Walking around CES this year, I asked the question of many '3rd tier' product companies about "when will you start selling ATSC digital sets?". Eventually they all answered correctly (march deadline). I then asked "what is the add-on cost to do this?" The typical response was that it would add $40 to the cost wholesale (i.e. not to the consumer).
Just wanted to add another data point in this exercise... Markthe Mark that never argued that DVB was the solution, but rather, ease of reception was... (just so happened that DVB-T could be used to demonstrate our expectations, COFDM being used to set the bar of expected performance...)
PS - It was NEVER about COFDM. When one takes the time to read the 1999 "Petition for Expedited Rulemaking" filed with the FCC, the summary makes clear our unchanging position...
SummarySinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (“Sinclair”) hereby urges the Commission to modify its digital television (“DTV”) rules and give DTV broadcasters the flexibility to transmit their digital signals using COFDM digital modulation technology. Following Sinclair’s 1999 field trials, it is now clear that such action is crucial to the future viability of DTV in the United States. If broadcasters can operate under a COFDM-based alternative ATSC DTV standard, they will be able to offer ease of reception and reliable over-the-air DTV service to the American public, will have far greater flexibility in the video marketplace, and will benefit from a greater capacity for technological improvement. If the Commission instead maintains exclusive reliance on inflexible 8-VSB digital modulation technology, broadcasters will be unable to replicate their current NTSC service, and will struggle to adapt to new marketplace conditions in the next century. At the same time, Sinclair recognizes that many in the broadcast industry have already made a significant commitment to 8-VSB operations, and Sinclair does not advocate the abandonment of 8-VSB; rather, if the Commission grants the rule changes requested by Sinclair, broadcasters will be able to operate under either a COFDM-based or 8-VSB-based ATSC DTV
standard.Given the recent development of this technology, broadcasters using COFDM would be able to overcome complex multipath conditions and provide ease of reception and reliable over-the-air DTV service, including HDTV, to viewers using simple antennas within their stations’ core business areas (their Grade A contours). Moreover, COFDM currently permits 6 MHz data rates of up to 24 Mbps, almost twenty-five percent greater than the forever-frozen 8-VSB rate of 19.34 Mbps, and further development of COFDM over the next decade will allow easy and reliable reception of COFDM at 24 Mbps and higher. In addition, COFDM would give broadcasters the flexibility to vary their data rates, permitting a variety of HDTV, Standard Definition TV, and mobile and portable DTV programming streams across their daily and weekly schedules. For these reasons, a Commission decision to allow COFDM operations would stimulate consumer acceptance of DTV, accelerating its development and speeding the recapture of NTSC spectrum. Such action would also be consistent with the Commission’s flexible approach toward other elements of the ATSC DTV standard, including scanning formats, and would permit the marketplace to play an appropriate role in the development of DTV
broadcast technology.Ample signal strength does not guarantee that consumers will be able to receive that signal, and, as described in detail in Sinclair’s attached comparative study of COFDM and 8-VSB, the 8-VSB standard currently does not permit ease of reception or reliable DTV service through simple antennas in broadcasters’ core business areas. Given the unreliability of this reception, 8-VSB broadcasters will be unable to replicate their NTSC service, and, during the digital transition, consumers will likely be forced to receive DTV service through large rooftop antennas. Even consumers able to afford such an outdoor antennas will suffer limited viewing functionality in markets with non-collocated DTV stations. In addition, given 8-VSB’s fixed data rate, this standard will not allow the provision of mobile and portable
video services.As a result of all these factors, if the Commission continues its exclusive reliance on the 8-VSB standard, DTV will likely be perceived negatively by the public, thereby jeopardizing the digital transition. Even if the DTV transition is eventually completed, this policy would endanger the viability of free over-the-air television service, since an overwhelming majority of television households in the U.S.
would be forced to subscribe to cable or satellite service.In recent months, 8-VSB proponents have put forward a number of technical, operational, and economic reasons not to authorize COFDM operations in the U.S. (Sinclair’s Petition does not address the COFDM/8-VSB report released by FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology on October 1, 1999. Sinclair will respond separately to the OET report within one week of the filing of this Petition.) First, despite the doubts of entrenched 8-VSB interests, COFDM signals can be used to provide HDTV over 6 MHz channels, as shown by the 18.67 Mbps data rate achieved in Sinclair’s Baltimore testing. In addition, while some argue that 8-VSB provides greater coverage than COFDM at equivalent power levels, this theoretical coverage gap appears to disappear under real-world conditions, as described in Sinclair’s study. Finally, claims that technological improvements will allow 8- VSB to overcome dynamic multipath conditions are mere speculation, and in the absence of specific and identifiable consumer products that achieve these results, such promises cannot serve as the basis for the Commission’s continued exclusive reliance on 8-VSB. In any case, given the fact that COFDM can currently support a variety of data rates up to a maximum of 24 Mbps, the potential for improvement of that technology is far greater than for 8-VSB, and Sinclair fully expects that COFDM will remain superior to 8-VSB across the full range of reception environments.
While defenders of the status quo claim otherwise, broadcasters, manufacturers, and consumers would not incur significant costs if the Commission decided to permit use of COFDM in the U.S. Any additional power and equipment costs for COFDM broadcasters would be borne voluntarily, and would likely be inconsequential. Grant of the instant petition would not impose significant costs on DTV receiver manufacturers, since it appears that the necessary equipment and expertise are already available to incorporate COFDM technology into DTV receivers targeted for sale in the U.S. Finally, the prior sale of 8-VSB receivers to a tiny fraction of consumers should not prevent the Commission
from permitting broadcasters to use the COFDM standard.Accordingly, for the reasons described above, Sinclair respectfully urges the Commission to modify through rulemaking the existing rule for digital modulation to permit broadcasters to transmit their digital signals using COFDM technology. In its order, the Commission should institute a general principle of flexibility with respect to DTV modulation technology, establishing that broadcasters will be able to operate under either a COFDM-based or 8-VSB-based ATSC DTV standard. The Commission should facilitate COFDM operations by U.S. broadcasters by appointing an industry task force that would be directed to do the following, within 120 days of its appointment: (I) Conduct a study and issue recommendations to the Commission regarding the integration of COFDM digital modulation technology into the ATSC DTV standard;
and(ii) Conduct a rigorous scientific analysis to determine the interference ratios for COFDM
transmissions into existing NTSC and 8-VSB DTV signals.Once this task force has performed these duties, the Commission should review its recommendations and adopt an alternative COFDM-based ATSC DTV standard. The Commission should establish simple procedures whereby broadcasters could demonstrate, using the interference ratios provided by the COFDM Task Force, that they will not cause interference to any operating NTSC or 8-VSB DTV broadcasters. Once a broadcaster has made this interference showing, it would be permitted to initiate COFDM operations. Sinclair urges that the Commission act expeditiously
throughout this proceeding.While this petition urges the Commission to permit COFDM operations, Sinclair does not have an inherent interest in the adoption of any particular digital modulation standard. Sinclair does believe, however, that the Commission, having mandated an accelerated shift to digital operations, must now take the steps necessary to make this transition successful and beneficial to all Americans. Since the development of COFDM has now raised the benchmark for DTV reception, the Commission should authorize use of this technology, allow the marketplace to play its appropriate role, and enable broadcasters to deliver the long-awaited era of advanced television to the U.S. public.
Mark Schubin wrote:
You confuse me with someone making an argument in favor of DVB-T. You are pointing to a $50-retail box of which, according to your figures (higher ones are also published), half would be IP costs.I point to readily available inexpensive analog TV sets, some of which currently retail for less than your IP costs.As the old joke goes, will they make it up on the volume? TTFN, Mark Manfredi, Albert E wrote:Mark Schubin wrote:Once again, the issue is the IP fees.Mark, I thought we had established that those are about $23. If $16 are for the MPEG-2 decoder, as has been suggested in the past, then the majority of the IP fees apply equally to DVB-T boxen. 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.---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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@xxxxxxxxxx www.newscentral.tv www.sbgi.net =================================== "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." ------- Albert Einstein------- =================================== "I like nonsense—it wakes up the brain cells. Fantasy is a necessary ingredient in living. It's a way of looking at life through the wrong end of a telescope...and that enables you to laugh at all of life's realities." ~ ~ Theodor S. Geisel, a.k.a. "Dr. Seuss" ~ ~ =================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
