The transition from the NTSC analog TV standard to the ATSC1 digital standard was only made after about a 10 year transition period. That provided enough time for consumers to transition to an ATSC1 TV when their analog TV sets reached the end of their life. So the vast majority of consumers had an ATSC1 TV by the time of the mandatory shutdown of NTSC transmitters.
I believe that is unlikely to be the case for this transition if the NAB gets its way.
Yes, I know. Just another reason why the FCC should refuse to allow a quicker transition which will orphan existing users of free over-the-air television.
In my opinion, television broadcasters helped create the problem which they are now facing. Now they want to be bailed out.
Their users should not be forced to bail them out by purchasing a new television set before their’s dies.
My objection is based on the principle that bailing out large corporations only encourages them to be short sighted.
Personally, I believe that the NAB is furious that voluntary adoption is not moving forward as they would like. My answer is two things need to happen ASAP to reverse the resistance to ATSC 3.0.
DRM encryption needs to be ended. It would be great if the FCC banned it outright for OTA subchannels or at the very least ban it for all but obvious subscription networks, such as HBO, ESPN and other such channels that are obviously subscription based. It should never be allowed for ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, CW and any of the current OTA diginets.
The company Constellation Designs that refused to join the ATSC 3.0 patent pool should be told by the FCC that if they don’t join that patent pool, the FCC will refuse to authorize any mandatory transition to ATSC 3.0.
If both items are properly addressed, we would have more 3.0 tuners and possibly more TV manufacturers putting 3.0 tuners in their budget and midrange TV lines.
Also, I agree 100% that bailing out large corporations encourages poor decision making. They need to put their big boy pants on and admit the failure of DRM encryption and move on.
For a very long time corporate entities have been licensed to use 6 Megahertz of bandwidth in the public RF spectrum space set aside for free over-the-air television. This was justified as serving the public good.
The requirement for ATSC-1 was that the station’s free over-the-air main channel was to be broadcast in high definition.
With their push for ATSC-3 (NextGen) they developed a system that allowed for program encryption which required internet service at the television receiver.
If that was done on the free over-the-air main channel then there would no longer be a free over-the-air high definition service.
Consumers in the US are being squeezed by higher prices on the necessities of life. That leaves fewer dollars for discretionary purchases.
If the FCC does anything to relieve television broadcasters from those requirements, then it will have only itself to blame for the criticisms hurled in its direction.
Nothing too new. Except that the brodcasters and NextGenTV folks are desperately trying to make their case for end device control for OTA. Evil. I have watched companies that followed the law to a “T” get killed… well, because… very sad. Can we get all their spectrum taken away? Idiots.
Their main point is that since everyone is immensely wealthy and living in major metroplexes, the whole idea that people are using OTA is “nothing” and therefore they should be able to do whatever they want. Nice. Let’s just say, they’re launching their nukes and we’re supposed to enjoy the destruction. “Pretty lights!!”
Isn’t there still a requirement for local broadcasters to provide free broadcasts for local, state and national emergencies? Seems like they’d lose their licenses if they made OTA a paid service.
More likely the national broadcasters (NBC, ABC, etc) will DRM their shows they send to the local affiliates, but local news and locally produced shows would be DRM-free, if that is even possible. IMHO, DRM is not meant for OTA broadcasts so hopefully the FCC will shut the idea down at some point. We can only hope.
If there is pay OTA hold on to your seats it will be a jamboree of special offers, get a free month if you buy 6 cans of beans, etc ad nauseum. A rehash of how everything else gets pushed to sale.
I think digital world is big enough that there will always be free alternatives. Maybe not exactly what I want, but it’s already true that what is offered now is not exactly what I want, free or pay. Not to mention if the pay OTA lobby gets their way (after they figure out what they want), it’ll be a few minutes before some of them get scared they might lose some of the free viewers, and there will still be free OTA. The frequency space will be found somewhere.
What will be will be, however I cannot imagine myself paying for garden variety everyday TV.
