[opendtv] Re: Barriers eroding to LCD TV adoption
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 12:27:12 -0400
Starting to catch up after three brutal weeks remodeling an office
building that will house a video production facility and Pilates
studio...
At 6:42 PM -0400 7/13/04, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
>If you bring up the $129 viable analog NTSC set, and then point
>to how a digital front end would raise the price, what are you
>trying to prove?
>
>1. Are you trying to make an argument that NTSC transmissions
>should be retained for cheap sets? At least, *that* would make
>sense as an argument. I don't think you intend it, though.
Not exactly.
One could make a viable argument that it would be economically viable
to take advantage of the analog cable infrastructure to justify near
immediate return of the analog TV broadcast spectrum. The vast
majority of homes would continue as they do today. A small percentage
of homes would need to subscribe to lifeline cable when the analog
transmitters are turned off. The problem with this approach is that
cable must eventually transition to digital too.
The real argument I am trying to make is that it is WRONG to force
people to buy receivers they do not need, when they have multiple
options for TV service. Even if the cost of an integrated receiver
with all of the other required crap drops to $200, that's still a big
price to pay for something you don't want or need. The consumer
should be allowed to choose the tuner(s) they need for the services
they want. This does not preclude good integration. With IEEE-1394
and DVI you can provide a seamless user interface to MULTIPLE tuners
and components (DVD, PVR, D-VHS etc). Products can be built that
allow plug-in integration, or you can just use external boxes for the
components (a simple tuner can even get power from 1394, so that you
don't need a separate power supply).
I'm not against integration. I AM in favor of letting the marketplace decide.
>
>2. Are you trying to suggest that it would be better to offer that
>$129 set as a mere monitor? What does that achieve? As a monitor,
>you need to add either an ATSC STB or some DBS or cable STB, or
>it might as well be a boat anchor. So add up the price of the
>cheap monitor + STB (+ potential subscription service), and
>you have lost any semblance of low cost TV.
You can still include the NTSC tuner, since it provides support for
analog cable and OTA until the analog transmitters are turned off. It
would be a good idea to add IEEE-1394 and DVI to new monitors; this
would cost FAR LESS than requiring:
1. An ATSC tuner
2. A one-way cable ready tuner (QAM)
3. IEEE-1394 with DTCP
4. DVI with HDCP
5. all of the decoders needed to support ATSC and digital cable
6. A POD module for the requisite cable card
Clearly DTV monitors ARE NOT boat anchors - they are the overwhelming
choice of consumers today, who understand that this is a volatile
period and it makes more sense to buy components until things settle
out.
> If I came up with examples of cheap and viable TV sets of today,
>I would follow that up with discussion on achieving a low price
>in a set that is viable AFTER the DTV transition. And to achieve
>that, you have to consider a built-in and combined digital
>receiver.
Why. NTSC receivers will not stop to function after analog broadcasts
cease. The larger problem is when analog cable tiers cease. All that
will be needed is the right box to hook up to those analog receivers.
Is this not what Congress is talking about as a way to accelerate the
DTV transition?
>
>Or perhaps, let's champion the retention of analog transmission?
Another potential transition scenario would be to retain analog VHF
as the legacy lifeline service and immediately transition the UHF
bands to digital. Let the broadcast networks take control of the VHF
spectrum and figure out how to provide national coverage in this
band, if they think the investment is justified. When nobody is
watching VHF anymore, it can be recovered.
I am not advocating this approach, just noting that it is possible.
>
>The alternative to this is to give up on the notion of low
>cost TV sets. Which again begs the question, why on earth
>did you mention the $129 NTSC set at all?
Because of the context of the original thread. You keep complaining
about the added cost of a STB, with separate box, power supply and
connectors. I was merely pointing out that I saw a cheap $129 flat
screen CRT TV with more connectors than are needed on a STB.
As I said before, the real issue is volume, not the packaging. This
is the argument you use to justify forced integration; i.e. ATSC
receivers will drop in price if they are built by the millions.
Unfortunately the forced royalties of $25-40 per set do not drop with
volume.
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:
