[opendtv] Re: its a wifi world - Re: Re: Twang's
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 13:24:16 -0400
I don't see any reason why 802.11 can't *already* be considered to
complement analog or digital TV in the way you describe. I have no
objections to this concept, but it isn't what they were talking
about.
Just as radio and TV advertizing (and newspaper and magazine
ads too) direct people to call a phone number, ads can just as
easily direct people to browse a web site, and can even make that
easy by providing a URL to click, ultimately, for DTVs which are
also connected to the Internet.
You don't need anything fancy for any of this. We already have
all the pieces in place. All I was objecting to was the really
strange notion that somehow 802.11 can do a better job of TV
delivery than DTT can (either ATSC or DVB-T, makes no difference
which one), when in fact it's easy to show that the opposite is
true *in general*. WLAN infrastructure requirements and
protocols make for abysmally inefficient TV broadcast delivery.
Now sure, in specific special cases, e.g. to relay one program
within a house, it could make good sense.
In other words, we HAVE that network of networks. All we have
to do is use it. There's no reason to assume that a given
appliance must only ever look at a narrow slice of RF spectrum.
Bert
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
> Now let's look at this in a more rational way.
>=20
> If we look at this from the perspective of a network of networks, the=20
> consumer will use a variety of services to capture digital bits and=20
> to handle two-way transactional services. From this perspective, WiFi=20
> could be the PERFECT back channel for digital broadcast services.
>=20
> The problem is not that one infrastructure will obsolete another. The=20
> problem is using the infrastructure in a complementary manner so as=20
> to facilitate the goal of providing the services people want,=20
> anywhere, anytime.
>=20
> That can't happen until the entrenched services, protected by=20
> political franchises and legislation, are forced to compete in an=20
> open marketplace.
>=20
> Regards
> Craig
>=20
>=20
> At 6:33 PM -0400 4/27/04, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
> >Venki S. Iyer wrote:
> >
> >> From a service provider perspective,
> >> if I am installing meshed wifi APs in each customer home,
> >> what's to stop me
> >> from using some protion of the available bandwidth
> >> for multicast ("broadcast") purposes? Sure, I'd need the
> >> right legalese
> >> within my customer contracts, etc, but that's all (apart
> >> from actually getting content to re-broadcast).
> >
> >Speaking only about technical issues, not legal ones, I'd
> >say no problem. As an ISP, go for it.
> >
> >But this in no way competes with DTT broadcast delivery.
> >It's a separate matter. If anyone expects DTT delivery to
> >depend on 802.11 instead of the allocated DTV spectrum,
> >then these people are:
> >
> >(a) using WLANs to provide continuous coverage of the
> >same material, which would defeat one of the *key*
> >features of 802.11 (frequency reuse), and/or
> >
> >(b) dedicating all of the WLAN bandwidth to TV delivery
> >and potentially still unable to transmit all of the
> >market's OTA stations.
> >
> >Eventually we'll have 100 Mb/s 802.11, which could do a
> >reasonable job of providing local broadcasts of DTV in
> >many smaller markets. But to compete with ATSC delivery,
> >you'd need an awful lot of these WLANs, which will
> >*therefore* render their intended mission unachievable.
> >There are barely enough frequencies available to provide
> >continuous coverage, at least in the 2.4 GHz band of
> >802.11b and g, and these will be taken up with DTV
> >broadcasts. And range restrictions only get more acute
> >as you bump up the bit rate to accommodate the DTT
> >stations in a market.
> >
> >So it is disturbing to me to see people in leadership
> >positions throw out these red herrings. It just spins up
> >the uninformed and defocuses those who need to remain
> >focused. If TV is such a spectrum hog, as lots of people
> >complain about, then why would anyone assume that by
> >moving TV to a different transmission protocol, the
> >spectrum issue would disappear? It's a bit like
> >proposing that perpetual motion machine to solve the
> >energy crisis.
> >
> >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:
