[opendtv] Re: Harris, NAB: PSIP Deadline Impossible
- From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 16:40:05 -0800
If someone wants to meet the deadline, I would suggest they start working
with their automation system and PSIP vendor NOW. It can be done, but it
would be best to get the bugs out of real-time updates outside of the May
sweeps. Thankfully, the May sweeps end the week before the deadline. I for
one, see two types of customers; those interested in meeting the deadline,
and those interested in having real PSIP working after the deadline.
As a practical matter, as I pointed out on my PSIP list late last year,
these new rules will require EVERY TV STATION IN THE US TO HAVE AN
AUTOMATION SYSTEM. Or, they get fined when their sports programming
overruns, or they or their network make last-minute changes.
Harris demonstrated the ADC automation system at last year's NAB. Was it
vaporware then? They used a Harris-branded PSIP+ generator that was PMCP
compliant but which was not available to customers. In the meantime, despite
having previously said that they would not market a PMCP-compliant PSIP
generator, Triveni Digital has PMCP support in the latest rev of their PSIP
software. Triveni's system is operational, but ADC's isn't?
Didn't they know that broadcasters would need to make last-minute changes in
programs?
There is stuff I would like to say, but I cannot. There is a mutual NDA
between Harris and myself. I can say that Harris and Triveni Digital have
parted ways, and that means costs will go up for users if they wish to
continue to use "less defective than previous" Triveni units.
I can say that I am actively pitching my system to network folk, including
Harris customers, and I am not getting responses to my emails. I've been
wondering why that is.
If this comes down to an FCC proceeding - I doubt it, since any proceeding
at this point would automatically delay things - I will oppose it. I can
meet the deadline, but the requirement to label downconverted programming
will be challenging to implement in the real world. It's not unlike the
issue presented by Martin Holmes in his recent lapse of lurkerdom - the
aspect ratio and size of the video needs to be bound to the item in the
traffic log.
Also, I need to point out something. The text of the proceeding was
released on December 31. Jay Adrick participated in the proceeding for
Harris. If this was a big issue, just why are we only hearing of it more
than 60 days later? I'd say that the deadline might be extended, but only
for a few weeks. Broadcasters have five months from the date the text was
released.
I think the issue might actually be the sales cycle. Selling the needed
systems at NAB and installing them within 6 weeks, that will be an issue.
It's an issue that should have been addressed in the proceeding, not a month
after the text was published in the Federal Register.
We need also to remember that the ATSC and NAB was strongly urging the FCC
to adopt an EARLIER deadline than the last day of May; they wanted the rules
to be in force by March 1, 2007. So, on second thought, this has about 0%
chance of succeeding; the FCC was itself delayed in opening this proceeding.
Nobody wants to use that argument in this context, I suspect; they're
unlikely to extend it.
Pay Triveni Digital $9,000 (plus $2,700 per year software assurance) to
'upgrade' former units, or buy something better, or face FCC fines. I just
love free markets!
I'm sorry to hear that one of Harris's automation systems won't be able to
handle PMCP by May 30, 2007. There have been such systems offered by other
vendors for more than 3 years. Let me phrase this carefully; how many other
of the Harris units that offer automation or traffic systems won't be able
to meet the deadline?
John Willkie, wondering how many people he can offend in a single post.
_____________________________________________
De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En
nombre de Dale Kelly
Enviado el: Friday, March 07, 2008 2:25 PM
Para: OPENDTV
Asunto: [opendtv] Harris, NAB: PSIP Deadline Impossible
John W., what's your take on this?
Harris, NAB: PSIP Deadline Impossible
March 7, 2008
When the FCC ordered a May 30, 2008, deadline for the implementation of the
ATSC PSIP standard, some saw a problem ahead for broadcasters.
Deep in its New Year's Eve order on final DTV transition rules, the FCC
called for PSIP and program guide information to accurately reflect what's
on the air-even when the program data is updated on the fly, such as when
sporting events end and other programming begins-and also help viewers find
a closed captions, multiple feeds and V-chip information.
"That won't be easy!" Doug Lung wrote in RF Report
<http://www.tvtechnology.com/pages/s.0115/t.10535.html> Jan. 4.
Now Harris Corp., the NAB and the Association for Maximum Service Television
(MSTV) have asked the FCC to kick that deadline ahead a year, to May 30,
2009. NAB and MSTV say further that some elements of the FCC's PSIP vision
won't happen even by then.
"Broadcasters will not be able to implement the ATSC PSIP standard... by May
30, 2008 because the product is unavailable," Jay Adrick, Harris Corp. vice
president for broadcast technologies, referring to a new company product in
a letter to the FCC. "Harris is in the process of testing a new product
which will enable automated updating of PSIP information from its ADC
automation system (the most widely deployed master control automation system
in the U.S.) to the station's PSIP generator, enabling broadcasters to
comply with this rule."
Deploying the software at hundreds of stations will take at least a year,
Adrick wrote.
In addition, NAB and MSTV said real-time program updates are not on the
immediate horizon, and they asked for "clarification" of the PSIP standard.
"We... ask that the commission acknowledge that the real-time updates to the
Event Information Table ('EIT') require automation capabilities which will
not be available for several years," the groups told the FCC. They said
read-time updates are permitted, but not required, by the ATSC standard
adopted by the FCC in its order.
The groups also asked the FCC to "clarify" that the order does not require
PSIP to include information about the definition (standard or high) of the
programming.
Other related posts:
