There's some
limitation regarding reception
of local (Boston and Providence) channels if I happened to be
travelling long distance on the
boat, but that really doesn't bother me.

Most locals are broadcast in what they call a "spotbeam." That's a focused
signal over a relatively small area, opposed to nationwide coverage which is
called "conus." Once you travel out of the coverage area of a spotbeam,
those channels are gone. They do this to give the sats more capacity to
carry locals.

--Mike

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 21:02:58 -0800, "Mike" wrote:

You're good there too. The cable co. already does the conversion for you,
and broadcasts it thru the cable to whatever channel you're watching. Kind
of a digital/analog hybrid.

Really, it only affects over the air reception.

Nope - the current system is dual carrier. If you connect directly to
the cable without the benefit of a box, it's an analog signal.

The analog signal is set to switch off on Feb. 9, 2009.

True, but the FCC has mandated that subscribers to "basic" or analog cable,
be able to receive a picture for at least 3 years after the conversion.

--Mike

On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 08:31:10 -0800, "Mike" wrote:


"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 21:02:58 -0800, "Mike" wrote:

You're good there too. The cable co. already does the conversion for you,
and broadcasts it thru the cable to whatever channel you're watching. Kind
of a digital/analog hybrid.

Really, it only affects over the air reception.

Nope - the current system is dual carrier. If you connect directly to
the cable without the benefit of a box, it's an analog signal.

The analog signal is set to switch off on Feb. 9, 2009.

True, but the FCC has mandated that subscribers to "basic" or analog cable,
be able to receive a picture for at least 3 years after the conversion.

Didn't know that - learn something new everyday.

On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 11:21:53 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 05:38:24 -0800 (PST), wrote:


It'll work. The only thing that the going digital thing will affect is
if you use an antenna. What I'm ****ed about is that now the History
Channel has went to digital format, the only way you can get it is
with the Comcast box. Only have one on the main TV, all the other TV's
are just wired directly to cable.

I really believe soon we will be getting content like "history" and
"discovery" directly from the internet with the cable company only
providing bandwidth. If guys like the Mythbusters could get us to pay
a dime an episode for the download they would make more money than
they do through the network and cable company distribution with very
little cost to them.

Not that it's particularly germane here, but I tried out the Netflix
streaming movie thingy last night - that's really good. Not a hiccup,
the streaming was smooth and the video crisp with no problems.

I could get used to that.

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

On Jan 6, 11:53 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Mike" wrote in message


As long as the tv is digital ready you are ok.. it's only older tv's
that will be effected. If the tv works now with cable from the wall,
it is digital and you will not have a problem if I understand
correctly..

--------------------------------------

I don't think that is true. The older analog TVs work now connected
directly to the cable (no box) because the cable company also provides an
analog signal in addition to digital.

The reason I asked is because the people living in the assisted living
place that my mother is in are all concerned that their older analog TVs
won't work. Most of them are on fixed incomes and have basic cable
service that does not require a cable box. I've tried to decipher the
Comcast advertisements on the subject and they are not very clear. They
say, "if you are a cable subscriber" you don't need to do anything, and
the ads show a TV connected to one of their boxes.

I guess the real question is, "How much longer will the cable companies
continue to provide the analog signal on their cable lines?" I suspect
that eventually (if not starting this February) that they will phase out
the analog signal and do everything in digital. It only makes sense
because analog consumes much of the bandwidth capacity of cable and they
want it for other things (like digital voice for telephone). If my
assumption is correct, then anyone with an analog only TV will eventually
require either a cable box from the cable company, a digital to analog
converter box or a digital TV.

Meanwhile, this is funny. I made a copy and sent it to my mother.

http://www.eisboch.com/digitalconversion.wmv

Eisboch

If you do not need the converter box coupon's you can order 2, the max per
address and deliver them to senior centers or assisted living centers. They
can also only get 2 coupons.

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 05:31:06 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:




I guess the real question is, "How much longer will the cable companies
continue to provide the analog signal on their cable lines?" I suspect
that eventually (if not starting this February) that they will phase out
the
analog signal and do everything in digital. It only makes sense because
analog consumes much of the bandwidth capacity of cable and they want it
for
other things (like digital voice for telephone). If my assumption is
correct, then anyone with an analog only TV will eventually require either
a
cable box from the cable company, a digital to analog converter box or a
digital TV.

On the bandwidth point, they're not having a problem - here, anyway -
currently sending digital, analog, HD, broadband, and digital phone on
the same cable. I think the digital mandate was to free up the air
waves.
Then, I suspect, as gfretwell does - that requiring boxes on every
analog TV will push customers to satellite. It would push me there.
I don't need much excuse to leave Comcast behind.
Only the fact I'd have to pay for the extra sat boxes has kept me
from going to sat.
Thirdly, Comcast has been harping in ads for months now that their
customers don't have to get a converter box. Be pretty dumb to go
back on that any time soon.
I figure they have a 5-10 year time frame for dropping analog.
Probably have statisticians working on analog TV obsolescence and
psychologists analysing public response.
They have plenty of money to pay them.
I've been in meetings with these types. If they're any good they'll
keep as many customers as they can.
But its always possible they'll go for cost-cutting bonus money and
screw the pooch.

Meanwhile, this is funny. I made a copy and sent it to my mother.

http://www.eisboch.com/digitalconversion.wmv

Funny. We'll all get there soon enough. If we're lucky.

--Vic



My Dish network box only supports 2 TV's. So I need a 2nd $5 box for the
3rd TV.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:19:32 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:

Direct and/or Dish do not provide the Internet service. In the case of
Dish
here in my area they partner with Embarq and they provide DSL service.

I found for me it was better not to bundle the DishNetwork and Embarq
Internet service. When you get the Embarq DSL and landline phone service
they force a bundle of phone "services" that would make my phone bill part
of the service go up about 20 bux per month.

Embarq offers different Internet speeds for different monthly prices. I
have the 3MB service and it is just fine. I have never seen Comcast in
action but I've heard they have higher d/l speeds that 3MB.


Cable is faster than consumer grade DSL If you are watching videos all
day it is probably worth it. Unfortunately when you average the "zero
bits per second" you get when Comcast is down in the equation DSL is
faster, I call their offering the triple threat plan. At least 3 times
a month you will be transported back to the 19th century.
No TV, No phone, No internet.
I guess you just curl up with a good book, remember those?

Still read books. Starting a Ted Bell novel later today. Used to have
cable, but everytime it rained or got foggy the cable went out. Was one of
the first cable systems in the country. They replaced all the cables and
supposedly is good and reliable now. Just to costly for what I use.

On Jan 7, 12:26*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:19:32 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:

Direct and/or Dish do not provide the Internet service. In the case of
Dish
here in my area they partner with Embarq and they provide DSL service.

I found for me it was better not to bundle the DishNetwork and Embarq
Internet service. *When you get the Embarq DSL and landline phone service
they force a bundle of phone "services" that would make my phone bill part
of the service go up about 20 bux per month.

Embarq offers different Internet speeds for different monthly prices. *I
have the 3MB service and it is just fine. *I have never seen Comcast in
action but I've heard they have higher d/l speeds that 3MB.

Cable is faster than consumer grade DSL If you are watching videos all
day it is probably worth it. Unfortunately when you average the "zero
bits per second" you get when Comcast is down in the equation DSL is
faster, I call their offering the triple threat plan. At least 3 times
a month you will be transported back to the 19th century.
No TV, No phone, No internet.
I guess you just curl up with a good book, remember those?

Still read books. *Starting a Ted Bell novel later today. *Used to have
cable, but everytime it rained or got foggy the cable went out. *Was one of
the first cable systems in the country. *They replaced all the cables and
supposedly is good and reliable now. *Just to costly for what I use.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Jan 7, 11:29*am, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:19:32 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:
Direct and/or Dish do not provide the Internet service. In the case of Dish
here in my area they partner with Embarq and they provide DSL service.

I found for me it was better not to bundle the DishNetwork and Embarq
Internet service. *When you get the Embarq DSL and landline phone service
they force a bundle of phone "services" that would make my phone bill part
of the service go up about 20 bux per month.

Embarq offers different Internet speeds for different monthly prices. *I
have the 3MB service and it is just fine. *I have never seen Comcast in
action but I've heard they have higher d/l speeds that 3MB.

Cable is faster than consumer grade DSL If you are watching videos all
day it is probably worth it. Unfortunately when you average the "zero
bits per second" you get when Comcast is down in the equation DSL is
faster, I call their offering the triple threat plan. At least 3 times
a month you will be transported back to the 19th century.
No TV, No phone, No internet.
I guess you just curl up with a good book, remember those?

I'll bet my cable at home hasn't been down in at least two years. At
the office, Bellsouth is down at least every week. Sometimes for a few
minutes, sometimes for a few hours, sometimes for a day. The business
line from them is horrible, noise all of the time. Comcast is clear as
a bell.

On Jan 7, 11:21*am, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 05:38:24 -0800 (PST), wrote:
It'll work. The only thing that the going digital thing will affect is
if you use an antenna. What I'm ****ed about is that now the History
Channel has went to digital format, the only way you can get it is
with the Comcast box. Only have one on the main TV, all the other TV's
are just wired directly to cable.

I really believe soon we will be getting content like "history" and
"discovery" directly from the internet with the cable company only
providing bandwidth. If guys like the Mythbusters could get us to pay
a dime an episode for the download they would make more money than
they do through the network and cable company distribution with very
little cost to them.

That's true. I'm having a little trouble understanding the thing with
the History channel. They went digital, so I get no signal unless it
goes through Comcast's box. Any other TV doesn't get it. BUT, when all
cable goes digital, it's not supposed to affect the cable ready TV's.
What's up with that?