Sony HDTV over the air tuner and Obsolescence?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

I'm thinking of buying a set like Sony's KV 32HS510, for use in
receiving over the air programming (I don't plan on getting cable
anytime soon). This TV has the DVI HDTV connection. Does that prevent
it from becoming obsolete in the future, if broadcasters scramble
their signals, or should I wait a few years?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, CGott wrote:
> I'm thinking of buying a set like Sony's KV 32HS510, for use in
> receiving over the air programming (I don't plan on getting cable
> anytime soon). This TV has the DVI HDTV connection. Does that prevent
> it from becoming obsolete in the future, if broadcasters scramble
> their signals, or should I wait a few years?

Assuming that you intend to use an STB (set top box, that is a separate
HDTV tuner) you are fine. The TV probably has both component and DVI, DVI
being slightly preferable.

If you can wait a short while until the FCC mandate kicks in, you'll find
TVs with a built-in HDTV tuner showing up on the market for much less (and
the TVs without the tuner being dumped at fire-sale prices).

"Broadcasters scrambling their signals" is a problem that only exists in
Bob Miller's fantasies. There is something about copy-restriction, but
that's only going to affect digital copying, and the final jury isn't out
on that.

If you have a TV with an HDTV tuner, you'll be able to watch your favorite
network prime time shows in HDTV for free. That's not going away.

-- Mark --

http/staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

 

[curmudgeon]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

That connection has nothing to do with OTA signals. Nor does it have
anything to do with scrambling. It is there for copy protection for
Hollywood which is afraid you're going to copy their movies.


"CGott" <curtgottler@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:70fae150.0406241820.442fc1e8@posting.google.com...
> I'm thinking of buying a set like Sony's KV 32HS510, for use in
> receiving over the air programming (I don't plan on getting cable
> anytime soon). This TV has the DVI HDTV connection. Does that prevent
> it from becoming obsolete in the future, if broadcasters scramble
> their signals, or should I wait a few years?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

CGott wrote:
>
> I'm thinking of buying a set like Sony's KV 32HS510, for use in
> receiving over the air programming (I don't plan on getting cable
> anytime soon). This TV has the DVI HDTV connection. Does that prevent
> it from becoming obsolete in the future, if broadcasters scramble
> their signals, or should I wait a few years?

I use a Sony 34HS510 HDTV today for both OTA component and

Cable Box (SA3250HD) DVI HD programs... Both work swell!!

As far as OTA HD Broadcasters scrambling... No way......

and yes, I do fear Cable 'new' Scrambling with my DVI....

but I will cross that bridge when &... IF DVI 'goes bad'...

I enjoy HDTV today... and that's counts.....

The movie industry may not be my friend?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> The FCC won't tell you, broadcasters won't tell you, the manufacturers of
> 8-VSB receivers won't tell you that current receivers may become obsolete IN
> MANY POSSIBLE ways.
>
> And then there are those who think that they are promoting HDTV by ignoring
> reality, by denying the risk, because they work for one of the above
> entities.

Doesn't it get hot wearing your tin-foil hat all the time?

-- Mark --

http/staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> USDTV is selling receivers in WalMart for $200.

In case you haven't discovered, those receivers do HD; and their big
selling point at Wal-Mart is free HD. USDTV's pay SD programming is an
attempt to get viewers, no longer needing the cable company to give them
their local channels, to fire the cable company entirely.

It's a clever idea. Whether it's successful remains to be seen. The
important thing is that USDTV's entire business model depends upon the
widespread availability of free HD OTA.

It is not in USDTV's interest to see HD OTA go away in the way that BOB
alleges. If that were to happen, USDTV's entire selling point over cable
goes away.

> Emmis Broadcasting encouraged by USDTV has gone a step furthur.

All of the above also applies to Emmis. Without widespread and free HD
OTA, the business model collapses. Cable and satellite will kill them.

Everywhere in the world (yes, even with BOB's precious COFDM) OTA requires
more consumer level maintenance of reception capability than cable or
satellite. There is a very real cost to this. Cable and satellite both
offer "install it and forget about it", and consumers will pay a premium
for that.

In order to undercut cable and satellite, USDTV/Emmis must not only be
cheaper, but offer a benefit not found on cable and satellite. That
benefit is free HD. The key is that HD is free *both* to the consumer
*and* to USDTV.

It's a clever means of bottom-feeding. Let the broadcasters give away the
HD content; and on the cheap provide CNN, Fox News, Cartoon Network, USA
Network, and the other popular SD channel while undercutting the cable
company.

But, like all bottom-feeders, it depends upon the food chain higher up.
The more free HD is available to all, the more crumbs that come down for
USDTV to gobble.

Thus, BOB's attempts at spreading anti-HD FUD attack USDTV too. Which, if
you think about it, makes sense. USDTV represents a competitor for the
bandwidth that BOB wants to use to put tampon advertisements on city
buses.

-- Mark --

http/staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Mark Crispin wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, CGott wrote:
>
>> I'm thinking of buying a set like Sony's KV 32HS510, for use in
>> receiving over the air programming (I don't plan on getting cable
>> anytime soon). This TV has the DVI HDTV connection. Does that prevent
>> it from becoming obsolete in the future, if broadcasters scramble
>> their signals, or should I wait a few years?
>
>
> Assuming that you intend to use an STB (set top box, that is a separate
> HDTV tuner) you are fine. The TV probably has both component and DVI,
> DVI being slightly preferable.
>
> If you can wait a short while until the FCC mandate kicks in, you'll
> find TVs with a built-in HDTV tuner showing up on the market for much
> less (and the TVs without the tuner being dumped at fire-sale prices).
>
> "Broadcasters scrambling their signals" is a problem that only exists in
> Bob Miller's fantasies. There is something about copy-restriction, but
> that's only going to affect digital copying, and the final jury isn't
> out on that.
>
> If you have a TV with an HDTV tuner, you'll be able to watch your
> favorite network prime time shows in HDTV for free. That's not going away.
>
> -- Mark --
>

Your first worry is not about broadcasters scrambling their signals
which they would do if they offer a subscription service.

Your first worry is that broadcasters will segment their signal. That is
they will satisfy the requirement of the FCC that they broadcast AT
LEAST ONE NTSC PROGRAM WITH MPEG2 IN THE FREE AND CLEAR and they they
will use the rest of their bandwidth to deliver more programming using a
codec such as WM9, MPEG4 or VP6 which is 2 to 3 times more efficient.

This programming could be free, part free or all subscription but even
if it is ALL FREE, that is NO SCRAMBLING, your current 8-VSB OTA
receiver will still NOT RECEIVE ANYTHING BUT THE NTSC QUALITY PROGRAM.
NTSC=SD.

Mark can say this will not happen but he is doing you no favor. He is
intent on you taking the risk. He does not want you to have all the
information that you need to make a purchase decision.

If he did he would tell you himself that what I say will happen IS
ALREADY HAPPENING.

USDTV is selling receivers in WalMart for $200. IN a couple of months
they will start selling receivers that do both MPEG2 and MPEG4. Where
ever they operate they make deals with broadcasters to use some stations
to do exactly what I suggest above. Except that they have no plans that
I know of to do any HD in their MPEG4 bandwidth. Broadcasters have
invested in USDTV.

Emmis Broadcasting encouraged by USDTV has gone a step furthur. They
have formed an organization of broadcasters to do the same thing but on
steroids. Emmis has already signed up over 400 stations out of the total
of 1600. That after only a few months. They expect ALL broadcasters to
join. They talk of buying USDTV.

Hey a few hundred $ for a receiver that works now and may work for some
time before what I suggest happens (or it may not happen) is no big
deal. Buy it but don't say you have not been warned.

The FCC won't tell you, broadcasters won't tell you, the manufacturers
of 8-VSB receivers won't tell you that current receivers may become
obsolete IN MANY POSSIBLE ways.

And then there are those who think that they are promoting HDTV by
ignoring reality, by denying the risk, because they work for one of the
above entities.

And then there are potentially those who would consciously deceive new
or would be new HD buyers about the risk because they want as many as
possible in the same boat with them. The more in the less chance it will
sink seems to be the reasoning.

Good reasoning if the numbers in the boat were actually very high. They
are not and the powers that be will ignore them as this change occurs.

I would not buy an 8-VSB receiver until they have 5th generation Zenith
capability and can handle advanced codecs like MPEG4, WM9 or VP6. The
capabilities of the 5th generation receivers were promised in 1999.

Actually much more was promised or more correctly they said that they
had the capability of mobile and indoor ease of reception in 1999. The
only reason I believe that 5th generation receivers are better is
because of trusted friends who have tested them and told me. No mobile
however.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bob Miller <bob@viacel.com> wrote in message news:<QLUCc.13222$w07.12724@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> Mark Crispin wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, CGott wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Assuming that you intend to use an STB (set top box, that is a separate
> > HDTV tuner) you are fine. The TV probably has both component and DVI,
> > DVI being slightly preferable.
> >
> > If you can wait a short while until the FCC mandate kicks in, you'll
> > find TVs with a built-in HDTV tuner showing up on the market for much
> > less (and the TVs without the tuner being dumped at fire-sale prices).
> >
> > "Broadcasters scrambling their signals" is a problem that only exists in
> > Bob Miller's fantasies. There is something about copy-restriction, but
> > that's only going to affect digital copying, and the final jury isn't
> > out on that.
> >
> > If you have a TV with an HDTV tuner, you'll be able to watch your
> > favorite network prime time shows in HDTV for free. That's not going away.
> >
> > -- Mark --
> >
>
> Your first worry is that broadcasters will segment their signal. That is
> they will satisfy the requirement of the FCC that they broadcast AT
> LEAST ONE NTSC PROGRAM WITH MPEG2 IN THE FREE AND CLEAR and they they
> will use the rest of their bandwidth to deliver more programming using a
> codec such as WM9, MPEG4 or VP6 which is 2 to 3 times more efficient.
>
> This programming could be free, part free or all subscription but even
> if it is ALL FREE, that is NO SCRAMBLING, your current 8-VSB OTA
> receiver will still NOT RECEIVE ANYTHING BUT THE NTSC QUALITY PROGRAM.
> NTSC=SD.
>
>
> If he did he would tell you himself that what I say will happen IS
> ALREADY HAPPENING.
>
> USDTV is selling receivers in WalMart for $200. IN a couple of months
> they will start selling receivers that do both MPEG2 and MPEG4. Where
> ever they operate they make deals with broadcasters to use some stations
> to do exactly what I suggest above. Except that they have no plans that
> I know of to do any HD in their MPEG4 bandwidth. Broadcasters have
> invested in USDTV.
>
> Emmis Broadcasting encouraged by USDTV has gone a step furthur. They
> have formed an organization of broadcasters to do the same thing but on
> steroids. Emmis has already signed up over 400 stations out of the total
> of 1600. That after only a few months. They expect ALL broadcasters to
> join. They talk of buying USDTV.
>
> Hey a few hundred $ for a receiver that works now and may work for some
> time before what I suggest happens (or it may not happen) is no big
> deal. Buy it but don't say you have not been warned.
>
> The FCC won't tell you, broadcasters won't tell you, the manufacturers
> of 8-VSB receivers won't tell you that current receivers may become
> obsolete IN MANY POSSIBLE ways.
>
> And then there are those who think that they are promoting HDTV by
> ignoring reality, by denying the risk, because they work for one of the
> above entities.
>
> And then there are potentially those who would consciously deceive new
> or would be new HD buyers about the risk because they want as many as
> possible in the same boat with them. The more in the less chance it will
> sink seems to be the reasoning.
>
> Good reasoning if the numbers in the boat were actually very high. They
> are not and the powers that be will ignore them as this change occurs.
>
> I would not buy an 8-VSB receiver until they have 5th generation Zenith
> capability and can handle advanced codecs like MPEG4, WM9 or VP6. The
> capabilities of the 5th generation receivers were promised in 1999.
>
> Actually much more was promised or more correctly they said that they
> had the capability of mobile and indoor ease of reception in 1999. The
> only reason I believe that 5th generation receivers are better is
> because of trusted friends who have tested them and told me. No mobile
> however.
When you talk about receivers, are you talking about a separate set
top receiver or an HDTV capable television like the Sony KV34HS510.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <bob@viacel.com> wrote in message
news:qo_Cc.734$lh4.116@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Gomer Jones wrote:
>
> > So what? Its a pay alternative to Cable or Sat with limited selections.
> > Are you infereing that I don't go this route I won't be able to watch
> > ABC/ABC HD on cable? Highly unlikely ... This is just an alternative to
> > cable or sat ... hopefully this type of packaging and competition will
lead
> > to ala carte pricing/selection on cable.
>
> Right an alternative to cable and satellite using OTA broadcast spectum,
> possible a pay service. And it could, I think will, lead to ala carte
> pricing and selection on cable and satellite.

So the Emmis / USDTV model is good, more competition means progressively
better service and lowered prices (in terms of relative dollars). So here
we are back to the root of your issue modulation, as you state later.

> As in Europe the rebirth of OTA broadcasting is putting pressure on
> cable and satellite. Only two years after beginning FREEVIEW in the UK
> has already caused SKY Satellite to offer 200 free channels.
>
> My ONLY problem is with the US modulation 8-VSB for OTA broadcasting.

Well isn't the battle over with, with Sinclairs endorsement, the OEMs
adopting integrated receivers, maybe your business model would be better
suited by jumping on the E-VSB bandwagon

> And while I still think it is a travesty and political hack job visited
> on the US public, I do think that the new OTA 5th generation receievers
> could make Emmis or USDTV viable. In fact there are other VIABLE
> possibilities in the offing that are even bigger than Emmis or USCTV
> that become viable with the 5th gen receivers.


> IMO cable and satellite will see far more competition from new OTA
> offering both 8-VSB and COFDM in the next few years than ANYTHING that
> is now happening in Europe.

So we will let the market decide.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Mark Crispin wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> USDTV is selling receivers in WalMart for $200.
>
>
> In case you haven't discovered, those receivers do HD; and their big
> selling point at Wal-Mart is free HD. USDTV's pay SD programming is an
> attempt to get viewers, no longer needing the cable company to give them
> their local channels, to fire the cable company entirely.

Yes they do HDTV in MPEG2 and the new receivers that USDTV will market
in August will do HDTV in MPEG4. The MPEG2 HDTV is free OTA DTV but the
MPEG4 can be free or subscription based. As USDTV or Emmis bring all
broadcasters on board the only programming left on MPEG2 will be ONE SD
program.
>
> It's a clever idea. Whether it's successful remains to be seen. The
> important thing is that USDTV's entire business model depends upon the
> widespread availability of free HD OTA.

I don't think so. The more successful they are the less they depend on
the MPEG2 SD part of the broadcast. They can deliver HD free or via
subscription on the MPEG4 side.
>
> It is not in USDTV's interest to see HD OTA go away in the way that BOB
> alleges. If that were to happen, USDTV's entire selling point over
> cable goes away.

The more spectrum that USDTV can capture and use in any market with the
2 to 3 times more efficeint WM9 codec the more they can compete with
cable. USDTV's entire selling point is the amount of HD, ED, SD and data
they can deliver in MPEG4. Whatever is being broadcast to satisfy the
FCC MPEG2 SD requirement is totally inconsequential.
>
>> Emmis Broadcasting encouraged by USDTV has gone a step furthur.
>
>
> All of the above also applies to Emmis. Without widespread and free HD
> OTA, the business model collapses. Cable and satellite will kill them.

They could kill cable and satellite. IF they had 20 broadcast channels
in a market like NYC they can deliver at least 10 SD or 3 HD programs
with MPEG4 in the spectrum not used by the ONE SD MPEG2 SD program. That
would total 200 SD or 60 HD channels or some mix of the two. With PVR
capability in the receiver they can more than compete with cable and
satellite.
>
> Everywhere in the world (yes, even with BOB's precious COFDM) OTA
> requires more consumer level maintenance of reception capability than
> cable or satellite. There is a very real cost to this. Cable and
> satellite both offer "install it and forget about it", and consumers
> will pay a premium for that.

Well while this is true with current 8-VSB receivers it is EMPHATICALLY
NOT TRUE of COFDM and hopefully not true of 5th generation 8-VSB
receivers. COFDM and we beleive 5th gen 8-VSB offers a MUCH lower
maintenance cost than cable or satellite. Install it and forget it is
what COFDM is all about.

Satellite is more like install it and pray that is doesn't rain and
cable as I have experienced it is more call they and stay on hold for
most of the day for problems that occur all to regularly.
>
> In order to undercut cable and satellite, USDTV/Emmis must not only be
> cheaper, but offer a benefit not found on cable and satellite. That
> benefit is free HD. The key is that HD is free *both* to the consumer
> *and* to USDTV.

At first USDTV must be cheaper and it can be. Its plant cost far less
and maintenance is minor compared to cable. Its benefits can include no
lost signal due to rain ala satellite, free programming including HD
delivered on the MPEG4 side, higher bit rate SD or even ED programming
and lower cost.

Down the road a bit OTA does not have to be cheaper. At the same price I
believe OTA wins out.
>
> It's a clever means of bottom-feeding. Let the broadcasters give away
> the HD content; and on the cheap provide CNN, Fox News, Cartoon Network,
> USA Network, and the other popular SD channel while undercutting the
> cable company.
>
> But, like all bottom-feeders, it depends upon the food chain higher up.
> The more free HD is available to all, the more crumbs that come down for
> USDTV to gobble.
>
> Thus, BOB's attempts at spreading anti-HD FUD attack USDTV too. Which,
> if you think about it, makes sense. USDTV represents a competitor for
> the bandwidth that BOB wants to use to put tampon advertisements on city
> buses.

No the USDTV model carried to its logical end is not a bottom feeder it
is the rebirth of OTA and the end of cable and satellite in any form
that we now recognize them in if they exist at all.

Bob Miller
>
> -- Mark --
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>>Gomer Jones wrote:

>>
>>Right an alternative to cable and satellite using OTA broadcast spectum,
>>possible a pay service. And it could, I think will, lead to ala carte
>>pricing and selection on cable and satellite.
>
>
> So the Emmis / USDTV model is good, more competition means progressively
> better service and lowered prices (in terms of relative dollars). So here
> we are back to the root of your issue modulation, as you state later.
>
>
>>As in Europe the rebirth of OTA broadcasting is putting pressure on
>>cable and satellite. Only two years after beginning FREEVIEW in the UK
>>has already caused SKY Satellite to offer 200 free channels.
>>
>>My ONLY problem is with the US modulation 8-VSB for OTA broadcasting.
>
>
> Well isn't the battle over with, with Sinclairs endorsement, the OEMs
> adopting integrated receivers, maybe your business model would be better
> suited by jumping on the E-VSB bandwagon

If the battle is over we won. Hard to understand with my arguments here
but my BUSINESS MODEL REQUIRES that broadcasters are STUCK with a non
mobile 8-VSB while we can use COFDM on other spectrum for mobile services.

The better 5th generation 8-VSB receivers so LOCK IN 8-VSB that this is
a great day. Understand that if current broadcasters could offer a
mobile receiver why would anyone want to compete with them? Why would
anyone start a new business using spectrum they had to pay for to
compete with broadcasters who got their spectrum for free and have most
of the content? It would be crazy. If they cannot compete then that is a
different story. They can't do mobile with 8-VSB or if they try I would
love to compete with them using COFDM.
>
>
>>And while I still think it is a travesty and political hack job visited
>>on the US public, I do think that the new OTA 5th generation receievers
>>could make Emmis or USDTV viable. In fact there are other VIABLE
>>possibilities in the offing that are even bigger than Emmis or USCTV
>>that become viable with the 5th gen receivers.
>
>
>
>>IMO cable and satellite will see far more competition from new OTA
>>offering both 8-VSB and COFDM in the next few years than ANYTHING that
>>is now happening in Europe.
>
>
> So we will let the market decide.
>

If only we could let the market decide. As it is many decisions that
should be market driven are decided by who has the most money
politically in DC.

And at the moment this is more true in the US than in many other
countries. We try to export our morality and have laws against our
companies taking or giving bribes overseas for business purposes while
here at home our government is more and more run by outright bribery
that is reported to us on TV every night and we accept it.

Just listen to responses right here to the affect "they picked a
modulation already so nothing can ever be done about it". YOu don't hear
that in S. Korea where broadcasters refuse to go on the air with 8-VSB 6
years after is was chosen.

The British tried to put a tax, the first tax of any kind, on the
American Colonialist. These were loyal British subjects. The tax was 4%
on a tea most favored by the colonist. The British sent a ship loaded
with this tea at half price into Boston Harbor. A steal, a bargain and
the Bostonian's threw it into the sea and then killed 300 or so of the
soldiers who came to restore order.

No such bloodshed today we would say "what are you going to do, nothing
can be done" and then drink the tea.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <bob@viacel.com> wrote in message
news:34%Cc.778$lh4.729@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >>Gomer Jones wrote:
>
> >>
> >>Right an alternative to cable and satellite using OTA broadcast spectum,
> >>possible a pay service. And it could, I think will, lead to ala carte
> >>pricing and selection on cable and satellite.
> >
> >
> > So the Emmis / USDTV model is good, more competition means progressively
> > better service and lowered prices (in terms of relative dollars). So
here
> > we are back to the root of your issue modulation, as you state later.
> >
> >
> >>As in Europe the rebirth of OTA broadcasting is putting pressure on
> >>cable and satellite. Only two years after beginning FREEVIEW in the UK
> >>has already caused SKY Satellite to offer 200 free channels.
> >>
> >>My ONLY problem is with the US modulation 8-VSB for OTA broadcasting.
> >
> >
> > Well isn't the battle over with, with Sinclairs endorsement, the OEMs
> > adopting integrated receivers, maybe your business model would be better
> > suited by jumping on the E-VSB bandwagon
>
> If the battle is over we won. Hard to understand with my arguments here
> but my BUSINESS MODEL REQUIRES that broadcasters are STUCK with a non
> mobile 8-VSB while we can use COFDM on other spectrum for mobile services.
>
> The better 5th generation 8-VSB receivers so LOCK IN 8-VSB that this is
> a great day. Understand that if current broadcasters could offer a
> mobile receiver why would anyone want to compete with them? Why would
> anyone start a new business using spectrum they had to pay for to
> compete with broadcasters who got their spectrum for free and have most
> of the content? It would be crazy. If they cannot compete then that is a
> different story. They can't do mobile with 8-VSB or if they try I would
> love to compete with them using COFDM.


You have totally lost me here ... So why are you so pissed? You said you
won? Broadcast your mobile data services on other spectrum and let us watch
HDTV.

> >
> >
> > So we will let the market decide.
> >
>
> If only we could let the market decide. As it is many decisions that
> should be market driven are decided by who has the most money
> politically in DC.
>
> And at the moment this is more true in the US than in many other
> countries. We try to export our morality and have laws against our
> companies taking or giving bribes overseas for business purposes while
> here at home our government is more and more run by outright bribery
> that is reported to us on TV every night and we accept it.
>
> Just listen to responses right here to the affect "they picked a
> modulation already so nothing can ever be done about it". YOu don't hear
> that in S. Korea where broadcasters refuse to go on the air with 8-VSB 6
> years after is was chosen.
>
> The British tried to put a tax, the first tax of any kind, on the
> American Colonialist. These were loyal British subjects. The tax was 4%
> on a tea most favored by the colonist. The British sent a ship loaded
> with this tea at half price into Boston Harbor. A steal, a bargain and
> the Bostonian's threw it into the sea and then killed 300 or so of the
> soldiers who came to restore order.
>
> No such bloodshed today we would say "what are you going to do, nothing
> can be done" and then drink the tea.


I guess you are angry at the government for not listening to you? Well get
in line.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>Well isn't the battle over with, with Sinclairs endorsement, the OEMs
>adopting integrated receivers, maybe your business model would be better
>suited by jumping on the E-VSB bandwagon

Of course the battle is over! Only BOB doesn't know it. Would anyone like to
inform BOB of the FCC decision? BOB reminds me of the guy that is found on the
island still fighting the war 20 years after peace is declared. Amazing, it
really is.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Gomer Jones wrote:

> "Bob Miller" <bob@viacel.com> wrote in message
> news:34%Cc.778$lh4.729@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>>>Gomer Jones wrote:
>>
>>>>Right an alternative to cable and satellite using OTA broadcast spectum,
>>>>possible a pay service. And it could, I think will, lead to ala carte
>>>>pricing and selection on cable and satellite.
>>>
>>>
>>>So the Emmis / USDTV model is good, more competition means progressively
>>>better service and lowered prices (in terms of relative dollars). So
>
> here
>
>>>we are back to the root of your issue modulation, as you state later.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>As in Europe the rebirth of OTA broadcasting is putting pressure on
>>>>cable and satellite. Only two years after beginning FREEVIEW in the UK
>>>>has already caused SKY Satellite to offer 200 free channels.
>>>>
>>>>My ONLY problem is with the US modulation 8-VSB for OTA broadcasting.
>>>
>>>
>>>Well isn't the battle over with, with Sinclairs endorsement, the OEMs
>>>adopting integrated receivers, maybe your business model would be better
>>>suited by jumping on the E-VSB bandwagon
>>
>>If the battle is over we won. Hard to understand with my arguments here
>>but my BUSINESS MODEL REQUIRES that broadcasters are STUCK with a non
>>mobile 8-VSB while we can use COFDM on other spectrum for mobile services.
>>
>>The better 5th generation 8-VSB receivers so LOCK IN 8-VSB that this is
>>a great day. Understand that if current broadcasters could offer a
>>mobile receiver why would anyone want to compete with them? Why would
>>anyone start a new business using spectrum they had to pay for to
>>compete with broadcasters who got their spectrum for free and have most
>>of the content? It would be crazy. If they cannot compete then that is a
>>different story. They can't do mobile with 8-VSB or if they try I would
>>love to compete with them using COFDM.
>
>
>
> You have totally lost me here ... So why are you so pissed? You said you
> won? Broadcast your mobile data services on other spectrum and let us watch
> HDTV.
>

Broadcasters who were given the spectrum for free are still squatting on
spectrum we bought at auction. They are using their clout in Washington
as they have done for many decades now to keep this spectrum out of the
hands of potential competitors.

While the law, and broadcasters agreed to this when it was passed, said
the drop dead date for the end of the digital transition is 2006 and the
FCC now suggest that 2009 MIGHT be possible the broadcasters are still
thinking no sooner than 2020.

We won only refers to broadcasters getting stuck with 8-VSB.
Unfortunatley all US consumers are stuck with 8-VSB also. The better
8-VSB receivers suggest that the digital transition will now take place
a little faster is all the good news.

Again don't expect to watch a lot of free HDTV OTA with your current
receiver for very long.

>>>
>>>So we will let the market decide.
>>>
>>
>>If only we could let the market decide. As it is many decisions that
>>should be market driven are decided by who has the most money
>>politically in DC.
>>
>>And at the moment this is more true in the US than in many other
>>countries. We try to export our morality and have laws against our
>>companies taking or giving bribes overseas for business purposes while
>>here at home our government is more and more run by outright bribery
>>that is reported to us on TV every night and we accept it.
>>
>>Just listen to responses right here to the affect "they picked a
>>modulation already so nothing can ever be done about it". YOu don't hear
>>that in S. Korea where broadcasters refuse to go on the air with 8-VSB 6
>>years after is was chosen.
>>
>>The British tried to put a tax, the first tax of any kind, on the
>>American Colonialist. These were loyal British subjects. The tax was 4%
>>on a tea most favored by the colonist. The British sent a ship loaded
>>with this tea at half price into Boston Harbor. A steal, a bargain and
>>the Bostonian's threw it into the sea and then killed 300 or so of the
>>soldiers who came to restore order.
>>
>>No such bloodshed today we would say "what are you going to do, nothing
>>can be done" and then drink the tea.
>
>
>
> I guess you are angry at the government for not listening to you? Well get
> in line.
>

I think that is the point, we should not be getting in line anymore.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

curtgottler@yahoo.com (CGott) wrote in
news:70fae150.0406251416.6662d97c@posting.google.com:

> When you talk about receivers, are you talking about a separate set
> top receiver or an HDTV capable television like the Sony KV34HS510.
>

He's probably talking about both, but it really doesn't matter. Bob's
stated goal is to talk people out of buying an HD OTA receiver due to his
own personal vendetta. He tends to ignore folks like myself who report that
they're getting great reception of OTA HD now and instead wanders off into
off-topic rants about what other countries are doing with DTV (note the
lack of the "H") and claims about how local broadcasters are going to
abandon their current business plans to migrate to some OTA pay TV scheme.

He sounds sort of reasonable and knowledgable at first read, but if you
follow any of the links he posts and/or google the subjects he talks about,
you'll discover that he's taken statements out of context (or maybe made
'em up) and mostly don't support his claims.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

CGott wrote:
> Bob Miller <bob@viacel.com> wrote in message news:<QLUCc.13222$w07.12724@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>
>>Mark Crispin wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, CGott wrote:
>>>
>>>Assuming that you intend to use an STB (set top box, that is a separate
>>>HDTV tuner) you are fine. The TV probably has both component and DVI,
>>>DVI being slightly preferable.
>>>
>>>If you can wait a short while until the FCC mandate kicks in, you'll
>>>find TVs with a built-in HDTV tuner showing up on the market for much
>>>less (and the TVs without the tuner being dumped at fire-sale prices).
>>>
>>>"Broadcasters scrambling their signals" is a problem that only exists in
>>>Bob Miller's fantasies. There is something about copy-restriction, but
>>>that's only going to affect digital copying, and the final jury isn't
>>>out on that.
>>>
>>>If you have a TV with an HDTV tuner, you'll be able to watch your
>>>favorite network prime time shows in HDTV for free. That's not going away.
>>>
>>>-- Mark --
>>>
>>
>>Your first worry is that broadcasters will segment their signal. That is
>>they will satisfy the requirement of the FCC that they broadcast AT
>>LEAST ONE NTSC PROGRAM WITH MPEG2 IN THE FREE AND CLEAR and they they
>>will use the rest of their bandwidth to deliver more programming using a
>>codec such as WM9, MPEG4 or VP6 which is 2 to 3 times more efficient.
>>
>>This programming could be free, part free or all subscription but even
>>if it is ALL FREE, that is NO SCRAMBLING, your current 8-VSB OTA
>>receiver will still NOT RECEIVE ANYTHING BUT THE NTSC QUALITY PROGRAM.
>>NTSC=SD.
>>
>>
>>If he did he would tell you himself that what I say will happen IS
>>ALREADY HAPPENING.
>>
>>USDTV is selling receivers in WalMart for $200. IN a couple of months
>>they will start selling receivers that do both MPEG2 and MPEG4. Where
>>ever they operate they make deals with broadcasters to use some stations
>>to do exactly what I suggest above. Except that they have no plans that
>>I know of to do any HD in their MPEG4 bandwidth. Broadcasters have
>>invested in USDTV.
>>
>>Emmis Broadcasting encouraged by USDTV has gone a step furthur. They
>>have formed an organization of broadcasters to do the same thing but on
>>steroids. Emmis has already signed up over 400 stations out of the total
>>of 1600. That after only a few months. They expect ALL broadcasters to
>>join. They talk of buying USDTV.
>>
>>Hey a few hundred $ for a receiver that works now and may work for some
>>time before what I suggest happens (or it may not happen) is no big
>>deal. Buy it but don't say you have not been warned.
>>
>>The FCC won't tell you, broadcasters won't tell you, the manufacturers
>>of 8-VSB receivers won't tell you that current receivers may become
>>obsolete IN MANY POSSIBLE ways.
>>
>>And then there are those who think that they are promoting HDTV by
>>ignoring reality, by denying the risk, because they work for one of the
>>above entities.
>>
>>And then there are potentially those who would consciously deceive new
>>or would be new HD buyers about the risk because they want as many as
>>possible in the same boat with them. The more in the less chance it will
>>sink seems to be the reasoning.
>>
>>Good reasoning if the numbers in the boat were actually very high. They
>>are not and the powers that be will ignore them as this change occurs.
>>
>>I would not buy an 8-VSB receiver until they have 5th generation Zenith
>>capability and can handle advanced codecs like MPEG4, WM9 or VP6. The
>>capabilities of the 5th generation receivers were promised in 1999.
>>
>>Actually much more was promised or more correctly they said that they
>>had the capability of mobile and indoor ease of reception in 1999. The
>>only reason I believe that 5th generation receivers are better is
>>because of trusted friends who have tested them and told me. No mobile
>>however.
>
> When you talk about receivers, are you talking about a separate set
> top receiver or an HDTV capable television like the Sony KV34HS510.

Both. I definitely would not buy any integrated HDTV set. Buy a monitor
with NO ATSC or NTSC receiver in it. Hook it up to your cable or
satellite receiver. RENT don't buy an 8-VSB receiver from your satellite
or cable company.

If you buy a OTA receiver just know that if it cannot do MPEG4 it
probably will become obsolete IMO. If you buy one that is not 5th
generation make sure you can return it if it has a problem with reception.

I beleive that any resale of 8-VSB receivers from here on out will go
like this. What generation is it? Can it handle MPEG4? If not MPEG4/5th
Gen it will be worthless on the resale market.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
> Michael J. Sherman wrote:
>
>>
>> Do not believe anything Bob says. If he had his way nobody would be
>> watching excellent HDTV broadcasts at all.
>>
>
> Don't have to beleive me call up Emmis 317.266.0100 or USDTV 801-748-2464
>
> Emmis, Partners eye buying USDTV
> http/www.tvweek.com/news/web060304.html#emmis
>
> USDTV Moving to WM9
> http/www.uprez.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=index&catid=&topic=9
>
>
> NAB: USDTV Chooses Windows Media 9 for Pay-TV
> http/digital-lifestyles.info/display_page.asp?section=business&id=1147
>
> With lawmakers closing in on the analog broadcast spectrum like a pack
> of hungry dogs on a bone, broadcasters are gravitating toward the
> over-the-air, multichannel pay service proposed by Emmis Chairman Jeff
> Smulyan at NAB2004.
> http/www.tvtechnology.com/dailynews/one.php?id=2040

Yeah, I beleive Smilin' Smulyan just as much as I believe you.

Matthew

--
If the war in Iraq was over oil, we lost.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Go for it. Everything will be obsolete in the future, so don't get hung up
on it. In the NEAR future, you should be OK, and any changes in any
standards will be spread out over time (look how long it is taking just to
kill off NTSC broadcasting).

Oh, and don't listen to Bob. He has a bug up his rear about losing the COFDM
vs. 8VSB battle, and he just can't tolerate the thought of HDTV possibly
being a success.

Phil

"CGott" <curtgottler@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:70fae150.0406241820.442fc1e8@posting.google.com...
> I'm thinking of buying a set like Sony's KV 32HS510, for use in
> receiving over the air programming (I don't plan on getting cable
> anytime soon). This TV has the DVI HDTV connection. Does that prevent
> it from becoming obsolete in the future, if broadcasters scramble
> their signals, or should I wait a few years?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Real bad advise Phil unless by the near future you mean a year or so.
Most people want to have a $300 piece of equipment work for at least 5
years in the TV set area.

USDTV is going to be selling receivers that do MPEG4 in
August/September. Their partners in this venture include WalMart (an
investor) and Hisense, a Chinese TV manufacturer who is trying to break
into the US market. USDTV is already starting to try to answer the
question about their own outmoded receivers that are being sold NOW.
These are the least expensive 8-VSB receivers available and there is a
real company that is advertising and trying to sell OTA HD and SD.

This is something quite new, a business whose focus is OTA for their
survival. Up till now no broadcaster or other company I know of was in
this position. They actually advertise. And they have the interest of
all broadcasters. This was the focus of attention at NAB this year...

http/www.idate.fr/an/qdn/an-04/IF308/index_a.htm
New business models for digital terrestrial TV

"Other solutions include consortia of local channels which could go as
far as purchasing their content from cable operators.

This type of trend was the focus of lively discussions at the NAB, and
poses a number of problems: terrestrial TV will have to rely solely on
its broadcasting capacities, and its future will be largely decided by
the existence of high quality receivers, but also by consumers’
willingness to install terrestrial antennae that have long disappeared
from the rooftops. A possible decision by the FCC to charge for
frequencies may also play a role here."

So everybody in the industry is talking about it, 400 of 1600 TV
stations have already joined a "consortia" with most of the rest
expected to join (Emmis), we have the biggest retailer and the NO ONE
company in the US, WalMart, as an investor and already selling the
lowest priced receiver on the market and we have one of the biggest and
hungriest Chinese TV manufacturers making and financing those receivers
and all you can say is DON"T WORRY!

I think Phil you may be one of those early adopters that want to "HELP"
newbies join the HDTV club at all cost.

I think telling the truth and getting it right the first time would go a
lot further to fostering HDTV and the US would be a lot further along
with HDTV if that had been the direction Congress, the FCC and early
adopters had taken.

If CGott doesn't mind buying a new receiver in a year or two then he can
go ahead. I think sound advice would be to know the risk that he is taking.

To me it makes sense to buy a monitor with NO tuner in it at all, NTSC
or ATSC. Then if you can get a receiver from cable or satellite do that
on a rental basis. If you must buy some kind of stand alone receiver and
can wait a month or two buy a USDTV receiver that can handle MPEG4 but
make sure you can return it if you have a reception problem.

The best of all (8-VSB) worlds would be to wait for a 5th generation
receiver that does MPEG4.

The best of all worlds today would be a COFDM receiver/PVR with
VP6/WM9/MPEG4 capability IMO and it is coming to the US also.

BTW Phil I did not lose the COFDM/8-VSB battle the US and all its
citizens did. We (business wise) won since our business plan depends on
broadcasters being stuck with 8-VSB or at best (also worst) E-VSB. The
new improved 8-VSB receivers will cement in 8-VSB in the US and ensure
that current broadcasters will not be offering a mobile service.

And I have been an advocate of HDTV from the 1980's. Being pro COFDM is
being pro HDTV. HDTV OTA has suffered a 5 year and counting DELAY
because of 8-VSB.

Bob Miller


Phil Ross wrote:
> Go for it. Everything will be obsolete in the future, so don't get hung up
> on it. In the NEAR future, you should be OK, and any changes in any
> standards will be spread out over time (look how long it is taking just to
> kill off NTSC broadcasting).
>
> Oh, and don't listen to Bob. He has a bug up his rear about losing the COFDM
> vs. 8VSB battle, and he just can't tolerate the thought of HDTV possibly
> being a success.
>
> Phil
>
> "CGott" <curtgottler@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:70fae150.0406241820.442fc1e8@posting.google.com...
>
>>I'm thinking of buying a set like Sony's KV 32HS510, for use in
>>receiving over the air programming (I don't plan on getting cable
>>anytime soon). This TV has the DVI HDTV connection. Does that prevent
>>it from becoming obsolete in the future, if broadcasters scramble
>>their signals, or should I wait a few years?
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in news:WCkDc.1951$lh4.1432
@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:

> This is something quite new, a business whose focus is OTA for their
> survival. Up till now no broadcaster or other company I know of was in
> this position.

Now there's a statement that's typical of Bob - twisting stuff around to
his own means and posting something that sounds fairly reasonable as long
as you don't think about it or do any research.

Seems to me that before the proliferation of cable TV, every local
broadcaster and the national networks were in the position of having to
focus on OTA for their survival. And in all but the largest markets with
relatively well to do broadcasters, the local broadcasters still depend on
OTA - that's how their signal gets to the cable head!