Cell phone video video Japan

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

Video of cell phone reception of DTV. Notice the antenna size on the
phones and on the bigger player. They are broadcasting to the phones at
the same time as they broadcast HDTV.

http://www.wirelesswatch.jp/module [...] le&sid=741

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:133xc.24989$Tn6.24851@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Video of cell phone reception of DTV. Notice the antenna size on the
> phones and on the bigger player. They are broadcasting to the phones at
> the same time as they broadcast HDTV.
>
> http://www.wirelesswatch.jp/module [...] le&sid=741


http://www.trich.org/v1/whatis.htm

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

Jim wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:08:45 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Video of cell phone reception of DTV. Notice the antenna size on the
>>phones and on the bigger player. They are broadcasting to the phones at
>>the same time as they broadcast HDTV.
>>
>>http://www.wirelesswatch.jp/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=741
>
>
> This is off-topic to an HDTV newsgroup.
>
> Bob, you've been requested to stop, now you're being asinine.
> Continue posting off-topic items like this and we'll start reporting
> you to your ISP. Once your service is terminated perhaps we'll be rid
> of you.
>
The antenna being used by the cell phone is not off topic. The
information that this is being broadcast in the same channel and at the
same time as HDTV is not off topic.

If we were able to receive HDTV via simple antennas like this without
the cost of rooftop rotorized installations the DTV transition in the US
would be far more successful.

Japan is far more successful in their HDTV DTV transition in just the
three cities they have started broadcasting in. This is all very much on
topic IMO.

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

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<fOlxc.6814$uX2.5786@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

> The antenna being used by the cell phone is not off topic. The
> information that this is being broadcast in the same channel and at the
> same time as HDTV is not off topic.
>

What you talking about? This technology has nothing to do with HDTV.
HDTV is only a part of DTV. I think most of us would consider any
non-HD related DTV post as "off topic" and trolling behavior (as some
like to put it).


> If we were able to receive HDTV via simple antennas like this without
> the cost of rooftop rotorized installations the DTV transition in the US
> would be far more successful.
>

No it wouldn't. Your stance that the "poor quality of 8VSB" as the
primary cause of DTV "failure" had zero merit. You have nothing to
back it up. In order for what you believe to be true, people would
have to be going out, buying 8VSB equipment, discovering how "poor
quality" it is and returning it.

People aren't bringing integrated HDTV's into their home to even try
it because they going going though other routes because 1. HDTV
monitors are cheaper and 2. The selection of integrated HDTVs is very
small at retailers and 3. cable and sat providers are offering HD STBs
for a very small increase in price over current digital cable service.
Those are three facts for you. If I'm not mistaken, DirectTV and Dish
Network HD recievers both rely on integrated 8VSB tunners for local
networks.

Look at the amount of content the major networks are offering in HD
and look at the rate at which they are embracing HD (compare today vs
what we had two years ago). The wheels are turning, and THERE IS NO
FAILURE. This is all propaganda from you. I think you actually believe
(or want so badly to believe) in this "failure" that a large part of
your time is taken up posting to on-line forums like this to get your
message out.

I'm a hobbist at this, and frankly I think your border line insane. I
don't think I've ever seen someone who appears so educated on a topic
to continue to selectively ignore facts and continue to preach the
same message over and over again without providing any evidence to
back their claims.

These dicussions have taken up enough of my time and I think it's best
to let osmeone else step, because you can't seem to make a case for
what you believe.


> Japan is far more successful in their HDTV DTV transition in just the
> three cities they have started broadcasting in. This is all very much on
> topic IMO.


(Yawn) WHAT DO YOU BASE THIS ON? "Japan is far more successful..."
THAT'S SUBJECTIVE, GENERAL STATEMENT. You refuse to take into
consideration the cultural differences, the demographic differences,
etc, etc... It's just the same comments... over and over and over
again... with nothing to back it.

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

"JDeats" <jeremy@pdq.net> wrote in message
news:b0738dc6.0406081740.7f1fedf9@posting.google.com...
> People aren't bringing integrated HDTV's into their home to even try
> it because they going going though other routes because 1. HDTV
> monitors are cheaper and 2. The selection of integrated HDTVs is very
> small at retailers and 3. cable and sat providers are offering HD STBs
> for a very small increase in price over current digital cable service.

Here is what I've encountered in my months of HDTV evangelization:

1) Absolutely no one is willing to install a new roof antenna, except
perhaps theoretically as part of an expensive satellite service upgrade.

2) A satellite service upgrade to HD costs hundreds of dollars up front,
because satellite services require the customer to buy a new professionally
installed antenna setup and a new receiver. Moreover, since local HD
channels are actually being received terrestrially rather than through the
satellite, reception is not guaranteed anyway.

3) Many cable providers already include local HD channels on the cable. A
customer who buys an integrated HDTV may be able to pick up local HD
channels without any increase in monthly cable cost.

Here is the bottom line I see:

32" integrated HDTVs now cost only $800. Almost everyone seems to agree
that when their current TV set finally breaks down, they may as well buy an
integrated HDTV. At that point, such a customer, if on satellite, will
switch to cable.

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

Lawrence G. Mayka (lgmayka000@ameritech.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> 32" integrated HDTVs now cost only $800.

Where can you get a 32" TV that has a built-in ATSC tuner for $800?

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/Macarena.gif
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
uce@ftc.gov |