Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ABC recommends "self-help" rebroadcasting towers (down-und..

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
July 11, 2004 5:54:20 PM

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

From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation website:

http://www.abc.net.au/reception/services/selfhelp.htm

"Residents in highly populated areas may also experience reception problems
due to signals being blocked by tall buildings or electrical interference."

And from DBA.org website:

http://www.dba.org.au/newsletter/troubleshooting.asp#PR...

"Interference from impulse noise may be causing pictures to break up and
audio to drop out momentarily. Check for domestic sources of impulse noise
(eg, the use of light switches, fridges, hair dryers, air conditioners
etc.). "

And more of recent postings from aus.tv.digital, and
http://www.dtvforum.info :

------------------------------------------------

"I have 2 *SD* set top boxes, different brands. and while I concede they
are your cheaper variety, the problems I am having do not inspire a
purchase of a higher quality box.
Most times when a _light switch_ is flicked the image becomes pixilated
and the sound breaks, squeals and sometimes drops out. When a hair
dryer is running, the problem becomes exponential.
I live in an apartment complex. and the neighbors effect my reception
too.
Is there any documentation on how the electrical supply effects digital
reception? Is there is a known solution? Do the pricy, brandname or *HD*
boxes suffer the same interference? if not, what is the difference?"
------------------------------------------------------
"There is no doubt and it is proven that high quality flyleads (TV
cables) will minimise electrical interference. However, unless you
know what the carrier signal levels are, then it's hard to diagnose.
The lower the signal level, the more susceptible to electrical
interference.
What type of antenna is up on the roof? what type of
cable has been used? How old is the antenna? Is there corrosion in the
balun or cable? Is there a mast head amplifier? Is there any
amplifier?
There are so many questions to be answered before a
conclusion can be reached. Contact your body corporate and demand that
the problem be rectified. Knock on your neighbours door and ask them
how their analog reception is. If the analog is poor, the digital may
break up too.
I have done many digital/analog TV antenna installations
from country to city and I know that digital TV may be robust but
unless all is well in the system, it will show it's other
side...picture break up and screeching audio. And that can be worse
than a constant snowy analog reception."
-----------------------------------------------------------
"With digital you do need a decent antenna and cabling.
When I first got my STB, I just had it connected to rabbit ears which
normally provided good analogue signals, but I couldn't receive anything
besides 9 and 10 (I think), and _simply touching the antenna cable_ made a
difference to the picture quality.
I believe you need a "high gain" antenna, which your analog one may
not
be, and well shielded cabling, which simple inhouse cables usually aren't."
---------------------------------------------------------------

"OK, we're new to all this so hopefully this is not an old problem.
Equipment
we have is:
LG Rear Projection TV RT39NZ40RB
Digitalview DSD-103 set top box
Problem is continuous 'dropouts'. The TV seems to keep losing signal
and
there are loud audible 'bangs' each time this happens and the picture
disappears and re-appears, and it happens quite frequently on all channels,
although some seem worse than others.
It's also worse during electrical storms, and seems to coincide with
any
electrical impulses around the house such as lights on and off etc."
------------------------------------------------------------

"Another gripe I forgot to add, which I am sure other people have
experienced, is the succeptability to small interference that digital
reception has.
Nobody is allowed to turn the toilet light on/off when we are
recording in dig in this house - causes a 3-10 second outage, no matter what
the channel. :unsure: (yes I know it is probably a scratchy switch, as
others do not have the same effect).
Digital Rule #1 in my house:
Urination etc. in the dark is essential during favorite programs. :o  "
---------------------------------------------------------
"Problem:
>I get sporadic Picture corruption and sound drop out, the picture kind of
freezes
>and becomes blocky (not fast-moving blocky, but proper blocky, kind of like
when a >movie file is corrupt on your PC.

This is a typical symptom of digital TV where there is either a reception
"glitch" or momentary interference.
1. Check if you have any pumps, fans or similar which is automatically
switching on or off.
2. Check also by switching on or off light switches or applicances near
the STB or on the same circuit which may affect reception.
It could also be an appliance next door as well."
----------------------------------------
"I'd suggest getting an antenna expert out to use a suitable antenna.
An lp45 may be a good antenna for the area you're in but I'm sure a
good local technician would be better able to comment.
You may require two separate narrow band antennas e.g. a esv45
diplexer and a 20/3539 antenna and a blu920 or 20/6269 to get the best
reception on digital.
Cabling for digital must be at least dual shield. The difference
between dual shield and quad is marginal. I'd advise rg6 cabling as
losses on rg59 are too high.
Again, without a technician and a meter, guesswork abounds."
--------------------------------------------------
"If you know the source of the interference, it may be possible to
rotate your antenna so that its front is opposite the source to maximise the
rejection of that interference.
If the interference is from a mains appliance (particularly a motor,
such as in a fridge), you will get some benefit by connecting that device to
an interference suppressor (but these are fairly expensive, so a surge
suppressing power board may be a cheaper starting point. "
-------------------------------------------------------
"The picture still breaks when my wife opens the fridge door but it
pixellates only for millseconds, not seconds as the Panasonic did. "
-------------------------------------------------------
"I've been pestering the Panasonic help desk who admitted that with
signal level strength in the 80%s there shouldn't be a problem. Magic number
they mention was over 78% they also grudgingly admitted that below that
figure there had been a number of issues with electrical impulse
interference. Not their fault of course but a signal problem !!!"
------------------------------------------------------
"No, I'm at 80% strength, where I'd like to be about 85%. On really bad
weather days I get the occasional skips and drop outs (no where near as bad
as the amp though). My thoughts were to go higher with a 20' mast and then
if I still need it put in a second LP345HV. Will RG11 really provide less
loss on a 17m run than my existing Belden RG6 1189A? "
--------------------------------------------------------------
"You may require two separate narrow band antennas e.g. a esv45 diplexer
and a 20/3539 antenna and a blu920 or 20/6269 to get the best reception on
digital."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
http://www.dba.org.au/uploads/templates/files/DBA_Insta...

"Impulse noise interference:

Impulse noise from house appliances, vehicle ignitions or overhead power
lines may interfere with the reception of the digital services causing
intermittent picture blocking or freezing. The disturbance to the sound may
be of greater annoyance.
Both level and quality margins may be consumed by the interference
caused by Impulse noise. If the interference is not being received via the
antenna, increased level, either by use of an amplifier or a higher gain
antenna may reduce the problem.

Further improvement to reception quality may be provided by:

a) correct matching of the antenna cable to the antenna balun

b) use of double screened cables between the antenna and outlet plate

c) use of double screened fly-lead from the wall outlet to the receiver

2.7 Interference from other services

Interference from adjacent channel or co-channel broadcast services may
result in reduced margins. As experienced in analog reception, reduction in
the level of the interference relative to the desired service is the first
approach to a solution.

Depending on the direction from which the interference is originating,
antenna repositioning or antenna type may be the solution. The performance
of the receiver to these types of interference may vary between models and
brands of receivers.

-------------------------------------------------------------

"hair dryer"
"fridge door"
"light switch"

8VSB rocks.
------------------------------------------------------------

So, impulse/interference noise troubles really are an ongoing issue for
COFDM DTV users. No offense intended toward Aussie HDTV fans.
But judging by the troubleshooting recommendations and the myriad of
recent real-world postings, COFDM DTV systems are obviously NOT always
"plug and play", despite some continuing claims that they are.
Anonymous
July 11, 2004 5:54:21 PM

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

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004, David wrote:
> So, impulse/interference noise troubles really are an ongoing issue for
> COFDM DTV users. No offense intended toward Aussie HDTV fans.
> But judging by the troubleshooting recommendations and the myriad of
> recent real-world postings, COFDM DTV systems are obviously NOT always
> "plug and play", despite some continuing claims that they are.

Why should this surprise anyone?

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
July 12, 2004 5:48:33 PM

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

I will leave it to other readers to visit the newsgroups you list,
aus.tv.digital and http://www.dtvforum.info and make up their own minds
on what the truth is about reception in OZ.

ALL RF broadcasting is susceptible to impulse noise interference
including 8-SVB. The design of the receiver and the cabling to an
antenna are problem areas. COFDM DVB-T is not plagued with impulse noise
problems which is attested to by the forum and newsgroup above. Sales of
receivers in countries like the UK and OZ also attest to there not being
a problem.

OZ has sales now that are ten times sales of OTA 8-VSB receivers in the
US while the UK will have total sales of 6 million receivers by the end
of this year. That would be 36 million in the US and those sales were
made over the last 2 1/2 years not the 6 years the US has had.

Sales of DTV receivers in the UK is like 1000 times those of DTV
receiver sales in the US. To suggest that there is any significant
impulse noise problem endemic to COFDM DVB-T is ridiculous and David
knows it.

But I give him credit he had to dig pretty deep to find the few post he
did and the generic red herring post from the ABC website.

Remember also that OZ is using power levels that are well below what the
US is using and would be laughed at as unworkable by David if a
broadcaster was using such power in the US. The UK's average power level
is ONE kW while 8-VSB transmitters in the US broadcast at ONE MILLION WATTS.

That is in the US we broadcast at 1000 times the power compared to the
UK and still have ONLY 1/1000 th the sales of receivers.

GO FIGURE!!!

And David will tell you COFDM needs 2 to 4 times the power to work.

GO FIGURE TWO!!!

It seems that REAL people in the REAL world believe that COFDM works
better at 1/1000 th the power of 8-VSB and they back it up with REAL
money FREELY spent, NO MANDATE.

That is NO MANDATE in the UK like the FCC one now in affect that
requires US citizens to spend $200 extra for a DTV set that is MANDATED
to have an 8-VSB OTA receiver even though they may only want to hook up
to cable or satellite. Since 97% of US citizens do so they are being
ripped off with every sale of a TV set to the tune of $200 so that the
other 3% don't have to make a decision on whether they want to buy an
integrated set or a stand alone STB.

Can politically inspired industrial policy get any crazier than that???

Bob Miller

BTW Keep digging David maybe you will find an 8-VSB user that gets
reception of a Dallas station in Utah. Stuff like that is what seems to
make the day of the typical 8-VSB early adopter. Thats what a million
watts gets you off and on. Adopting 8-VSB in the US is like adopting
1960 engine technology for your 2004 muscle car. Big is better. Bigger
is badder and biggest is obscene.

And once again here is what reception in OZ is really like. NO PROBLEMS
receiving COFDM 1080i HDTV at 120 kph from a station broadcasting at 30
kWs 40 km away.
pg. 13
http://www.dvb.org/documents/newsletters/DVB-SCENE-08.p...


David wrote:
> From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation website:
>
> http://www.abc.net.au/reception/services/selfhelp.htm
>
> "Residents in highly populated areas may also experience reception problems
> due to signals being blocked by tall buildings or electrical interference."
>
> And from DBA.org website:
>
> http://www.dba.org.au/newsletter/troubleshooting.asp#PR...
>
> "Interference from impulse noise may be causing pictures to break up and
> audio to drop out momentarily. Check for domestic sources of impulse noise
> (eg, the use of light switches, fridges, hair dryers, air conditioners
> etc.). "
>
> And more of recent postings from aus.tv.digital, and
> http://www.dtvforum.info :
>
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> "I have 2 *SD* set top boxes, different brands. and while I concede they
> are your cheaper variety, the problems I am having do not inspire a
> purchase of a higher quality box.
> Most times when a _light switch_ is flicked the image becomes pixilated
> and the sound breaks, squeals and sometimes drops out. When a hair
> dryer is running, the problem becomes exponential.
> I live in an apartment complex. and the neighbors effect my reception
> too.
> Is there any documentation on how the electrical supply effects digital
> reception? Is there is a known solution? Do the pricy, brandname or *HD*
> boxes suffer the same interference? if not, what is the difference?"
> ------------------------------------------------------
> "There is no doubt and it is proven that high quality flyleads (TV
> cables) will minimise electrical interference. However, unless you
> know what the carrier signal levels are, then it's hard to diagnose.
> The lower the signal level, the more susceptible to electrical
> interference.
> What type of antenna is up on the roof? what type of
> cable has been used? How old is the antenna? Is there corrosion in the
> balun or cable? Is there a mast head amplifier? Is there any
> amplifier?
> There are so many questions to be answered before a
> conclusion can be reached. Contact your body corporate and demand that
> the problem be rectified. Knock on your neighbours door and ask them
> how their analog reception is. If the analog is poor, the digital may
> break up too.
> I have done many digital/analog TV antenna installations
> from country to city and I know that digital TV may be robust but
> unless all is well in the system, it will show it's other
> side...picture break up and screeching audio. And that can be worse
> than a constant snowy analog reception."
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> "With digital you do need a decent antenna and cabling.
> When I first got my STB, I just had it connected to rabbit ears which
> normally provided good analogue signals, but I couldn't receive anything
> besides 9 and 10 (I think), and _simply touching the antenna cable_ made a
> difference to the picture quality.
> I believe you need a "high gain" antenna, which your analog one may
> not
> be, and well shielded cabling, which simple inhouse cables usually aren't."
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "OK, we're new to all this so hopefully this is not an old problem.
> Equipment
> we have is:
> LG Rear Projection TV RT39NZ40RB
> Digitalview DSD-103 set top box
> Problem is continuous 'dropouts'. The TV seems to keep losing signal
> and
> there are loud audible 'bangs' each time this happens and the picture
> disappears and re-appears, and it happens quite frequently on all channels,
> although some seem worse than others.
> It's also worse during electrical storms, and seems to coincide with
> any
> electrical impulses around the house such as lights on and off etc."
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Another gripe I forgot to add, which I am sure other people have
> experienced, is the succeptability to small interference that digital
> reception has.
> Nobody is allowed to turn the toilet light on/off when we are
> recording in dig in this house - causes a 3-10 second outage, no matter what
> the channel. :unsure: (yes I know it is probably a scratchy switch, as
> others do not have the same effect).
> Digital Rule #1 in my house:
> Urination etc. in the dark is essential during favorite programs. :o  "
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> "Problem:
>
>>I get sporadic Picture corruption and sound drop out, the picture kind of
>
> freezes
>
>>and becomes blocky (not fast-moving blocky, but proper blocky, kind of like
>
> when a >movie file is corrupt on your PC.
>
> This is a typical symptom of digital TV where there is either a reception
> "glitch" or momentary interference.
> 1. Check if you have any pumps, fans or similar which is automatically
> switching on or off.
> 2. Check also by switching on or off light switches or applicances near
> the STB or on the same circuit which may affect reception.
> It could also be an appliance next door as well."
> ----------------------------------------
> "I'd suggest getting an antenna expert out to use a suitable antenna.
> An lp45 may be a good antenna for the area you're in but I'm sure a
> good local technician would be better able to comment.
> You may require two separate narrow band antennas e.g. a esv45
> diplexer and a 20/3539 antenna and a blu920 or 20/6269 to get the best
> reception on digital.
> Cabling for digital must be at least dual shield. The difference
> between dual shield and quad is marginal. I'd advise rg6 cabling as
> losses on rg59 are too high.
> Again, without a technician and a meter, guesswork abounds."
> --------------------------------------------------
> "If you know the source of the interference, it may be possible to
> rotate your antenna so that its front is opposite the source to maximise the
> rejection of that interference.
> If the interference is from a mains appliance (particularly a motor,
> such as in a fridge), you will get some benefit by connecting that device to
> an interference suppressor (but these are fairly expensive, so a surge
> suppressing power board may be a cheaper starting point. "
> -------------------------------------------------------
> "The picture still breaks when my wife opens the fridge door but it
> pixellates only for millseconds, not seconds as the Panasonic did. "
> -------------------------------------------------------
> "I've been pestering the Panasonic help desk who admitted that with
> signal level strength in the 80%s there shouldn't be a problem. Magic number
> they mention was over 78% they also grudgingly admitted that below that
> figure there had been a number of issues with electrical impulse
> interference. Not their fault of course but a signal problem !!!"
> ------------------------------------------------------
> "No, I'm at 80% strength, where I'd like to be about 85%. On really bad
> weather days I get the occasional skips and drop outs (no where near as bad
> as the amp though). My thoughts were to go higher with a 20' mast and then
> if I still need it put in a second LP345HV. Will RG11 really provide less
> loss on a 17m run than my existing Belden RG6 1189A? "
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> "You may require two separate narrow band antennas e.g. a esv45 diplexer
> and a 20/3539 antenna and a blu920 or 20/6269 to get the best reception on
> digital."
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> From:
> http://www.dba.org.au/uploads/templates/files/DBA_Insta...
>
> "Impulse noise interference:
>
> Impulse noise from house appliances, vehicle ignitions or overhead power
> lines may interfere with the reception of the digital services causing
> intermittent picture blocking or freezing. The disturbance to the sound may
> be of greater annoyance.
> Both level and quality margins may be consumed by the interference
> caused by Impulse noise. If the interference is not being received via the
> antenna, increased level, either by use of an amplifier or a higher gain
> antenna may reduce the problem.
>
> Further improvement to reception quality may be provided by:
>
> a) correct matching of the antenna cable to the antenna balun
>
> b) use of double screened cables between the antenna and outlet plate
>
> c) use of double screened fly-lead from the wall outlet to the receiver
>
> 2.7 Interference from other services
>
> Interference from adjacent channel or co-channel broadcast services may
> result in reduced margins. As experienced in analog reception, reduction in
> the level of the interference relative to the desired service is the first
> approach to a solution.
>
> Depending on the direction from which the interference is originating,
> antenna repositioning or antenna type may be the solution. The performance
> of the receiver to these types of interference may vary between models and
> brands of receivers.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "hair dryer"
> "fridge door"
> "light switch"
>
> 8VSB rocks.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> So, impulse/interference noise troubles really are an ongoing issue for
> COFDM DTV users. No offense intended toward Aussie HDTV fans.
> But judging by the troubleshooting recommendations and the myriad of
> recent real-world postings, COFDM DTV systems are obviously NOT always
> "plug and play", despite some continuing claims that they are.
>
>
>
July 12, 2004 5:48:34 PM

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

In five years of daily HDTV forum and newsgroups reading, I've have never
seen ANY confirmed comments or reports about impulse noise being any kind of
an ongoing problem for our 8VSB OTA DTV.
And you're saying it's "susceptible".

Just another example of your habitual distortions and lies.

Who the hell needs interference-hobbled COFDM DTV in this country, besides
one loony internet forum troll?


"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:REwIc.48$mL5.37@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I will leave it to other readers to visit the newsgroups you list,
> aus.tv.digital and http://www.dtvforum.info and make up their own minds
> on what the truth is about reception in OZ.
>
> ALL RF broadcasting is susceptible to impulse noise interference
> including 8-SVB. The design of the receiver and the cabling to an
> antenna are problem areas. COFDM DVB-T is not plagued with impulse noise
> problems which is attested to by the forum and newsgroup above. Sales of
> receivers in countries like the UK and OZ also attest to there not being
> a problem.
>
> OZ has sales now that are ten times sales of OTA 8-VSB receivers in the
> US while the UK will have total sales of 6 million receivers by the end
> of this year. That would be 36 million in the US and those sales were
> made over the last 2 1/2 years not the 6 years the US has had.
>
> Sales of DTV receivers in the UK is like 1000 times those of DTV
> receiver sales in the US. To suggest that there is any significant
> impulse noise problem endemic to COFDM DVB-T is ridiculous and David
> knows it.
>
> But I give him credit he had to dig pretty deep to find the few post he
> did and the generic red herring post from the ABC website.
>
> Remember also that OZ is using power levels that are well below what the
> US is using and would be laughed at as unworkable by David if a
> broadcaster was using such power in the US. The UK's average power level
> is ONE kW while 8-VSB transmitters in the US broadcast at ONE MILLION
WATTS.
>
> That is in the US we broadcast at 1000 times the power compared to the
> UK and still have ONLY 1/1000 th the sales of receivers.
>
> GO FIGURE!!!
>
> And David will tell you COFDM needs 2 to 4 times the power to work.
>
> GO FIGURE TWO!!!
>
> It seems that REAL people in the REAL world believe that COFDM works
> better at 1/1000 th the power of 8-VSB and they back it up with REAL
> money FREELY spent, NO MANDATE.
>
> That is NO MANDATE in the UK like the FCC one now in affect that
> requires US citizens to spend $200 extra for a DTV set that is MANDATED
> to have an 8-VSB OTA receiver even though they may only want to hook up
> to cable or satellite. Since 97% of US citizens do so they are being
> ripped off with every sale of a TV set to the tune of $200 so that the
> other 3% don't have to make a decision on whether they want to buy an
> integrated set or a stand alone STB.
>
> Can politically inspired industrial policy get any crazier than that???
>
> Bob Miller
>
> BTW Keep digging David maybe you will find an 8-VSB user that gets
> reception of a Dallas station in Utah. Stuff like that is what seems to
> make the day of the typical 8-VSB early adopter. Thats what a million
> watts gets you off and on. Adopting 8-VSB in the US is like adopting
> 1960 engine technology for your 2004 muscle car. Big is better. Bigger
> is badder and biggest is obscene.
>
> And once again here is what reception in OZ is really like. NO PROBLEMS
> receiving COFDM 1080i HDTV at 120 kph from a station broadcasting at 30
> kWs 40 km away.
> pg. 13
> http://www.dvb.org/documents/newsletters/DVB-SCENE-08.p...
>
>
> David wrote:
> > From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation website:
> >
> > http://www.abc.net.au/reception/services/selfhelp.htm
> >
> > "Residents in highly populated areas may also experience reception
problems
> > due to signals being blocked by tall buildings or electrical
interference."
> >
> > And from DBA.org website:
> >
> > http://www.dba.org.au/newsletter/troubleshooting.asp#PR...
> >
> > "Interference from impulse noise may be causing pictures to break up and
> > audio to drop out momentarily. Check for domestic sources of impulse
noise
> > (eg, the use of light switches, fridges, hair dryers, air conditioners
> > etc.). "
> >
> > And more of recent postings from aus.tv.digital, and
> > http://www.dtvforum.info :
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------
> >
> > "I have 2 *SD* set top boxes, different brands. and while I concede they
> > are your cheaper variety, the problems I am having do not inspire a
> > purchase of a higher quality box.
> > Most times when a _light switch_ is flicked the image becomes
pixilated
> > and the sound breaks, squeals and sometimes drops out. When a hair
> > dryer is running, the problem becomes exponential.
> > I live in an apartment complex. and the neighbors effect my
reception
> > too.
> > Is there any documentation on how the electrical supply effects
digital
> > reception? Is there is a known solution? Do the pricy, brandname or *HD*
> > boxes suffer the same interference? if not, what is the difference?"
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > "There is no doubt and it is proven that high quality flyleads (TV
> > cables) will minimise electrical interference. However, unless you
> > know what the carrier signal levels are, then it's hard to diagnose.
> > The lower the signal level, the more susceptible to electrical
> > interference.
> > What type of antenna is up on the roof? what type of
> > cable has been used? How old is the antenna? Is there corrosion in the
> > balun or cable? Is there a mast head amplifier? Is there any
> > amplifier?
> > There are so many questions to be answered before a
> > conclusion can be reached. Contact your body corporate and demand that
> > the problem be rectified. Knock on your neighbours door and ask them
> > how their analog reception is. If the analog is poor, the digital may
> > break up too.
> > I have done many digital/analog TV antenna installations
> > from country to city and I know that digital TV may be robust but
> > unless all is well in the system, it will show it's other
> > side...picture break up and screeching audio. And that can be worse
> > than a constant snowy analog reception."
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> > "With digital you do need a decent antenna and cabling.
> > When I first got my STB, I just had it connected to rabbit ears
which
> > normally provided good analogue signals, but I couldn't receive anything
> > besides 9 and 10 (I think), and _simply touching the antenna cable_ made
a
> > difference to the picture quality.
> > I believe you need a "high gain" antenna, which your analog one
may
> > not
> > be, and well shielded cabling, which simple inhouse cables usually
aren't."
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > "OK, we're new to all this so hopefully this is not an old problem.
> > Equipment
> > we have is:
> > LG Rear Projection TV RT39NZ40RB
> > Digitalview DSD-103 set top box
> > Problem is continuous 'dropouts'. The TV seems to keep losing
signal
> > and
> > there are loud audible 'bangs' each time this happens and the picture
> > disappears and re-appears, and it happens quite frequently on all
channels,
> > although some seem worse than others.
> > It's also worse during electrical storms, and seems to coincide
with
> > any
> > electrical impulses around the house such as lights on and off etc."
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > "Another gripe I forgot to add, which I am sure other people have
> > experienced, is the succeptability to small interference that digital
> > reception has.
> > Nobody is allowed to turn the toilet light on/off when we are
> > recording in dig in this house - causes a 3-10 second outage, no matter
what
> > the channel. :unsure: (yes I know it is probably a scratchy switch, as
> > others do not have the same effect).
> > Digital Rule #1 in my house:
> > Urination etc. in the dark is essential during favorite programs. :o  "
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > "Problem:
> >
> >>I get sporadic Picture corruption and sound drop out, the picture kind
of
> >
> > freezes
> >
> >>and becomes blocky (not fast-moving blocky, but proper blocky, kind of
like
> >
> > when a >movie file is corrupt on your PC.
> >
> > This is a typical symptom of digital TV where there is either a
reception
> > "glitch" or momentary interference.
> > 1. Check if you have any pumps, fans or similar which is
automatically
> > switching on or off.
> > 2. Check also by switching on or off light switches or applicances
near
> > the STB or on the same circuit which may affect reception.
> > It could also be an appliance next door as well."
> > ----------------------------------------
> > "I'd suggest getting an antenna expert out to use a suitable antenna.
> > An lp45 may be a good antenna for the area you're in but I'm sure a
> > good local technician would be better able to comment.
> > You may require two separate narrow band antennas e.g. a esv45
> > diplexer and a 20/3539 antenna and a blu920 or 20/6269 to get the best
> > reception on digital.
> > Cabling for digital must be at least dual shield. The difference
> > between dual shield and quad is marginal. I'd advise rg6 cabling as
> > losses on rg59 are too high.
> > Again, without a technician and a meter, guesswork abounds."
> > --------------------------------------------------
> > "If you know the source of the interference, it may be possible to
> > rotate your antenna so that its front is opposite the source to maximise
the
> > rejection of that interference.
> > If the interference is from a mains appliance (particularly a
motor,
> > such as in a fridge), you will get some benefit by connecting that
device to
> > an interference suppressor (but these are fairly expensive, so a surge
> > suppressing power board may be a cheaper starting point. "
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > "The picture still breaks when my wife opens the fridge door but it
> > pixellates only for millseconds, not seconds as the Panasonic did. "
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > "I've been pestering the Panasonic help desk who admitted that with
> > signal level strength in the 80%s there shouldn't be a problem. Magic
number
> > they mention was over 78% they also grudgingly admitted that below that
> > figure there had been a number of issues with electrical impulse
> > interference. Not their fault of course but a signal problem !!!"
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > "No, I'm at 80% strength, where I'd like to be about 85%. On really
bad
> > weather days I get the occasional skips and drop outs (no where near as
bad
> > as the amp though). My thoughts were to go higher with a 20' mast and
then
> > if I still need it put in a second LP345HV. Will RG11 really provide
less
> > loss on a 17m run than my existing Belden RG6 1189A? "
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > "You may require two separate narrow band antennas e.g. a esv45
diplexer
> > and a 20/3539 antenna and a blu920 or 20/6269 to get the best reception
on
> > digital."
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > From:
> >
http://www.dba.org.au/uploads/templates/files/DBA_Insta...
> >
> > "Impulse noise interference:
> >
> > Impulse noise from house appliances, vehicle ignitions or overhead
power
> > lines may interfere with the reception of the digital services causing
> > intermittent picture blocking or freezing. The disturbance to the sound
may
> > be of greater annoyance.
> > Both level and quality margins may be consumed by the interference
> > caused by Impulse noise. If the interference is not being received via
the
> > antenna, increased level, either by use of an amplifier or a higher gain
> > antenna may reduce the problem.
> >
> > Further improvement to reception quality may be provided by:
> >
> > a) correct matching of the antenna cable to the antenna balun
> >
> > b) use of double screened cables between the antenna and outlet plate
> >
> > c) use of double screened fly-lead from the wall outlet to the receiver
> >
> > 2.7 Interference from other services
> >
> > Interference from adjacent channel or co-channel broadcast services
may
> > result in reduced margins. As experienced in analog reception,
reduction in
> > the level of the interference relative to the desired service is the
first
> > approach to a solution.
> >
> > Depending on the direction from which the interference is
originating,
> > antenna repositioning or antenna type may be the solution. The
performance
> > of the receiver to these types of interference may vary between models
and
> > brands of receivers.
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > "hair dryer"
> > "fridge door"
> > "light switch"
> >
> > 8VSB rocks.
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > So, impulse/interference noise troubles really are an ongoing issue
for
> > COFDM DTV users. No offense intended toward Aussie HDTV fans.
> > But judging by the troubleshooting recommendations and the myriad of
> > recent real-world postings, COFDM DTV systems are obviously NOT always
> > "plug and play", despite some continuing claims that they are.
> >
> >
> >
Anonymous
July 12, 2004 5:48:34 PM

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

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
>[snip]

alt.tv.tech.hdtv Frequently Asked Question:

Q: Who is Bob Miller?
A: Bob Miller, the president of a failed company in NYC called Viacel, is
our resident clown and snake oil salesman. He serves a valuable
purpose in this newsgroup by reliably coming to an incorrect conclusion
from any news item or piece of data. He is so reliably wrong on all
matters that whenever he says anything, you can be confident that the
exact opposite is true.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
July 12, 2004 7:42:51 PM

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

First there are not that many 8-VSB receivers in the US actually sold or
being used so the pool of users is small. Then you factor in all the
problems with multipath that 8-VSB users have and any impulse noise
problems get lost in the noise.

Was that the dog walking across the room or the air conditioner kicking
in? Was that the bus going by causing multipath or an impulse problem
from its engine.

First we have to solve the multipath problems with 8-VSB before the
impulse noise problems even can be distinguished.

Hey COFDM has intrinsically more of a problem with impulse noise but it
has been designed out with modern receivers. The associated problems now
may come from old cables, antennas and very weak signals.

To suggest that is is any REAL problem is disingenuous. The numbers
speak for themselves. Sales of 8-VSB receivers are dismal and require a
MANDATE. This is because of the many problems associated with 8-VSB. The
new Zenith 5th gen receivers will solve the most basic, static multipath
I have heard.

David wrote:
> In five years of daily HDTV forum and newsgroups reading, I've have never
> seen ANY confirmed comments or reports about impulse noise being any kind of
> an ongoing problem for our 8VSB OTA DTV.
> And you're saying it's "susceptible".
>
> Just another example of your habitual distortions and lies.
>
> Who the hell needs interference-hobbled COFDM DTV in this country, besides
> one loony internet forum troll?
>
>
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:REwIc.48$mL5.37@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>I will leave it to other readers to visit the newsgroups you list,
>>aus.tv.digital and http://www.dtvforum.info and make up their own minds
>>on what the truth is about reception in OZ.
>>
>>ALL RF broadcasting is susceptible to impulse noise interference
>>including 8-SVB. The design of the receiver and the cabling to an
>>antenna are problem areas. COFDM DVB-T is not plagued with impulse noise
>>problems which is attested to by the forum and newsgroup above. Sales of
>>receivers in countries like the UK and OZ also attest to there not being
>>a problem.
>>
>>OZ has sales now that are ten times sales of OTA 8-VSB receivers in the
>>US while the UK will have total sales of 6 million receivers by the end
>>of this year. That would be 36 million in the US and those sales were
>>made over the last 2 1/2 years not the 6 years the US has had.
>>
>>Sales of DTV receivers in the UK is like 1000 times those of DTV
>>receiver sales in the US. To suggest that there is any significant
>>impulse noise problem endemic to COFDM DVB-T is ridiculous and David
>>knows it.
>>
>>But I give him credit he had to dig pretty deep to find the few post he
>>did and the generic red herring post from the ABC website.
>>
>>Remember also that OZ is using power levels that are well below what the
>>US is using and would be laughed at as unworkable by David if a
>>broadcaster was using such power in the US. The UK's average power level
>>is ONE kW while 8-VSB transmitters in the US broadcast at ONE MILLION
>
> WATTS.
>
>>That is in the US we broadcast at 1000 times the power compared to the
>>UK and still have ONLY 1/1000 th the sales of receivers.
>>
>>GO FIGURE!!!
>>
>>And David will tell you COFDM needs 2 to 4 times the power to work.
>>
>>GO FIGURE TWO!!!
>>
>>It seems that REAL people in the REAL world believe that COFDM works
>>better at 1/1000 th the power of 8-VSB and they back it up with REAL
>>money FREELY spent, NO MANDATE.
>>
>>That is NO MANDATE in the UK like the FCC one now in affect that
>>requires US citizens to spend $200 extra for a DTV set that is MANDATED
>>to have an 8-VSB OTA receiver even though they may only want to hook up
>>to cable or satellite. Since 97% of US citizens do so they are being
>>ripped off with every sale of a TV set to the tune of $200 so that the
>>other 3% don't have to make a decision on whether they want to buy an
>>integrated set or a stand alone STB.
>>
>>Can politically inspired industrial policy get any crazier than that???
>>
>>Bob Miller
>>
>>BTW Keep digging David maybe you will find an 8-VSB user that gets
>>reception of a Dallas station in Utah. Stuff like that is what seems to
>>make the day of the typical 8-VSB early adopter. Thats what a million
>>watts gets you off and on. Adopting 8-VSB in the US is like adopting
>>1960 engine technology for your 2004 muscle car. Big is better. Bigger
>>is badder and biggest is obscene.
>>
>>And once again here is what reception in OZ is really like. NO PROBLEMS
>>receiving COFDM 1080i HDTV at 120 kph from a station broadcasting at 30
>>kWs 40 km away.
>>pg. 13
>>http://www.dvb.org/documents/newsletters/DVB-SCENE-08.p...
>>
>>
>>David wrote:
>>
>>> From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation website:
>>>
>>>http://www.abc.net.au/reception/services/selfhelp.htm
>>>
>>>"Residents in highly populated areas may also experience reception
>
> problems
>
>>>due to signals being blocked by tall buildings or electrical
>
> interference."
>
>>>And from DBA.org website:
>>>
>>>http://www.dba.org.au/newsletter/troubleshooting.asp#PR...
>>>
>>>"Interference from impulse noise may be causing pictures to break up and
>>>audio to drop out momentarily. Check for domestic sources of impulse
>
> noise
>
>>>(eg, the use of light switches, fridges, hair dryers, air conditioners
>>>etc.). "
>>>
>>>And more of recent postings from aus.tv.digital, and
>>>http://www.dtvforum.info :
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>"I have 2 *SD* set top boxes, different brands. and while I concede they
>>>are your cheaper variety, the problems I am having do not inspire a
>>>purchase of a higher quality box.
>>> Most times when a _light switch_ is flicked the image becomes
>
> pixilated
>
>>>and the sound breaks, squeals and sometimes drops out. When a hair
>>>dryer is running, the problem becomes exponential.
>>> I live in an apartment complex. and the neighbors effect my
>
> reception
>
>>>too.
>>> Is there any documentation on how the electrical supply effects
>
> digital
>
>>>reception? Is there is a known solution? Do the pricy, brandname or *HD*
>>>boxes suffer the same interference? if not, what is the difference?"
>>>------------------------------------------------------
>>>"There is no doubt and it is proven that high quality flyleads (TV
>>>cables) will minimise electrical interference. However, unless you
>>>know what the carrier signal levels are, then it's hard to diagnose.
>>> The lower the signal level, the more susceptible to electrical
>>>interference.
>>> What type of antenna is up on the roof? what type of
>>>cable has been used? How old is the antenna? Is there corrosion in the
>>>balun or cable? Is there a mast head amplifier? Is there any
>>>amplifier?
>>> There are so many questions to be answered before a
>>>conclusion can be reached. Contact your body corporate and demand that
>>>the problem be rectified. Knock on your neighbours door and ask them
>>>how their analog reception is. If the analog is poor, the digital may
>>>break up too.
>>> I have done many digital/analog TV antenna installations
>>>from country to city and I know that digital TV may be robust but
>>>unless all is well in the system, it will show it's other
>>>side...picture break up and screeching audio. And that can be worse
>>>than a constant snowy analog reception."
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>"With digital you do need a decent antenna and cabling.
>>> When I first got my STB, I just had it connected to rabbit ears
>
> which
>
>>>normally provided good analogue signals, but I couldn't receive anything
>>>besides 9 and 10 (I think), and _simply touching the antenna cable_ made
>
> a
>
>>>difference to the picture quality.
>>> I believe you need a "high gain" antenna, which your analog one
>
> may
>
>>>not
>>>be, and well shielded cabling, which simple inhouse cables usually
>
> aren't."
>
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>"OK, we're new to all this so hopefully this is not an old problem.
>>>Equipment
>>>we have is:
>>>LG Rear Projection TV RT39NZ40RB
>>>Digitalview DSD-103 set top box
>>> Problem is continuous 'dropouts'. The TV seems to keep losing
>
> signal
>
>>>and
>>>there are loud audible 'bangs' each time this happens and the picture
>>>disappears and re-appears, and it happens quite frequently on all
>
> channels,
>
>>>although some seem worse than others.
>>> It's also worse during electrical storms, and seems to coincide
>
> with
>
>>>any
>>>electrical impulses around the house such as lights on and off etc."
>>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>"Another gripe I forgot to add, which I am sure other people have
>>>experienced, is the succeptability to small interference that digital
>>>reception has.
>>> Nobody is allowed to turn the toilet light on/off when we are
>>>recording in dig in this house - causes a 3-10 second outage, no matter
>
> what
>
>>>the channel. :unsure: (yes I know it is probably a scratchy switch, as
>>>others do not have the same effect).
>>>Digital Rule #1 in my house:
>>>Urination etc. in the dark is essential during favorite programs. :o  "
>>>---------------------------------------------------------
>>>"Problem:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I get sporadic Picture corruption and sound drop out, the picture kind
>
> of
>
>>>freezes
>>>
>>>
>>>>and becomes blocky (not fast-moving blocky, but proper blocky, kind of
>
> like
>
>>>when a >movie file is corrupt on your PC.
>>>
>>>This is a typical symptom of digital TV where there is either a
>
> reception
>
>>>"glitch" or momentary interference.
>>> 1. Check if you have any pumps, fans or similar which is
>
> automatically
>
>>>switching on or off.
>>> 2. Check also by switching on or off light switches or applicances
>
> near
>
>>>the STB or on the same circuit which may affect reception.
>>>It could also be an appliance next door as well."
>>>----------------------------------------
>>>"I'd suggest getting an antenna expert out to use a suitable antenna.
>>>An lp45 may be a good antenna for the area you're in but I'm sure a
>>>good local technician would be better able to comment.
>>> You may require two separate narrow band antennas e.g. a esv45
>>>diplexer and a 20/3539 antenna and a blu920 or 20/6269 to get the best
>>>reception on digital.
>>> Cabling for digital must be at least dual shield. The difference
>>>between dual shield and quad is marginal. I'd advise rg6 cabling as
>>>losses on rg59 are too high.
>>>Again, without a technician and a meter, guesswork abounds."
>>>--------------------------------------------------
>>> "If you know the source of the interference, it may be possible to
>>>rotate your antenna so that its front is opposite the source to maximise
>
> the
>
>>>rejection of that interference.
>>> If the interference is from a mains appliance (particularly a
>
> motor,
>
>>>such as in a fridge), you will get some benefit by connecting that
>
> device to
>
>>>an interference suppressor (but these are fairly expensive, so a surge
>>>suppressing power board may be a cheaper starting point. "
>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>> "The picture still breaks when my wife opens the fridge door but it
>>>pixellates only for millseconds, not seconds as the Panasonic did. "
>>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>> "I've been pestering the Panasonic help desk who admitted that with
>>>signal level strength in the 80%s there shouldn't be a problem. Magic
>
> number
>
>>>they mention was over 78% they also grudgingly admitted that below that
>>>figure there had been a number of issues with electrical impulse
>>>interference. Not their fault of course but a signal problem !!!"
>>>------------------------------------------------------
>>> "No, I'm at 80% strength, where I'd like to be about 85%. On really
>
> bad
>
>>>weather days I get the occasional skips and drop outs (no where near as
>
> bad
>
>>>as the amp though). My thoughts were to go higher with a 20' mast and
>
> then
>
>>>if I still need it put in a second LP345HV. Will RG11 really provide
>
> less
>
>>>loss on a 17m run than my existing Belden RG6 1189A? "
>>>--------------------------------------------------------------
>>> "You may require two separate narrow band antennas e.g. a esv45
>
> diplexer
>
>>>and a 20/3539 antenna and a blu920 or 20/6269 to get the best reception
>
> on
>
>>>digital."
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>From:
>>>
>
> http://www.dba.org.au/uploads/templates/files/DBA_Insta...
>
>>>"Impulse noise interference:
>>>
>>> Impulse noise from house appliances, vehicle ignitions or overhead
>
> power
>
>>>lines may interfere with the reception of the digital services causing
>>>intermittent picture blocking or freezing. The disturbance to the sound
>
> may
>
>>>be of greater annoyance.
>>> Both level and quality margins may be consumed by the interference
>>>caused by Impulse noise. If the interference is not being received via
>
> the
>
>>>antenna, increased level, either by use of an amplifier or a higher gain
>>>antenna may reduce the problem.
>>>
>>>Further improvement to reception quality may be provided by:
>>>
>>>a) correct matching of the antenna cable to the antenna balun
>>>
>>>b) use of double screened cables between the antenna and outlet plate
>>>
>>>c) use of double screened fly-lead from the wall outlet to the receiver
>>>
>>>2.7 Interference from other services
>>>
>>> Interference from adjacent channel or co-channel broadcast services
>
> may
>
>>>result in reduced margins. As experienced in analog reception,
>
> reduction in
>
>>>the level of the interference relative to the desired service is the
>
> first
>
>>>approach to a solution.
>>>
>>> Depending on the direction from which the interference is
>
> originating,
>
>>>antenna repositioning or antenna type may be the solution. The
>
> performance
>
>>>of the receiver to these types of interference may vary between models
>
> and
>
>>>brands of receivers.
>>>
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>"hair dryer"
>>>"fridge door"
>>>"light switch"
>>>
>>>8VSB rocks.
>>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> So, impulse/interference noise troubles really are an ongoing issue
>
> for
>
>>>COFDM DTV users. No offense intended toward Aussie HDTV fans.
>>> But judging by the troubleshooting recommendations and the myriad of
>>>recent real-world postings, COFDM DTV systems are obviously NOT always
>>>"plug and play", despite some continuing claims that they are.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
Anonymous
July 12, 2004 7:42:52 PM

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

Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> First there are not that many 8-VSB receivers in the US actually sold or
> being used

As a percentage of the US population/households, this is true.

As absolute numbers, this is false.

There have been more digital TV receivers sold in the US by *number* than
in any other country. And, of course, ours *all* can receive HDTV, which
isn't true in *any* other country.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Pickles/Adoration.gif
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
uce@ftc.gov |
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 11:25:10 AM

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

This Bob Miller posts a technically firm response complete
with accurate names and other pertinent information. Then
Mark Crispin and Jeff Rife, instead, attack the credibility
and integrity of Bob Miller without once even trying to
responsibly dispute facts. What kind of replies are that?
Apparently both Jeff Rife and Mark Crispin don't have
technical facts. They just "know". So they attack the person
- Bob Miller.

Jeff Rife - if Bob Miller's numbers were wrong, then an
honest man would have quoted a responsible source. Instead
you posted as children argue. "Yes it is. Not its not. Yes
it is..." Jeff, be an adult. Cite a credible source or stop
wasting good bandwidth.

Mark Crispin - some people advance America by taking risks;
trying to start new businesses. Then we have those who never
get above working in the sewers. Never tried to do what makes
America great. Then personally attack others who bothered to,
risk, learn, and try. You post really says Bob Miller is an
example of why the American economy prospers, and why Mark
Crispin sometimes ends up in the unemployment line.

I don't know if Bob Miller has posted accurately. But based
upon responses from both Mark Crispin and Jeff Rife, then
apparently Bob Miller is credible; posts too accurately for
their emotions.

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
>> [snip]
>
> alt.tv.tech.hdtv Frequently Asked Question:
>
> Q: Who is Bob Miller?
> A: Bob Miller, the president of a failed company in NYC called
> Viacel, is our resident clown and snake oil salesman. He
> serves a valuable purpose in this newsgroup by reliably coming
> to an incorrect conclusion from any news item or piece of data.
> He is so reliably wrong on all matters that whenever he says
> anything, you can be confident that the exact opposite is true.
>
> -- Mark --
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 12:24:01 PM

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

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, w_tom wrote:
> This Bob Miller posts a technically firm response complete
> with accurate names and other pertinent information.

When? Every single claim of Miller's is verifiably, and has been verified
as, false.

One of Miller's little tricks is to post URLs from the Japanese press,
with a photo that claims to back up his claim. Only problem is, I read,
speak, and write Japanese; and being able to read the article shows that
Miller's claim is bullshit.

Miller, by his own admission, does nothing but post fear, uncertainty, and
doubt.

> Mark Crispin - some people advance America by taking risks;
> trying to start new businesses. Then we have those who never
> get above working in the sewers. Never tried to do what makes
> America great. Then personally attack others who bothered to,
> risk, learn, and try.

That is a description of Bob Miller. Every one of Miller's posts consists
upon an attack upon the North American HDTV infrastructure and on the
people who are working to build it. Miller's claims basically boil down
to the assertation that "political corruption" led to the selection of an
"inferior" digital TV system upon the US, and that Europe and Japan are
far ahead of the US.

Yet Europe has no HDTV at all, and has nationwide digital TV in only one
country. Japan has HDTV with digital TV in only three cities.
Meanwhile, the US has HDTV with digital TV nationwide, with over a
thousand broadcasters.

Bob Miller has no business.

> You post really says Bob Miller is an
> example of why the American economy prospers, and why Mark
> Crispin sometimes ends up in the unemployment line.

Right. Someone like Mark Crispin, who has:
1) never been on an unemployment line in a career spanning
several decades
2) invented technology used by millions worldwide
has nothing to do with America's prosperty.

Right. What sort of narcotics are you smoking?

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
July 13, 2004 3:16:16 PM

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

"technically firm"?
"accurate"?
"pertinent information"?
"credible"?

Where has Miller ever posted with these qualities?
On AVS forum?



"w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40F3C696.88FD876C@hotmail.com...
> This Bob Miller posts a technically firm response complete
> with accurate names and other pertinent information. Then
> Mark Crispin and Jeff Rife, instead, attack the credibility
> and integrity of Bob Miller without once even trying to
> responsibly dispute facts. What kind of replies are that?
> Apparently both Jeff Rife and Mark Crispin don't have
> technical facts. They just "know". So they attack the person
> - Bob Miller.
>
> Jeff Rife - if Bob Miller's numbers were wrong, then an
> honest man would have quoted a responsible source. Instead
> you posted as children argue. "Yes it is. Not its not. Yes
> it is..." Jeff, be an adult. Cite a credible source or stop
> wasting good bandwidth.
>
> Mark Crispin - some people advance America by taking risks;
> trying to start new businesses. Then we have those who never
> get above working in the sewers. Never tried to do what makes
> America great. Then personally attack others who bothered to,
> risk, learn, and try. You post really says Bob Miller is an
> example of why the American economy prospers, and why Mark
> Crispin sometimes ends up in the unemployment line.
>
> I don't know if Bob Miller has posted accurately. But based
> upon responses from both Mark Crispin and Jeff Rife, then
> apparently Bob Miller is credible; posts too accurately for
> their emotions.
>
> Mark Crispin wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >
> > alt.tv.tech.hdtv Frequently Asked Question:
> >
> > Q: Who is Bob Miller?
> > A: Bob Miller, the president of a failed company in NYC called
> > Viacel, is our resident clown and snake oil salesman. He
> > serves a valuable purpose in this newsgroup by reliably coming
> > to an incorrect conclusion from any news item or piece of data.
> > He is so reliably wrong on all matters that whenever he says
> > anything, you can be confident that the exact opposite is true.
> >
> > -- Mark --
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 5:45:18 PM

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

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, w_tom wrote:
> HDTV format used in the United States has been widely
> criticized in major technical publications for its intolerance
> to noise, multi-path signals, and other problems. Criticisms
> have been widespread as an example of inferior standards
> winning only due to politicians. Sinclair Broadcasting's
> appeal to the US Courts is but the tip of an iceberg.
> [snip]

This is either a Bob Miller sock puppet, or someone "coached" by Miller.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 7:22:27 PM

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

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, w_tom wrote:
> This is a poster who has hate for those who would 'attack
> the messenger' rather than post responsibly.
>[snip]
> But I know an enemy of humanity when I see one. He posts
> using the head between his legs rather than using the one on
> his shoulders.

The juxtaposition of these two comments from the same poster is
interesting.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 7:31:22 PM

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

Thanks w_tom.

I try to keep above the invective.

Mark Crispin's post are perplexing because he claims such
accomplishments as IMAP which I use.

Much of what I post is from personal testing of both COFDM and 8-VSB. I
doubt if most who support 8-VSB reflexively have ever experienced COFDM.

There is very little to no data that supports 8-VSB vs. COFDM so it is
hard to counter my post. You have to feel sorry for those who have an
emotional investment in 8-VSB.

I will use it if and when I must but will hold my nose.

Bob Miller

w_tom wrote:
> This Bob Miller posts a technically firm response complete
> with accurate names and other pertinent information. Then
> Mark Crispin and Jeff Rife, instead, attack the credibility
> and integrity of Bob Miller without once even trying to
> responsibly dispute facts. What kind of replies are that?
> Apparently both Jeff Rife and Mark Crispin don't have
> technical facts. They just "know". So they attack the person
> - Bob Miller.
>
> Jeff Rife - if Bob Miller's numbers were wrong, then an
> honest man would have quoted a responsible source. Instead
> you posted as children argue. "Yes it is. Not its not. Yes
> it is..." Jeff, be an adult. Cite a credible source or stop
> wasting good bandwidth.
>
> Mark Crispin - some people advance America by taking risks;
> trying to start new businesses. Then we have those who never
> get above working in the sewers. Never tried to do what makes
> America great. Then personally attack others who bothered to,
> risk, learn, and try. You post really says Bob Miller is an
> example of why the American economy prospers, and why Mark
> Crispin sometimes ends up in the unemployment line.
>
> I don't know if Bob Miller has posted accurately. But based
> upon responses from both Mark Crispin and Jeff Rife, then
> apparently Bob Miller is credible; posts too accurately for
> their emotions.
>
> Mark Crispin wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>>>[snip]
>>
>>alt.tv.tech.hdtv Frequently Asked Question:
>>
>>Q: Who is Bob Miller?
>>A: Bob Miller, the president of a failed company in NYC called
>>Viacel, is our resident clown and snake oil salesman. He
>>serves a valuable purpose in this newsgroup by reliably coming
>>to an incorrect conclusion from any news item or piece of data.
>>He is so reliably wrong on all matters that whenever he says
>>anything, you can be confident that the exact opposite is true.
>>
>>-- Mark --
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 7:47:17 PM

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

South Korea selects ATSC!

South Korea selects ATSC!

South Korea selects ATSC!

Booby you go dude!


"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:REwIc.48$mL5.37@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> I will leave it to other readers to visit the newsgroups you list,
> aus.tv.digital and http://www.dtvforum.info and make up their own minds
> on what the truth is about reception in OZ.
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 8:31:23 PM

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

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, w_tom wrote:
>
>> This Bob Miller posts a technically firm response complete
>> with accurate names and other pertinent information.
>
>
> When? Every single claim of Miller's is verifiably, and has been
> verified as, false.
>
> One of Miller's little tricks is to post URLs from the Japanese press,
> with a photo that claims to back up his claim. Only problem is, I read,
> speak, and write Japanese; and being able to read the article shows that
> Miller's claim is bullshit.

My claims about ISDB-T broadcasting in Japan are true. Multiple entities
in Japan have built and demonstrated reception of digital TV on cell
phones using ISDB-T. Next year it is expected that this will be a
reality commercially. This is also happening in Europe and the US with
DVB-H.

It is also happening in S. Korea where they are debating using DVB-H or
DMB-T both of which use COFDM.

So Mark if you can read Japanese find something factual that contradicts
this. It is possible that the English version of an article I read was
different from the Japanese version in a given instance but that does
not change the fact that this is contemplated in Japan and we have every
reason to expect it to happen next year by the overwhelming number of
articles and conversations I have has with English speaking Japanese.
>
> Miller, by his own admission, does nothing but post fear, uncertainty,
> and doubt.

No I do not admit that. I post facts that cause fear uncertainty and
doubt as they should. Others who would promote 8-VSB have posted
lies,partial truths and uninformed comments that mislead which in turn
promote unwarranted optimism, certainty where there is none and
conviction which will be proved wrong.
>
>> Mark Crispin - some people advance America by taking risks;
>> trying to start new businesses. Then we have those who never
>> get above working in the sewers. Never tried to do what makes
>> America great. Then personally attack others who bothered to,
>> risk, learn, and try.
>
>
> That is a description of Bob Miller. Every one of Miller's posts
> consists upon an attack upon the North American HDTV infrastructure and
> on the people who are working to build it. Miller's claims basically
> boil down to the assertation that "political corruption" led to the
> selection of an "inferior" digital TV system upon the US, and that
> Europe and Japan are far ahead of the US.

I firmly believe this to be true, all points. Many others agree with me.
Sooner or later the truth will out.
>
> Yet Europe has no HDTV at all, and has nationwide digital TV in only one
> country. Japan has HDTV with digital TV in only three cities.
> Meanwhile, the US has HDTV with digital TV nationwide, with over a
> thousand broadcasters.

Factually incorrect. Most of Europe has HDTV via satellite with two more
ventures in the works. France will deploy HDTV next year terrestrially.
A number of countries are now beginning to plan a terrestrial HDTV system.

Again the KEY point in looking at who is ahead in HDTV is not the number
of broadcasters on air. US broadcasters have been forced on air under
threat of losing their licenses. It would be better to look at the
trend. In Japan where they have ONLY three cities with HDTV broadcast
and which ONLY started broadcasting last December they have ONE MILLION
INTEGRATED OTA HDTV sets SOLD since DECEMBER last year.

This is not a NEGATIVE as Mark would suggest. How many integrated HDTV
sets have been sold in the US in the last SEVEN YEARS. Compare US SEVEN
YEARS to Japan's SEVEN MONTHS.

The trend is your friend as they say on Wall Street.

Thank God for the FCC Mandate the first phase of which kicked in July
1st because in the US with 8-VSB the trend is not your friend according
to this article.

http://www.twice.com/article/CA435342.html?verticalid=8...

"Through the first quarter of 2004, manufacturers said sales of fully
integrated HDTV sets — those that carry built-in tuners to receive ATSC
digital broadcasts — have been flat or even down. That status even
extends to the first models that were digital cable ready (DCR) —
meaning, they carry slots for new uni-directional CableCARDs that permit
conditional access to premium programming."

I am sure that Mark will suggest that this is all factually inaccurate
but it would be nice to see some backup. Something I am accused of not
supplying or distorting. I suggest a search of my post will show a lot
more backup than those who criticize.

Can't wait to see the numbers of integrated HDTV sets sold in the next
three months.

>
> Bob Miller has no business.
>
>> You post really says Bob Miller is an
>> example of why the American economy prospers, and why Mark
>> Crispin sometimes ends up in the unemployment line.
>
>
> Right. Someone like Mark Crispin, who has:
> 1) never been on an unemployment line in a career spanning
> several decades
> 2) invented technology used by millions worldwide
> has nothing to do with America's prosperty.
>
> Right. What sort of narcotics are you smoking?


>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 8:34:06 PM

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

It is normal and quite common in newsgroups to attack the
poster of long technical facts when the attacker does not have
technical competence. Usually such attacks are justified by
attack on an arcane and misunderstood point - followed by an
attack on the poster's character. Maybe Bob Miller is a
kook. But I don't see it when reading posts from Jeff Rife
and Mark Crispin. I see posts that provide no fundamental
facts from two people who display no grasp of technology or
the issue. They could not bother to post facts? Instead they
post hearsay and personal attacks.

HDTV format used in the United States has been widely
criticized in major technical publications for its intolerance
to noise, multi-path signals, and other problems. Criticisms
have been widespread as an example of inferior standards
winning only due to politicians. Sinclair Broadcasting's
appeal to the US Courts is but the tip of an iceberg.
Criticism of 8VSB has been that strong for some time. The
rest of the world uses another format for good technical
reasons. But that technical point is now moot - thanks to US
politics that made a political rather than technical
decision. 8VSB was suppose to rescue the American TV
manufacturing industry. That purpose of rushing a new
technical standard into the US was widely promoted in
government. Didn't happen, did it. Where are all these
American dominate companies in the TV industries. The rest of
the world is using variations of another standard.

In the meantime, Bob Miller's posts provide facts and
significant technical detail. His critics provide no
technical detail or responsible citations. They instead
foolishly attack Bob Miller rather than his facts. Therefore
his critics are the first to suspect as kooks.

Did Bob Miller try to start a company that failed? If yes,
that makes Bob Miller superior to most every poster here.
Such entrepreneurs are why America is strong. But very few
people have the balls to do what Bob Miller did.

Only those without the balls would criticize Bob Miller for
taking a risk - regardless of whether it panned out or not.

David wrote:
> "technically firm"?
> "accurate"?
> "pertinent information"?
> "credible"?
>
> Where has Miller ever posted with these qualities?
> On AVS forum?
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 9:38:32 PM

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

This is a poster who has hate for those who would 'attack
the messenger' rather than post responsibly. Your attacks on
Bob Miller demonstrate the worst characteristics of newsgroups
- experts who never bothered to first learn technology. I
don't have a clue who Bob Miller is or even what he posted.
But I know an enemy of humanity when I see one. He posts
using the head between his legs rather than using the one on
his shoulders. Its called intelligence. Humans are suppose
to use it. You apparently forgot that part.

Mark Crispin wrote:
> This is either a Bob Miller sock puppet, or someone "coached"
> by Miller.
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 10:06:56 PM

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

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 17:38:32 -0400, w_tom <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote:

> This is a poster who has hate for those who would 'attack
>the messenger' rather than post responsibly. Your attacks on
>Bob Miller demonstrate the worst characteristics of newsgroups

snip... Tom whomever he is.. is obviously clueless..
Anonymous
July 13, 2004 10:16:05 PM

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

w_tom wrote:
>
> HDTV format used in the United States has been widely
> criticized in major technical publications for its intolerance
> to noise, multi-path signals, and other problems. Criticisms
> have been widespread as an example of inferior standards
> winning only due to politicians. Sinclair Broadcasting's
> appeal to the US Courts is but the tip of an iceberg.
> Criticism of 8VSB has been that strong for some time. The
> rest of the world uses another format for good technical
> reasons.

OK, pot, where's your citations for the above?

But that technical point is now moot - thanks to US
> politics that made a political rather than technical
> decision. 8VSB was suppose to rescue the American TV
> manufacturing industry. That purpose of rushing a new
> technical standard into the US was widely promoted in
> government. Didn't happen, did it. Where are all these
> American dominate companies in the TV industries. The rest of
> the world is using variations of another standard.

There isn't an American TV manufacturing industry. How can something
that's non-existant be saved?

>
> In the meantime, Bob Miller's posts provide facts and
> significant technical detail. His critics provide no
> technical detail or responsible citations. They instead
> foolishly attack Bob Miller rather than his facts. Therefore
> his critics are the first to suspect as kooks.

Unfortunately, Bob doesn't provide much of anything to support his
"facts". When I've followed any of the web links he's posted, most of
the time the linked documents did not support his assertions. And a high
percentage of his posted links aren't pertaining to HDTV, which makes
them off-topic on this newsgroup. He's making the assertions, which
makes it his responsibility to provide citations to support them. When
we follow the few links he's provided, they're either don't support his
assertions or they're not talking about HDTV.

If it ain't HDTV, it's off-topic here.

>
> Did Bob Miller try to start a company that failed? If yes,
> that makes Bob Miller superior to most every poster here.
> Such entrepreneurs are why America is strong. But very few
> people have the balls to do what Bob Miller did.
>
> Only those without the balls would criticize Bob Miller for
> taking a risk - regardless of whether it panned out or not.

I haven't seen anyone criticize Bob for taking a risk or starting a
company. What most folks have criticized Bob for is not letting go of a
failed business concept and his attempts to subvert public airways and
free OTA HDTV to try to save his failed business.

>
> David wrote:
>
>>"technically firm"?
>>"accurate"?
>>"pertinent information"?
>>"credible"?
>>
>>Where has Miller ever posted with these qualities?
>>On AVS forum?
July 13, 2004 10:41:06 PM

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

w_tom,
Put your money where your mouth is.

Why can't you help poor, long-suffering, misunderstood Bob create
his own website?

Bob could provide links to all the proof he needs
that American HDTV broadcasting is a "failure". :-)
Why, just think of it, Bob could even show photographs of *Mark Schubin's
apartment* in New York City.
There could be .mov files that show Bob speeding around NYC with his 2"
rubber ducky antenna on the back of his scooter or whatever. "You see, no
multipath!".

He could even have with his own little "forum".
[where he can't be so rudely thrown out of the forum, as he was at AVS four
years ago]

Think how brave Bob could be. Everyone would stop laughing at him.

> He posts
> using the head between his legs rather than using the one on
> his shoulders. Its called intelligence.

That's a keeper. It should be quoted on top of Bob's home page.



"w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40F45658.3F6AB7DA@hotmail.com...
> This is a poster who has hate for those who would 'attack
> the messenger' rather than post responsibly. Your attacks on
> Bob Miller demonstrate the worst characteristics of newsgroups
> - experts who never bothered to first learn technology. I
> don't have a clue who Bob Miller is or even what he posted.
> But I know an enemy of humanity when I see one. He posts
> using the head between his legs rather than using the one on
> his shoulders. Its called intelligence. Humans are suppose
> to use it. You apparently forgot that part.
>
> Mark Crispin wrote:
> > This is either a Bob Miller sock puppet, or someone "coached"
> > by Miller.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 1:00:49 AM

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

"w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40F4473E.16D53C44@hotmail.com...
> It is normal and quite common in newsgroups to attack the
> poster of long technical facts when the attacker does not have
> technical competence. Usually such attacks are justified by
> attack on an arcane and misunderstood point - followed by an
> attack on the poster's character. Maybe Bob Miller is a
> kook. But I don't see it when reading posts from Jeff Rife
> and Mark Crispin. I see posts that provide no fundamental
> facts from two people who display no grasp of technology or
> the issue. They could not bother to post facts? Instead they
> post hearsay and personal attacks.
>
> HDTV format used in the United States has been widely
> criticized in major technical publications for its intolerance
> to noise, multi-path signals, and other problems. Criticisms
> have been widespread as an example of inferior standards
> winning only due to politicians. Sinclair Broadcasting's
> appeal to the US Courts is but the tip of an iceberg.
> Criticism of 8VSB has been that strong for some time. The
> rest of the world uses another format for good technical
> reasons. But that technical point is now moot - thanks to US
> politics that made a political rather than technical
> decision. 8VSB was suppose to rescue the American TV
> manufacturing industry. That purpose of rushing a new
> technical standard into the US was widely promoted in
> government. Didn't happen, did it. Where are all these
> American dominate companies in the TV industries. The rest of
> the world is using variations of another standard.
>
> In the meantime, Bob Miller's posts provide facts and
> significant technical detail. His critics provide no
> technical detail or responsible citations. They instead
> foolishly attack Bob Miller rather than his facts. Therefore
> his critics are the first to suspect as kooks.
>
> Did Bob Miller try to start a company that failed? If yes,
> that makes Bob Miller superior to most every poster here.
> Such entrepreneurs are why America is strong. But very few
> people have the balls to do what Bob Miller did.
>
> Only those without the balls would criticize Bob Miller for
> taking a risk - regardless of whether it panned out or not.
>

I think the problem many have had all along with Bob posts is the fact that
this newgroup is here to advocate HDTV. While Bob is here to advocate a
modulation scheme, and I don't fault him initially as that modulation scheme
would have benefited his business. But to continue to come to this
newsgroup and profess that American HDTV is dismal failure, because the rest
of the world had selected CODFM doesn't add up to me -- I mean a great
number of Americans have access to HDTV. Have they implemented or purchased
a HDTV set, I am not sure -- but it is akin to saying that Windows is a
failure because not everyone has upgraded to XP.

I have no doubt that both of the modulation schemes have their pros and
cons -- but what Bob and others fail to recognize is that most users don't
really care. I like most Americans will be happy to receive their HDTV
content via cable. Others will argue that transition to DTV will revive OTA
broadcasters -- me I just don't see it -- Bob will argue without CODFM
broadcasters will fail, with it they will succeed. I for one am not of the
school that OTA will make a revivial -- America is about consumption and
excess and where can more of that but anywhere but cable (Ok SAT too).
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 1:00:50 AM

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

As an American, I care about how that modulation would have
succeeded in its original purpose - to save the American TV
industry. Had the Advanced Television Systems Committee done
their work and further studied an OFDM standard, then they
could have set an international standard and actually created
American jobs. Instead we did something equivalent to
tarrifs. We created a lesser standard and now find that our
TVs products are, even moreso, less compatible with the rest
of the world. Having not created an acceptable world standard,
then the TV industry is further dominated by foreign
competitors. How do we create innovative American jobs when
politics subverts technology?

On the otherhand, I can appreciate the reason why they
rushed into an 8VSB standard. 8VSB was easier to implement
when getting a standard created sooner (rather than make a
better standard) was more important. As a result, 8VSB
suffered even from reflections off of passing airplanes. It
became a standard the world did not want. So what happened to
all those American jobs?

Supposedly the new upgrades to 8VSB are to solve this
multipath problem. Too late. The US lost leadership and
associated jobs only because they rushed a standard rather
than develop one. Again, all of this is moot to the issue of
domestic HDTV. But it remains an excellent lesson in how to
responsibly management technological innovation. At least
people who watched the 8VSB / COFDM controversy should be
smarter (and hopefully wealthier in the future) from watching
what happened to HDTV.

In the meantime, personal attacks on anyone only mean those
posters could not be bothered to first learn facts. Use facts
rather than personal insults to challenge Bob Miller - and we
all learn more about how to make an innovative America.

Gomer Jones wrote:
> I think the problem many have had all along with Bob posts is the
> fact that this newgroup is here to advocate HDTV. While Bob
> is here to advocate a modulation scheme, and I don't fault him
> initially as that modulation scheme would have benefited his
> business. But to continue to come to this newsgroup and
> profess that American HDTV is dismal failure, because the rest
> of the world had selected CODFM doesn't add up to me -- I mean
> a great number of Americans have access to HDTV. Have they
> implemented or purchased a HDTV set, I am not sure -- but it
> is akin to saying that Windows is a failure because not
> everyone has upgraded to XP.
>
> I have no doubt that both of the modulation schemes have
> their pros and cons -- but what Bob and others fail to
> recognize is that most users don't really care. I like most
> Americans will be happy to receive their HDTV content via
> cable. Others will argue that transition to DTV will revive
> OTA broadcasters -- me I just don't see it -- Bob will
> argue without CODFM broadcasters will fail, with it they
> will succeed. I for one am not of the school that OTA will
> make a revivial -- America is about consumption and excess
> and where can more of that but anywhere but cable (Ok SAT
> too).
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 1:45:17 AM

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

In article <40F4473E.16D53C44@hotmail.com>,
w_tom <w_tom1@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> HDTV format used in the United States has been widely
> criticized in major technical publications for its intolerance
> to noise, multi-path signals, and other problems.
>
The US HDTV formats are specified by the ATSC specs and have
been settled. Also, in my area where NTSC reception is difficult,
my ATSC HDTV reception is fantastically good.

>
> Criticism of 8VSB has been that strong for some time.
>
8VSB is a modulation scheme, and the difference in performance
between that and other viable possibilities aren't worth
an extreme upheaval.


>
> The
> rest of the world uses another format for good technical
> reasons.
>
It would be good to discuss 8VSB and COFDM in a forum that
makes sense for MODULATION SCHEMES (e.g. an electronics or
radio group.)

This happens to be a newsgroup whose topic is generally
HDTV, and 8VSB is an issue that is practically off topic.
Most importantly, no-one in this forum can do anything about
the modulation schemes, so complaining and whining only
produces negative effects.

The ONLY result of complaining here (in this newsgroup)
about 8VSB (or COFDM) is to produce FUD. Such FUD used to
have long term effects against HDTV, but luckily the
denizens of this group have become wise to the anti-HDTV
FUD campaigns, and most of us realize that whining about
COFDM (or 8VSB) is effectively a form of masturbation.

John
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 1:47:00 AM

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

In article <Pine.LNX.4.61.0407131344460.18234@shiva0.cac.washington.edu>,
Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, w_tom wrote:
>> HDTV format used in the United States has been widely
>> criticized in major technical publications for its intolerance
>> to noise, multi-path signals, and other problems. Criticisms
>> have been widespread as an example of inferior standards
>> winning only due to politicians. Sinclair Broadcasting's
>> appeal to the US Courts is but the tip of an iceberg.
>> [snip]
>
> This is either a Bob Miller sock puppet, or someone "coached" by Miller.
>
Given Bob's previous history, the originator of the off-topic 8VSB whining
might even be Bob. Geesh, he has even used his own child's account for
spewing FUD about modulation schemes.

I have SELDOM seen Bob make positive comments about HDTV.

John
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 5:47:17 AM

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

Mark Crispin (mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004, w_tom wrote:
> > [snip]
>
> This is either a Bob Miller sock puppet, or someone "coached" by Miller.

No, he's real, and he's just as far out there in the DBS and home audio
newsgroups when anyone mentions "surge protector". According to him,
despite the fact that many people have had a lot of equipment saved by
good-quality plug-into-the-wall surge protectors, they don't actually
work.

So, now he's in this group with his "just enough buzzwords to be
dangerous". Although that does describe Bob Miller, too, I'm pretty sure
it's just a co-incidence.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/ActualCode.gif
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
uce@ftc.gov |
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 5:47:19 AM

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

Gomer Jones wrote:

> "w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:40F4473E.16D53C44@hotmail.com...
>
>> It is normal and quite common in newsgroups to attack the
>>poster of long technical facts when the attacker does not have
>>technical competence. Usually such attacks are justified by
>>attack on an arcane and misunderstood point - followed by an
>>attack on the poster's character. Maybe Bob Miller is a
>>kook. But I don't see it when reading posts from Jeff Rife
>>and Mark Crispin. I see posts that provide no fundamental
>>facts from two people who display no grasp of technology or
>>the issue. They could not bother to post facts? Instead they
>>post hearsay and personal attacks.
>>
>> HDTV format used in the United States has been widely
>>criticized in major technical publications for its intolerance
>>to noise, multi-path signals, and other problems. Criticisms
>>have been widespread as an example of inferior standards
>>winning only due to politicians. Sinclair Broadcasting's
>>appeal to the US Courts is but the tip of an iceberg.
>>Criticism of 8VSB has been that strong for some time. The
>>rest of the world uses another format for good technical
>>reasons. But that technical point is now moot - thanks to US
>>politics that made a political rather than technical
>>decision. 8VSB was suppose to rescue the American TV
>>manufacturing industry. That purpose of rushing a new
>>technical standard into the US was widely promoted in
>>government. Didn't happen, did it. Where are all these
>>American dominate companies in the TV industries. The rest of
>>the world is using variations of another standard.
>>
>> In the meantime, Bob Miller's posts provide facts and
>>significant technical detail. His critics provide no
>>technical detail or responsible citations. They instead
>>foolishly attack Bob Miller rather than his facts. Therefore
>>his critics are the first to suspect as kooks.
>>
>> Did Bob Miller try to start a company that failed? If yes,
>>that makes Bob Miller superior to most every poster here.
>>Such entrepreneurs are why America is strong. But very few
>>people have the balls to do what Bob Miller did.
>>
>> Only those without the balls would criticize Bob Miller for
>>taking a risk - regardless of whether it panned out or not.
>>
>
>
> I think the problem many have had all along with Bob posts is the fact that
> this newgroup is here to advocate HDTV. While Bob is here to advocate a
> modulation scheme, and I don't fault him initially as that modulation scheme
> would have benefited his business.

As I have stated many times, if the US adopted COFDM for its standard
for full power broadcasters this would not help my business it would
kill it.

> But to continue to come to this
> newsgroup and profess that American HDTV is dismal failure,

I have continually come to this newsgroup and said JUST THE OPPOSITE.
That HDTV is wonderful and would do well on cable and satellite.

The only thing I said other than that was that HDTV would also do well
on OTA if we had a reasonable modulation like COFDM. In the support of
HDTV it would make eminent sense to have the best modulation system.
Someone can be a STRONG PROPONENT of HDTV and at the same time support
having a FAR BETTER modulation.

> because the rest of the world had selected CODFM doesn't add up to me

Didn't say HDTV was a dismal failure, said it was a dismal failure OTA.
Never said that the rest of the world's choice of COFDM had anything to
do with any failure in the US.
-- I mean a great
> number of Americans have access to HDTV. Have they implemented or purchased
> a HDTV set, I am not sure -- but it is akin to saying that Windows is a
> failure because not everyone has upgraded to XP.

Said nothing about the number of people who have or have not purchased
an HDTV set. It is all about the number of OTA receivers sold. THAT is
an unqualified disaster. The FCC thinks so and has a MANDATE to prove
it. This is something they DID NOT WANT TO DO AND HELD OFF DOING FOR
YEARS. Congress thinks it is a disaster and is holding hearing every two
months on the subject now. They sent the GAO over to Berlin to see how
they did it.

Every one knows it is a disaster. That is not the question. How do we
fix it is the question. Maybe the 5th gen receivers will do it. I hope
so as a business person. Maybe finally the broadcasters will get off
spectrum that has been sold to someone else and let us use it with COFDM.
>
> I have no doubt that both of the modulation schemes have their pros and
> cons -- but what Bob and others fail to recognize is that most users don't
> really care. I like most Americans will be happy to receive their HDTV
> content via cable. Others will argue that transition to DTV will revive OTA
> broadcasters -- me I just don't see it -- Bob will argue without CODFM
> broadcasters will fail, with it they will succeed. I for one am not of the
> school that OTA will make a revivial -- America is about consumption and
> excess and where can more of that but anywhere but cable (Ok SAT too).
>
In my lifetime cable was a non entity. Now someone says that cable is
permanent. Ten years ago the Internet was just starting now it is a fixture.

I tell you things change and are in the process of changing more
rapidly. Cable and satellite as we know it are on the way out.

Ten years from now mesh networks that connect everyone to each other
will be the thing and content providers will be bypassing cable,
satellite and OTA broadcasting to deliver directly to their customers
with no middleman. Will this be pervasive in ten years no but it will be
well into being created. Most people who now have broadband at 300 Kbps
to 1Mbps will have 100 Mbps to a Gbps Internet access.

Contracts are already being signed. The smart players are already
starting to operate in that world.

The airwaves will be used for broadcasting to mobile and fixed devices.
Given the option a customer will sign up for a subscription service ONLY
if it works mobile, fixed and portable. ALL fixed services will be well
on their way to be delivered via the mesh IP networks on an ala carte
basis. A smart computer in your media center will record all things it
knows you want to see most of which will be delivered via IP.

The only thing left will be broadcasting to mobile. And by mobile I mean
completely hassle free reception where ever I am whether I am moving or
still. NO one will settle for anything else.

If Cable or satellite are still in that game it will be because they can
deliver 100 Mbps Internet access not because they have 1000 channels.
The number of channels is irrelevant in the age of the terabyte hard
drive that cost $200. And they will be locked out of mobile.
Broadcasters still using 8-VSB OTA??? That is so completely ridiculous
just in the hearing. It is just utterly stupid.

My numbers say that only 2.32% rely on OTA TV/DTV today in the US. In
countries that use COFDM a reversal is being witnessed as MORE people
are coming back to OTA because it works plug and play and is cheaper
than cable or satellite. Mobile is also now a reality in Berlin also.
This will lead to a RAPID, very RAPID re adoption of OTA.

In the meantime in the USA the OTA numbers can't go down anymore. WE
HAVE HIT ROCK BOTTOM. 2.32% is in the NOISE.

In the meantime in the US we will see a POSSIBLE re adoption of OTA as
the new 5th gen receivers show up next year and ventures such as USDTV
take advantage of them and use a better compression scheme. As this
happens and COFDM ventures in the US also become successful the pressure
on broadcasters and the FCC to dump 8-VSB as soon as possible will
become INTENSE.

The lifespan of 8-VSB already a very DULL 7 years? I give it another 7
max. Just enough time to become recognized as the total complete utter
F**k*p it is.

The handwriting is on the wall. It is in 20 ft high flashing neon
letters why can't anyone see it?

The Mandate is now 13 days old. How are those numbers?
July 14, 2004 5:47:20 AM

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

After admitting to using your own daughter's internet account to sneak back
on a discussion forum? How shifty and underhanded and sick can you get?

KenH should have called Social Services when you told him about that.


"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Hg0Jc.1695$mL5.1560@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> The handwriting is on the wall. It is in 20 ft high flashing neon
> letters why can't anyone see it?
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 5:51:50 AM

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

w_tom,

You are not special. Every poster that has had the temerity to in any
way agree with anything I say is immediately labeled ME or someone I
have coached. This is just standard procedure.

Bob Miller

w_tom wrote:

> This is a poster who has hate for those who would 'attack
> the messenger' rather than post responsibly. Your attacks on
> Bob Miller demonstrate the worst characteristics of newsgroups
> - experts who never bothered to first learn technology. I
> don't have a clue who Bob Miller is or even what he posted.
> But I know an enemy of humanity when I see one. He posts
> using the head between his legs rather than using the one on
> his shoulders. Its called intelligence. Humans are suppose
> to use it. You apparently forgot that part.
>
> Mark Crispin wrote:
>
>>This is either a Bob Miller sock puppet, or someone "coached"
>>by Miller.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 7:55:05 AM

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

In article <Wk0Jc.1700$mL5.1678@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> writes:
> w_tom,
>
> You are not special. Every poster that has had the temerity to in any
> way agree with anything I say is immediately labeled ME or someone I
> have coached.
>
(Some people who are tired of your superficially civilized but
substantively misleading language will rudely respond. VERY FEW
individuals who had intially been negatively effected by your apparent
dishonesty will be initially rude. Eventually, people get a little
frustrated by your FUD and apparent dishonesty, sometimes using
coarse language. I have seen you being overly chastised, but actually
it is well deserved.)

There is definitely a history of a certain FUDSTER (you, Bob) using his
child's account (and other semi-dishonest techniques), for admittedly
other communcations forums, but also trying to FUD the
already decided modulation techniques in those forums (similar to
your behavior here.) It is reasonable to assume misleading claims from
you, considering the effect of your claims (for example, my mistaken
trusting you.)

My distrust of you isn't based only on the philosophical aspects of
your off topic and only partially correct discussions about modulation
methods (instead of HDTV itself), but also that the negative effects of
your claims having wasteful costly effect against me. Even though I am
technically competent as an EE and software developer, I don't always know
everything. I had mistakenly trusted your claims, making the
silly assumption that people usually try to maintain their credibility
by trying to avoid perpetrating falsehoods. I was wrong about that
when it concerns you.

When a newbie in the group does notice that most long-timers seem
to have troubles with your statements, then many VERY NICE and
GOOD newbie people will make an initial assumption that you are being
abused. There is a natural, civilized behavior to try to protect
the stealth-miscreant who is being chastized... It is certainly
jumping the gun to overly negatively judge a newbie 'Bob protector' --
where that 'Bob protector' doesn't realize that Bob has consistently
perpetrated some anti-social behaviors (including being a disgusting
FUDster.)

Alas, even with my very early generation DTC100 tuner (purchased
because of Bob's dishonest warnings about difficulties using
8VSB), and my attrocious reception conditions, I found that receiving HDTV
was MUCH MUCH easier than Bobs claims. So, in a way, your apparently
dishonest (or minimally, very biased) claims against HDTV did increase
the likelihood that I wasted money on an additional HDTV tuner (needed
to avoid the potential waste of the cost of a full tuner and TV set.)

So, because I had initially trusted you (yes, I was a newbie in this
group at one time), I wasted money. My opinion of you since that
time has changed (over time) from someone who is misguided and
pseudo-competent to where I am convinced that you have maleavolent
intent and a desire to discourage the success of OTA HDTV...

Note that the hdtv newsgroup is NOT an effective forum for bitching
about modulation methods. It won't significantly help your jihad
against HDTV in the US!!! All but the most naive newbie is aware
of your anti-HDTV campaign. Most often, your best supporters are
either very naive or could even be one of your minions.)

John
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 11:09:16 AM

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

Why do you post this nonsense? This is not relevant to the
discussion. Who cares anything about Mark Schubin's
apartment? If it was relevant, then why were you so unkind as
to not even explain why? Instead, you post more personal
attacks on someone you don't like. Your emotional opinions
are totally irrelevant to anyone in the world. If Bob has
posted in error, then you do all a favor by only exposing
those errors. Period. Nothing more.

Apparently you are so emotional as to even think I agree
with Bob. If I don't agree with you, then I must be against
you? Stop and think a minute. What did I criticize
previously? Posts like this from David provides no useful
information and perverts purpose of newsgroups. Please
demonstrate some intelligence, David. Show us where Bob has
posted so much in error. Raise the standards of newsgoups and
your own posts. Either stop posting or post real world
technical fact.

David wrote:
> w_tom,
> Put your money where your mouth is.
>
> Why can't you help poor, long-suffering, misunderstood Bob create
> his own website?
>
> Bob could provide links to all the proof he needs
> that American HDTV broadcasting is a "failure". :-)
> Why, just think of it, Bob could even show photographs of *Mark
> Schubin's apartment* in New York City. There could be .mov
> files that show Bob speeding around NYC with his 2" rubber
> ducky antenna on the back of his scooter or whatever. "You
> see, no multipath!".
>
> He could even have with his own little "forum". [where he
> can't be so rudely thrown out of the forum, as he was at
> AVS four years ago]
>
> Think how brave Bob could be. Everyone would stop laughing
> at him.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 11:20:57 AM

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

In my region, many cannot receive HDTV even though less than
20 miles from the transmitter. Loss of signal is frequent.
Suspects include hills that created too much multi-path
interference or maybe the constant flight of incoming planes
that is greatest in the evening. Monmouth and Middlessex
counties in NJ is another region where HDTV reception is
nonexistent except by cable. Any word on how well the 8VSB
upgrade will solve this problem? Modulation means that many
could not prosper from HDTV. So will the 8VSB upgrade improve
reception significantly?

The improvement better come soon because the conventional
NTSC TV was supposed to be terminated in 2006. Do more than
50% of TV viewers have HDTV? Why not? In this area, because
signal reception is that poor using conventional 8VSB
receivers. It there any experience with improved 8VSB
receiver - that corrected the reception problem?

"John S. Dyson" wrote:
> In article <40F4473E.16D53C44@hotmail.com>,
> w_tom <w_tom1@hotmail.com> writes:
>> HDTV format used in the United States has been widely
>> criticized in major technical publications for its intolerance
>> to noise, multi-path signals, and other problems.
>>
> The US HDTV formats are specified by the ATSC specs and
> have been settled. Also, in my area where NTSC reception
> is difficult, my ATSC HDTV reception is fantastically good.
>
>>
>> Criticism of 8VSB has been that strong for some time.
>>
> 8VSB is a modulation scheme, and the difference in performance
> between that and other viable possibilities aren't worth
> an extreme upheaval.
>
>> The rest of the world uses another format for good
>> technical reasons.
> >
> It would be good to discuss 8VSB and COFDM in a forum that
> makes sense for MODULATION SCHEMES (e.g. an electronics or
> radio group.)
>
> This happens to be a newsgroup whose topic is generally
> HDTV, and 8VSB is an issue that is practically off topic.
> Most importantly, no-one in this forum can do anything about
> the modulation schemes, so complaining and whining only
> produces negative effects.
>
> The ONLY result of complaining here (in this newsgroup)
> about 8VSB (or COFDM) is to produce FUD. Such FUD used to
> have long term effects against HDTV, but luckily the
> denizens of this group have become wise to the anti-HDTV
> FUD campaigns, and most of us realize that whining about
> COFDM (or 8VSB) is effectively a form of masturbation.
>
> John
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 11:39:18 AM

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

If you would read the history of "Bob Miller", you would understand.

Unless you are him, that is.............
=============================
"w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40F5145C.E0853FFC@hotmail.com...
: Why do you post this nonsense? This is not relevant to the
: discussion. Who cares anything about Mark Schubin's
: apartment? If it was relevant, then why were you so unkind as
: to not even explain why? Instead, you post more personal
: attacks on someone you don't like. Your emotional opinions
: are totally irrelevant to anyone in the world. If Bob has
: posted in error, then you do all a favor by only exposing
: those errors. Period. Nothing more.
:
: Apparently you are so emotional as to even think I agree
: with Bob. If I don't agree with you, then I must be against
: you? Stop and think a minute. What did I criticize
: previously? Posts like this from David provides no useful
: information and perverts purpose of newsgroups. Please
: demonstrate some intelligence, David. Show us where Bob has
: posted so much in error. Raise the standards of newsgoups and
: your own posts. Either stop posting or post real world
: technical fact.
:
: David wrote:
: > w_tom,
: > Put your money where your mouth is.
: >
: > Why can't you help poor, long-suffering, misunderstood Bob create
: > his own website?
: >
: > Bob could provide links to all the proof he needs
: > that American HDTV broadcasting is a "failure". :-)
: > Why, just think of it, Bob could even show photographs of *Mark
: > Schubin's apartment* in New York City. There could be .mov
: > files that show Bob speeding around NYC with his 2" rubber
: > ducky antenna on the back of his scooter or whatever. "You
: > see, no multipath!".
: >
: > He could even have with his own little "forum". [where he
: > can't be so rudely thrown out of the forum, as he was at
: > AVS four years ago]
: >
: > Think how brave Bob could be. Everyone would stop laughing
: > at him.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 11:40:13 AM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Wk0Jc.1700$mL5.1678@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
: w_tom,
:
: You are not special. Every poster that has had the temerity to in any
: way agree with anything I say is immediately labeled ME or someone I
: have coached. This is just standard procedure.
:
: Bob Miller
:
======================
That is because you have indeed used MANY alter-egos.................
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 12:45:05 PM

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

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Jeff Rife wrote:
>> This is either a Bob Miller sock puppet, or someone "coached" by Miller.
> No, he's real, and he's just as far out there in the DBS and home audio
> newsgroups when anyone mentions "surge protector".

That's pretty typical for a sock puppet. It's done in order to establish
the puppet's "unique" personality. Ditto different message formatting.

Some things do come through. If you study the grammar, and in particular
the grammar mistakes, you'll be able to distinguish the differences
between forced mistakes and mistakes that are part of that individual's
personal syntax. Betrays a puppet every time.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 2:53:49 PM

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

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> And you know that because I have freely admitted it. And only on AVSForum
> because that is the only place I needed to. They let members post inaccurate
> information and delete post that offer correct information. I used aliases
> (still do) to correct such BS.

Who died and make you god? What gave you the "right" to "correct"?

By your own admission, you are a crook. Only criminals persist in their
attempt to enter property after being tresspassed from the property; and
only criminals use aliases with the intent to deceive.


alt.tv.tech.hdtv Frequently Asked Question (update):

Q: Who is Bob Miller?

A: Bob Miller, the president of a failed company in NYC called Viacel, is
our resident clown and snake oil salesman. He serves a valuable purpose
in this newsgroup by reliably coming to an incorrect conclusion from any
news item or piece of data. He is so reliably wrong on all matters that
whenever he says anything, you can be confident that the exact opposite is
true. He admits to fraudulent use of aliases to tresspass into a forum
from which he was ejected.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 4:02:32 PM

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

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, w_tom wrote:
> I am an engineer.
> Will the
> upgraded 8VSB solve this pathetic reception problem that so
> many have suffered from with the original 8VSB version of
> HDTV?

If you were really an engineer, then you would know (or at least know how
to find out) the technical details of reception quality issues. If, as
you imply, you live in Middlesex or Monmouth county in New Jersey, then
you would know about the issues raised in receiving NYC and Philadelphia
NTSC broadcasts in that locality.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
July 14, 2004 4:15:29 PM

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

"You" and Bob will never create a DTV website because your *only* purpose
here is to harass honest, benevolent HDTV enthusiasts.


"w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40F5145C.E0853FFC@hotmail.com...
> Why do you post this nonsense? This is not relevant to the
> discussion. Who cares anything about Mark Schubin's
> apartment? If it was relevant, then why were you so unkind as
> to not even explain why? Instead, you post more personal
> attacks on someone you don't like. Your emotional opinions
> are totally irrelevant to anyone in the world. If Bob has
> posted in error, then you do all a favor by only exposing
> those errors. Period. Nothing more.
>
> Apparently you are so emotional as to even think I agree
> with Bob. If I don't agree with you, then I must be against
> you? Stop and think a minute. What did I criticize
> previously? Posts like this from David provides no useful
> information and perverts purpose of newsgroups. Please
> demonstrate some intelligence, David. Show us where Bob has
> posted so much in error. Raise the standards of newsgoups and
> your own posts. Either stop posting or post real world
> technical fact.
>
> David wrote:
> > w_tom,
> > Put your money where your mouth is.
> >
> > Why can't you help poor, long-suffering, misunderstood Bob create
> > his own website?
> >
> > Bob could provide links to all the proof he needs
> > that American HDTV broadcasting is a "failure". :-)
> > Why, just think of it, Bob could even show photographs of *Mark
> > Schubin's apartment* in New York City. There could be .mov
> > files that show Bob speeding around NYC with his 2" rubber
> > ducky antenna on the back of his scooter or whatever. "You
> > see, no multipath!".
> >
> > He could even have with his own little "forum". [where he
> > can't be so rudely thrown out of the forum, as he was at
> > AVS four years ago]
> >
> > Think how brave Bob could be. Everyone would stop laughing
> > at him.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 5:12:31 PM

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

I am an engineer. The only facts that apply are real
world. If Bob Miller is a kook, then his technical facts
would make that obvious. However others have once called
another a kook only because the 'another' was an industry
professional; demonstrated how Geritol did nothing effective.
Since that too was contrary to popular belief and technically
correct, then the many ill-informed others also called the
technically informed 'another' a kook. They were too ignorant
to see the facts he had provided and only worshipped what was
on TV (Lawrence Welk Show).

A real kook is obvious. He posts personal insults rather
than good technical fact. I don't know anything about the
history of posters here. But I do know some are so pathetic
as to attack Bob Miller, the person, rather than challenge
statements posted by Bob Miller. If Bob Miller is a kook, then
his facts should be exposed. In this post, not one has
attacked what Bob Miller posts. Why? Are the many that
ill-informed - English majors or poets - also known as kooks -
masquerading as honest, benevolent HDTV enthusiasts?

If Bob Miller is a kook, then it should be painfully obvious
in his facts. Show me (an indication of where I come from).
Show me where he posts technically inaccurate facts. Please
don't waste my time with your emotions. Expose Bob Miller as
a kook only because he posts erroneously.

And BTW, please also answer my original question. Will the
upgraded 8VSB solve this pathetic reception problem that so
many have suffered from with the original 8VSB version of
HDTV? Some, such as the emotionally overcharged David,
instead post emotional attacks. Don't be like David.

"Richard C." wrote:
> If you would read the history of "Bob Miller", you would
> understand.
>
> Unless you are him, that is.............
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 5:15:19 PM

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

I am so glad David demonstrates what a good intelligent post
should include. Now if David is finished personally attacking
me, then he is invited to fill this newsgroup with his
knowledge. Or maybe David has done all that - which his why
everyone one of his previous posts is an insult?

An honest and benevolent HDTV enthusiast possesses basic
system knowledge. An honest, benevolent HDTV enthusiast could
answer my original question without personal insults. Will
the necessary upgrade to 8VSB solve the atrocious reception
problems and repeated loss of signal? Please, David - show us
how much you understand the technology instead of using it for
porn excitation. Did your blow up doll leak? Yes, anyone can
post as David does repeatedly. It takes no intelligence to
post like David. Now, is there anyone in this newsgroup that
is an honest, benevolent HDTV enthusiast? If so, this
question would be answered politely and technically.

David wrote:
> "You" and Bob will never create a DTV website because your
> *only* purpose here is to harass honest, benevolent HDTV
> enthusiasts.
>
> "w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:40F5145C.E0853FFC@hotmail.com...
>> Why do you post this nonsense? This is not relevant to the
>> discussion. Who cares anything about Mark Schubin's
>> apartment? If it was relevant, then why were you so unkind as
>> to not even explain why? Instead, you post more personal
>> attacks on someone you don't like. Your emotional opinions
>> are totally irrelevant to anyone in the world. If Bob has
>> posted in error, then you do all a favor by only exposing
>> those errors. Period. Nothing more.
>>
>> Apparently you are so emotional as to even think I agree
>> with Bob. If I don't agree with you, then I must be against
>> you? Stop and think a minute. What did I criticize
>> previously? Posts like this from David provides no useful
>> information and perverts purpose of newsgroups. Please
>> demonstrate some intelligence, David. Show us where Bob has
>> posted so much in error. Raise the standards of newsgoups and
>> your own posts. Either stop posting or post real world
>> technical fact.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 5:21:52 PM

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

Mark Crispin (mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> That's pretty typical for a sock puppet. It's done in order to establish
> the puppet's "unique" personality. Ditto different message formatting.
>
> Some things do come through. If you study the grammar, and in particular
> the grammar mistakes, you'll be able to distinguish the differences
> between forced mistakes and mistakes that are part of that individual's
> personal syntax. Betrays a puppet every time.

In this case, though, I think it's just that w_tom has been laughed out
of all the other groups (he started in places like the Windows OS groups,
moved through the various PC hardware groups, then into the home repair
and DBS groups) he has posted in.

Basically, he took the true statement "many cheap surge protectors are
poorly designed and don't work" and munged that into "only whole house
protection works".

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/99/Apr/columbine.html
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
uce@ftc.gov |
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 5:46:08 PM

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

"w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40F45590.A84D0691@hotmail.com...
> As an American, I care about how that modulation would have
> succeeded in its original purpose - to save the American TV
> industry. Had the Advanced Television Systems Committee done
> their work and further studied an OFDM standard, then they
> could have set an international standard and actually created
> American jobs. Instead we did something equivalent to
> tarrifs. We created a lesser standard and now find that our
> TVs products are, even moreso, less compatible with the rest
> of the world. Having not created an acceptable world standard,
> then the TV industry is further dominated by foreign
> competitors. How do we create innovative American jobs when
> politics subverts technology?
>
> On the otherhand, I can appreciate the reason why they
> rushed into an 8VSB standard. 8VSB was easier to implement
> when getting a standard created sooner (rather than make a
> better standard) was more important. As a result, 8VSB
> suffered even from reflections off of passing airplanes. It
> became a standard the world did not want. So what happened to
> all those American jobs?
>
> Supposedly the new upgrades to 8VSB are to solve this
> multipath problem. Too late. The US lost leadership and
> associated jobs only because they rushed a standard rather
> than develop one. Again, all of this is moot to the issue of
> domestic HDTV. But it remains an excellent lesson in how to
> responsibly management technological innovation. At least
> people who watched the 8VSB / COFDM controversy should be
> smarter (and hopefully wealthier in the future) from watching
> what happened to HDTV.
>
> In the meantime, personal attacks on anyone only mean those
> posters could not be bothered to first learn facts. Use facts
> rather than personal insults to challenge Bob Miller - and we
> all learn more about how to make an innovative America.
>


Why do you top post?



> Gomer Jones wrote:
> > I think the problem many have had all along with Bob posts is the
> > fact that this newgroup is here to advocate HDTV. While Bob
> > is here to advocate a modulation scheme, and I don't fault him
> > initially as that modulation scheme would have benefited his
> > business. But to continue to come to this newsgroup and
> > profess that American HDTV is dismal failure, because the rest
> > of the world had selected CODFM doesn't add up to me -- I mean
> > a great number of Americans have access to HDTV. Have they
> > implemented or purchased a HDTV set, I am not sure -- but it
> > is akin to saying that Windows is a failure because not
> > everyone has upgraded to XP.
> >
> > I have no doubt that both of the modulation schemes have
> > their pros and cons -- but what Bob and others fail to
> > recognize is that most users don't really care. I like most
> > Americans will be happy to receive their HDTV content via
> > cable. Others will argue that transition to DTV will revive
> > OTA broadcasters -- me I just don't see it -- Bob will
> > argue without CODFM broadcasters will fail, with it they
> > will succeed. I for one am not of the school that OTA will
> > make a revivial -- America is about consumption and excess
> > and where can more of that but anywhere but cable (Ok SAT
> > too).
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 5:57:37 PM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Hg0Jc.1695$mL5.1560@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> I have continually come to this newsgroup and said JUST THE OPPOSITE.
> That HDTV is wonderful and would do well on cable and satellite.

A person reading your posts over time would have a difficult time coming to
this conclusion. In fact later in this post you predict the death of cable
and sat (albeit hedged with as we know it)


> The only thing I said other than that was that HDTV would also do well
> on OTA if we had a reasonable modulation like COFDM. In the support of
> HDTV it would make eminent sense to have the best modulation system.
> Someone can be a STRONG PROPONENT of HDTV and at the same time support
> having a FAR BETTER modulation.
>
> > because the rest of the world had selected CODFM doesn't add up to me
>
> Didn't say HDTV was a dismal failure, said it was a dismal failure OTA.
> Never said that the rest of the world's choice of COFDM had anything to
> do with any failure in the US.

Once again a reader to this newsgroup, new to HDTV would not understand that
difference.

> -- I mean a great
> > number of Americans have access to HDTV. Have they implemented or
purchased
> > a HDTV set, I am not sure -- but it is akin to saying that Windows is a
> > failure because not everyone has upgraded to XP.
>
> Said nothing about the number of people who have or have not purchased
> an HDTV set. It is all about the number of OTA receivers sold. THAT is
> an unqualified disaster. The FCC thinks so and has a MANDATE to prove
> it. This is something they DID NOT WANT TO DO AND HELD OFF DOING FOR
> YEARS. Congress thinks it is a disaster and is holding hearing every two
> months on the subject now. They sent the GAO over to Berlin to see how
> they did it.

Once again the new reader to the group would find this to mean that HDTV is
not successful. It just proves the point that consumers find it easier to
get HDTV via cable or SAT.

>
> Every one knows it is a disaster. That is not the question. How do we
> fix it is the question. Maybe the 5th gen receivers will do it. I hope
> so as a business person. Maybe finally the broadcasters will get off
> spectrum that has been sold to someone else and let us use it with COFDM.
> >
> > I have no doubt that both of the modulation schemes have their pros and
> > cons -- but what Bob and others fail to recognize is that most users
don't
> > really care. I like most Americans will be happy to receive their HDTV
> > content via cable. Others will argue that transition to DTV will revive
OTA
> > broadcasters -- me I just don't see it -- Bob will argue without CODFM
> > broadcasters will fail, with it they will succeed. I for one am not of
the
> > school that OTA will make a revivial -- America is about consumption and
> > excess and where can more of that but anywhere but cable (Ok SAT too).
> >
> In my lifetime cable was a non entity. Now someone says that cable is
> permanent. Ten years ago the Internet was just starting now it is a
fixture.
>
> I tell you things change and are in the process of changing more
> rapidly. Cable and satellite as we know it are on the way out.
>
> Ten years from now mesh networks that connect everyone to each other
> will be the thing and content providers will be bypassing cable,
> satellite and OTA broadcasting to deliver directly to their customers
> with no middleman. Will this be pervasive in ten years no but it will be
> well into being created. Most people who now have broadband at 300 Kbps
> to 1Mbps will have 100 Mbps to a Gbps Internet access.
>
> Contracts are already being signed. The smart players are already
> starting to operate in that world.
>
> The airwaves will be used for broadcasting to mobile and fixed devices.
> Given the option a customer will sign up for a subscription service ONLY
> if it works mobile, fixed and portable. ALL fixed services will be well
> on their way to be delivered via the mesh IP networks on an ala carte
> basis. A smart computer in your media center will record all things it
> knows you want to see most of which will be delivered via IP.
>
> The only thing left will be broadcasting to mobile. And by mobile I mean
> completely hassle free reception where ever I am whether I am moving or
> still. NO one will settle for anything else.
>
> If Cable or satellite are still in that game it will be because they can
> deliver 100 Mbps Internet access not because they have 1000 channels.
> The number of channels is irrelevant in the age of the terabyte hard
> drive that cost $200. And they will be locked out of mobile.
> Broadcasters still using 8-VSB OTA??? That is so completely ridiculous
> just in the hearing. It is just utterly stupid.
>
> My numbers say that only 2.32% rely on OTA TV/DTV today in the US. In
> countries that use COFDM a reversal is being witnessed as MORE people
> are coming back to OTA because it works plug and play and is cheaper
> than cable or satellite. Mobile is also now a reality in Berlin also.
> This will lead to a RAPID, very RAPID re adoption of OTA.
>
> In the meantime in the USA the OTA numbers can't go down anymore. WE
> HAVE HIT ROCK BOTTOM. 2.32% is in the NOISE.
>
> In the meantime in the US we will see a POSSIBLE re adoption of OTA as
> the new 5th gen receivers show up next year and ventures such as USDTV
> take advantage of them and use a better compression scheme. As this
> happens and COFDM ventures in the US also become successful the pressure
> on broadcasters and the FCC to dump 8-VSB as soon as possible will
> become INTENSE.
>
> The lifespan of 8-VSB already a very DULL 7 years? I give it another 7
> max. Just enough time to become recognized as the total complete utter
> F**k*p it is.
>
> The handwriting is on the wall. It is in 20 ft high flashing neon
> letters why can't anyone see it?
>
> The Mandate is now 13 days old. How are those numbers?
>
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 7:54:45 PM

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

Gomer Jones wrote:
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:Hg0Jc.1695$mL5.1560@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>I have continually come to this newsgroup and said JUST THE OPPOSITE.
>>That HDTV is wonderful and would do well on cable and satellite.
>
>
> A person reading your posts over time would have a difficult time coming to
> this conclusion. In fact later in this post you predict the death of cable
> and sat (albeit hedged with as we know it)
>
Cable and satellite could both die and the average American could be
watching 10 hours a day of HDTV material with 5 options on how to
receive same. These are different topics. HDTV is a resolution that can
be delivered on a disk, in a file over the Internet, broadcast over the
Internet or a private IP network. It can be delivered over point to
point wireless or WiFi or WiMax.

It could be delivered from "stratolittes" or flying balloons at 70,000
ft. like the one being tested this morning in Atlanta.

You have to separate the "resolution", HDTV, from the delivery methods.

My argument that the delivery of HDTV is being delayed because of a
defect in what has been till now the PRIMARY delivery method, OTA, is on
topic. It is at the heart of the topic. I assume that people who are for
HDTV would be for the most people being able to receive HDTV with the
least cost, in the most situations and with the simplest gear.

That I believe requires using the best modulation with the economies of
scale that COFDM already offers because it has been adopted by most of
the world.

If cable and satellite respond to the changes in technology that are in
the works they will survive but not in their present form. If cable goes
into wireless and ala carte and the portion of cable for IP increases
dramatically it could survive IMO. They are so bloated with debt, so
dependent on their monopoly status and have in most cases such a bad rep
with their customers that I think they are more vulnerable to the
piranha that will feed on them than even the Telcos.

If you want to see the future of video delivery watch what is happening
with VoIP. Non Regulated piranha feeding off of regulated beached
whales. IDT just entered the fray. I use Vonage for everything. Even
take it with me on trips. Have plugged into WiFi in offices across the
country and it is just like being at home. Video will soon be the same.
Delivered everywhere to many types of devices mobile or fixed. People
want ubiquitous and that is what they will get.

Mixing a resolution with a delivery method is stupid. It was a construct
by the Consumer Electronics Manufacturers to stimulate sales of high
profit margin HDTV capable sets. IT DIDN"T WORK! More HDTV capable sets
are being sold to watch DVDs. Force is not a proper marketing strategy.
Mandates DO not work. You can't push a string. I could go on.

Having a modulation that works on the other hand does work. If the new
8-VSB receivers work as advertised the story changes. Even I give 8-VSB
a chance of success in the medium term (10 years). I do so because I see
a success in the UK and Berlin based on fixed reception of a free OTA
service.

The market for all fixed delivery of video will narrow and choke
business plans like cable has now however even by such new services like
USDTV.

Satellite?? We dropped it because it went off when it rained. If there
is a better service that doesn't (drop out in the rain) and at a lower
cost satellite has no where to hide. Except Charlie has bought up a lot
of MVDDS spectrum at auction lately. That could work. But it is not mobile.

If you are offered two services at the same price, a service that works
everywhere and one that works only in a fixed location both having the
same content which do you buy? If the one that is mobile uses less
expensive receivers that work with built in antenna which to you buy? If
you are a cable company and the mobile service takes 1/3 of your
customers in the first two years and you can't service your debt what do
you do? If the market even smells that such a trend MIGHT develop what
happens to your credit?

Mr. Murdock smelled such a threat in the UK and became a partner. Even
so it is such a threat to his satellite business in the UK that he now
is going to offer 200 free channels in an attempt to kill the upstart
FREEVIEW. FREEVIEW is outselling SKY 10 to 1. The clock is already
ticking in the UK.

OTA rules and that is without mobile. Once mobile is added OTA will be
the place to be for all content.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 8:02:34 PM

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

Richard C. wrote:

> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:Wk0Jc.1700$mL5.1678@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> : w_tom,
> :
> : You are not special. Every poster that has had the temerity to in any
> : way agree with anything I say is immediately labeled ME or someone I
> : have coached. This is just standard procedure.
> :
> : Bob Miller
> :
> ======================
> That is because you have indeed used MANY alter-egos.................
>
>
And you know that because I have freely admitted it. And only on
AVSForum because that is the only place I needed to. They let members
post inaccurate information and delete post that offer correct
information. I used aliases (still do) to correct such BS.

Because of their paranoia to not offend their corporate sponsors they
delete very quickly now so it is hard to post anything. But it does keep
the BS down also so there is less need to post.

In their witch hunt to stamp out all politically incorrect thinking they
have made the posting there very tame. They can't even talk about many
subjects anymore.
Anonymous
July 14, 2004 11:42:56 PM

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

w_tom wrote:


> And BTW, please also answer my original question. Will the
> upgraded 8VSB solve this pathetic reception problem that so
> many have suffered from with the original 8VSB version of
> HDTV? Some, such as the emotionally overcharged David,
> instead post emotional attacks. Don't be like David.
>
The upgraded 5th Gen Zenith receivers, having learned a lot from COFDM
technology, will solve some of the reception problems generic to 8-VSB.
Specifically I hear they will solve the static multipath problems. How
well they do with dynamic multipath I don't know. I have been told they
will not allow mobile operation. The other version of 8-VSB that was
developed specifically to address mobile, E-VSB, does not allow mobile
reception.

Dynamic multipath comes from moving objects such as people in your
living room and airplanes traffic etc. If you are mobile all signals
that hit your antenna are dynamic multipath.

But they say that dynamic multipath is addressed well enough so that
indoor antennas will work well.

I will no more on July 23rd.
Anonymous
July 15, 2004 1:47:12 AM

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

Vidguy7 (vidguy7@aol.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> > And only on
> >AVSForum because that is the only place I needed to. They let members
> >post inaccurate information and delete post that offer correct
> >information.
>
> That is an UTTER LIE.

Well, I'll give Bob a small crumb.

Like any other forum, AVSForum *does* allow members to post innaccurate
information. People aren't perfect, so errors happen.

On the other hand, AVSForum does NOT delete posts of verifiable information
presented in a non-confrontational manner.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Zits/CheckTheGigabytes.gif
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov |
uce@ftc.gov |
Anonymous
July 15, 2004 2:10:01 AM

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

In article <40F56A27.11914F91@hotmail.com>,
w_tom <w_tom1@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> An honest and benevolent HDTV enthusiast possesses basic
> system knowledge. An honest, benevolent HDTV enthusiast could
> answer my original question without personal insults. Will
> the necessary upgrade to 8VSB solve the atrocious reception
> problems and repeated loss of signal?
>
Note that you are making an assumption (obviously) that other
people who have tried to receive HDTV have had the serious problems
that you allege. Being an actual engineer (instead of just claiming
it), I find that the 8VSB signal to be significantly more robust
than NTSC... It is fairly clear that when 8VSB is blamed for
reception troubles, the effects of inferior front end design
appear to be TOTALLY ignored. In at least one case, the tuner front
end appears to be almost wide-open, and interfering sources appear
to be problematic. Without careful measurement, the effects of
multipath and high power interference (e.g. UHF NTSC stations running
at full power) can be difficult to distinguish.

Of course, I really do have experience in receiving 8VSB in less
than ideal situations, rather than just seeing the spin as perpetrated
by pro-COFDM (or even pro-8VSB) advocates. Those who are generally
failures at receiving 8VSB in non-ideal circumstances shouldn't be
deemed to be 'experts.' Those who are generally successful are proven
to be relatively more competent.

Summing this up: You are not 'connecting' to most people in this group,
because you are making claims that are not based upon the successful
experience of many of the people who are reading the group.

John
Anonymous
July 15, 2004 3:55:25 AM

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

>Cable and satellite could both die and the average American could be
>watching 10 hours a day of HDTV material with 5 options on how to
>receive same.

God help us, I thought we were rid of BOB for several months. I figured he was
looking for allys since he no longer has any.

>It could be delivered from "stratolittes" or flying balloons at 70,000
>ft. like the one being tested this morning in Atlanta.

Great, now we've got COFDM via flying baloons.

>My argument that the delivery of HDTV is being delayed because of a
>defect in what has been till now the PRIMARY delivery method, OTA, is on
>topic.

No BOB, you're NEVER EVER on topic. All you do is LIE, LIE, LIE.

>That I believe requires using the best modulation with the economies of
>scale that COFDM already offers because it has been adopted by most of
>the world.

It never ends, it just never ends. This dope still doesn't understand that 8VSB
is it. It's over for COFDM. This man is totally 100% detached from reality. He
is quite ill. Hey BOOBY, what did Korea ever do? Yeah, I thought so.
Anonymous
July 15, 2004 4:01:58 AM

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

>alt.tv.tech.hdtv Frequently Asked Question (update):
>
>Q: Who is Bob Miller?
>
>A: Bob Miller, the president of a failed company in NYC called Viacel, is
>our resident clown and snake oil salesman. He serves a valuable purpose
>in this newsgroup by reliably coming to an incorrect conclusion from any
>news item or piece of data. He is so reliably wrong on all matters that
>whenever he says anything, you can be confident that the exact opposite is
>true. He admits to fraudulent use of aliases to tresspass into a forum
>from which he was ejected.
>
>-- Mark --

A wise post by Mark. Too bad we don't have "stickies" on this ng.
Anonymous
July 15, 2004 4:09:33 AM

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

>If Bob Miller is a kook, then
>his facts should be exposed.

Mr. w_tom, if you are indeed someone other than BOB, you must be a newcomer.
Only a newcomer would have said something like this. BOB (or you) has been
exposed BASED ON FACTS countless times. Let me repeat that, BOB (or you) has
been exposed BASED ON FACTS countless times. The history is replete with proof
that has been provided showing BOB (or you) to be a complete liar.

>In this post, not one has
>attacked what Bob Miller posts.

It gets tiresome since it's been done so many times before. The amount of time
and energy that has been wasted on this "man" is beyond belief. He was BANNED
from the very well respected AVS forum because it was PROVED beyond a shadow of
a doubt that BOB (or you) was a liar. This was not heresay, this was not
conjecture, this was FACT. So if you are indeed a newcomer you are forgiven. If
you are indeed BOB, you remain a liar and a son of a bitch.

>Will the
>upgraded 8VSB solve this pathetic reception problem that so
>many have suffered from with the original 8VSB version of
>HDTV?

What about the myriad of people (by FAR the VAST majority that post on this
very ng) that have no probelm whatsoever with 8VSB? What about the VAST
majority who speak of horrific NTSC reception at the very site where they get
picture perfect 8VSB? Yes indieed w_tom, you do indeed sound and post PRECISELY
like BOB. I remain skeptical.
!