[Chasing Kate]

No it isn't. There is no single main benefit.


PAL isn't being phased out. Analogue is being phased out and it isn't by
2010. It's at least 2014 in some areas.

But is there any logical reason to phase it out?

 

[Diabolik]

Better stop listening to the propaganda and pop down to your local Harvey
Norman
and check it out yourself.

Digital TV really doesn't look any better then PAL from what I've seen...
it does
manage to get rid of "ghosting" that you get in standard TV reception, but
then
you have the downside of having to see shitty pixelization of the image
from the
digital compression.

Try a high definition Plasma screen connected to a high definition STB, via
DVI or HDMI output, and you'll see that the quality is better than DVD, even
though not many programs are transmitted in REAL high definition.

I know I'll never go back to crappy Analogue TV.

 

[Diceman]

Yes there's a parliamentary inquiry on at the moment
looking into why more people are not purchasing digital
set top boxes....

In other words a great piss up for the people involved LOL and
nothing constructive will come out of it IMHO......

But the one question I'd like answered is why?

Why do we have to go to full digital TV?

This is a forced death for the existing system which seems
to work dam fine in other parts of the world so why change
it?

If you've seen something in high definition on a high definition screen
you will know why.
I was thinking of buying a standard defnintion box from Woolworths for
$70 but there weren't any there, I don't really need one though as the
reception in my area's good.
Your argument is a bit like why change to digital mobile phone networks
when the analogue phone networks worked fine?

 

[David L. Jones]

Yes there's a parliamentary inquiry on at the moment
looking into why more people are not purchasing digital
set top boxes....

In other words a great piss up for the people involved LOL and
nothing constructive will come out of it IMHO......

But the one question I'd like answered is why?

Why do we have to go to full digital TV?

This is a forced death for the existing system which seems
to work dam fine in other parts of the world so why change
it?

Digital has MANY advantages over the existing system. I too was
skeptical until I got a STB to enable me to get my favourite shows in
widescreen.
The benefits I've found are:
- Absolutely perfect picture on every channel, all with my existing
crappy antenna. I could hardly pick up SBS at all before, now I get it
perfect, along with all the other channels. Fantastic. Not many people
get a perfect picture on every channel with analog. Sure there is a bit
of pixelisation now and then, but you have to be watching for it. Give
me a perfect picture and a bit of pixelisation over a snowy picture any
day.
- Widescreen. A HUGE benefit IMHO.
- A much sharper picture, and much easier to see and clearer so say
people I know with vision problems.
- The sound is slightly better, but this only a marginal benefit for
me.
- Online TV guides. Marginal benefit, but nice.
- High definition for those with the gear, although Hi-Def is still
ridiculously expensive for the small benefit. i.e. I can't watch any of
my DVDs in Hi-Def.

Dave

 

[Franc Zabkar]

Yes there's a parliamentary inquiry on at the moment
looking into why more people are not purchasing digital
set top boxes....

In other words a great piss up for the people involved LOL and
nothing constructive will come out of it IMHO......

But the one question I'd like answered is why?

Why do we have to go to full digital TV?

This is a forced death for the existing system which seems
to work dam fine in other parts of the world so why change
it?

Lack of quality content aside, I can imagine the benefit of HDTV on a
large screen TV. As it is now, I can almost see the individual scan
lines on my 80cm 625-line Sanyo - the line pitch is about 0.8mm.


- Franc Zabkar

 

[David L. Jones]

That is all rubbish.

The reason colour was sucessful was because adding colour was a
significant improvement in the veiwing experience.

The reason digital has been a failure is that it offers only
incremental improvement in sound and picture at great expense.

What "great expense"?
Standard definition STBs can be had for less than $100.
Simply plug in and go with your existing TV and antenna in most cases.
You get the massive benefits of better picture quality and widescreen
(for those with a WS set).

Dave

 

[David L. Jones]

***************************** Crap

Cheap STBs cost that much. GOOD ones cost more.

Cheap can mean good too, price is NOT proportional to goodness.
Plenty of good SD STBs on eBay around the $100 mark, even less.

Dave

 

[Pooh Bear]

If theres crap on TV now with analogue not worth watching,
why watch it in digital ?

It certainly hasn't improved the quality of Television
Programming.

But just look at the huge numbers of channels of crap you can get !


Graham

 

[AJ]

"dewatf"



** Crap - good STBs cost around $100.

AND What did a STB cost when it first came out, you better compare
apples to apples. They were a hell of a lot more than $100.

As for this whole issue the question was why do we have to have
digital TV, or probably more to the point why are we getting rid of
analogue TV. Digital does have a lot of good technical reasoning for
it, but for most people they would hardly notice it, without these
fancy new TV's etc. People often compare digital and analogue TV to
DVD's and VCRs, and although there may be an improvement going digital
over analogue for TV its nothing like the improvement from VCR's to
DVD and that is because VHS was a lesser picture quality to broadcast
TV. With digital TV you really need to go HD or widescreen which means
investing in more than an STB.

Remember if you have a STB you are still sending an analogue signal
from the STB to the TV, just like a DVD, so the max picture quality
will be limited by the TV.

A few friends of mine have got digital just to get rid of ghosting,
but as has been pointed out in some other threads although digital
gets rid of ghosting if you are in a bad receiption area (just like
ghosting) but you can get drop outs in the digital signal which causes
pixilisation. I have a ghosting issue where I live and digital would
fix that, but I am not going to be upgrading my TV until such time as
it fails and needs replacing or if there are good priced (under $1000)
TV's available with a digital decoder in-built, but how many of them
are there now?

 

[Who_tat_me]

Cheap can mean good too, price is NOT proportional to goodness.
Plenty of good SD STBs on eBay around the $100 mark, even less.

That's sort of true but the cheaper the STU, the fewer features that it will
have. That's fairly true of anything.

 

[Who_tat_me]

People often compare digital and analogue TV to
DVD's and VCRs, and although there may be an improvement going digital
over analogue for TV its nothing like the improvement from VCR's to
DVD and that is because VHS was a lesser picture quality to broadcast
TV.

Very true. It's hard even to compare VHS to VHS. I still have some original
VHS movies that I purchased in the early 80s as well as some copies that I
made by conecting two VCRs together. At the time I thought that the picture
was great but comparing them to VHS tapes from 1999 (the last time I
purchased a pre-recorded movie on VHS) and they look and sound terrible.

 

[Who_tat_me]

What "great expense"?
Standard definition STBs can be had for less than $100.
Simply plug in and go with your existing TV and antenna in most cases.

That's only reasonably recently and you're looking at the cost for just one
TV. If I was to go "all digital" in my house I'd have to purchase 7 STBs to
retain my current functionality (1 for each TV and 1 for each VCR) Even if I
was to purchased several of the Woolies $70 boxes that's an outlay of $490.
Not all that long ago it would have cost $1,400 and a couple of years ago
the cost would have been $3,500.

 

[David L. Jones]

That's sort of true

Read - that's completely true.

but the cheaper the STU, the fewer features that it will
have. That's fairly true of anything.

So a "good" STB has to have lots of "features" huh?
What are these features the "good" STBs have which the "cheap" STBs do
not?
Does number of features equate to a better quality picture?, or a
better decoder chip?, or a better quality front end?

You get a lot of features for your $68 + postage:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4693&item=5763112021&rd=1
or your $71:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4693&item=5763000911&rd=1
or your $80:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=4693&item=5757904015&rd=1
or...

Plenty good enough for most people I would think.

Dave

 

[Swampfox]

Yes there's a parliamentary inquiry on at the moment
looking into why more people are not purchasing digital
set top boxes....

In other words a great piss up for the people involved LOL and
nothing constructive will come out of it IMHO......

But the one question I'd like answered is why?

Why do we have to go to full digital TV?

This is a forced death for the existing system which seems
to work dam fine in other parts of the world so why change
it?

Because digital is better.
No ghosting and a far superior picture.
And for most people the cost is minimal.
Set top boxes can be had for less than $200, which is cheaper than the
aerials required for analogue in poor reception areas.
Live program guides, extra channels on SBS and the ABC, better sound etc.
It's simply a better technology.

 

[ferret]

ferret wrote:




But just look at the huge numbers of channels of crap you can get !


Graham

Great,

1 - A program guide, for those too cheap to buy a paper
44-49 what a waste of air space and power usage.

 

[hadda hadda]

"TheMan" = TheFuckwit

Correction:
Phill = The Fuckwit

** Got a nice STB at home thanks.

What did you have before? 1955BW AWA?

** It must have gone blind from all that public wanking.

If you had decent and properly installed TV set, you would not see
difference at all! This is a fact!

** This imbecile is right off with the pixies.

When STB has its value shown?

One must have HD TV set
One must have HD STB
One must have decent antenna installation.

 

[ferret]

Because digital is better.
No ghosting and a far superior picture.
And for most people the cost is minimal.
Set top boxes can be had for less than $200, which is cheaper than the
aerials required for analogue in poor reception areas.
Live program guides, extra channels on SBS and the ABC, better sound etc.
It's simply a better technology.

If Digital is so cheap and so good, why after 5 years it still
only has ~660,000 units installed. Considering Australia is usually
quick to jump on technology bandwagon, Phones,Computers, Internet etc..
From a sales point of view its a complete disaster.

 

[Natalie]

** Utter bullshit.

SD digital supplies a DVD quality, noise and ghost free pic that very few
folk have with analogue. Plus a semi wide screen option ( letterbox mode )
that gives more of the picture than analogue 4:3 can.

If you have excellent reception there is no need for a STB, unless you
really need those crappy extra channels. As for WS, blah, I'd actually
rather watch the footy in standard mode! DVDs are what widescreen is
for, if I want to watch it.

I don't have good reception any more because I've got no outside
antenna, but I was watching a DVD of a TV show I used to watch in my old
place that DID have an outside antenna and excellent reception, no
difference in picture quality at all!

None of it changes the absolute crap on TV most of the time. I don't
really need to see ACA on digital thanks.

Natalie

 

[Phil Allison]

"ferret" = "ferkwit"

If Digital is so cheap and so good, why after 5 years it still
only has ~660,000 units installed.

** That many ?? I'm surprised.

Considering Australia is usually
quick to jump on technology bandwagon, Phones,Computers, Internet etc..

** False analogy.

As a result of Govt decree DTV presently offers a picture quality
improvement only .

From a sales point of view its a complete disaster.

** Rot.




.................. Phil

 

[dmm]

Yes there's a parliamentary inquiry on at the moment
looking into why more people are not purchasing digital
set top boxes....

In other words a great piss up for the people involved LOL and
nothing constructive will come out of it IMHO......

But the one question I'd like answered is why?
Why do we have to go to full digital TV?

These questions (other than in the first paragraph) have been
asked and answered and done to death over the past few years
or so...

This is a forced death for the existing system which seems
to work dam fine in other parts of the world so why change
it?

YAWN !!! Bloody Luddites....