[opendtv] Re: news: Migrating to advanced video coding; What's the plan?
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 08:13:51 -0500
At 3:22 PM -0500 11/4/05, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
>I think the whole line of reasoning is ridiculous.
Why am I NOT surprised.
>
>Everyone is "constrained" by interoperability
>standards, no matter what they are. At first, these
>standards support smooth deployment of the service.
>Thereafter, they constrain improvement. It doesn't
>mean improvement is impossible. It's simply not as
>easy as when you started out.
These "supposed" constraints were well known going in. We put
together an interoperability review for the Advisory Committee in
1993. We laid out the factors that would enable interoperability,
extensibility and scalability BEFORE the GRAND ALLIANCE was created.
One of the most important points in those reports was the fact that
you SHOULD NOT lock down important aspects of a digital standard, as
was necessary for an analog standard. What is needed is a plan - up
front - to deal with interoperability and extensibility.
Rather than working to enable this, just the opposite happened. The
ATSC standard was hardwired, just like the NTSC standard. It should
come as no surprise that it is already outdated, before it has even
been widely deployed.
And this was completely unnecessary.
>
>DTT broadcasters TODAY have to rely on STBs for the
>transition. People won't go en masse and buy DTT
>sets the day before analog shutoff. This reliance on
>transitional STBs would apply to cable or DTT
>whenever there's a change in the standard.
Get over it Bert. The days of an appliance that you can plug in and
expect to keep working without changes for 10-20 years are history.
We are not talking about transitional STBs. We are talking about
communications systems that are designed to evolve gracefully over
time. We are talking about modular components that plug together to
provide integrated services in a home, office, vehicle, or worn on a
person. Components that can evolve without making everything else
obsolete.
It is STUPID to force integration of something that you KNOW is going
to be outdated by the time it is deployed. Stupid, that is, unless
you are purposely trying to block evolution and force people into
another closed system that you hope to control for another fifty
years.
>
>The DBS companies are just as "constrained," in the
>sense that deploying a zillion new STBs is not free
>for them either, or for their customers.
True. So they built evolution INTO the business model, and thus they
are NOT constrained.
>
>Sure, consumers who are finally rid of the
>burdensome STB won't relish the thought of having to
>use one again, in the interim. So what do you
>suggest? Annoy consumers continuously, so they won't
>object when a transition occurs?
It seems that you are the only person who is burdened by the concept
of a STB. I attribute this to some kind of disconnect in your
stubborn head, that prevents you from understanding that we no longer
live in a world of cheap, purpose built analog devices that were
never intended to play together nice.
What you cannot understand is that it is possible to build
interoperable digital components that can play together nice; that
can evolve independently without having to throw everything away and
start over; that can work MUCH better than the old devices that are
being replaced.
Sorry Bert, but programming a VCR to capture channel 12 at 7pm on
Thursday November 10th is like chiseling stone tables to write a
book. Someday you will need to let go of the buggy whip.
>This was also true for the introduction of UHF TV.
>So this analysis simply didn't broaden its
>perspective enough to see the whole landscape.
>
The analogy to UHF TV is hopelessly outdated. By the way, there were
two UHF transitions;
First the broadcast version;
Then the cable version that made cable ready analog TVs a reality.
I still remember my first stereo radio receiver. It had an add on box
to receiver stereo broadcasts, because the original integrated
receiver/amplifier had only a mono tuner.
We are not talking about monolithic analog standards here Bert.
We are talking about a system to deliver BITS the the masses. And we
totally screwed up the most basic part of the equation, which renders
the whole thing useless...
You need a reliable way to receive the bits.
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:
