[opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA


John Willkie wrote:
 > John Willkie, who currently has too much time on his hands, and is 
wondering what happened to that Wal-Mart posting of his from yesterday. 
  A resend is pending.
 >

I remember reading at least one post from you about Wal-Mart equipment. 
  When in doubt about my own posts I usually check
<http://www.freelists.org/archives/opendtv/>

- Tom

> really?
> 
> You haven't noticed that Europe is a largely mature market, with few new 
> players and just one significant manufacturer?  I will concede that Australia 
> is an interesting case, but it's really simple -- if you're unhappy with your 
> returns in Europe, to make the simple modifications necessary to deal with 
> Australia's channelization.
> 
> Largely what we're dealing with here is the fact that there are few U.S. 
> manufacturers of this type of equipment, and that's been going on since GTE's 
> Sylvania got out of the picture tube business in 1968.  If not before.
> 
> Sony lost it's nerve to introduce snazzy products when their betamax dreams 
> finaly ended in 1993.  The market's last really signifcant advance was 
> Trinitron, and other makers innovated only in their marketing.  And lies.
> 
> And Bob, part of the reason that the chickens are even more scared is the ill 
> informed "engineering analyses" of non-engineers.  The only thing you really 
> have to offer is f,u and d.  That just gives the scared more to be scared 
> about.
> 
> Also, I note that the United States has pretty serious antitrust/restraint of 
> trade enforcement wthin it's shores, and one doesn't need to read too far 
> into the business pages to encounter Japanese and Korean companies with 
> brutal business practices who engage, usually off-shore, to control U.S. 
> markets through cartels.  RAM prices, motherboards, plasma displays, solvents 
> used to make chips and other areas are good examples of just the more recent 
> allegations of bad deeds in the consumer electronics field.  These types of 
> cases are widely suspected, but t's hard to bring antitrust cases due to 
> time, manpower and expense involved by the cops, let alone that you need to 
> have an insider to even puncture the cartels.  I suspect that there are more 
> cases of collusion affecting the U.S. market than have been alleger.
> 
> If you had the cohones and wherewithal instead of just the voice, you would 
> have already started -- if not completed -- the studies on ofdm into ntsc and 
> ofdm into NTSC interference.  The last time I checked, the nearest neighbors 
> to the North (2800 mile border, not including Alaskas) and South (1849 mile 
> border) are occupied by countries that support both of these communications 
> protocols.  Any idea to go to ofdm would have to create the same or less 
> interference as is caused today against these foreign operations.
> 
> Then, you can start to dea with the myriad domestic interference issues. And, 
> the issues are not just broadcasting into broadcasting issues.  As Mark 
> Schubin has pointed out in his memo concerning Dallas, and there was one case 
> in San Diego where patient-monitoring equipment received interference from 
> DTV transmitters ny channels removed from the frequencies used by the patient 
> monitoring equipment.  And, in least at the San Diego case, in which the 
> hosptial eventually conceded that they were ultimately at fault, the 
> monitoring equipment was used exclusively in the intensive care unit, making 
> it a matter of life and death.
> 
> To say that stations just have to decrease their power makes the whole matter 
> a non-starter.  So that just compounds the problem: without basic 
> interference studies, the whole matter is a non-starter. 
> 
> ATSC would not be interested in sponsoring such studies, and the failure of 
> those many ofdm/dvb-t advocates among the weeds at CEA just begs the 
> question:  if they are so favorably disposed towards dvb just why havent they 
> completed the studies that they know will be needed?
> 
> Their words -- and yours -- are belied by their -- and your -- actions and 
> inactions.  I'f I've written this type of message on this list once, I've 
> done it a dozen times.
> 
> The current situation, in my mind, just enables you to not enter -- and 
> thereby not fail - in the marketplace.
> 
> If Australia is such a good market, why aren't you there?  If things are 
> going so swimmingly in Europe and Singapore, why aren't you in those markets? 
>  
> 
> If DVB-T is such a great idea in the U.S., why is the Qualcomm MediaFlo 
> system not selling like gangbusters? Why are the still in demo mode?
> 
> Do you think it might have something to do with the fact that the content 
> distributors and makers in the U.S. are -- wisely or not -- somewhere between 
> happy to complacent with 8vsb?
> 
> Not happy with the content providers?  Create your own and learn a few 
> lessons.
> 
> People flock to interesting, new and unique programming content.  It's safe 
> to say that many to most of the program offerings on terrestrial, satellite 
> and cable these days aren't new, are far from interesting and well below 
> unique.  So, there's an angle or two here to play. 
> 
> However, there are still the big dogs and the porch sitters. If the CE folks 
> aren't playing well in the market, they're still on the porch.  Sounds like a 
> good opportunity for the right person with the right idea.
> 
> I see the U.S. as being the most competitive media marketplace in the world 
> since Silvio Berlusconi started buying up Italian pornsters to create his 
> first network.   
> 
> I see the non-computer CE marketplace being about as competitive as that for 
> breakfast cereal.  Beyond oats, corn and wheat, just what are the differences 
> between the products? 
> 
> You tend to provide deeply negative assessments of the overall TV gear 
> marketplace, in between spouts of euphoria about the prototypes of various CE 
> manufacturers who mght just be playing with you.  
> 
> Do what the NAB and MSTV are attempting, but do it one better.  Define the 
> actual receiver characteristics you need, down to multipath rejection, 
> selectivity and sensitivity and the like, and issue a RFP.  You play them; 
> don't  let them play you.
> 
> Or, design and stich together your own system from the ic of others and 
> become a fabless fab.
> 
> To me, switching modulation just won't do much.  Craig's boogeymen will still 
> dominate the content marketplace.  
> 
> More than a decade ago, George Gilder predicted that terrestrial would 
> largely be used by phone companies within 20 years, and TV would be delivered 
> exclusively by cable and satellite. I doubted the prediction then, but it 
> gets harder and harder each year to make the case.
> 
> Broadcasting is dying.  Long live broadcasting.  But, it's just not as 
> special these days as it was when I was a child.  That will change, or the 
> first sentence in this paragraph will prevail and the second sentence will be 
> a joke.
> 
> John Willkie, who currently has too much time on his hands, and is wondering 
> what happened to that Wal-Mart posting of his from yesterday.  A resend is 
> pending.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Miller <bob@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Oct 29, 2005 6:15 AM
> To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
> 
> Dale Kelly wrote:
> 
> 
>>Bert wrote:
>>* If I were
>> 
>>
>>
>>>a conspiracy theorist, I'd guess the reason they aren't
>>>making it to store shelves quickly is that CE vendors
>>>make more money by building only proprietary boxes for
>>>individual service providers. And the service providers
>>>prefer it that way as well.
>>>   
>>>
>>
>>As you likely recall, that's been my opinion for a number of years. I simply
>>remove the term "theory"; CE member actions over the past four to five years
>>presage this outcome.
>>However, it might be instructive to learn what retail ATSC product is
>>available in Korea. Does anyone know?
>>
>>* I don't know why these boxes
>> 
>>
>>
>>>haven't been on store shelves for the past two years,
>>>but I know it has nothing to do with RF modulation
>>>schemes.
>>>   
>>>
>>
>>Five years ago I believe that it could have made a difference.
>>
>>Dale
>> 
>>
> 
> It would make a MAJOR difference right now, today, if we switched to 
> DVB-T IMO. First of all you would have fifty manufacturers chomping on 
> the bit to make all kinds of receivers for the US market.
> 
> Bob Miller
> 
> 
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
>>Behalf Of Manfredi, Albert E
>>Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 1:27 PM
>>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
>>
>>Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>>Bert says, "When reasonably priced and good recording
>>>devices with integrated ATSC receivers become
>>>available,"
>>>
>>>When? Why not now?
>>>   
>>>
>>
>>Don't ask me, I ain't the CE guy.
>>
>>I am baffled by the implication, yours and others, that
>>somehow DVB-T would change this state of affairs.
>>
>>ATSC is perfectly capable of being applied to such
>>recording devices, at prices that are competitive with
>>DVB-T. The question of why such products are finding it
>>so difficult to get to store shelves.
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>>With the tuner mandate/agreement, you'd think such
>>>products would be a slam dunk, wouldn't you? If I were
>>>a conspiracy theorist, I'd guess the reason they aren't
>>>making it to store shelves quickly is that CE vendors
>>>make more money by building only proprietary boxes for
>>>individual service providers. And the service providers
>>>prefer it that way as well.
>>>   
>>>
>>
>>And that the American consumer is willing to be led
>>around by the nose by umbillical service providers more
>>than their Euro and Aussie counterparts are.
>>
>>What do you want me to say? I don't know why these boxes
>>haven't been on store shelves for the past two years,
>>but I know it has nothing to do with RF modulation
>>schemes.
>>
>>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.
> 
> 
>  
>  
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
> 
> 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: