CRTC Public Proceeding on DTV in Canada: May 6, 2010 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums

stampeder · 2010-04-20, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Call for comments on issues related to the digital television transition

In this notice, the Commission calls for comments and seeks further information on the number of Canadians that could potentially lose service as a result of the transition to over-the-air digital television (DTV), on its proposal to authorize the provision by broadcasting distribution undertakings of a free package consisting of all local and regional conventional television signals currently available over-the-air in a given market, on possible regulatory measures to educate consumers regarding the DTV transition, on the implementation of one or more trial market(s) for DTV conversion and on other related matters. The deadline for the receipt of comments is 6 May 2010.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2010/2010-169.htm

If you intend to intervene just use the easy to follow instructions in the Procedure for filing comments section of that page.

This is mostly an info-finding expedition to determine if/whether/how many Converter Boxes would be required to transition present analogue OTA users to DTV.

We can discuss this here but if you have complaints or strong opinions about the government possibly giving out such boxes you'd better be prepared to submit an intervention or we'll have to just ignore you here.

stampeder · 2010-04-20, 09:05 PM

My intervention will include my strong opinion that any Converter Boxes to be distributed by a government-led plan must have the following technical features in order to properly accommodate the needs of Canadian consumers:

HDMI A/V (or else TOSLINK audio output (coax and/or optical) with HDMI video)
Composite
S-Video
Component
Dolby Pro Logic II over analogue RCA R-L jacks

I'm also of the opinion that retailers would have to charge a predetermined price or less.

timlocke · 2010-04-21, 06:19 AM

What price range do YOU think the box should be in ?

I'd say $85 so that it would be $100 or less including sales taxes.

JamesK · 2010-04-21, 07:07 AM

Quote:

HDMI A/V

Given that most of those converters will be used with old analog TVs, why is HDMI necessary? S-video & composite are already capable of better than what NTSC supports. In the U.S., the plan was to subsidize only "basic" converters.

classicsat · 2010-04-21, 08:45 AM

I am of the same mind as those that have designed the specs for the US converter program, in that the converters that need to be available for those in that need them should only serve the basic features they need, not have features that cost extra money and they cannot use.

Those that want (and I am right in saying want) the extra features can very well afford the existing market price for those features, or afford to upgrade their own receiving equipment.

JamesK · 2010-04-21, 10:07 AM

^^^^
Quite so. Those coupon program converters were intended only to replace the function of the now useless tuner. A digital signal, connected via composite or S-video, will already result in an improved picture on most sets.

hugh · 2010-04-21, 10:24 AM

Why should the price of a converter box be mandated and why should the government pay people so they can watch digital television?

If a converter box retails for $50, $100 or $500 in a competitive marketplace, then that is the price it should sell for.

Cripes we have government supported the cartels that artificially raise the price of milk, wheat, beef and butter in this country but we want to subsidize the cost of watching television?

classicsat · 2010-04-23, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesK

^^^^
Quite so. Those coupon program converters were intended only to replace the function of the now useless tuner. A digital signal, connected via composite or S-video, will already result in an improved picture on most sets.

The Coupon program allowed composite, even S-video (although the S-video equipped models were few). Component and HDMI were prohibited, for the government did not want to be subsidising premium features, which as I said could be afforded by those that would want them.

Dr.Dave · 2010-04-21, 10:48 AM

stampeder, the problem with your proposal is that by mandating HDMI, you would specifically disallow every single model of converter designed for the U.S. coupon program. The U.S. program stated that any converter with a digital output was not eligible for a coupon.

I'm not convinced that Canadian taxpayers should be paying for such a program, but if we do it should allow the same minimum specs as the U.S. program. Given Canada's smaller population and lower percentage of analog OTA viewers, we would have a very limited choice of more expensive converters if we required HDMI.

PrinceLH · 2010-04-21, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesK

Given that most of those converters will be used with old analog TVs, why is HDMI necessary? S-video & composite are already capable of better than what NTSC supports. In the U.S., the plan was to subsidize only "basic" converters.

My first HD set, was and is a CRT and does not have a digital tuner in it. It would be great, to be able to use this set with a digital television signal.

JamesK · 2010-04-21, 11:03 AM

Quote:

It would be great, to be able to use this set with a digital television signal.

A basic converter, connected via RF, composite or S-video, will give you reception comparable to what you had prior to the digital conversion. That was the entire purpose of the coupon program in the U.S. There's nothing to stop you from buying a better converter to give you more than you had before, but don't expect me to help you pay for it.

stampeder · 2010-04-21, 11:11 AM

classicsat and Dr.Dave: I'm completely underwhelmed by the U.S. CECB boxes, so my goal is to set the capability bar much higher for Canadian ones if this goes ahead.

Hugh, JamesK: Each year the Canadian government pours millions upon millions of seed money and other forms of corporate welfare into Tech Industry R&D (of which I am a part, btw) and an horrendous amount is simply burned up as part of that process. So, concerns about taxpayers picking up the tab for converter boxes mean nothing to me.

Having said that, I fully expect the U.S. CECB spec to be rubber stamped for Canada and either a coupon or tax refund system put in place.

classicsat · 2010-04-23, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PrinceLH

My first HD set, was and is a CRT and does not have a digital tuner in it. It would be great, to be able to use this set with a digital television signal.

You can. Nobody is saying you cannot. You just have to buy your own at market price if you want HD.

AmowAgou · 2010-04-21, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stampeder;109244as a TV0

My intervention will include my strong opinion that any Converter Boxes to be distributed by a government-led plan must have the following technical features in order to properly accommodate the needs of Canadian consumers:

HDMI A/V (or else TOSLINK audio output (coax and/or optical) with HDMI video)
Composite
S-Video
Component
Dolby Pro Logic II over analogue RCA R-L jacks

I'm also of the opinion that retailers would have to charge a predetermined price or less.

I am not sure if the above was meant to be a joke.

If the goverment is going to subsidize the box, digital to analogue RF Ch 3/4 is all required, nothing more.

I don't want to subsidize anyone who uses a HD digital display monitor or $2000 front video projector as a TV.

mr weather · 2010-04-21, 02:25 PM

I tend to agree. A basic digital-to-analog box is all that the government (my tax dollars) should consider subsidizing.

But, they're really going to have to get a move on it as far as education is concerned. We're less than 18 months from the "official" conversion. The US had much more lead time and still they pushed the date back four months.

2010-04-20, 09:05 PM	#2
stampeder OTA Forum Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: North Delta, BC (96Av x 116St) Posts: 23,338	My intervention will include my strong opinion that any Converter Boxes to be distributed by a government-led plan must have the following technical features in order to properly accommodate the needs of Canadian consumers: HDMI A/V (or else TOSLINK audio output (coax and/or optical) with HDMI video) Composite S-Video Component Dolby Pro Logic II over analogue RCA R-L jacks I'm also of the opinion that retailers would have to charge a predetermined price or less.

2010-04-21, 10:24 AM	#7
hugh Member #1 Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto Posts: 47,501	Why should the price of a converter box be mandated and why should the government pay people so they can watch digital television? If a converter box retails for $50, $100 or $500 in a competitive marketplace, then that is the price it should sell for. Cripes we have government supported the cartels that artificially raise the price of milk, wheat, beef and butter in this country but we want to subsidize the cost of watching television? __________________ As of January 2012, I am no longer the owner of the Digital Home website. If you have questions about the operation of the site, please contact VSAdmin. For personal inquiries contact me at the Hugh Thompson website.

2010-04-21, 10:48 AM	#9
Dr.Dave Moderator Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Winnipeg Posts: 4,813	stampeder, the problem with your proposal is that by mandating HDMI, you would specifically disallow every single model of converter designed for the U.S. coupon program. The U.S. program stated that any converter with a digital output was not eligible for a coupon. I'm not convinced that Canadian taxpayers should be paying for such a program, but if we do it should allow the same minimum specs as the U.S. program. Given Canada's smaller population and lower percentage of analog OTA viewers, we would have a very limited choice of more expensive converters if we required HDMI. Last edited by Dr.Dave; 2010-04-21 at 11:06 AM.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

2010-04-21, 06:19 AM	#3
timlocke Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Guelph Posts: 551	What price range do YOU think the box should be in ? I'd say $85 so that it would be $100 or less including sales taxes.

2010-04-21, 08:45 AM	#5
classicsat Veteran Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Kincardine ON. Posts: 4,005	I am of the same mind as those that have designed the specs for the US converter program, in that the converters that need to be available for those in that need them should only serve the basic features they need, not have features that cost extra money and they cannot use. Those that want (and I am right in saying want) the extra features can very well afford the existing market price for those features, or afford to upgrade their own receiving equipment.

2010-04-21, 10:07 AM	#6
JamesK Veteran Join Date: May 2009 Location: Mississauga Posts: 5,089	^^^^ Quite so. Those coupon program converters were intended only to replace the function of the now useless tuner. A digital signal, connected via composite or S-video, will already result in an improved picture on most sets.

2010-04-21, 11:11 AM	#12
stampeder OTA Forum Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: North Delta, BC (96Av x 116St) Posts: 23,338	classicsat and Dr.Dave: I'm completely underwhelmed by the U.S. CECB boxes, so my goal is to set the capability bar much higher for Canadian ones if this goes ahead. Hugh, JamesK: Each year the Canadian government pours millions upon millions of seed money and other forms of corporate welfare into Tech Industry R&D (of which I am a part, btw) and an horrendous amount is simply burned up as part of that process. So, concerns about taxpayers picking up the tab for converter boxes mean nothing to me. Having said that, I fully expect the U.S. CECB spec to be rubber stamped for Canada and either a coupon or tax refund system put in place.

2010-04-21, 02:25 PM	#15
mr weather Veteran Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Mississauga, Ontario Posts: 1,950	I tend to agree. A basic digital-to-analog box is all that the government (my tax dollars) should consider subsidizing. But, they're really going to have to get a move on it as far as education is concerned. We're less than 18 months from the "official" conversion. The US had much more lead time and still they pushed the date back four months.