[opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
- From: Bob Miller <bob@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:17:39 -0500
There are 5th gen receivers on the market, BBTI and DVICO PCI cards.
These are not up to the 5th gen prototype but close.
Bob Miller
John Willkie wrote:
>The "new" receivers that are so new that they are yet to enter the
>marketplace.
>
>John Willkie
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>On Behalf Of Tony Neece
>>Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 8:11 AM
>>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
>>
>>Thanks for the spelling correction. Wasn't sure how he spelled his =
>>name. =20
>>Quoted from a New York Times article, June 24, 2004:=20
>>
>>"LG's new technology is a giant leap toward addressing the multipath
>>reception problems," said Nat Ostroff, Sinclair vice president for new
>>technology. Now that consumers will easily be able to receive digital
>>broadcasts, "the incentive is there for us to go to full power."
>>
>>I also read a similar statement of his in TV Technology. From that
>>I gather Mr. Ostroff's position is that with the improved receivers, =
>>there
>>is no longer sufficient compelling benefit to COFDM as to warrant an on
>>going battle to revert back to square one with our DTV standards. =20
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] =
>>On
>>Behalf Of John Willkie
>>Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 11:17 PM
>>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
>>
>>Another little missed item: it's Nat Ostroff, not Osteroff, and just =
>>where
>>did he say this? (Care to comment, Nat?)
>>
>>John Willkie
>>
>>
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =
>>>
>>>
>>[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>
>>
>>>On Behalf Of Tony Neece
>>>Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 5:43 AM
>>>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
>>>=20
>>>The simple fact is that the broadcasters did at first promote DTT. =
>>>
>>>
>>Then
>>
>>
>>>along came the controversy over changing to COFDM. That caused =3D
>>>everything
>>>to come to a halt. STB R & D stopped. Sony and others pulled back =
>>>
>>>
>>=3D
>>
>>
>>>product
>>>in the pipeline as well as support for HD broadcast production. It =
>>>
>>>
>>=3D
>>
>>
>>>looked
>>>like VHS vs Beta again. With almost no receivers out there it would =
>>>
>>>
>>have
>>
>>
>>>been asinine for the broadcasters to heavily promote their Digital =3D
>>>service.
>>>=20
>>>The next step came when the dust settled over the modulation standard, =
>>>
>>>
>>=3D
>>
>>
>>>and
>>>even Nat Osteroff, the most ardent supporter of COFDM, agreed that the
>>>improved equalizers for ATSC reception made COFDM a dead issue.=3D20
>>>=20
>>>What then happened was that the big retailers told the manufacturers =
>>>
>>>
>>=3D
>>
>>
>>>that
>>>they would be wasting their time to expend R&D on STBs, because the
>>>retailers had decided it was not in their interest to advertise and =
>>>
>>>
>>sell =3D
>>
>>
>>>an
>>>item that reduced the incentive to buy new TV sets or sign for Cable =
>>>
>>>
>>or =3D
>>
>>
>>>DBS.
>>>It was the retailers that killed the market. I read of one retailer =
>>>
>>>
>>=3D
>>
>>
>>>that
>>>actually told a TV station to STOP advising their viewers to get =3D
>>>converters,
>>>because they weren't selling them and didn't want people coming in =3D
>>>looking
>>>for them!!! =3D20
>>>=20
>>>Oh but how much more fun it is to blame the big bad broadcasters for =
>>>
>>>
>>the
>>
>>
>>>sluggish transition, despite that for 7 years now they have been =3D
>>>spending
>>>millions upon millions for new transmitters, new STL's, new terminal =
>>>
>>>
>>and
>>
>>
>>>studio equipment, even new towers in some cases, and a double or =
>>>
>>>
>>triple
>>
>>
>>>power bill at the transmitter sites. The broadcasters did this =3D
>>>willingly,
>>>even eagerly in most cases. The station personnel dug in to learn
>>>completely new technology and measurement technique. No small task =
>>>
>>>
>>=3D
>>
>>
>>>that.
>>>=20
>>>It is just too much to expect the broadcaster to carry all the load, =
>>>
>>>
>>=3D
>>
>>
>>>when
>>>even now, DTT receivers are few and far between in the hands of =
>>>
>>>
>>viewers.
>>
>>
>>>Now, really, does anyone truly think the retailers would be eagerly =
>>>
>>>
>>=3D
>>
>>
>>>pushing
>>>DVB-T STBs if we had somehow gone that route?=3D20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =
>>>
>>>
>>[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] =3D
>>
>>
>>>On
>>>Behalf Of Manfredi, Albert E
>>>Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 4:29 PM
>>>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: White paper from CEA
>>>=20
>>>Frank wrote:
>>>=20
>>>
>>>
>>>>Does anyone think there is any real chance that the
>>>>FCC could be convinced to reverse it's decision on
>>>>allowing COFDM? How many corporate executives are
>>>>foolish enough to bet their careers on a business
>>>>model that assumes such a change of heart will happen
>>>>at the FCC?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>=20
>>>I agree completely. So what's stopping these corporate
>>>executives from playing in the ATSC market?
>>>=20
>>>
>>>
>>>>That RFP is a joke.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>=20
>>>That RFP is only a joke if the NAB allows to become a
>>>joke. In my opinion, it's a good way to kick start the
>>>market, because it should convince the CE guys that
>>>*broadcasters* are actually interested in DTT now, as
>>>opposed to before. And by the way, if anything, the
>>>NAB ought to include recording devices as well as
>>>bargain basement simple STBs.
>>>=20
>>>
>>>
>>>>assuming anyone even responded to the RFP
>>>>
>>>>
>>>=20
>>>I don't understand this. Are you saying that the NAB
>>>was just making it all up?
>>>=20
>>>=
>>>
>>>
>>http://www.nab.org/newsroom/pressrel/Releases/100505_Thomson_LG_Converte
>>
>>
>>>rBox.htm
>>>=20
>>>I thought they selected LG and Thomson.
>>>=20
>>>
>>>
>>>>Most companies that are actually in the IC business
>>>>and highly capitalized have given up on that idea for
>>>>ATSC DTT. Good luck to any newcomers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>=20
>>>But the 5th gen LG chips exist, in quantity production,
>>>do they not? I don't understand what you're saying here
>>>either. And it looked like Micronas is also getting
>>>into the chip market, and perhaps Samsung too.
>>>=20
>>>Leaving aside the conspiracy theory for why these DTT
>>>products aren't coming to market, the only rational
>>>explanation I can come up with is that the broadcasters
>>>have been so uninterested in pushing this transition
>>>that the CE guys saw no credible market out there. Maybe
>>>the CE guys are expecting OTA to die. (Or maybe Dale is
>>>correct, and the CE guys are *ensuring* that OTA will
>>>die.) I'll accept that poor performance was a good
>>>reason for broadcasters to be uininterested -- in the
>>>past!
>>>=20
>>>Now that decent and low cost receivers have been demoed
>>>and that some of these are being sold (in LG integrated
>>>sets, anyway), the best way to get DTT going is for the
>>>broadcasters to get in the thick of the action, JUST
>>>LIKE their cable and DBS counterparts do.
>>>=20
>>>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.
Other related posts:
