[opendtv] Re: 050615 Wolfsson's Wednesday Words (Mark's Monday Memo)
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:31:36 -0400
At 5:40 PM -0400 6/20/05, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
>The best approach is the cheapest approach. If a standard
>receiver can be installed that handles OTA, cable, and DBS,
>without having to incur the extra cost of an
>interchangeable module scheme or of external converter
>boxes, then this is the cheapest route. The different
>distribution systems are more similar than they are
>different.
To date, no manufacturer has built such a tuner. This does not
necessarily mean that it would be cost prohibitive. What it does mean
is that it is an absurd waste of money, as virtually NO customers
have the need to receive signals from OTA, Cable and DBS on the same
device.
Furthermore, these systems have other variables that would increase
the cost, in particular the encryption and smart card technologies
used to protect the content. So including multiple tuners may also
mean multiple smart cards and other components. And then there is the
reality that each system may also offer unique interactive and data
services that require both hardware and software support. We still do
not have an agreement on two-way cable tuners, much less agreement on
EPGs, interactive services etc.
>The consumer who buys or rents cable STBs today, or uses
>OTA today, would not get screwed. As of now, the DBS
>subscriber won't benefit, so they should take that up with
>their DBS companies.
They took it up with the DBS company when they agreed to the terms
and conditions of service. In return the DBS company typically paid
a large percentage of the cost of the receivers.
These customers receive NO BENEFIT from a receiver with integrated
ATSC and cable tuners, just as the vast majority of digital cable
subscribers are not using sets with integrated cable tuners and smart
cards.
>I never liked the broadcast flag idea, but this is supposed
>to be a retransmission control flag. The FCC should crack
>down on broadcasters or CE manufacturers who use it for any
>other purpose, e.g. to prevent recording for time shifting
>or other personal use. And if broadcast flag scheme cannot
>work as intended, which I believe it cannot, then the FCC
>is responsible for correcting its mistaken design. Or, of
>course, Congress or the courts can also nix the whole thing.
Uhhhhh Bert...they did try to crack down on "other purposes." That
was the whole point, to control retransmission of "protected
content." This is why the Appelas Courts overturned the FCC
regulations on the Broadcast Flag, stating that the FCC had no
authority to dictate the design of products or the downstream uses of
broadcast bits.
The BF cannot work because it does not protect ANYTHING. It is a
classic catch 22 situation. Broadcasters cannot encrypt their content
if it is on a channel that is offered in the free and clear, and they
cannot use the DTV channel if they do not provide at least one
service in the free and clear. Without encryption the content is NOT
protected. Forcing downstream devices to honor the retransmission
control descriptor steps well beyond the bounds of FCC authority, not
to mention the reality that the system does nothing to protect
against real piracy.
And if Congress steps in and gives the FCC such authority, God help
us all. This will place bureaucrats in the critical path of virtually
all new digital media product designs, while granting veto power to
the content oligopolies.
> > I don't want to PAY FOR a cable STB, because the built-in
>> tuner provides access to everything I am paying the cable
>> system for today. I could care less about having a STB if
>> it provides something I want, like a PVR.
>
>So we agree completely, then. You don't want an STB when
>connected to cable, *and* you want a built-in receiver in
>your recording device. That's what I've been saying all
>along.
No Bert, we DO NOT agree.
I am not going to pay for a STB that duplicates what is already in my
TVs. But I will pay for a STB that provides enhanced services, such
as the ability to watch digital programming in both SD and HD, and a
PVR so that I can cache the programs I want to watch.
Paying for a TV with an integrated ATSC/Cable receiver does not
provide the same functionality as the box that the cable system will
provide. It only gives me access to a portion of what the cable
system is offering, and I will still need to pay a monthly fee for
the smart card to make it work. And it will not provide PVR functions.
> > Rubbish. This entire transition was predicated upon the
>> misplaced notion that broadcasters would not be
>> competitive in the future without HDTV.
>
>The part about HDTV is certainly turning out to be true.
Really. can you show me ANY difference in ratings because of a
broadcast being offered in HDTV?
Would the people watching the HD version NOT watch the SD version if
no HD version were available.
Since I am writing about local news production in HD, please tell me
what benefits you expect to get from such broadcasts, if you ever
bother to buy an ATSC capable receiver...
>How odd that you continue to be in denial. But HDTV is
>not the reason the govt wants the transition over with. At
>this point, the govt wants to auction off the extra
>spectrum. That's all. No mention of HDTV anymore.
On this we agree. This has never been about HD. It has been about
protecting the NTSC franchise. The HD part was simply the concession
made by broadcasters to get the CE industry to pay for the
development of the standard. It now appears that the politicians are
so desperate to auction off the spectrum so that they can get MORE
MONEY, that they may actually be willing to risk turning off NTSC.
What a scam...
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:
