At 11:52 AM -0400 4/9/05, Mark A. Aitken (Webmail) wrote: >A few in line comments. > >Quoting Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>: > >> Doug's inquiries about antennas is a prime example of this. For some >> reason he thinks that the ability to receive signals from distant >> markets is important to television viewers. It is NOT. > >B--- S---! Local network IS the choice of most viewers!!! NO B.S. Local networks ARE NOT distant markets...they are THE local market. Why do I need to pull in a Philadelphia station that duplicates the content of network affiliates in MY market (Baltimore)? Importation of distant signals is a byproduct of the fact that you guys cannot control your emissions... ;-) > >> IF broadcasters ever decide they need to compete with the program >> distributors who are carrying their water today, then, AND ONLY THEN, >> will technology become an issue. At that point the following issues >> will become important: > >We have! Yes you have. And you have been beaten down because of this. > >> 1. Can the system support mobile and portable reception? This is the >> ONLY major competitive advantage for broadcasters. > >Not really sure this is a fact...I will grant you that it is one view. See my response to Tom. Ultimately this is the only major advantage broadcasters enjoy over cable and DBS. I do agree with both of you that delivering a FREE extended basic cable equivalent to fixed receivers is the critical first step. This is what will introduce real competition into the marketplace. But competitors will respond, and then the ability to reach things that move will become a major competitive differentiation. > >> 2. Is the system easy to install with a simple omnidirectional >> antenna that can be located either inside the home, or outside (i.e. >> gutter mount). This configuration MUST be able to receive all local >> channels (distant channels are not relevant if local transmission >> facilities work properly); no rotors, electronically steerable >> antennas or antenna arrays allowed. > >On the way... With 8-VSB? We already know that COFDM and the Japanese system can do this. > >> 3. Is there a well defined "platform" with all of the services that >> consumers expect today from the other multi-channel services. >> a. A well designed, integrated program guide; >> b. Local caching to support PVR functions and (premium) >> cached VOD services; >> c. Back channel capabilities to support interactive and data >> broadcast services, >> and transactional services; >> d. Competition among vendors to drive innovation and lower >> costs to consumers. > >On the way... Really. Broadcasters can;t even get PSIP right. Do you really expect me to believe that you can support all of the stuff above with the ATSC standard? Again, I know that all of this is possible because your competitors are already doing it. > >> 4. Can the system compete with cable and DBS in terms of delivering >> targeted advertising based on viewer preferences, location, or >> demographic factors? > >On the way... Not with ATSC. > > When viewed from this perspective, it is clear that ATSC is simply a >> place holder, which will need to be replaced in order for >> broadcasters to field a competitive service. > >ATSC is a standard. Nothing more, nothing less... Well maybe a little less.... ;-( 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.