[NCLUG] MythTV Questions

Mon Feb 18 03:26:37 MST 2008

Sean Reifschneider wrote:
> Chad Perrin wrote:
>> obsolete.  *Someone* is going to have to serve those who can't afford to
>> plunk down six hundred bucks on a new TV.
> 
> $600?!?  It's not exactly fair to say that nobody buying a new TV can 
> buy anything less than a 32" LCD (including digital tuner and HD 
> resolution, though I think it's 720p, $600 from Wal-Mart).  They also 
> list a 24" tube TV for under $200 with a built-in digital tuner, though 
> it's a SD set.
> 
> The big pisser if people are going to be replacing their TVs is the 
> waste of all those tubes.  Though I guess they're going to go sometime.  
> Hopefully after someone figures out something nice to do with all that 
> leaded glass.

The lead is the least of the problems. Phosphorous and various rare 
earths make a color CRT one of the most toxic things at the landfill. 
It's already illegal most places for a *business* to dispose of CRTs 
except by sending them to an EPA-certified facility (individuals may 
continue to do what they wish with them).

> 
> Anyway, my understanding is that there are "set top boxes" that will be 
> given away by the government to keple people hooked up with the source 
> of their addiction.  These will allow traditional TVs to work with the 
> digital.

That's the idea, you can get 2 $40 certificates good towards the 
purchase of the set top converters. Of course the manufacturers are 
already trying to "enhance" the converters with DVD recorders etc. in 
order to turn them into profit-making items (and run the cost up above 
the value of the certificates).

> 
> See, it's not SD that's going away, it's analog broadcast.  This is why 
> cable is exempt, it's the broadcast spectrum that's trying to be 
> reclaimed...  So, in Feb 2009 you'll still be able to get SD content 
> over your digital tuner. You just need the digital tuner or the set-top 
> box.  Now, over digital they'll also be able to broadcast HD content, 
> but even then they're talking about dumbing it down to lower 
> resolutions, much like some of the satellite providers are doing right 
> now, so that channels can use less bandwidth.

The satellite signals are the same resolution as they started out with, 
it's the "aggressive processing" (aka h264 encoding) that some people 
(like the cable companies) claim reduces the quality. Interestingly the 
QAM signals most cable companies put out reduce the bitrate enough to 
degrade quality as well. Only the original ATSC has the full quality 
that can be had, though that is limited to 1080i. Theonly way to get 
1080p at this time is blu-ray or HD-DVD, or downloaded files.

The broadcasters see this not so much as an opportunity to offer better 
quality but as a chance to transmit multiple programs on one channel, 
though each network seems to have a different approach.

> 
> I deliberately bought a TV without a tuner when I got my latest.  I'm 
> not really interested in watching "push TV".  And besides, if you go 
> with cable or satellite, you probably will have their set-top box anyway 
> with DVR if you decide to go that direction...

Note that TiVo is trying to get DISH to shut down their DVRs, claiming 
infringement of:

http://www.google.com/patents?id=IeoIAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,233,389