[opendtv] Re: 7" ATSC TV

Pretty much the way the executive branch gets all their power these days. Declare they already have it, throw it up against the wall, and see what sticks.
But in the Zenith/LG case the FCC could politely express concern and ask if Zenith would be willing to voluntarily give up that explanation. Behind the velvet glove would be the possibility later of testifying under oath in front of Congress if satisfactory answers were not forthcoming.
And there is no guarantee receivers will continue to be self-certified if it becomes suspicious that practice is neither in the public interest nor conducive to rapid and profitable spectrum auctions. These things can change rapidly if they become a political hot potato. 

- Tom


John Willkie wrote:

How would the FCC get jurisdiction to do that, Tom?  Receivers are
self-certified by the maker, not type-accepted by the FCC.

John Willkie
----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Barry" <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 5:44 PM
Subject: [opendtv] Re: 7" ATSC TV




My own opinion is that the FCC should carefully question Zenith/LG on
what exactly was in the 5th gen "black box", and whether Zenith is
willing to share detailed info and duplicate it or whether they indeed
committed some sort of fraud there.

IMHO there are an awful lot of people (including the other CE guys) that
stand  to incur some political embarrassment and possible financial loss
based upon various Zenith/LG claims.  I consider them liable.

- Tom

Dale Kelly wrote:


Frank wrote:



I don't know how you can say with certainty that these
Performance issues are entirely related to "poor RF front end design.



My statement was based upon a tuners "selectivity" performance* in the
packed channel environment which will now include new unlicensed signals
introduced into the so-called "unused white spaces". In such an


environment


better receiver front ends are required to deal with the IM and image
products produced by "minimal" tuners.
Clearly, other A/74 related failings could very well be non-tuner


related.


* = Good selectivity performance generally requires some combination of
multi conversion IF, wide band AGC and tracking filters to achieve


desired


performance.




In any case, the market will continue to decide how much incremental
Receiver performance is worth. My guess is that CE products will
Continue to include the very best RF front end + base band chips, as
long as those also happen to be the cheapest ones -- because of
the perceived value of an ATSC receiver to most consumers is pretty
close to $0.



I see this as a somewhat more complex issue than pure economics and


don't


believe that the CE industry should receive a free pass. Please bear


with me


for a short historical review, as I recall it:
* The ATSC/8VSB system was developed and proposed by the CE community,


who


also control the current ATSC standards process and is responsible for


the


very marginal A/74 RP.
* 8VSB was "sold" to broadcasters and adopted by the FCC with certain
receiver performance expectations.
* The original ATTC (Blue Rack) test receiver incorporated a


well-designed


double conversion tuner that met those expectations.
* During initial testing, the industry was "blind sided" by the poor
multi-path performance issue, even though it was predicted by a number


of


engineers.
* The CE industry, having no where to hide and needing to protect it's


IP


investment and stave off a broadcaster revolt, committed significant
resources to resolving the multipath problem. After a number of false


starts


laced with questionable performance claims and five years time, they


were


able to demonstrate satisfactory performance using a Zenith 5th gen.


"black


box" receiver, whose performance was never duplicated in any commercial
product (as tested by the FCC and others).

IMO, that same CE industry, who developed this system and who now


proposes


and will benefit from, the new unlicensed services, while likely not


guilty


of fraud, is, through it's failure to provide receivers capable of
functioning in the environment they created, disingenuous and completely
untrustworthy.

They are, through their manipulations, largely responsible for "the
perceived value of an ATSC receiver to most consumers being pretty close


to


$0", which was a self fulfilling prophesy based upon their actions, or


lack


thereof.

Dale








----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at


FreeLists.org


- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word


unsubscribe in the subject line.




--
Tom Barry                  trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx



----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at


FreeLists.org


- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word


unsubscribe in the subject line.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org 
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.




--
Tom Barry                  trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx  



----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org 
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: