Re: Cable HD TV Systems

 In rec.video.cable-tv,    Msg ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 Corporate American Citizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, wrote:

>Private Citizen wrote:
>>
>> I heard somewhere that signals used for for HD TV are incompatibile
>> with all existing TV sets.
>
>Yes.  Existing television sets -- the kinds which have been around for
>decades -- understand only analog (RS-170A NTSC standard) signals.
>
>In order to receive ATSC (the standard which defines both standard-
>definition and high-definition ("HD") digital television) via antenna,
>you will have to:
>
>(a) buy new television sets capable of handling ATSC signals, or:
>
>(b) keep your existing television sets and buy set-top converters
>which can change those digital (ATSC) over-the-air signals into
>regular RS-170A NTSC analog.
>
>> I also heard that there is a plan circulating to "transition" both
>> broadcast and cable sytems over the next 5-10 years to 100% HD TV.
>
>No.  The only transition plan presently in effect is one that requires
>all analog over-the-air television signals in America to cease by 2006.

Any idea what will happen if consumers don't buy into the HD scam?
The real advantage of digital signals is the ability to control access
the content, isn't it. Wont this merely serve to privatice the airwaves?
Is digital Radio the next "new frontier"?
Then digital Air, Water, and Sunlight?

>Cable system operators are not bound by that requirement, though.  They
>will be free to continue offering analog signals over their systems for
>as long as they desire.

Yeah... Sure.

>Even if your local cable service does shut down its analog signals at
>some point, then you could still rely upon the fact that their rental
>descrambler boxes would offer analog outputs for older TVs.
But they reserve the right to NOT sell them, at least mine will NOT.


>The same applies to satellite service.  Their transmission systems are
>already digital, and their receiver boxes already have analog outputs --
>and will continue to have them.

They all strive to do the same thing,,
That is: To assert an ownership interest in the content.

>> My questions. 1. Are any converter boxes on the market today capable
>> of converting these signals to Standard Definition signals?
>>
>> STANDARD DEFINITION (SD) BROADCAST SYSTEMS
>> may either be analog (NTSC / PAL / PAL-M / SECAM) or
>> digital (DTV), having 625 or less scan lines and an aspect ratio of
>> either 4:3 or 16:9. By 2006, most SD broadcasting will be digital.
>
>I think you are being confused by terminology overload.  There are but
>two kinds of television signals that you need to concern yourself with:
>analog (NTSC), and digital (ATSC a.k.a. DTV).  "Standard definition"
>(SDTV) and "high definition" (HDTV) are just relative terms describing
>the amount of detail in either analog or digital signals.

While you may be correct about terminology overload.
I have a global interest, what with free trade, and the new
international capitalism movements..

>So the question you really want to ask is: are there any converters on
>the market capable of converting those signals to NTSC (analog).  The
>answer is yes.  As I mentioned above, however, such converters are only
>necessary for those who don't have cable or satellite service -- those
>who will receive television strictly via antenna.  All existing digital
>cable boxes and satellite receivers already have digital-to-analog
>circuitry in them (as evidenced by the analog outputs that they offer).

In all cases, they operate "legal" monopolies..
And use "public" infrastuctures, for devious purposes.
(The ether, telephone poles, etc. etc. rights of way of various types.)
As corporations, they owe their very EXISTENCE to governments.

>> 2. Apparently the "over the air" broadcaters will join the "digital"
>> age. Is it legal for me to attach such a device to my antenna, and
>> cable, and continue to use the TVs I now own..
>
>For antenna reception, yes, you will be able to purchase digital-to-
>analog converters at most electronics stores and attach them legally.

Is that a "promise" of things to come?

>For cable, things will work differently, and the answer is ultimately
>dependant upon the style of cable service that you now have.

Yep.. Per minute charges for News, is but just one more "new"  thing.

>1.  If you have analog service without descrambler/converter boxes:
>you will be able to continue receiving analog cable signals as you're
>doing now for as long as your cable company provides them.  Again,
>cable companies are not required to turn off their analog signals in
>2006.  Your cable company may continue offering them until 2016, or
>it may shut them down tomorrow.  Either way, at whatever point they
>discontinue the analog channels on your system, you will receive a
>notice from them informing you that you must begin renting their new
>digital cable descrambler boxes.  For older television sets, those
>boxes will have analog outputs on them.
>
>2.  If you have analog service WITH descrambler boxes: same as above.
>When they decide to shut down the analog signals in their system, you
>will receive a notice telling you that your analog descrambler boxes
>must be exchanged for new, digital ones (which, again, will provide
>analog outputs).
>
>3.  If you have digital cable service, then you already have digital
>cable converter boxes with analog outputs on them.  In that case, the
>point when your cable company shuts down its analog channels will be
>irrelevant to you: your existing converters will continue working,
>and you will be required to do nothing.

All of it sucks!!!
--
Ray