[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: ACA Threatens Reconsideration Petition on ATSC 3.0 Authorization
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 08:38:43 -0500
On Nov 28, 2017, at 5:21 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
This hand wringing makes no sense to me. The FCC has already said that
broadcasters have to simulcast their main program on ATSC 1.0 and 3.0, and
the MVPDs currently have no 4K capability, so what's the problem? What means
"ATSC 3.0 signal"? It means nothing. The MVPDs only carry the content, not
the protocol.
First it is interesting that stations are trying to require ATSC 3.0 carriage
BEFORE they even decide whether they will offer it. This might suggest that
there is strong support among broadcasters. Or it may just be another
broadcaster owe grab to get more bandwidth from the MVPDs.
There is no issue with respect to carriage of 4K content, or any other format
for that matter. I suspect that what the stations want is continued carriage of
ATSC 1.0 content that is compatible with existing STBs, and simultaneous
carriage of 4K content streams that would be decoded by ATSC 3.0 tuners (both
integrated and add on devices). This is essentially what happened with ATSC
1.0, as the FCC required MVPDs to carry the HDTV content streams in a format
that could be decoded by the subscribers TV, when they subscribe to lifeline
service and do not have a STB.
If this is the case, I can understand why the aCA is concerned. Such a
simulcast requirement - not from the FCC, but as a result of retrans consent -
as it would increase the capacity of the MVPD dedicated to carriage of
broadcast TV.
Ditto with any special new features, whatever they are. No carriage required,
says the FCC. Besides, since these new features are most likely
Internet-based, carriage on the broadband service should be automatic.
The issue appears to be the use of retrans consent to exact more from the MVPDs
than what the FCC order requires.
Maybe 4K content is the issue? After the MVPDs are capable of 4K, then we'll
have the same scenario that HD created. The MVPDs bitched and moaned about
not having room for HD, back in the 1990s, but you know, they were trying to
pee upstream.
More fake news from Bert.
The MVPDs were INCAPABLE of carrying ATSC 1.0 on analog systems Bert. The
initial digital cable systems were capable of carrying the HDTV bit streams,
but most consumers did not lease HDTV capable STBs until there was sufficient
HD content to make HD capable STBs useful. The same was true for the DBS
systems which started operation with SD quality until the cost of HD STBs came
down and sufficient content became available.
It is important to note that most of the initial HD content on MVPD systems
came from networks that upgraded to HD - like ESPN in 2001 - not from
broadcasters, most of which did not offer HD until required by the FCC.
There was never a question about carriage of HDTV formats, as this was all
worked out as part of the ATSC standards process - where cable chose to use a
different modulation system appropriate for a wired network.
And to illustrate just how out of touch Bert is, the NAB asked the FCC to
launch the HDTV standards process in 1986, stating as the primary reason that
they feared being left behind as competitors upgraded to HD. This was not
digital HD, it was 12 MHz analog HD, which could easily have been carried on
existing analog cable systems.
Everyone demands HD these days. Perhaps the same will happen with 4K content
from broadcasters. Time will tell. In the meantime, there is no issue that I
can tell.
The world has left HD in the dust Bert, but not necessarily for TV viewing. We
now use displays with far more pixels than the ATSC 1.0 formats to surf the
web. ANd we still use 360P and 480P to deliver TV to mobile devices to conserve
bandwidth. Obviously 4K TV is happening, although the benefits are marginal at
best. HDR and WCG are far more important than more pixels for TV content. More
pixels are critical to advanced web applications, as well as HDR and WCG.
There is a bit of irony here.
We continue to see the decline in MVPD subscribers among cable and to a lesser
extent DBS. Cable is required to carry broadcasts, with DBS its optional. With
VMVPDs the ability to access local broadcasts is very limited.
One wonders if local broadcasters will be the last guys standing on the legacy
systems as consumers migrate to VMVPD systems...
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
