In this era of ever expanding complex technology it sometimes feels like the world is getting really mixed up big time. It was not too long ago that most phones had to be hard wired into the wall and most TV’s could get all the programming over the air. Today more and more of us are jettisoning our wired Ma Bell phones and using our wireless mobile phones almost exclusively. Many “twenty-somethings” are shocked to hear that a TV can actually work without being connected to the cable or satellite dish. It is in this vein that I share the following true story.
A colleague of mine told me that over the Super Bowl weekend she received a call from her brother in Connecticut. He had recently purchased a new HD TV set but he had yet to decide if he was going to sign up for a high definition service with his cable provider or go with one of the satellite services. Well to make a long story short, he was very disappointed because his procrastination had resulted in not being able to watch the Super Bowl in High Definition on his brand new HD set.
“Why don’t you just pick it up over the air from Channel 3, the CBS station in Hartford,” my colleague inquired of her brother. A long pause ensued.
“You mean that I can get High Definition programming over the air …Channel 3 broadcasts in HD?” he asked incredulously.”
As it turned out she walked him through the rather simple process of attaching a regular “rabbit ears” antenna to the new TV set and, voila, it worked. He was nothing short of amazed.
I don’t think that my colleague’s brother is the exception as evidenced by the sheer wonder found in the eyes of many when they see TV actually coming to their mobile phone, Palm Pilot™ or video iPod™ through the air. Marconi got a Nobel Prize for developing this process in 1909.
Who knows, over –the-air TV broadcasting may have a second life with HDTV.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Monday, March 12, 2007
If a tree falls in the forest…
With all the “whiz-bang” high tech developments gaining attention in recent years, one seems to have escaped the notice of many. Perhaps it is because it is looked at as an old technology. Perhaps it is because the devices for using it are expensive and hard to find. Or perhaps it is a technology that just doesn’t offer enough new benefit. Perhaps it is because of all the above. The technology is HD Radio™.
HD Radio™ is the moniker used for the technology developed by iBiguity Corporation to digitally transmit audio and data on the current FM and AM radio bands. Right now most radio in the US is broadcast with regular analog transmission technology that has changed little since the first regular radio broadcasts began in the early 1900s. The FCC has adopted HD Radio™ as the standard for digital broadcasts in the United States. However, unlike digital TV, there is no FCC mandate and no deadline for stations to begin digital transmission.
There are three major improvements offered with HD Radio™. First, the quality of the audio is enhanced. While the quality is not that much better than good current FM broadcasts, e.g., WGUC/ 90.9, WARM 98, or WEBN 102.7, the audio quality (if not the content) on AM stations is greatly improved. In fact, you will be hard pressed to hear the difference in the quality of music played on AM or FM using HD radio™.
The second major benefit of HD Radio™ comes in its ability to offer multiple programs on a single channel. For example, if you tuned to WGUC 90.9 using an HD Radio you will find not only a commercial free classical music service but also be able to hear jazz programming 24 hours a day. Other local stations that are transmitting HD Radio have decided to use the second or third “channel” in a variety of ways.
HD Radio™ has a third feature that many will find useful. Some receivers will have small screens on which can be displayed information about the program being broadcast. This is somewhat akin to the on-screen TV guide on your cable. The display might be the name of the performer or catalog number of the musical recording being played.
There are cuurently 15 stations in the Cincinnati area broadcasting in HD Radio™ format. Unfortunately that is also about the same number of radios in the Cincinnati area that are able to receive the broadcasts. That is an exaggeration, but not by much.
Auto makers have been slow to provide HD Radios™ in the new models. It is easy to forget, but it was in large part the standard offering of AM/FM radios in cars that propelled FM broadcasting from the poor “step child” to the prominent and even dominant player in radio broadcasting. That has not happened for HD Radio™ as the car manufacturers have embraced the satellite radio pay services.
The radios are not cheap and up until now not easy to find. The large national electronic stores may have one or two models on the shelf for home and car. RadioShack® stores offer two models for home or office use but they are pricey in the $200 neighborhood. Like any other electronic device, as sales increase the price will go down. But that is yet to happen. Last week’s announcement by the retail behemoth Wal-Mart® might jump- start sales but even their announcement was cautious in predicting demand.
Frankly HD Radio™ is an enigma. It is a good service. It is free. It is available anywhere. It provides more listening options, e.g. a real jazz service in this market. But it just has not taken off. I have been watching it for years and really don’t have an opinion when or even if it will replace traditional analog radio. Perhaps it will require the FCC the do what it has done for TV, set a sunset date for analog radio transmission.
HD Radio™ is the moniker used for the technology developed by iBiguity Corporation to digitally transmit audio and data on the current FM and AM radio bands. Right now most radio in the US is broadcast with regular analog transmission technology that has changed little since the first regular radio broadcasts began in the early 1900s. The FCC has adopted HD Radio™ as the standard for digital broadcasts in the United States. However, unlike digital TV, there is no FCC mandate and no deadline for stations to begin digital transmission.
There are three major improvements offered with HD Radio™. First, the quality of the audio is enhanced. While the quality is not that much better than good current FM broadcasts, e.g., WGUC/ 90.9, WARM 98, or WEBN 102.7, the audio quality (if not the content) on AM stations is greatly improved. In fact, you will be hard pressed to hear the difference in the quality of music played on AM or FM using HD radio™.
The second major benefit of HD Radio™ comes in its ability to offer multiple programs on a single channel. For example, if you tuned to WGUC 90.9 using an HD Radio you will find not only a commercial free classical music service but also be able to hear jazz programming 24 hours a day. Other local stations that are transmitting HD Radio have decided to use the second or third “channel” in a variety of ways.
HD Radio™ has a third feature that many will find useful. Some receivers will have small screens on which can be displayed information about the program being broadcast. This is somewhat akin to the on-screen TV guide on your cable. The display might be the name of the performer or catalog number of the musical recording being played.
There are cuurently 15 stations in the Cincinnati area broadcasting in HD Radio™ format. Unfortunately that is also about the same number of radios in the Cincinnati area that are able to receive the broadcasts. That is an exaggeration, but not by much.
Auto makers have been slow to provide HD Radios™ in the new models. It is easy to forget, but it was in large part the standard offering of AM/FM radios in cars that propelled FM broadcasting from the poor “step child” to the prominent and even dominant player in radio broadcasting. That has not happened for HD Radio™ as the car manufacturers have embraced the satellite radio pay services.
The radios are not cheap and up until now not easy to find. The large national electronic stores may have one or two models on the shelf for home and car. RadioShack® stores offer two models for home or office use but they are pricey in the $200 neighborhood. Like any other electronic device, as sales increase the price will go down. But that is yet to happen. Last week’s announcement by the retail behemoth Wal-Mart® might jump- start sales but even their announcement was cautious in predicting demand.
Frankly HD Radio™ is an enigma. It is a good service. It is free. It is available anywhere. It provides more listening options, e.g. a real jazz service in this market. But it just has not taken off. I have been watching it for years and really don’t have an opinion when or even if it will replace traditional analog radio. Perhaps it will require the FCC the do what it has done for TV, set a sunset date for analog radio transmission.
Monday, March 5, 2007
No this is not another Y2K!
The upcoming change in the date for the beginning of Daylight Saving Time in the United States will cause some minor problems for many computers. If you are running Microsoft Windows™, our good friend Bill Gates has built in a little program that automatically changes your computer’s clock at the beginning and end of Daylight Saving time periods. Of course Bill could not know that in 2007 those dates would change expanding Daylight Saving Time by some four weeks. Not to worry. The sky will not fall on March 11th at 2 AM! Do not stock up on toilet paper and milk! Put away the extra flashlight batteries. Take a deep breath.
There are available on the Internet various “patches” to address this problem. A “patch” is a little program that fixes your computer’s operating system when something malfunctions, either because of a mistake in the program, or as in this case, changes in the dates. I wouldn’t bother with a patch. I have an easier way.
For those of you who use Microsoft Windows XP™, there is a simple fix that you can do in 30 seconds. When you have time on Sunday, March 11th just fire up your computer and RIGHT CLICK on the time display at the lower left corner of your screen. When the menu appears, LEFT CLICK on the “Adjust Date and Time” item. Another screen with a calendar and a place to set the “Time of Day” will appear. Go ahead and set the time ahead by 1 hour. At the top of the box you will find a TAB marked “TIME ZONE.” LEFT CLICK on that and you will see map of the world and below the map a little box that is most likely already checked with the words, “Automatically adjust clock for daylight saving changes.” By LEFT Clicking on that box you will disable Bill’s little handy dandy program so it will not add another hour in three weeks nor will it subtract an hour in November.
For those of you who use Windows 98™, you will find the little daylight saving box as soon as you click on the time in the lower right side of your screen. As for VISTA™, the process in similar to XP™ but you actually can have multiple Daylight Saving settings.
For Mac Users, there are patches available on the Internet and some Macs connected to the Internet will “Call Home” to Apple to get the correct time. Again, I would suggest that you manually go into your clock settings and set the time ahead by one hour. Don’t forget to un-check the box marked “Automatically adjust clock for daylight saving changes.” No big deal.
You are all set until Sunday November 4th when you will need to set the clock back an hour. See, no need for extra milk, toilet paper or extra blankets and flashlights! Isn’t technology wonderful!
PS. A few weeks ago we discussed DTV. For those who want more info on the Digital TV, the FCC has a neat web site: www.dtv.gov
There are available on the Internet various “patches” to address this problem. A “patch” is a little program that fixes your computer’s operating system when something malfunctions, either because of a mistake in the program, or as in this case, changes in the dates. I wouldn’t bother with a patch. I have an easier way.
For those of you who use Microsoft Windows XP™, there is a simple fix that you can do in 30 seconds. When you have time on Sunday, March 11th just fire up your computer and RIGHT CLICK on the time display at the lower left corner of your screen. When the menu appears, LEFT CLICK on the “Adjust Date and Time” item. Another screen with a calendar and a place to set the “Time of Day” will appear. Go ahead and set the time ahead by 1 hour. At the top of the box you will find a TAB marked “TIME ZONE.” LEFT CLICK on that and you will see map of the world and below the map a little box that is most likely already checked with the words, “Automatically adjust clock for daylight saving changes.” By LEFT Clicking on that box you will disable Bill’s little handy dandy program so it will not add another hour in three weeks nor will it subtract an hour in November.
For those of you who use Windows 98™, you will find the little daylight saving box as soon as you click on the time in the lower right side of your screen. As for VISTA™, the process in similar to XP™ but you actually can have multiple Daylight Saving settings.
For Mac Users, there are patches available on the Internet and some Macs connected to the Internet will “Call Home” to Apple to get the correct time. Again, I would suggest that you manually go into your clock settings and set the time ahead by one hour. Don’t forget to un-check the box marked “Automatically adjust clock for daylight saving changes.” No big deal.
You are all set until Sunday November 4th when you will need to set the clock back an hour. See, no need for extra milk, toilet paper or extra blankets and flashlights! Isn’t technology wonderful!
PS. A few weeks ago we discussed DTV. For those who want more info on the Digital TV, the FCC has a neat web site: www.dtv.gov
Monday, February 26, 2007
The information superhighway is not a freeway
With more and more of us using our home computers to surf the web and send email, pictures, pay bills and watch TV, there has been an explosion in the demand for broadband Internet connections. The term “broadband connection” is used to define a variety of high speed connections to the Internet. The definition of “high speed” is somewhat arbitrary but basically refers to any connection other than a standard phone line and modem.
In ancient times, i.e. five years ago, most of us used phone lines and a simple modem for connecting to the Internet. A modem is a device that lets your computer “talk” to other computers. These old connections were limited to relatively low speeds because the telephone lines used were not designed to handle anything else. For example using my old telephone modem, it would have taken about 3 minutes to download from the Internet the complete text (no pictures) of the King James Version of the Bible. Today, with a standard broadband connection available from the phone company or your local cable company, that same text could be received in about 4 – 10 seconds.
While most of us don’t send and receive large documents rivaling the size of the Bible, we do send and receive files that are even larger. For example, one high quality photograph when converted to a computer file can be as large as or larger than the file containing the Bible. So sending Johnny’s birthday shots “over the river and through the woods to grandma’s house” via your computer will take a long time if you don’t have a broadband connection.
There is also a steep increase in the amount of video programming available via the Internet. For example my station, CET, has more than 400 programs available for watching on your computer on itsservice. Video is a ravenous consumer of Internet bandwidth and if you don’t have a broadband connection, forget about even trying to view live video.
For those of us in the Harrison area we have two choices of broadband suppliers. We can go with Cincinnati Bell and purchase ZoomTown® which uses a technology called DSL. (Don’t worry what DSL stands for) There are various levels of ZoomTown® available but most provide a minimum of 1.5 megabits per second, which will give you the Bible in about 5 seconds.
The other option is to contract with your cable company. Time Warner Cable offers RoadRunner®. This service uses the same connection that carries your Cable TV programming to your home. When you come down to it there is very little difference in the two offerings. Cincinnati Bell will tell you that they provide a dedicated circuit right to your house while with the cable company you are “sharing” a connection with your neighbors. Who cares? What is important is that it works, is affordable and gives you speed adequate for your needs. Both services do that. Both are similarly priced after you factor out the introductory discounts.
In ancient times, i.e. five years ago, most of us used phone lines and a simple modem for connecting to the Internet. A modem is a device that lets your computer “talk” to other computers. These old connections were limited to relatively low speeds because the telephone lines used were not designed to handle anything else. For example using my old telephone modem, it would have taken about 3 minutes to download from the Internet the complete text (no pictures) of the King James Version of the Bible. Today, with a standard broadband connection available from the phone company or your local cable company, that same text could be received in about 4 – 10 seconds.
While most of us don’t send and receive large documents rivaling the size of the Bible, we do send and receive files that are even larger. For example, one high quality photograph when converted to a computer file can be as large as or larger than the file containing the Bible. So sending Johnny’s birthday shots “over the river and through the woods to grandma’s house” via your computer will take a long time if you don’t have a broadband connection.
There is also a steep increase in the amount of video programming available via the Internet. For example my station, CET, has more than 400 programs available for watching on your computer on its
For those of us in the Harrison area we have two choices of broadband suppliers. We can go with Cincinnati Bell and purchase ZoomTown® which uses a technology called DSL. (Don’t worry what DSL stands for) There are various levels of ZoomTown® available but most provide a minimum of 1.5 megabits per second, which will give you the Bible in about 5 seconds.
The other option is to contract with your cable company. Time Warner Cable offers RoadRunner®. This service uses the same connection that carries your Cable TV programming to your home. When you come down to it there is very little difference in the two offerings. Cincinnati Bell will tell you that they provide a dedicated circuit right to your house while with the cable company you are “sharing” a connection with your neighbors. Who cares? What is important is that it works, is affordable and gives you speed adequate for your needs. Both services do that. Both are similarly priced after you factor out the introductory discounts.
Monday, February 19, 2007
The "vista" might look better under the tree
My dad was a very smart man and often gave me some very good advice about many things in life. One bit of advice related to automobiles. Back then in the 60’s GM and Ford introduced new models about as often as some of us get a haircut. When a new model came out my dad was quick to opine, “Wait till they get the bugs out. The old car gets you there, doesn’t it?” Well I think my dad’s advice is very appropriate relating to the introduction of the new Microsoft operating system, Windows® Vista ™
The operating system in any computer tells all those microprocessors, disk drives, printers and scanners what to do. It also serves as a sort of translator, taking your mouse clicks and keystrokes and turning them into actual instructions that the simple-minded machine can understand.
If you are a PC user there is no doubt that Vista™ will be the operating system that you will eventually have. The big question is when. Here are a few observations about when to change.
- Unless you are a real geek (and if you are you won’t be reading this) don’t upgrade you current computer to Vista™. While some claim that upgrading is as simple as putting in a CD and pressing “Enter”, experience suggest otherwise. The hardware requirements, memory size and program compatibility issues are not worth the hassle.
- Ask yourself if you really need Vista™ right now. If you use your computer for Internet surfing and email as well as word processing and perhaps bill paying, the computer you currently have most likely can serve you well for a few more years. Microsoft still supports Windows® XP™ so you don’t have to make a decision now. After all they just recently quit supporting Window ® 98™.
- If you do buy a new PC you will no doubt not have a choice as they are now being shipped with Vista™ already loaded. You will however need to decide what version you want and need. Vista™ comes in six basic “flavors.” Three of these are aimed at the home user. They are Vista Ultimate™, Vista Home Premium™ and Vista Home Basic™. Don’t bother with the Basic “plain vanilla flavor”. It doesn’t offer enough benefits to justify the change. Unfortunately many of the lower priced new machines will come with this Basic version because the hardware is just at the minimum level needed to run Vista™.
- Don’t presume that all the programs that you now have on your current machine will run on the new one. While Microsoft has tried to make sure this backward compatibility issue is addressed, some programs, especially those that handle security issues and spam filters don’t play well with Vista™
From what I have gathered, Vista™ should be an improvement over the current versions of Windows®. Unfortunately, history tells us that it may take a few tweaks to get it right even after the first copies shipped. So perhaps that new computer with Vista™ installed will look better under the twinkling lights of the Christmas tree next December.
The operating system in any computer tells all those microprocessors, disk drives, printers and scanners what to do. It also serves as a sort of translator, taking your mouse clicks and keystrokes and turning them into actual instructions that the simple-minded machine can understand.
If you are a PC user there is no doubt that Vista™ will be the operating system that you will eventually have. The big question is when. Here are a few observations about when to change.
- Unless you are a real geek (and if you are you won’t be reading this) don’t upgrade you current computer to Vista™. While some claim that upgrading is as simple as putting in a CD and pressing “Enter”, experience suggest otherwise. The hardware requirements, memory size and program compatibility issues are not worth the hassle.
- Ask yourself if you really need Vista™ right now. If you use your computer for Internet surfing and email as well as word processing and perhaps bill paying, the computer you currently have most likely can serve you well for a few more years. Microsoft still supports Windows® XP™ so you don’t have to make a decision now. After all they just recently quit supporting Window ® 98™.
- If you do buy a new PC you will no doubt not have a choice as they are now being shipped with Vista™ already loaded. You will however need to decide what version you want and need. Vista™ comes in six basic “flavors.” Three of these are aimed at the home user. They are Vista Ultimate™, Vista Home Premium™ and Vista Home Basic™. Don’t bother with the Basic “plain vanilla flavor”. It doesn’t offer enough benefits to justify the change. Unfortunately many of the lower priced new machines will come with this Basic version because the hardware is just at the minimum level needed to run Vista™.
- Don’t presume that all the programs that you now have on your current machine will run on the new one. While Microsoft has tried to make sure this backward compatibility issue is addressed, some programs, especially those that handle security issues and spam filters don’t play well with Vista™
From what I have gathered, Vista™ should be an improvement over the current versions of Windows®. Unfortunately, history tells us that it may take a few tweaks to get it right even after the first copies shipped. So perhaps that new computer with Vista™ installed will look better under the twinkling lights of the Christmas tree next December.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Déjà vu All Over Again …
Borrowing from that American icon, Yogi Berra, let’s see if we “can observe a lot by watching” the wars between the Blue Ray DVD™ and HD-DVD™ formats. These are the new very high capacity DVD formats that allow for real High Definition quality. As more and more of us buy HD sets, HD DVDs are coming to the market. Up until now a DVD might have offered you a wide-screen picture and very good video, but it was not real high definition. Enter these two non-compatible formats. If you think this sounds familiar your right. You might remember the Betamax™ vs. VHS wars back in the late 1970’s. The two formats slugged it our for a few years with VHS ultimately winning, causing many consumers to end up with a Betamax™ machine but little programming to play on it.
I have been asked which one to buy. Right now my advice is to wait unless you want to pay lots of money for a machine that might not be supported in the future. In early January the annual Consumer Electronics Show took place in Los Vegas. This is one of the largest trade shows in the world. I had hoped to see some clarification of which format would “win.” I was interested in seeing which new machines were featured and more important, which format the big movie studios and video distributors would choose. Right now it is close to a 50/50 proposition with about the same number of movies available in each format.
Some of the manufactures of High Definition DVD machines are hedging their bets and have decided that they will offer machines that will play both formats. These machines are very pricey. Some of the movie studios are offering a single DVD disc with the movie encoded in both Blue Ray DVD™ and HD-DVD™ formats. I think this is a temporary “fix” as this radically limits the amount of material that can be crammed onto a single disc. Who wants to change to a second disc in the middle of a movie?
Right now there are large companies lining up behind each format with Apple, Panasonic and more recently Sony in the Blue Ray™ camp and Microsoft, Toshiba and NEC siding with HD-DVD™.
So my best advice again comes from old Yogi. "If you come to a fork in the road, take it." Seriously, unless you really, really, really “need” the newest HD toy and are willing to pay a premium price, wait!
I have been asked which one to buy. Right now my advice is to wait unless you want to pay lots of money for a machine that might not be supported in the future. In early January the annual Consumer Electronics Show took place in Los Vegas. This is one of the largest trade shows in the world. I had hoped to see some clarification of which format would “win.” I was interested in seeing which new machines were featured and more important, which format the big movie studios and video distributors would choose. Right now it is close to a 50/50 proposition with about the same number of movies available in each format.
Some of the manufactures of High Definition DVD machines are hedging their bets and have decided that they will offer machines that will play both formats. These machines are very pricey. Some of the movie studios are offering a single DVD disc with the movie encoded in both Blue Ray DVD™ and HD-DVD™ formats. I think this is a temporary “fix” as this radically limits the amount of material that can be crammed onto a single disc. Who wants to change to a second disc in the middle of a movie?
Right now there are large companies lining up behind each format with Apple, Panasonic and more recently Sony in the Blue Ray™ camp and Microsoft, Toshiba and NEC siding with HD-DVD™.
So my best advice again comes from old Yogi. "If you come to a fork in the road, take it." Seriously, unless you really, really, really “need” the newest HD toy and are willing to pay a premium price, wait!
Monday, February 5, 2007
Aunt Emily's TV
Right after the Super Bowl telecast and right before March Madness in 2009, all US television stations will cease analog over-the-air broadcasting. That’s right, about two years from now, on February 17, 2009, all US TV stations will turn off their analog transmitters. It is interesting but not surprising to note that a new study by CBS found that less than 30% of the population is aware of the FCC's drop dead date for analog television. Is that a problem? Well most likely not.
For many viewers this promises to be a non-event. For those of us with cable or direct satellite service, that’s currently about 75-80% of all US households and growing, it won’t matter. In fact you may already be receiving digital signals on your analog TV from your cable or satellite provider and you are watching them quite satisfactorily on your trusty 25 year old TV. That is because the cable or satellite provider’s set top box makes the conversion for you … Digital signal in …Analog signal out.
So why are we doing this? The governments in the US and in most of the rest of the world decided to upgrade to all digital TV systems in order to open up more broadcast “real estate.” In the US it is being phased in over a period beginning in the early 2000s and ending for us in 2009. The new digital system allows for a much more efficient use of the public airwaves. With devices from garage door openers to cell phones to wireless door bells all vying for the finite supply of radio frequencies, the end of TV broadcasting on local channels 5, 9,12, 19, 48 and 64 will free up a tremendous amount of valuable vacant “broadcasting real estate.” The Federal Government has already begun auctioning off the resource. Companies like Verizon, AT&T and others have great plans for mobile Internet access on devices in cars, in pockets and on wrists throughout the country. All of this depends on a robust supply of available radio spectrum.
In 2009, when analog over-the-air broadcasting ceases, it is true that your old TV will no longer be able to “tune in” over-the-air the digital signals, but there promises to be inexpensive adapters available that will convert the over-the-air digital signals to signals that your old TV can handle. Some of us old timers remember the UHF converters of the 50s and 60s. Same idea. In fact Congress is considering a program that will provide vouchers toward the purchase of these converters.
So for most of us the availability cable or satellite providers, inexpensive adapters and the steady increased rate of sales of new digital sets should alleviate any problems in watching our favorite programs. So don’t throw away that black & white “Philco” TV your aunt Emily gave you for your dorm room back in ‘78. Your grand kids will get a kick out of it.
For many viewers this promises to be a non-event. For those of us with cable or direct satellite service, that’s currently about 75-80% of all US households and growing, it won’t matter. In fact you may already be receiving digital signals on your analog TV from your cable or satellite provider and you are watching them quite satisfactorily on your trusty 25 year old TV. That is because the cable or satellite provider’s set top box makes the conversion for you … Digital signal in …Analog signal out.
So why are we doing this? The governments in the US and in most of the rest of the world decided to upgrade to all digital TV systems in order to open up more broadcast “real estate.” In the US it is being phased in over a period beginning in the early 2000s and ending for us in 2009. The new digital system allows for a much more efficient use of the public airwaves. With devices from garage door openers to cell phones to wireless door bells all vying for the finite supply of radio frequencies, the end of TV broadcasting on local channels 5, 9,12, 19, 48 and 64 will free up a tremendous amount of valuable vacant “broadcasting real estate.” The Federal Government has already begun auctioning off the resource. Companies like Verizon, AT&T and others have great plans for mobile Internet access on devices in cars, in pockets and on wrists throughout the country. All of this depends on a robust supply of available radio spectrum.
In 2009, when analog over-the-air broadcasting ceases, it is true that your old TV will no longer be able to “tune in” over-the-air the digital signals, but there promises to be inexpensive adapters available that will convert the over-the-air digital signals to signals that your old TV can handle. Some of us old timers remember the UHF converters of the 50s and 60s. Same idea. In fact Congress is considering a program that will provide vouchers toward the purchase of these converters.
So for most of us the availability cable or satellite providers, inexpensive adapters and the steady increased rate of sales of new digital sets should alleviate any problems in watching our favorite programs. So don’t throw away that black & white “Philco” TV your aunt Emily gave you for your dorm room back in ‘78. Your grand kids will get a kick out of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)