Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The TV antenna is making a comeback

marketplace.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 254 posts

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#211

Post by porsupah »

ForHackernews wrote: post #153
pidg wrote: post #7

This kind of TV is the 'default' here in the UK (Freeview) - we get about 50-60 digital channels and 10 HD channels. I suspect cable TV is actually on the rise here, but can't find stats to back that up.

The Brits really have us beat here. For Americans, take a look at this list: http://www.ukfree.tv/channels/all On the other hand, they have to pay an annual government tax just for owning a TV.

Not quite - the license fee only applies if you watch live programming. If you're an iPlayer catch-up sort instead, or only watch iTunes/Blu-Ray/Netflix, no fee is payable - although it's hardly a bad idea to support a broadcaster as good as the BBC.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#212

Post by scholia »

johnwards wrote: post #162
ForHackernews wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Brits really have us beat here. For Americans, take a look at this list: http://www.ukfree.tv/channels/all On the other hand, they have to pay an annual government tax just for owning a TV.

The TV Licence funds the BBC content, which is Free to Air TV, online stuff, Radio etc. It has no ads and aims to have as much diverse stuff as possible. The BBC is awesome, I happily pay my tv tax :)

I'm also happy to pay, and feel sorry for Americans who have to put up with inferior public TV services.

Not only is the BBC awesome, the licence fee is much lower than cable or satellite charges, and BBC programmes are not stuffed with mind-numbing adverts.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#213

Post by scholia »

One advantage of OTA TV is that it can be a very efficient use of spectrum. It costs the same to broadcast a TV signal to 5 million users as it does to broadcast it to 5 users. This is not the case with video (or radio) transmitted over the internet or via cellular networks, where every additional user consumes additional bandwidth.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#214

Post by shanecleveland »

noelsusman wrote: post #180
shanecleveland wrote: post #79

Get internet service from cable provider with basic cable plus HBO for less than the advertised price of the internet service alone. Have to call back every year to get the promotional price back, which sucks. But we almost never watch the cable channels. Local channels in HD with a couple low-end antennas in the attic. And tend to watch HBO GO on a Roku, where we also have Netflix, Prime, etc. Doing Sling during foo…

I heard Sling is laggy and unreliable. Have you had good experiences with it?

I'd say a good experience, but not great. The picture is good. I view primarily through a Roku connected to TV, but also nice to have access on a phone or tablet.

There can be a little lag time loading programing or jumping between shows. It has occasional reliability issues, cut-out midstream, didn't come back up from commercial break, but not the norm and may be device related.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#215

Post by rhino369 »

Retric wrote: post #67
dangerlibrary wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the correct answer. Old, but still relevant density map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density#/media/File...

Nope, population density is only important outside of cities. Circa 2000 the US had a lot of unused backhaul capacity between cities. So, the real reason why most people in the US don't have cheap high speed internet is simply corruption at the local, state, and federal levels. PS: This is also why for example Florida lags in solar adoption. When you dig a little into politics you find US politicians are horribly cor…

Calling policy differences corruption is silly. The US made a choice to favor competition and low regulation over no competition and high regulation. It was probably a poor decision.

But you can't just label it corruption.

Plus backhaul capacity has virtually nothing to do with ISP costs. Almost all the costs is last mile network.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#216

Post by upofadown »

ilamont wrote: post #89

I took a look at a relative’s cable bill last year. He lives in a town with three competing cable/ISP services. Here is how the monthly costs broke down: Expanded basic service: $60 High definition converter box: $10 Digital converter rental: $3 HBO Cinemax package: $18 Premiere Total Pack: $16 Showtime/TMC: $5 Starz: $5 Franchise fee: $7 Broadcast TV surcharge: $4 Sports programming surcharge: $2 Total monthly cost:…

>DTV reception even over a good antenna within 10 miles of the broadcast towers can be spotty.

It ends up being about more than distance. TV is just radio. If there are hills blocking the signal then even close transmitters can be a problem. If both you and the transmitters are on high places then the distance can be ridiculous.

In general indoor TV reception tends to be flaky. If the signal has to go through and refract around a whole lot of objects close to the ground then you end up with so much mush. There are reasons that people back in the day had an antenna on the roof and those reasons have not gone away. If someone is suggesting that their indoor antenna design is somehow better that what existed in the past they are pretty much selling snake oil.

There are sites that model TV reception. TVFool.com is the best one right at the moment.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#217

Post by upofadown »

drmpeg wrote: post #51
chiph wrote: post #42

If you're using an OTA antenna to get HDTV, this site can help you point it in the right direction to get the best signal. Just enter your ZIP code. http://www.antennaweb.org/

A much more advanced tool here. http://tvfool.com/

Yeah, antennaweb uses that system the antenna makers set up involving coloured zones. Unfortunately that oversimplifies the problem too much. In practice you need more detail so TVFool.com ends up being much more useful.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#218

Post by HelloMcFly »

car wrote: post #198
HelloMcFly wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Xbox One allows pausing and rewinding of live TV, but not recording.

Recording OTA TV on Xbox One has been announced for Q1 2016.

I had not seen that, thank you. Slowly but surely, the Xbox One pushes my Roku out of the picture.

Re: The TV antenna is making a comeback

#220

Post by legitster »

0xdeadbeefbabe wrote: post #204
legitster wrote: post #159

I'm 24 and I have never had cable in my life. Frankly, I'm surprised it's not more common. You get a LOT of TV for free. I grew up watching PBS and Simpsons and etc. I remember at superbowl some of my friends were amazed that I was able to watch the football game without cable. I was floored. They didn't even know that channels came in over the air. I showed them the antenna, where it installs in the TV, how cheap th…

Makes you wonder what other good tech the group is ignoring.

Ethernet cables. My friends constantly complain about the quality of wireless, and I try to get them to take a step back in technology and try a wired network.
Post reply on HN