Nick Kocsis wrote: > Portability and mobility trumps any amount of money if > the goal is to use spectrum in a manner that serves the > public and not the politicians that get all those > juicy trips and dinners paid for by the lobbyists. I guess my point was that it seemed fairly clear that the issues were NOT entirely technical. There were apparently other considerations there, including possible development work done in country as a result of the choice. This is entirely commonplace in this sort of negotiation. Not to mention the 300M Euro loan, which I doubt the ATSC so far has matched (but I don't know this for a fact). The technical tradeoffs are debatable ad nauseam. Brazil is a geographically enormous country. Certainly, anyone with the guts to do a long range reception comparison test between the three standards could make the case that a scheme optimized for long range, at equal bandwidth and power, would be beneficial to such a huge country. Just a point to consider, among many. Obviously, choosing a COFDM scheme would not be a mistake. However, I don't think the mea culpa attitude about all related to ATSC or the US govt is valid either. The price of ATSC boxes, being HD especially, is simply not going to be a valid argument anymore. The cost/price differential is inconsequential. Bert ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.