Intel Developing DTV Antenna; Coupons Resume
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: Intel, HDTV, Antenna
While the public television market slowly shifts over to digital broadcasting, Intel looks to chime in on the switch with its own DTV antenna. Unfortunately, it still may not help viewers retrieve a clear signal.
A few days ago, Intel said that its researchers developed the world's first embedded balanced antenna for digital TV. Although the design is currently patent pending, Intel's "innovation" will enable on-the-go users to receive OTA digital television on their laptop without the need for an external antenna. While the company offered no other specifics, the embedded antenna would alleviate the need to carry or keep track of additional equipment.
In the meantime, the 2.3 million households currently sitting on the National Telecommunications and Information Administration's (NTIA) coupon waiting list may be able to breathe a sigh or relief now that the $650 million economic stimulus package has kicked in. Last week officials said that the entire waiting list should dissipate in a matter of weeks as new coupons--funded by the new stimulus boost--go out in the mail "first class."
However, those households that are already receiving digital transmissions are finding that the voucher dilemma was only the tip of the iceberg. Many have discovered that tuning into the digital channel lineup isn't quite as simple as the advertisements foretold, that signals come in, or they don't. There's no in-between haze as seen with analog channels when the signals lose strength. In fact, getting a digital station to come in without disruption is actually quite tricky, as it seems apparent that digital signals just don't have the same coverage as the older analog format.
"When you listen to the advertisements, it's 'Oh, all you have to do is get this little digital converter box and hook it up,'" said Harry Vanderpool of Salem, Oregon. "Well, we get nothing. Zero signal strength."
Consumers are hearing that--on top of having to shell out money for the digital converter box--they probably need an outdoor antenna to receive the new signals. Sometimes signals can come in crystal clear, and then ten minutes later pictures turn into a pixilated explosion that is not only annoying, but sometimes may not clear back up for hours. Despite what advertisers and officials may claim, there are no DTV-specific antennas required for reception; any one will work. However, it's getting those antennas -whether they're rabbit ears, amplified or mounted outside- to actually keep a signal for a long period of time.
To add onto the overall annoyance, the FCC even admitted that when a station moves from VHF to UHF, there are dead zones where the signal can no longer reach as it once did before. The good news is that, after June 12, many stations will use the VHF frequencies to transmit digital TV, hopefully resolving many reception issues.
But while Intel's innovative DTV antenna shows promise, that consumers can watch digital television anywhere without the need to lug around additional equipment, the entire DTV structure needs improvement. Those who purchase laptops with Intel's antenna may very well smash that device once they experience the aggravation many DTV consumers are already tolerating.
-
Previous News Article
Filmmaker To Implant Camera in... -
Next News Article
Mobile Users Rejoice:...
It's silly why so few laptops can actually receive a signal over the air, like FM radio, & digital audio and video broadcasted.
You'd expect out of all the devices that a Laptop should be able to do that!
I mean, FM radio is enabled on some MP3 players and phones, and even some watches!
A laptop should at least do this much, because it's able.
Only, not all laptops will be able to display 1080 video, as well as the antenna of a regular HD is about 3 foot.
Any lower,and the reception might be very lousy (unless amplified).
the reasons laptop or some "seem-to-be-able-to-do-it devices" does not have certain popular features.....cost..
1, it is a costly R/D nightmare to design so many features with all sort of antenna working peacefully at the same time.
2, it is costly to pass all the regulatory certification for even a country..imaging for a global market..that's way too costly.
3, adding a feature to a electronic devices is not as easy as making a cup cake at home. It is a huge process.
The reason for laptops or "Seem-to-be-able-to-do-it-all" devices does not come with all the popular features...cost...
1, It is a costly R/D nightmare to design many features into a electronic device and make sure they can work peacefully with all sort of antenna.
2, too expensive to pass all the certifications to compliance with local regulatory.
TV on laptop or mobile phone will happen in Europe where they chose a superior modulation method (COFDM versus 8VSB for DTV in North America). Some lobbied FCC to go COFDM in 2001, but FCC quickly rejected it. The issue isn't signal strength, but MULTIPATH and 8VSB is really bad at dealing with it. Almost seems like a deliberate win for lobbyists that wanted to keep subscribers on Satellite TV or cable.
BTW... I have a tower mounted antenna and get 23 DTV signals with very few dropouts... you just need a decent antenna. Forget the indoor amplified stuff.
Has anyone heard whether or not the FEDS are going to or perhaps already have renewed expired converter coupons? I ordered mine the first time I heard about the program over a year ago and there weren't any boxes even available then. I had no idea they expired in 30 days. I heard there was a chance they would renew expired coupons but nothing recently.
I've been assisting my grandparents with this whole matter for months now and I've found good digital reception to be somewhat elusive. It comes and goes wildly. The same antenna picked up flawless analog reception and it wasn't cheap. If Intel can come up with an antenna that's somehow smarter and better than the not so old one they're using right now, I'll buy it. Then I guess convert the not so old but still good antenna into an FM radio antenna. Did that with my own antenna after I subscribed to cable and it's still rolling nicely!
Nature is analog. There is nothing that is naturally digital. Therefore, the interference will be analog. An analog signal can handle this interference. A digital signal gets distorted beyond usage.
The FCC is only making this forced transition because companies have lobbied for it to happen. A digital signal takes up less bandwidth than an analog signal. The lobbying companies wanted to buy the freed bandwidth to use or sell later. There is no other logical reason both analog and digital signals can't be broadcast simultaneously.
Suck it up and go by a sat for petes sake. And a portion of the old signals is going to be dedicated to opening government hosted free internet in high traffic city centers. The transition benefits the common man if he were using digital devices. Dont tell me you can not afford them, I have 7 Kids, not so great rate of pay, and just put aside a little money at a time till I could get my flat panel 1080p screen. Dish Network is not as good as Directv, but hell, with packages starting at only 20 bucks, even a poor family can afford that if they want tv that much.
There's always the home-made route. I use a home-made indoor antenna that requires no power cable and I receive all the channels from the towers 22 miles away. I followed this video's instructions. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWQhlmJTMzw
Suck it up and go by a sat for petes sake. And a portion of the old signals is going to be dedicated to opening government hosted free internet in high traffic city centers. The transition benefits the common man if he were using digital devices. Dont tell me you can not afford them, I have 7 Kids, not so great rate of pay, and just put aside a little money at a time till I could get my flat panel 1080p screen. Dish Network is not as good as Directv, but hell, with packages starting at only 20 bucks, even a poor family can afford that if they want tv that much.
FYI, the $20 package from DISH has next to nothing that anybody watches and doesn't even include local channels. They know nobody will buy it and that's why they can advertise it as a starting point.
So the people that use an antenna will not loose out on any programing since they are used to nothing on the screen in the first place.
So the people that use an antenna will not loose out on any programing since they are used to nothing on the screen in the first place.
That's some pretty convoluted logic.
LOL, it may be, but in all honesty, using an antenna nets you what, at most 13 channels, half of which are plagued with static? where as the limited dishnetwork package offers you around 40 including channels like sci-fi and one discovery? It is the same price as basic cable, which is not even offered anymore, and is a plug and go system. Not to mention you can pipe that feed to a second tv, and neither tv has to be digital to receive the signal. So would the average antenna user benefit from a crappy $20 package, yes.
LOL, it may be, but in all honesty, using an antenna nets you what, at most 13 channels, half of which are plagued with static? where as the limited dishnetwork package offers you around 40 including channels like sci-fi and one discovery? It is the same price as basic cable, which is not even offered anymore, and is a plug and go system. Not to mention you can pipe that feed to a second tv, and neither tv has to be digital to receive the signal. So would the average antenna user benefit from a crappy $20 package, yes.
The truth is some people don't have $20 per month to spend on entertainment of any kind. Apparently you've never experienced this, but I have. Count yourself lucky.
I have 7 Kids, and I teach, not a very high rolling job to be honest. I do not get much per month, but it comes to the point of sacrificing some things to afford others, its called budgeting. Apparently you've never experienced this, but I have.
I have 7 Kids, and I teach, not a very high rolling job to be honest. I do not get much per month, but it comes to the point of sacrificing some things to afford others, its called budgeting. Apparently you've never experienced this, but I have.
I don't know what I said that led you to conclude I don't have to budget. Maybe it's just another leap of logic on your part. You may be certain, though, that I have never experienced having 7 kids. No wonder you can't think straight. ;-(
The point I am trying to make, now follow me here, is that I am a normal average everyday ordinary guy with a family and one income. I do not accept it when people say they don't have enough to afford something, now if they come out and say, "I don't want to give up my bar nights, or poker, or Starbucks for 2 days." Then I can accept that, or if you say "I am in between jobs so luxury is out of the question on any level." then hey, I feel for you and hope you can find a place to work, but to simply say that you can not afford it is BS.
I Must apologize though for my blunt reply about budgeting, I do not know you and it was uncalled for, but if a single income family like mine can afford a premium package from Directv, then it is hard to believe that others with smaller to no families can not. I had to give up smoking to maintain that luxury of good TV, but hey, i won twice, I am healthier now, and I can have 300 channels of nothing on lol.
The point I am trying to make, now follow me here, is that I am a normal average everyday ordinary guy with a family and one income. I do not accept it when people say they don't have enough to afford something, now if they come out and say, "I don't want to give up my bar nights, or poker, or Starbucks for 2 days." Then I can accept that, or if you say "I am in between jobs so luxury is out of the question on any level." then hey, I feel for you and hope you can find a place to work, but to simply say that you can not afford it is BS. I Must apologize though for my blunt reply about budgeting, I do not know you and it was uncalled for, but if a single income family like mine can afford a premium package from Directv, then it is hard to believe that others with smaller to no families can not. I had to give up smoking to maintain that luxury of good TV, but hey, i won twice, I am healthier now, and I can have 300 channels of nothing on lol.
I was right the first time. Your thinking process is convoluted to say the least. Now follow me on this, if you can: You're willing to give up smoking to facilitate your TV viewing habits but not for the well being of your 7 kids. You have (verbally) shot yourself in the foot not once but several times. Your opinions are not to be taken seriously. Have you figured out yet where the 7 kids came from?
Where did you get that I do not take care of my kids? My family is first, they are taken care of, now if you feel that you could not do what I can, then I understand your train of thought, but still wow, seriously? So you resort to further personal attacks to prove an empty argument and I am not to be taken seriously? Well, for those that understand what I am trying to say, if you truly want to view TV, and you are willing to drop cash on a converter box that will not guarantee reception, then go out and subscribe to an inexpensive provider. If you want it that badly, there is always something else to give up to have the means to gain something else.
Where did you get that I do not take care of my kids? My family is first, they are taken care of, now if you feel that you could not do what I can, then I understand your train of thought, but still wow, seriously? So you resort to further personal attacks to prove an empty argument and I am not to be taken seriously? Well, for those that understand what I am trying to say, if you truly want to view TV, and you are willing to drop cash on a converter box that will not guarantee reception, then go out and subscribe to an inexpensive provider. If you want it that badly, there is always something else to give up to have the means to gain something else.
Obviously you didn't follow my thought process. I'll try again. Listen carefully. According to you you quit smoking in order to be able to afford a subscription to Direct TV. To me that means you put both smoking & Direct TV ahead of your 7 kids. Quitting smoking not only puts more money in your pocket but improves your chances to live longer, both of which would benefit your family. Very simply, your logic ( or lack thereof) impunes your credibility.
Well its good that you can assume, I am proud of you for it. So here it is, again, my kids have what they need, and what they want, smoking was a thing I carried over from my younger years, it was my thing, the one thing that I did for myself, my wife was given things she wanted, and my children probably should not have all the things I try to give them, I wanted something else for myself, so I switched from smoking to sat. I allow myself a small privilege, does not mean I do not care for or do not support my children, it means that I save enough money after supplying my family with needs and wants to get myself a little something. There is no flaw in that logic, there is no hidden meaning, nothing you can pull assumptions out of, it is there, plain and simple logic. Please read it, don't just glance at it and assume, all you are doing is making an ass out of yourself.
Do I wish i could get computer upgrades all the time? yes, have more channels on DTV? yes, but it all comes down to if I wish to do any of that, I must find something that I am supplying that is not a necessity to give up in order to obtain anything else. Again, nothing wrong with that logic or train of thought, now if I said, I can give up milk for the kids for a month to get a new vid card on payday, then hey, you would be right about me, but it is things that I can give up, not what my family can give, unless it is something we want as a whole, and even then I would give from my list first before asking anything of theirs. It all comes back around to if you want something bad enough, you can sacrifice something else to get it. Hell, if you want a good reception, walk to work during the summer time, or carpool, those gas savings can add up quickly.
I am done arguing with you cause I am sure I will not get through to you. The key to a conversation or discussion is taking the other side into account. I do understand that some families are even worse off then me, I am not rich or well off by any means, and if people are in a lower income bracket then me, I understand the lack of funds, all I am saying is there is always a way.
And yes, I know where the children come from, trust me, the smile on my face before, during, and after the process of making them is bigger then life. I enjoy my children, and yes, the sat is a waste of money cause most of my time is spent with them. Good luck in life, and I hope that you can find another person to verbally abuse to make yourself feel better.
Well its good that you can assume, I am proud of you for it. So here it is, again, my kids have what they need, and what they want, smoking was a thing I carried over from my younger years, it was my thing, the one thing that I did for myself, my wife was given things she wanted, and my children probably should not have all the things I try to give them, I wanted something else for myself, so I switched from smoking to sat. I allow myself a small privilege, does not mean I do not care for or do not support my children, it means that I save enough money after supplying my family with needs and wants to get myself a little something. There is no flaw in that logic, there is no hidden meaning, nothing you can pull assumptions out of, it is there, plain and simple logic. Please read it, don't just glance at it and assume, all you are doing is making an ass out of yourself. Do I wish i could get computer upgrades all the time? yes, have more channels on DTV? yes, but it all comes down to if I wish to do any of that, I must find something that I am supplying that is not a necessity to give up in order to obtain anything else. Again, nothing wrong with that logic or train of thought, now if I said, I can give up milk for the kids for a month to get a new vid card on payday, then hey, you would be right about me, but it is things that I can give up, not what my family can give, unless it is something we want as a whole, and even then I would give from my list first before asking anything of theirs. It all comes back around to if you want something bad enough, you can sacrifice something else to get it. Hell, if you want a good reception, walk to work during the summer time, or carpool, those gas savings can add up quickly. I am done arguing with you cause I am sure I will not get through to you. The key to a conversation or discussion is taking the other side into account. I do understand that some families are even worse off then me, I am not rich or well off by any means, and if people are in a lower income bracket then me, I understand the lack of funds, all I am saying is there is always a way.And yes, I know where the children come from, trust me, the smile on my face before, during, and after the process of making them is bigger then life. I enjoy my children, and yes, the sat is a waste of money cause most of my time is spent with them. Good luck in life, and I hope that you can find another person to verbally abuse to make yourself feel better.
I definitely agree with you about one thing. One of us has made an ass of themselves. I'm happy to let the readers decide...as if they care.