But apart from penile sublimation of bragging rights, why would I spend it to get the same crap I get now.
That one died along time ago and when it comes to $4,000 dollars, well that is about enough DVD's to run on the old one or on my computer screen.
** I see you like to take folks words out of context and then post bovine remarks under them. ** Moooooooooo.
........... Phil
Until the content improves, I'm perfectly happy with soso quality. That means I'm likely to be happy with it for ever.
Good Standard Definition STBs cost arount $200... and High Definition STBs cost around ... $500? If you have a 'normal size tv' and a good tv reception, there isnt really anything to be gained by digital tv. If you want to watch wide screen, High definition will get you there. Digital will eliminate effects of minor ghosting, noise, and interference. But if your reception isnt good, rather than having a poor quality picture, youll have none. And unfortunately with digital, with fast moving scenes you can notice pixelation (under some conditions atleast).
"Denz" "Phil Allison"
** You are out of touch - prices have fallen. ** 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.
** It can *remove* quite major ghosting and serious amounts of noise plus most RF interference.Pics can go from **totally unmatchable** to perfect - particularly true with channel 2 since the digital version is on VHF ch 12.
** Utter bullshit again - see above. ** Not true of the SD digital system............ Phil
I think that's back to front. The political donations get the pollies to do whatever they are asked. The donations must come first.
MrT.
Sometimes they need to suggest possible reasons to donate to do, or not do something,
Awww you gonna have a cry because you blew 8 grand on a fizzer technology. Want a tissue mate?
-TheMan-
***************************** Crap
Cheap STBs cost that much. GOOD ones cost more.
Dick Smith has a generic DSE for $138, Teac for $168, DGTec for $298, Panasonic for $298. High Definition ranges from $398 to $748. Dick Smith prices are usually fairly average
really
mode )
All you need is a quality antenna, and no bad conditions to get a good picture (most of melb area can achieve this). Then theres no point in going digital. Quite unlike going from B&W to Colour. Sure, I appreciate letterbox when watching DVD's, but im not too fussed watching 4:3 on analog even if it is pan & scan or cropped.
Ive youve seen digital work where analog had serious amounts of noise, thats encouraging. Ive heard this isnt always the case.
I wish channel 2 analog had been on VHF ch 12 Its frequency seems to be a bit low for optimum tv reception (maybe why 0 moved to 10 ?)
"TheMan" = "TheFuckwit"
** That is just how mine looks.............. Phil
"Who_tat_me" "Phil Allison"
** So you got ripped off - eh ??............. Phil
Go back to your cave Leister I'm sure you'd enjoy the lifestyle better and we would be spared.
[snip]"Denz"
** That is a very good one.** But NOT most of Sydney or other capitols.
Melbourne is very flat and all the transmitters are right up on that mountain top !!
** Depends just how bad the noise is and if the issue is with ch 2 or not.Folk with poor antennas ( even indoor ones ) and ghosty/noisy installed systems in block of units find STBs work like magic.
............. Phil
[snip]
You'd better get yours looked at then because mine looks better than DVD (except with the AFL).
[snip]
Phil Allison can't afford to spend anything more than $100 on a STB.
He has to budget that low to go with the 21 y.o. Sony CDP-101 CD player, the ageing AWIA 9500 LW/MW/FM tuner (same model recently passed in on Ebay with no bids at $19.95) the 12" AWA Deep Image portable tele (circa 1978) and kit speakers driven by a clapped out amplifier.
ROTLF
Cheers, Alan
All TV transmitters are analog. The only digital transmitter is one used to send true keyed CW, AKA "Morse code" Existing TV transmitters are being retrofitted for digital TV in some places. The reason most stations are buying a new transmitter is twofold: One, they don't want to drop their analog service right away, and they can write off the cost the new transmitter on their taxes during the forced upgrades.
As far as cooling cost the heat from the tubes is transferred by copper pipe to an outdoor heat exchanger. The cabinet of a Comark 130 KW (Visual) and 65 KW (Aural) TV transmitter I serviced was cool to the touch, except on the outside of the water jacket on the three 65 KW EEV Klystrons. The two large heat exchangers blew a lot of hot air into the outside air and away from the building. The support equipment was a heavier cooling load than the transmitter. The control room was smaller than the transmitter room but had more air conditioning units on that part of the roof.
** In fairness - KLR never suggested otherwise. ** Some Aussie sites are using 5 kW transmitters for the DTV signal or even a standby transmitter.
he situation here is still in a state of change.
** In Aussie - networks are forced by law to have both at present but only DTV will continue in 2008.IIRC, they are now allowed to use up to a 50 kW transmitter for the combined SD and HD signals.
( snip interesting plumbing info ..... )
............... Phil
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.************************************************ No, haven't got one. I don't see any point in getting one because I get excellent FTA reception but I prefer to watch Foxtel.
Cheap STBs are $80-$150 Good STBs cost at least $200
Prove otherwise
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required