Hi!

I don't think digital is ready for prime time.

Most of the TV channels here are actually doing really well. It hasn't
made the programming any better though. But one of them (WCIA-TV) is
plain miserable. It sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks
sucks sucks and sucks so badly on any set I've watched it on. That is
to say it Just Doesn't Work.

Of course, anything I want to watch on TV is probably on CBS. So it
goes.

I don't know why--I've watched it on sets that could receive their
analog signal with rock-solid clarity and sets that were hooked up to
very good directional antennas pointed the right way. Even the
slightest little thing upsets it to the point of unwatchability.

And did I mention that it sucks? I can't see how these people don't
know there is a problem. (And yes, I'm assuming it is *their* fault
judging by the wide variety of TVs I've watched it on in many
different locations.)

I haven't had a single digital cell phone conversation without
some audio ****ups of some kind.

I hate 'em. Whatever compression or encoding they're using on the
majority of digital cellular telephone networks makes any background
noise sound like intrusive mumbling or underwater bubbling. And that's
to say *nothing* of how people behave in public with them!

(Oh wait! I wrote a rant that was partially about that!
http://greyghost.mooo.com/phonerant.htm)

Of course, I know I'm a minority. I don't carry one with me regularly,
have it turned off when I do have it around.

(I also discovered that there was at least one person in this world
who has less to do than the Maytag repairman of yesteryear. That
person is the person at AT&T who writes you a letter to say that
you've had your phone for so long that they are shutting down the
network it runs on.)

This is digital **** is really a ****ed up system. Maybe I'm too
old or something but I don't remember this problem in the old
days with analog things.

The problem (at least as I saw it) was that analog couldn't provide
you with 500 subchannels of TV wrestling (!!!) with high definition
pictures so you can see *all* of the compression artifacting and 5.1
surround sound so you can hear it as well. I'm not sure why we needed
it, seems to me that it was more of a solution looking for a problem
than anything else. They *say* it's for reuse of the old spectrum for
various other purposes, a claim that I guess I find doubtful at best.

Oh, and of course, analog TV *worked*. It might have a snowy picture
or monophonic sound, but who cared. If you wanted to watch (big if)
you *could*.

Wow. Did I just get on a bit of a soapbox or what?

William

William R. Walsh wrote in message
...
Hi!

I don't think digital is ready for prime time.

Most of the TV channels here are actually doing really well. It hasn't
made the programming any better though. But one of them (WCIA-TV) is
plain miserable. It sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks
sucks sucks and sucks so badly on any set I've watched it on. That is
to say it Just Doesn't Work.

Of course, anything I want to watch on TV is probably on CBS. So it
goes.

I don't know why--I've watched it on sets that could receive their
analog signal with rock-solid clarity and sets that were hooked up to
very good directional antennas pointed the right way. Even the
slightest little thing upsets it to the point of unwatchability.

And did I mention that it sucks? I can't see how these people don't
know there is a problem. (And yes, I'm assuming it is *their* fault
judging by the wide variety of TVs I've watched it on in many
different locations.)

I haven't had a single digital cell phone conversation without
some audio ****ups of some kind.

I hate 'em. Whatever compression or encoding they're using on the
majority of digital cellular telephone networks makes any background
noise sound like intrusive mumbling or underwater bubbling. And that's
to say *nothing* of how people behave in public with them!

(Oh wait! I wrote a rant that was partially about that!
http://greyghost.mooo.com/phonerant.htm)

Of course, I know I'm a minority. I don't carry one with me regularly,
have it turned off when I do have it around.

(I also discovered that there was at least one person in this world
who has less to do than the Maytag repairman of yesteryear. That
person is the person at AT&T who writes you a letter to say that
you've had your phone for so long that they are shutting down the
network it runs on.)

This is digital **** is really a ****ed up system. Maybe I'm too
old or something but I don't remember this problem in the old
days with analog things.

The problem (at least as I saw it) was that analog couldn't provide
you with 500 subchannels of TV wrestling (!!!) with high definition
pictures so you can see *all* of the compression artifacting and 5.1
surround sound so you can hear it as well. I'm not sure why we needed
it, seems to me that it was more of a solution looking for a problem
than anything else. They *say* it's for reuse of the old spectrum for
various other purposes, a claim that I guess I find doubtful at best.

Oh, and of course, analog TV *worked*. It might have a snowy picture
or monophonic sound, but who cared. If you wanted to watch (big if)
you *could*.

Wow. Did I just get on a bit of a soapbox or what?

William


Its about making money. If I had the brass neck to sell empty space for
billions, I'd be done for fraud.

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-...to-Vacant-Broa
dcasters-Spectrum-313032/

"Long dubbed "beachfront" spectrum, the 700MHz band is considered ideal for
advanced wireless services such as mobile television and wireless broadband
because the signals are strong enough to penetrate most interference. In
all, the spectrum auction brought in almost $20 billion, with Verizon
spending $9.6 billion and AT&T dropping another $6.6 billion. "


--
Diverse Devices, Southampton, England
electronic hints and repair briefs , schematics/manuals list on
http://home.graffiti.net/diverse:graffiti.net/

Its about making money. If I had the brass neck to sell empty space for
billions, I'd be done for fraud.

http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-...to-Vacant-Broa
dcasters-Spectrum-313032/

"Long dubbed "beachfront" spectrum, the 700MHz band is considered ideal
for
advanced wireless services such as mobile television and wireless
broadband
because the signals are strong enough to penetrate most interference. In
all, the spectrum auction brought in almost $20 billion, with Verizon
spending $9.6 billion and AT&T dropping another $6.6 billion. "


--
Diverse Devices, Southampton, England
electronic hints and repair briefs , schematics/manuals list on
http://home.graffiti.net/diverse:graffiti.net/




Yes, much of it is indeed about making money. There has been a huge amount
of public brainwashing going on with regard to digital TV. Most people think
it is better than analogue, because that is what the government (here in the
uk) want them to think. That allows a switch-off of analogue TV services
with the minimum of fuss, freeing up the UHF bands for sale to cell phone
operators and others, for billions.

Some aspects of digital are better. It allows many more channels (if that's
what you want) to be crammed into the same space. When it is a full data
rate transmission or in HD, with an appropriate (that's good quality,
operating in native mode) receiver on the end, the results can be quite
stunning. But at grass roots level, it also has many shortcomings, not the
least of which is pixellating or nothing at all on even a slightly marginal
signal, feeding an 'average' receiver. Heavily 'charged' air during
thunderstorm activity, has a profound effect on satellite digital reception,
and heavy rain disturbs my digital terrestrial tv to the point of
pixellation and total freeze, even though I am only 20 miles from the
transmitter with a good 'line of sight'. Whilst my analogue reception used
to degrade under similar circumstances, it never-the-less remained
watchable.

If you have a crap digital receiver however, the results can be truly
dreadful. I see supermarket brands all the time, and even on a good quality
transmission, they still look awful. For the most part, the same couldn't be
said for analogue receivers. Over the years, I have owned many 'el cheapo'
analogue TV sets, and they have all performed remarkably well on some very
variable signals.

Thing is, love it or hate it, digital is with us now, and we are just going
to have to embrace its advantages, and live with its shortcomings. I think
that the trick is to spend that bit extra on buying quality equipment, and
make sure that you have the best signal possible available to it. It's easy
to become a technology Luddite, especially as you get older, but sometimes,
I think we cling onto elements of our youth just because we feel comfortable
with them ...

Arfa