NextGen TV?
billbillw
Posts: 7,165
How many of you folks use an antenna to get local broadcast? If you do, have you been keeping up with the transition to ATSC 3.0 (aka NextGen TV)?
If you haven't, you should probably read up. The new standard has added DRM encryption that has been problematic in many ways. That would be all fine if they kept the current ATSC 1.0 broadcast, but the broadcasters want to sunset those as soon as 2028. What would that mean? You need all new TVs and/or stand alone Tuners for each TV. Yep, there is currently a restriction on DVR/Gateway devices like the HDHomerun. They don't work with the DRM.
Other issues are cost. The licensing/certification is expensive. Remember how the there were $20 tuner boxes that you could get back when the Analog TV went off the air? Now the average tuner for ATSC3.0 with DRM will be more like $120 and that's for an HDMI output only for Live TV. No DVR, no pausing. What are we, back in the 80s/90s?
The reason for me posting today is the FCC has actually listened to some of the concerns from consumers and they have opened a public comment period. Now is the chance to be heard. If you value free OTA broadcast, watch this video and submit a public comment to the FCC. The Comment Period is only open until May 7th. The guy has a whole series on these devices and all the problems DRM causes so check out his channel for additional information if you need.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQGH08rams8
Another YouTube channel with similar content related to the DRM issues is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp782nRIGDQ
If you haven't, you should probably read up. The new standard has added DRM encryption that has been problematic in many ways. That would be all fine if they kept the current ATSC 1.0 broadcast, but the broadcasters want to sunset those as soon as 2028. What would that mean? You need all new TVs and/or stand alone Tuners for each TV. Yep, there is currently a restriction on DVR/Gateway devices like the HDHomerun. They don't work with the DRM.
Other issues are cost. The licensing/certification is expensive. Remember how the there were $20 tuner boxes that you could get back when the Analog TV went off the air? Now the average tuner for ATSC3.0 with DRM will be more like $120 and that's for an HDMI output only for Live TV. No DVR, no pausing. What are we, back in the 80s/90s?
The reason for me posting today is the FCC has actually listened to some of the concerns from consumers and they have opened a public comment period. Now is the chance to be heard. If you value free OTA broadcast, watch this video and submit a public comment to the FCC. The Comment Period is only open until May 7th. The guy has a whole series on these devices and all the problems DRM causes so check out his channel for additional information if you need.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQGH08rams8Another YouTube channel with similar content related to the DRM issues is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp782nRIGDQComments
-
Do you have a FCC link for this Bill?
-
It's in the videos, or the guy Lon has links here: https://blog.lon.tv/
Either way, make sure to watch one (or both) of the videos I linked for instructions and tips on how to word the comments. The second video goes into more about what to avoid and also how to do a reply comment after May 7th. Be original and use your real life experience to express how the addition of DRM as it currently stands will restrict your ease of viewing or make it impossible to continue watching the way you are used to (DVR, pausing, etc.)Post edited by billbillw on -
So lie 😎. I've never DVR'd any over the air content. What makes me mad is the interactive features that personalize the viewing experience. I just need a feed to view not BS.
I also do not think this benefits the viewer.Beyond entertainment, the technology supports innovations like the Broadcast Positioning System (BPS), a potential GPS alternative that could bolster national security by addressing vulnerabilities in critical infrastructure. -
So lie 😎. I've never DVR'd any over the air content. What makes me mad is the interactive features that personalize the viewing experience. I just need a feed to view not BS.
I also do not think this benefits the viewer.
I've been DVR'ing OTA since I bought my first TivoHD in 2006. I still have a Tivo Roamio recording about a dozen shows a week (mostly Jeopardy daily). I've been wanting to move to an HD Homerun 4K tuner, but it won't decode 4 out of 5 of my local NextGen stations because of DRM.
The other issue with the proposed standard is needing an antenna feed at every TV. I only have one run of coax from my attic antenna to the living room. I use Tivo's networking to watch at 3 different locations. It is basically going backwards in usability.
I should have also mentioned, the broadcasters want to mandate that these more expensive NextGen tuners be required for all new TVs. That would easily add $100 to the cost of a new TV. No thanks. I haven't used the built in tuners for any of my TVs since sometime around 2004. I want a DVR or gateway device (ie: network tuner).
-
One run, no DVR for OTA. I have a Dish DVR Hopper so if I'm going to DVR I'll use it. The OTA is such a better non-compressed signal than mpeg4 on Dish signal. Honestly my Dish costs have really went up the last 10yrs all due to ESPN, Disney and local broadcast channels, it's ridiculous.
The broadcasters are actually blaming DVR's for our ability to skip commercials. Some broadcasters had Dish remove the ability to skip totally on some channels and waiting a week to do it for other channels. NBC has not jumped in that pool yet, but they will at some point I'm sure. Hell even on channels I can "stream" I cannot jump commercials when I download to my DVR, how ridiculous. -
For what I'm paying for cable I shouldn't have to see a single damn commercial.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Just imagine paying even more for cable because the cable companies will have to adopt some of the technology to carry the local channels, and still, if the industry has its way with this, you will be also be paying extra for each TV that has these newer tuners. All to "protect" the broadcast from piracy. How much of that do you see currently? It's not a thing.
-
Local tv is only for local news and weather in the morning.
I really don't care, but the wife gets obsessed with it.
I stream everything else. Most of it I don't pay for. If
broadcasters want to commit suicide, who am I to stop them.
I can't think of a program on broadcast TV I've watched in years."The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." --Thomas Jefferson -
Guess you aren't a sports fan. NFL, College Football, March Madness, IndyCar, F1, PGA tour, are all things that I watch on local broadcast...for free.sucks2beme wrote: »I can't think of a program on broadcast TV I've watched in years.
-
I don't understand why broadcasters would want to invest all this money upgrading their systems for FREE tv. What's in it for them?
All they will be doing is reducing the viewers of their commercials.
I got rid of cable in 2014, it wasn't worth the cost any more. I do most my viewing on the second monitor of my computer, with a tuner card. I do have a tv, but rarely watch it for TV, no way I'm investing anything in that TV. And tuner cards are almost non existent these days, and 3.0 are about $200 last I looked (not DRM comp.).
Guess I'll just stream everything. -
I don't understand why broadcasters would want to invest all this money upgrading their systems for FREE tv. What's in it for them?
Well simply, broadcasters must retain at least one channel of free, over-the-air broadcast programming. ATSC 3.0 has NOTHING to do with the receivers end it has EVERYTHING to do with the broadcasting end. They will more than likely have a bunch of nonsense that will come along with the 3.0, like DRM. Realistically there is no piracy on OTA so no need to clamp down on it with DRM, they're creating a problem where a statistically there was none. -
Well simply, broadcasters must retain at least one channel of free, over-the-air broadcast programming. ATSC 3.0 has NOTHING to do with the receivers end it has EVERYTHING to do with the broadcasting end. They will more than likely have a bunch of nonsense that will come along with the 3.0, like DRM. Realistically there is no piracy on OTA so no need to clamp down on it with DRM, they're creating a problem where a statistically there was none.
While they must retain a free channel, they will eliminate ATSC 1.0 completely which has everything to do with receivers, the stream is different. That means you will have to upgrade equipment for FREE tv. The advanced features also require internet. They will lose many viewers. It really makes no sense to me.
FCC needs to require 1.0 to continue. -
Interesting, how so? There is a lot of folks out in the sticks that do not have internet capability outside of a cell phone and even then it is hit or miss.The advanced features also require internet -
Interesting, how so? There is a lot of folks out in the sticks that do not have internet capability outside of a cell phone and even then it is hit or miss.
For the interactive features they tout, since your TV cannot broadcast to them. There are also 3.0 tuners that require internet to decode the DRM. And last, for targeted ads, which I think is the main reason they want 3.0. -
Commercials years ago made tv free, was the nature of the beast. Now, we pay for a service to watch tv plus we have to watch the stinking commercial's.
Oh wait a second, we can also pay to not watch commercials.
Something f-d up along the way.
Almost makes me want for the days of being able to hack satellite systems.
Did the tv stick hacking for a while but it’s just not worth the hassle, too much fiddly ****.
-
I don't pay for TV service and I don't watch commercials. That's the beauty of free OTA and the whole reason I shared those videos in the original post in the first place. The NextGen should not have DRM, or if it does, it shouldn't be some version that requires an Internet connection to decode. Gateway/DVRs should also be allowed. That's the crux of my comments to the FCC.
-
For the interactive features they tout, since your TV cannot broadcast to them. There are also 3.0 tuners that require internet to decode the DRM. And last, for targeted ads, which I think is the main reason they want 3.0.
Jesus ! we just want to watch TV ! I do not need "interactive" features or "targeted ads". Seriously that in a nut shell is what has ruined the internet and clogging up everything. Click on something and 700 things are trying to get in the door with it.
-
Jesus ! we just want to watch TV ! I do not need "interactive" features or "targeted ads". Seriously that in a nut shell is what has ruined the internet and clogging up everything. Click on something and 700 things are trying to get in the door with it.
I agree. ATSC 1.0 is fine with me.
It's easy to fix on the internet though, it's called Ublock Origin. I haven't seen an ad on my PC in over a decade, maybe longer. Not even on YouTube.
-
I agree that ATSC 1.0 is fine, but it is going to be replaced one way or another. The only way to ensure it is a suitable replacement that is actually an improvement is to participate when they ask for public comments. At the very least, you should comment that the cost to replace existing tuners is prohibitive for you and also that you want to have networking abilities.
The last thing the broadcasters want to do is to continue airing two formats. They want to sunset the old standard asap. -
Guess you aren't a sports fan. NFL, College Football, March Madness, IndyCar, F1, PGA tour, are all things that I watch on local broadcast...for free.
Nope. I stopped years ago. I loved playing and watching sports when I was younger.
I went a number of years in the service never watching TV. The habit kind of
Stuck with me.
The whole tv/catv and streaming thing is at a crossroads. Who's gonna
pay for everything? Viewers are watching so many different things that
there's not enough of an audience watching a station, channel, or stream.
I don't watch tv at all really. The wife has it all to herself. I use a tablet for
any entertainment. I wouldn't even bother owning a tv if it was just me.
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." --Thomas Jefferson -
F1 is not broadcast on local stations. It's on various ESPN channels.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
F1 is not broadcast on local stations. It's on various ESPN channels.
Last year Montreal, Miami, Austin, Monaco, Mexico City, and Vegas were aired on ABC over the air. I haven't seen whether they will do the same this year, but in the past, I was able to watch those. It seems like the TV rights are in a bit of transition right now since ESPN has not renewed after 2025. At least, that was what I was reading at the beginning of the season. I had ESPN+ for some of the other races (but not all), but cancelled that last winter because I wasn't getting enough out of it. Honestly, I get more entertainment out of IndyCar these days. F1 has become a snooze fest.Post edited by billbillw on
