It's not irrelevant when you want people to know that their DTV channel 
X may not be ON channel X anymore. People need to understand what 
virtual channels are.

For example: Why is my local channel 43 interfering with my 6M repeater 
now? Well, if you don't know about virtual channels, then you're really 
going to have a tough time with that issue. BUT, if you learn that the 
RF channel used may not be the same as the virtual channel number, and 
you learn that the DTV channel 43 TX may actually be on RF Channel 2, 
the issue becomes much more clear.

Why would anyone want to promote ignorance? (other than the government)

BTW, "needs fixed" = "needs to be fixed" the same as "needs said" = 
"needs to be said". The words "to be" are irrelevant aside from making 
the post longer. (or is that making the post 'to be' longer...)

Joe M.

wd8chl wrote:
> MCH wrote:
>> You know, I just though of another example that needs 'fixed'.
> 
> Do you mean that it 'needs to be fixed'?
> |cP
> 
>   My local
>> Channel 2 is on RF channel 2 on the cable system (a mistake, I'm sure). 
>> 4 is on 3, 11 is on 12, 53 is on 7, 22 is on 10, and 13 is on 9.
>>
>> If people can understand that the channel name isn't always the channel 
>> number on the cable systems, why can't they understand the same will now 
>> be true for DTV where 2 is on 25, 4 is on 51 and 11 is on 48???
>>
>> It seems that the main source of the confusion is the alias that shows 
>> 02-1 rather than 25-1. The very item designed to avoid confusion seems 
>> to be the cause.
>>
>> Maybe we should just make it easy and make them use their callsigns 
>> again so you can know WTAE is on OTA Channel 4 (STD), OTA Channel 51 
>> (DTV), and 3 (STD) or 210 (DTV) on cable?
>>
>> BTW, KPBS is on OTA Channel 15 (STD) and Channel 30 (DTV). It may show 
>> 15-1 as an alias, but it's RF Channel 30 for the DTV signal.
>>
>> Joe M.
> 
> Could y'all just forget about the stupid virtual channel garbage? It's 
> totally irrelevant to the point!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to