Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Free TV Will Have 4K Content in a Couple Years

posted by martyb on Monday May 29 2017, @03:41PM   Printer-friendly
from the Looks-Better==Is-Better? dept.

mcgrew writes:

Consumer Reports is running an article titled Free Over-the-Air TV Is Going to Get Better. They're rolling out a new standard, ATSC 3.0.

According to the article, you'll be able to watch OTA (over the air) TV on your phone or tablet! I wrote an article a few years back wondering why you couldn't already.

It's a fairly long and very informative article, but very much worth a read. It only talks about American broadcasts, no word about when or if it will reach other countries, but my guess is it won't be long.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Free TV Will Have 4K Content in a Couple Years | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 59 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by requerdanos on Monday May 29 2017, @10:11PM (2 children)

    by requerdanos (5997) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 29 2017, @10:11PM (#517338) Journal

    Sucks to be you, but your problems are rare.

    People who watch over-the-air TV are rare, because it's more common to have a cable or satellite provider.

    But among most non-urban areas where watching over-the-air TV was previously well-supported, "Can't pick up anything watchable" is by far the most common result of the replacement of broadcast analog TV with the less robust all-or-nothing digital broadcasts.

    By land mass, areas that are not urban make up almost all of the planet.

    Previously, in most areas, it was a matter of how high your antenna, and whether it was pointed at the right city. Now, it almost doesn't matter. Either you get a perfect signal that's watchable, or you get less than a perfect signal, which isn't watchable.

    This answers the question, is "Looks-Better" equal to "Is-Better". No, it isn't. We measure that by previous coverage area compared to current coverage area. No TV is not better than TV regardless of how pretty the picture would be if you had TV.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @11:53PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @11:53PM (#517377)

    But among most non-urban areas where watching over-the-air TV was previously well-supported, "Can't pick up anything watchable" is by far the most common result of the replacement of broadcast analog TV

    Facts not in evidence.
    You are the outlier. Stop indulging in the base rate fallacy.

    PS. No need to lecture me about how OTA works. I cancelled my cable-tv subscription over a decade ago.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @04:31AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 30 2017, @04:31AM (#517460)

    But among most non-urban areas where watching over-the-air TV was previously well-supported, "Can't pick up anything watchable" is by far the most common result of the replacement of broadcast analog TV with the less robust all-or-nothing digital broadcasts.

    If that were true, the FCC would be flooded with complaints about it. And yet they aren't.