Ack.. am I a traitor???

[Tom Snyder]

I had to talk to TWC customer service today about a lost bill, and while I was on the phone with them, I put my name on the waiting list for an HD DVR!

Please don't hate me. :rolleyes:

[gparris]

Why should you be a traitor?

Many forum members like me subscribe to TWC and some may even do both satellite, OTA and Cable (I did sat and cable before).

HD DVR from TWC will eventually arrive once the bugs come out and since many of us cannot afford to cough up a grand for an HD Tivo, it presents an opportunity for HD recording. Thank you.
:)

[summerfun]

That's great. I sure don’t think you need to apologize. I fail to see why there is so much "hate speech" around TWC. We have had this conversation before. They are a very good company, they offer a great service and I couldn’t be a happier customer.

I know some people have express issues around poor service, but any company can have bad employees and no company is perfect. I personally have never had a problem. They have been more than professional and helpful every time I need to work with them.

They have 15 HD channels, all the local channels both SD and HD, hundreds of digital channels, VOD (video on demand), PPV (pay per view), high speed internet, DVR (digital video recorder) and 99 analog channels for all the extra TVs in the home with no STB box required. All of this and never any upfront purchase cost.

Unless you live in an area that seems to have some old equipment that has a lot of down time, which I don’t, I can’t see one reason not to have TWC. No purchase required, not antennas required, no OTA signal strength issues to deal with, it just seems like the perfect solution. I know we are still waiting on HD DVR and ESPN HD, but when my HD DVR comes, I won’t have to shell out $1,000.

This is not intended to start another string of hate mail post, just my opinion for what it’s worth. I have nothing against Satellite, but for me, TWC is the best choice.

[borghe]

I tried not to, but I still hate you.. :p

as for summerfun

Originally posted by summerfun
That's great. I sure don’t think you need to apologize. I fail to see why there is so much "hate speech" around TWC.
I don't hate them (i.e. want them dead or gone). I just dislike them. Let's look why.

They are a very good company,
Well, a good company.. I would only reserve very good or higher for companies that truly make a difference in thge world.

they offer a great service
I can agree with this.

and I couldn’t be a happier customer.
Unless you EVER have a problem with the great service. heaven forbid you have to work with a tech, or even worse a CSR. and because there are a million variables between you and this service (miles of buried cable, indoor wiring, telephone poles, neighborhood juctions, etc.) your chances of having problems with the service are much higher than satellite.. If you are installed right with satellite, it pretty much takes damaging winds to require a service call.

I know some people have express issues around poor service, but any company can have bad employees and no company is perfect.
It is one thing to have some bad employees. It is another to have them make up the majority of your call center.

I personally have never had a problem. They have been more than professional and helpful every time I need to work with them.
While they usually are professional, helpful is definitely not a word I would use to describe them.. the funny part is the biggest obstacle I usually run into isn't the CSR but the level of escalation TWC has in place. If I have to reboot my PC one more time because I am just trying to find out where the downed line is.....

They have 15 HD channels, all the local channels both SD and HD, hundreds of digital channels, VOD (video on demand), PPV (pay per view), high speed internet, DVR (digital video recorder) and 99 analog channels for all the extra TVs in the home with no STB box required. All of this and never any upfront purchase cost.
The service is nice, but so is satellite. Also, while they have no upfront cost, they definitely have a rearloaded cost. You WILL pay more for your service with TWC.. and with as competitive as satellite has become with HD (aside from the HD Tivo), you will make your money back on those upfront costs in usually a little over a year.

Unless you live in an area that seems to have some old equipment that has a lot of down time, which I don’t, I can’t see one reason not to have TWC.
Same service provider no matter where you live, you own your own equipment, you can move to the middle of nowhere and not worry about who your next cable co is going to be, cheaper monthly fees, free OTA local HD channels (if your area has them), better picture than analog channels, etc.. there are many reasons for both sides.

No purchase required
There is no purchase required for SD satellite either, and HD is down to $99 plus an antenna, unless you are talking about Voom and Dish which you can get HD for no cost and just lease the equipment.

not antennas required
I don't get why people keep harping on antennas when all three sat companies will install one for you now with little to no charge extra.

no OTA signal strength issues to deal with
there are no signal strength issues. there may be installation issues, as there are with cable, but once an antenna is installed and getting a signal, there are no issues unless they are at the station in which case cable has the same ones.

it just seems like the perfect solution.
Nothing is perfect.. Higher service cost across the board and poor customer support sure doesn't sound perfect.

I know we are still waiting on HD DVR and ESPN HD, but when my HD DVR comes, I won’t have to shell out $1,000.
You said it yourself.. When it finally comes. Also, when your DVR finally comes you won't be able to increase your HD space, won't be able to access your box on a network, likely won't be able to archive video from it, etc.

This is not intended to start another string of hate mail post, just my opinion for what it’s worth. I have nothing against Satellite, but for me, TWC is the best choice.
Good to hear. And I hope you don't take this follow up as hate either.. I really don't hate TWC or people that use them.. I really don't hate anyone (though Jessica Simpson is really really really close). I just usually step into these "TWC is SOOO dreamy" threads for a little perspective.. Satellite and cable both have their ups and downs, and your last sentence sums it up entirely.. What is the best choice for you..

The only last thing I will say is more of a plea than anything else... Can we stop with the antenna and HD non-DVR box stuff with satellite.. Voom, DirecTV, and Echostar all now have plans where you can lease and/or get HD boxes for extremely cheap right now and all offer low cost antennas with installation as well ($0-50 installed). Also, for most people in the Milwaukee area, local HD isn't a big deal OTA with the exception of Fox (soon to be going away). The only huge roadblock remaining is the HD DVR. Virtually every other argument against satellite as it pertains to "huge" upfront costs has vanished.. So when not referring to the HD Tivo can we please stop talking about upfront costs like it's actually an issue?

[summerfun]

If you read my post carefully, you can see that I never ONCE said anything negative about Satellite. I think it is a fine service. My whole point of the post was, TWC is also a very good service and I listed some of their benefits.

It just bothers me to hear bashing of TWC on this board like it is the worst company ever and anybody using it must hang their head in shame. Everyone has different needs, and mine are best serviced by cable here in Pewaukee.

Many communities have terrible cable service and if I lived in one of those areas, I would be the first guy on satellite.

[gparris]

Ok guys, the HD DVR is not here for TWC subs yet...but soon.
No, it is not a HD-Tivo, but it is cheaper than buying one.:cool:
Yes, TWC subscribers will beat that to death until the HD-Tivo is at least half the price it is now.:D

borghe:
Satellite and cable have equal advantages over each other, that is true.

But until...

1) I can grab a couple of HD-Tivos off a shelf at C.C. and not re-mortgage my house to do it.

And

2) I can get my HD Locals available from satellite...(Directv, Dish,whomever).

I am not buying into satellite, period.:guitar:


My service and setups have been flawless for years, with TWC.

Sorry if you can't say the same.:D

:wave:

[borghe]

summerfun - as I said, it was not5 my intention to "bash" TWC (at least in this thread :P ).. just to provide perspective on the disadvantages of cable.

gparris - I have conceded on point one numerous times and have nothing else to say other than, you're right. $1000 is extremely steep and even out of DirecTV subs only a marginal percentage will buy it.. you are 100% correct. But as to point 2, if you were to go with ANY satellite provider, you would get local HD channels. Period. End of story. Please stop now. I don't get what one's insistance is with getting these channels from the same source (ie cable or satellite). Do you get to watch them? Check. Can you record from them? Check. Do they appear on your system like every other channel? Check. Do they have all relevant guide data? Check. If you were to look at my system and compare it to your system (guide data that is) the only difference you will see between my HD locals and your HD locals is that your are numbered in the 500's and mine have a -n after each number.. but they are the same channels. And anyone who signs up with an HD satellite service right now will get an antenna installed as well by the service and except for fringe locations and some rare exceptions, will get the same local HD channels you do...

[Tom Snyder]

Just cuz I put my name on the list doesn't mean I'm deifitnely gonna do it. :) Just trying to keep my options open, as I'm spending a ton o'bucks every month to have enough of both TWC and DirecTV to get the stations I need.

[gparris]

Doing both got expensive for me: I calculated if I continued to do both it would set me up for about $50 more a month than I am currently paying with cable-only.
If I did all-cable or all-Directv and add in the Road Runner factor
(discount of $5 with Digipic 2000 or 4000) I am about even, except with satellite,I would have to do the outside antenna thing for network HD locals and even then, I still would not be able to record shows without spending a couple grand for 2 HD-Tivos, for both sets.
So I am keeping cable for its HD DVR coming out soon as I watch everything time-shifted with my busy schedule and that would include HD programmes, plus the ability to fast forward over commercials...
(unless they're entertaining).;)

Again, I don't care if borghe likes his antenna/dish array, as that is his business and opinion.

I feel summerfun would agree with me on this:
We don't want our home roofs to start looking like the backlot of a cable company.

Antennas are ugly.

Where I live to get anything HD OTA, it would require more of what Gregg L. has in his yard.

Forget that.:mad:

[borghe]

technically you should be able to get chicago without much work at all... (in kenosha that is).

as for antennas are ugly, every house usually has somewhere to put one (or more) without being seen by the public.. you cannot see my dish or antenna from the street nor even the sidewalk in front of the house... if you drove or walked past my house it would appear I was just another cable lemming.. :p

[Todd Wiedemann]

as for antennas are ugly...I completely disagree.

I take pride in my hobby; my antennas and dishes are as much a part of my house and lifestyle as the mailbox or the front door.

I believe that it's all about your perspective. Personally, I find snowmobiles, boats, jetskis, ATV's, etc and their related trailers ugly yet many of my neighbors have them in their yards.

Would I say anything ? Nope. Furthermore, no one has expressed anything negative about my very prominent huge OTA antenna or 90cm motorized dish perched on my second story roof.

They are a conversation starter, though. :D

[borghe]

like have you found alien life yet.. lol... :p

I won't get into a debate anymore on this, but I do agree.. there is something about antennas to me that are just cool... knowing that, over this technology which has largely remained unchanged for 50 years, you are receiving pictures with 1080 lines of resolution and discrete 5.1 channel audio all delivered in a digital format.. that is just beyond cool.. people come over to my house, ask why I have an antenna, and I show them HD.. and you know what they say? Every single time they say "Well, if I could get that over an antenna I probably wouldn't go with cable".

Many people, at least ones I know, go with cable/satellite for local channels first and foremost... sure they like their Food Network, HBO, TNT, etc.. but especially in today's day and age of TV on DVD, most of them end up using just their local channels more than anything else and get their favorite shows on DVD after the fact.

People like the thought of getting something for nothing, and as more TVs come with built in digital tuners and the public starts learning that with an antenna and the advent of digital signals they can get quite a few channels for free (after fox 6 comes up it will be 17 channels with just an antenna) and in perfect quality, I really believe that the antenna will start making a comeback..

Honestly, if it weren't for HDNet Movies I could honestly say I watch very little on satellite any more... (ironic about the Tivo... lol...)

[summerfun]

I believe that it's all about your perspective. Personally, I find snowmobiles, boats, jetskis, ATV's, etc and their related trailers ugly yet many of my neighbors have them in their yards.
It's all about where you live. My neighborhood does not allow snowmobiles, boats, jet skis, ATV's etc in your driveway or on your property. I don't know if an antenna is allowed, but I have never seen one. I doubt it though.

All power lines, phone lines and cables are underground. I don't know, but maybe that's why we don't seem to have the TWC down time others have talked about. I have been here 5 years and can't remember cable or RR being down more than once or twice in all that time.

[borghe]

it is against the law to prohibit an antenna. they can't even require you to use an attic antenna instead. They also cannot prohibit satellite dishes. The only thing they can require is that all dishes and antennas be placed in the least conspicuous area that DOES NOT INHIBIT reception. So if you get a 95 signal strength on satellite on the front of the house and a 95 signal strength on the back of the house, they can require you put it on the back of the house. However if you get a 60 signal stregth on the back and a 95 on the front, they cannot require you to put it in the back.

I believe they also CAN prohibit that your antenna not extend more than like 10' or 12' above your roofline, or something like that. Can't remember exactly what.

All hail SHIVA.

[gparris]

Originally posted by summerfun
It's all about where you live. My neighborhood does not allow snowmobiles, boats, jet skis, ATV's etc in your driveway or on your property. I don't know if an antenna is allowed, but I have never seen one. I doubt it though.

All power lines, phone lines and cables are underground. I don't know, but maybe that's why we don't seem to have the TWC down time others have talked about. I have been here 5 years and can't remember cable or RR being down more than once or twice in all that time.

I hate ATVs in the driveways, etc. like you do, Todd...however, I never intended to say your hobby or YOUR antennas are ugly...it is just a matter of perspective. Most folks have other hobbies and HDTV is not a hobby anymore unless you want to make it, but it should NOT have to be in order to get good HD reception...my point all along with HD-Cable subscriptions.

As for summerfun...he lives in the same kind of community I live:
devoid of powerlines, cablelines, etc and newer cabling which translates to fewer, if ever, downtimes and the fun with TWC Csrs.
My neigbourhood includes an association where we all agreed that unslightly mast antennas and big black dishes were not to be allowed in the community, but the satellite dishes like Directv and so forth were allowed from any roof location.:D
You pay for and desire for a nice community, no one drags you into it and if big mast antennas are not part of the "scene" it is because your association (you and your neighbors) voted on it.
Nothing unlawful here...everyone reads the bylaws before the buy and build. They can, take another vote and change them,however, but I don't think that will happen to get Illinois channels because TWC allows Illinois SD channels on our system here in Kenosha: now only if they would allow the WB and UPN to come in with the HD parts...so long Sinclair!.:cool:

[Gregg Lengling]

Originally posted by gparris
My neigbourhood includes an association where we all agreed that unslightly mast antennas and big black dishes were not to be allowed in the community, but the satellite dishes like Directv and so forth were allowed from any roof location.:D

I hope you realize that what Borghe posted is the law....even in your subdivision with the covenents against antennas...it is now federally pre-empted. I could buy the house next to you and put up a tripod with a 10 foot height and put a TV antenna or Amateur Radio antenna on the roof and the courts would just say that your Assoc. Rules are superceded by federal law.

Sorry that's the world today.

[Gregg Lengling]

Here is the relevant FCC rule:

47 CFR Subpart S - Preemption of Restrictions that “Impair” the ability to receive television broadcast signals, direct broadcast satellite services, or ultichannel multipoint distribution services or the ability to receive or transmit fixed wireless communications signals


§1.4000 Restrictions impairing reception of television broadcast signals, direct broadcast satellite services or multichannel multipoint distribution services.

(a)(1) Any restriction, including but not limited to any state or local law or regulation, including zoning, land-use, or building regulations, or any private covenant, contract provision, lease provision, homeowners' association rule or similar restriction, on property within the exclusive use or control of the antenna user where the user has a direct or indirect ownership or leasehold interest in the property that impairs the installation, maintenance, or use of:
(i) An antenna that is designed to receive direct broadcast satellite service, including direct-to-home satellite services, that is one meter or less in diameter or is located in Alaska;
(ii) An antenna that is designed to receive video programming services via multipoint distribution services, including multichannel multipoint distribution services, instructional television fixed services, and local multipoint distribution services, and that is one meter or less in diameter or diagonal measurement;
(iii) An antenna that is designed to receive television broadcast signals; or
(iv) A mast supporting an antenna described in paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii) or (a)(1)(iii) of this section; is prohibited to the extent it so impairs, subject to paragraph (b) of this section.
(2) For purposes of this section, a law, regulation or restriction impairs installation, maintenance or use of an antenna if it:
(i) Unreasonably delays or prevents installation, maintenance or use,
(ii) Unreasonably increases the cost of installation, maintenance or use, or
(iii) Precludes reception of an acceptable quality signal.
(3) Any fee or cost imposed on a viewer by a rule, law, regulation or restriction must be reasonable in light of the cost of the equipment or services and the rule, law, regulation or restriction's treatment of comparable devices. No civil, criminal, administrative, or other legal action of any kind shall be taken to enforce any restriction or regulation prohibited by this section except pursuant to paragraph (c) or (d) of this section. In addition, except with respect to restrictions pertaining to safety and historic preservation as described in paragraph (b) of this section, if a proceeding is initiated pursuant to paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, the entity seeking to enforce the antenna restrictions in question must suspend all enforcement efforts pending completion of review. No attorney's fees shall be collected or assessed and no fine or other penalties shall accrue against an antenna user while a proceeding is pending to determine the validity of any restriction. If a ruling is issued adverse to a viewer, the viewer shall be granted at least a 21-day grace period in which to comply with the adverse ruling; and neither a fine nor a penalty may be collected from the viewer if the viewer complies with the adverse ruling during this grace period, unless the proponent of the restriction demonstrates, in the same proceeding which resulted in the adverse ruling, that the viewer's claim in the proceeding was frivolous.
(b) Any restriction otherwise prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section is permitted if:
(1) It is necessary to accomplish a clearly defined, legitimate safety objective that is either stated in the text, preamble or legislative history of the restriction or described as applying to that restriction in a document that is readily available to antenna users, and would be applied to the extent practicable in a non-discriminatory manner to other appurtenances, devices, or fixtures that are comparable in size and weight and pose a similar or greater safety risk as these antennas and to which local regulation would normally apply; or
(2) It is necessary to preserve a prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure or object included in, or eligible for inclusion on, the National Register of Historic Places, as set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 16 USC 470, and imposes no greater restrictions on antennas covered by this rule than are imposed on the installation, maintenance or use of other modern appurtenances, devices or fixtures that are comparable in size, weight, and appearance to these antennas; and
(3) It is no more burdensome to affected antenna users than is necessary to achieve the objectives described in paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section.
(c) Local governments or associations may apply to the Commission for a waiver of this section under §1.3. Waiver requests must comply with the procedures in paragraphs (e) and (g) of this section and will be put on public notice. The Commission may grant a waiver upon a showing by the applicant of local concerns of a highly specialized or unusual nature. No petition for waiver shall be considered unless it specifies the restriction at issue. Waivers granted in accordance with this section shall not apply to restrictions amended or enacted after the waiver is granted. Any responsive pleadings must be served on all parties and filed within 30 days after release of a public notice that such petition has been filed. Any replies must be filed within 15 days thereafter.
(d) Parties may petition the Commission for a declaratory ruling under §1.2, or a court of competent jurisdiction, to determine whether a particular restriction is permissible or prohibited under this section. Petitions to the Commission must comply with the procedures in paragraphs (e) and (g) of this section and will be put on public notice. Any responsive pleadings in a Commission proceeding must be served on all parties and filed within 30 days after release of a public notice that such petition has been filed. Any replies in a Commission proceeding must be served on all parties and filed within 15 days thereafter.
(e) Copies of petitions for declaratory rulings and waivers must be served on interested parties, including parties against whom the petitioner seeks to enforce the restriction or parties whose restrictions the petitioner seeks to prohibit. A certificate of service stating on whom the petition was served must be filed with the petition. In addition, in a Commission proceeding brought by an association or a local government, constructive notice of the proceeding must be given to members of the association or to the citizens under the local government's jurisdiction. In a court proceeding brought by an association, an association must give constructive notice of the proceeding to its members. Where constructive notice is required, the petitioner or plaintiff must file with the Commission or the court overseeing the proceeding a copy of the constructive notice with a statement explaining where the notice was placed and why such placement was reasonable.
(f) In any proceeding regarding the scope or interpretation of any provision of this section, the burden of demonstrating that a particular governmental or nongovernmental restriction complies with this section and does not impair the installation, maintenance or use of devices designed for over-the-air reception of video programming services shall be on the party that seeks to impose or maintain the restriction.

(g) All allegations of fact contained in petitions and related pleadings before the Commission must be supported by affidavit of a person or persons with actual knowledge thereof. An original and two copies of all petitions and pleadings should be addressed to the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554. Copies of the petitions and related pleadings will be available for public inspection in the Reference Information Center, Consumer Information Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554. Copies will be available for purchase from the Commission’s contract copy center, and Commission decisions will be available on the Internet.

[Gregg Lengling]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Effective upon OMB approval, 66 FR 2322, §1.4000 is revised to read as follows: §1.4000 Restrictions impairing reception of television broadcast signals, direct broadcast satellite services, or multichannel multipoint distribution services and restrictions impairing reception or transmission of fixed wireless communications signals. - (a)(1) Any restriction, including but not limited to any state or local law or regulation, including zoning, land-use, or building regulations, or any private covenant, contract provision, lease provision, homeowners' association rule or similar restriction, on property within the exclusive use or control of the antenna user where the user has a direct or indirect ownership or leasehold interest in the property that impairs the installation, maintenance, or use of:
(i) An antenna that is:
(A) Used to receive direct broadcast satellite service, including direct-to-home satellite service, or to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals via satellite, and
(B) One meter or less in diameter or is located in Alaska;
(ii) An antenna that is:
(A) Used to receive video programming services via multipoint distribution services, including multichannel multipoint distribution services, instructional television fixed services, and local multipoint distribution services, or to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals other than via satellite, and
(B) That is one meter or less in diameter or diagonal measurement;
(iii) An antenna that is used to receive television broadcast signals; or
(iv) A mast supporting an antenna described in paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), or (a)(1)(iii) of this section; is prohibited to the extent it so impairs, subject to paragraph (b) of this section.
(2) For purposes of this section, "fixed wireless signals" means any commercial non-broadcast communications signals transmitted via wireless technology to and/or from a fixed customer location. Fixed wireless signals do not include, among other things, AM radio, FM radio, amateur ("HAM") radio, Citizen's Band (CB) radio, and Digital Audio Radio Service (DARS) signals.
(3) For purposes of this section, a law, regulation, or restriction impairs installation, maintenance, or use of an antenna if it:
(i) Unreasonably delays or prevents installation, maintenance, or use;
(ii) Unreasonably increases the cost of installation, maintenance, or use; or
(iii) Precludes reception or transmission of an acceptable quality signal.
(4) Any fee or cost imposed on a user by a rule, law, regulation or restriction must be reasonable in light of the cost of the equipment or services and the rule, law, regulation or restriction's treatment of comparable devices. No civil, criminal, administrative, or other legal action of any kind shall be taken to enforce any restriction or regulation prohibited by this section except pursuant to paragraph (d) or (e) of this section. In addition, except with respect to restrictions pertaining to safety and historic preservation as described in paragraph (b) of this section, if a proceeding is initiated pursuant to paragraph (d) or (e) of this section, the entity seeking to enforce the antenna restrictions in question must suspend all enforcement efforts pending completion of review. No attorney's fees shall be collected or assessed and no fine or other penalties shall accrue against an antenna user while a proceeding is pending to determine the validity of any restriction. If a ruling is issued adverse to a user, the user shall be granted at least a 21-day grace period in which to comply with the adverse ruling; and neither a fine nor a penalty may be collected from the user if the user complies with the adverse ruling during this grace period, unless the proponent of the restriction demonstrates, in the same proceeding which resulted in the adverse ruling, that the user's claim in the proceeding was frivolous.
(b) Any restriction otherwise prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section is permitted if:
(1) It is necessary to accomplish a clearly defined, legitimate safety objective that is either stated in the text, preamble, or legislative history of the restriction or described as applying to that restriction in a document that is readily available to antenna users, and would be applied to the extent practicable in a non-discriminatory manner to other appurtenances, devices, or fixtures that are comparable in size and weight and pose a similar or greater safety risk as these antennas and to which local regulation would normally apply; or
(2) It is necessary to preserve a prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure or object included in, or eligible for inclusion on, the National Register of Historic Places, as set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 16 USC Section 470, and imposes no greater restrictions on antennas covered by this rule than are imposed on the installation, maintenance, or use of other modern appurtenances, devices, or fixtures that are comparable in size, weight, and appearance to these antennas; and
(3) It is no more burdensome to affected antenna users than is necessary to achieve the objectives described in paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section.
(c) In the case of an antenna that is used to transmit fixed wireless signals, the provisions of this section shall apply only if a label is affixed to the antenna that:
(1) Provides adequate notice regarding potential radiofrequency safety hazards, e.g., information regarding the safe minimum separation distance required between users and transceiver antennas; and
(2) References the applicable FCC-adopted limits for radiofrequency exposure specified in §1.1310 of this chapter.
(d) Local governments or associations may apply to the Commission for a waiver of this section under §1.3 of this chapter. Waiver requests must comply with the procedures in paragraphs (f) and (h) of this section and will be put on public notice. The Commission may grant a waiver upon a showing by the applicant of local concerns of a highly specialized or unusual nature. No petition for waiver shall be considered unless it specifies the restriction at issue. Waivers granted in accordance with this section shall not apply to restrictions amended or enacted after the waiver is granted. Any responsive pleadings must be served on all parties and filed within 30 days after release of a public notice that such petition has been filed. Any replies must be filed within 15 days thereafter.
(e) Parties may petition the Commission for a declaratory ruling under §1.2 of this chapter, or a court of competent jurisdiction, to determine whether a particular restriction is permissible or prohibited under this section. Petitions to the Commission must comply with the procedures in paragraphs (f) and (h) of this section and will be put on public notice. Any responsive pleadings in a Commission proceeding must be served on all parties and filed within 30 days after release of a public notice that such petition has been filed. Any replies in a Commission proceeding must be served on all parties and filed within 15 days thereafter.
(f) Copies of petitions for declaratory rulings and waivers must be served on interested parties, including parties against whom the petitioner seeks to enforce the restriction or parties whose restrictions the petitioner seeks to prohibit. A certificate of service stating on whom the petition was served must be filed with the petition. In addition, in a Commission proceeding brought by an association or a local government, constructive notice of the proceeding must be given to members of the association or to the citizens under the local government's jurisdiction. In a court proceeding brought by an association, an association must give constructive notice of the proceeding to its members. Where constructive notice is required, the petitioner or plaintiff must file with the Commission or the court overseeing the proceeding a copy of the constructive notice with a statement explaining where the notice was placed and why such placement was reasonable.
(g) In any proceeding regarding the scope or interpretation of any provision of this section, the burden of demonstrating that a particular governmental or nongovernmental restriction complies with this section and does not impair the installation, maintenance, or use of devices used for over-the-air reception of video programming services or devices used to receive or transmit fixed wireless signals shall be on the party that seeks to impose or maintain the restriction.
(h) All allegations of fact contained in petitions and related pleadings before the Commission must be supported by affidavit of a person or persons with actual knowledge thereof. An original and two copies of all petitions and pleadings should be addressed to the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. Copies of the petitions and related pleadings will be available for public inspection in the Reference Information Center, Consumer Information Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. Copies will be available for purchase from the Commission's contract copy center, and Commission decisions will be available on the Internet.]

[mhz40]

So in a nutshell, it's OK to put up an antenna. Hear that Fox6?

[sp44again]

I like how everybody harps on needing to have a big ugly antenna. What about the little Zenith Silver Sensor I have on top of my TV. Nobody sees it but me. :) And it's not a hobby to tune a station. I set it in one place and never move it.

[gparris]

It is great you can use your little antenna and get the OTA...but many of us cannot. The Federal Government has not made digital stations to go a FULL power. If you live close enough to one to use that baby antenna, GREAT for you. That is at least in the spirit of the FCC, or whatever controls this digital changeover.
They want everyone to go digital but the ramp-up of the power to transmit is mostly non-existant. How can anyone go out and get digital OTA with a set top antenna like in the analogue days?
Not everybody: Sorry FCC-you cannot have it both ways and expect a complete all-digital rollout.
I have digital tuners in both my sets but cannot use them without a large antenna outside my house and I find that distasteful and I want to keep peace with my neighbours in a planned community, bylaws (Gregg L) or not. A cable box for a handful of HD channels is a saner way (for me) to get the OTA HD.
Good for you and your little antenna...nice to know the system works as it was intended...but not all of us live in Milwaukee County.:)

[sp44again]

And you are the only one who lives in Kenosha county on this board. Good for you!

[louisd13]

I'm In that southern little (Flodded!) paradise as well!!

[gparris]

Many members in the forum live inside the "realm" of easy or better digital reception.
This is why, at reduced power transmission levels, allowed by the FCC, HDTV set owners like sp44again get to put a set top mini-antenna and get use out of it. :)

Good for you.

The POINT is that the stations aren't doing everything to allow more of us to get their signal OTA without an outdoor antenna and make it easy for the average HDTV set owner to do a plug and play...like we cable owners do and will do with the HD DVR:D

We in Kenosha County are part of SE Wisconsin and like our Wisconsin stations more, perhaps, than the Illinois stations, at least for me, with the exception of maybe the WB station which I believe broadcasts in HD unlike the WB station in Milwaukee.:p

The POINT is that there are other counties in the SE Wisconsin area than Milwaukee and this forum is equally a part of our "scene"
...maybe I should have been more clear for you, sp44again. Sorry. :blush:

[tazman]

I personaly don't care how you get your HD content Tom. I won't look down upon you for it. After all this is the Milwaukee HDTV forum RIGHT.;)

[StarvingForHDTV]

Originally posted by mhz40
So in a nutshell, it's OK to put up an antenna. Hear that Fox6?

:rofl:

[gparris]

It IS the Milwaukee HDTV forum and when-ever this area of Wisconsin gets to record HD
(even from cable) and we'll probably be called upon to answer questions from the subscribers not as tech-savy as we are as to what to do and what they DIDN'T do to make the box work and so on.

It will be just like the OTA concerns or STB box concerns that come in from "Newbies"...
What did I do wrong, how does it work, should I try it, etc.

But it will be great time anyway. :)

I think everyone in the forum should get one who has at least the basic digital cable package and tell each other what they think and their concerns.
It is just a matter of getting the HD DVR to begin with.
The other thread addresses a June (later) date for delivery because TWC doesn't want ANY problems upon introduction rollout...just like they didn't want any with the SD version.:D

So let's wait (impatiently) and hope it comes out in 3-4 weeks with the LEAST amount of "bugs".:cool:

[borghe]

I think the only thing being said here, is what I was originally asking.. We need to stop with the antenna stuff when it comes to satellite as it is a non-issue. If DirecTV were to come to your house tomorrow and install a dish and antenna, you would get HD locals over your DirecTV STB. They might not be Milwaukee locals, but you would get HD locals nonetheless and still get to watch all the same HD shows you can watch now (actually more including WGN/WB).

I don't care about preference of antenna or not or your right to have it etc... We've been over all of that 100 times here. I am just saying the antenna is still being made into an issue for satellite HD reception by some on this board and it needs to stop because as of right now it is bordering on misinformation. Most readers of this board will be able to receive HD locals from an antenna (whether Chicago, Madison, or Milwaukee) and most satellite providers will install that antenna for either free or a nominal charge. If you don't want a rooftop antenna, that is certainly fine. But let's knock off arguing like it is based on any real point other than aesthetic preference, whether preference of looks or preference of local stations.