[opendtv] Re: And They were not even invited
- From: Tom Barry <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 12:28:15 -0500
Possibly they wanted to do some posturing but not really have to support
their claims.
Anyway, from the "said with a straight face" department, here are some
amusing, if out of context, quotes from that letter, signed by Robert K.
Graves, Chairman of ATSC forum. ;-) :
- Tom
------ quotes -----------
Although there were serious flaws in some of the testing procedures and
analyses, the tests did demonstrate inadequacies in the ability of early
ATSC receivers to handle multiple reflected signals (“multipath
impairments”). The receivers used for those tests were first and
second-generation ATSC receivers, whereas now, seven years later,
fifth-generation receivers are widely deployed in commercial products
with chipsets that have completely overcome the inadequacies in those
early receivers. Clearly, if multipath problems currently existed with
ATSC receivers, the government of the United States would not have
enabled the deployment of the ATSC system and would not have legislated
the end of analog broadcasting with complete reliance on the ATSC DTV
system for its national broadcasting system.
.
.
.
In addition, broadcasters in the U.S. have captured the actual RF
signals occurring in locations know to have extremely difficult
multipath conditions, and have tested the latest ATSC receivers against
these captured signals. The latest receivers have shown dramatic
improvements in handling the most severe multipath conditions. In sum,
the early problems with ATSC receivers were completely resolved two
years ago.
.
.
.
Thus, the TWG report has it exactly wrong: now and over the long term,
the ATSC Standard has an inherent advantage over DVB-T in its ability to
handle multipath impairments without sacrificing the information payload.
.
.
.
In all events, at least four ATSC member companies have been working
over the past several years on advancements aimed specifically at
developing the mobile and handheld capabilities of the ATSC Standard.
One of these companies, Zenith Electronics, has indicated that it
expects to demonstrate high-quality mobile reception capability in the
same 6 MHz channel used for fixed reception within the next several months.
.
.
.
By the time the Philippines would be implementing DTT broadcasting, the
ATSC Standard will have the capability to offer mobile and handheld
services within the same 6 MHz channel used for reception by fixed
receivers. While the market momentum for mobile and handheld
applications is not yet as significant as that for fixed reception,
we’re convinced that the ATSC Standard will ultimately be the best
system for delivering the full range of DTV applications, including
mobile and pedestrian services, due to its tremendous advantage in
weak-signal operation and its substantially higher information payload
within a 6 MHz channel.
.
.
.
In the U.S., February 17, 2009 has now been set by law as a firm date
for the end of analog television transmissions. Approximately 40 million
very inexpensive digital-to-analog converter boxes, priced at $50 or
less, are expected to be sold by that time.
.
.
.
Indeed, as the Commission rightly recognizes, ensuring the lowest
possible prices for receivers and set-top boxes is one of the most
important factors to consider in choosing the platform upon which to
base these services. The ATSC Standard, alone among the alternatives,
offers the greatest economies of scale and the lowest possible prices.
-----------------------------
Bob Miller wrote:
(second attempt)
Seems that the ATSC responded to a Philipines request for comments
that was offered well beyond the deadline for such comments.
http://www.ntc.gov.ph/whatsnew/611Comments%20on%20Philippines%20Draft%20MC.pdf
Why is the ATSC doing this? How many countries have rejected 8-VSB?
How many girls are left to ask for a dance? Are they without shame?
Fun read though.
Bob Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Find my resume and video filters at www.trbarry.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
- References:
- [opendtv] And They were not even invited
- From: Bob Miller
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] And They were not even invited
- » [opendtv] Re: And They were not even invited
(second attempt) Seems that the ATSC responded to a Philipines request for comments that was offered well beyond the deadline for such comments.http://www.ntc.gov.ph/whatsnew/611Comments%20on%20Philippines%20Draft%20MC.pdf
Why is the ATSC doing this? How many countries have rejected 8-VSB? How many girls are left to ask for a dance? Are they without shame? Fun read though. Bob Miller ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
- [opendtv] And They were not even invited
- From: Bob Miller