Fox shows with the widescreen notice. (1 Viewer)

[RodC]

Could someone clue me in as to what is meant by the message "...FOX High Resolution broadcast..." (can't remember the whole blurb, but I hope you know which one I mean :b) that displays at the beginning of many shows on the FOX network? What is it and how do you receive it? Maybe more importantly, is it worth pursuing?
Thanks in advance!
Rod

 

[Jared_B]

It's Fox's way of saying that these shows are boradcast in 480P. It is NOT HDTV. You can get this broadcast the same way you would get NBCs HD channel - by using an antenna and a DTV receiver to get the digital signal to your HD television.

 

[Frank_S]

Rod, it's basically their way of trying to trick us into thinking they are giving us something really impressive.

I believe they give us a widescreen(16 x 9)image of their SD transmission, remember what the SuperBowl looked like?

It was nothing like the previous HDTV Superbowls viewed in 1080i. Fox is just screwing with us, they have no intention of giving us 1080i, they do not support HDTV.

 

[StephenT]

Is the Super Bowl on FOX again next year? I just got a set top box, and I would love a Super Bowl in 1080i. What about CBS doing at least one game a week in 1080i?
Masters this weekend in HD! Wohoo!
To get a little back on topic: Yes, FOX widescreen digital is 480p. Boo!

 

[DaveBB]

Is the Super Bowl on FOX again next year?

I believe it is on ABC this year. Looking forward to seeing the Rams in the Super Bowl again. However the St. Louis ABC affiliate is a Sinclair owned station so we'll probably will never see a Hi Def Super Bowl here until 2030.

 

[Mike I]

ABC does have the 2003 superbowl...My bet is I am sure they will come thru with a true HD broadcast...

 

[Chris Brunner]

Okay,
What does the little D)) symbol that follows the "Fox Widescreen" banner stand for?
C

 

[Mike I]

I pretty sure it is dolby digital...

 

[MickeS]

Why is Fox refusing to do High Defintion, by the way?

/Mike

 

[Mike I]

They have some misguided notion that people can't tell the difference in picture quality between 480p and 1080i

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Some of the 16:9 480p widescreen Fox shows look pretty good...not like good 1080i though.

They look better than the superbowl did.

 

[Frank Zimkas]

From what I was able to find on the net regarding the lack of HD broadcast by FOX for the Superbowl was that they were not willing to spend the money to support 2 production vans and 2 sets of cameras for the game. They reportedly could not find anyone to share the expense.how much of that is true..I really don't know but although I was disappointed I guess I can understand their viewpoint. I don't like it, but what can the average fan do?

 

[MickeS]

From what I was able to find on the net regarding the lack of HD broadcast by FOX for the Superbowl was that they were not willing to spend the money to support 2 production vans and 2 sets of cameras for the game.

That makes sense. After all, Ruper Murdoch needs a few more luxury houses with 50 bathrooms, a few more yachts, airplanes, diamodn studded watches, collectible art, and other things necessary for survival. Who are we to want better picture quality? I bet if they skipped color broadcasts and transmitted the sound in mono, they could save even more money!

/Mike

 

[Frank Zimkas]

Mike,

I agree that it seems that Fox just wants to make more of a profit. But remember that no matter how you spell it, PROFIT is not a four letter word. I try to see both sides of the issue. As a small business owner my concerns are the same as every other business owners. Sure Murdoch is getting richer by the minute, good for him. If we all worked a little harder maybe we would too.

Would you be willing to spend millions of dollars to reach a very small percentage of the population that has an HD tv and an HD receiver. How do you know that those people will even tune in?

Yes it is true that until every local station coast to coast is broadcasting an HD signal, those of us that own a broadcast ready system will have to suffer through very meeger selections.

 

[MickeS]

Would you be willing to spend millions of dollars to reach a very small percentage of the population that has an HD tv and an HD receiver. How do you know that those people will even tune in?

Yes I would, since I would realize that the future is in HDTV, and it would give goodwill and credibility to the network. I would also know that for the Superbowl most of the viewers WILL tune in.

I'm not complaining that they want to make a profit, but if they think that it's OK to make the profit by providing a substandard product (which 480p is compared to 1080i), then they're simply wrong.

/Mike

 

[Michael St. Clair]

since I would realize that the future is in HDTV

Unfortunately, that is not a forgone conclusing. HDTV may forever stay a niche in the USA. 480i SDTV is the lowest common denominator that the FCC is pushing OTA broadcast towards.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

Actually the FCC IS mandating high-def broadcasts be a regular thing.

I think the big reason why Fox isn't broadcasting 1080i is because most of their stations aren't even on digital yet, let alone HD

 

[Larry Seno Jr.]

Jeff-The stations can always ask for a waiver.

 

[Joseph S]

When will the FCC start allowing companies to purchase DTV Bands?? I was under the impression that this was to be an option. It is time for the company that pushes all limits to further the cause of HDTV. They may not have the morals, but they do tend to bring tend to bring technology to higher level. It's time for the Mark Cuban owned "Jerry Springer and Porn" Nationwide OTA Network!!
This is coming from someone living in an area with only 3 of 11 stations broadcasting HD with less than 3 weeks to go to the deadline. It has been almost 5 years now and the time has come for the FCC to start imposing non-compliance fines of $500,000 a day. They all got their free bandwidth and have had more than enough time and plenty of cash rolling in over the past 6-7 years of prosperity to meet that deadline.

 

[Mike I]

Actually the FCC is pushing HDTV

makers give jolt to digital TV

Wed Apr 10, 2:50 AM ET

By Pamela McClintock

LAS VEGAS (Variety) - Federal Communications Commission (news - web sites) chairman Michael Powell hit the jackpot Tuesday as the electronics industry reversed itself and embraced the regulator's voluntary plan to begin equipping television sets with digital tuners, beginning New Year's 2004.

The move marks a major victory for broadcasters and provides a key element in the FCC (news - web sites) chairman's sweeping strategy for jump-starting the nation's faltering transition to digital TV.

The move could pose significant implications for consumers, who can now expect to see a new generation of TV sets. Until Tuesday, TV manufacturers had vigorously opposed the idea of including digital tuners in sets until stations were indeed broadcasting digitally.

But the Powell doctrine, made public late last week, calls on electronics manufacturers to proceed, post haste. Powell's proposal went further, calling on all sectors of the TV industry to do their part, including asking the four networks to air half of this fall's prime-time line-up in high-definition broadcasts.

The Consumer Electronics Assn. (CEA) had been the only group to criticize Powell's plan, and the FCC chair was clearly pleased at the organization's shift.

Powell said television is at a historical crossroads and that digital TV means more of everything. He said he would be sitting down with media and consumer electronics executives in the coming weeks.

"You either get on this train, or it will run you over," Powell told attendees at the National Assn. of Broadcasters during an interview with ABC News veteran Sam Donaldson. "A voluntary plan does work. All parties have something to gain."

CEA president Gary Shapiro issued a statement saying his industry is committed to working with the FCC. Shapiro also was in Sin City for NAB.

"To that end, we will discuss the chairman's proposal with our manufacturers as soon as possible and examine how we can support our mutual goal of expediting the transition to digital television," Shapiro said. "We call upon all affected industries to join us in recognizing that we all must give a little so that in the end, each industry -- and consumers, in particular -- will gain a lot."

Shapiro has long argued that electronic makers should not bear the brunt in making digital TV a reality. He considers the major stumbling block to be Hollywood, which has refused to license content until there is adequate copy protection.

But Powell said CEA member companies, including Panasonic and Mitsubishi, had personally contacted him in the past week to say they were in fact willing to consider the digital tuner rule.

The key provisions of Powell's voluntary proposal include:

-- Beginning Jan. 1, 2004, half of TV sets that are 36 inches or larger would be equipped with digital tuners. All such sets would need to have digital tuners by Jan. 1, 2005.

The next deadline would come in January 2006, when all sets 13 inches or larger would be equipped with digital tuners.

-- The four networks, as well as HBO and Showtime, will air half of the 2002-03 primetime season in high-def or offer other "value added services," such as interactive TV. Network execs have pledged to achieve this goal, with most already offering a major chunk of their evening programming in hi-def.;

-- By January 2003, network affiliates in the top 100 markets will make sure they have the needed equipment to pass on the network signal in hi-def.

-- By January 2003, cable systems with 750-megahertz capacity will offer to carry for free five digital signals per broadcaster, or pass on a hi-def signal.