wrote:
On Jan 3, 3:17 am, Terri wrote:
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.
Other than those in areas needing to hear tornado updates on tv I still
fail to see why losing tv signal is any great loss. There's virtually
nothing but crap on both regular AND paid programming and if you've got
a computer and a way to dialup, you can get the news by reading it
rather than listening to some bimbo telling you 24 hour *breaking news*
updates about Anna Nicole Smith or OJ Simpson.

If it were up to me the only time our tv would be on is to play and
watch a DVD.


I guess you never heard of or watched The History Channel, Discovery,
National Geographic, 60 Minutes, etc.

Add the Science Channel and History International and thats pretty much
what we watch with the exception of 60 minutes which doesn't belong in
that list since it is just another permutation of the "our
interpretation of the news presented as news plus entertainment hour"
type programs we absolutely don't watch.

On Jan 3, 6:04*am, wrote:
On Jan 3, 3:17*am, Terri wrote:





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. *

Other than those in areas needing to hear tornado updates on tv I still
fail to see why losing tv signal is any great loss. There's virtually
nothing but crap on both regular AND paid programming and if you've got
a computer and a way to dialup, you can get the news by reading it
rather than listening to some bimbo telling you 24 hour *breaking news*
updates about Anna Nicole Smith or OJ Simpson.

If it were up to me the only time our tv would be on is to play and
watch a DVD.

I guess you never heard of or watched The History Channel, Discovery,
National Geographic, 60 Minutes, etc.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That is about all I _do_ watch and 90% of that is either reruns or
garbage. I figure I am lucky to find 1 or 2 programs a week that are
both new AND worth watching. The history channel is getting very bad
for running religious type subjects. 60 minutes at least is
current.

Harry K

local over the air TV is critical when bad things happen like
emergencies, tornadoes, hurricanes, or terrorism which we have been
told will occur.

at such time the population needs timely asnd accurate information
and direction.

================================================== =========

As to Bush about 20% of the population still beleves in him despite
evidence to the contrary. which we are all well aware of

Perhaps these people who probably voted for bush in the first place,
and likely saw their retirement accounts shrink by half are really
trying to convince themselves that any president would of been as bad
or worse......

so they support bush?

my belief is once bush is out of office we will be told the truth, he
was hitting the bottle heavy in the white house, which would explain
some of his bad performance

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in
:


"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
although a printer/scanner/copier I bought SAID on the box it would
run under W98SE,they deleted the drivers for W98/ME from the disc.
they did change an addendum sheet -inside- the carton,but failed to
change the carton's support chart on the outside,and required
archive sites to DELETE the already-written W98/Me drivers.

Microsoft SUCKS.

Why does Microsoft suck? Did they make the printer? Does your Ford
or Chevy dealer still stock headlight assemblies for you 1952 model?
When you buy a new computer or peripheral you know it will be out of
date when you get it home and won't be supported after a few years.




The driver was ALREADY CREATED,and IN circulation.
It existed UNTIL -MS- set a date of June 30,2007.
there was no reason for MS to REQUIRE it be removed from a 3rd party's
driver disc,nor to require the driver be removed from archive sites.
MS just wanted people to be unable to use W98SE.

That makes it entirely Microsoft's fault.So,they SUCK.

I can see not -creating- drivers for older systems after the cutoff
date,but not deleting existing drivers from archive sites.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:54:51 -0800, wrote:

local over the air TV is critical when bad things happen like emergencies,
tornadoes, hurricanes, or terrorism which we have been told will occur.

at such time the population needs timely asnd accurate information and
direction.

It has been an interesting thread. Mostly people with cable, a dish,
and/or broadband complaining about have-nots complaining about the loss of
(some) OTA TV. I have no wish to deprive anyone of their HDTV. But don't
expect us (Luddites, frugal, etc.) to buy that TV isn't important to you
when you are actually paying to get more of it than is available OTA. g


...

On Jan 3, 9:54*am, " wrote:
local over the air TV is critical when bad things happen like
emergencies, tornadoes, hurricanes, or terrorism which we have been
told will occur.

at such time the population needs timely asnd accurate *information
and direction.


Then I guess I'm gonna die, because I haven't received any TV OTA
since the 70s. Neither do 90%+ of other Americans who rely on cable
or sat.




================================================== =========

As to Bush about 20% of the population still beleves in him despite
evidence to the contrary. which we are all well aware of


You Bush haters can't even shut up when he has only 3 weeks left in
office can you? One would think you'd be happy, but no...

And BTW, I'm sick and tired of guys like you claiming Bush lied about
Iraq. He didn't lie, but you are. At the time Bush made the
decision to go to war, most of the Democrats were spouting the same
lines about WMDs. Democrats like Bill Clinton, Hillary, Joe
Biden.... If you google, you will find plenty of sound bites from
them saying that Sadam had WMDs and how serious the threat was, how he
must be stopped. That's because it was based on intelligence, which
any reasonable person knows can never be perfect. Not only US, but
British, Israeli and Russian intelligence believed Sadam had active
WMD programs.

And Sadam was sure acting like a guy with WMDs to hide. Right up to
the last minute, he refused full coperation with the UN weapons
inspectors and was launching occasional missles at US aircraft
enforcing the no-fly zone.

And we don't know what Obama would have done had he been in the
Senate and had to vote on going to war. He didn't because he was a
mere state senator at the time. So now in hindsight, it's easy for
him to say he was against the war. But just like with issues such as
off shore drilling, nuclear power, etc. where he's conveniently
changed his position, you don't know that he would not have voted for
it because it was the seemingly correct political decision at the time

So, why do guys like you continue to say Bush lied? I'm not saying
Bush is perfect; far from it. But you just discredit yourself when
you claim Bush lied about Iraq. Had Bush not gone to war and it
turned out Sadam did have WMDs that one day got used, you'd be right
here bitching about how Bush should be impeached because everyone knew
what Sadam was up to and Bush FAILED TO ACT.




Perhaps these people who probably voted for bush in the first place,
and likely saw their retirement accounts shrink by half are really
trying to convince themselves that any president would of been as bad
or worse......

How about the people who voted for Clinton and saw their IRAs get
blown up too in the tech bubble that ended in a bear market? That
bear market began while Clinton was in office. Funny how you don't
bitch about that. I'd like to know specifically what Bush did to
cause the bear stock market.




so they support bush?

my belief is once bush is out of office we will be told the truth, he
was hitting the bottle heavy in the white house, which would explain
some of his bad performance


More baseless speculation. Why don't you bitch about Clinton, the
sex addict?

enigma wrote:
Robert wrote in

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?

...Crawford, Texas (AP) -- A tragic flood this morning destroyed the
personal library of President George W. Bush.

The flood began in the presidential bathroom where the books were kept.
Both of his books have been lost.

A presidential spokesman said the president was devastated, as he had
almost finished coloring the second one.

The White House tried to call FEMA but there was no answer.

wrote:

And BTW, I'm sick and tired of guys like you claiming Bush lied about
Iraq. He didn't lie, but you are. At the time Bush made the
decision to go to war, most of the Democrats were spouting the same
lines about WMDs.

The Bush administration was filled with neocons that wanted to "get"
Sadam since a little after the Gulf War (example Project for the New
American Century). The decision to "get" Sadam was virtually made just
after 9-11 (source Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neil and National
Security Adviser Richard Clarke). The administration threw up a series
of justifications, none of which worked. Until they got to WMDs.

Because the traditional intelligence agencies weren't producing the
answers that were desired, a lot of 'intelligence' was moved into the
DOD under the control of the neocons. They come up with such gems as
"curveball" and "yellowcake from Niger", both of which had been
discredited in other US intelligence circles. George Tenet had to decide
whether to be the intelligence chief or associate of the president. He
made the wrong choice. Very few in congress, Democrat or Republican,
looked at the actual intelligence (classified information was available).

(The neocons also made the disastrous decisions after we "won" the war.)

And the Bush administration created the belief that Sadam had something
to do with 9-11. If asked directly, Bush says there was no connection.
But there is a reason (including Cheney) why a high percentage of
Americans still believe this lie.

(I am not interested in discussing this. There are many people that live
in an alternate reality - not aimed at trader.)

Jim Yanik wrote:

Why does Microsoft suck? Did they make the printer? Does your Ford
or Chevy dealer still stock headlight assemblies for you 1952 model?
When you buy a new computer or peripheral you know it will be out of
date when you get it home and won't be supported after a few years.




The driver was ALREADY CREATED,and IN circulation.
It existed UNTIL -MS- set a date of June 30,2007.
there was no reason for MS to REQUIRE it be removed from a 3rd party's
driver disc,nor to require the driver be removed from archive sites.
MS just wanted people to be unable to use W98SE.

That makes it entirely Microsoft's fault.So,they SUCK.

I can see not -creating- drivers for older systems after the cutoff
date,but not deleting existing drivers from archive sites.

Could you give us a reference to MS mandating that legacy software - or any
software for that matter - be removed from circulation.

It's not that I don't believe you, it's just that I don't believe you.

On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:46:11 -0600, 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


I watch DVDs from Redbox for $1 each. Don't need ComCast, dish, or
other services that try to suck your wallet dry. Get news/weather
from the Internet and/or radio, regular TV is too censored, sponsered,
depressing.

Jim Yanik wrote:

"Cheri" wrote in
:



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





I'm still running W98SE.

although a printer/scanner/copier I bought SAID on the box it would run
under W98SE,they deleted the drivers for W98/ME from the disc.
they did change an addendum sheet -inside- the carton,but failed to change
the carton's support chart on the outside,and required archive sites to
DELETE the already-written W98/Me drivers.

Microsoft SUCKS.



I thought I was a hold-out, still using ME ) I wish I still had my
Micron comp. with W95 - I
"raised" it from the system mess it came with (Win. 3), through the
first version of W95 and,
finally, to the good version of W95........it did far more, without
crashing, than my Dell with
ME. Learned I could find any file somewhere on the net - there must be
a driver somewhere
that can be downloaded for your printer. The mfg. website almost always
has old drivers to
download.

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
The driver was ALREADY CREATED,and IN circulation.
It existed UNTIL -MS- set a date of June 30,2007.
there was no reason for MS to REQUIRE it be removed from a 3rd party's
driver disc,nor to require the driver be removed from archive sites.
MS just wanted people to be unable to use W98SE.

That makes it entirely Microsoft's fault.So,they SUCK.

I can see not -creating- drivers for older systems after the cutoff
date,but not deleting existing drivers from archive sites.

If that is true then yes, they do suck.

bud-- wrote:

[....]

(I am not interested in discussing this. There are many people that live
in an alternate reality -

I know what you mean. sometimes it's just nice to express how things
are without having to build a defense or provide a proof.

On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 01:17:17 -0600, Caesar Romano
wrote:

2) bungled the economy worse than anything since the 1929 depression.


Do you know what the interest rates and tax rates in '29 were? Both
were high and prevented an early rebound in the market, people
languished. Some jumped from tall buildings.

With low rates today, the economy will rebound faster.

That's pretty impressive miss-management even by American standards.

Writing history, already?!

Per Cheri:
I still live in my starter home, which will
be my ending home as well.:-)

Only if the inflation brought on by printing a trillion+ worth of
dollars (and Euros... and whatever else) doesn't make taxes and
insurance go up to the point where you can no longer afford to
own the house.

That's what I see in the future of a lot of retired people:
financial ruin on a fixed income.
--
PeteCresswell

Per Jim:
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.

Well, it's not just him - and I'm no economist.... but I'd say
that his administration's trillion-plus deficit really will be
affecting us for years and years to come.
--
PeteCresswell

Per SteveB:
I guess we'll just
print some more money. That oughta take care of it. Right?

AFIK, it's already been done. They call it 'deficit spending'.
--
PeteCresswell

On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 17:56:12 -0500, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Jim:
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.

Well, it's not just him - and I'm no economist.... but I'd say
that his administration's trillion-plus deficit really will be
affecting us for years and years to come.

More important: the federal debt went from 5.7 trillion to over 10.5 trillion.

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
...
Per Jim:
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.

Well, it's not just him - and I'm no economist.... but I'd say
that his administration's trillion-plus deficit really will be
affecting us for years and years to come.
--
PeteCresswell

Don't forget how the budget got to him. The Democratic controlled congress
sent it over. He foolishly signed what they wanted.

If you expect a fast recovery from the current fiancial troubles you
are living in dream land.

200,000 stores will close this year, and 3000 malls go bankrupt. We
have twice the number of stores our country needs, and many years of
home inventory

Recovery isnt going to be fast or complete

On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 15:46:47 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

If you expect a fast recovery from the current fiancial troubles you
are living in dream land.

200,000 stores will close this year, and 3000 malls go bankrupt. We
have twice the number of stores our country needs, and many years of
home inventory

Recovery isnt going to be fast or complete

My personal recovery is fine, thank you very much.

I sat up sand bags for defense.

first of all, i'd never have a house that close to me. IF i did by some
brain lapse, i'd merely make an agreement with the neighbor to mount it on
his house on the other side or whatever needed to be done.

s


wrote in message
...


doi tell if I were your neighbor would you mind me trimming your trees
or offer to mount my dish on your home?

In article ,
lid (Robert) says...

while I used to get 7 channels (occasionally two
more), with the converter box, I get PBS. That's it.

Many stations are not broadcasting a digital signal, and won't until
February. Other stations are using low power backup transmitters. When
they turn off the analog signal, they will start feeding the digital
programming through their primary transmitters, and your receptions will
be as good as it ever was, except a lot clearer, with sub-channels.

I realize that things you don't understand are scary, but you should
wait to complain until you see what you are getting.

--
For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
with my first name and last initial.

In article ,
lid (Robert) says...

The whole thing comes down to sucking more money out of those people
stupid enough to buy into all this technology that they *think* they
need because some advertiser tells them so.

What really irritates me are the ignorant conservatives who think the
world ended the last time they figured something out, which was about
1968. If they don't want to participate in progress, then they don't
get the benefits of the progress. It's like they expect us to cripple
ourselves because they are too stupid to read an instruction manual.

--
For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
with my first name and last initial.

Steve Barker wrote:
first of all, i'd never have a house that close to me. IF i did by some
brain lapse, i'd merely make an agreement with the neighbor to mount it on
his house on the other side or whatever needed to be done.

Talk about hand-waving. I certainly wouldn't be inclined to let a
neighbor mount a dish on my house, nor would I presume to ask if I could
mount one on his. The contractual situation with Dish aside (they take a
very dim view of the hardware extending beyond the property line, even
if you swear you aren't sharing signal), the insurance liability and
potential resale problems make the idea a non-starter.

Either that, or your neighbors are a whole lot more accommodating than
the ones around here.

--
aem sends...

In article ,
(AL) says...
dadiOH wrote:
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"?


The 35mm format with a ratio of 3:4 worked just fine for 100 years plus.
Yes, movies moved on but TV retained it. Why change?


You know, I've heard of that 35mm thing but I shoot 645 and 6x6. But
then I've also talked to some who are really big on 4x5 - I even know
one guy who swears by 8x10 - go figger. Have you noticed how muffled
things sound from where you have your head stuck?

The interesting thing is that 35mm is a wide screen format. In the
movie theater, that format is called Vistavision. The negative is 24mm
x 36mm, which is a 2:3 aspect ratio. If you print a 35mm negative full
frame, the print is 8x12. After the success of Cinerama, they started
using anamorphic lenses in filming and projection to give an even wider
format.

The 3:4 ratio was from 16mm film, which was cheaper and plenty high
quality for TV production. Now that TV doesn't use film any more,
there's no economic reason not to broadcast a wide screen format. If
somebody insists on sticking with the old 3:4 tube, they can either
letterbox the picture or crop the edges. The new digital technology
gives them the choice. In the old days, they just cropped the edges for
TV broadcast.

--
For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
with my first name and last initial.

On Jan 3, 1:07�am, "Bob F" wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message

...
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.

************************************************** ***********

And who was the idiot that decided we needed color?

And remote control.

And why do we need TV after 11 PM?

And whatever happened to the tube tester, and the TV repair guy who
made house calls?

On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 06:03:59 -0800, "Cheri"
wrote:

"Robert" wrote in message
.. .

I use what works for me. Windows 98, PSP5, my 4 year old CRT tv, my
VHS and DVD movies, and my 16 year old pickup truck. I have no
outstanding debts, and except my latest utility bills, and I can sit
back and enjoy life and my computer and movies without working 3 jobs
to pay for all this crap, and always being in debt and wanting more
because some greedy ******* is wanting to get his filthy hands in my
wallet, by telling me I need more and more and more.....
Some day we will all be buried in our waste, and then we will look
back and wonder why.......

Hear! Hear! And I might add, many drowning in debt with *hayuge* houses they
can't afford, wanting the government to bail them out, but wanting to keep
all their toys in the process. I still live in my starter home, which will
be my ending home as well.:-)

Cheri


You got that right. Its not only the mortgage, it has to all be
heated in winter and cooled in summer. I too have a starter home, and
it's all we need, except we need a little more storage and project
space so I decided to add another room out back next summer. Probably
about 14x16 feet, which I'll build myself using mostly all recycled
lumber from a building that was to be demolished, and I got paid to
tear it down, plus keep all the materials.

I cant understand why people want those huge houses? This little
224ft addition I want to build would only be a bathroom in one of
those places, and there are likely 3 or more other bathrooms. Hell, I
only got one asshole to take a **** with, and only spend a few minutes
on the toilet every day. That leaves 23 hours and some minutes for
any other asshole in the house to use the toilet. Why the hell does
any average family full of assholes need more than one toilet, much
less multiple baths. I have never lived in any house with more than
one toilet. Oh yea, there are occasionally those bad moments when teo
people need to use it at the same time, but hell, if it gets that bad,
I can always go outside and "rough it" a few moments out of a
lifetime. That sure beats having to pay to heat and clean 5
bathrooms.

We live in a world of bloat and extremism. We need to get back to our
roots and a simpler life. Getting back to the TV. To me, it's just a
thing to obtain some news, weather, football, and watch some mindless
sitcoms and other nonsense. Much of the programming is lousy, but I
still like to have it on when I am online or just relaxing. Once and
awhile I get more serious about the TV and watch a movie. But I dont
need a big screen HDTV (dont have the room for one anyhow). I dont
need surround sound, in fact I rarely like to have the sound on loud,
because the minute I do, someone is at the door, and I wont hear them.
Just give me a plain old tv with about a 20 inch picture and a speaker
or two. I'm happy !!!

Robert

"Robert" wrote in message
...

We live in a world of bloat and extremism. We need to get back to our
roots and a simpler life. Getting back to the TV. To me, it's just a
thing to obtain some news, weather, football, and watch some mindless
sitcoms and other nonsense. Much of the programming is lousy, but I
still like to have it on when I am online or just relaxing. Once and
awhile I get more serious about the TV and watch a movie. But I dont
need a big screen HDTV (dont have the room for one anyhow). I dont
need surround sound, in fact I rarely like to have the sound on loud,
because the minute I do, someone is at the door, and I wont hear them.
Just give me a plain old tv with about a 20 inch picture and a speaker
or two. I'm happy !!!

Robert

And there was this in the paper today
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...,2869589.story How long
can it be before they start charging a monthly "per inch" fee on those huge
TV's? ;-)

Cheri

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. You
don't have to subscribe to cable, but you do need a digital TV. I don't
know how well that will work in your area compared to a box.

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"


Hi,
Progress has price. Digital signal needs less power. That is nature of
digital technology. Price of flat panel digital TVs came down a lot.
Time to move on. Or erect an antenna with more gain. Also LCD panel TVs
use lot less power compared to old CRT TVs.

On Jan 3, 8:24�pm, Sheldon wrote:
On Jan 3, 1:07 am, "Bob F" wrote:





"Harry K" wrote in message

....
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.

************************************************** ***********

And who was the idiot that decided we needed color?

And remote control.

And why do we need TV after 11 PM?

And whatever happened to the tube tester, and the TV repair guy who
made house calls?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

that tv repair bguy is back fixing those big screen sets too big and
heavy to move.

although LCD is killing their business again

On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:46:11 -0600, 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.....

You get South Park by antenna?

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 !!!!

In 17 days now. It's one of the countdowns I'm displaying on my
homepage (and the other is for the TV).

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
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The government of the United States is not, in
any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

On Jan 3, 7:36�pm, Larry Caldwell
wrote:
In article ,
(Robert) says...

while I used to get 7 channels (occasionally two
more), with the converter box, I get PBS. �That's it.

Many stations are not broadcasting a digital signal, and won't until
February. �Other stations are using low power backup transmitters.. �When
they turn off the analog signal, they will start feeding the digital
programming through their primary transmitters, and your receptions will
be as good as it ever was, except a lot clearer, with sub-channels. �

I realize that things you don't understand are scary, but you should
wait to complain until you see what you are getting. �

--
For email, replace firstnamelastinitial
with my first name and last initial.

show me a cite they arent broadcasting digital at this time. the feds
required all regular stations being digital over a year ago.

your info is way out of date

On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:46:11 -0600, Robert
wrote:

Welcome to 2009. The year we lose our TV signals.

Well, I solved that by getting several antennas and conecing them to
boxes, and they've been running 24 hours a day for almost a year. I
have plenty of TV signals.

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 15:51:55 -0500, "Twayne"
wrote:

"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.


I can get CBS, NBC, Fox (and probably ABC and CW after the
transition). I wish that included PBS.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The government of the United States is not, in
any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

On Jan 3, 9:08�pm, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 23:46:11 -0600, 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.....

You get South Park by antenna?

�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 !!!!

In 17 days now. It's one of the countdowns I'm displaying on my
homepage (and the other is for the TV).

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

--
Mark Lloydhttp://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The government of the United States is not, in
any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

bush has approved of israels attack in gaza, and now a ground war.

israel figures make war while the war monger bush is still in control.

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 12:22:34 -0800, "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

I say XP is worse (though tolerable) and Vista is much worse.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The government of the United States is not, in
any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 13:13:15 -0800, "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

and a player

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

On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 17:20:24 -0800, "Cheri"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
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



I do have two DVD VCR combos, but the regular old VCR was just fine, until
they stopped releasing new movies in the VHS format. The DVD's don't wear
well at all, and I can't tell you how many times I've had to return them to
the video store because they're skipping, scratched etc. Once in a great
while you would get a VHS that didn't sound good or something, but not
often, with DVD's it's a crap shoot. I also hate that you can't FF through a
lot of that crap on a DVD, and on some, you can't even FF through the
previews.

Cheri

I forget what it was called, but I seem to remember a program that
copies DVDs without the crap.

On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 08:06:11 -0600, Caesar Romano
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,

Good riddance to it.

I think there's one station around here that won't be affected (it's
low power), but the programming is REALLY crappy.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"The government of the United States is not, in
any sense, founded on the Christian religion."