Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

End of the road for Bob Miller.

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
June 9, 2004 8:15:11 PM

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

First, I want to apologize to everyone for the off-topic post. Bob
Miller has spread his propaganda thoughout this newsgroup long enough
and today marks a incredibly huge blow to what he believes (and what
his pushes on everyone here with post after post of the same
rhetoric).

First a bit of background. For those of you who don't know Bob Miller
is a regular participant in this newsgroup, almost all of his post
revolve around "the failure of DTV in the US" and/or "the desaster of
8VSB modulation" or generic post on how much better things are in
Japan, Germany, China, et al.

8VSB modulation (for those who don't know) is the standard adopted by
the FCC years ago, that broadcasters must conform to this standard in
order to send DTV (which includes HDTV) content over the air.

Standards are a good thing because they allow the industry to move
forward. Once a standard such as 8VSB is adopted, everyone moves
forward. Electronics manufactuers invest R&D and manufacturing dollars
in putting out compliant product. Broadcasters invest in the equipment
needed to send the signal and consumers invest in the product (e.g.
8VSB tunners), there's of course a bit longer chain than this, but
needless to say once a standard has been adopted it takes a
signifigant cause to roll things back and start over because billions
of dollars invested stand to be lost.

But as things worked out 8VSB would be questioned. Sinclair Broadcast
Group (a company I believe Bob has some affiliation with), a
broadcasting giant conducted test that lead to question 8VSB. COFDM (a
competiing standard to 8VSB) was purposed. Inspired by Sinclar's, MSTV
conducted their own test and found no signifigant reason to recommend
abandoning 8SVB in favor of COFDM.

This took place in 2000. If you're interested, here is a good article
on the event: http://web-star.com/hdtv/mstvtestsum.html

After Bob Miller's mission to educate the world and push his opinion
on everyone began. His recommendation and belief was that 8VSB DTV
would fail horribly and that everything should roll back and
transistion to COFDM regardless of the cost to everyone and the
industry in general. In spite of Bobs ramblings, US broadcasters
(following the FCC mandate) began sending out 8VSB signal and with the
infrastructure laid, the studios began to emrace HDTV (today, the
majority of prime time television in the US is send out in HD or
"Ehanced Definition" format). In a short span the US became #1 in
available HDTV content. Yet Bob continued to ramble on and bash the US
system.

Yesterday (June 08 2004) something very important happend that should
end Bob Miller's quest. Sinclar Broadcasst Group (the only signifigant
organization to question 8VSB) put out a press release to announce:
"Our concerns that poor indoor reception would hinder the DTV
transition have now been addressed,... And this is especially timely
because of the FCC-mandated rollout of millions of large-screen HDTV
receivers with integrated over-the-air tuners beginning this summer.".

You can read the press release here:
http://www.sbgi.net/press/release_200468_72.shtml

Sinclar's change of stance comes from technology innovations by Zenith
and LG who have developed next generation 8VSB tunners that have
corrected the multipath issues.

This development is very important, because it means the networks do
not have to roll back, the FCC can continue to push things forward
(without resistance) and the billions invested in the current 8VSB
infrastucture do not have to be lost. For the early adopter this means
your 8VSB tunner isn't going to be outdated anytime soon as the
enhancements are in the new tunners and not a complete change of
standard.

Bob Miller crazy ideas have no more weight or merit (not that many of
them ever did). 8VSB is not only hear to stay, once the new test
results roll in (on the this next generation technology) it's likely
8VSB will be considered the more robust format.

-Jeremy

More about : end road bob miller

Anonymous
June 9, 2004 9:58:43 PM

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

"JDeats" <jeremy@pdq.net> wrote in message
news:b0738dc6.0406091515.55457ab@posting.google.com...
:
: You can read the press release here:
: http://www.sbgi.net/press/release_200468_72.shtml
:
==========================
I think that the ONLY response to Bob's posts from now on should be
twofold:

1) reply with the link:
http://www.sbgi.net/press/release_200468_72.shtml
2) report him to his ISP for off-topic posts. ( abuse@earthlink.net )

That is what I plan on doing.
Anonymous
June 10, 2004 6:09:19 AM

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

>Yesterday (June 08 2004) something very important happend that should
>end Bob Miller's quest. Sinclar Broadcasst Group (the only signifigant
>organization to question 8VSB) put out a press release to announce:
>"Our concerns that poor indoor reception would hinder the DTV
>transition have now been addressed,... And this is especially timely
>because of the FCC-mandated rollout of millions of large-screen HDTV
>receivers with integrated over-the-air tuners beginning this summer.".
>
>You can read the press release here:
>http://www.sbgi.net/press/release_200468_72.shtml
>
>Sinclar's change of stance comes from technology innovations by Zenith
>and LG who have developed next generation 8VSB tunners that have
>corrected the multipath issues.
>
>This development is very important, because it means the networks do
>not have to roll back, the FCC can continue to push things forward
>(without resistance) and the billions invested in the current 8VSB
>infrastucture do not have to be lost. For the early adopter this means
>your 8VSB tunner isn't going to be outdated anytime soon as the
>enhancements are in the new tunners and not a complete change of
>standard.
>
>Bob Miller crazy ideas have no more weight or merit (not that many of
>them ever did). 8VSB is not only hear to stay, once the new test
>results roll in (on the this next generation technology) it's likely
>8VSB will be considered the more robust format.
>
>-Jeremy

Thanks very much Jeremy for releasing the TRUTH about 8VSB. Our resident LIAR
will undoubtedly have some unbelievable spin about this. Perhaps Sinclair is
not part of the great 8VSB conspiracy? Perhaps Sinclair was paid off? Hey, it's
BOB, anything is possible from our resident Snake Oil Salesman.

At any rate this is great news and puts BOB's B.S. to rest once and for all.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 10, 2004 6:10:31 AM

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

JDeats wrote:

> First, I want to apologize to everyone for the off-topic post. Bob
> Miller has spread his propaganda thoughout this newsgroup long enough
> and today marks a incredibly huge blow to what he believes (and what
> his pushes on everyone here with post after post of the same
> rhetoric).
>
> First a bit of background. For those of you who don't know Bob Miller
> is a regular participant in this newsgroup, almost all of his post
> revolve around "the failure of DTV in the US" and/or "the desaster of
> 8VSB modulation" or generic post on how much better things are in
> Japan, Germany, China, et al.
>
> 8VSB modulation (for those who don't know) is the standard adopted by
> the FCC years ago, that broadcasters must conform to this standard in
> order to send DTV (which includes HDTV) content over the air.
>
> Standards are a good thing because they allow the industry to move
> forward. Once a standard such as 8VSB is adopted, everyone moves
> forward. Electronics manufactuers invest R&D and manufacturing dollars
> in putting out compliant product. Broadcasters invest in the equipment
> needed to send the signal and consumers invest in the product (e.g.
> 8VSB tunners), there's of course a bit longer chain than this, but
> needless to say once a standard has been adopted it takes a
> signifigant cause to roll things back and start over because billions
> of dollars invested stand to be lost.

Changing from one digital standard to another is not that big a deal.
Billions of invested capital would not be wasted. Only modulators have
to be switched and that could be from $30,000 to $50,000 per transmitter.

Setting a standard can be a good thing unless of course the standard is
bad. When 8-SVB was set as the US standard it was a bad standard. It has
held up the digital transition in the US for the past six years.
Broadcasters DIN NOT want to invest in equipment. The fact that Sinclair
was vocal about it does not mean that other broadcasters were
enthusiastic. In fact most broadcasters dragged, are dragging and will
drag their feet until they see these better receivers in action and
being purchased. Retailers were not advertising and manufacturers were
not makings significant numbers of receivers. Most everybody was just
waiting.

Sinclair was the one bright spot. They were the one broadcasters that
didn't just quietly sulk in the corner. They actively pushed and prodded
for the past four years for improvements.

Till now 8-VSB has been a ghastly standard.

The question is will the new improved receiver from Zenith allow 8-VSB
to do other things that the old 8-VSB cannot. Will 8-VSB be capable of
true SFN and on-channel repeating. I think we have to assume that
mobile is still impossible though it sound like portable might work. How
long will it take Zenith and others to reduce the price of these
receivers anywhere near where comparable COFDM receivers would sell for
today.

How soon will inexpensive digital to analog converters be made
available. They were promised in the summer of 2000 and still 4 years
later there is no sign of them.

>
> But as things worked out 8VSB would be questioned. Sinclair Broadcast
> Group (a company I believe Bob has some affiliation with), a
> broadcasting giant conducted test that lead to question 8VSB. COFDM (a
> competiing standard to 8VSB) was purposed. Inspired by Sinclar's, MSTV
> conducted their own test and found no signifigant reason to recommend
> abandoning 8SVB in favor of COFDM.
>

I have no affiliation with Sinclair other than meeting Nat Ostrof and
Mark Aitken at the hearings of 2000. We were also involved with a test
done for the DOD in November of 2001 at Ground Zero.

> This took place in 2000. If you're interested, here is a good article
> on the event: http://web-star.com/hdtv/mstvtestsum.html
>
> After Bob Miller's mission to educate the world and push his opinion
> on everyone began. His recommendation and belief was that 8VSB DTV
> would fail horribly and that everything should roll back and
> transistion to COFDM regardless of the cost to everyone and the
> industry in general. In spite of Bobs ramblings, US broadcasters
> (following the FCC mandate) began sending out 8VSB signal and with the
> infrastructure laid, the studios began to emrace HDTV (today, the
> majority of prime time television in the US is send out in HD or
> "Ehanced Definition" format). In a short span the US became #1 in
> available HDTV content. Yet Bob continued to ramble on and bash the US
> system.
>
I never bashed HDTV or HDTV content. The only problem I had/have is with
8-VSB.

> Yesterday (June 08 2004) something very important happend that should
> end Bob Miller's quest. Sinclar Broadcasst Group (the only signifigant
> organization to question 8VSB) put out a press release to announce:
> "Our concerns that poor indoor reception would hinder the DTV
> transition have now been addressed,... And this is especially timely
> because of the FCC-mandated rollout of millions of large-screen HDTV
> receivers with integrated over-the-air tuners beginning this summer.".

The FCC did not mandate the rollout of a single large screen HDTV with
integrated tuner let alone millions. They said that if you want to sell
a monitor that has an NTSC tuner in it then you must include an 8-VSB
tuner also. Since around 88% (on average) of the public uses cable or
satellite, doesn't have a TV set at all (2/%) or pirates cable or
satellite (6.8%) and only 4.2% still rely on OTA reception of TV or DTV
those integrated tuners would be a colossal waste of the consumers money.

I would expect that a lot of monitors with NO tuner at all will be sold
starting this summer. It would be pretty easy to de-install that $3 NTSC
tuner so that the retailer can sell that true monitor against any
overpriced integrated set that the cable user will not need.

Any decent retailer will so inform his customer or should be the subject
of a class action suite. I can envision big signs in the window of
retailers.
>
> You can read the press release here:
> http://www.sbgi.net/press/release_200468_72.shtml
>
> Sinclar's change of stance comes from technology innovations by Zenith
> and LG who have developed next generation 8VSB tunners that have
> corrected the multipath issues.

Not corrected the multipath issue, improved on the multipath issue. I
don't hear anything about these receivers working mobile and I have been
following this a long time. I was a big fan of 8-VSB in early 1999
before the BS started. I was a true believer before the BIG LIES that
8-VSB proponents consciously pedaled in their PR staring that year.
>
> This development is very important, because it means the networks do
> not have to roll back, the FCC can continue to push things forward
> (without resistance) and the billions invested in the current 8VSB
> infrastucture do not have to be lost. For the early adopter this means
> your 8VSB tunner isn't going to be outdated anytime soon as the
> enhancements are in the new tunners and not a complete change of
> standard.

Strange that you thought that the networks were going to have to "roll
back" if this improvement in Zenith receivers didn't happen. You never
hinted that you were that worried about the future. I thought that only
Bob Miller had crazy ideas like that. And you were worried that
"billions would be lost in the 8-VSB infrastructure". Should have called
me. I could have put your fears at rest. I knew these receivers were
coming and were a lot better. And I could have told you that even if the
US had switched to COFDM that billions would not be lost by broadcasters.

And I am still a bit confused by these 5th generation receivers and
those 5th generation receivers tested by MSTV. Hopefully these that
Sinclair is talking about are not the same that MSTV talked about at NAB.

Unfortunately I can not give you good news about your current receiver.
It is still at risk of being rendered obsolete by the EMMIS and USDTV
business plans and now with the better Zenith receiver you can bet
broadcasters for the first time will be paying a lot more attentions to
these plans. In fact it was the knowledge of the the better receivers
that had already peaked their interest in these plans. Expect them to
move forward much faster now.

That means more multicasting and only one channel of SD with MPEG2 per
broadcast channel that can be received by all current receivers.

Broadcasters may then do multiple streams of HD, SD or ED in any
combination one option of which will be no HDTV but none of these
programs will be receivable by any current receiver.

Sorry but I can't imagine another outcome. As of today if you listened
to McCain's Committee Hearing this morning HDTV is out and transition is
in. HDTV was called a number of bad things today including an attempt at
industrial policy. "Failed" was implied by inflection. Industrial policy
is what put Japan in the hole this last 13 years. And the use of OTA
broadcasting to FORCE HDTV and the use of the MANDATE to FORCE consumers
to buy receivers will fail/ is failing just as any attempt at industrial
policy should and Japan's attempt did.

Anyway now both the Republican head of the House Commerce Committee, Joe
Barton, and the Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, Senator
McCain, are on the record as wanting this transition over by 2006 or
sooner. And don't talk about HDTV to them talk about transition and
PUBLIC SAFETY.

Actually it was worse than that you should listen...
http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=...


>
> Bob Miller crazy ideas have no more weight or merit (not that many of
> them ever did). 8VSB is not only hear to stay, once the new test
> results roll in (on the this next generation technology) it's likely
> 8VSB will be considered the more robust format.

8-VSB is still c**p. The one good thing is that now these better
receivers will fix current broadcasters with this ancient 8-VSB
technology and leave the market open for new broadcasters who will use
COFDM in auctioned spectrum. 8-SVB at best will allow OTA broadcasters
below channel 52 to survive for some longer period of time than they
would have without them. But not that long.

Prediction: broadcasting with 8-VSB that might have survived another 5
years before these receivers will now last 8 years. Things are changing
to fast to suggest anything more than that.

The horror is that 8-VSB has lasted the last 6 years.

>
> -Jeremy
Anonymous
June 10, 2004 7:25:02 AM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:rqPxc.34$Wr.23@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> tuner also. Since around 88% (on average) of the public uses cable or
> satellite, doesn't have a TV set at all (2/%) or pirates cable or
> satellite (6.8%) and only 4.2% still rely on OTA reception of TV or DTV
> those integrated tuners would be a colossal waste of the consumers money.

Actually, an integrated tuner can be *very* useful to a cable or satellite
customer. It may permit him to watch local HD channels without paying extra
for a so-called HD cable/satellite service that may add very little value to
what he already gets.

1) By all accounts, satellite services do not intend to carry local HD
channels anytime soon, if ever. If the customer is buying a new
large-screen TV anyway, he may well want to get an integrated 8VSB tuner and
try to watch local HD channels via a separate antenna without paying an
exorbitant amount for a complete new setup (new dish, new satellite
receiver, etc.).

2) Many cable services already carry local HD channels unscrambled on the
cable (regardless of whether one has actually subscribed to so-called HD
cable service). An integrated QAM tuner lets the customer watch those local
HD channels at no additional cost. Again, the customer avoids the eternal
equipment rental.

Innovative manufacturers like Zenith and Sanyo are now integrating combined
8VSB/QAM (OTA/cable) tuners into $800 HDTVs. I have one myself.
Anonymous
June 10, 2004 8:14:04 AM

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

Lawrence G. Mayka wrote:
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:rqPxc.34$Wr.23@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>tuner also. Since around 88% (on average) of the public uses cable or
>>satellite, doesn't have a TV set at all (2/%) or pirates cable or
>>satellite (6.8%) and only 4.2% still rely on OTA reception of TV or DTV
>>those integrated tuners would be a colossal waste of the consumers money.
>
>
> Actually, an integrated tuner can be *very* useful to a cable or satellite
> customer. It may permit him to watch local HD channels without paying extra
> for a so-called HD cable/satellite service that may add very little value to
> what he already gets.
>
> 1) By all accounts, satellite services do not intend to carry local HD
> channels anytime soon, if ever. If the customer is buying a new
> large-screen TV anyway, he may well want to get an integrated 8VSB tuner and
> try to watch local HD channels via a separate antenna without paying an
> exorbitant amount for a complete new setup (new dish, new satellite
> receiver, etc.).
>
> 2) Many cable services already carry local HD channels unscrambled on the
> cable (regardless of whether one has actually subscribed to so-called HD
> cable service). An integrated QAM tuner lets the customer watch those local
> HD channels at no additional cost. Again, the customer avoids the eternal
> equipment rental.
>
> Innovative manufacturers like Zenith and Sanyo are now integrating combined
> 8VSB/QAM (OTA/cable) tuners into $800 HDTVs. I have one myself.
>
>
Get as much use out of the 8-VSB portion ASAP because it will only pull
in one MPEG2 SD program from each broadcaster one to two years out.
Far too many risk factors in buying an integrated set IMO.
Anonymous
June 11, 2004 12:07:27 AM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:geRxc.8571$uX2.803@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Far too many risk factors in buying an integrated set IMO.

Not if the price increment is small. Sanyo's 30" (16:9) and 32" (4:3)
models are reportedly only $747 at Wal-Mart. Prices for mere monitors
(without tuner) are not much lower.
Anonymous
June 11, 2004 12:53:08 AM

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

>Get as much use out of the 8-VSB portion ASAP because it will only pull
>in one MPEG2 SD program from each broadcaster one to two years out.
>Far too many risk factors in buying an integrated set IMO.
>

So this is what your argument has been downgraded to as the result of the
Sinclair statement? Sad BOB, very sad.
Anonymous
June 11, 2004 3:33:50 AM

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

Bob Miller has a point... 8VSB is hardly ideal. Getting off-air TV is
really hard with anything but the hight tech recievers available to the FCC,
at least indoors. Sometimes the reception is hit or miss.
June 11, 2004 1:46:59 PM

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

"magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:QH9yc.710$X92.299@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> Bob Miller has a point... 8VSB is hardly ideal. Getting off-air TV is
> really hard with anything but the hight tech recievers available to the
FCC,
> at least indoors. Sometimes the reception is hit or miss.

You're right, 8VSB is hardly ideal for Bob Miller.

Allowing COFDM would have only caused confusion and
would have derailed our HDTV transition entirely.

Besides, COFDM has a couple of very serious issues itself.
Anonymous
June 11, 2004 9:12:40 PM

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

"magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:QH9yc.710$X92.299@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> Bob Miller has a point... 8VSB is hardly ideal. Getting off-air TV is
> really hard with anything but the hight tech recievers available to the
FCC,
> at least indoors. Sometimes the reception is hit or miss.

There is no ideal OTA modulation/protocol - all have good and bad points and
issues.

Universally it seems, those concerned about the weaknesses of 8VSB are
really concerned with providing mobile data services, not its weaknesses in
carrying the highest quality HDTV in the world (and ATSC provides picture
and sound second to none)

For what it is worth, I get all my local ATSC stations solidly with a cheap
loop/rabbit ears antenna which does not require movement between channels
with a sub-$200 Funai STB receiver that probably is somewhat lower in
price/performance than the reference standards.
Anonymous
June 12, 2004 5:54:07 AM

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

>Bob Miller has a point... 8VSB is hardly ideal. Getting off-air TV is
>really hard with anything but the hight tech recievers available to the FCC,
>at least indoors. Sometimes the reception is hit or miss.
>

Huh? You mean the "high tech" receivers you can get for $199 that only need a
simple Yagi antenna? Those? And these are only available to the FCC. Huh?
Sounds like a BOB induced drug state.
Anonymous
June 15, 2004 11:40:27 AM

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

Pure bullshit.

==========
"magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:QH9yc.710$X92.299@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
: Bob Miller has a point... 8VSB is hardly ideal. Getting off-air
TV is
: really hard with anything but the hight tech recievers available to
the FCC,
: at least indoors. Sometimes the reception is hit or miss.
:
:
Anonymous
June 15, 2004 12:38:15 PM

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

Richard C. wrote:

> 2) report him to his ISP for off-topic posts. ( abuse@earthlink.net )

I doubt Earthlink will thank you for that. As long as Bob talks about
some aspect of HD he is on topic. Why don't you instead take the more
adult action of ignoring him.
Anonymous
June 15, 2004 9:34:40 PM

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

In article <QH9yc.710$X92.299@bignews6.bellsouth.net>,
"magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> writes:
> Bob Miller has a point... 8VSB is hardly ideal. Getting off-air TV is
> really hard with anything but the hight tech recievers available to the FCC,
> at least indoors.
> ...
>
Note that I have found 8VSB to be MUCH MORE robust than OTA analog,
except in certain cases. It would be more appropriate that OTA
analog would be a huge disappointment, if we were converting from
8VSB to NTSC/PAL OTA analog. I cannot reasonably receive OTA
NTSC with a reasonable picture, yet 8VSB works great. I suspect
that the case of 8VSB working where OTA composite will not is
very common.

John
!