LG touts first converter box approved for 2008 digital changeover

The U.S. Department of Commerce has certified the first digital-analog converter box eligible for the digital television transition coupon program. LG Electronics has developed a low-cost box which will allow consumers to get broadcast signals to their older television sets using a $40 government coupon. The converter drops higher-end features like digital audio or component outputs, but includes features designed for older sets, such as RF and composite outputs, V-Chip parental controls, closed captioning, and options for 4:3- or 16:9-ratio televisions. The company plans to have production ramped up to coincide with the launch of the coupon program in early 2008, just in time for consumers to remain clueless as to what they needed a converter box for anyway.

[Nick Gold @ Oct 8th 2007 7:17PM]

Is Uncle Sam covering the full cost of the converter? The article isn't super clear as to whether the $40 coupon covers the entire cost.

[TVGenius @ Oct 9th 2007 10:03AM]

The goal of the program is once production has ramped up, the costs will drop to a point where the coupon should cover almost or the whole cost. Two vouchers will be available per household, and those vouchers will only be good for limited-feature boxes like this. If you want component or DVI/HDMI or digital audio outs, you're going to have to buy yours at full cost. This program is only intended to defray the cost for lower-income people so they don't lose access to free TV, though I'm sure a lot of people will pick up one or two of these for those TVs in your game room or wherever that aren't worth upgrading yet, and aren't connected to cable or satellite. For instance, my grandparents' have DirecTV in their living room, but their bedroom TV is only connected to an antenna since their house was built before cable TV, and wasn't wired with a coax distribution system.

[easymac30 @ Oct 8th 2007 7:25PM]

Dude, it's the government.

Given their typical approach to subsidizing changes that they impose, the total cost of the box will be $73,000,000,000.

Which, of course, begs the response:

BUY AN HD TV, JOE SIX-PACK!!!
YOU CHEAP-A**, TECHNOLOGICALLY-IMPAIRED A**HOLE!!!

[Leebo @ Oct 9th 2007 12:36AM]

What I'm bummed about is the fact that our PVR's on our computers won't work anymore.

[ShyGuy91284 @ Jan 1st 2008 12:51PM]

What I'm bummed about is that you can't build your own computer PVR supporting CableCard without buying an expensive OEM system from Dell or someone similar and using Windows (MCE is impressive, but it lacks the flexibility and options MythTV offers....)

[Neil Christie @ Oct 8th 2007 7:27PM]

And the rest of the world welcomes the USA to 2001.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Oct 8th 2007 10:37PM]

Upgrading the infrastructure of a geographically small with a rich GDP per capita like South Korea, Germany, England, Japan, etc is much easier and cheaper to do than a geographically large nation like the USA, China, or Russia; the hurdles are much greater.

[Brad @ Oct 8th 2007 7:31PM]

Uncle Sam is covering the cost of these converters, but they are doing so with the proceeds of auctioning off the immense and valuable radio spectrum that's currently being used for analog signals.

[paul34 @ Oct 8th 2007 7:33PM]

Oh man, I can just hear all the endless questions from all my relatives towards me when this goes into effect... =(

[Mark @ Oct 8th 2007 7:53PM]

If your working TV is a 13" B/W with a government-subsidized converter box, sitting on top of a non-working 25" color console, you might be a redneck.

[Ben Stafford @ Oct 8th 2007 10:16PM]

Techno-snobs

[rantor @ Oct 8th 2007 7:59PM]

it does not go into effect until 2012 anyway.

http://www.techspot.com/news/27005-fcc-extends-analog-tv-deadline-to-2012.html

[tcc3 @ Oct 8th 2007 8:22PM]

The way In understand it thats only for cable. The broadcast TV spectrum still gets re purposed in 2k9.

[tcc3 @ Oct 8th 2007 8:22PM]

The way I understand it thats only for cable. The broadcast TV spectrum still gets re purposed in 2k9.

[Sir.Byrd @ Oct 9th 2007 12:03AM]

The world also ends in 2012. Coincidence? I think not!

[hn333 @ Oct 9th 2007 2:54AM]

Planet X come at 2012, Game over !

[Lisa @ Oct 8th 2007 8:39PM]

I think it is nice to have the option of all digital but just see the move to MAKE us go to it if we want cable channels is just another way to get control of the consumer. The coupons are supposed to cover part of the converter box cost and not all of it the way I understand it, and I doubt you will get more than one per family. It is just another forced expense. I have 2 digital compatable TVs and two that will need the box, although I already have a converter box on one through the cable company. This is just another cost forced on the public just as eventually hybrid cars will probably be all the government allows on the road. They going to have converter boxes for that too?

[revolutionz_s13 @ Oct 9th 2007 12:21AM]

The current plan is they will send two coupons to each household. From what I understand, the average box will run $60-80

[Lisa @ Oct 10th 2007 8:59PM]

not suprising...
they are going to force you to need one, but only pay for about half. I feel for those on min. wage who only have TV for entertainment. Gov. and big business run it all..

[Not Lisa @ Nov 6th 2007 3:33AM]

QUOTE: "I think it is nice to have the option of all digital but just see the move to MAKE us go to it if we want cable channels is just another way to get control of the consumer. The coupons are supposed to cover part of the converter box cost and not all of it the way I understand it, and I doubt you will get more than one per family. It is just another forced expense. I have 2 digital compatable TVs and two that will need the box, although I already have a converter box on one through the cable company. This is just another cost forced on the public just as eventually hybrid cars will probably be all the government allows on the road. They going to have converter boxes for that too?"


Not to get personal, but think about this. "It is just another forced expense." Are you smoking crack? TV is a luxuery. It is not a nessesity. If you can't afford to meet the industry standard, which is upgrading to a technology that lasts longer and is cheaper to maintain, then perhaps the time previously spent watching tv should be spent on other activities such as getting an educational or trade-skill upgrade.

Yes, I understand that TV is a medium for news delivery. However, That is not the majority of the programming for local broadcasting. Still, need the news? Pick up a newspaper. Can't read or afford the paper? Again, refer to the above suggestion.

70% of the huts here in Iraq, you will see a digital satilite. If the majority of the population of a war ravaged country can afford these things, with NO goverment subsidies, our minimum wage 'poverty stricken' portion of the population can suck up the $20-$40 not covered by our overly generous (by comparison) government.

Besides, when something is free how can you complain about it being taken away? You do not, and never did, own it. None of us have paid for it directly from our own personal budget. If you were given a free meal when you are hungry, should you complain because there isn't any silverware? Would you turn it down? If so, what does that say about you?

As for your fear of hybrid vehicals, you will be allowed to drive your gas guzzling monster truck for as long as you are able to afford the fuel for it. God forbid the government try to clean up our environment at the painstaking expense of your SUV.

No, I'm not any better than you. I too drive a hummer (HMMWV). Only I am doing so in Iraq, working hard to secure the oil you need for your non-hybrid.

[Chris Taylor @ Jan 1st 2008 8:27PM]

Not Lisa you miss the point. By going digital they REMOVE consumer power. Right now I have a computer with 4 TV tuners connected to my ANALOG comcast cable. I do not like and do not WANT digital because doing this PVR setup would be IMPOSSIBLE with digital. Its too restrictive its NOT OPEN and its FULL of encryption and limitations.

This is NOT an industry standard. This is a GOVERMENT standard that they went to the industry with and said HEY your gonna switch to this and oh No you do not have a choice we are SELLING your bandwidth and taking it from you so switch or die.

It was NOT an industry upgrade it IS a government forced industry ultimatum.

THIS is the "excuse" comcast and other ilks need to FORCE us to "rent" a box from them for $40-$50 a month over the $30 a month I pay them now for 99% of the channels I need.

This switch will effectively force me to live off of bittorrent. I have NO desire whatsoever to spend $2500+ on a god damned television. ITS JUST not that important to me AND it would be SMALLER than what I have now. I have a 40" CRT which is MUCH larger a screen than a 50" Plasma or LCD (remember its DIAGONAL 16:9 so the numbers are deccieving) Don't believe me? if you can find one measure the VERTICAL HEIGHT of 40" 4:3 set and then measure the VERTICAL height of a 50" 16:9 set ! Prepare for a shocking.

a 50" 16:9 would be a downgrade as far as I am concerned.

I am not against new nice technology in fact quite the opposite. I AM against technologies being used AGAINST ME to restrict my rights abilities and what I can do with it.

Industry loves digital ONLY because they can apply "limitations" to what you can do with it.

[drumdbeat @ Oct 8th 2007 8:48PM]

Erm, isn't this just like... freeview in UK?

oollddddd.

[grug @ Oct 8th 2007 9:23PM]

Yes, it's exactly like Freeview or any other number of digital FTA systems throughout Europe, Australia/NZ and Asia from a good 6-7 years ago. Well not quite since the US is not using the DVB standard but ATSC, but the same principle.

The real question is why it's taken that long for the US to join the rest of the world and why Uncle Sam needs to cover the cost of these things anyway -- here in Australia digital set top boxes can be found for as little as au$29 and HD boxes from au$99. SD boxes have been around the au$50-60 mark for a year or two. Yet US households get two us$40 coupons "to go towards the cost"?

[Julian Bond @ Oct 9th 2007 3:21AM]

"the US is not using the DVB standard"

Aye, there's the rub. Not invented here is used to justify propping up a non existent domestic electronics industry. but then as always "It's different in the USA".

Sigh.

[Nubaeus @ Jan 1st 2008 1:35PM]

@Julain

...did you seriously just use a line from Hamlet?

[RandomCake @ Oct 8th 2007 9:33PM]

Well... The US Switch over doesn't seem to be too far different to the UK Switch over which is from 2008-2012, granted the majority of the UK population are already using digital because of the fact that you get an extra few dozen channels!

As for cost, it's hardly a breakthrough, in the UK we've had sub-£20 ($40) boxes for ages!

[TCW @ Oct 9th 2007 11:48AM]

It may surprise some of you who are more technologically inclined to learn that quite a few US residents have no idea about digital or analog or what high-definition means in terms of television.
So, to these people, free and publicly accessible mediums like the radio and standard television channels with news will no longer be such. One must now pay to receive the same thing that was once free.
And while we laugh at black and white televisions, you would be surprised how many households still have these sitting in kitchens or basements in case of emergencies along side dial radios and corded telephones.
I imagine that this switch will be hardest on the elderly who are not techies at heart and those who do not have the income to justify a $20-50 purchase to watch something that was once without price.
I am glad there is a voucher program, but I am also disheartened in the way in which the program is being carried out.
By encouraging the full adopting of digital, we are also encouraging people to buy new HDTVs, which, for the most part, have not gone anywhere near the price point of standard definition televisions. More alarmingly, the price of a 20" standard definition television seems to be stagnant and/or rising above $100 for some 20" models! If the average household has at least 2-3 televisions, and we can expect that at least 1 of these televisions is a standard definition model, then we are also effectively encouraging a huge amount of electronic junk without any sort of plan to handle those excess parts. That is my second problem with this push toward digital.

I would love to have a 27" or 32" LCD HDTV in my tiny apartment, but when the price is still so high, it doesn't make any sense in my monthly budget. Perhaps Black Friday sales after Thanksgiving shall prove beneficial to the rest of us...

[dataminer49er @ Oct 10th 2007 1:37PM]

Really, is that photo of TVs w/ rabbit ears? My parent's stopped using those in 1983.

[tvprogrammer @ Oct 29th 2007 5:11PM]

Too bad LG wasn't the first...according to my resources the NTIA approved Digital Stream's...a company based out of Korea...prototype first. Either way it's still good for the consumer...wonder which one is going to cost less?

[fred @ Jan 1st 2008 6:54PM]

"
I would love to have a 27" or 32" LCD HDTV in my tiny apartment, but when the price is still so high, it doesn't make any sense in my monthly budget. Perhaps Black Friday sales after Thanksgiving shall prove beneficial to the rest of us..."

whut? prices are incredibly low already. back when tubes ruled the day in the 90s a decent 27" cost ~$500 and thats without inflation. now a decent 27" lcd is maybe $300 on sale. if you are incredibly tight on budget the low low end is still around.

[Chris Taylor @ Jan 1st 2008 9:13PM]

but that 27" lcd is NOT HD. what the freaking point of going Digital is your not even going to get an HD Image from your screen.

Whats the cheapest 1080p Screen you can can find? also a 27" lcd is a LOT SMALLER than a 27" CRT Go put them side to side. HUGE difference. you would need something like a 32-36" lcd to equal the size of the 27" 4:3 CRT.

We paid $800 for our nearly 40" CRT Go find me a LARGER than 50" plasma for LCD for double that even TRIPLE that. Even a 50" Plasma or LCD is SMALLER than our CRT is now.

[whitey @ Jan 2nd 2008 9:34AM]

I got my 106" screen and 720p DLP Projector for $900 shipped. I can pretty much guarantee that any way you measure it, the 'groundbreaking' 40" CRT will pale in comparison.

[fred @ Mar 14th 2008 5:07AM]

"but that 27" lcd is NOT HD. what the freaking point of going Digital is your not even going to get an HD Image from your screen."

? it is hd. even 720p is 3x the resolution of sdtv you know, nothing to scoff at.