cable plans - apparently non-existant

[LCHIEN]

I just popped on the Time-warner live chat technical help and asked a question about cable future.
I said, at some time in the near future (like Jan 1 2009) analog broadcasting (NTSC) will be turned off for over the air broadcasts and only digital (ATSC) will be sent.
I asked what is the roadmap for analog broadcasting of cable, will they continue to support it forever or do they have a phase-out plan and what will it become - ATSC or some more proprietary cable formats? Particularly interested because I will probably replace some analog TVs in the not to distant future and wanted to know what features to get.
He was very polite but said they had no answer now but would let me know at some date in the future.
I told them that that was just wonderful advance planning by a multi-billion dollar company , please pass it on to his bosses.

Considering the FCC has had a plan for phasing out analog TV for about 8 years now.

[TheRic]

Loring, I know what your talking about. Unfortunately everyone is looking at the other guy to see what they are doing. No one wants to make a decision. It's not just the big cable companies, but the small ones also.

[bmyers]

I was thinking about this also. The FCC phase is only talking about those frequencies broadcast over the air. Cable companies don't really get their content over the air, in that frequency range anyways. They get downlinks from satellites right? Then they process it and send it on down the cable line to their box sitting on my TV. The box might have an RCA jack to go to the TV, it might have a coax cable. Neither of those are FCC regulated.

So what will that phase out by the FCC really affect? Local broadcast companies? It ends up in my cable feed anyway. I don't tune them in OTA.

If I wanted to live out in the boonies past where cable companies go, I could get DirectTV and again, that box will do RCA, S-Video or coax. None of the FCC regulations apply.

In theory, couldn't I continue to use my good ole boob-tube until I let the smoke out of it? As long as what ever cable box I get can talk to it via RCA, S-Video or coax, whats the difference?



Bill

[LCHIEN]

I was thinking about this also. The FCC phase is only talking about those frequencies broadcast over the air. Cable companies don't really get their content over the air, in that frequency range anyways. They get downlinks from satellites right? Then they process it and send it on down the cable line to their box sitting on my TV. The box might have an RCA jack to go to the TV, it might have a coax cable. Neither of those are FCC regulated.

So what will that phase out by the FCC really affect? Local broadcast companies? It ends up in my cable feed anyway. I don't tune them in OTA.

If I wanted to live out in the boonies past where cable companies go, I could get DirectTV and again, that box will do RCA, S-Video or coax. None of the FCC regulations apply.

In theory, couldn't I continue to use my good ole boob-tube until I let the smoke out of it? As long as what ever cable box I get can talk to it via RCA, S-Video or coax, whats the difference?



Bill

The phase out by the FCC means that receivers with NTSC (analog) tuners will become obsolete and possible unobtainable (except for used ones). So will cable continue to transmit the NTSC formatted signals as they do now (for analog cable) or will they adopt ASTC (the digital format) and HiDef or will they use an incompatible digital format as they do now if you get digital cable requireing a cable company proprietary box or interface card? FCC only has effect because they approved the ATSC format and ordered the phase out of the NTSC format (for broadcast) AND also set requrements for compatibility of TV receivers.

Its sort of independent of the frequency for each channel, the cable analog channels are a superset of the broadcast frequencies, but that's only the carrier frequency.

It's less than 2 years away. Large TVs are expensive, you want to buy ones that will last 5-10 years and not kludge up the place with adapter boxes or have to buy new sets, you need to plan. How can the cable companies not have a plan?

[JTimmons]

How can the cable companies not have a plan?

Loring, this is a question that I'd like to see answered, as well as a couple of other BT3 members that work at the same place I do. This we accept as just a part of telecom, you'd drive yourself crazy trying to figure it out.

It's not surprising to me that they couldn't tell you anything. Telecom workers are much like mushrooms, they feed us S#^& and keep us in the dark!

[jziegler]

Right now, digital transmissions in High Def over cable are already using a different modulation scheme than over the air, but some (Many?) hi def sets can receive both. The ATSC standard uses 8VSB modulation. Cable uses a form of QAM. The bitstream that goes to the hi-def decoder might be the same.

Of course, this might only apply to the unencrpyted digital content, which in my area is just the over the air channels and a few others. Who knows about the stuff that needs their box. And it doesn't say that they will continue this practice.

Then there's always the cable card stuff. If you get a cable card compatable set, you may have better luck.. Or not..

Jim

[LCHIEN]

Then there's always the cable card stuff.... you may have better luck.. Or not..

Jim

see, that's the kind of indecision they're sowing.
Nobody can tell me what its going to be.

[Kristofor]

You're highly unlikely to talk to a call-center worker who is going to know anything about changes 2 years away... Some call centers average 100% turn-over per year, so if there isn't red-hot customer interest, AND a competitor willing to give a better answer, there's little reason to add that to the 3-ring binder.

There's little incentive for the cable companies to adopt a freebie/QAM approach for most of their lineup, when they can have you pay extra for each device (tuner box/cable card) rather than the current situation where every room in the house has access to the "free" channels.

Besides, they also want to bundle in a down-featured rights-controlled DVR in the same box as the cable tuner so they can charge extra for that too, so you may as well have a decoder for every TV :S

[Jeffrey Schronce]

I remember a Dilbert comic that said cable workers were just folks who couldn't get hired by the phone company. My ex-wife (Bellsouth/AT&T) got a hoot out of that.

[MilDoc]

The whole field of HDTV has been confusing and changing from the start. Blame the FTC for not setting a firm standard for every provider to meet by a set deadline, instead of numerous resolution standards etc. Other countries adopted HDTV this way. No hassles. I'm not planning any purchase until this settles out more. I feel sorry for the very early folks.

[Ed62]

I'm not planning any purchase until this settles out more. I feel sorry for the very early folks.

I'm with you, Paul. LOML would like to buy now, but I'm from the "wait and see what happens" crowd.

Ed

[linear]

I think this is one of the better resources on this topic:
http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ISSUES/what_is_ATSC.html

Loring, if you don't find it informative, I'll bet you at least find it interesting.

[MilDoc]

I think this is one of the better resources on this topic:
http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ISSUES/what_is_ATSC.html

Loring, if you don't find it informative, I'll bet you at least find it interesting.

Yep, just makes my point. 8 different resolution standards. Only in the good ol' USofA where companies rule the gov.

[Kristofor]

That's one take... Of course the electronics companies would love to sell everyone new equipment...

But do you really need as much resolution for a cartoon as for a movie or fast action sporting event? In a digital world you can slice and dice the bandwidth to allow for a few higher res signals or more lower res signals.

The multi-format isn't really the problem, it's a lack of clearly expressed vision for the plan and timelines surrounding the conversion. (I think this was the core of Loring's complaint). The moving target also extended the number of people stuck with bridge-generation technology who are kind of out in the cold.

The fact that 90% of the population has no real idea how any electronic device works or even the difference between analog and digital makes educating consumers somewhat harder too.

[MilDoc]

The moving target also extended the number of people stuck with bridge-generation technology who are kind of out in the cold.

The fact that 90% of the population has no real idea how any electronic device works or even the difference between analog and digital makes educating consumers somewhat harder too.

Which, IMHO, are 2 reasons why the entire conversion could have been made far simpler.