[opendtv] Re: Interesting Point
- From: "Tony Neece" <tonyneece@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:46:59 -0700
Egad! So much of these discussions are just so much anti-establishment
fluff! NTSC never worked well for indoor reception either. That is =
what
got the cable industry going in the first place! OFDM and COFDM are not
without drawbacks as well. For one, for DTT COFDM requires considerably
more transmitter power to cover the same area as ATSC. Also with the =
new
ATSC decoder chips with much improved multi-path rejection, there is =
little
or no advantage to COFDM. There are many homes that can't get good
reception no matter what technology is used, just as there are many =
homes
that are not passed by cable or are blocked by trees or terrain from
satellite reception. =20
Back in the early days of color some people thought it was really cool =
to
deride NTSC because it wasn't PAL. I got to look at a lot of PAL and =
saw it
wasn't really any better. Like so many things it had advantages and
disadvantages.
It is just silly to badmouth something that is working, here to =
stay,while
lauding pie-in-the sky vaporware.
Oh my I just can't wait to have the experience of watching movie =
trailers
and advertising on my cell phone while walking with my sweetie on the =
beach
at sunset!!! Just because technology makes something possible doesn't =
mean
we are obligated to enslave ourselves to it.
The guys who designed ATSC are brilliant men, not shills to some =
corporate
agenda. I am sure they do not waste their minds fretting over the =
various
ways the word "broadcasting" can be defined!!
Regards,=20
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] =
On
Behalf Of Eory Frank-p22212
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 10:49 AM
To: 'opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Interesting Point
John Golitsis wrote:
>Which fits perfectly with the concept of an MMBS (Mobile Multimedia =20
>Broadcast Service) proposed by the CEA in 1999. Not many people =20
>every expected ATSC to fill that roll. Certainly not I.
Nor I, nor anyone else that ever designed an ATSC receiver, nor the FCC =
that
'designed' a DTT network that at best, supports rooftop antenna =
reception
for most of the people most of the time, and indoor reception only for a
much lower percentage of the people much less of the time.
Note that the MMBS system as proposed by CEA in 1999 was going to use =
OFDM.
Notice a trend in all this? Wireless broadband =3D OFDM transmission.=20
Someone earlier made the comment that ATSC is best suited for STL links. =
To
that I would add that someday -- after mandatory widespread =
proliferation in
new TV sets -- it could also become an excellent candidate for =
single-wire
A/V device interconnect, much as NTSC tuners using channel 3 or 4 are =
today.
But it still is and always will be an extremely poor choice for wireless
broadband distribution of DTV.
-- Frank=20
>> It is extremely unlikely that such portable devices will ever be =20
>> enabled with ATSC receivers, for technical and economic reasons. =20
>> The phrases "low power," "low cost" and "reliable" simply don't =20
>> apply to ATSC receivers, and probably never will.
=20
=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org=20
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
