[opendtv] Re: SO tired of the tiresome spin against 8-VSB
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:34:50 -0500
At 11:25 AM -0800 2/1/05, johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>ALL digital transmission -- at this point -- anyway, is problematic.
Huh?
There is no such thing as ALL DIGITAL TRANSMISSION.
There is ONLY ANALOG transmission.
To make your statement make sense, it needs to be revised to:
All forms of RF transmission can be problematic.
E.G. Wireless handsets for wireline telephones have existed for
decades; these "telephone instruments" are JUST AS LIKELY to fail as
any other form of RF transmission when the link budget is not met.
Hence the rapid evolution of wireless handset transmission technology
over the past two decades, much of it based on the use of digital
signal processing.
>Who has a digital mobile phone that doesn't drop out? Have you considered
>filing a class-action lawsuit against the vendor, the provider and the
>government because of reception/transmission problems in the transition to
>digital phones?
There are two key issues here:
1. Infrastructure - when you go to sign up for a cellular telephone
service, a major competitive issue between carriers is COVERAGE.
There is NO ATTEMPT to claim 100% coverage - you get a coverage map
where reliable service should be possible.
2. Bandwidth - system bandwidth is limited; access to more
frequencies to increase available bandwidth in any area is also
limited. As a result, capacity is constrained. Cellular services will
make claims about coverage and connection reliability, but NO carrier
guarantees 100% connections within their defined coverage areas.
As you correctly state John, consumers are willing to "compromise"
their expectations relative to wireline phones, because the service
that IS provided is considered by consumers to be more useful that a
wireline service.
>
>I talked at the Tech Retreat with a lurker on this list who formerly
>worked at iBlast. I know from former partners of theirs that system
>worked well in "the Southland." He told me the places where they didn't
>have reception, cell phones also didn't work.
DUH!
ANY service that uses RF transmission techniques will ultimately
"fail." We all know the reasons:
Link margins must be met;
Terrain blockage may make it impossible to receive services that rely
upon line of sight or near line of sight links tot he transmitter.
But there are no laws of physic that tell us that it is impossible to
provide a high quality of service for any RF transmission service in
ANY location. The only laws that apply to this issue are the laws of
economics. With respect to filling in the gaps in cellular coverage,
the solution is easy - build another cell. If an area is unserved or
underserved, the place to begin your analysis is with the economics
of coverage. Is there adequate demand for service, in any particular
area, that justifies the economic investment in infrastructure.
Unfortunately, economics and demand do not always match up. There
are vast areas where demand exists, however, the economics do not
justify the investment in infrastructure. This is not a new problem.
It is one of the few areas where government regulation can actually
help the consumer. Rural electrification and telecommunications
regulations forced service providers to provide services in areas
where the economics did not add up. In essence the government stepped
in and created universal service funds to deal with the issue - this
is just a revenue shifting scheme, where profits from one area are
used to compensate for loses in another.
With TV broadcasting, there has NEVER been any effort in the U.S. to
provide universal service. Some European countries have attempted to
bring coverage up beyond 90% to 95% of all homes.
In the U.S., near universal TV service is afforded by broadcast
competitors - cable and DBS. Broadcasters are MORE concerned about
the ability to extend their reach via these competitors, than they
are in building a modern infrastructure that extends the reach of
their RF transmissions. Frankly, its cheaper to build one big stick
than to build a network of transmitters that provide reliable service
to >95% of the homes within a served market. There is NO pressure on
broadcasters to improve the reliability of the service, because
broadcasters do not need their OWN infrastructure to compete
effectively. All they need is the strong arm of government to force
competitors to provide the needed infrastructure.
>
>D-u-h. (This tends to deflate Craig's distributed transmission desires;
>one transmitter versus dozens of transmitters, with largely equivalent
>results.)
No John, it REALLY strengthens my argument, although I have NEVER
indicated the need for dozens of transmitters to cover ANY market.
Each market is unique; the infrastructure needed to cover ANY market
will be dictated by the geography and terrain to be covered, and the
economics of serving smaller pockets of population that may require
additional infrastructure.
Isn't this how CATV got started?
>Too many people are trying to equalize these asymetrical relationships.
>What IS clear is that the U.S. models are wide open, compared to the first
>world. (In case folks don't know, the second world is largely North &
>South America; the first world is largely Europe and Asia, north of the
>equator.)
John is suffering from the illusion that the commercial nature of
broadcasting in some regions is DIFFERENT than state run
broadcasting. Unfortunately he cannot point to any country where the
government is NOT deeply involved in the regulation of
telecommunications markets. We have the "best" government regulated
telecommunications oligopolies in the world. Our politicians rely
upon these oligopolies to retain their power, not to mention
financing their elections.
Ther is NOTHING OPEN about broadcasting in the U.S.
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:
