[opendtv] Re: 050615 Wolfsson's Wednesday Words (Mark's Monday Memo)
- From: Bob Miller <bob@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 19:28:38 -0400
Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
>John McClenny wrote:
>
>
>
>>For the vast majority of us who will NEVER get HD
>>from an antenna, but instead from a cable STB, why
>>should we pay for an expensive tuner?
>>
>>
>
>First, let me quibble with "expensive." It was only
>months ago that folk were claiming built-in ATSC
>receivers would cost over $300. Months later, that
>supposed price is reduced to $100. By 1/1/2007, my
>prediction, from about 4 years ago, of $35 already
>appears way too high (given that stand-alone STBs
>will supposedly be close to $50 by then).
>
>Second, the agreement was that along with these ATSC
>tuners would also come the digital cable front end.
>So the cost of this built-in receiver would be offset
>by savings and convenience of being rid of the cable
>STB. In the future, even interactive features will be
>included, even if at first it's only one-way cable.
>That should cover a large segment of the buying
>public. And, of course, there's no one chasing the
>DBS guys away either. These non-ATSC parts are
>voluntary agreements. So the majority of TV buyers
>will benefit (unless you really like the extra box).
>
>
They will not benefit from the OTA receiver whatever the cost.
>Third, "for the vast majority of us who will NEVER
>benefit from a deploying air bag, why do we have to
>spend hundreds of extra dollars on each car we buy?"
>
>
Bad analogy. We all can have an accident. Having cable or satellite is
not an accident. The ATSC receiver is not going to pop out of your DTV
and save your *** like an airbag. It is just a cost with NO justification.
>It's because (in the case of ATSC) we supposedly will
>benefit from having all the extra RF spectrum
>available for emergency services or other toys we all
>want. It's a means to that end. As to air bags, in
>principle, we all benefit from lower insurance bills,
>achieved by the reduced traffic casualties, even if
>we're fortunate enough never having to experience the
>airbag deploying.
>
>
Reclaiming the spectrum is not related in anyway to having an OTA
receiver in my cable connected DTV. The only set we have to worry about
are those owned by people that rely on OTA. Having 85% buy digital
receivers to lower the cost for 15% is STUPID. And more costly no matter
how you calculate the numbers. You logic would dictate that we all be
mandated to buy surfboards so that the cost of a surfboard for those who
actually surf would be lower and more affordable. I would rather we all
just donate a small amount so that all surfers have free boards. It
would be cheaper.
>Have you noticed how PC motherboards these days have
>Ethernet, modem, sound cards, etc., all built in? Not
>long ago, each of these cost upwards of $100.
>
>
And all useful for most folks. Though I would most likely ask for the
dime in savings from no modem these days. Best analogy so far but, when
85% (and my figures say 92.7%) of folks don't use OTA, still doesn't cut
it IMB.
Bob Miller
>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:
