[opendtv] Re: IEEE Ericsson article on use of LTE for TV

  • From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:54:56 -0500

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

>> Apps are programs. And yes, perhaps that's a start at telcos "losing
>> control," but I have yet to see an "app" that will allow an iPhone or
>> any other phones to run on a competitor's cell network. Or that will
>> permit reception of TV broadcasts OTA, for that matter.
>
> http://www.telly-app.com/

Are you serious? Can't you see how that works? Do you think it allows the 
iPhone to receive ATSC broadcasts? Read more carefully, Craig. You're confused.

>> So *if* the cellcos saw any reason to do so, they could certainly "allow"
>> the Samsungs and the LGs of the world to build in ATSC M/H
>
> Nothing stopping them. Since Samsung has both IP in the standard and builds
> chips and ATSC MH products, you might ask why they are NOT adding MH support
> in their smartphones.

Duh! Over here, we buy phones whose design is at the mercy of the cellcos. Why 
would Verizon wireless want their cell phones to support ATSC/MH? When they 
offer a competing product for a monthly fee?

> The GPS chips is used extensively by apps for location based services.

Exactly. If there's a will, on the part of the cellco, because it benefits them 
directly, they will build it in. If not, they won't.

> Quoted run times for ATSC MH hand held devices have been abysmal

Quoted run times for cell phones using Pandora is also not good. Just like 
anything else, ATSC/MH would go through a development cycle, as did ATSC 1.0 
receivers, as are doing LTE tuners, and the power draw drops. Point being, it's 
much like DVB-H. The design is such that it should not draw excessive power. 
But even then, as with LTE for that matter, if you use the hand held device to 
watch TV for long periods of time, battery draw will definitely be a factor.

> The required channel bandwidths will be possible with spectrum pooling.

That's ridiculous, sorry. Of COURSE the spectrum can be cobbled together 
through pooling. The point is, what will these competing companies, whose main 
job is to transmit others' content on their own transmission facilities, do 
after the transmission facilities are combined? This is such a simple question.

> I have not agreed that broadcasters will use any of their spectrum for a
> return path.

Fine, so you continue waffling, that way whatever you say can be changed. No 
return path means the TV-run spectrum cannot be VOD. That's right away a 
liability.

Plus, *if* all you're talking about dedicating spectrum to true broadcast, then 
my suggestion is, hand that spectrum over to the cell networks. First, because 
you won't have the problem of the cellcos freezing out broadcaster's spectrum. 
Second, the cellcos can dynamically assign more or less spectrum to 2-way 
service, depending on time of day for instance.

Or, let the broadcasters hold on to their spectrum, don't get stuck on LTE if 
you're not interested in 2-way capability, and see if there's any chance of 
broadcasters reaching an arrangement with cell phone makers.

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:

  1. Home
  2. opendtv
  3. Archive
  4. 06-2012