancelled, and is supposed to be airing, it
    >can't because the production company's tape format isn't compatible with WB's
    >new tape format.
    >
    >And the production company can't afford the new tape format, since it's a
    >smaller production company, and so the show isn't able to air even though it's
    >supposed to be airing, because of that.
    >
    >so that's what the "technical difficulties" they were and are experiencing are.
    >
    >over the air digital tv broadcasting is a bust.
    >
    >tv shows that are supposed to be currently be airing aren't even able to air
    >because of it.
    >
    >not even on the analog station because of it, (even though the show is produced
    >on analog tape), since the tape isn't compatible with WB's new tape format.
    >
    >The FCC's required digital broadcasting is making shows that are supposed to
    >air on analog stations not able to air at all on either the digital station or
    >the analog station.
    >
    >I can't pick up the digital signal from that station anyway even though I pick
    >up the analog signal fine.
    >
    >I don't get watchable reception on any digital station. And I have tried
    >several different antennas, both non-HDTV ones AND ones made specificaly for
    >HDTV, both outdoor antennas and indoor antennas.
    >
    >Ironically, the best digital HDTV reception I got out of any of them was with
    >an anaog indoor non-HDTV rabbit ears antenna that had only one ear because the
    >other ear was broken off of it. (Insert Van Gogh jokes here).
    >
    >Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because the digital tv stations aren't
    >even watchable while the analog ones are completely watchable. ( You can't even
    >follow a story with digital, while you can with analog. I know. I've tried
    >both from here.)
    >
    >Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because digital tv prevents tv
    >programs that are supposed to air from airing, while with analog, they usually
    >air when they're supposed to, while with digital, the shows can't even air.
    >
    >with techinal difficulties lasting for months because of digital tv while
    >technical difficulties on a completely analog system last only a day at the
    >most (usually, although there's probably some exceptions to that that lasted
    >longer).
    >
    >therefore, analog tv is far superior to digital tv.
    >


    respond here or email responses to cruzincat"deletethis"@cruzincat.com
    Russell Patterson, Feb 18, 2004
    #5
  6. Waterperson77

    Richard C. Guest

    "Waterperson77" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    : The FCC required all tv shows tto broadcast digitally as of January 1, 2004.
    :
    : As soon as this happened, a local show here that is supposed to be airing can't
    : even air because of it.
    :
    : It's been off over a month now because of it, and is still off, although it's
    : supposed to be on.
    :
    ===================================
    Did you major in redundancy in high school?
    Richard C., Feb 18, 2004
    #6
  7. Waterperson77

    Richard C. Guest

    Probably the one featuring 2.35:1 tube sets in his county.

    ===================
    "Mark B." <> wrote in message
    news:...
    : Just what show would that be?
    :
    :
    :
    : "Waterperson77" <> wrote in message
    : news:...
    : > The FCC required all tv shows tto broadcast digitally as of January 1,
    : 2004.
    : >
    : > As soon as this happened, a local show here that is supposed to be airing
    : can't
    : > even air because of it.
    : >
    : > It's been off over a month now because of it, and is still off, although
    : it's
    : > supposed to be on.
    : >
    : > At first I thought it might have been cancelled, but it wasn't. The
    : production
    : > company said the reason it's been off is because they're "experiencing
    : > technical difficulties.
    : >
    : > It turns out that the problem is that the production company's tape format
    : is
    : > not compatible with WB's new tape format that the WB is requiring all of
    : their
    : > affiliates to use now, now that digital tv broadcasting is a must.
    : >
    : > That's according to the production company itself.
    : >
    : > I was wondering what kind of "technical difficulties" would knock a show
    : off
    : > the air for over a month.
    : >
    : > Now I know.
    : >
    : > At first I was wondering what was going on, since I've never ever in my
    : whole
    : > entire life seen or even heard of technical difficulties at tv stations
    : lasting
    : > that long. Usually only minutes or hours, a day at the max, but this was
    : over a
    : > month.
    : >
    : > Now I know the problem is because of "digital tv broadcasting being
    : required by
    : > the FCC"
    : >
    : > And the production companiy's equipment isn't compatible with WB's new
    : format.
    : > So even though the show wasn't cancelled, and is supposed to be airing,
    : it
    : > can't because the production company's tape format isn't compatible with
    : WB's
    : > new tape format.
    : >
    : > And the production company can't afford the new tape format, since it's a
    : > smaller production company, and so the show isn't able to air even though
    : it's
    : > supposed to be airing, because of that.
    : >
    : > so that's what the "technical difficulties" they were and are experiencing
    : are.
    : >
    : > over the air digital tv broadcasting is a bust.
    : >
    : > tv shows that are supposed to be currently be airing aren't even able to
    : air
    : > because of it.
    : >
    : > not even on the analog station because of it, (even though the show is
    : produced
    : > on analog tape), since the tape isn't compatible with WB's new tape
    : format.
    : >
    : > The FCC's required digital broadcasting is making shows that are supposed
    : to
    : > air on analog stations not able to air at all on either the digital
    : station or
    : > the analog station.
    : >
    : > I can't pick up the digital signal from that station anyway even though I
    : pick
    : > up the analog signal fine.
    : >
    : > I don't get watchable reception on any digital station. And I have tried
    : > several different antennas, both non-HDTV ones AND ones made specificaly
    : for
    : > HDTV, both outdoor antennas and indoor antennas.
    : >
    : > Ironically, the best digital HDTV reception I got out of any of them was
    : with
    : > an anaog indoor non-HDTV rabbit ears antenna that had only one ear because
    : the
    : > other ear was broken off of it. (Insert Van Gogh jokes here).
    : >
    : > Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because the digital tv stations
    : aren't
    : > even watchable while the analog ones are completely watchable. ( You can't
    : even
    : > follow a story with digital, while you can with analog. I know. I've
    : tried
    : > both from here.)
    : >
    : > Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because digital tv prevents tv
    : > programs that are supposed to air from airing, while with analog, they
    : usually
    : > air when they're supposed to, while with digital, the shows can't even
    : air.
    : >
    : > with techinal difficulties lasting for months because of digital tv while
    : > technical difficulties on a completely analog system last only a day at
    : the
    : > most (usually, although there's probably some exceptions to that that
    : lasted
    : > longer).
    : >
    : > therefore, analog tv is far superior to digital tv.
    : >
    : >
    :
    :
    Richard C., Feb 18, 2004
    #7
  8. Waterperson77

    Scot Gardner Guest

    "Richard C." <> wrote in message
    news:40337d54$0$168$...
    Waterperson77" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    : The FCC required all tv shows tto broadcast digitally as of
    :January 1, 2004.
    :
    : As soon as this happened, a local show here that is supposed to be
    : airing can't even air because of it.
    :
    : It's been off over a month now because of it, and is still off,
    : although it's supposed to be on.
    :
    ===================================
    <<Did you major in redundancy in high school?>>


    What I don't understand is how Waterperson77 managed to find the time to
    compose the 35 highly-repetitious posts that he made on February 17,
    2004. Obviously, he is interested in quantity, not quality.

    His last flurry of redundant posts were made on January 16, 2004. My
    guess is that he has gotten another 5-day pass and he intends to make
    the most of it.
    Scot Gardner, Feb 18, 2004
    #8
  9. Change 2004 to 2007 and you might be right.....

    Except for that part with analog being better than digital.

    Yes, I must admit I love analog TV. It's lower resolution, and signal noise
    is much prettier and sharper than the 1920x1080 MPEG-2 files that are
    streamed along in HDTV land. Plus, the academy film ratio from the 30s and
    40s is far superior to the modern widescreen aspect and makes viewing things
    so much more life-like because our eyes are set to view in a perfect 4:3
    rectangle, not the one the doctors say (y'know, 2:1).

    I sure hope analog prevails as the clear winner in all this, since it is
    clearly superior.....


    "Waterperson77" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The FCC required all tv shows tto broadcast digitally as of January 1,

    2004.
    >
    > As soon as this happened, a local show here that is supposed to be airing

    can't
    > even air because of it.
    >
    > It's been off over a month now because of it, and is still off, although

    it's
    > supposed to be on.
    >
    > At first I thought it might have been cancelled, but it wasn't. The

    production
    > company said the reason it's been off is because they're "experiencing
    > technical difficulties.
    >
    > It turns out that the problem is that the production company's tape format

    is
    > not compatible with WB's new tape format that the WB is requiring all of

    their
    > affiliates to use now, now that digital tv broadcasting is a must.
    >
    > That's according to the production company itself.
    >
    > I was wondering what kind of "technical difficulties" would knock a show

    off
    > the air for over a month.
    >
    > Now I know.
    >
    > At first I was wondering what was going on, since I've never ever in my

    whole
    > entire life seen or even heard of technical difficulties at tv stations

    lasting
    > that long. Usually only minutes or hours, a day at the max, but this was

    over a
    > month.
    >
    > Now I know the problem is because of "digital tv broadcasting being

    required by
    > the FCC"
    >
    > And the production companiy's equipment isn't compatible with WB's new

    format.
    > So even though the show wasn't cancelled, and is supposed to be airing,

    it
    > can't because the production company's tape format isn't compatible with

    WB's
    > new tape format.
    >
    > And the production company can't afford the new tape format, since it's a
    > smaller production company, and so the show isn't able to air even though

    it's
    > supposed to be airing, because of that.
    >
    > so that's what the "technical difficulties" they were and are experiencing

    are.
    >
    > over the air digital tv broadcasting is a bust.
    >
    > tv shows that are supposed to be currently be airing aren't even able to

    air
    > because of it.
    >
    > not even on the analog station because of it, (even though the show is

    produced
    > on analog tape), since the tape isn't compatible with WB's new tape

    format.
    >
    > The FCC's required digital broadcasting is making shows that are supposed

    to
    > air on analog stations not able to air at all on either the digital

    station or
    > the analog station.
    >
    > I can't pick up the digital signal from that station anyway even though I

    pick
    > up the analog signal fine.
    >
    > I don't get watchable reception on any digital station. And I have tried
    > several different antennas, both non-HDTV ones AND ones made specificaly

    for
    > HDTV, both outdoor antennas and indoor antennas.
    >
    > Ironically, the best digital HDTV reception I got out of any of them was

    with
    > an anaog indoor non-HDTV rabbit ears antenna that had only one ear because

    the
    > other ear was broken off of it. (Insert Van Gogh jokes here).
    >
    > Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because the digital tv stations

    aren't
    > even watchable while the analog ones are completely watchable. ( You can't

    even
    > follow a story with digital, while you can with analog. I know. I've

    tried
    > both from here.)
    >
    > Analog tv is far superior to digital tv, because digital tv prevents tv
    > programs that are supposed to air from airing, while with analog, they

    usually
    > air when they're supposed to, while with digital, the shows can't even

    air.
    >
    > with techinal difficulties lasting for months because of digital tv while
    > technical difficulties on a completely analog system last only a day at

    the
    > most (usually, although there's probably some exceptions to that that

    lasted
    > longer).
    >
    > therefore, analog tv is far superior to digital tv.
    >
    >
    Anonymous Joe, Feb 18, 2004
    #9
  10. >Change 2004 to 2007 and you might be right.....
    >


    no, thee beginning og 2007 is the date when all over-the-air analog tv
    broadcasting must stop.

    January 1, 2004 was the date when all over-the-air tv stations must be
    broadcasting digitally (must have their digital transmitters on-the-air.)

    although they can keep their analog tv stations until the end of 2006-beginning
    of 2007, ther digital tv stations must also be on te air as of January 1, 2004
    Waterperson77, Feb 18, 2004
    #10
  11. >Yes, I must admit I love analog TV. It's lower resolution, and signal noise
    >is much prettier and sharper than the 1920x1080 MPEG-2 files that are
    >streamed along in HDTV land.


    It is from what I myself have seen. When you can't even follow any story or
    news on the digital HDTV stations because the picture always freezes and breaks
    up into blocks every minute or so, (for the stations you do get) while the
    analog is perfectly watchable. And most of the digital tv stations don't come
    in at all even though theey're on the air (blank screen with a notice from the
    hdtv receiver saying "weak signal") while the same stations' analog signals are
    perfectly watchable.

    I'd rather watch an analog signal where I can see a picture, hear the sound,
    and follow the story or news information being presented rather than watching a
    digital signal that I caan't even follow a story or news info on because the
    signal on every station that does come in always freezes and breaks up into
    blocks so that I can't see or hear the story or news info that is being
    presented.
    Waterperson77, Feb 18, 2004
    #11
  12. >That doesn't make a lick of sense.
    >
    >And the lack of specifics in your article brands it as completely phony.


    no it isn't. Here's a few direct quotes from the production company itself,
    along with a direct quote of a reply.

    1. direct quote from the production company that produces the show:

    "We are experiencing technical difficulties.

    2. direct quote from the production company that produce the show:

    "Technical difficulties with the tape. Hope to be resolved next week".

    3. direct quote from a reply to the above:

    "There must be some serious technical difficulties to knock the show off tv for
    almost a month"

    4. direct quote from the production company that produces the show:

    "You can let your forum know we are on hiatus. We have some technical
    difficulties that need to be resolved. ( Our media format is not compatible
    with WB's new format )

    me: And there you have it from the production companny itself. by the way,
    it's been more than a month now and the technical issues still haven't been
    resolved.

    The station did NOT cancel the show. The station did NOT put the show on
    hiatus. However, the show IS on hiatus because it hasn't been able to air since
    the production comany's tape format is not compatible with WB's new format.

    The show isn't even able to air on the analog station because of the
    incompatibilities caused by WB's new format (WB's digital tv format).

    and wasn't able to air on the digital station, either because of it.

    The tv station wants to show the show. The producers of the show want to show
    the show. But neither are able to since the production company's tape format
    isn't compatible with WB's new format.

    And this problem coincided with January 1, 2004, the date that all over-the-air
    tv stations must broadcast digitally by law ( not to be confused with
    2006-2007, the date when all over the aair tv stations must stop analog tv
    broadcasting.

    And it's not some cheap public-acess cable tv station, either.

    It's a sucessful regular full-powwered over-the-air tv station.

    The production company of the show has been trying to resolve the technical
    difficulties for over a month now, and still haven't been able to do so since
    WB's new format is so incompatible with the production company's tape format.

    As I said, over-the-air digital tv broadcasting is a bust. Not only do I get
    terrible blocky reception on the digital channels that I do get, but digital
    broadcasting also prevents analog tv shows (like the above) from being able to
    air on analog tv and prevents it from airing on digital tv also.
    Waterperson77, Feb 18, 2004
    #12
  13. looking at the direct quotes from the production company that I provided, I see
    there was only one mistake in my post regarding this subject, and that was when
    I said "WB's new tape format".

    The correct information is that the production company said "WB's new format",
    not "WB's new tape format
    ".

    The WB's new format is digital HDTV, and the production company said that the
    production company's tape format is NOT compatible with WB's new format, and
    that that is why the show isn't able to air even though both the production
    company and the tv station want it to air. That that's the technical
    dfficulties that are causing the problem.

    So it's because of the digital HDTV format that a tv show that is supposed to
    air on an analog tv station isn't even able to air on the analog tv station
    like they're supposed to, anymore, and isn't able to air on the digital tv
    station, either.
    Waterperson77, Feb 18, 2004
    #13
  14. Waterperson77

    Justin Guest

    Waterperson77 wrote on [18 Feb 2004 19:12:00 GMT]:
    > looking at the direct quotes from the production company that I provided, I see
    > there was only one mistake in my post regarding this subject, and that was when
    > I said "WB's new tape format".


    Just go away.
    Justin, Feb 18, 2004
    #14
  15. Waterperson77

    Richard C. Guest

    "Waterperson77" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    :
    : January 1, 2004 was the date when all over-the-air tv stations must be
    : broadcasting digitally (must have their digital transmitters on-the-air.)
    :
    =============================
    Congratulations!

    You are correct!

    There is always a first for everything............
    Richard C., Feb 18, 2004
    #15
  16. Waterperson77

    Ronald Cole Guest

    (Waterperson77) writes:
    > The FCC required all tv shows tto broadcast digitally as of January 1, 2004.


    And so this "production company" has had many years warning of the
    upcoming change and did nothing. And I'm supposed to be sympathetic
    why?

    --
    Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412
    Ronald Cole <> Phone: (760) 499-9142
    President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152
    My GPG fingerprint: C3AF 4BE9 BEA6 F1C2 B084 4A88 8851 E6C8 69E3 B00B
    Ronald Cole, Feb 18, 2004
    #16
  17. Waterperson77

    Ronald Cole Guest

    "Anonymous Joe" <> writes:
    > Change 2004 to 2007 and you might be right.....


    You're confusing "start broadcasting in digital" with "stop
    broadcasting in analog". Even the latter is put off until digital
    gets 85% penetration, IIRC.

    --
    Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412
    Ronald Cole <> Phone: (760) 499-9142
    President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152
    My GPG fingerprint: C3AF 4BE9 BEA6 F1C2 B084 4A88 8851 E6C8 69E3 B00B
    Ronald Cole, Feb 18, 2004
    #17
  18. Waterperson77

    Matt Ackeret Guest

    In article <>,
    Waterperson77 <> wrote:
    >>Change 2004 to 2007 and you might be right.....
    >>

    >
    >no, thee beginning og 2007 is the date when all over-the-air analog tv
    >broadcasting must stop.
    >
    >January 1, 2004 was the date when all over-the-air tv stations must be
    >broadcasting digitally (must have their digital transmitters on-the-air.)
    >
    >although they can keep their analog tv stations until the end of 2006-beginning
    >of 2007, ther digital tv stations must also be on te air as of January 1, 2004


    There is no set in stone date for the end of analog transmissions anymore.
    It is based upon how fast HDTV is embraced in each TV market. See the FCC's
    web site for more details.
    Matt Ackeret, Feb 18, 2004
    #18
  19. >There is no set in stone date for the end of analog transmissions anymore.
    >It is based upon how fast HDTV is embraced in each TV market. See the FCC's
    >web site for more details.
    >


    well, that's more of a matter of a way of looking at it. You're right, but my
    understanding is that the set date is still there and still yet. However,
    you're correct since the rules also say that analog shutoff doesn't have to
    happen in each market unil 85 percent of the people in that market hass acess
    to digital signals. (which supposedly could delay analog shutoff until way
    after 2006)

    However, while I assumed that meant until 85 pecent of the people have digital
    recievers, other people said that it means until more than 85 percent of the tv
    stations in a marrket are digital (still forcing analog shutoff aat the end of
    2006) and not the percent of people having recievers.

    I don't know which of the two intterpretations is correct.

    only time will tell.

    But those are the two diffferent interpretations of "acess to digital signals"
    that are out there.
    Waterperson77, Feb 18, 2004
    #19
  20. >And so this "production company" has had many years warning of the
    >upcoming change and did nothing. And I'm supposed to be sympathetic
    >why?


    It's my understanding that the company probably can't afford the change. And
    by the way, they didn't do nothing.

    They're trying to resolve the problem. They said that their tape format is not
    compatible with WB's new format.

    But eveything they have tried to resolve the problem so far has failed. (within
    what they can afford to do).

    They had no idea that their tape format would be incompatible with WB's new
    format until it happened.

    For years, I've read a lot about hdtv and digital broadcasting, and I certainly
    never read or heard anything about certain tv industry standard tape being
    incompatible with digital atsc format, until this happened.

    Therefore, they most certainly didn't know, either.

    Yes, they were mosst certaainly aware of the change to digital broadcasting,
    but they weren't aware that their tape format would be incompatible with
    digital tv broadcasting.

    They didn't have any idea it would happen either, until it happened.



    ..
    Waterperson77, Feb 18, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    512
    Charlie Pearce
    Jul 15, 2006
  2. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,145
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,373
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,745
  5. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    881
    Bert Hyman
    Dec 31, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page