Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

On Sale Now 3G phone with DTV reception

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
May 26, 2004 6:50:01 AM

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

http://www.commsdesign.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=...

"KDDI is working with Japan Broadcasting Corp. on a mobile phone that
receives digital TV programs and simultaneously receives downloads of
related program data. The company demonstrated DTV reception on a
handset last year, in a system about the size of a paperback. All those
functions have since been incorporated into a third-generation (3G)
handset that's on sale now."

So not all DTV reception in Japan is with rooftop antennas. Some
receivers are in cell phones with minuscule size omni antennas. The same
antenna could just as easy receive an HD signal.

So when you are on the roof adjusting your rotored directional 10 ft VHF
Yagi think about the rest of the world where reception can be had on an
antenna that you might not even see in a small handheld display device
which does not have to be directional.

What has your Congress and FCC done to you? Call up the General
Accounting Office and ask them what they found out in Berlin. Ask them
if they could recommend to the Chairman of the House Commerce Committee
that we have the same system here.

Call up Congressman Dingell from Michigan. Ask him what the hell he was
thinking of when he helped foist that modulation system on us that
requires that grotesque antenna on your roof. He was one of the goon
squad that intimidated broadcasters with the threat of spectrum or must
carry rights loss if they voted for COFDM. His gig was well co-ordinated
with the fraudulent MSTV test report and the outgoing Chairman Kennard's
last minute gift of 8-VSB to us all back in January of 2001.
Anonymous
May 26, 2004 11:52:55 AM

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

On Wed, 26 May 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> "KDDI is working with Japan Broadcasting Corp. on a mobile phone that
> receives digital TV programs and simultaneously receives downloads of related
> program data.

Bob Miller lies once again.

This telephone does *NOT* receive broadcast television! Instead, it
receives low resolution video from the cell phone provider at 15fps.

"Digital TV" is a marketing term. It does not mean "digital broadcast
television."

> What has your Congress and FCC done to you? Call up the General Accounting
> Office and ask them what they found out in Berlin. Ask them if they could
> recommend to the Chairman of the House Commerce Committee that we have the
> same system here.

No, we do not want Germany's semi-authoritarian political system in the
US.

Congress requested the GAO to check the Berlin experience to determine if
it is reasonable to set a quick deadline, with no reclama, instead of the
current gradual transition. It had nothing to do with the modulation
scheme.

This wasn't just the US mandate, after years of warning, that all new
large-screen TVs have an ATSC tuner. Berlin had an ueber-mandate, with
only a few months, that EVERYBODY must change to digital TV since analog
would stop working.

In the US, the choice of digital vs. analog is still voluntary. In
Berlin, it was mandatory.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
May 26, 2004 9:14:32 PM

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

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 26 May 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> "KDDI is working with Japan Broadcasting Corp. on a mobile phone that
>> receives digital TV programs and simultaneously receives downloads of
>> related program data.
>
>
> Bob Miller lies once again.
>
Well I will let the reader decide. They can read the article that I
posted and make up their own mind. The article, one of many, and
conversations with Sony, Sanyo and others in Japan all tell me that DTV
will be broadcast to cell phones next year, that working prototypes and
in the case of the KDDI article phones for sale are already a reality.

> This telephone does *NOT* receive broadcast television! Instead, it
> receives low resolution video from the cell phone provider at 15fps.
>
> "Digital TV" is a marketing term. It does not mean "digital broadcast
> television."

Whatever you say Mark. 15 fps on a very small screen could be acceptable
as TV to many. They are doing similar things in the rest of the world
with DVB-H due to start broadcasting next year and being tested in
Pittsburgh now. The spectrum is there, the tech is there this will
happen in the US next year. There will be millions of phones with
something that resembles TV soon. It will be broadcast with COFDM and
received on minuscule antennas. The same antenna could receive the
entire 6 MHz channel if so configured. I know we used a three inch
antenna in Manhattan and it was better than larger more expensive antennas.
>
>> What has your Congress and FCC done to you? Call up the General
>> Accounting Office and ask them what they found out in Berlin. Ask them
>> if they could recommend to the Chairman of the House Commerce
>> Committee that we have the same system here.
>
>
> No, we do not want Germany's semi-authoritarian political system in the US.
>
> Congress requested the GAO to check the Berlin experience to determine
> if it is reasonable to set a quick deadline, with no reclama, instead of
> the current gradual transition. It had nothing to do with the
> modulation scheme.

Well I have been talking to the GAO and they have a different
interpretation. They think that they are supposed to look at all aspects
of the digital transition in Berlin. I have conveniently given them all
my contact information in Germany and France and they were thankfully.
Also gave them info on mobile receivers they could try and who might set
them up.
>
> This wasn't just the US mandate, after years of warning, that all new
> large-screen TVs have an ATSC tuner. Berlin had an ueber-mandate, with
> only a few months, that EVERYBODY must change to digital TV since analog
> would stop working.
>
> In the US, the choice of digital vs. analog is still voluntary. In
> Berlin, it was mandatory.

Hardly, they started broadcasting digital with a cutoff date nine months
later with the proviso that this would only happen if everything went
well and the market was receptive. They then monitored the turnoff
carefully to see if there were any problems or backlash. They were
proactive in distributing subsidized receivers to the poor and free
receivers to the very poor. Not that many were given out and only around
300 calls came in over the first week or so a very great majority of
which were simply asking for directions or such. It was a very
uneventfully transition preceded by a 13% penetration before cutoff.
Receivers cost as little as $85 and 95% of the population was already on
satellite or cable. Were a few people disenfranchised? Possibly a few, I
can't imagine many and NO one was complaining.


A mandate is where you cannot buy a TV set without an 8-VSB receiver in
it whether you want or plan on using it or not. A pure unmitigated
waste. In Germany the number affected was a small part of 5% of the
population. It doesn't affect that small part of 5% of the population
which is poor or very poor, they were taken care of, nor a member of the
3% who don't want TV at all. No the 1.5% of the population that might
have been affected and we don't know how many of those 1.5% were
negatively affected but if some were it was to the tune of as much as
$85, the cost of a receiver.

In the US the cost of a mandated receiver will be more like $200 at
minimum and those affected will number in the MILLIONS!! In fact it will
affect everyone in that 85% of the population that wants a new TV set
and wants to use it exclusively with cable or satellite. An incredible
waste.

And worse once they have the receiver they will find that they will not
get any HD on it in the future because all broadcasters are only
broadcasting the minimum single NTSC quality program so as to maximize
their money making subscription service bandwidth that they are doing
with a better compression. This will not be receivable on those mandated
receivers or any receiver sold to date.


>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Related resources
May 28, 2004 8:11:04 AM

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

In article <Yf4tc.11566$Tn6.11001@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:

> > This telephone does *NOT* receive broadcast television! Instead, it
> > receives low resolution video from the cell phone provider at 15fps.
> >
> > "Digital TV" is a marketing term. It does not mean "digital broadcast
> > television."
>
> Whatever you say Mark. 15 fps on a very small screen could be acceptable
> as TV to many. T

What part of "digital broadcast television" do you not understand?

A choppy little video stream is not broadcast TV.

Who knows what it costs to watch this so-called TV for an hour, with the
air time and data you transfer over a cell network.
Anonymous
June 6, 2004 7:17:05 PM

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

What is with this guy? 15fps TV on a 2" screen? Clueless and persistent - a
bad combination.

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Yf4tc.11566$Tn6.11001@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> Whatever you say Mark. 15 fps on a very small screen could be acceptable
> as TV to many. They are doing similar things in the rest of the world
> with DVB-H due to start broadcasting next year and being tested in
> Pittsburgh now. The spectrum is there, the tech is there this will
> happen in the US next year. There will be millions of phones with
> something that resembles TV soon. It will be broadcast with COFDM and
> received on minuscule antennas. The same antenna could receive the
> entire 6 MHz channel if so configured. I know we used a three inch
> antenna in Manhattan and it was better than larger more expensive
antennas.
!