[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: Sinclair's Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
- From: Albert Manfredi <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 10:10:01 +0000
Ron Economos wrote:
What's so horrible about an Internet back channel? You seem totally hung up
on this point.
You mean, what's so horrible about admitting that in order to provide
interactivity you need an Internet (or other) 2-way communications channel, and
NOT a one-way broadcast channel? Nothing is wrong with that, because it's the
truth. What's wrong with stating facts as they are? The one-way broadcast
channel, in practice, plays no part in the interactive service.
Also note: to me, at least, "backchannel" implies a one-way link back to the
source. You need a 2-way channel for any credible interactive service, let's
not pretend otherwise. The total capacity of the one-way 6 MHz broadcast
channel is nowhere close to enough for interactive service to customers in any
typical TV market.
The two simple points are: (1) ATSC 3.0 does not provide interactivity over the
public airwaves (contrary to what the article states), and (2) on demand TV
requires an interactive link with the customer (2-way channel). There should ne
no need to belabor these two points?
Other related posts: