On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:12:10 -0500, Billy Burpelson wrote:

msg wrote:

Or so I thought until the disingenuous propaganda spots for the DTV
conversion that proclaim "digital is better" when in fact for a
worrisome number of viewers

Well, maybe so...or not. What do you call a "worrisome number of
viewers"?

Surprisingly enough (to me at least), only 13% of viewers across the
nation receive their TV "over the air".

the conversion will prevent over the air reception of their customary
stations even with substantial hardware 'upgrades', signals are for the
most part SD and often are plagued with artifacts and sync issues,

Hard to believe that that many of the 13% will have the problems you
describe. If their analog service was that bad, they probably would have
gone to cable long ago. Those that receive their over the air signals
from translators, will still be able to continue to do so with the
'analog pass through' feature of their 40 buck converters.

and the reclaimed spectrum for the most part will be auctioned for
government revenue.

You expected otherwise from those fine folks at the FCC? ;-)

However, technical issues aside, it seems digital TV is not high on the
list of things this country needs.

the original topic about gubermint propaganda, don't overlook the
fiasco known as 'Homeland Security', a huge money pit with very little
benefit. Orange light, anyone?

Not all DTV converters have analog pass-through. Way more than 13% of
the viewing is over-the-air. Almost everyone has a portable TV they use
from time to time. And HDTV looks better over-the-air than it does on
cable or satellite; plus, it's free. I predict people will be dropping
pay TV in substantial numbers.