[opendtv] Re: ATSC Receives 10 Proposals for Mobile-Handheld TV Standard

At 6:08 PM -0700 6/22/07, johnwillkie wrote:

Perhaps, but

1) there wouldn't have been ten proposals;
Some of these proposals are there in name only based on technologies that are NOT backward compatible with 8-VSB. This was encouraged so that manufacturers could better understand what would be needed to support multiple modulation standards in cheap mobile handsets. 


2) the adopted system wouldn't be compatible with 8-VSB, but would have been
compatible with DVB-T;
And it would be compatible or only slightly different from the modulation standards being used by the mobile telco operators. So now we are faced with the possible reality that mobile receivers will need to support both COFDM and the chosen mobile ATSC technology. This would soon ripple into chips for fixed receivers, with the ultimate outcome that the most efficient and reliable system would win in the marketplace. 

Funny how this is EXACTLY what Sinclair asked for all those years ago...



3) the proposals wouldn't have been as advanced; and
They are NOT as advanced in terms of what they bring to the table, unless one of the untested systems can deliver significantly higher bit rates. From what I have seen to date, all of these proposals are significantly less efficient that what was demonstrated with COFDM in Las Vegas in 2000.
The only advance i can find is in the ability to chew up lots of transistors on highly integrated chips. And this in turn also chews up power, which is the biggest hurdle for small cheap hand held receivers. 


4) adoption would have been problematic in the meantime, since it would
have;
5) at least partially been disrupted by the dtv transition itself.
What transition? Almost anything would have been more productive than what has ACTUALLY HAPPENED in the U.S. 



Also, think about this:

These proposals are outside of the "Grand Alliance" process/paradigm, in
that they will all be evaluated on what I presume to be a relatively even
playing field, with BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY being required.
See above. I think the correct statement would be: harmonization via support for multiple standards will emerge as the real requirement. 



It would be kinda cool to get the possibility for more bits, but I guess
that's the '1999' argument and not the '2000' one.  :-)
The way to get more bits is to use the spectrum efficiently. That ain't gonna happen with VSB big sticks...
These kludges will result in fewer, not more bits in total. What I think John Shutt was saying is that the proposal that has the lowest bit penalty will win. 

Regards
Craig



----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: