Over-the-air making a comeback? - Page 2

Piggie · 07-01-2009, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron62

I'd say you have 4 stations, but 8 channels. Technically, you could say I'm wrong, but that's just the way I see it since all 8 of those channels and subchannels are displaying different programming.

Guess we need some kind of reference to clarify this further because I would have made the same mistake Orry and 1inxs did talking about channels too.

I go by the fact that the actual RF range of frequencies used by a single TV transmitter has been called a channel for 50 years.

But the area between subchannels and TV stations has been blurred by digital.

I am not sure a "proper" terminology has been set by anyone including slang, but since slang forms the dictionary not the other way around, subchannels are rapidly in the public minds and speech being called channels.

Time and word usage on the street always wins in the end. Unless you are in an environment where technical or intellectual meaning are required.

DTVuser2009 · 07-01-2009, 11:09 AM

Just call them what the DTVPal does. 'services'. as in 'i got 15 services to watch'

Whatever the term is for a sub-channel, right or wrong, the big deal is it does give extra choices to watch. better than the two or three stations i used to get, after awhile PBS, Fox, and CBS are very blah compared to THIS TV, RTN/RTV, and MyNetworkTV

Jay · 07-01-2009, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bicker

I suppose the DTV transition could have evoked a "fad" of watching television via OTA. However, I think it more likely to be fleeting, soon to be eclipsed by online video or perhaps even a resurgence of cable and satellite coinciding with an economic recovery.

Agree with that. I would have liked to have seen additional questioning about the biggest contributing factor behind the consumer's choices in that survey too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1inxs

When I was a kid, I was excited when the 3 channels we received, started broadcasting more programs in color. That wasn't all that long ago. Now, with my 21 HD stations, I'm very satisfied. Most everyone I tell about my new OTA HD experience are confused. I get comments or questions like "you get 21 high definition stations and don't pay anything for it" or "is there anything to watch on the stations you receive?" I think as more people find out whats available, there will be more people migrating from cable and satellite to OTA HD TV.

The addition of subchannels has really opened up a new world for OTA viewers. Like DTVuser2009 mentioned, THIS TV, RTN/RTV, and MyNetworkTV are a breath of fresh "retro" air.

Orrymain · 07-01-2009, 05:24 PM

That's exactly what I'm talking about. When I grew up, we got 3, 10, and 13, plus PBS on 6.The UHF kicked in slowly with channel 40. That was TV. Now sometimes, if the skies were clear, I could get channel 5, 7, or 12, which are San Francisco and surrounding stations, but that was it. So, to get all these other channels now is great. If my antenna were better, there'd be more. With my surprise today, though, I have renewed hope, since my channel count (including subs), went from 20 to 43 in a day. I'm still hoping for RTN. I haven't noticed it yet, but I'm hoping.

Piggie · 07-01-2009, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTVuser2009

Just call them what the DTVPal does. 'services'. as in 'i got 15 services to watch'

Whatever the term is for a sub-channel, right or wrong, the big deal is it does give extra choices to watch. better than the two or three stations i used to get, after awhile PBS, Fox, and CBS are very blah compared to THIS TV, RTN/RTV, and MyNetworkTV

Well in the industry, "subchannel" has been accepted. But most of the time say there is a Ch5-DTV with 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3. Then that is 2 subchannels strictly speaking and a main program. And they are on one channel. But that is more so TV industry lingo.

In DTVPal lingo it is 3 "services".

I like the name services. There is no confusion what is a channel, what is a subchannel and what is a main program. The word "service" takes into account every program on a single channel. It has not other historic meaning I know except "broadcasting service" meaning all broadcasting.

But I bet the next time I say here in Gainesville I receive 8 services reliably and 9 more from Jacksonville on a good day, someone will say please explain, lol.

Piggie · 07-01-2009, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bicker

Maybe. As we've already discussed, the specters of commercial avoidance and piracy promise to undercut the ability of OTA broadcaster to continue to produce and provide the quantity and quality of programming as they have up until now.

The bigger question is will the broadcast networks survive regardless if they are viewed OTA, cable or satellite.

I think if a lot of the cable only stations had their thinking caps on they would have fought the 700 MHz auction early on to preserve channels where they could go OTA. After all they get a good bit of their revenue from ads.

But then as far as good programming goes, the cable channels are a vast waste land of infomercials late night.

Then there those like me that will keep an OTA system running as long as there is anything to watch, just as another source, the way some have FTA running even though they only get a few channels they watch from it. Probably something I am thinking of doing in the future.

HTNut · 07-02-2009, 12:25 PM

With today's announcement of the jobless rate rising to 9.5%, I imagine that we're going to see a bunch of people cutting costs by going back to OTA.

Piggie · 07-02-2009, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HTNut

With today's announcement of the jobless rate rising to 9.5%, I imagine that we're going to see a bunch of people cutting costs by going back to OTA.

yes, for someone that can't pay a cable bill, it is one of least needed finding a job.

so someone that say even only gets 2 or 3 OTA might be happy just to dump the bill.