Wow. The government will be giving out $800 million so people can buy converter boxes.

[Deja Q]

On the TV news tonight, the government will be giving out $40 vouchers so people (the estimated 20 million who don't have HDTV) can get a converter for $20 instead of $60.

I'm surprised Wal-mart or Best Buy isn't doing this deal.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

1. Madness.

n/t

[JuniperLea]

2. They want everyone on digital systems...

So they can pull the plug when they want to keep information from us, and to keep us from communicating via broadcast, which is more easily hacked. This is the beginning... mark my words.

[BelgianMadCow]

4. THANK YOU for saying that out loud. Digital online = owned

Did you know the HDMI interface is basically a DIGITAL RIGHTS management system?

[walldude]

6. Really? How so?

How can a cable that does nothing but carry signal from one device to another work as a DR management system? And if what you say is true then why not just use a component cable interface?

[vogonity]

37. Check out HDCP...

High Bandwidth Digital Content Protection.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdcp.

HDCP is licensed by Digital Content Protection, a subsidiary of Intel. In addition to paying fees, licensees agree to limit the capabilities of their products. For example, high-definition digital video content must be restricted to DVD quality on non-HDCP compliant video outputs when requested by the source. DVD-Audio content is restricted to DAT quality on non-HDCP digital audio outputs (analog audio outputs have no quality limits). Licensees cannot allow their devices to make copies of content, and must design their products in ways that "effectively frustrate attempts to defeat the content protection requirements."

Which only addresses the first part of your question. Using componnent cables still seems to be an option.

[walldude]

49. Ok but what you posted has nothing to do with an HDMI interface

it has to do with the devices themselves. I believe the poster I was responding to was mistaken in his assertion about HDMI.

[Liberal In Texas]

71. Look, HDMI and DRM have nothing to do with this upcomming conversation.

It's a wholly separate issue.

All this means is that broadcasters in your town will not be on channel 4 or 6 or 10 or whatever anymore.
Their broadcast services are going to be moved to a UHF channel that will be broadcast (over the air) with a signal that can only be recognized with a tuner that is as different from VHF as UHF is. Or, think of it this way. You can't pick up short wave radio on your FM receiver. Why? It's a different kind of broadcast on a different part of the spectrum.

If you have cable or a sat dish, it will make no difference. This is about broadcast.

[Liberal In Texas]

5. How can they pull the plug? It's still broadcast over the air.

This is just a different kind of tuner.

[JuniperLea]

8. And who controls the tuners?

Look at the big picture, and think in terms of one step at a time.

[Liberal In Texas]

11. YOU control the tuner. There is no way anybody but YOU control it.

This is just goofy.

[baldguy]

13. You control the tuner, they control the content.

[Liberal In Texas]

15. Right, it's no different than it is now.

[KatyaR]

18. It;'s VERY different than it is now.

Oklahoma's current circumstances are a perfect example. The ice storm we had this weekend knocked out power to 1 out of every 3 residents of the state. The only way to get any information about the situation was to use a battery-operated television or a radio that broadcasts the television bands. When everyone converts to the digital signal, no more analog signals and no more emergency information. We are lucky here in that most of the TV stations do go to emergency simulcast on local radio stations, but that's usually not a 24-7 situation. So it would be difficult to find out what's going on.

This is the most stupid thing Congress has ever done--oh, wait, let me think about that . . . .

[shadowknows69]

19. Bingo, thanks for saying that

I got the rare opportunity, good opportunity bad situation, of being in broadcast radio during a very nasty ice storm and we were on the only station (a heritage AM news station) even on the air. We were manning the board and phones 24/7 and I got to do several shift of just spewing out information as it came in. Closings (everything), road reports (no travel), shelters etc. etc. We were even picked upi and delivered to the station via police because there was no travel and we were considered vital personel. This service to the community will go the way of the dinosaur soon and lives will be lost because of it.

[NashVegas]

21. And All The Broadcast Bands Will Be *Owned* - Not Licensed - By Telcos

The FCC has a mother-fucking HUGE auction lined up, if it hasn't happened already. The frequencies being sold are getting lower and lower.

I wonder what this will do to pirate stations.

[Liberal In Texas]

24. No. They are selling off the VHF band to the telcos, not the UHF band where the TV channels are

moving.
Broadcasters will still have to get licenses and those airwaves will (in theory) still be owned by the people.
I don't like the fact they're selling off the VHF band, but it is another reason we need to get the privatization crowd out of office.

[freebrew]

27. Channels 1 - 13 are VHF.

Didn't even have UHF until the 70s. Wasn't even on the dial for most sets sold back then.

[Liberal In Texas]

30. Required in 1962.

1962 was the first year that tuners for both UHF and the earlier Very High Frequency (VHF) stations were required by Congress, which allowed UHF stations to compete more effectively.

http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/adaccess/tv-history.html

[JuniperLea]

46. Our 1960's TV's had a separate UHF tuner...

You turned the VHF knob to the UHF setting, between 2 and 13, and then used the UHF knob to tune in. In Los Angeles, we had KCET and at least a couple of other channels in the 60's. We started getting Sesame Street in 1969 as I recall, and before that the LAUSD used UHF for instructional programming, and there were other community programs as well.

[Art_from_Ark]

69. That's right, the UHF tuner was where "Channel 1" would have been

In the Northwest Arkansas/Southwest Missouri area in the late '60s, they tried to get a UHF station in Fayetteville, Arkansas going, but it wasn't until many years later that Fayetteville finally got a working UHF station. They did succeed in getting a UHF station in Joplin, Missouri going in 1967 (KUHI-TV 16).

[Liberal In Texas]

32. I'm going to correct myself. Apparently they are going to sell off the part of the UHF

spectrum as well where the current UHF TV stations reside.

[Liberal In Texas]

23. Wrong.

Pretty soon nobody will even make TVs with analog tuners in them. Even battery operated TV sets will have digital tuners to receive information off the air. New radios with TV bands will be sold with the capability to pick up the digital signals. Which means your emergency information can still be tuned in on battery operated devices.

We are going to be in a state of transition for awhile, and as with any transition, there is going to be a mix of old and new equipment around. Old analog TVs will have to have a box that receives the signal off the air and then convert it to an analog signal that the TV can understand.

Unfortunately this does make a lot of equipment obsolete, but it is a much better system and should have been changed over years ago. The reason it wasn't was because of the resistance of broadcasters to spend the bucks for upgrading their equipment.

[NashVegas]

28. What's Better About This System?

And, are you an engineer?

[Liberal In Texas]

31. For one thing, it allows HD broadcasts, which are far superior to the current

3x4 analog pictures.

Plus, no ghosts. Either you have it or you don't.

No, but I was in the TV broadcast industry for 34 years.

[NashVegas]

34. Well

From what I can see, the main advantages the digital band has is:

1. It gets male viewers very excited, at least initially.

2. The information carried within programming provides further automation, eliminates jobs (great if you're a stockholder!) and provides networks with further control of local airwaves.

Here's the hysterical thing - all it's going to do is hasten traditional media's downfall.

Broadcasters are shelling out 10s of millions to have side-channels to compete against other broadcasters' side-channels. Unless people start screaming at DC in droves, further ownership deregulation IS going to happen. Right now, radio is on a respirator because of consolidation, and the PPM ain't gonna bring it back.

Meanwhile, "content providers," also known as creative people, are walking away from our media jobs cause you can pay us crap and let us have plenty of freedom, or you can give us no freedom and pay us well, but you can't pay us crap AND expect us to be high-tech equivalents of burger-flippers.

[Liberal In Texas]

35. Consolidation is a huge problem. So is the dilution of the available audience (consumer).

All this fancy new high-tech digital stuff doesn't mean squat without decent programming.

I got out in '04 after putting up with the BS office politics, age discrimination, bad management, and crappy pay raises. I'm freelancing video now and am much happier for it.

[NashVegas]

36. Congrats

I'm still on the air, but just started managing a local band and am hoping to build more on that.

[onenote]

45. How many people actually have and use battery operated tvs?

I suspect more people use generators to get power when the electricity fails than use battery operated televisions. And I know that more people rely on battery powered radios (which are unaffected by the digital television transition) than battery operated TVs to get information in an emergency.

[Mountainman]

39. Turn it off!

[JuniperLea]

47. Haha... if you say so...

Ask yourself who benefits...

[Zywiec]

63. You control the horizontal. You control the vertical. n/t

[onenote]

44. if that was the case why are they making it possible for people to receive analog?

The converter boxes covered by the coupon program are simple devices that take a digital signal and convert it to analog so it can be received on television sets that do not have digital tuners or are otherwise connected to a device (cable or DBS set top) that can receive digital signals.

[Cerridwen]

65. Don't forget - digital is not "public domain" as are the air-waves...

It is privatized.

Those publicly held and "publicly regulated" airwaves over which We, the People, have some say, go the way of the dinosaur with digitally, privately owned, cable.

When it goes private, we lose all pretense of public accountability.

edit: air-waves is plural or singular, hmmm, inquiring minds want to know. :D

[Liberal In Texas]

66. Wrong. Digital is no more privaitized than it is now.

It is the same airwaves, just on a different spectrum with a different method of how it is broadcast.

I don't like the fact that they are taking the OLD airwaves (VHF and some UHF) and selling that. None of the spectrum should EVER be sold.

But going digital alone does not "privatize" it. The same rules still apply about licensing and regulation for broadcasters.

Don't confuse this with cable or satellite. This is broadcast. Over the air. The only change is that in 2009 analog is going away and digital replaces it.

[Cerridwen]

67. Ah huh. n/t

[Liberal In Texas]

73. Look, what don't you understand?

I've been checking this thread all day (except for the annoying time when I had to work) and have been trying to stamp out the fires of the Luddites and the truly naive.

This digital conversation really is a very good thing. It will probably piss a lot of people off (my 82 year old mother isn't too happy) but it will enhance the technical quality of TV in the US for the next century.

[Cerridwen]

75. Ah huh. n/t

[Liberal In Texas]

77. Have a nice life where the most intelligent thing you can think of is Ah huh. n/t

[flyarm]

3. but the turd vetoed health care for kids..TV or health care..why turd has to keep murdock in

business!

fly

[Trailrider1951]

14. ABSOLUTELY! If there are dollars for the inane spew that eminates

from the boob tube, where is the money for those poor peoples' children? Gawd, this makes me LIVID!!! And I will state that when my built-in-1982 TV no longer works, I WILL NOT OWN ANOTHER!!


And, another question: If the new TV's are built just so, can that digital signal go both ways down the old cable, as a certain Mr. Orwell envisioned? Now, where did I put that tinfoil? :tinfoilhat:

[Liberal In Texas]

7. Just try and buy one for $40.

Prices might come down with volume, but I bought one awhile back and it was like $120 IIRC.

[AlertLurker]

9. We've already lost the airwaves...

I find it incredible that once, people bought a TV, and THAT WAS IT.

TV programming was free, and networks got filthy rich off advertising dollars.

Then came cable and satellite, so now people have to pay for everything, and the networks get filthy rich off US AND advertising dollars.

Who says that you can't have your cake and eat it, too?

[Stinky The Clown]

25. You don't HAVE to pay for anything

They STILL broadcast over the air.

Hyperbole doesn't substitute for fact.

[Mountainman]

40. Right, I'm not buying anything right now and no one can make be buy anything.

I have DISH and the cheapest set up you can get. I have a 12 inch plane old TV and only watch something that is of interest like the History Channel's thing on 1968. I don't have to do any more and I can do much less.

I'm proud of the fact that I remain technically challenged.

[Stinky The Clown]

41. You're all set. You will never need to buy anything

The ONLY people that will not get teevee as of the changeover date are those who get broadcast teevee through an antenna. If you get satellite or cable or any variant you are 100% UNAFFECTED by this.

Your next purchase will be when your 12 inch set dies.

[me b zola]

57. Well, watch broadcast tv through an antena...

...and I want to know why the public airwaves are no longer free.

[fishwax]

61. the public airwaves are still free

well, as free as they ever were, anyway :)

[RoyGBiv]

55. No, they don't ...

There is far more "free," over-the-air content available today than in the 70's when cable started emerging. With a good antenna, I can get over 20 Hi-Def channels OTA, i.e. at no monthly cost, in my market. It's a large market, but still...

The *point* of this program is to allow those who choose not to use cable/satellite and can't afford a new digital television or a decoder to still be able to pick up that "free," OTA content.

Cable started out for those communities that couldn't pick up OTA signals very well and wanted to be able to get them. They'd stick a HUGE antenna up on a hill somewhere that could pull in the stations clearly, then wire up the town down in the valley so the residents could pick up those channels also.

What cable/satellite (same thing with different tech at the user's end really) have done since is rather blood-sucker-ish, but in the beginning, it is what people wanted ... and is still what a lot of people want actually.

[Virginia Dare]

10. Isn't that (gasp) SOCIALISM?

:sarcasm:

[baldguy]

12. Its an $800 mill subsidy to broadcasters.

[Atman]

22. Bingo.

Why do you think they all love BushCo so much and their news departments never cover war protests or The BushCo Scandal du Jour? Bushie can pull the plug on their little give-away as fast he can pop the top on a Hamms 40. These guys are political geniuses, you have to give them credit. They knew they'd be committing all manner of crimes long ago, so the got all their proverbial ducks in a row first. Consolidating the media and getting them on their side was masterful (in an "evil mastermind" sort of way), and of course it took our tax money to do it. BushCo is selling off PUBLIC airwaves at fire-sale prices, and all the nice little media companies have to do is toe the line. At least until Bush is out of office (if he's out of office).

This digital crap really is scary in the context of everything else BushCo has been doing. I don't think all the people reading this thread understand that...you won't be able to pull the old rabbit-ears set out of the attic. Your little Casio portable won't work. The "internet tubes" and the "media tubes" will essentially be at the whim of the government, who has plenty of provisions within the Patriot Act to shut 'er all down. Even the government of Tibet realized it during the recent uprisings; to stop people from reporting about their actions to the outside world, all the internet access and media was cut. If the people cannot communicate, and they have no way of knowing what is going on in another part of the country, all manner of hell could easily break loose. And you should assume it probably will. As Naomi Kline has so many times pointed out, it doesn't happen overnight, and no government consolidates all this power without intending to use it.

.

[onenote]

48. No, its an $800 million subsidy to consumers

I have (and pay for) a cable box capable of receiving HD on my television. I will not need any additional equipment after February 17, 2009 (the date that analog broadcasting is supposed to end -- at least for full power stations).

But my father, who does not have cable -- just relies on over the air signals received via an antenna -- he will need a device to convert the over the air digital signal to an analog signal that his set can receive. The government is subsidizing his purchase of that device which he would not need but for the government's decision to transition television from analog to digital.

[JackRiddler]

52. Bullshit...

As with all things electronic, the price would drop to something closer to cost (which is probably in the single digits) before most holdouts would buy it. Demand and supply. This subsidy keeps the price high in the name of supposed public interest.

Or to make it really obvious: Where does the $800 million end up as cash? In the pockets of consumers, or in the balance sheets of device makers?

[onenote]

82. the claim was that it was a subsidy for broadcasters

So yelling "bullshit" at me and then claiming its a subsidy for electronic manufacturers is out of line. And yes, there may be some truth to the assertion that the payments "subsidize" electronics manufacturers to a degree, but the idea is that the price of the device would drop into the single digits is what is bullshit. I know, because I work with companies that make these sorts of devices.

But even if they would eventually drop in price, the fact is that the government has a responsibility to the members of the public who bought televisions with the expectation that they would work and who are now being forced to obtain additional equipment to keep them operable. The people most likely not to have a television set capable of receiving digital signals (directly or through cable) are the elderly, the infirm, people of color. And I have no problem with some assistance being provided to these people.

[cory817]

16. Technically digital/analog is separate from HDTV

The analog to digital switch scheduled for 2009 that these converter boxes are for is a completely separate issue from HDTV vs standard tv. The people most effected will be those that use rabbit ears or a roof antenna to receive analog broadcasts of local channels. If you have a standard tv with cable or satellite you won't need anything because its already digital.

You could look at it that the local channels that people have already received for free will be upgraded to digital and still free, all you will need is a converter box if you have an older tv. Another thing a lot of people don't know is if you purchase an HDTV you can receive your local channels in HD over the air free also with an antenna.

The only thing the cable/satellite companies control are the "cable" channels, but it's becoming increasingly inconvenient to not have those channels when important events are carried on those channels and not simulcast locally. Like debates on the cable news channels or sporting events like Monday Night Football on ESPN or the baseball playoffs on TBS. I know when games are on NFL Network or ESPN if you live in the local area for one of the participating teams it is simulcast on a local which is a good thing.

[tritsofme]

17. This is being paid for through the money collected in the auction of rights

to the airwaves opened up through switching to digital.

[RB TexLa]

20. Not HD just digital or digital to analog conversion will be required.

If I want a new TV, will I have to buy a High Definition TV (HDTV) to watch digital broadcast television after the transition?

No. It is important to understand that the DTV transition is a transition from analog broadcasting to digital broadcasting. It is not a transition from analog broadcasting to High Definition broadcasting. Digital broadcasting allows for High Definition broadcasts, but High Definition is not required, and you do not need to buy a HDTV to watch digital TV. A Standard Definition DTV (which is simply a TV with an internal digital tuner), or a digital-to-analog converter box hooked to an analog TV, is all that is required to continue watching over-the-air broadcast television. Digital broadcast television includes Standard Definition (SD) and High Definition (HD) formats. You can watch High Definition programming on a Standard Definition DTV (or on an analog TV hooked to a digital-to-analog converter box), but it won’t be in full High Definition quality. It is also important to know that Standard Definition DTVs are comparably priced to similar sized analog TVs.


http://www.dtv.gov/consumercorner.html#faq1

[erpowers]

26. Money For Homes

The government should try giving people $800 million to keep their homes. I understand some people would say the amount of money is so great because so many people are getting the vouchers. However, that money could put an end to the housing crisis. I do not think people should be given houses for making mistakes, but if the government is going to give out that much money it seems that it would be better if they gave the money to people who are losing their houses. It seems that most people would be able to go out and buy the converter for $60 if they had to. There are a number of people struggling to keep their homes.

[gasperc]

29. if you have cable or sat TV, you don't need the converter

but if you rely on soley the antenna, then you'll need to buy one

[Tesha]

33. Keeping the electronic opium flowing is in the government's interest. (NT)

[hunter]

43. That's why the converters will be essentially free.

I expect the market will be entirely saturated with them, even for people who don't bother doing the paperwork.

Getting a converter will be easier than getting a club card at the supermarket.

Sales people trying to force a converter upon you will actually become a nuisance in many places.

There's no way in hell they are going to allow the "mainstream media" pipeline into people's heads to be obstructed.

[Javaman]

38. TV good, health care bad. nt

[raccoon]

42. They want to make sure everybody is properly brainwashed. nt

[Breeze54]

51. They are US and I'm not going to be forced to buy an HDTV or cable TV!

:grr:

[Liberal In Texas]

70. You will not be forced to buy HD or cable. However...

if you want to watch ANY TV after February 2009 off the air, your old analog TV will only have snow.

The coupon, or whatever they're going to give you, is designed to offset the cost of having to buy a converter so you can still watch TV on your old set...OFF THE AIR!

[Breeze54]

50. It's OUR airwaves and it's our frigging $$! - The Gov. is OURS too... US!

They better give me a converter! Otherwise, I'm forced
to not only buy an HDTV but also cable!! Fuck that!

[RoyGBiv]

53. HDTV does NOT equal Digital TV

Please, PLEASE get the terms correct on this.

The converters are to convert DIGITAL television signals for analog televisions. The subsidy under discussion was requested so that those who do not have cable or satellite (for whom this will make not one whit of difference) largely because they can't even afford it could still receive Over-the-Air (OTA) broadcast signals without having to go out an buy a new television.

The mandate to switch to digital has already taken place. It's happening. Measures like this simply help those who don't have spare change to go out and buy a new TV or converter.

The amount of misinformation about this issue -- and how stubbornly it remains -- is astounding. The sales culture at work as been largely responsible for it, since companies involved in equipment manufacturing, retail, and the cable/satellite industry itself have been trying to push off high-end digital and HD televisions and services on people while the prices and profit margins are still enormous. The spread a bunch of FUD about what will turn out as a non-event for most people, and it gets swallowed up.

[Breeze54]

54. Wrong...the converters are so that regular TV's can get digital signals.

;)

[RoyGBiv]

56. Uh, that's what I said ...

But I edited to clarify anyways ... thankee

The other alternative is cable/satellite, customers of which won't be affected by this at all unless they have to use an antenna to get local stations.

[Breeze54]

58. LMAO! ~ Sorry!! (laughing at myself)

:P

At any rate, unless I win the lottery, I'm keeping my 35 inch non-digital TV! :P

Sorry about that... I kinda thought I was sort of agreeing with you but I admit,

I only 'skimmed' your reply. It's been long day! LOL! Snow and all that! :P

:hi:

[hunter]

59. You WILL get a free converter before the 2008 elections.

I'm certain of that.

In fact you'll probably have to shove away the people offering you free converters. It'll be like the scene in Airport where Robert Stack is walking along knocking down all the folks trying to sell him their religion.

"Do you have your converter box yet? Just..."

BAM!, hit 'em right in the face. People will cheer.

The last thing in the world that any of the politicians and special interest groups would want is for you to miss their television commercials. They'll prbably go door to door handing out converter boxes with their campaign literature.

[Lorien]

60. I won't bother. If it's coming to that, then I'll just use my TV for

watching DVDs from Netflix and the library. TV programming is crap these days anyway.

[knitter4democracy]

64. We're thinking of doing the same thing.

Our cable company is pushing us to go digital and taking more and more channels away all the time. Forget it. We'll keep it for the internet and that's it.

[Liberal In Texas]

81. Essentially, that's about all we do now.

We don't have cable or sat. We get movies every week or so from Netflix. We watch them on our HDTV.
Now, the movies are being played through a standard definition player so they're not HD, but it makes for a pretty good picture.

I have an off-the-air digital HD box, to get what is already being broadcast in HD on the local channels. But the programming is pretty much crap. (How many stations are they going to license to churches, the Mexican community, and Home Shopping? How many more "American Idols" and "Survivors" can one want?)

Once in awhile we might want to watch a PBS show, or with me it's a Nebraska football game -- until they cratered, but pretty much the TV is only turned on to watch DVDs.

Plus, when you haven't had to sit through a bunch of inane ads, when you do, it's annoying as hell.

And look at me. A 34+ year veteran of the commercial TV broadcast industry. I still shoot video as my new freelance job and can't bloody stand commercial TV!

[Lorien]

83. Hey, I hear you. I used to animate for Disney and I can't stand watching

animated films. The quality of entertainment in general has declined, imho. Besides, if there's something worth watching, you'll probably find it on DVD or a podcast.

More and more friends of mine are ditching cable and finding other ways to be entertained. I did so about five years ago and don't feel like I've missed a thing!

[Swamp Rat]

62. Don't do it y'all!

THEY will truly control your mind then. :hide:

[The Gunslinger]

68. anything to keep them watching the propaganda

Without TV, the mases might read, or think.

[riverdeep]

72. Does TV fall under necessity?

It seems people would need telephones more that they would TV.

Or even healthcare. Although, I guess if you're just poor enough, you might fall under some program or another. Or like Dear Leader said, 'just go to the emergency room'.

Oh well, maybe we should just be glad they're not pocketing the money outright.

[gatts]

74. From an economic conservativism viewpoint

Think of it like an investment. The RF spectrum is worth much, much more than 800 million dollars.

[Liberal In Texas]

78. Which begs the question. Why should we sell it off?

It's part of the commons. The public should own it forever.

[Liberal In Texas]

76. I would go with healthcare. But it is an apple/oranges argument.

Who can say what's more important?
So many things are interwoven.

Phones are good, but so are aircraft.
Cars are good, but so are boats.
Plastic is good, but so is wood.

I loved the '68 Oldsmobile 4-4-2, but it's probably better to have a Prius. Or a plug-in Prius if they ever make one.

Change happens. And technological change happens at a rate the some people don't like.

[riverdeep]

79. I'm going with healthcare, too.

Since it's hard to use the phone or watch TV when you're dead. Although TV can make people effectively dead, so there's that.

[NNN0LHI]

80. Receiving digital TV signals with a converter box does not mean you will be watching HDTV

http://dtvfacts.com/55/is-dtv-the-same-as-hdtv/

Is DTV the same as HDTV?

Digital television (DTV) includes broadcasts in standard definition (SDTV), enhanced definition (EDTV) and high-definition (HDTV) formats.

Digital SDTV offers resolution comparable to analog TV broadcasts. Yet picture and sound quality are noticeably better because digital transmissions are free of snow, ghosts, or static noises.

HDTV offers significantly improved images in high resolution—comparable to what you experience in a movie theater—along with CD-quality surround sound. Most digital TVs sold in the U.S. are high-def.

While TV stations will be required to convert to digital broadcasts, they need not offer high-definition broadcasts. But most stations deliver some HD programming and are adding much more as time goes on.

It isn’t enough for your favorite show to be produced in HD. To actually see it in high-def, two more things are needed: First, an HDTV signal must be received from the transmission source—either over the airwaves or via digital cable or satellite service. Second, you will need an HDTV set to watch it on.