I thought I needed a digital TV antenna, but I was wrong

I've given up on antennas, though. There are a few reasons why, which almost pain me given how much it costs to get a decent streaming catalog going into 2026.

The greatest problem is content

The desert of the real

Credit: NBC / Pocket-lint

I live in Edmonton these days, but even when I lived in Austin, Texas, the over-the-air broadcast selection was dire for someone with my tastes. In theory, there were plentiful channels to choose from -- but a lot of them could be ruled out instantly. I don't speak Spanish, so channels like Univision and Telemundo were out the window. I also don't care for pro sports, or cooking, or game shows. I care even less about home improvement, and think "reality" shows are actively making the world worse.

In practice, then, the closest I came to caring about anything were the major broadcast channels -- ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox -- as well as 24-hour news stations and PBS. With the big broadcasters, there was almost never anything that grabbed my interest, since most of their shows were either sitcoms or watered-down medical, police, or legal dramas. Once upon a time, some of these shows might've been considered ground-breaking. But even within their genres, it's hard to take something like CSI seriously after you've seen The Wire, and The Big Bang Theory is laughless next to a show like I Think You Should Leave.

There are entire genres you won't see on over-the-air TV anymore, owing to budgets shifting to streaming and "premium" cable, and creators wanting to work outside the time and censorship limits of broadcast. A fantasy epic like Game of Thrones could never have appeared on NBC, much less a realistic war drama like Masters of the Air, or whatever you'd call The Chair Company. Indeed without streaming services constantly trying to one-up each other, I doubt we would've ever got something like Netflix's The Midnight Gospel, or Apple TV's adaptation of Isaac Asimov's Foundation books.

That variety is key. While I still struggle to find movies and shows I like on streaming, I'd rather pay extra to get a few things worth watching than waste time with forgettable broadcast content. You can't really find movies on antenna TV anymore -- there's not much point in featuring a shortened and censored version of a movie people may have already streamed multiple times by the time the rights and ad deals have been cleared.

Watching in my own way

The disjunction with modern life

Almost as important to me as having something worth watching is being able to watch it on-demand. My viewing time is limited -- on top of work, my hobbies include weightlifting and electric unicycles, which already take me out of the house for hours at a time. Frequently, the only instances I can afford to sit down and watch something are breakfast, lunch, dinner, or shared time with my wife.

The likelihood that something good is going to come over the airwaves at the exact time I'm in front of the TV is low. It's never been good, in retrospect. In the '90s, the morning was either news or kids' shows, and you had to wait until the evening for anything that wasn't a rerun, soap opera, or game show. If you wanted to see the better late-night comedy, you'd end up sleep-deprived the next day.

There are, of course, ways of recording antenna broadcasts, such as PC equipment or a DVR. But those are additional expenses which are difficult to justify when content is as slim as it is. In fact, much of what I watch is completely free courtesy of YouTube, and far more aligned with my interests -- some examples being PBS Space Time and PEV Point of View. Heck, I use YouTube to catch up on TV shows that I'd otherwise miss, such as The Daily Show or Last Week Tonight.

For a lot of people, the issue is not just what and when they can watch, but how they can watch it. While TVs aren't going anywhere, many people want the flexibility to use their mobile devices, and without setting up a hardware/software combo like Tablo, antennas are going to keep you glued to your living room. Conversely, I can pay for a service like Netflix or HBO Max and watch on just about any device with a minimum of effort. Many of you probably don't even keep permanent subscriptions, choosing instead to subscribe for a month or two at a stretch. That certainly eases the financial pain of the subscription life.

The technical quality of OTA TV is still lacking

One more nail in the coffin

I'm not precious about video and sound, so this is actually the least important category in my hit list. When I was setting up a new TV last year, for instance, I intentionally chose a cheaper soundbar without Dolby Atmos, despite having the budget for better.

My issue is that when watching antenna TV, it often feels like a throwback. 4K is virtually non-existent, even with the NextGen TV/ATSC 3.0 standard. In fact you'll be lucky to get HDR (high dynamic range), or sometimes just 720p or 1080p, despite compatible TVs having been around for over a decade. I understand that there are technical and financial obstacles in the way for broadcasters, but sympathy isn't exactly a selling point when I have so many other options.

Then there's the problem every antenna owner has to deal with: signal quality. If you're in the wrong part of town, some channels may not come in reliably, and rural viewers may be fortunate to get anything. Weather, meanwhile, is rarely an issue in a dry climate like Austin, but can easily wreak havoc if you live somewhere with regular rain or snow. Free access to the Super Bowl hardly matters if your feed is disrupted or full of artifacts.

If you're willing to put up with all the limitations of digital antennas, I actually encourage you to do so -- going into 2026, it's almost a form of rebellion to opt out of the subscription world. But to me, the tech feels increasingly antiquated, and I can't see it catching up with on-demand streaming in the current marketplace.