[opendtv] Re: Hearings :Cost of Converter Boxes

> > So again, context is everything. The marketplace alone
> > does not create standards. It takes effort from
> > organizations such as ANSI, or the IETF, *or* the ATSC.
> > Or, of course, proprietary standards can be adopted,
> > created by private industry.

Craig Birkmaier wrote:
>
> The IETF is a good example.
>
> Do you think they sit down and approve every new
> innovation that happens with the Web, e-mail, et al?
>
> Not a chance.
>
> The IETF codifies the stuff that works well and helps
> document this stuff into new standards and practices. The
> marketplace is free to innovate, either in the form of
> trades groups developing and advancing new standards, or
> as the result of proprietary efforts that turn into
> important new marketplace standards.

My own new mantra, Craig, is going to be "Context is
everything."

What is the reality here?

Did you know that the IETF to this day insists that all
RFCs be published in ASCII text format only? Ditto for
IETF working group e-mail? Why do you think that is?
(This was a policy established by the late, great, Jon
Postel. You will see him as the author or co-author of
most of the early RFCs.)

It is for the same reason that the ATSC and DVB want the
basic DTT program stream to use MPEG-2 compression, It is
specifically to avoid situations where the receiver goes
dark. This is a good thing, not a bad thing, but of course
it slows down innovation.

What you ignore is that the reason we don't use simple
text for document transfer is that the world has become
dependent on Microsoft Office. So there's a real world
tradeoff. If the IETF or the ATSC, or DVB, don't want
to give in to such a model, it isn't necessarily a bad
thing, right? Before MS Office became the standard, for a
short time, industry used WordPerfect. Before that, it
was a zoo. No one in his right mind wants to go back to
that zoo stage.

[DVB and ATSC]

> Sorry, but these standard tightly define what is
> allowed at each layer. They can only be extended by the
> standards group that acts as the gatekeeper. They cannot
> be extended by the marketplace as is the case today with
> the Internet.

Context is everything, Craig. DTT is an application. As
long as there are devices out there that depend on
compatibility with this application, there will be
resistance to change the standard. Just like RFCs still
using simple text.

But certainly, when opportunities arise, the standard
can be upgraded. One example is CA streams which use
ATSC. Another example is HDTV over DVB. Perfect
opportunities to update, since you are adding a new
service which does not invalidate the existing
services.

> There is no way that a U.S. or European broadcaster
> can launch an H.264 service, unless they are willing
> to deploy proprietary receivers like the cable and
> DBS systems.

Deploy or sell. Duh! Just like MS Word and PowerPoint
would not have become de-facto industry standards
either, except that individuals and businesses went out
and bought new computers and new software.

You imply that TV and other CE appliances have to follow
this same path. I argue that this is not a foregone
conclusion for mature appliances, such as TV.

> Not Bert, it is not an implementation issue. It is
> fundamental to efficient spectral re-use.

Either DVB or ATSC can be designed to work with tall or
short sticks, high or low power.

> The ultimate solution is to build a transmission
> infrastructure that maximized spectral re-use so as to
> deliver the right mix of services based on the demands
> on the system. There is no single answer,

Your last 5 words are the correct thought here. If you
have a strictly broadcast scenario in which you need to
achieve wide area coverage, certainly some form of SFN
is a good way to go, but small sticks by themselves
might not be the right answer at all.

Context is everything. The small stick solution that
makes perfect sense in the unicast cellular world does
not translate to being the answer for nationwide TV
broadcast DTT networks. Or even market-wide TV nets.

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.

Other related posts: