[opendtv] Re: New Thread: What becomes of Legacy Analog Equipment

  • From: "Hunold, Ken" <KRH@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 10:32:05 -0500

Well, "proven" requires a bit more rigorous test, but I have two
different types of off-the-shelf tuners (USB-style, not integrated into
receivers) that I routinely use at my desk in the "canyons" of NYC and
in random locations in hotels in almost two dozen cities, so far.  They
work fine.  Anecdotally, I would venture a success rate of greater than
90%, and in most of these locations cable TV has been the only
alternative for tolerable NTSC reception. 

I recently checked an older, first generation tuner and it still didn't
work any better at my office than it did about seven years ago, so
nothing has "improved" on the transmission side (power, location, etc.)
My guess is that the improved ability to deal with signal reflections is
the reason that these new tuners work so well, but other improvements
might have been put in as well.

I should also add that I don't do these tests just to check the
performance of the 8VSB system.  However, I do need to receive the
signals to perform other measurements.

Regards,

Ken Hunold

-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Tom Barry
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 9:38 PM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: New Thread: What becomes of Legacy Analog
Equipment

Are we now assuming ATSC STB's or TV's will work indoors in urban
canyons?  I didn't know that was really proven yet with off the shelf
equipment.

- Tom


Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> At 10:58 AM -0500 11/27/07, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
> 
>> John Shutt wrote:
>>
>>>  And Bert's insistence to the contrary, I know very well we  could 
>>> have done better.
>>
>>
>> Some people are just inconsolable.
>>
>> The facts are, one by one all the oft-repeated objections to 8-VSB 
>> have dropped by the wayside, as was predictable from fairly early on.

>> The dreaded cliff effect remains, of course, which affects all 
>> modulation schemes. It would be great to do another comparison test 
>> now, but since no one would benefit from it, it won't happen. Alas.
> 
> 
> And some people are just blinded with optimism.
> 
> All you are able to relate is that the ATSC system has become usable 
> by a handful of laggards who are unwilling or unable to pay a monthly 
> subscriber fee for their TV fix.
> 
> For now the ATSC system will work as advertised for a the very small 
> percentage of the population that uses an antenna. Will this continue 
> to be true in a few years?
> 
> What will happen to the image quality of programming if and when 
> broadcasters decide that they want to reach portable and mobile 
> receivers?  New services will need to steal bits from existing 
> services
> - bits that will need even more bits to get delivered reliably using a

> standard that is still being developed. In other words, ALL legacy 
> receivers WILL NOT be able to use these new services, but the quality 
> of the existing services is likely to be compromised.
> 
> There are SO MANY ways we could have done better:
> 
> - A modulation system that has the flexibility to be optimized for 
> different services on the fly, WITHOUT a hefty bit penalty for the 
> more demanding MPH modes.
> 
> - A spectrum allocation system that would have forced the broadcasters

> to use SFNs to provide BETTER coverage of their markets WITHOUT 
> radiating into adjacent markets, with the net result of improved 
> spectral efficiency that would allow EVERY market to have at least 
> twice as many channels.
> 
> - A political/regulatory environment that would have removed the 
> anti-competitive perks that broadcasters are using to avoid 
> competition with multi-channel systems.
> 
> - A well defined platform that supports news services and the ability 
> to extend the capabilities of the system using software defined 
> functionality as is the case with web browsers.
> 
> We are all glad for you Bert. The ATSC has succeeded in its quest to 
> replicate the NTSC service. Hope you are enjoying the better pictures 
> and sound, and the same lame, old, dying programming.
> 
> 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.
> 
> 

-- 
Tom Barry                  trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx  

 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.


-----------------------------------------
This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose.  If you
are not the intended recipient, delete this message.  If you are
not the intended recipient, disclosing, copying, distributing, or
taking any action based on this message is strictly prohibited.
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: