On Jan 2, 11:43�am, Jim wrote:
Cheri wrote:
Robert wrote:

Of course there is one good thing about 2009, we'll lose BUSH !!!!
A much welcomed loss.......

Really? Are you sure we'll lose him? I would imagine that we'll see and hear
about him every single day for many years to come.

yep, it's going to take several years for the simpletons to figure
out how bush is no longer president. �but, they'll blame him anyhow.

bushes lack of judgement and common sense, will be creating troubles
for our country for generations

the bush failure effects dont end when he leaves office

"enigma" wrote in message
...
Robert wrote in
:

Welcome to 2009. The year we lose our TV signals. What a way
to start the year, knowing in another month and a half, we will
lose our tv reception, unless we subscribe to costly cable or
satellite tv.

you do realize that you can not only live without television, but you
might even get more things accomplished. you could use the time you
waste watching tv to learn something new or work on hobbies.

Or to post to newsgroups.

Cheri

On Jan 2, 6:40*am, AL wrote:
dadiOH wrote:
Progress? *[...]The feds get billions...and the manufacturers get to sell new,
"improved" TV sets. *Wide screen ones at that (another useless
"innovation").

yeah, those original round screens are the way to go - who needs
"innovation"?

Exactly. Just what was wrong with a 6" round screen.

Harry K

Jim Yanik wrote:

"Pete C." wrote in
ster.com:


Robert wrote:


Drivel snipped

Quit your whining until a few months *after* the transition when most
stations will be transmitting their digital signals on their final
channel assignments and at their final power levels. Many are currently
transmitting digital on temporary channels, at low power from temporary
transmitters, from temporary antennas and in some cases from alternate
tower sites.

one local station has said they're going to LOWER transmitted power.

I may lose that station.I've already lost NBC.(but don't miss it...)


Lowering transmitter output power doesn't necessarily mean lower ERP if
they are switching to a better antenna at a better tower position.

On Jan 2, 6:46*am, Ann wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 07:50:31 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

"Robert" wrote in message
.. .
Welcome to 2009. *The year we lose our TV signals. *What a way to start
the year, knowing in another month and a half, we will lose our tv
reception, unless we subscribe to costly cable or satellite tv. *Oh yea,
they tell us we can get convertors and even give us coupons worth $40
for the $50 and up boxes that DO NOT work in rural areas, because the
digital signals are under-powered for those in fringe areas.

Progress. At some point in technological life we have to move on and some
are going to be left behind. *You can't buy leaded gas any more either.

hallerb wrote:

Jim wrote:
Cheri wrote:
Robert wrote:

Of course there is one good thing about 2009, we'll lose BUSH !!!!
A much welcomed loss.......

Really? Are you sure we'll lose him? I would imagine that we'll see and hear
about him every single day for many years to come.

yep, it's going to take several years for the simpletons to figure
out how bush is no longer president. but, they'll blame him anyhow.

bushes lack of judgement and common sense, will be creating troubles
for our country for generations

the bush failure effects dont end when he leaves office

so said the clinton haters...

On Jan 2, 12:46�pm, Jim wrote:
hallerb wrote:
�Jim wrote:
Cheri wrote:
Robert wrote:

Of course there is one good thing about 2009, we'll lose BUSH !!!!
A much welcomed loss.......

Really? Are you sure we'll lose him? I would imagine that we'll see and hear
about him every single day for many years to come.

yep, it's going to take several years for the simpletons to figure
out how bush is no longer president. �but, they'll blame him anyhow.

bushes lack of judgement and common sense, will be creating troubles
for our country for generations

the bush failure effects dont end when he leaves office

so said the clinton haters...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Clinton happened to be a decent adminstrator, although morally
bankrupt

Busdh is just a screw up. Do we need a list?

On Jan 2, 7:59 am, ransley wrote:
....
So you didnt check ratings on boxes before you went to your local
store and got one, kinda dumb, you reviewed your computer, tv, car and
wife. It just so happens NO boxes sold at local stores have good
ratings, ratings are done by many like Cnet, Consumer Reports and are
easy to joogle. Yes reception varies greatly, Quality of picture, ease
of use, so go read ratings, buy another box, and enjoy.

I've seen no ratings that actually had anything to do with fringe
reception issues such as sensitivity, S/N ratios, etc., etc.,
etc., ... All the ratings dealt with that I've seen were "ease of
use" issues and some minor quality variations given an input signal.
I looked and the ratings were worthless the standpoint of trying to
determine which (if any) might be more satisfactory for those in areas
where reception might be an issue.

So far, there's nobody here broadcasting digital in sufficient
strength to get any reception whatsoever.

I've also been unable to ascertain from the broadcasters what their
plans are for the translators we're currently using as for signal
strength, conversion date(s), etc., ...

--

On Jan 2, 11:45*am, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Jan 2, 12:46*am, Robert wrote:





Welcome to 2009. *The year we lose our TV signals. *What a way to
start the year, knowing in another month and a half, we will lose our
tv reception, unless we subscribe to costly cable or satellite tv. *Oh
yea, they tell us we can get convertors and even give us coupons worth
$40 for the $50 and up boxes that DO NOT work in rural areas, because
the digital signals are under-powered for those in fringe areas. *Yea,
i know this first hand. *I got my coupon, bought a $60 box for $20 and
the coupon, and while I used to get 7 channels (occasionally two
more), with the converter box, I get PBS. *That's it. I can watch Mr.
Rogers, Sesame Street, Teletubbies, and all the cruddy english garbage
they show, but no local news, no weather reports, no Soaps (that psrt
is OK, I hate soaps)...... *I'll just miss the local news and weather
reports, and once and awhile South Park..... *Either way, even despite
most of the crappy tv programs, like American Idol, all the Crime
shows, Survivor, and the Springer Show, I will still miss the tv. *On
the plus side I will no longer have to climb on the roof to fix my
antenna after a windstorm.....

Of course there is one good thing about 2009, we'll lose BUSH !!!!
A much welcomed loss.......

It looks like 2009 may end up being NEUTRAL. *We lose an asshole
president and out tv signals.

Happy New Year

Robert

South Park? You can get South Park via broadcast TV?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, yeah, at least around here. The local fox station (no cable
required to receive) carries the episodes about 2 weeks behind first
broadcast on Comedy Central.

SteveB wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message
...
Welcome to 2009. The year we lose our TV signals. What a way to
start the year, knowing in another month and a half, we will lose our
tv reception, unless we subscribe to costly cable or satellite tv. Oh
yea, they tell us we can get convertors and even give us coupons worth
$40 for the $50 and up boxes that DO NOT work in rural areas, because
the digital signals are under-powered for those in fringe areas. Yea,
i know this first hand. I got my coupon, bought a $60 box for $20 and
the coupon, and while I used to get 7 channels (occasionally two
more), with the converter box, I get PBS. That's it. I can watch Mr.
Rogers, Sesame Street, Teletubbies, and all the cruddy english garbage
they show, but no local news, no weather reports, no Soaps (that psrt
is OK, I hate soaps)...... I'll just miss the local news and weather
reports, and once and awhile South Park..... Either way, even despite
most of the crappy tv programs, like American Idol, all the Crime
shows, Survivor, and the Springer Show, I will still miss the tv. On
the plus side I will no longer have to climb on the roof to fix my
antenna after a windstorm.....

Of course there is one good thing about 2009, we'll lose BUSH !!!!
A much welcomed loss.......


It looks like 2009 may end up being NEUTRAL. We lose an asshole
president and out tv signals.

Happy New Year

Robert

What's the big ****ing deal? Get a dish. Move. Get cable. Throw away
that piece of **** antiquated television and get another one. Learn to
read. Buy a DVD player. Quit watching so much tube and do something else.

As to Bush, at least give this purple lipped big eared cocksucking
non-citizen of the US liberal a year to give away even more of your money
than Bush could ever do, and then comment. Bush at least kept the oil
flowing with all that money. Big Ears is going to give it to every lazy
mother****er who goes down and fills out the paperwork, although a $80,000
per year plus benefits government worker will have to fill them out because
lazy mother****er can't read or write. That is, the money that's left over
after him and his cronies take their vig, and IF there's any left.

WHERE'S MAH CHECK! or DONDE ESTA MI CHEQUE?

It's coming. Bend over.

Steve


You are one nasty piece of ****! Good thing you're not my neighbour,
asshole!

"dadiOH" wrote in message
...

If people want to buy a wide screen TV (or computer monitor), well and
good; I have no problem with that. What I *do* have a problem with is the
manufacturers selling them by the same old diagonal measurement...people
buy, say, a 32" widescreen to replace their old 27" and they think they
are going to get a bigger picture. They aren't. To get an image even the
same size they would have to buy one (in this example) almost 34".

I don't have a problem with new technology, but I do have a problem with
having it forced on me, such as DVD's vs VHS tapes. I much prefer the VHS
format, but you can't rent movies that way anymore, so if you want to rent a
movie you have to have a DVD player. No sooner do you get that, then Blu-Ray
starts, and on and on. At least the VCR's were viable for many years, now
every time you turn around, something becomes so obsolete that it's no
longer viable even while it's still in good working order. This all happens
in a very short time these days.

I was just fine with Win98 for instance, but nothing supports it anymore, so
had to upgrade to Vista, which is OK, but certainly not better IMO.

Cheri

"dpb" wrote in message
...
On Jan 2, 7:59 am, ransley wrote:
...
So you didnt check ratings on boxes before you went to your local
store and got one, kinda dumb, you reviewed your computer, tv, car and
wife. It just so happens NO boxes sold at local stores have good
ratings, ratings are done by many like Cnet, Consumer Reports and are
easy to joogle. Yes reception varies greatly, Quality of picture, ease
of use, so go read ratings, buy another box, and enjoy.

I've seen no ratings that actually had anything to do with fringe
reception issues such as sensitivity, S/N ratios, etc., etc.,
etc., ... All the ratings dealt with that I've seen were "ease of
use" issues and some minor quality variations given an input signal.
I looked and the ratings were worthless the standpoint of trying to
determine which (if any) might be more satisfactory for those in areas
where reception might be an issue.

So far, there's nobody here broadcasting digital in sufficient
strength to get any reception whatsoever.

I've also been unable to ascertain from the broadcasters what their
plans are for the translators we're currently using as for signal
strength, conversion date(s), etc., ...


Have you tried contacting the broadcaster about your problems? They may be
interested, or may have specific suggestions.

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 09:36:48 -0800, Harry K wrote:

On Jan 2, 6:46Â*am, Ann wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 07:50:31 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

"Robert" wrote in message
.. .
Welcome to 2009. Â*The year we lose our TV signals. Â*What a way to
start the year, knowing in another month and a half, we will lose our
tv reception, unless we subscribe to costly cable or satellite tv.
Â*Oh yea, they tell us we can get convertors and even give us coupons
worth $40 for the $50 and up boxes that DO NOT work in rural areas,
because the digital signals are under-powered for those in fringe
areas.

Progress. At some point in technological life we have to move on and
some are going to be left behind. Â*You can't buy leaded gas any more
either. You don't have to subscribe to cable, but you do need a
digital TV. Â* I don't know how well that will work in your area
compared to a box.

Buying a digital TV should make no difference with the reception part of
it. Â*A 42" flat screen won't get any more stations, although retailers
would like us to believe that they do.

I have to wonder how many people will wake up and not have any TV at
all and not have a clue as to why. Â*They've been talking about it
every hour for months but some will still say Â*"no one told me"

Already, it may be too late to get a coupon in time. Â*Rather than being
open ended, the funding is for a specific dollar amount. Â*When all the
money is out there in the form of redeemable coupons, new applicants
have to wait for coupons to expire, unredeemed.

Well, if someone can't get one whose fault is that. It has been promoted
endlessly for at least 6 months.

Just relating how the coupon thing works ... which I didn't know until
recently. If one is to believe www.dtv2009.gov a coupon ordered today
should be mailed on the 19th of this month. But apparently that's in
doubt.

"Caesar Romano" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 06:17:29 -0800, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas
wrote Re The year we lose our TV signals:

What's the big ****ing deal? Get a dish. Move. Get cable. Throw away
that piece of **** antiquated television and get another one. Learn to
read. Buy a DVD player. Quit watching so much tube and do something else.

As to Bush, at least give this purple lipped big eared cocksucking
non-citizen of the US liberal a year to give away even more of your money
than Bush could ever do, and then comment. Bush at least kept the oil
flowing with all that money. Big Ears is going to give it to every lazy
mother****er who goes down and fills out the paperwork, although a $80,000
per year plus benefits government worker will have to fill them out because
lazy mother****er can't read or write. That is, the money that's left over
after him and his cronies take their vig, and IF there's any left.

Well put.

If you're an idiot.

On Jan 2, 1:14�pm, Jim wrote:
hallerb wrote:
Jim wrote:
hallerb wrote:
Jim wrote:
Cheri wrote:
Robert wrote:

Of course there is one good thing about 2009, we'll lose BUSH !!!!
A much welcomed loss.......

Really? Are you sure we'll lose him? I would imagine that we'll see and hear
about him every single day for many years to come.

yep, it's going to take several years for the simpletons to figure
out how bush is no longer president. but, they'll blame him anyhow.

bushes lack of judgement and common sense, will be creating troubles
for our country for generations

the bush failure effects dont end when he leaves office

so said the clinton haters...- Hide quoted text -

Clinton happened to be a decent adminstrator, although morally
bankrupt

morally bankrupt is going to be a judgment call based on
evaluations where no standards exist. �

for example while one group would consider there to be nothing
repugnant about a certain activity a different group might find
the same activity completely an abhorrent abomination. �



Busdh is just a screw up. Do we need a list?

no, I do not need a list because I do not need anyone other than
myself to blame for my own issues and previously made decisions.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

lying before congress and the voters? set aside cheating on
spouse...... thats not uncommon

"Steve Barker" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

cable isnt everywhere and there are definetely places that cant get
satellite service, because of trees or other obstructions.



Trees can be trimmed. it takes a very narrow path to get the dish to work. If
it's something other than a tree, then mount the dish on it.

Your neighbors might be a little annoyed though when you trim their trees.

On Jan 2, 2:22*pm, "Cheri" wrote:
"dadiOH" wrote in message

...

If people want to buy a wide screen TV (or computer monitor), well and
good; I have no problem with that. *What I *do* have a problem with is the
manufacturers selling them by the same old diagonal measurement...people
buy, say, a 32" widescreen to replace their old 27" and they think they
are going to get a bigger picture. *They aren't. *To get an image even the
same size they would have to buy one (in this example) almost 34".

I don't have a problem with new technology, but I do have a problem with
having it forced on me, such as DVD's vs VHS tapes. I much prefer the VHS
format, but you can't rent movies that way anymore, so if you want to rent a
movie you have to have a DVD player. No sooner do you get that, then Blu-Ray
starts, and on and on. At least the VCR's were viable for many years, now
every time you turn around, something becomes so obsolete that it's no
longer viable even while it's still in good working order. This all happens
in a very short time these days.

I was just fine with Win98 for instance, but nothing supports it anymore, so
had to upgrade to Vista, which is OK, but certainly not better IMO.

Cheri

You have a choice, you can keep watching your VHS tapes as long as
they last. Nobody is forcing you to watch anything. Hell I still
have a Beta player and a bunch of Beta tapes that I watch. When I
bought the CD player it was my choice, nobody forced me to buy it. I
may someday buy the BlueRay or not, again my choice. As for the
change over to digital TV, again it is my choice to either watch TV or
not and if I choose to watch, I got my converters for free.

Oh yes, you could have gone with LINUX instead.

On Jan 2, 12:01*pm, " wrote:
On Jan 2, 11:08 am, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:





wrote in message
performance of converter boxes isnt necessarily worse than a brand new
digital tv, but isnt necessarily better either.
sadly people who have cable, or satellite dont appear very sympathetic
for those who are losing tv.

Why is that sad? If I have sympathy for you will you get better reception?
I have cable because I can't get decent reception with an antenna here. Nor
does broadcast TV have most of the stations I like to watch. TV's have been
made digital capable for a couple of years now so some will not need a
converter. As of March 1, 2007, all television receivers shipped in
interstate commerce or imported into the United States must contain a
digital tuner.

This may be of passing interest. Ware are not the first to changehttp://www.answers.com/topic/digital-television
The first country to make a wholesale switch to Digital Over-the-Air
(terrestrial) broadcasting was the Netherlands, in 2006. This was followed
by Finland in 2007. [1] After February 17, 2009, full-power television
stations in the USA will broadcast in digital only. In Canada, this is
scheduled to happen Aug. 31, 2011. China is scheduled to switch in 2015..

In a area with say 10 stations they could offer a pay cable like
service of 40 channels for profit.by subscription.

Competition to the cable and sattelite companies? That may be a good thing.

theres no requirement they offer high definition at all!

Yes, there is even if it is not law. If they don't they will lose viewers.

if your unhappy with any of this call your federal representives,
congress and senate since they are the ones who passed this #@!$%^%
idea.

None of it makes me unhappy. One of my TVs is HD and I like the improved
quality.

local chaNNELS REALLY DONT CARE ABOUT HIGH DEF.

their main interest is making money, they will do whats most
profitable for them

Odd, all of my local OTA stations are now broadcasting at least one of
their digital channels in HD. It's nice to watch PBS in HD especially
when they have a nature or travel program. Most of them have one or
two sub-channels as well which you just can't get without digital. So
far, I'm liking it, and I expect after Feb. I'll like it even more as
there are a couple "marginal" stations that I can almost get that I am
hoping will increase their power. If not, I guess I'll just have to
throw up an outdoor antenna. Might even cancel my cable at that
point.

nate

On Jan 2, 11:56*am, dpb wrote:
On Jan 2, 7:59 am, ransley wrote:
...

So you didnt check ratings on boxes before you went to your local
store and got one, kinda dumb, you reviewed your computer, tv, car and
wife. It just so happens NO boxes sold at local stores have good
ratings, ratings are done by many like Cnet, Consumer Reports and are
easy to joogle. Yes reception varies greatly, Quality of picture, ease
of use, so go read ratings, buy another box, and enjoy.

I've seen no ratings that actually had anything to do with fringe
reception issues such as sensitivity, S/N ratios, etc., etc.,
etc., ... *All the ratings dealt with that I've seen were "ease of
use" issues and some minor quality variations given an input signal.
I looked and the ratings were worthless the standpoint of trying to
determine which (if any) might be more satisfactory for those in areas
where reception might be an issue.

So far, there's nobody here broadcasting digital in sufficient
strength to get any reception whatsoever.

I've also been unable to ascertain from the broadcasters what their
plans are for the translators we're currently using as for signal
strength, conversion date(s), etc., ...

--

I can look again, but a review I read went into reception and how well
they fared at being able to get signals when some boxes would not get
them. I think it was a retailer selling several brands. What box are
you referring to because I need 2 soon. Besides the best box I plan on
getting a new large antenna.

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...

I have to wonder how many people will wake up and not have any TV at
all and not have a clue as to why. They've been talking about it
every hour for months but some will still say "no one told me"

Of course they will. It's inevitable. :-)

Cheri

For some, that will be true. e.g. those inthe frings areas. ALL the
adds talk about how great it will be, but NONE of them yet have
mentioned, that I see anyway, anything about fringe areas needing to add
better antennas and possibly amplifiers.

Another who gets only PBS on DTV.

"dadiOH" wrote in message
...

If people want to buy a wide screen TV (or computer monitor), well
and good; I have no problem with that. What I *do* have a problem
with is the manufacturers selling them by the same old diagonal
measurement...people buy, say, a 32" widescreen to replace their old
27" and they think they are going to get a bigger picture. They
aren't. To get an image even the same size they would have to buy
one (in this example) almost 34".

I don't have a problem with new technology, but I do have a problem
with having it forced on me, such as DVD's vs VHS tapes. I much
prefer the VHS format, but you can't rent movies that way anymore, so
if you want to rent a movie you have to have a DVD player. No sooner
do you get that, then Blu-Ray starts, and on and on. At least the
VCR's were viable for many years, now every time you turn around,
something becomes so obsolete that it's no longer viable even while
it's still in good working order. This all happens in a very short
time these days.
I was just fine with Win98 for instance, but nothing supports it
anymore, so had to upgrade to Vista, which is OK, but certainly not
better IMO.
Cheri

Here's a tip though: The new copy protection in the brodcast signals is
NOT detected by the old VCRs, and they WILL copy those "protected"
movies. I just got thru testing an old one this week; an RCA model. So
at least those will still let you record a show while you're away from
home, which you can't do with a lot of them and the new recorders.

"BobR" wrote in message
news:ea904922-15d2-48c2-916e-

You have a choice, you can keep watching your VHS tapes as long as
they last. Nobody is forcing you to watch anything. Hell I still
have a Beta player and a bunch of Beta tapes that I watch. When I
bought the CD player it was my choice, nobody forced me to buy it. I
may someday buy the BlueRay or not, again my choice. As for the
change over to digital TV, again it is my choice to either watch TV or
not and if I choose to watch, I got my converters for free.

=========

No, I don't have a choice if I want to watch a new movie...since new movies
do not come in the VHS format. When DVD's first came out, both options were
available, so I did have a choice. Obviously, nobody forced you to use
common sense when replying either.

Cheri

"Twayne" wrote in message
...

Here's a tip though: The new copy protection in the brodcast signals is
NOT detected by the old VCRs, and they WILL copy those "protected" movies.
I just got thru testing an old one this week; an RCA model. So at least
those will still let you record a show while you're away from home, which
you can't do with a lot of them and the new recorders.

Thanks for the tip. I have 2 RCA models that I use, and 1 still in the box
for future use. I hope they last my lifetime. I'm old, so they should. LOL

Cheri

On Jan 2, 3:30*pm, "Bob F" wrote:
"Steve Barker" wrote in message

...



wrote in message
....

cable isnt everywhere and there are definetely places that cant get
satellite service, because of trees or other obstructions.

Trees can be trimmed. *it takes a very narrow path to get the dish to work. If
it's something other than a tree, then mount the dish on it.

Your neighbors might be a little annoyed though when you trim their trees..

Speak for yourself. I'd be overjoyed if my neighbors trimmed some of
my trees - less work for me

nate

"SteveB" wrote in
:


"enigma" wrote

Of course there is one good thing about 2009, we'll lose BUSH
!!!! A much welcomed loss.......

do you think he'll have a library? if so, what books would it
contain?

At least Bush's books will have words in them.

very small words... he's not exactly literate. he was having a hard
time reading that first grade book on 9/11.
but seriously, what do ex-presidents put in their libraries?
lee

Steve Barker wrote:
I agree. And since when is dish costly? Hell, just eat out one less time
each month. Done.


(snip)


Must be nice to be rich. My cheap-as-possible dish subscription runs
about 40-something per month. I might have a restaurant tab that high
maybe once a year.

--
aem sends...

Steve Barker wrote:
wrote in message
...

cable isnt everywhere and there are definetely places that cant get
satellite service, because of trees or other obstructions.



Trees can be trimmed. it takes a very narrow path to get the dish to work.
If it's something other than a tree, then mount the dish on it.



I think my neighbor, who owns the tree, might have a problem with that.....

--
aem sends...

aemeijers wrote:

Steve Barker wrote:
wrote in message
...

cable isnt everywhere and there are definetely places that cant get
satellite service, because of trees or other obstructions.



Trees can be trimmed. it takes a very narrow path to get the dish to work.
If it's something other than a tree, then mount the dish on it.



I think my neighbor, who owns the tree, might have a problem with that.....

Then your solution is a mast/tower to mount your dish higher to clear
the tree.

Honestly, I've not seen any single family residential situation where a
dish could not be sited with some creativity.

On Jan 2, 5:35�pm, "Pete C." wrote:
aemeijers wrote:

Steve Barker wrote:
wrote in message
....

cable isnt everywhere and there are definetely places that cant get
satellite service, because of trees or other obstructions.

Trees can be trimmed. �it takes a very narrow path to get the dish to work.
If it's something other than a tree, then mount the dish on it.

I think my neighbor, who owns the tree, might have a problem with that......

Then your solution is a mast/tower to mount your dish higher to clear
the tree.

Honestly, I've not seen any single family residential situation where a
dish could not be sited with some creativity.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

obviously you live in a flat area. my street is a big U shape, half of
which has no satellite view, being obstructed by a large hill

besides a dish on a high tower needs a very sturdy tower. the dish
acts like a airfoil, err wing

Pete C. wrote:
aemeijers wrote:
Steve Barker wrote:
wrote in message
...

cable isnt everywhere and there are definetely places that cant get
satellite service, because of trees or other obstructions.


Trees can be trimmed. it takes a very narrow path to get the dish to work.
If it's something other than a tree, then mount the dish on it.


I think my neighbor, who owns the tree, might have a problem with that.....

Then your solution is a mast/tower to mount your dish higher to clear
the tree.

Honestly, I've not seen any single family residential situation where a
dish could not be sited with some creativity.

Yeah, I know, I know. Dish was already up there when I bought the place,
and I was doing ten things at once moving in, and didn't have the
presence of mind to think about it at the time, to lean on the installer
to put it elsewhere. I also didn't have an extension ladder yet, to take
it down and make the guy run fresh cable, which I also should have done.
If I was starting from scratch, I'd put it at other end of roof, or even
visible from road on the front of the house down low. Much clearer shot
there. It only goes flakey in high wind or heavy rain, mainly when
leaves are on the trees. Higher really isn't an option- these are mature
trees we are talking about, and it would take a REAL tower to get above
them. Still trying to figure where to put a replacement OTA backup
antenna, that won't be locked in a death match with my apple tree that
was planted way too close to the addition, or the addition was placed
way too close to. (not sure which came first...)

--
aem sends...

aemeijers wrote:

Pete C. wrote:
aemeijers wrote:
Steve Barker wrote:
wrote in message
...

cable isnt everywhere and there are definetely places that cant get
satellite service, because of trees or other obstructions.


Trees can be trimmed. it takes a very narrow path to get the dish to work.
If it's something other than a tree, then mount the dish on it.


I think my neighbor, who owns the tree, might have a problem with that.....

Then your solution is a mast/tower to mount your dish higher to clear
the tree.

Honestly, I've not seen any single family residential situation where a
dish could not be sited with some creativity.

Yeah, I know, I know. Dish was already up there when I bought the place,
and I was doing ten things at once moving in, and didn't have the
presence of mind to think about it at the time, to lean on the installer
to put it elsewhere. I also didn't have an extension ladder yet, to take
it down and make the guy run fresh cable, which I also should have done.
If I was starting from scratch, I'd put it at other end of roof, or even
visible from road on the front of the house down low. Much clearer shot
there. It only goes flakey in high wind or heavy rain, mainly when
leaves are on the trees. Higher really isn't an option- these are mature
trees we are talking about, and it would take a REAL tower to get above
them. Still trying to figure where to put a replacement OTA backup
antenna, that won't be locked in a death match with my apple tree that
was planted way too close to the addition, or the addition was placed
way too close to. (not sure which came first...)

--
aem sends...

A "real" tower isn't a bad thing you know, you can put a wind generator
on it was well as other goodies.

"AZ Nomad" wrote in message
...


Get a dish, you idiot.

What if he doesn't want to spend the money on the dish? I thought his point
was he was going to lose local news?

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 09:05:46 -0500, "dadiOH"
wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message
...
Welcome to 2009. The year we lose our TV signals. What a way to
start the year, knowing in another month and a half, we will lose our
tv reception, unless we subscribe to costly cable or satellite tv. Oh
yea, they tell us we can get convertors and even give us coupons
worth $40 for the $50 and up boxes that DO NOT work in rural areas,
because the digital signals are under-powered for those in fringe
areas.

Progress.

Progress? The reason for the change from analog to digital is money,
nothing more. It allows removal of some VHF and UHF from TV use thereby
enabling those friendly, caring folks in Washington to peddle the freed up
frequencies. The feds get billions...and the manufacturers get to sell new,
"improved" TV sets. Wide screen ones at that (another useless
"innovation").

You hit the nail right on the head with what you said. The govt will
make a killing selling these frequencies to cell phone companies. so
those companies can continue to pollute our youth with their toy
cellphones. If cellphones were only used for business and personal
emergencies, like they were intended, we would nto need more
frequencies.

I dont buy the "Progress" concept at all. In a fringe rural area, I
can get analog signals that may be a bit snowy at times, but I can
still watch them. With digital tv, it's ALL or NOTHING. I can NOT
watch a program when the screen goes blank every few minutes. As far
as picture quality, their ads say how much better it is. To that I
say BULL****. At least not on a standard tv with converter. But
then, I have always been satisfied with a regular tv picture. I am
not trying to get a home theater, I just watch tv. About the only
real improvement in many years was stereo sound.

Like you said, Wide screen is just another useless "innovation". I
personally could care less. And for those who think HDTV is better, I
disagree. I have looked at many of the HDTV sets on the stores, from
the low end cheap ones to the most expensive. For some reason I
always end up watching the cheapest ones referred to as SDTVs. The
ones with the CRT. For some reason those LCD screens give me a
headache, (literally), and I do not care for the picture. It looks
fake. Closeups of faces look like they are made out of plastic.
Nature scenes look a little better, but I still much prefer the CRT
sets.

But like everything, these companies will continue to brainwash
consumers, particularly the youth who have been programmed to NEVER be
satisfied with any consumer product, and always want more. I'm
elderly, I have been watching analog tv on a CRT for many years.
There have been great improvements since the 1950s, and the tv sets
made since the 1990s have been superior. Now we can all go back to
the 50's where we have poor reception. Poor reception, but in wide
screen HDTV color...... Whoopie. I AM NOT IMPRESSED !!!!

Robert

as to the DVD player, I recently saw a blue ray one for 99 bucks.

now DVDs are cheaper to make than videotapes, for new movies etc

so buying a cheap DVD player or DVD VCR combo might be a good move.

or take a DVD and copy to videotape. it breaks copyright rules but
videotapes arent nearly as good picture quality as a DVD

On Jan 2, 3:13*pm, "Cheri" wrote:
"BobR" wrote in message

news:ea904922-15d2-48c2-916e-

You have a choice, you can keep watching your VHS tapes as long as
they last. *Nobody is forcing you to watch anything. *Hell I still
have a Beta player and a bunch of Beta tapes that I watch. *When I
bought the CD player it was my choice, nobody forced me to buy it. *I
may someday buy the BlueRay or not, again my choice. *As for the
change over to digital TV, again it is my choice to either watch TV or
not and if I choose to watch, I got my converters for free.

=========

No, I don't have a choice if I want to watch a new movie...since new movies
do not come in the VHS format. When DVD's first came out, both options were
available, so I did have a choice. Obviously, nobody forced you to use
common sense when replying either.

Cheri

Yes, you have a choice...don't waste your time watching the damn
movie. If you don't chose to use common sense and not watch it, don't
bitch about it. You always have a choice, you just don't like the
available choices and find it easier to bitch about it than make your
silly choice and shut up.

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 18:13:48 -0500, The Henchman wrote:

"AZ Nomad" wrote in message
...


Get a dish, you idiot.

What if he doesn't want to spend the money on the dish? I thought his point
was he was going to lose local news?

poor baby. Move out of the sticks, get a dish, buy a radio, or learn how to
read a newspaper.

Pete C. wrote:
aemeijers wrote:
Pete C. wrote:
aemeijers wrote:
Steve Barker wrote:
wrote in message
...

cable isnt everywhere and there are definetely places that cant get
satellite service, because of trees or other obstructions.

Trees can be trimmed. it takes a very narrow path to get the dish to work.
If it's something other than a tree, then mount the dish on it.


I think my neighbor, who owns the tree, might have a problem with that.....
Then your solution is a mast/tower to mount your dish higher to clear
the tree.

Honestly, I've not seen any single family residential situation where a
dish could not be sited with some creativity.
Yeah, I know, I know. Dish was already up there when I bought the place,
and I was doing ten things at once moving in, and didn't have the
presence of mind to think about it at the time, to lean on the installer
to put it elsewhere. I also didn't have an extension ladder yet, to take
it down and make the guy run fresh cable, which I also should have done.
If I was starting from scratch, I'd put it at other end of roof, or even
visible from road on the front of the house down low. Much clearer shot
there. It only goes flakey in high wind or heavy rain, mainly when
leaves are on the trees. Higher really isn't an option- these are mature
trees we are talking about, and it would take a REAL tower to get above
them. Still trying to figure where to put a replacement OTA backup
antenna, that won't be locked in a death match with my apple tree that
was planted way too close to the addition, or the addition was placed
way too close to. (not sure which came first...)

--
aem sends...

A "real" tower isn't a bad thing you know, you can put a wind generator
on it was well as other goodies.

If this was 5-10 acres in the boonies where I planned to stay for 10-20
years, such projects would have a appeal. But this is an entry-level
ranch on a 100x200 semi-rural subdivision lot, that I will need to be
selling in 3-5 years, assuming I can make the retirement $ numbers work
out. The place needs to look 'normal' for painless resale, and any
permanent inprovements need to be within spitting distance of paying for
themselves at sale time.

--
aem sends....

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 15:32:19 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

or take a DVD and copy to videotape. it breaks copyright rules but
videotapes arent nearly as good picture quality as a DVD

lol

How MANY tapes would that take to accomplish?

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 06:02:03 -0800 (PST), Andy wrote:



JohnR66 wrote:

I suspect the only people who really should be ****ed are the ones who
already had a good quality, high mounted antenna and are having trouble
getting the signal. This should be very rare. Second are the people who will
have to upgrade their antenna, get a higher mast and upgraded feed line.
This can be costly if professionally installed.

Andy writes

I think you are incorrect....

In my area, stations have been broadcasting digital signals together
with the old analog signals for over a year.,

That leads to a point that nobody else has mentioned. When they pull the plug
on the analog side, many stations will dramatically up their digital power.
Broadcasting at reduced power on digital is mainly an economic move. A high
power station can run a power bill just for the transmitter of $20k a month or
more (that's about what Ch11/Atlanta ran when I moonlighted there in the 80s).
Running high powered digital with not much audience just didn't make sense.
Once the analog financial burden is gone and everyone is moved to digital, it
makes sense to go full power.

A call to the stations that one is interested in will quickly elicit whether
they're currently at reduced power or not.

John
--
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
http://www.neon-john.com
http://www.johndearmond.com -- best little blog on the net!
Tellico Plains, Occupied TN
What do you call a blonde's cranial cavity? Vacuum chamber?

On Jan 2, 7:05�pm, Neon John wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 06:02:03 -0800 (PST), Andy wrote:

JohnR66 wrote:

I suspect the only people who really should be ****ed are the ones who
already had a good quality, high mounted antenna and are having trouble
getting the signal. This should be very rare. Second are the people who will
have to upgrade their antenna, get a higher mast and upgraded feed line.
This can be costly if professionally installed.

Andy writes

�I think you �are incorrect....

�In my area, stations have been broadcasting digital signals together
with the old analog signals for over a year.,

That leads to a point that nobody else has mentioned. �When they pull the plug
on the analog side, many stations will dramatically up their digital power.