Nielsen finds 53% of homes have HDTVs, but only 46% can receive an HD signal

So close, and yet so far away. The good news from Nielsen's latest Television Audience Report is that it reaffirms a CTAM survey indicating HDTV ownership has finally crossed into the majority (up from just a third a year ago) however there's still a significant number of people out there who can't actually watch HDTV on their new set. Even accounting for the cable cutters who simply choose not to watch pay-TV on their display, that's still a significant number of people not getting everything they can out of their television set. We'd point out that these numbers should mean considerably more focus paid towards the high definition capable viewers but judging by recent events -- it would appear broadcasters and content producers have gotten the message. As the ruling majority, the only question left is what exactly should we do with this power?

[intrglctcrevfnk Posted Apr 29th 2010 10:33PM]

Wow. That chart is all sorts of hard-to-read.

[WBonner Posted Apr 29th 2010 10:52PM]

I find the terms really confusing, and the chart hard to read.

As a person who cut the cable cord a few years back, I pretty much only watch things in HD, and am Broadcast Only. I do watch things in SD when they are on the subchannels.

[engadgetcomexcludeengadget Posted Apr 29th 2010 11:16PM]

@the two above me

Try clicking through and looking at the giant pdf, that has a key so you know what the terms mean!

[Jeff Kibuule Posted Apr 29th 2010 11:17PM]

What is an SD channel? It's been so long since I've watched any of them...

Hell, even Hulu on a HDTV looks better than an SD channel.

[John H Posted Apr 30th 2010 9:34AM]

@Jeff Kibuule

Agreed. I very seldom channel surf (I just turn the TV on to watch what I wanted and turn it off when it's done, because otherwise you just end up wasting time watching crap you wouldn't have watched otherwise), but on the rare occasions when I do, I never even bother to see what's on the SD channels.

[John H Posted Apr 30th 2010 9:31AM]

It's too bad we can't also get reliable data on how many people have HDTVs and HD cable/satellite service but aren't using HD-capable cables and/or haven't properly configured their boxes to send an HD signal, because of course getting data from user surveys like Nielsen does implies proper understanding of how to set up HD, in which case this problem wouldn't exist. I've been to so many people's houses who had a composite or even RF cable connecting their HD box to their HDTV, or who had a TiVo HD that was still configured to send every signal in 480i. In one case when I corrected it for them, they weren't sure how to feel -- on the one hand, they were happy to see HD and amazed at how great it looked, but on the other, they'd been paying for HD cable for 3 years and had spend a huge chunk of change on an HDTV (that didn't have any other HD sources) and had therefore never seen an HD feed on it until now.

[John H Posted Apr 30th 2010 9:37AM]

@John H

And I forgot one other group: The people who have an HDTV, an HD cable box receiving HD service, HD cabling and proper configuration, but who don't realize that the HD channels are separate from the normal channels. Some people seem to think that once you have HD, all the HD-capable normal channels are magically turned into HD, and while I think it would actually be really cool if that were the case and arguably SHOULD be the case, it's not (yet). It's so funny when I show people where the HD channels are hiding and they thought that their stretch-o-vision SD channels were HD the whole time.

[LazarusDark Posted Apr 30th 2010 6:35PM]

@John H
Every time I go to my grandparents, they are watching the local channels on the ANALOG station through the cable box. And every time I tell them, look the local HD channels are in the 9000 or so channel block. They say "Ooohh" and seem to understand, but when I go back they are watching the analog again! I guess they're eyes are so bad they really can't tell anyway... The HD upgrade was free when they got it, so no money wasted I guess.

I really don't understand why they don't automatically block the sd channel when you have the HD version, whether cable or sat. Why would you ever want to watch the sd? I've even caught my wife watching the sd of Discovery or something once or twice; I walk in and think, that looks wrong, then change it. There's just no reason to have the sd channels even available.

[JRMG Posted May 1st 2010 12:30AM]

@LazarusDark
In Japan, where I'm currently living, there's a button on the remote controls where you can switch the channel you're watching from its SD to its HD signal. You don't even have to flip to channel 835 (or whatever) to watch in HD.

I wonder why they don't do that in North America?

I will be moving back to Canada soon, and I want to buy an HDTV. The problem is, there's maybe 3 channels I want to watch in HD and the rest of the channels I like are still in SD. What a waste!

[raionyuki Posted Apr 30th 2010 8:33PM]

I wish that the cost would come down for HD packages. Me and my wife just don't watch enough TV to justify the cost. The idea of having to pay more for HD Channels seems crazy to me. Did they used to have a premium for TV in color over black and white service?

I will have to wait until HD TV becomes the new standard on not the new premium.. :(