[opendtv] Re: Broadcast and other topics
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 22:13:18 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
But thank you for answering your own question about the Beat's 1
Internet Radio Station. Now you are applying the term broadcast
to suit your own arguments.
No, Craig. I think by now everyone knows this is YOUR tactic for perpetuating
long-winded and absurd arguments. I'm using the term in its strict technical
sense, BECAUSE I'm making the point that ATSC 3.0 does not even need a one-way
broadcast mode at all. If one-way broadcast is ever beneficial, it would be in
that LTE-A sense, where it becomes a special subcase of IP multicast, and only
used when a huge simultaneous audience justifies its use. Otherwise, you remain
in unicast or multicast, without wasting a bunch of spectrum on this one-to-all
mode.
But it takes forever to get this point across, because Craig likes to drift
back and forth with imprecise arguments, just to keep disagreeing.
Changing the subject again. One of your favorite tactics!
Hardly. I just follow the discussion, whereas you get confused and off track.
You wrote (about broadcasting and linear cable):
Instead, they would go away instantly if the luddites were given
a just-as-easy-way of watching this on demand.
The public has been given the option you desire, and the majority of
homes are using it.
Not quite, Craig, because most people who want to watch online content on the
big screen are limited to connected TVs or to (pathetically limited) streaming
boxes. Most people do not connect a PC to the big screen, and as a result, they
do not fully exploit what is available on the Internet. Matter of fact, the
only sites they can go to are a handful of SVOD sites, and perhaps YouTube.
I've commented on multiple occasions how the trade scribes are still waiting
for a messiah to deliver them a way to stream TV to the big screen. Evidently,
Craig, these trade scribes, and the general public, are not capable of
exploiting these options properly, not yet.
For example, if some broadcaster wants to set up his own new OTT site, for
people to watch on big screens and/or other screens, FIRST this broadcasters
would have to get in bed with all the streaming box manufacturers. You don't
collude, you won't get your content on TV screens. Whereas, this should be as
easy as falling of that proverbial log.
ATSC 3.0 may we'll be trying to adapt to this new world, but it is
not abandoning broadcasting,
Have you finally read what ATSC 3.0 is attempting to do, or is this another
guess? And how are you using the term "broadcasting" this time, Craig? ATSC 3.0
makes multiple claims that are incompatible with one-way broadcast. It's as
simple as that.
CBS All Access is instead where at least some in the industry
claim they are heading. A mix of live and on demand, where obviously,
at any instant in time, your choice of on demand content will be
hugely larger than your choice of "live." (And, "live" does not
necessarily mean "broadcast.") Echo echo echo.
So now you agree that the linear streams, whether they are really
live or just pre-produced content are still going to be there.
I've said all along that linear "live" streams can be unicast, IP multicast, or
broadcast, and I also described to you how this can be done. Yes, even "live"
unicast, without wasting a bunch of spectrum. Do you remember how many times
you claimed "there wasn't enough spectrum"? Do you remember how many times you
claimed the streaming media audience was tiny? I don't have to "now agree." I
explained it to you, Craig, and it took a lot of doing. And I'm not convinced
you got it yet.
Even if the audience is shrinking, the service is still viable and
producing profits.
Well, a dwindling audience means the industry has to quickly introduce new
techniques, or they will be left out in the cold. So Craig, while this should
be obvious to everyone, you seem to wax eloquent about how ATSC 3.0 will be
just another broadcast standard.
I have not said ATSC is just another broadcast standard. It is a
more flexible broadcast standard
Hmmmm. I didn't say "cat." I said "cat." Okay Craig. You got it.
The TV business is growing too Bert.
Just because one segment is shrinking does not mean that everything
is shrinking. It is evolving with new options.
Hey Craig. Please quote where I said the TV industry is shrinking. Go ahead. I
think you've got that racket in the background distracting you again, right?
What I do see is the possibility that broadcasters could embrace
ATSC 3.0 and build out multiple infrastructures over time. First
with existing big sticks and SFN gap fillers, and in some markets,
with medium density 2-way cellular networks.
Rather than me explaining why I don't buy this, Craig, why not you explain to
us what the broadcasters would use this "medium density" 2-way net, and how it
would be competitive for the broadband service they claim to want to provide.
Also, describe what "medium density" is.
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:
