Which TV Converter Box to buy?

Things they forgot that makes it hard to believe anyone was listening to any potential customers when designing the boxes, most of which are the same thing, and most all of which are overpriced for what you get...even with the DoC (so called) rebate coupons.

1. Only one output per box...so multiple box purchases required.

2. Why not converter only (no tuner) so money invested in TV tuners is not wasted.

3. Not compatible with Coax cable...boxes are small and light, not massive like TV, so dressing cable and keeping unit stable is problem.

4. Use of so-called "set-top-box" form factor (this is one of the dumbest)...no TV with flat for that would accommodate a set top box has been produced in over 20 years; So none of these boxes will rest on a TV. The demo's on TV always show TV and converter placed on "kitchen" table...worthless in real world. The mere price of accommodating the boxes without a mess (purchase furniture etc) means these boxes are far from cheap...nothing like the Free Airwaves concept that was originally behind the 40 coupon idea...which is now being re-termed as "discount" as people catch on to the scam.

9999 out of 10000 sellers are clueless as to universal remote and remote coding, and nearly all boxes don't have it...and it's probably one of the most important features the boxes should have.

Boxes can only be laid flat (some can be stood upright with little outriggers) but need to be mountable (as in on the wall, say, near antenna entrance). This was the the most surprising oversight by so called designers...even though the most obvious...as a way to resolve all of the form factor (set-top without top) problem. (Since seeing the box is irrelevant (in fact not desirable in most cases), mount-ability would have been the easiest, cheapest way to solve the placement problem, the coax cable problem, the wiring concealment problem, ... all without requiring furniture and other accessories.

These are a few examples of a product that would have found no takers had people thought of what a product that really meets there needs would be; had people not been bamboozled by all the gov't, industry, news media hype. It is also a vivid example of what happens when well intended government departments come up with high-minded schemes for helping people...an case of unintended (bad) consequences that could readily have been foreseen. When the Department of Commerce took as there mandate the principal that airwaves are free so they must do something...the idea of a government subsidy (under the false pretext that citizens were to be the beneficiaries), instead of actually helping, only ensured that:

• Manufacturers would view the subsidy as a price cap..which in turn:
• Assured that there would be only a very few boxes produced by a very few manufacturers (not counting re-brand "manufacturers" and that
• Because of the perceived profit cap, that all the boxes would be essentially the same, $25 dollar boxes...so that with the $20+ markups over the coupons, the purchasers would bear the cost of the coupons.

Had there been no producer subsidy (let's call it what it really is) program, then there might have been competition (and design initiative) to find out and produce what people would really need and want. Instead, many if not most people will wind up paying far more that they plan, even $hundreds and more, because of the analog to digital changeover. So much for Free Airwaves. (I would much prefer to have been able to buy a box for $100 that would do what I need it to do, than spend 50 over rebates, and then 200-500 more just to accommodate all the boxes...and still not have something that works very conveniently or avoids losing investment in the TVs..

Lets call this what it really is - a scam. I would assume there are few if any cable or digital satellite service providers that are not overjoyed withis situation.

Yes, Guest#2, but I prefer to call it part consumer manipulation, part producer stupidity. One ironic thing is that those with the oldest TV sets, including old consoles—the sets that will be most likely to fail sooner and need HDTV replacements that don't need converters—are the ones who well realize greatest value from the rebate program; newer-set owners (whose sets are farthest from wear out and replacement) will get the least value. And (as described previously) it is the newer-set owners who will be stuck with the most additional expense above the converter gadgets: I would estimated that for multiset households, owners will wind up essentially "buying" their third and more sets all over again...in terms of what it will cost to install and use the converters. Lots of people in addition to Cable/Satt TV sellers stand to cash in on this converter box phenomenon.

OK, guests, I don't mind venting, but your comments aren't doing me any good. I just bought a Zenith DTT901. It picked up 15 channels on a loop of wire, and got excellent reception on most. Not all channels in the area are broadcasting digitally yet, so that was better than expected (I get 14 channels without the converter box). My out of pocket was $14, so guest 3, you're way off base. I intend to buy 1 or 2 more with different features than the Zenith.

S

S,

I can't see what your grief or your beef is all about. Practically all stations in the country, both affiliates and independents, are broadcasting both analog and (follow-on) digital, and have been for quite some time (excepting perhaps some isolated places in Colorado?). The reception via a wire loop (One of my sets is presently receiving digital and analog via an ancient TV antenna and mast which has been lying on the ground since being blown down in a last-winter storm) may be attributed to digital, for which signal "purity" and strength is much less an issue. Yes, you are right that the converter boxes are reported to improve even (seemingly) analog reception on an analog (only) set (again, probably due to digital conversion rather then analog amplification or processing). So there is one advantage, but certainly not a planned and certainly not a designed-in advantage, to be gained (even with analog signals) from the converters—and I never said they do not do what they were advertised to do...only that (on the technical side) the boxes are not well thought out and well designed...but instead were "designed" for very cheap production cost and, accordingly maximum producer (and broadcaster, but not consumer) advantage.

The whole (publicly hyped) concept behind the tuner-converters was to enable reception after next February (and after all the previous drop dead dates) for existing analog set owners; not for those who might somehow still find an analog set to buy, or be induced out of need or greed to buy one. But, even there one must acknowledge that the primary benefit accrues to TV set producers...who would otherwise face "mass action" by customers (not to mention action by governments and courts) who are left stuck with inoperative sets after buying the remaining analog sets in the production and retail pipeline; so the ability (because of converter tuners) to liquidate that inventory (the part that doesn't end up in the bush and other remote locales) and move over to DTV production seamlessly was a boon to industry that most people never consider when they clamor for their few rebates coupons.

But just think: if because of what you (inaccurately) call "venting," the message gets back to producers and brand sellers (and to their designers) that there was a market all along for a well-thought-out converter (in addition to cheaper, card-in-obsolete-form-factor-boxes presently available), won't that have made your blog worthy of public acclaim?

It is a bit haughty to say Guest 3 is "way off base": just because your circumstances (1) enabled you to buy one tuner-converter for less that the now-standard, $20+ rigged-on charge (not counting tax on the rebate coupon); and because you are not (yet) among those who need a place, or care about not having a place, to put the tuner-converter—or who do not want cables strung across their room from TV to tuner-converter—or who don't want to be chasing after two and three remotes to make each channel change (and that in every TV equipped room...and make it even more for those with VCR's...and so on). Many of those people—and they must be legions in number—will also look for least-cost ways to physically accommodate multiple tuner-converters, but many will also will be faced with, or sadly awakened to, the choice between spending more money, sometimes considerably more (to the extra disdain of recent analog set buyers) or accepting a degradation of their former enjoyment of their sets, and of their prior investments in their sets...and not just their TV sets.... This guest's guess is that your case is an exception that proves the rule; and of late some retailers of those tuner-converter set-top gadgets seem to be in agreement with me on that point...so the word is getting out...for whatever good it will be worth.

I apologize for "messing" up your blog; I just had no way to know of any agenda you might have had. Perhaps another forum on all the pros and cons of the presently offered converter-tuners is something that might be a better way to go. I'll go work on that.

Thanks for reading.

Hi Guest 1 (I assume),

"I can't see what your grief or your beef is all about."

Since you're the one "venting", you must have a beef. Mine is that none of you answered any of my questions (that was the purpose of this "blog"). I agree that the boxes have to be put somewhere, but they're small. Don't cry just because they don't come with glue to stick them on the side of the TV.

"one must acknowledge that the primary benefit accrues to TV set producers..."

Not so. With the box I don't have to shell out $1500 plus, but only $20 or so. The TV producer gets nothing from me, I'm still using my old one. Buying a $200 analog set and a $20 converter still beats $1500 a long way, so where are you coming from? I would think the TV producers would hate the converter boxes.

"I apologize for "messing" up your blog"

No problem, CR4 is here to give us all a voice.

"Perhaps another forum on all the pros and cons of the presently offered converter-tuners is something that might be a better way to go. I'll go work on that."

If you have that information please share it. That's what this discussion was supposed to be!

Correction, it was $24.

Here's another link to comparisons of converter boxes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_CECB_units

Other links have conflicting reports of the features! This one has more models listed, but leaves out "control buttons on box" (change channels without the remote). I consider this one essential. The Apex units seem to be missing this, otherwise they have good features. The Coship N9988T looks good, but consumes 12W (highest I have seen) and has annoying bright LEDs. The Dish Network DTVPAL has a great program manager, but Consumer Reports rated the picture quality less, and no control buttons on box. Anybody else have any inputs?