[opendtv] Re: 2013: The year of the OPEN DTV?
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 11:29:23 -0500
At 4:54 PM -0600 1/11/13, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
And for the record, we were all telling the broadcasters about the
Internet and other emerging digital technologies before the Grand
Alliance was formed.
Okay, so 25 years ago, you were predicting that eventually Internet
distribution would be adequate for TV content too. So there was no
need to develop DTV distribution schemes that would actually work
back then? Just wait a quarter century or more, keep using analog TV?
No Bert. We were trying to help the broadcasters develop a new
distribution standard that would be:
1. Scalable
2. Extensible
3. Interoperable
Why scalable? Because we understood that there would be many screens
with different sizes and pixel densities that would be used to view
television content in the future. And we understood that many video
applications do not require HDTV resolution and beyond.
Bottom line, the system should have been designed to deal with a wide
range of applications, and the evolution to higher display
resolutions for all screens, which we knew was going to happen.
Why extensible? because we knew that Moore's Law would quickly make
many technologies obsolete...like MPEG-2. We encouraged the
broadcasters to focus mainly on the transport level of the standard;
to leave the applications layer to the market so that it could evolve
with the enabling technologies.
Clearly this was the right approach, as it has enabled the Internet
to become what it is today. In the end, the only thing extensible
about the TVs being sold today is that they have HDMI ports so you
can bypass the obsolete internal tuners and decoders.
Why Interoperable? Because we expected the public to want to view
television content on the new screens that would proliferate in the
future, not to mention the millions of computer screens they already
were investing in.
The computer industry had to solve the problem using brute force, and
then moved on with improved standards that have made Internet
distribution of high quality video practical.
The ATSC standard was obsolete the day the FCC approved it. Which is
a major reason that the ATSC immediately started working on a viable
standard for mobile broadcasting. Unfortunately it had to be
compatible with the poorly chosen 8-VSB standards, which in turn has
resulted in the still birth of the ATSC MHP standard.
Bottom line, broadcasters need to start over again.
The irony of this is, on the one hand you claim that ATSC was
developed to "protect the interests of broadcasters" (who are
instead using the Internet already), and in the same breath, you now
claim that Internet distribution won't work because the MVPDs and
the congloms prefer you to use cable.
Where is the irony?
The ATSC standard was developed to protect the interests of
broadcasters. Unfortunately it did not help much. The one MAJOR
benefit of HDTV was to sports broadcasting, which is the critical
economic base of the industry. Note that SD-DVD still dominates the
physical distribution of movies.
Yes broadcasters can use the Internet, but most have not done so
effectively. Speaking of irony, why is is that I watch more video on
Internet news sites operated by newspapers and other formerly "print"
media, than I do on sites operated by broadcasters?
The real irony is that we let the politicians and broadcasters get
away with all of this, while getting stuck with ever large bills for
our entertainment fix.
I've never said Internet distribution won't work. What YOU SAID is
the reality - the conglom led broadcasters allow us to view some of
their content via the Internet - as long as we keep paying those
monthly subscriber fees...
Make up your mind, Craig. Broadcasters, and ATSC by extension, are
by far the least culpable in keeping you addicted to your MVPD. And
MVPDs don't use ATSC, remember?
Give me a break!
The congloms control 95% of the content on the MVPD systems.
Broadcasters are now dependent on the MVPDs for economic survival, as
the congloms keep squeezing them, even going as far as to require the
sharing of retrans consent revenues. Broadcasting could not survive
today without the MVPDs. It survives because it gives the politicians
a rational for industry regulation - the use of scarce public
resources.
Fine. UHDTV takes this a step beyond. You may not even need to
eliminate nyquist filtering, when used as computer monitor, to get
sharp text. And updated codecs promise that the ATSC distribution
pipe, unchanged, is adequate already.
Computer applications never used Nyquist filtering for text - it
makes for pretty edges on the text, at the expense of contrast. My
iPhone 4 was a breakthrough in terms of improving the end user
experience via the Retina Display. Higher brightness and contrast and
much sharper text; the video still looks the same.
Again, mountain made out of molehill. I watch all manner of TV over
the Internet, from the congloms and local broadcasters, and none of
it is MPEG-2 compression anymore. ATSC is perfectly capable of using
other codecs, as I've pointed out to you countless times. So, what's
your point?
A mole hill?
Yes, you use your PC to take advantage of all of the advancements in
the underlying technology that your TV cannot. Thanks for making my
point about extensibility!
So explain me this: if the ATSC decided to authorize the use of h.264
tomorrow, or h.265 in 2014, what would be required for people to
watch it on their existing ATSC enabled TVs?
And while you're at it, please explain to me how this is going to
benefit people who would like to receive DTV broadcasts on their
smartphones and tablets.
> We are not talking about tablets and smartphones as remote controls. We
are talking about new forms of group entertainment and activities that
integrate multiple screens into the experience.
What's the big deal? If a PC can do this, and clearly it can, a
smart TV can do the same thing.
Huh?
Are you suggesting that groups of people sit around a PC with a big
screen and use their smartphones and tablets to control what everyone
is watching on the PC screen?
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:
