[opendtv] Re: New Thread: What becomes of Legacy Analog Equipment

  • From: "Bob Miller" <robmxa@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 14:32:32 -0500

On Nov 27, 2007 2:00 PM, Mark A. Aitken <maitken@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  Mark Aitken says (inline...)
>
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
> One transmitter maybe more later.
>
> I'm waiting for DVB-SH ;-)
>

8-VSB would work better for that.

>
>
> Any of the 11 or 20 proposals, bring them on. As long as they use MPEG2
> and are receivable by all current 8-VSB receivers.
>
> Any of the proposals do not "break" current receivers, they just (as Craig
> put it) 'steal' bits from the main/standard VSB channel.
>

In theory they don't break current receivers but who in their right mind
plans on using any of them with MPEG2? In use they break legacy receivers.

>
>
> If we are talking a new version of 8-VSB that breaks any legacy receivers
> and works with MPEG4 that is another story. I am and have always been open
> to any modulation that works.
>
> Broadcaster could (today) provide one MPEG2 SDTV quality signal today, and
> commit the rest to AVC if they wished. Just aren't receivers that could do
> much with it...
>

Again technically doesn't break the receiver but in use, the spirit of 8-VSB
if you will, they break current receivers. Current receivers could not
receive any of the AVSB MPEG4.

>
>
> But we are only talking of the current 8-VSB standard which has to work
> with legacy receivers and MPEG2. That is the whole argument. As soon as you
> break with that you might as well consider all state of the art modulations
> and codecs and the possibility of mandating that receivers can be updated to
> some degree to what we know may be coming down the line within reasonable
> cost.
>
>  The only command is one MPEG2 encoded channel of equivalent quality...the
> rest of the bits can be anything!
>

We are talking  the spirit here. Can you imagine having used that argument
when arguing for COFDM? What if we broke a 6 MHz channel into two parts? An
8-VSB 2 Mbps segment and a DVB-T 4 Mbps segment and said that we were not
violating the legacy 8-VSB receivers because they could still receive an
MPEG2 SD program in the same 6 MHz channel? How would that have been
received?


> All things we advocated in 1999.
>
> Who started the band-wagon you hopped onto?
>

We were trying to avoid the bandwagon. We were about to do an experimental
license with DVB-T in Stamford Ct. when the bandwagon derailed us.
Internally that is. My partner vetoed it when the controversy flared up.

>
>
> One of the strongest arguments to stay with the current 8-VSB would be
> that legacy receivers can upgrade to say MPEG4. The fact that they can't is
> one of the strongest arguments today to abandon 8-VSB and it gets stronger
> and stronger as receiver prices fall for all modulations.
>
> (regards MPEG4) It is not an issue of 'can't'. There is NOT a technical
> barrier, it is a business barrier based on current business.
>

How do you handle the spirit of 8-VSB? How do you explain to all current
8-VSB receiver owners that their receivers can only receive on SD MPEG2
program? I don't think you do it at all. I think things go on just as they
are and OTA is less than ONE% of viewers and I think broadcasters will not
have the power to protect their spectrum in new world.

Bob Miller

>
>
> High priced 8-VSB STB's were one of the main arguments for not
> reconsidering the US modulation in 2000 even though there were few such
> receivers. A strong argument can be made today that since receiver prices
> are getting very low in price the individual cost to switch is getting very
> small compared to the potential gain.
>
> Yeah, keep trying. With analog shutdown just 448 days away, not sure how
> anyone thinks (believes) they could pull anything off...
>
>
> Bob Miller
>
> On Nov 27, 2007 1:03 PM, John Willkie <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >  You mean that's what the 11 proposals for h/h being sorted out by ATSC
> > TSG/S4 is all about?  I do believe you are talking about legacy proposals,
> > not the trade offs of today.
> >
> >
> >
> > I'll leave aside your predictions about DTMB being operational by
> > Christmas.  At best, you're talking about one transmitter.
> >
> >
> >
> > John Willkie
> >
> >
> >  ------------------------------
> >
> > *De:* opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > * En nombre de *Bob Miller
> > *Enviado el:* Tuesday, November 27, 2007 9:54 AM
> > *Para:* opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > *Asunto:* [opendtv] Re: New Thread: What becomes of Legacy Analog
> > Equipment
> >
> >
> >
> > And when you are talking alternative modulations today it is a moving
> > target. The trade off today is not between DVB-T and ATSC but between DVB-T2
> > coupled with MPEG4 or DTMB and MPEG4 and ATSC crippled with A-VSB and MPEG2.
> >
> >
> > No contest.
> >
> > Any realistic comparison in any real world test between these standards
> > would doom any concoction of 8-VSB saddled as it is with legacy receivers.
> >
> > Just allowing the US broadcast system to use MPEG4 would increase the
> > value of the US OTA spectrum below channel 51 so much that it probably would
> > pass the tipping point that would make it a valid competitor to cable and
> > satellite used right even using 8-VSB.
> >
> > But of course you can't go there because logic says if you sacrifice
> > legacy receivers that opens the pandora's box of all modulations being
> > considered. After all if you are going to dump all current receivers why not
> > upgrade everything to the best it can be.
> >
> > DTMB should be operational in the US by Christmas. The testing is to
> > compare DVB-T to DTMB. You want to test 8-VSB or A-VSB against them in the
> > open air and the bright light of day? It could happen. I am calling all
> > 8-VSB types chicken. They were before, they are today and they will be
> > tomorrow. I give them one thing, they are smart enough to stay chicken.
> >
> > Bob Miller
> >
> > On Nov 27, 2007 11:55 AM, John Shutt <shuttj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Bert,
> >
> > Combine 1999 guard interval performance of DVB-T, add in 2007 blind
> > equalizers, and what do you get?  Still something far superior to ATSC.
> >
> > ATSC still cannot do mobile at all, and the A-VSB and E-VSB schemes
> > proposed
> > come with a much higher bitrate hit than DVB-T HM.
> >
> > DVB-T still has a full continuum of bitrate vs. robustness that is
> > settable
> > by each individual broadcaster to meet their perceived needs.  ATSC does
> > not.
> >
> > I told you 5 years ago and I will repeat it today:  Even if every ATSC
> > reception issue was solved, I would still prefer DVB-T because of it's
> > built
> > in flexibility it affords the broadcaster.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > > The facts are, one by one all the oft-repeated objections to 8-VSB
> > have
> > > dropped by the wayside, as was predictable from fairly early on. The
> > > dreaded cliff effect remains, of course, which affects all modulation
> > > schemes. It would be great to do another comparison test now, but
> > since
> > > no one would benefit from it, it won't happen. Alas.
> >
> >
> >
> >   ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
> Mark A. Aitken
> Director, Advanced Technology
>
> <><   <><   <><   <><   <><   <><   <><
>
> ===================================
> Sinclair Broadcast Group
> 10706 Beaver Dam Road
> Hunt Valley, MD 21030
> ===================================
> Business TEL: (410) 568-1535
> Business MOBILE: (443) 677-4425
> Business FAX: (410) 568-1580
> E-mail: maitken@xxxxxxxxxx
> Text PAGE: page.maitken@xxxxxxxxxx
> HTML PAGE: 4436774425@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ===================================
>
> "If you listen to all the people saying
> why you shouldn't, or can't, do something,
> you'll never do anything."
>
> ------ Edward Whitacre Jr. --------
> ===================================
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology
> is indistinguishable from magic."
>
> ------- Arthur C. Clarke -------
> ===================================
>
>
>

Other related posts: