HDTV FCC mandate

[MrMiyagi]

I was just recently reading a story on how the FCC has upped its deadline for TV's to be HD capable by March 2005.

CNN

What did I miss at the beginning of this initiative? What is the purpose? Aren't there more important things the FCC/US Government should be worrying about than every US citizen has sharp HD picture? It seems crazy to me! There must be something I'm missing....like it will clear air wave traffic for more critical signals....or....well whatever...

It sounds like the Cable providers are pushing for it, and why wound't they. People will need to/be more likely to upgrade their service = more $$$ for them.

TV mfg's are against it....they can't provide a marketable/affordable HD TV to average consumers.

My thought is to let capitalism takes its course. If the demand is there for HDTV's the mfg's will produce more of them and make money...forcing them to do so seems rediculous!

Again....what the F am I missing on this?

 

[owensdj]

Actually the deadline you're talking about is for TV's to be digital capable by March 2005, not HD capable. A TV can be digital without supporting HD, but all HD TVs are digital, if that makes any sense.

The FCC is pushing this because we're in a chicken-and-egg situation. TV manufacturers don't want to produce digital TVs until the broadcasters are sending a digital signal. Broadcasters don't want to send a digital signal until TVs are digital.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

The deadline is actually set in 2006. Since March 2005 has already come and gone it would be pretty difficult to comply with that deadline.

 

[Tab]

The goverment doesn't want to use analog anymore they want to use digital...

Meh, I mean... if you're going to buy a HDTV don't you want it to play HDTV? Right?

 

[MrMiyagi]

owensdj: I still don't see a need for the FCC to get involved, but thanks for the clarification

TLC: not a productive reply, you know I meant 2006, but thanks for the correction anyway

Tab: "they just want to" doesn't justify anything, the free market place figures these things out by itself

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: MrMiyagi
owensdj: I still don't see a need for the FCC to get involved, but thanks for the clarification

TLC: not a productive reply, you know I meant 2006, but thanks for the correction anyway

Tab: "they just want to" doesn't justify anything, the free market place figures these things out by itself

I am not siding with the goverment at all here, don't put in that group...

It's not really a good thing, I know the devices (I don't know the technical term) that translate the HDTV cannot be upgraded if they are made in the TVs. That's a bad thing for consumers.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: MrMiyagi
owensdj: I still don't see a need for the FCC to get involved, but thanks for the clarification

TLC: not a productive reply, you know I meant 2006, but thanks for the correction anyway

Tab: "they just want to" doesn't justify anything, the free market place figures these things out by itself

Well I think a correction can be productive since it helps prevent people from passing on incorrect information or causing confusion.

Anyway.

The reason therre is a push to digital is because there's been a push, since Clinton was in office, to realign the broadcast spectrums for all kinds of devices. Look at all the differing broadcast spectrums we use to day, from cell phones, to wireless handsets for land lines, to wireless (and soon, WiMAX) networking, radio, TV, and more. The FCC wants digital to take hold so the old analog TV broadcast spectrum can be used for other things (as a spectrum dedicated for emergency services - police, fire, etc.) and until all sets are digital this will not be possible.

That's why the FCC is involved and why the .gov is pushing this. It's their job to manage the broadcast spectrums.

 

[filterxg]

Basically the technology became available in the mid-90's, but neither broadcast nor cable companies were willing to spend the money for new hardware. The reasoning is the people who wanted HD were already customers, and they couldn't makeup the costs on new hardware by increasing fees. So the government stepped in and forced their hand.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: owensdj
Actually the deadline you're talking about is for TV's to be digital capable by March 2005, not HD capable. A TV can be digital without supporting HD, but all HD TVs are digital, if that makes any sense.

The FCC is pushing this because we're in a chicken-and-egg situation. TV manufacturers don't want to produce digital TVs until the broadcasters are sending a digital signal. Broadcasters don't want to send a digital signal until TVs are digital.

That's the "normal" explanation, but if we're feeling slightly paranoid, we might be tempted to think it's because digital signals can have controls analog signals can't. Analog TV doesn't have any DRM, while digital TV can/does. My guess is that it is a combination, but I'm sure the FCC is getting pressure to plug the "analog hole" by the movie and TV industry. Witness their push for the broadcast flag. There is no earthly reason the FCC should care about that, but they seem to.

 

[DealMonkey]

IMO, the reason the FCC/administration is pushing for broadcasters to migrate to digital signals is because the sooner they do, the sooner the FCC can auction off the analog spectrum the broadcasters were previously using. Imagine the huge $$ they could generate selling off that chunk of spectrum. Cha-ching!

 

[jimkyser]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
IMO, the reason the FCC/administration is pushing for broadcasters to migrate to digital signals is because the sooner they do, the sooner the FCC can auction off the analog spectrum the broadcasters were previously using. Imagine the huge $$ they could generate selling off that chunk of spectrum. Cha-ching!

This is the main reason for the switch to digital, free up spectrum and lease it to others for more money. The side benefits are a better picture and, yeah, things like DRM will probably come along for the ride.

The reason for the push is the chicken/egg issue mentioned above. By moving most new TVs to digital, the FCC will have leverage to get the broadcasters to move their transmissions.

As a side note, most of these 'digital' TVs will be able to receive analog signals, too. They will just be optimized for one of the digital formats, like 720p, and when receiving an analog signal will shape-shift it to allow for display.