On Jan 13, 9:18*am, Metspitzer wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:45:34 -0500, "Percival P. Cassidy"

wrote:
I can no longer find the message, but I'm sure that it was on one of
these two newsgroups within the past few days that I read an allegation
that the move from analog to digital for TV broadcasting was a plot to
push vast numbers of people to cable or satellite because the digital
signal is receivable only over a very small area.

I mentioned this allegation to a broadcast engineer yesterday. He told
me that in fact many people are not getting good reception of the OTA
digital signals and are moving to cable or satellite because many of the
expensive HD TVs on the market have appallingly insensitive antenna
inputs -- far inferior to the almost-free converter boxes that were
distributed over the last couple of years.

Perce

To the people that use OTA digital, how far do you live from the TV
stations?

I live in an area where we could never get good TV signals. *I am
interesting in hearing from people that had poor TV and are using OTA
for digital. *I live 45-60 miles from the stations.

I live 20 miles from the transmission towers. I live atop a 400'
hill. I had to put a large antenna on the roof to get good digital
reception. Some local stations have done some tinkering over the past
months to help on their end.

BTW, I've always heard that the integral digital tuners in TV's are
superior to converter boxes.