Comments on: Commerce TV Subsidy Compromise: Spend First, Limit Later http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Fri, 25 May 2012 18:27:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: eric http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/comment-page-1/#comment-50913 eric Wed, 14 Mar 2007 19:08:28 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/#comment-50913 <p>For me TV is mostly a joke. Cable TV especially so. I just set up an OTA HDTV rig on a computer -- to capture local high def programming. It isn't really practical for general viewing, but sometimes I want to save a particular program. Right now the HDTV signals are in the UHF band, so rabbit ears are not the best. When analog TV goes dead, I read that they intend to shift the frequencies down into the VHF band -- so rabbit ears will work again.<br><br>I am glad for OTA television, and glad for this federal program. It's probably one of the few ways I'll ever get to suck on a government teat.<br><br>If you want to complain about government waste, why don't you concentrate on the programs that waste the most money? Start with the nonsense programs the defense department keeps pursuing.</p> For me TV is mostly a joke. Cable TV especially so. I just set up an OTA HDTV rig on a computer — to capture local high def programming. It isn’t really practical for general viewing, but sometimes I want to save a particular program. Right now the HDTV signals are in the UHF band, so rabbit ears are not the best. When analog TV goes dead, I read that they intend to shift the frequencies down into the VHF band — so rabbit ears will work again.

I am glad for OTA television, and glad for this federal program. It’s probably one of the few ways I’ll ever get to suck on a government teat.

If you want to complain about government waste, why don’t you concentrate on the programs that waste the most money? Start with the nonsense programs the defense department keeps pursuing.

]]> By: eric http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/comment-page-1/#comment-37612 eric Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:08:28 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/#comment-37612 <p>For me TV is mostly a joke. Cable TV especially so. I just set up an OTA HDTV rig on a computer -- to capture local high def programming. It isn't really practical for general viewing, but sometimes I want to save a particular program. Right now the HDTV signals are in the UHF band, so rabbit ears are not the best. When analog TV goes dead, I read that they intend to shift the frequencies down into the VHF band -- so rabbit ears will work again.</p> <p>I am glad for OTA television, and glad for this federal program. It's probably one of the few ways I'll ever get to suck on a government teat.</p> <p>If you want to complain about government waste, why don't you concentrate on the programs that waste the most money? Start with the nonsense programs the defense department keeps pursuing.</p> For me TV is mostly a joke. Cable TV especially so. I just set up an OTA HDTV rig on a computer — to capture local high def programming. It isn’t really practical for general viewing, but sometimes I want to save a particular program. Right now the HDTV signals are in the UHF band, so rabbit ears are not the best. When analog TV goes dead, I read that they intend to shift the frequencies down into the VHF band — so rabbit ears will work again.

I am glad for OTA television, and glad for this federal program. It’s probably one of the few ways I’ll ever get to suck on a government teat.

If you want to complain about government waste, why don’t you concentrate on the programs that waste the most money? Start with the nonsense programs the defense department keeps pursuing.

]]> By: James Gattuso http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/comment-page-1/#comment-50912 James Gattuso Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:36:26 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/#comment-50912 <p>My point is that the converter box is only necessary for reception of over-the-air signals. Certainly, you need an antenna to receive such signals. But fewer and fewer viewers are getting their signals this way. I don't know if it will go away completely, but do think that it will at best be a marginal form of TV transmission.</p> My point is that the converter box is only necessary for reception of over-the-air signals. Certainly, you need an antenna to receive such signals. But fewer and fewer viewers are getting their signals this way. I don’t know if it will go away completely, but do think that it will at best be a marginal form of TV transmission.

]]> By: Gary McGath http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/comment-page-1/#comment-50911 Gary McGath Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:22:54 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/#comment-50911 <p>"Rabbit ear reception" will go away? The notion seems to be pretty widespread that digital TV reception won't require an external antenna any more. That sounds unlikely to me.</p> “Rabbit ear reception” will go away? The notion seems to be pretty widespread that digital TV reception won’t require an external antenna any more. That sounds unlikely to me.

]]> By: James Gattuso http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/comment-page-1/#comment-37611 James Gattuso Wed, 14 Mar 2007 14:36:26 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/#comment-37611 <p>My point is that the converter box is only necessary for reception of over-the-air signals. Certainly, you need an antenna to receive such signals. But fewer and fewer viewers are getting their signals this way. I don't know if it will go away completely, but do think that it will at best be a marginal form of TV transmission.</p> My point is that the converter box is only necessary for reception of over-the-air signals. Certainly, you need an antenna to receive such signals. But fewer and fewer viewers are getting their signals this way. I don’t know if it will go away completely, but do think that it will at best be a marginal form of TV transmission.

]]> By: Gary McGath http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/comment-page-1/#comment-37610 Gary McGath Wed, 14 Mar 2007 14:22:54 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/03/13/commerce-tv-subsidy-compromise-spend-first-limit-later/#comment-37610 <p>"Rabbit ear reception" will go away? The notion seems to be pretty widespread that digital TV reception won't require an external antenna any more. That sounds unlikely to me.</p> “Rabbit ear reception” will go away? The notion seems to be pretty widespread that digital TV reception won’t require an external antenna any more. That sounds unlikely to me.

]]>