Great article. You are completely right about this. The transition is going to be more difficult than some people think, and thanks for raising the awareness that there are those who need help.

So, the government sells off the airwaves that are supposed to belong to the public for their own benefit, and now WE'RE supposed to do the work of telling everyone?

No way.

I have already ranted about this to everyone I know who will listen, and that includes those who I know will be affected. As for the rest of the country, I could care less. I'll be laughing my butt off at how I'm a genius and know more than the idiots running both the country and network TV when they see the backlash.

I dont know anybody who still uses rabit ears.

my brother (& his wife) switch last year, from rabit ears, to digital cable with a dvr....which they love and would never go back to "the ears".

as for me, I have a HDTV and I get HD channels through my cable provider. I actually bought my 1080i tv like 4-5 years ago.....so I've been ready.

We went back to the rabbit ears about the same time we bought a new TV, a digital flatscreen standard resolution for about $200. I've got to say the digital signal is better than any cable we ever had, it's clearer than cable, and yet it's free. I'm fine with the 10 perfect stations we get and it's a great boon to the budget. It's also nice to have a life and not feel tied to the TV.

Here is australia the transition for analog to digital was easier than you think, and there has been no backlash people love it as our broadcasters are looking for thing to add to keep us happy. So quite ya whinging and get on with it. As our analog system gets turned off at the end of the year. Plus Australias DVB system is a lot better than what the usa are offering their viewers plus we can fit more in.

Nice idea to get 2 coupons even if you don't need them and then give them to someone who does. However, I understand the coupons will only be valid for the person who requested them, and the stores have to verify that. So good samaritans should buy two converters with the coupons (some are reported to cost $39.99) and then give the boxes to those going through TV withdrawal on 2/18/09.

Other reasons not to simply order the coupons when you don't need them - (1) there are a limited number available; you may take them away from people who truly need them and more important (2) they expire 90 days after they're mailed, so ordering now and giving them to someone when the analog gets switched off won't be possible.

If you're getting one for your grandmother, fine; if you're just hoping to run into some old lady at the grocery store, don't. And if you want to really make a difference, actually volunteer for Meals on Wheels or similar groups, THEN find out who needs the coupons and help them get one of their own.

As for the comments from the person in Australia, I must respectfully point out that they are incorrect.

-Australia has a completely different video system (PAL) than that of the US (NTSC), and the digital standards will be different as well (DVB-T for Australia and ATSC for the US). I won't comment on the differences or quality because I don't have enough personal experience, but I do know you can't compare apples and oranges.

- Australia has not yet ended analog broadcasts. That won't happen completely until 2013. Digital TV isn't even available in all areas yet. When the transition is complete, THEN you can determine how successful it was.

For the record - my family still uses rabbit ears. I currently watch most of my "TV" through the networks' streaming sites or on DVD. With those options, I won't pay for cable until they offer all the channels I want at a reasonable price or a la carte.

And also for the record, I graduated summa cum laude with a degree in communication, have experience in EVERY aspect of TV production, and spend most of my time watching or reading about or critiquing TV, so I'm not just talking out of my elbow or something.

i have enjoyed this site today

hey guys if u want some info bout DTV go to this site I know it from australia but it could help you. www.dba.org.au, http://www.digitaltv.com.au. oh and the comment bout analog tv getting shut of in 2013 is AUS get ya facts straight it gets shut of at the end of next year, and for this comment " Digital TV isn't even available in all areas yet." it will be by the and of the year unless something major happens. jedichef22 get ya facts straight first as i work for one of the tv stations here in australia

I live in rural Ohio. I know more about any of this than most people here. I don't have a HDTV yet. I still use rabbit ears (external antenna outside). I believe this one of the dumbest moves by the FCC yet. Right now I can't afford a HDTV. The same goes for a lot of people in this area of the country. I think the rebate coupon for the converter boxes is another dumb move. Why not just make a set price for every converter box that everyone can afford. Also to FORCE this transition on everyone is just (I hate to sound like a broken record) ignorant. The amount of people that purchased brand new TV's before this transition came to fruition. What is supposed to be done with those TV's. They'll be good for several years to come. What do we do just throw them away for a new HDTV. I myself have a TV that was bought in 2003. It still has several years left. So I get a converter box until I need a new TV. What do I do with that converter box when I no longer need it? Give it away. Take it to Goodwill or Salvation Army. How many people are actually going to do that? Say I do get a new TV by this time next year. How am I going to get those over the air channels fifty miles between two cities with TV stations. Right now I have to use two boosters to receive anything at all. I still have static on some channels. Especially during storms. How strong are the digital over the air channels going to be for the next few years? My only hope would be to get some kind of dish. And I don't see the point in that. Because there are too many extra channels that never get watched with the package that I would have to get for the channels that I do watch. Most of the things I do want to watch I just download via bitTorrent anyways. I know illegal. I don't care. Or watch online via that channels website. All TV should be free or damn near it. But that might be a problem in the near future because of the proposed bandwidth capping . With IPTV just around the corner the media mafia might have some issues with bandwidth capping. I'm done ranting for now peace.

@ADAM:

the dtv transition was announced in 2000, but you actually had to look (PBS added digital January 1, 2000)
in 2003 the announcements about the switch started for a month or two
but a major problem was that idiots in the FCC changed the year from 2005 to 2009 to 2007 to 2008.

Many people (including Adam) are confusing DTV with HDTV (it isn't the "H" alone). Digital TV is a transmission format, while HDTV is High Definition TV. You need DTV to get HDTV, but you don't need a HDTV receiver to get DTV. The major boradcasters are already transmitting DTV on the air, but they are using the UHF channels (14 to 83). But to receive and view a DTV channel, you need a digital converter. DTV uses MPEG2 formatted video, so the format is equal to what is recorded on a DVD, and what most computers are using to watch video from the Web. This is why there were DTV tuners for computers (some work throught the USB interface) years before the converters came.

I remember the first UHF convertes when TV only had the VHF tuners (channels 2 to 13). It wasn't such a hassle. All you needed to do was tune to channel 2 or 3 and turn the UHF box on. Most still do the same with VHS recorders and a few DVD players. So the new DTV converters will be the same.

Question: Why doesn't DVD manufacturers add the DTV tuners to their products? That alone will save the trouble of getting a new tuner/converter, and save space near the TV set itself. Add the tuner to the newer upconverters for those who have HDTV monitors or even add a VGA output to use computer monitors as receivers.

This is much better than just a DTV converter, and most analog TV owners also own a computer. Not everyone needs a 40-inch HDTV screen. I still have a regular 19-inch in use, and a 20-inch computer monitor that could be used as a DTV monitor.

Raymond

I think my biggest gripe about this whole thing is that the electronics industry developed a product and insisted everyone desperately wanted that product and then convinced the FCC to force that product upon us. The bulk of consumers haven't really been pacing their living rooms in anticipation of switching to HDTV. If there were a huge consumer demand for it, the FCC wouldn't have had to adjust the changeover deadline so many times.

A lot of consumers, like my dad for instance, just aren't convinced that there is something so horribly wrong with the TV picture they've been perfectly happy with for the last 30 years. Nevertheless, my dad went ahead and bought a new HDTV anyway - then was thoroughly disgusted by how lousy his standard def DVDs looked on it and returned it to the store.

I think the electronics industry has been entirely deceptive about the gains in picture quality. Nearly the entire catalog film and television ever produced was created before the advent of HDTV. Those football games and nature programs they show on the display HDTVs in the store look so great because they were SHOT in high def in the first place. Have you ever wondered why they don't have a DVD of "TOP GUN" or "Rocky" playing on those sets, so you can see how much better your favorite old movies look? It's because the gains in quality are minimal, at best. Do you think reruns of "I Love Lucy" or "Seinfeld" are going to look a million times better on your new HDTV? Well, they're not.

The fact is, film and TV have always had a softness to them that give them a kind of detachment from reality and provide a way to escape from everyday life for a few hours. The hyper-reality of HDTV looks great on football games and nature shows- but what about everything else?

Personally, I would have liked to have seen the broadcasters take the extra bandwidth from DTV and create more standard def programming- maybe then there'd be something on I actually wanted to watch.

Ok I'm not confused about anything. I just added the "H" for the simple fact that almost all HDTV's have a DTV tuner built in. If you bought an HDTV without one. Return it now. The main reason they are forcibly shoving this down our throats. Is so the electronics companies can make money off their new technology. Before the entire nation is ready for it. I have two friends that have DTV on their HDTV's and it is amazing for sports mostly. Regular programming (primetime shows, daytime soaps, talk shows,) don't need the DTV. I've noticed by flipping through channels that cartoons look the best on a HDTV. Weather or not they are DTV. But to force this on everyone just shows how much the government's of the world are controlled by the large multinational corporations.

If the government really wants to help, forget the converter box coupons!!! Give me a coupon for a $1000 towards a new tv !!!!!! I'll probably have to settle for the converter boxes though due to personal circumstances, (job went to Mexico, unemployed and looking for work).

Some years ago, the FCC gave away over-the-air channels 70 - 83 because there was more demand for cell phones and the like than for over-the-air TV. The switch to DTV will allow them to give away channels 52 - 69, as well, with some of the space going to police and fire departments, and the rest auctioned off for more wireless FOR PROFIT services such as wireless Internet (and let's be realistic, to allow for more low def cell phone TV capacity). That is the real major push for dumping analog TV.

As far as increasing the number of standard definition channels goes, the FCC is pushing this as a DTV advantage. One digital channel has enough space to offer up to 6 standard def sub-channels, or one high def with one standard def sub-channel. (Technically, there can be room for even more sub-channels than this.) In practice, here in southeast Idaho, our ABC station (8-1) is also transmitting a Spanish language network (8-2). Our NBC station (23-1) is also transmitting the NBC Weather channel (23-2), and late at night, a Spanish language music network (23-3). And our PBS station (17-1) is also transmitting PBS Kids (17-2), PBS Learn (17-3), and PBS World (17-4) by day, and PBS HDTV (17-5) by night.

I personally resent losing yet more over-the-air main channels. I realize many of the services receiving the old channel 52 - 69 frequency space cannot safely utilize higher frequencies, but hey, FCC, if you have to, MOVE TV channels 52 - 69 up to the SHF or even EHF band, but don't just plain take them away! You've given away 18 potential HDTV channels. (Better yet, also move the otherwise unusable channel 37 up there, and give us back channels 70 – 83!)

By the way, the big dish satellite industry (which all the cable channels use to get their signals to the cable and small dish companies) has all but abandoned digital transmissions. One C-band satellite can handle no more than 24 analog channels. One Ku-band satellite can handle no more than 32 analog channels. That same C-band or Ku-band satellite can handle well over a hundred (standard definition) digital channels. The switch from analog satellite transmissions to digital satellite transmissions was not an FCC mandate. It was an economic necessity. But then again, due to a different frequency allocation paradigm, cable channels don't have to share the same big dish satellite main channel. Sadly, with so few over-the-air main TV channels left, many (particularly low budget) over-the-air TV stations will have to share the same over-the-air main TV channel, with no possibility of ever offering anything in high definition.

But what am I griping about? Now that NBC has cancelled Jouneyman, what is there to watch on over-the-air TV? The Sci Fi Channel is totally unaffected by any of this.

In response to the comments by "Aussie Boy":

I did get my facts straight. While I already said I cannot speak from personal experience with the technology since I have not been to Australia, I did check MULTIPLE independent sources and I stand by my comments. I am a journalist, and I take pride in making sure the information I provide is both backed up by reputable sources and written in a precise manner.

As for the source you cite, it clearly states that most of the information is outdated, and was written in 2001. No updates appear to have been made in more than a year. While some of the information on the site may be valid (and I won't evaluate it to determine whether or not this is the case), it clearly can't be used to determine the state of things in 2008.

Also, "by the end of the year" is not the same as "now". I would say that's an even bigger difference considering the end of the year is 11 months, or almost an entire year, away, but that's a matter of semantics.

However, thank you for unintentionally proving my point that even many of those who supposedly work in the industry are ill-equipped to understand or deal with the transition. (And this statement is meant with no disrespect to the people that do know what they're talking about, whether in the industry or not, and regardless of which continent they're from.) Obviously, if there is so much confusion by posters on a site specializing in technology, there is little hope for the millions who had trouble hooking up a VCR.

**********

( The following quotes are from http://www.dba.org.au/index.asp )

"When will analog television be switched off?

The Australian Government has announced that the timeframe for the switch off of analog television in Australia will commence sometime between the years 2010 and 2012. This is consistent with the target timeframes set in many other industrialised nations who are making the transition to digital television. Up until this timeframe, broadcasters will continue to simulcast (transmit) their television programs in both analogue and digital mode."

"Free to view broadcasters will continue broadcast both analogue and digital signals (known as the simulcast) which will continue until at least the end of 2009."

**********

( The following quote is from http://www.cnet.com.au/tvs/0,239035250,240000380,00.htm )

"According to the original law, they must simulcast (ie, broadcast both analog and digital signals) for at least eight years in an area, so if you lived in any of the cities named above, you would to be able to use your current analog television set to receive free to air broadcasts until at least the end of 2008. This has now been extended until some time between 2010 and 2012. "

**********

( The following quote is from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_terrestrial_television_in_Australia )

"Although approximately 96% of the population has access to at least one digital service,[1] in March 2007, only 28% of Australia's 7.8 million households had adopted free-to-air digital television.[2] Digital services are available in most areas, however parts of Western Australia, and Central Australia have yet to begin transmissions.[3]"

test

Consumer Reports and HearUsNow.org have a great information site on Digital TV. And they set up a way to share your experience with the transition to digital television.

"Friends don't let Friends watch analog TV" ? Yes they certainly do if they want them to get severe weather warnings. A snowy radar image and sound beats the heck out of "Frozen picture/no sound" when a tornado is coming.

I got a converter box for myself and my mom...it works great...most people who have cable don't watch 90% of what's on it...if you have kids and love sports, fine, but who has time to watch all those shows anyway? The only thing that bothers me is my vcr ...you can only tape what you are watching...you need another converter box...too confusing...this is just another way for the government to get people to buy cable and new tvs..