Craig Birkmaier wrote: > Bert seems to think that the folks in Europe are facing similar > marketplace realities to U.S. DTV viewers, as the systems > evolve. So i though i would check out a few facts. I think you're misrepresenting what I said. Assuming we are talking specifically about those countries in which FOTA TV is successful, i.e. France, Italy, and the UK primarily (possibly others, like Spain, which are not as far ahead in transition execution), the "marketplace realities" are certainly not the same. There seems no particular effort to kill off FOTA TV in these European countries. You again focus instead on unimportant tangential topics, the modulation scheme, that have no bearing on any of this anymore. If technology demoed in a lab prototype in 2002, and integrated chip form in early 2003, has maybe just reached store shelves this month, in just one brand of STB which is not the best it can be anyway, you know darned well the problem here has nothing to do with modulation. The reality is that the successful Euro DTT systems are doing *TV*, not all the other services we might dream up. And the reality is that with A-VSB, ATSC will also have the other multiple modes available to it, should they ever become necessary. I'll remind you: none of these successful DTT systems is using HM COFDM. As you say, Craig, bits is bits. The modulation issue is, or more correctly could have been, ancient history by now. If we don't have 80 models of STBs for sale at WalMart, it is certainly not caused by a choice of modulation. CE vendors would have absolutely no problem developing STBs for the US market right alongside their DVB-T STBs, or even inside the same box. Integrated, global DTT chip sets already exist. > I'm glad you are happy with the service Bert, but the reality > is that you are part of a very small percentage of viewers in > the U.S. that are benefiting from the service. Asking the rest > of us to keep supporting your investment, rather than using the > spectrum to provide services that will be used by the vast > majority of people in the U.S. is an absurd waste of a valuable > resource. 1. The "very small percentage" you talk about is upwards of 30 percent who actually use OTA TV. The 15 percent figure only represents households that depend *solely* on OTA. 2. Imagine you walking up to a sun worshipper on a California beach, and telling him "This beach is way too 'valuable' for you to use. We should take it away and develop it." His response would no doubt be, "Whatever, dude," as he paddles out oh his surf board. Whatever, Craig. I'll bet you that 30 percent of Californians do not regularly use the public beaches, so should they be "developed?" This spectrum is public property, and I ain't selling. If the Congress can be convinced to do other things with it, so be it. Until then ... 3. Channels 52-83 have already been taken away. In Eastern cities at least, channels 2-13 could probably also be put to other uses. With A-VSB, the remaining DTT channels could also be used for stuff like broadcast to handheld devices, or other special apps. So your apparent desire to dismantle OTA TV is simply not necessary, not your call. Maybe a problem is that OTA broadcasters can depend on cable and DBS, as you have expressed in the past. Maybe the problem is there is funny business going on under the table. I'll tell you one thing for sure, though. There seems a rather total lack of enthusiasm from the DTT operators. Just compare the number of on-air spots we hear about the DTT transition with the number of on-air spots we hear on HD Radio. It's like night and day. Tell me why this is so. 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.