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

  • From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 15:33:25 -0800

I didn't say that the FCC needed to do the interference studies; proponents
do.  You might recall me saying that for DVB-T in the U.S. to even be
considered, proponents needed to do interference studies.  Otherwise, the
FCC can just play simple defense.

 

If you think MediaFlo is something more than a demo infrastructure, I would
suggest that you move a few miles off an interstate highway in an area
between metro areas.  How many people could be watching tv on interstate
highways?  Using their cellphone?

 

I don't do cynicism.  If you want to whine about not wanting to spend a
$1,000 in 2000 and what you ultimately left on the table, this is probably
not the right venue.  

 

Google doesn't need to worry about revenue projections, or lost
opportunities.

 

John Willkie

 

 

 

  _____  

De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En
nombre de Bob Miller
Enviado el: Saturday, December 01, 2007 3:01 PM
Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: [opendtv] Re: New Thread: What becomes of Legacy Analog Equipment

 

 

On Nov 30, 2007 10:37 PM, John Willkie <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

You are missing much.  

 

I don't see how you can use a different form of modulation within a single 6
Mhz channel and be backwards-compatible.  Indeed, your friend Richard Bogner
was told in a face-to-face meeting with the FCC this week that he cannot use
FM modulation in the same channel as 8-VSB because no interference studies
have been made.  (Richard told me this in a series of private email
messages, which I summarized in a message this week on my PSIP list.)


Said no to his doing interference studies, they do not intend to do
interference studies themselves so a total no.

 

Also, I don't see how you could save bits by transmitting black and white
images, since chroma and luma are needed to make pictures, even if the
source is black and white.

 

The chroma formats permitted by MPEG-2 are 4:2:0, 4:2:2 and 4:4:4.  They are
component: A matrix, block or single sample from one of the three matrices
(luminance and two chrominance) that make up a picture.


Shows you what I know. Thought b&W would save something. 

 

I note that one of the m/p/h proposals is from Qualcomm, which has spent
mightily - perhaps a billion dollars - on the MediaFlo demo infrastructure
in the U.S.  It would be the height of "creative destruction" if their
proposal to the ATSC resulted in destroying that infrastructure or wasn't
compatible with it, nor wasn't backwards compatible with 8-VSB.  I think
that trying to integrate a single-carrier system and a multiple-carrier
system into the same 6-Mhz channel is "mightily difficult" if not simply
impossible.

"Demo" infrastructure? You can buy a cell phone that receives their MediaFlo
in NYC. They may lose money on it but it would seem to be beyond demo. 

 

Perhaps you haven't thought much about it.  I also note the news today that
Google has decided to bid in the next auction round.  Perhaps that is behind
your newly-resurected interest in bashing 8-VSB and the parties that have to
make a business around it?

I didn't think anyone actually had to make money with 8-VSB. I thought they
just held the spectrum to justify must carry. Is it possible that any
business could show less interest in a valued asset than broadcasters have
shown in their OTA spectrum?? Not including Sinclair and a few others there.


If Google is bidding on using the spectrum for the Internet their own
spokesman has rightly addressed the limited potential of that as a business
model on the Communicators a couple of months ago. Broadcasting would be a
better use IMO. AT&T may be buying for broadcasting like Aloha demonstrated
to them in Las Vegas which is close to what we have been proposing since
1999. 

It will be interesting to see how much Google will spend. Remember that this
same spectrum, but including 54, 55 and 59, was supposed to generate $100
Billion in 2000. Such an estimate rested on the UK's $35 Billion and
Germany's $45 Billion auctions of the same year. 

Less 54, 55 and 59 but with 8 more years of inflation that $100 Billion
would be more like $130 Billion today, a far cry from the $15 Billion I have
seen in print lately. And  in 2000 you did not have Yahoo, Google, Apple and
who knows how many other players who had not the faintest clue about what
could be done with this spectrum or why they should do it in 2000. I know
Qualcomm had not a clue 10 minutes after our company became confirmed
bidders in Auction 44 because I was on the phone asking them to work with us
as soon as I got the news. Had a list of those who should be bidding but had
not signed up for whatever insane reason and as soon as I saw that they were
not on the list was calling them. 

I am just wound up because it has been a long time of working on this since
2000 and I can't play in a $100 Billion auction. Could have in 2000 though.
Money wise will do just fine but it was never about the money. 

Bob Miller



 

Hope this helps

 

John Willkie

 

Other related posts: