High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

High Definition News & Informative Articles Get the Latest High Definition News & Informative Articles Here! Please post newsworthy information here only! This forum is NOT for your first post. Thank you!

Many HDTV owners watch in ‘low-def’

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-04-2007, 04:44 PM   #1  
Vizio 37 LCD
Thread Starter
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,775
Default Many HDTV owners watch in ‘low-def’

I figured this was the case......

Anyone who thinks consumers understand high-definition television should consider a recent survey by Leichtman Research Group. It concluded that close to one-half of the 24 million households with HDTVs don’t actually watch high-definition programs because they haven’t obtained the necessary hardware from their cable, phone or satellite operators.

And about one half of those viewers — about six million — don’t even realize they’re not watching HDTV.

Bruce Leichtman, the market research firm’s president, figures the confusion is partly because the consumers spend so much money on the set they can’t believe they’re not getting what they paid for.

The forward march of consumer electronics, of course, is replete with examples of technology outpacing the ability of average users to understand it. Look no further than the success of the “For Dummies” series of how-to technology books.

The problem is bound to get worse as we near the February 2009 digital-transition deadline, when all broadcasters must transmit entirely in digital, rather than analog, signals. In the meantime, sales are rising as the price of flat-panel HDTV sets fall below $1,000. There were 13.6 million HDTVs sold last year, according to the Consumer Electronics Association.

The failure of so many HDTV owners to figure out what they’ve actually bought is bad for everyone. After years of dragging their feet, TV networks finally are investing heavily to produce shows in high definition. But these investments aren’t going to pay off anytime soon if 50 percent of the HDTV owners aren’t set up for HD viewing.

Consumer ignorance is understandable. It used to be buyers needed only to bring a new set home, plug it into a cable or satellite hookup and flop back on the couch. Now they first must choose either an HDTV set or a standard-definition digital set that has a lower price tag and inferior picture quality. (All HDTV sets are digital, but not vice versa.) Then, they must make sure they’re getting high-definition service from their cable or satellite operator, which typically costs more. After that, they have to lease a high-definition set-top box and make sure it’s set up right.

After all that preparation, viewers still can make the mistake of watching the wrong channel. Cable and satellite systems now carry both HDTV channels and regular channels for the same networks, such as ESPN and CBS.

Source
eHDMI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 06:10 PM   #2  
I want MORE!
 

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 112
Default

If consumers are that stupid, they deserve what get. It's no fault but their own.
richiephx1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 07:36 PM   #3  
Still learning
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 28
Default

I won't buy HD until I can watch more than stupid, boring sports shows and worthless reality TV shows. Most of what's out there is garbage, not worth more than 480 linesof resolution. Until BROADCAST offerings improve, why bother?
GerryG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 08:43 PM   #4  
1080 Optical Supporter
 
Type A's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Panama City, Fl
Age: 48
Posts: 2,723
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GerryG
Until BROADCAST offerings improve, why bother?
Because there is a hell of a lot more to HD than "BROADCAST." I cite my own "source" catagory of my signature as an example.

While what you say was true four years ago when I first went HD with a 55" rptv, today is a totally differnt story with streaming HD, downloadable HD content from the internet and Xbox live, HD DVD and BluRay players, upconverting dvd players, HD gaming from a pc and/or next gen console, and 31 channels of HD from providers like dish network. Dont forget the little things like viewing your digital pictures on an hdtv rather than just your computer monitor, and prices comming down on HD camcorders...Hell, if thats not good enough, looks like youll have a long wait ahead of you.

BTW, Ive never viewed 'broadcast' on my HD system

Last edited by Type A; 03-04-2007 at 08:58 PM..
Type A is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 09:10 PM   #5  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 482
Default

Quote:
BTW, Ive never viewed 'broadcast' on my HD system
Just curious, Type A. Why not? Seems you have a lot invested in your "HD system", why not go with a relatively small further investment, and add an antenna for OTA HD?
Are you too refined to watch "common" TV?
rinardman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 09:15 PM   #6  
1080 Optical Supporter
 
Type A's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Panama City, Fl
Age: 48
Posts: 2,723
Default

LOL, pretty much. No, Im just surrounded by big trees, and ota is pretty weak in such a small town like mine to begin with. Dish doesnt offer HD broadcasts (out of any city) in my area either. Only time I really miss it is football season, but with the 49ers sucking so bad in the last DECADE, I figured its for the best I dont have broadcast anyway

Last edited by Type A; 03-04-2007 at 09:18 PM..
Type A is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2007, 10:15 PM   #7  
What's all this, then?...
 
BobY's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,197
Default

One should also factor in that many consumers aren't "stupid", they just don't care and can't be bothered because it's not that important to them.

When I lived with my parents, they always wondered why I would reset the clock on the VCR when the power went out. The clock was of no relevance to their life. They couldn't imagine spending their time programming a VCR to tape a show when they weren't there (they were perfectly comfortable with the fact that if you missed a TV show, well, life went on), they had other clocks in the room to tell time with and the flashing display didn't bother them.

I know many people who bought HDTV's for no other reason than they wanted a widescreen display and/or a flat panel display. They don't care about HD and would never consider paying more money to get HD signals.

It is unfortunate that the manufacturers and content providers have made everything so confusing and the cable/satellite techs don't always know how to set things up, so I do feel sorry for those consumers who really did want HD and are paying for it, but still not getting what they think.
BobY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2007, 07:34 AM   #8  
HD Fan
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Little Rock, Arkansas
Posts: 1,023
Default Another reason people buy HD televisions

To reinforce what BobY said, there are many informed purchasers who are satisfied with the existing picture or bought the HD television to "future proof" themselves or for watching DVDs. My boss came over to my house when he was looking at replacing their aging television, and did a lot of research on-line.

The results:
- a bigscreen HD television hooked up to Direct TV (no HD)

His reasoning is that they do not watch enough network television to justify the small increase in price from DT for HD programming. They do watch a lot of DVDs, and thy look great on that television.

His second line of reasoning is that one of two things will eventually happen:
(1) competative pressures will eventually result in HD programming provided at no extra cost, or (more likely)
(2) the selection of HD programming, still fairly meager right now, will get large enough to justify the additional cost for HD.
SLedford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 11:25 AM   #9  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bay Area, CA
Age: 48
Posts: 679
Default

I wonder about their survey. If a person answered that they don't have a set-top box, did the survey then assume that they aren't getting HD? Some TVs have built in tuners, and coupled with a Cable Card (or unscrambled HD signal), they are getting HD. At my home, I have a DVR and an unscrambled HD signal. Now if I only had an HDTV instead of an EDTV. (:
fryet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 11:34 AM   #10  
Life Is Expensive
 
360kid's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobY
I know many people who bought HDTV's for no other reason than they wanted a widescreen display and/or a flat panel display. They don't care about HD and would never consider paying more money to get HD signals.

.

I bought my LCD mainly for the widescreen. I had the 360 for a month and really wanted the widescreen HD effect that I played at the kiosks, so I splurged for the LCD for gaming.

I went months before watching anything HD on my set other than the 360 games. For me HD set is for games and movies, everything else is just bonus. I have no urge to upgrade to HD DVD yet either. SD DVD look good and are widescreen, good enough for me.

I wouldn't call people stupid, they may just no care. And if they don't know to get HD cable box, is that there fault? We all know stuff, we just know different stuff. Grandma may not know about HD, but she can bake you a cake. It's like calling someone stupid becasue they they don't know how to make cookies from scratch.
360kid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 12:04 PM   #11  
Muscle Cars Forever!
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 47,291
Default

It has been over 40 years (1966) since people (general public) have been faced with a situation of a new television system.

In 1966 all programs were finally in color (birthed 1953) so since then, you plug it in, hook up a source and volia' . . . you get a picture. Many are not aware that the Analog channels are going away 2/09. I am sure many don't really know that you need an HD source to see HD.

And as stated . . . many don't want or care about HD.

This issue really orginates at the time of the sale of the display . . .will the salesman tell the consumer that you NEED an HD source to see HD (even OTA will do)? Or do they just accept the sale . . . and it's the consumers responsibility to "figure it out."

Last edited by Lee Stewart; 03-08-2007 at 12:07 PM..
Lee Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 12:18 PM   #12  
Format Neutral?
 
I WUV HD's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart
It has been over 40 years (1966) since people (general public) have been faced with a situation of a new television system.
What about cable? What about satellite? Those weren't new television systems?

What about the switch from analog to digital? My cable system went digital about a decade ago. Was that not a new system?
I WUV HD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 12:54 PM   #13  
Muscle Cars Forever!
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 47,291
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I WUV HD
What about cable? What about satellite? Those weren't new television systems?
Not really . . they were television delivery systems. When they started up both cable and Sat. provided NTSC pictures. . . again hook up a source (antenna, cable or sat . . .get a picture.

Quote:
What about the switch from analog to digital? My cable system went digital about a decade ago. Was that not a new system?
I was referring to the millon(s) of people who get their TV from an antenna or rabbit ears. These signals will (according to FCC) be terminated in 2/09.

There is money being set aside (about a billion dollars) to buy digital to analog "decoders" to provide to those people who will lose TV signals in their homes when "the switch is turned off." How that will be done is still being discussed.
Lee Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2007, 01:01 PM   #14  
Muscle Cars Forever!
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 47,291
Default

Since the birth of television we have had three "television systems" (in USA):

1. Black and White Only

2. Color - NTSC

3. HDTV - ATSC

Does that clarify it?
Lee Stewart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2007, 06:58 PM   #15  
Living life in high def
 
invasive's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 2
Default

My parents just got themselves a Sony widescreen HDTV but they still don't really understand the technology. I had to explain to them how to get HD from their local cable. And I still have to tell them to use the HD channels, not the regular channels.

It isn't that expensive to get HD broadcast though. I pay an extra $6 a month, and I get HDNet, Universal HD, etc... I still wish there were more HD channels availalbe though. Watching 4:3 standard broadcasts is really annoying.
invasive is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


to Many HDTV owners watch in ‘low-def’
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lower-res TV sales outpace 1080p -- hurting Blu-ray? Bravestime High Definition Media 6 09-26-2008 07:11 PM
Programmers' slow switch to HDTV gets clearer eHDMI High Definition News & Informative Articles 14 07-19-2008 12:30 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:10 AM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands