Has anyone noticed that Analogue signals are often still watchable with only 12% of the signal getting through, where as you need a minium of 24% signal to get anything more than a black screen on Digital...
Also it's great how Digital channels often freeze up for a few seconds when another channel is showing something intensive... and I would be willing to bet real money that 90% of those freeze-ups are caused by sports programs.
And of course... don't forget that Digital cuts off a lot of the infomation from the piture, in order to save space. Usually it's things that aren't noticable by the average person, but I often find that I can tell whether a signal is Digital or Analogue within a few seconds, because of this difference in available infomation.
Anywho... sorry fot eh rant, but this is one of my pet peeves - the general insistance that Digital is better, as spread by accountants who only see that more, lower-quality, channels can use the same bandwidth, thus upping profits...
Register
Analogue vs Digital
Has anyone noticed that Analogue signals are often still watchable with only 12% of the signal getting through, where as you need a minium of 24% signal to get anything more than a black screen on Digital...
Also it's great how Digital channels often freeze up for a few seconds when another channel is showing something intensive... and I would be willing to bet real money that 90% of those freeze-ups are caused by sports programs.
And of course... don't forget that Digital cuts off a lot of the infomation from the piture, in order to save space. Usually it's things that aren't noticable by the average person, but I often find that I can tell whether a signal is Digital or Analogue within a few seconds, because of this difference in available infomation.
Anywho... sorry fot eh rant, but this is one of my pet peeves - the general insistance that Digital is better, as spread by accountants who only see that more, lower-quality, channels can use the same bandwidth, thus upping profits...