Digital TV: Why do we have to have it?

[Trevor Woods]

Chasing Kate wrote:
Yes there's a parliamentary inquiry on at the moment
looking into why more people are not purchasing digital
set top boxes....

In other words a great piss up for the people involved LOL and
nothing constructive will come out of it IMHO......

But the one question I'd like answered is why?

Why do we have to go to full digital TV?

This is a forced death for the existing system which seems
to work dam fine in other parts of the world so why change
it?

Why more people aren't switching to digital is they don't see there's enough
there to bother making the change. Whenever I hear someone on the the radio
extolling the virtues of getting a digital set top box, the first thing they
will say is "no ghosting". I don't have ghosting. Will all these people with
ghosting please stand up. What will make me and a lot others switch to
digital is getting a lot more choice in what to watch. So using the digital
spectrum for more channels. It won't "no ghosting", a sharper picture or
wide screen.

 

[Matt2 - Amstereo]

plasma can never look good., poor resolution poor colour depth and poor
shade rendering.

lcd maybe

 

[regn.pickford]

"Trevor Woods" <trevorw@omninet.net.au> wrote in message
news:42456c08@news.eftel.com...

Chasing Kate wrote:
Yes there's a parliamentary inquiry on at the moment
looking into why more people are not purchasing digital
set top boxes....

In other words a great piss up for the people involved LOL and
nothing constructive will come out of it IMHO......

But the one question I'd like answered is why?

Why do we have to go to full digital TV?

This is a forced death for the existing system which seems
to work dam fine in other parts of the world so why change
it?

Why more people aren't switching to digital is they don't see there's
enough
there to bother making the change. Whenever I hear someone on the the
radio
extolling the virtues of getting a digital set top box, the first thing
they
will say is "no ghosting". I don't have ghosting. Will all these people
with
ghosting please stand up. What will make me and a lot others switch to
digital is getting a lot more choice in what to watch. So using the
digital
spectrum for more channels. It won't "no ghosting", a sharper picture or
wide screen.

Set top box's give you better pictures and a menu system that has a
programme
guide built in with programme information to boot.

They also tune in radio stations, they're excellent value at just over $100

 

[regn.pickford]

"Matt2 - Amstereo" <amstereo@ToptusDOTcomDOTau> wrote in message
news:4245786a$0$29451$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

plasma can never look good., poor resolution poor colour depth and poor
shade rendering.

Nice if you wantto buy a new unit every other year. Their longevity

is an issue.

lcd maybe

Nice if only two people are going to watch it.

I took advantag of the cheaper CRT prices and I'll wait for
the new technologies to get more `realistic'

 

[David L. Jones]

Trevor Woods wrote:

Why more people aren't switching to digital is they don't see there's
enough
there to bother making the change. Whenever I hear someone on the the
radio
extolling the virtues of getting a digital set top box, the first
thing they
will say is "no ghosting". I don't have ghosting. Will all these
people with
ghosting please stand up. What will make me and a lot others switch
to
digital is getting a lot more choice in what to watch. So using the
digital
spectrum for more channels. It won't "no ghosting", a sharper picture
or
wide screen.

If you have a widescreen TV (as many do for watching DVDs) then there
is a massive benefit in going to digital.
It's not just ghosting, it's the fact that a great many people do not
get a perfect picture on every channel. Digital will fix that in most
cases.
Even if you have a perfect picture on all or some channels, the digital
picture is so much clearer, so there is a benefit there alone, just ask
anyone with eyesight problems who have trouble seeing a normal analog
screen.

Dave

 

[David Barnett]

<altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111820622.254452.88960@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
: The ones on eBay are the SAME ones you can buy in the shops for grossly
: inflated prices.

Where do these STBs on EBay come from?
Do they come from disgruntled owners, who are glad to get rid of them at
any price.

IOW are the second hand or are they brand new?

--
David Barnett
"Where you stand depends on where you sit."

 

[Who_tat_me]

"regn.pickford" <doregn.pickford@beegpond.com> wrote in message
news:8gl1e.13074$C7.12444@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

Set top box's give you better pictures and a menu system that has a
programme
guide built in with programme information to boot.

They also tune in radio stations, they're excellent value at just over
$100

Most people really don't care about extra menus and listening to the radio
on your TV is not really the most cost effective way of listening to the
radio. As well as the cost of the STB you then have to fok out extra $$$ for
the extra power consumed by the TV over a normal radio. A 68cm TV uses 8
times the power that a home stereo system uses.

 

[Who_tat_me]

"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111877906.628138.148510@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

just ask
anyone with eyesight problems who have trouble seeing a normal analog
screen.

That's like asking anyone with poor hearing whether $5,000 home
enetertainment system sounds better than a $10 portable radio.

Unless the reception is really crappy to start with and hard to see for
somebody with good eyesight, digital isn't going to be a benefit for
somebody with bad eyesight and even then it's doubtful whether there'll be
an improvement.

 

Who_tat_me wrote:

"regn.pickford" <doregn.pickford@beegpond.com> wrote in message
news:8gl1e.13074$C7.12444@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

Set top box's give you better pictures and a menu system that has a
programme
guide built in with programme information to boot.

They also tune in radio stations, they're excellent value at just
over
$100


Most people really don't care about extra menus and listening to the
radio
on your TV is not really the most cost effective way of listening to
the
radio. As well as the cost of the STB you then have to fok out extra
$$$ for
the extra power consumed by the TV over a normal radio. A 68cm TV
uses 8
times the power that a home stereo system uses.

Umm, how about feeding your STB into your stereo? All STBs have audio
line out, and most these days have digital out too. No one would buy an
STB just to get the radio, but it's a nice side benefit for some. Also,
no one would buy an STB just for the online guides (ok, some may?), but
once again it's a nice side benefit.
The only sound I put through my TV speakers is my MiniDV on playback,
everything else (DVD, STB, Xbox) goes through the stereo, MUCH better
than the TV.

Some of the extra channels are getting used now too, although not
nearly as much as they could be. Like the recent broadcast of the
tennis had a channel where you could watch the tennis in a small box
and the rest of the screen had real-time stats.

Dave

 

[David L. Jones]

David Barnett wrote:

altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111820622.254452.88960@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
: The ones on eBay are the SAME ones you can buy in the shops for
grossly
: inflated prices.

Where do these STBs on EBay come from?
Do they come from disgruntled owners, who are glad to get rid of them
at
any price.

IOW are the second hand or are they brand new?

Almost all of them are brand new, and many come from offical dealers
with full Australian warranty.
Ebay is now a massive market for dealers, from one-man-bands in their
bedroom to big companies with real premesis and staff who ship
thousands of items a week.

Dave

 

[David L. Jones]

Who_tat_me wrote:

"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111877906.628138.148510@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
just ask
anyone with eyesight problems who have trouble seeing a normal
analog
screen.


That's like asking anyone with poor hearing whether $5,000 home
enetertainment system sounds better than a $10 portable radio.

Unless the reception is really crappy to start with and hard to see
for
somebody with good eyesight, digital isn't going to be a benefit for
somebody with bad eyesight and even then it's doubtful whether
there'll be
an improvement.

I don't have bad eyesight myself, so can't speak for myself, but I have
bought STBs for older relatives with eyesight problems and they rave
about the clarity of the STB picture compared to what I think is pretty
darn close to an ideal analog picture. They can now see stuff in detail
without their glasses, don't get sore eyes etc. So obviously it CAN
make a difference, and obvously you have no actual experience in this
area.

Dave

 

[Soixante Un Vieille Viand]

Who_tat_me wrote:

altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111884733.777930.254050@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Who_tat_me wrote:
Umm, how about feeding your STB into your stereo?

Most stereos have an FM receiver in them so it would seem rather pointless
doing that. In any case the cheaper STBs usually have just one set of A/V
sockets and most people feed those straight into the TV. If you want to use
the stereo it makes matters more complex than the average person is
interested in it being. Not only do you have to find/puyrchase additional
cables you end up having to use 3 remotes just to listen to the radio. Most
people like to be able to sit down, press ON and watch with one remote in
hand.

Leaving your other hand free for your 'other activities' hey?

 

[Who_tat_me]

<altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111884733.777930.254050@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Who_tat_me wrote:
Umm, how about feeding your STB into your stereo?

Most stereos have an FM receiver in them so it would seem rather pointless
doing that. In any case the cheaper STBs usually have just one set of A/V
sockets and most people feed those straight into the TV. If you want to use
the stereo it makes matters more complex than the average person is
interested in it being. Not only do you have to find/puyrchase additional
cables you end up having to use 3 remotes just to listen to the radio. Most
people like to be able to sit down, press ON and watch with one remote in
hand.

 

[Who_tat_me]

"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111885451.096802.176920@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Who_tat_me wrote:
"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111877906.628138.148510@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
just ask
anyone with eyesight problems who have trouble seeing a normal
analog
screen.


That's like asking anyone with poor hearing whether $5,000 home
enetertainment system sounds better than a $10 portable radio.

Unless the reception is really crappy to start with and hard to see
for
somebody with good eyesight, digital isn't going to be a benefit for
somebody with bad eyesight and even then it's doubtful whether
there'll be
an improvement.

I don't have bad eyesight myself, so can't speak for myself, but I have
bought STBs for older relatives with eyesight problems and they rave
about the clarity of the STB picture compared to what I think is pretty
darn close to an ideal analog picture. They can now see stuff in detail
without their glasses, don't get sore eyes etc. So obviously it CAN
make a difference, and obvously you have no actual experience in this
area.

Obviously I have more experience than you. I have 80 year old parents with
failing eyesight and they have lots of 80 year old friends. I live in an
area with a large aged population and I run a business that originally
started as a PC support operation but has expanded into other areas. I have
quite a few aged customers who I see on a regular basis, both in a
professional and personal capacity. Not one of them has ever raved about
digital TV and yes, I have shown quite a few of them the benefits of digital
while tuning their VCRs, fixing PCs, connecting Foxtel boxes etc. In almost
every case a marked improvement has resulted from an increase in picture
size, not from making an already clear picture clearer.

 

[Chasing Kate]

Matt2 - Amstereo wrote:

plasma can never look good., poor resolution poor colour depth and poor
shade rendering.

Yet plasma is heavily promoted despite this shortcoming

 

[Phil Allison]

"Who_tat_me"

altzone@gmail.com

Umm, how about feeding your STB into your stereo?

Most stereos have an FM receiver in them so it would seem rather pointless
doing that.

** Not pointless at all - many folk find they have poor of no FM
reception, very common with the antenna systems is blocks of units. In the
same situation, a STB supplies perfect quality, interruption free music 24
/7 - nothing like it is broadcast on the FM band at all.

In any case the cheaper STBs usually have just one set of A/V sockets and
most people feed those straight into the TV.

** Only those who have no stereo in the same room.

If you want to use the stereo it makes matters more complex than the
average person is interested in it being.

** Rot - once connected to the stereo it is left that way.

Not only do you have to find/puyrchase additional cables

** Rot - one pair of RCA leads from STB to stereo.

you end up having to use 3 remotes just to listen to the radio

** Rot - only one is needed. The STB one.




............... Phil

 

[Chasing Kate]

Who_tat_me wrote:

"Chasing Kate" <sittinginthepool@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:4244DA2F.CAE85FD3@internode.on.net...
Phil Allison wrote:

"ferret"

From a sales point of view its a complete disaster.


** Rot.


How is this NOT a marketing disaster.

** That is a different question in a new context - dickhead.

Makers and sellers of STBs have made good money from them - the same
designs are sold in Europe and elsewhere.

The government is concerned the Mandate to cut-off analogue will
expire before the majority have switched over.

** Most folk put off whatever is not urgent - when it gets urgent they
finally do it.

Wait and see what the Senate committee reports.

............. Phil






And again WHY does this have to be debated in the Senate?
Seems a waste of time

Because the government manages the country and it was the government who put
in place the plans to phase in digital and phase out analogue. Since the
government's plans aren't going according to schedule it seems only logical
that they should investigate the reasons why those plans are going the way
that they want them to so that they can determine what action to take.

The government should never have its fingers in
these sort of things...

Leave it all to private industry to handle. They'd
do a much better job IMHO

 

[David L. Jones]

Who_tat_me wrote:

"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111885451.096802.176920@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Who_tat_me wrote:
"David L. Jones" <altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111877906.628138.148510@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
just ask
anyone with eyesight problems who have trouble seeing a normal
analog
screen.


That's like asking anyone with poor hearing whether $5,000 home
enetertainment system sounds better than a $10 portable radio.

Unless the reception is really crappy to start with and hard to
see
for
somebody with good eyesight, digital isn't going to be a benefit
for
somebody with bad eyesight and even then it's doubtful whether
there'll be
an improvement.

I don't have bad eyesight myself, so can't speak for myself, but I
have
bought STBs for older relatives with eyesight problems and they
rave
about the clarity of the STB picture compared to what I think is
pretty
darn close to an ideal analog picture. They can now see stuff in
detail
without their glasses, don't get sore eyes etc. So obviously it CAN
make a difference, and obvously you have no actual experience in
this
area.

Obviously I have more experience than you. I have 80 year old parents
with
failing eyesight and they have lots of 80 year old friends. I live in
an
area with a large aged population and I run a business that
originally
started as a PC support operation but has expanded into other areas.
I have
quite a few aged customers who I see on a regular basis, both in a
professional and personal capacity. Not one of them has ever raved
about
digital TV and yes, I have shown quite a few of them the benefits of
digital
while tuning their VCRs, fixing PCs, connecting Foxtel boxes etc. In
almost
every case a marked improvement has resulted from an increase in
picture
size, not from making an already clear picture clearer.

The problem with your argument is that it only takes one single case to
prove you wrong. I have several visually impaired people who contradict
what you say, so the clearer STB picture CAN help some people.

Dave

 

[David L. Jones]

Who_tat_me wrote:

altzone@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1111884733.777930.254050@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Who_tat_me wrote:
Umm, how about feeding your STB into your stereo?

Most stereos have an FM receiver in them so it would seem rather
pointless
doing that. In any case the cheaper STBs usually have just one set of
A/V
sockets and most people feed those straight into the TV.

Wrong again.
Many of the low end STBs have SCART, A/V, and coax digital. That's 3
(count them) audio outputs.

If you want to use
the stereo it makes matters more complex than the average person is
interested in it being. Not only do you have to find/puyrchase
additional
cables you end up having to use 3 remotes just to listen to the
radio. Most
people like to be able to sit down, press ON and watch with one
remote in
hand.

My STB is the same brand as my TV, so I can share remote. In fact the
single power button turns both sets on and off. Very nice.

Dave

 

[Phil Allison]

"Chasing Kate"

And again WHY does this have to be debated in the Senate?
Seems a waste of time

Because the government manages the country and it was the government who
put
in place the plans to phase in digital and phase out analogue. Since the
government's plans aren't going according to schedule it seems only
logical
that they should investigate the reasons why those plans are going the
way
that they want them to so that they can determine what action to take.


The government should never have its fingers in
these sort of things...

** What "things" are you mysteriously alluding to now ??

Management of the use of electromagnetic spectrum ??

That is absolutely and naturally and function of government.

Leave it all to private industry to handle. They'd
do a much better job IMHO

** Again, you are not being specific and you have ignored all explanations
supplied.

Deliberately - like any other stinking troll.




............. Phil