One of the best things to happen for lovers of television is the DVR. One of the worst thinks to happen to lovers of television is the DVR. How can it be both?
The answer is simple, DVRs allow viewers to easily digitally record television shows, in most cases more than one show at a time, and to play them back at will. But the downside to DVRs is that they are subject to lockup and freezing at inopportune moments, which can cause not only the show you’re recording to lose transmission but also whatever you happen to be watching. Nothing is more annoying than having your DVR display a black screen when you change the channel because the HD signal is corrupted or the DVR just can process the command. A few weeks ago, there was a major glitch with Time Warner in northern Ohio which caused the picture to jump and juggle and then disappear, not just once, but multiple times within a broadcast. (TVs not using a DVR or cable box were not affected.) Time Warner promised credit – but only to those who contacted Time Warner to ask for it. Personally, I think Time Warner should have credited everyone for the 4-5 days of transmission problems; they know very well the problem was widespread.
But, back to DVRs. Serious consideration should be given to improving the dependability of these devices. It takes very little to cause then to become “confused” and to lock up. They also are horribly slow at times to respond to changing a channel, not to mention the length of time it takes them to reboot. My DVR is the newest model that Time Warner can offer at it is still awful at times. If I wasn’t paying an arm and a leg for Time Warner Cable, I wouldn’t be complaining. (I should clarify this is problem is not limited to Time Warner.) When I was a kid, watching television was free and we only had 3-4 channels that we needed “rabbit ears” or outside antennas to get a signal, and recording a TV show to watch later was virtually impossible for most. Now we have hundreds of channels, lovely HD pictures, and we can record and play back whenever we want. Yet sometimes those DVRs and cable boxes are no better than those rabbit ears.
All Original Text Content © frequentcritic.blogspot.com unless otherwise noted
Check out my blog home page for the latest information,
The Frequent Critic, here.
Showing posts with label Television. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Television. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Samsung 3-D TV To Come With Serious Warnings

As Samsung works to mass produce television with 3-D screens, Samsung has also come out with a warning for 3-D TV viewers which may give many people pause about buying one. An excerpt as the warning as it stands today:
Some viewers may experience an epileptic seizure or stroke when exposed to certain flashing images or lights contained in certain television pictures or video games. If you suffer from, or have a family history of epilepsy or strokes, please consult with a medical specialist before using the 3D function.
Even those without a personal or family history of epilepsy or stroke may have an undiagnosed condition that can cause photosensitive epileptic seizures.
Pregnant women, the elderly, sufferers of serious medical conditions, those who are sleep deprived or under the influence of alcohol should avoid utilising the unit’s 3D functionality.
If you experience any of the following symptoms, stop viewing 3D pictures immediately and consult a medical specialist:
1. altered vision;
2.lightheadedness;
3.dizziness;
4.involuntary movements such as eye or muscle twitching;
5.confusion;
6.nausea;
7.convulsions;
8.cramps; and/ or
9.disorientation.
…Viewing 3D television may also cause motion sickness, perceptual after effects, disorientation, eye strain and decreased postural stability. It is recommended that users take frequent breaks to lessen the potential of these effects. If your eyes show signs of fatigue or dryness or if you have any of the above symptoms, immediately discontinue use of this device and do not resume using it for at least thirty minutes after the symptoms have subsided.
…Viewing in 3D may cause disorientation for some viewers. Accordingly, DO NOT place your TV television near open stairwells, cables, balconies, or other objects that can be tripped over, run into, knocked down, broken or fallen over.
Keep in mind that the above is only an excerpt, there are quite a few more warning points listed. It is worse than reading the warning label on prescription drugs, it would only sound worse if one of the side effects was death. For me, I get motion sickness standing on a damp lawn, and get nauseated at the simple flicker of florescent lights or flashing lights on vehicles such as police cars and ambulances. It sounds like 3-D TV is going to be crossed off my list. But even for people who are not hyper-sensitive and motions sick and migraine prone like me, I would think that they would also have to think twice before putting down a large amount of money for a television that may make them ill while viewing. The next thing you know, it will become illegal to drive your car after watching 3-D TV for fear that it will impair drivers.
Technology is changing so fast that one can only hope that someone will come up with 3-D technology that doesn’t have such side effects. Until that time, I’ll stick with my nice, flat screen HD TV – because two dimensional TV is enough for me!
Reference
Samsung warning for 3-D TV viewers
Check out my blog home page for the latest information, The Frequent Critic, here.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Analog to Digital TV Transition: One Step Forward, One Step Back
I’ve got cable TV, so I wasn’t worried about the recent conversion from analog to digital television signals. But to experience the transition for myself, I picked up a new antenna – for UHF, VHF, HD, and digital signals. I also wanted the antenna as a backup in case the cable went out. And it does go out, usually at the times when you want it the most.
Imagine my dismay, however, when I hooked up the antenna over a month ago and got only a few channels, some with signals that seemed to break up a lot, or disappear altogether. Don’t worry I was told - the Cleveland stations weren’t all broadcasting at the time, and some who were broadcasting before the switch may not have been at full power. So, I waited for the day of the transition and rescanned my TV for digital channels several times, getting FEWER over the air channels than I got before the changeover, some local channels never appearing at all.
Our local Fox channel, WJW, was running a spot yesterday on the 5:00 PM newscast where they went to a viewer’s house who wasn’t able to get the Fox station at all, and the reporter showed the man that if he stood up and held his rabbit ears high, the signal came in much better. Of course, he said, a person should not have to do that. He got the man another set of rabbit ear antennas and seemed to be able to pull in Fox 8 a little better.
I also have read that outdoor antennas can get much better reception. Well, pardon me, but we got rid of our massive outdoor antenna years ago, when the ice age ended – I mean - when we got cable and there were newfangled things called satellite dishes out there. Another pat answer that people are handing out is just to re-scan your TV. Well, I’ve done that sometimes more than once a day just to see what I get, and the number of stations change every time. These digital signals should not be that inconsistent.
Imagine my surprise that in 2009, people have gone back to having to put “rabbit ears” on their TVs and put huge antennas on their roofs. I have a nice flat antenna that is supposed to work indoors and pull signals from every direction, yet now I find out that some stations are broadcasting in a weaker VHF signal that doesn’t transmit as well, regardless of how good my antenna is. What is even worse is that with old analog signals, at least you could get part of a signal – it may have looked snowy - but with digital, if there is too much signal loss, you get nothing at all. We can put a man on the moon, we can send phone calls via cell towers and we have wireless Internet, why is a television signal such a problem? Did I mention that this is 2009?
I can’t imagine how crazy I would be right now if I didn’t have cable. I feel sorry for the people – and there are many in this area – which still can’t get the same channels they used to be able to get over the air from the analog signals. Right now, Cleveland’s Fox affiliate, WJW, and the CBS affiliate, WOIO, have almost completely dropped off from many viewers’ television sets. (In the case of WOIO and their local newscasts, some see this as a benefit.) These two stations are broadcasting in the lower power VHF signal, by the way.
My gripe is really with the fact that in trying to deliver something better, it seems that we have now gone back to the old days where you had to have your antenna “just right” in order to see television. The FCC should have done a better job with the stations to make sure that their signals really did reach the intended viewing area. The government delayed the transition to make sure all the viewers had time to be ready, but possibly they should have used that time to make sure the stations were ready and that the signals actually could be received by people.
As this is hurricane season for the country’s east coast residents, I hope that signal problems can be resolved so those that don’t have cable, or must get their television via a portable, battery powered TV, can still get important weather and evacuation information.
So my experiment with the digital transition was that it happened, but it has some problems in some area that the local stations and the FCC must address quickly. There is no reason why, in this age of advanced technology, that there can’t be a better answer to this problem than bigger rabbit ears.
Check out my blog home page for the latest information, The Frequent Critic, here.
Imagine my dismay, however, when I hooked up the antenna over a month ago and got only a few channels, some with signals that seemed to break up a lot, or disappear altogether. Don’t worry I was told - the Cleveland stations weren’t all broadcasting at the time, and some who were broadcasting before the switch may not have been at full power. So, I waited for the day of the transition and rescanned my TV for digital channels several times, getting FEWER over the air channels than I got before the changeover, some local channels never appearing at all.
Our local Fox channel, WJW, was running a spot yesterday on the 5:00 PM newscast where they went to a viewer’s house who wasn’t able to get the Fox station at all, and the reporter showed the man that if he stood up and held his rabbit ears high, the signal came in much better. Of course, he said, a person should not have to do that. He got the man another set of rabbit ear antennas and seemed to be able to pull in Fox 8 a little better. I also have read that outdoor antennas can get much better reception. Well, pardon me, but we got rid of our massive outdoor antenna years ago, when the ice age ended – I mean - when we got cable and there were newfangled things called satellite dishes out there. Another pat answer that people are handing out is just to re-scan your TV. Well, I’ve done that sometimes more than once a day just to see what I get, and the number of stations change every time. These digital signals should not be that inconsistent.
Imagine my surprise that in 2009, people have gone back to having to put “rabbit ears” on their TVs and put huge antennas on their roofs. I have a nice flat antenna that is supposed to work indoors and pull signals from every direction, yet now I find out that some stations are broadcasting in a weaker VHF signal that doesn’t transmit as well, regardless of how good my antenna is. What is even worse is that with old analog signals, at least you could get part of a signal – it may have looked snowy - but with digital, if there is too much signal loss, you get nothing at all. We can put a man on the moon, we can send phone calls via cell towers and we have wireless Internet, why is a television signal such a problem? Did I mention that this is 2009?
I can’t imagine how crazy I would be right now if I didn’t have cable. I feel sorry for the people – and there are many in this area – which still can’t get the same channels they used to be able to get over the air from the analog signals. Right now, Cleveland’s Fox affiliate, WJW, and the CBS affiliate, WOIO, have almost completely dropped off from many viewers’ television sets. (In the case of WOIO and their local newscasts, some see this as a benefit.) These two stations are broadcasting in the lower power VHF signal, by the way.
My gripe is really with the fact that in trying to deliver something better, it seems that we have now gone back to the old days where you had to have your antenna “just right” in order to see television. The FCC should have done a better job with the stations to make sure that their signals really did reach the intended viewing area. The government delayed the transition to make sure all the viewers had time to be ready, but possibly they should have used that time to make sure the stations were ready and that the signals actually could be received by people.
As this is hurricane season for the country’s east coast residents, I hope that signal problems can be resolved so those that don’t have cable, or must get their television via a portable, battery powered TV, can still get important weather and evacuation information.
So my experiment with the digital transition was that it happened, but it has some problems in some area that the local stations and the FCC must address quickly. There is no reason why, in this age of advanced technology, that there can’t be a better answer to this problem than bigger rabbit ears.
Check out my blog home page for the latest information, The Frequent Critic, here.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
