Posted by Biz on 01/10/22 11:34

All HDTV's have always had ATSC tuners. Its the HD-monitor, or HD-ready
sets that didnt have tuners, and it pissed people off when they realized
they werent smart enough to know the difference. They certainly saw the
price difference, never bothered to understand why until later...they got
what they paid for, an HD capable set with no built-in way to tune HD
content...

"Goro" <evilninjax@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1134482249.620624.270460@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> David Levy wrote:
> > Jeff Rife wrote:
> >
> > > > Is it "cool" to spend money on a tuner that will never be used?
> >
> > > No, and you have the same problem with speakers on TVs, NTSC
> > > tuners on TVs, and a whole plethora of other "bundled" systems
> > > (look at car manufacturers for the worst examples).
> >
> > Integrated analog tuners and speakers of average quality are dirt
> > cheap, so it doesn't make sense to exclude them.
> >
> > Digital tuners will be similarly inexpensive in the not-too-distant
> > future, but they aren't today.
> >
> >
> > > The fact of the matter is that ATSC will be the standard for TV
> > > in the US, and like NTSC, whether you use the tuner or not, it
> > > needs to be in every TV.
> >
> > I wouldn't be surprised if ATSC tuners were to become mandatory in all
> > units with tuning capabilities, but I see no valid reason to ever
> > prohibit the production of "monitors" without any tuning capabilities
> > at all.
>
> I thot that this was already that case. Do not all new HDTVs have ATSC
> tuners by law?
>
> -goro-
>
> > As mentioned above, however, there will be a point (possibly very
> > soon) at which ATSC tuners will become cheap enough that it no longer
> > pays to omit them. In all fairness, ATSC tuner prices would have
> > dropped more rapidly if they had been congressionally mandated to a
> > greater extent.
>

[Back to original message]