[opendtv] Re: Reading between the lines

  • From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 07:14:06 -0400

At 8:01 PM -0500 5/12/11, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
If you really want to install a system that is redundant and survivable, then I repeat: the new portable ATSC receivers would do a good job. Better than cellular systems. For reasons I already gave.

Let's not get in a ditch here. Perhaps I should have used the term redundant rather than hardened. Neither ATSC TV nor FM are any more reliable than cellular in terms of the transmission side of the equation. But cellular is highly redundant and the cells are rarely impacted by natural events (storms, earthquakes, man made disasters...

As Ken noted, almost all communications were seriously impacted on 911, and clearly, the cellular infrastructure that survived was overloaded. It might be useful to compare the capacity of the cellular networks in Manhatten today with a decade ago, but we already know that cities like New York are where the available spectrum is in highest demand.

I would also note that an alert system using cellular could reach ALL subscribers to the network because it would have the highest priority and would be "broadcast" via all of the cells that survive.


There is no reason why the ATSC receivers and/or HD Radio receivers(?) cannot be incorporated into smart phones (and tablets, for that matter), so as to bypass the cell network in cases like these. Except that, as we already discussed, the cellcos would much rather their users paid them for any radio or TV programs, and relied only on their walled garden spectrum.

There are many reasons why you will never see ATSC radios in cellular handsets, either for the original 8-VSB modulation of the new MHP standard.

1. Power/space requirements - the chips take up too much space and draw too much power. Part of the attraction of a new broadcast standard would be the harmonization around LTE radios for both the cellular and broadcast segments of the networks.

2. Lack of support by broadcasters.

3. General awareness that the existing ATSC standard is outdated and work is already starting on replacing it.

As for the telcos controlling the content that moves over their networks, those days are already over. In fact they are moving toward a generic IP network infrastructure where even voice and messaging will just be more IP data. Flo already demonstrated that consumers are not interested in another subscription TV package for mobile devices. The telcos don't like the fact that they are being relegated to common carrier status, but there's not much they can do to stop it. They have two important assets that will keep them in the game:

1. Spectrum
2. Infrastructure for mobile broadband

If you want to look for the bad guys here, look to the media conglomerates, who want to monetize every instance of their content. So the issue is not "whether" you will be able to access content via your mobile devices, but how you will pay for it. At the moment, it is looking like the congloms are comfortable with using an MVPD subscription as the basis for granting rights to view the same content on mobile devices. But other cloud based models are certain to emerge.


So, you would rather the FCC actively supported the cellcos' wishes, grabbing spectrum from the better technical solution, to favor the solution that can charge more to customers and provide less reliable service during the emergencies you pretend to be concerned with.

The current broadcast solutions are NOT better. They waste huge chunks of spectrum and the spectrum they do utilize is used inefficiently, and yet the system still has difficulty reaching many fixed receivers - for mobile it is dead in the water and about to be replaced....

This is a simple case of allocation of scarce resources. The public is voting with their viewing behavior and their purchasing behavior. Broadcast TV no longer reaches enough people to justify the huge spectrum allocation it currently has - a viable broadcast service can be resurrected in far less spectrum with far better efficiency AND compatibility with the devices consumer choose to carry when they are mobile.


Or maybe the bit about "reliable alert system" was just noise.

For any alert system to work it needs to reach everyone. Radio does a good job...if it is turned on. Sending messages to the devices everyone now carries just makes good sense. The only question is whether we mandate a specific solution (to reward a special interest group) or let the marketplace decide...

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: