Honestly, this whole digital migration is pointless. I don't care about this "bandwidth" crap. Analog cable is cheaper, much easier to set up, and less cluttered.
Here is the problem. Analog channels are poorer quality, more prone to interference. Cable is facing a tough battle with satellite tv services that can offer nearly an unlimited amount of HD channels because all they have to do is add a few more satellites to increase their bandwidth capacity. FIOS is pure fiber to your home and runs on newer systems etc and can also carry huge amounts of HD channels. Cable companies are relying on technology and cables that are old and were not intended to carry the amount of data required. Newer upgrades in their systems are (for now) allowing cable companies to stay in the race with adding HD channels. At some point every cable company is going to have to go 100% digital. To stay competitive they must keep adding HD channels so the easiest solution is kill the analog channels and postpone their inevitable point at which they run out of bandwidth. Think of bandwidth like water flowing through a pipe. There is a maximum amount of water that can flow through that pipe.
Over the air broadcasts can sustain multiple digital channels. This doesn't mean you can fit 3HD channels on one channel. This means you can have 3SD channels OR 1 HD channel. Plus this only applies to over the air broadcasts. NOT cable.
Aaron your claim that nobody uses HD is far from the truth. All new TVs today are HDTVs and most are quite less costly than before. You can pick up a 22in TV for nearly 200 bucks. People buying these TVs (and there are a lot of them) want to get the best picture and who can blame them! I would much rather pay 10 more bucks a month to watch HD than analog.
Show Posts
