I have basic analog Time-Warner cable TV service.
Will anything change for me in February, 2009?

No, the cablecos are supposed to maintain at least the local channels in analog until 2012. See this post for more info. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=834668)

The most relevant line in the message wajo provided a link to was:Cable companies are free to convert their analog channels to digital whenever they choose, except for local broadcast stations that have chosen "must carry" status and therefore foregone any compensation by cable companies.So it is possible that Time-Warner in your area might choose February, 2009, but just as likely that they'll choose a date after that.

My cable co, Cox, FINALLY posted on their site their official position on what they will be doing next year.

The website now says they will continue analog for at least the next three years so if you have your cable running straight into an older analog tv w/o using a cable box. you don't need to change or buy anything to continue getting the analog service.

They did not, however, post which stations will still be carried on analog...

Cable TV isn't specifically affected by the DTV transition which affects OTA broadcasting. However, due to increasing bandwidth demands and the possibility of increasing revenue-per-customer, some cable TV operators may start to "bump" extended-basic channels into their "digital service" tiers.

Cable ops might reduce their analog service to "lifeline" or "limited" service tiers - which would be the local OTA broadcast stations, and a few public access, education and government (PEG) channels. In other words, analog service might be limited to 25 channels - most all of the major cable networks would be available via digital service only.

Cable TV isn't specifically affected by the DTV transition which affects OTA broadcasting. However, due to increasing bandwidth demands and the possibility of increasing revenue-per-customer, some cable TV operators may start to "bump" extended-basic channels into their "digital service" tiers.Seems to me at least Comcast been doing that gradually all along for the last couple of years.

If they haven't in your area yet, you've been lucky.

If they haven't in your area yet, you've been lucky.Though many folks, in certain threads, would say that if they have, you've been lucky. It really depends on which you consider more important: analog or HD.

I take it you mean digital, not specifically HD. I think that's all the OP was mainly asking about.

From what I've heard, there's also a lot of people on this forum who have had Sci-Fi taken off of extended basic analog and made available only on digital classic for $15.00 or more extra that don't consider themselves very lucky.

There are millions of fans of these stations in the real world outside of this forum who couldn't care less about digital vs analog and/or can't or don't want to pay for the added costs of either additional tiers or extra tuners (and here in this area, every channel they've removed from ext. basic analog is only available on a digital tier higher than the exact, ext. basic equivalent digital starter now).

I was gearing my response towards the OP, not anybody in any other thread. If he wasn't concerned about a possible change for the negative (to him), I don't think he'd have been asking the way he did.

No, I really meant HD, because that's the choice we're faced with: analog or HD. We cannot have more HD without losing analog; we cannot keep analog if we get more HD. SD digital is not necessarily what anyone actively wants, nor has any significant impact on what folks do active want: either analog or HD.

Regardless, I think we essentially agree. The point I was making is that there is no way to make everyone happy. Some folks don't want to pay for digital boxes so want to rely on analog, while others want more HD and couldn't care less about analog. No matter what decision cable makes between the two options, they will encounter roughly the same amount of dissatisfaction; it just is a matter of how much each side is disappointed.

...that's the choice we're faced with: analog or HD. We cannot have more HD without losing analog; we cannot keep analog if we get more HD. SD digital is not necessarily what anyone actively wants, nor has any significant impact on what folks do active want: either analog or HD. Cable companies know the public is going to be confused by the DTV Transition publicity, which only affects OTA-only television viewers. Nonetheless, cable companies are facing bandwidth constraint issues, not just because of carriage of HDTV programming which requires more programming bandwidth.

I called a Comcast rep to inquire why C-SPAN2 had disappeared from analog limited cable. I was informed C-SPAN2 was "bumped" to digital limited (still at limited level but requiring a digital box). Channels like C-SPAN2 and TV Guide are being "bumped" because the cable bandwidth for one analog channel could be squeezed through digital compression to carry twenty SD digital channels. The proliferation of channels and services, including growing use of high-speed Internet and cable telephone service, is causing a lot of "robbing paul to pay peter" in terms of bandwidth shuffling.

A likely scenario is that cable companies will continue to offer "Limited Cable" and "Basic Cable" services, but at some point may move all of those services to digital and issue some sort of "free" digital boxes to their analog households.

I am ok with it if cable companies eliminate analog service entirely as long as they offer all tiers of basic in clear QAM. I have a huge problem with it if they do it using encrypted QAM.

At this point, that seems pretty far off. In several other threads this morning we're discussing how there are not enough digital STBs available, east of the Mississippi, to support switching any more channels from analog to digital.

No, nothing will change...we're going to continue to broadcast Analog signals to you. Time Warner Cable.