[mythtv-users] US cable companies and mandatory OTA channels
goofygrin at gmail.com
Wed Jan 9 18:22:21 UTC 2008
On Jan 9, 2008 12:17 PM, Mitch Gore <mitchell.gore at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2008 12:09 PM, Florin Andrei <florin at andrei.myip.org> wrote:
> > Question for the US users:
> > I've heard that cable companies are required (by law? regulation?
> > agreement?) to include in their cable listing all stations that would
> > otherwise be accessible in that area OTA.
> > My question is - does that apply to just the content, or the actual
> > format too? In other words, if a station can be received in HD OTA, does
> > that mean that it will be received in HD via cable too? Or can the cable
> > company just provide that station in SD, even though OTA it's being
> > broadcast HD?
> > I'm asking because I need to decide whether it's worth the trouble to
> > install an antenna on the roof, or whether just using cable is fine.
> > --
> > Florin Andrei
> > http://florin.myip.org/
> > _______________________________________________
> > mythtv-users mailing list
> > mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> > http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
> I would just go with antenna. QAM channels seem to be more of a headache
> from what i see. The channels change and you will mis recordings etc. Plus
> the quality of OTA HD is better than QAM cable.
> If you get good signal on you antenna it will be much more reliable.
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
The quality of QAM HD is just as good as OTA for me (Dallas area). I
also don't get rain fade or "airplane flying overhead" artifacts with
my QAM channels either.
More information about the mythtv-users