Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

report from Japan

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
January 7, 2005 7:38:40 PM

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

As promised, here is my first-hand report about the situation with digital
over-the-air HDTV broadcasting in Japan. A certain person has been
spreading a lot of misinformation about Japan's COFDM-based DTV system
compared to the North American 8-VSB based system.

Here are the facts, each independently confirmed:

Japanese digital TV broadcasting is still experimental, and covers only a
small radius although the service area will expand in 2005. Even
worst-case service areas in the US are larger than what is currently in
Japan. NHK's web page has maps, although you need to know something about
Japanese geography to understand them.

Forget about rabbit ears in your living room. You need a rooftop-mounted
yagi.

I can attest that Japanese over-the-air digital HDTV can look quite nice,
but all of the shops demonstrating a TV's HDTV capabilities use satellite
instead. There is a reason for this; all the familiar pixellation and
dropout issues that we experience in the US also occurs in Japan. COFDM
is apparently not a magic Tesla coil or snake oil or juju-juice that makes
these problems go away after all.

Also, it may have been the programming, but I thought that satellite
looked better than over-the-air.

The notion of over-the-air digital HDTV sets "flying off the shelves" is a
gross distortion of the truth (to put it mildly). Widescreen HDTV sets
are indeed hot-selling items, but many people use them to watch satellite
and cable. Note that Japan has had analog widescreen, both HDTV and
non-HDTV, for a long time; the US decided to skip this step and go
directly to digital for widescreen.

Bottom line: HDTV satellite is in no danger of going out of business in
Japan with the advent of over-the-air digital HDTV. Japanese people are
not cancelling their satellite and cable subscriptions for over-the-air
digital HDTV. Most Japanese don't have access to OTA DTV HDTV, and of
those who do most don't receive it.

There are *no* digital TV mobile phones or even handheld digital TVs. It
will be at least *two* years before handheld digital TVs appear in Japan.

There *are* TV mobile phones, but these receive analog TV (basically the
equivalent of late 1980s handheld TVs). These have just recently
appeared.

Many mobile phones *do* have video, but this is downloaded over the
Internet to the mobile phone; in other words it's video web content and
not over-the-air television.

It's required on trains to put the phone in manner mode, so the main use
of mobile phones during commutes (a substantial portion of a Japanese day)
is to play games that don't require audio.

Many dashboard-mounted GPS systems also receive analog TV in 4:3 (not
widescreen) visible to the driver. It is illegal for cars to be sold with
these, but it's available aftermarket. Just about the only reason why
there hasn't been a (worse) problem is that analog reception is so
wretched in Japan. Also, Japanese driving laws are quite strict (e.g.
there is zero tolerance for *any* blood alcohol when driving) and
inattentive driving is severely punished.

-- Mark --

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

More about : report japan

Anonymous
January 7, 2005 7:48:17 PM

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

And here is another report from Japan without all the BS.

http://www.dibeg.org/news/news-3/news-e3.htm#dn039e

Sometime in January there will be an update of this page giving more
information on end of the year sales of HDTV sets. The fact is that as
the charts on this site show the sale of OTA HDTV sets are in a "hockey
puck" type explosion in Japan even though they have a limited coverage
area so far. Mark wants to continue to suggest that I am saying that the
coverage area in Japan is large. I have never said such. In fact I have
pointed out the ironic fact that even with a small OTA footprint in
Japan the sale of HDTV sets that are integrated is very strong. This
indicates a market acceptance of the Japanese modulation ISDB-T. The US
modulation 8-VSB has not been accepted. Few buy integrated sets in the
US despite an FCC mandate. While 5th gen 8-VSB receivers will improve
that it is a crime that the US OTA is still stuck with both an ancient
modulation and compression system MPEG2 while our satellite and cable
systems are free to upgrade to the best technology as witnessed by the
decision of DTV to upgrade to MPEG4 announced yesterday at the CES.

As it is laid out in this OpenDTV post below there is reason still to
believe that the CEA (Consumer Electronics Association) and its members
promoted the cementing of our OTA broadcast industry with ancient tech
to kill it. It has worked so far. OTA is practically dead in the US
while it flourishes in places like Japan. And as the article goes on it
refutes the notion that reception in Japan has problems like we have in
the US. The article shows HDTV reception with simple omni antennas at
speeds up to 100 kph. It also lays out the state of mobile reception on
cell phones and other devices. You can't have a rooftop antenna with a
cell phone Mark.

Bob Miller

Post from OpenDTV TODAY from Steve Long of the DoD (The DoD was a strong
proponent of COFDM DVB-T and a severe critic of 8-VSB).

"A month or so ago I received an interesting briefing from a company that
wanted to use ATSC / 8VSB to deliver data to fire departments and other
first responders. They had no clue about who they were briefing (my
history, etc.), other than my current title. Their business plan was for
the fire engine to get all the way to the site of the fire where they would
stop then they would be able to receive data about where the fire was. I
gently pointed out to them that once the fire department got to the fire,
they kind of knew where the fire was and would not wait around the fire
engine for data to arrive - firemen tend to run into the fire first thing
when they get there. The point to the story is, as thick as these folks
were, even they knew they could not receive 8VSB data while the truck was
moving (they must have tested their system prior to deployment - what a
concept).

To quote a lawyer from my swimming with sharks experience a few years back,
ATSC is great, it works 75% of the time for fixed locations. To which my
boss's boss responded, we tend to like communications channels to work
somewhere in the high 90s.

I am now also enjoying HDTV via my DirecTV HDTV receiver, which also has an
integral OTA ATSC decoder. Lots of signal strength for my Fox channel
(signal bars full strength), but I can not watch it at all - the picture
breaks up so often that it makes any sports program (Redskins football,
etc.) too painful to watch (pain on multiple levels), so I have to watch
Fox via SDTV satellite, no OTA HDTV for me. I know why the reception is so
bad - a one story hill behind my house causes a large standing reflection,
which we noted long ago when my house was one of the ATSC DC test sites.
8VSB does not work for me, never has, never will. I also can not receive
the local digital UPN station. The signal strength swings from 0 to 80+
every couple of seconds, which never gives the decoder a chance to lock up
and display a signal. So back to DirecTV for UPN at my house, no HDTV Star
Trek Enterprise for me.

The COFDM proponents lost the political fight several years back, but they
were still right - 8VSB was a poor choice for our nation. Isn't it a
wonderful irony that 8VSB was added to the ATSC specification as a bone to
the last US TV manufacturer, which was subsequently sold to a foreign
company who now owns the patents on 8VSB. Simply lovely.

It was cool to read Voom is going to add hundreds of channels of satellite
based HDTV. It is cool to get local traffic and weather on my XM satellite
radio now, and they even have emergency channel provisions now in case
things go stupid. Maybe the most cynical people I heard during the
8VSB/COFDM wars were right all along - the choice of 8VSB was a method to
kill over the air TV so everyone would move to cable and satellite then the
OTA spectrum would be sold off once and for all. If all of the HDTV is
over satellite, and now the last uses for local service (local traffic,
weather, and emergency broadcasts) are replaced by satellite service, why
would we need local OTA digital service anymore? Inquiring minds want to
know.

To my old friends on this list, hello, I've been away for awhile, busy
fighting a couple of wars recently. But my duties are changing soon, and I
am thinking about getting back into the digital Motion Imagery game. Watch
this space."

Mark Crispin wrote:
> As promised, here is my first-hand report about the situation with
> digital over-the-air HDTV broadcasting in Japan. A certain person has
> been spreading a lot of misinformation about Japan's COFDM-based DTV
> system compared to the North American 8-VSB based system.
>
> Here are the facts, each independently confirmed:
>
> Japanese digital TV broadcasting is still experimental, and covers only
> a small radius although the service area will expand in 2005. Even
> worst-case service areas in the US are larger than what is currently in
> Japan. NHK's web page has maps, although you need to know something
> about Japanese geography to understand them.
>
> Forget about rabbit ears in your living room. You need a
> rooftop-mounted yagi.
>
> I can attest that Japanese over-the-air digital HDTV can look quite
> nice, but all of the shops demonstrating a TV's HDTV capabilities use
> satellite instead. There is a reason for this; all the familiar
> pixellation and dropout issues that we experience in the US also occurs
> in Japan. COFDM is apparently not a magic Tesla coil or snake oil or
> juju-juice that makes these problems go away after all.
>
> Also, it may have been the programming, but I thought that satellite
> looked better than over-the-air.
>
> The notion of over-the-air digital HDTV sets "flying off the shelves" is
> a gross distortion of the truth (to put it mildly). Widescreen HDTV
> sets are indeed hot-selling items, but many people use them to watch
> satellite and cable. Note that Japan has had analog widescreen, both
> HDTV and non-HDTV, for a long time; the US decided to skip this step and
> go directly to digital for widescreen.
>
> Bottom line: HDTV satellite is in no danger of going out of business in
> Japan with the advent of over-the-air digital HDTV. Japanese people are
> not cancelling their satellite and cable subscriptions for over-the-air
> digital HDTV. Most Japanese don't have access to OTA DTV HDTV, and of
> those who do most don't receive it.
>
> There are *no* digital TV mobile phones or even handheld digital TVs.
> It will be at least *two* years before handheld digital TVs appear in
> Japan.
>
> There *are* TV mobile phones, but these receive analog TV (basically the
> equivalent of late 1980s handheld TVs). These have just recently appeared.
>
> Many mobile phones *do* have video, but this is downloaded over the
> Internet to the mobile phone; in other words it's video web content and
> not over-the-air television.
>
> It's required on trains to put the phone in manner mode, so the main use
> of mobile phones during commutes (a substantial portion of a Japanese
> day) is to play games that don't require audio.
>
> Many dashboard-mounted GPS systems also receive analog TV in 4:3 (not
> widescreen) visible to the driver. It is illegal for cars to be sold
> with these, but it's available aftermarket. Just about the only reason
> why there hasn't been a (worse) problem is that analog reception is so
> wretched in Japan. Also, Japanese driving laws are quite strict (e.g.
> there is zero tolerance for *any* blood alcohol when driving) and
> inattentive driving is severely punished.
>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 12:22:51 AM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> The US modulation 8-VSB has not been accepted. Few buy integrated sets in
the
> US despite an FCC mandate.

You are suggesting that Joe/Jane consumers worldwide have a technical
awareness of COFDM, 8-VSB, QAM and PSK, and their deep technical savvy is
causing them to vary their purchasing decisions. You are trying to attribute
buying/adoption rates worldwide solely on technical variables.

"(with surprise) Oh look honey, it uses the 8-VSB modulation scheme!
Doesn't that have multi-path issues? (now with a sigh) Honey, let's do some
more research on 8-VSB before buying, and let's just dedicate this day to
getting the new washer and dryer like we spoke of before. (husband and wife
walk off, happy in the thought that they avoided a bad technology day)"

NONSENSE!

Far more realistically, in areas of the world where cable and satellite TV
services exist (analog or digital), the use of terrestrial (analog or
digital, 8-VSB or COFDM) falls way off, and in many cases it becomes
redundant and unnecessary. I don't have the stats, but the number of cable
and satellite connected viewers in the US far exceeds those that use
terrestrial. Certainly in other parts of the world where the infrastructure
is lacking, terrestrial and satellite should have the edge.

I used to live in a typical US city of 50,000 people (Corvallis):

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?city=Corvallis&sta...

Yeah we have NTSC *and ATSC* OTA, but everyone I know is cable or satellite
based so they can get all the zillion programs that have never been and will
never be put OTA, *and* all the OTA programming they could have gotten is
also available via cable and satellite, so they can put away any and all
antennas, and better yet deal with one remote and one tuner that can tune in
all the programming.

I recently moved out into the country (still work in Corvallis though), and
satellite dishes dominate, and for a few bucks ($5?), I got local
programming feeds added to my 100+ station package. Why hassle with two
remotes and two tuners when I can do everything by the satellite STB.

If I had to rank what goes through Joe/Jane consumers head when they buy, I
bet it would be:

1) Does it work with my existing cable or satellite service, if that's what
I currently have
2) Is it digital (don't really know why, but rumor has it digital is good)
3) For the TV junkie family, might it be high-definition (little nervous
about it, sounds new-ish, could be expensive, but I could brag to the Jones'
next door)
4) How do I pay for it (should be #1, but...)
:
73) Does it support 8-VSB or CODFM
74) Does Bob recommend it
:

I *do* respect the technical debates, but beyond a few of us alpha-nerds
that think the fate of man kind rests on technology choices, I don't think
the masses even know or care. My Mom just wants the TV to work, and look
good.

Thomas Gilg
Related resources
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 2:43:52 AM

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

news.cup.hp.com wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>>The US modulation 8-VSB has not been accepted. Few buy integrated sets in

>
> You are suggesting that Joe/Jane consumers worldwide have a technical
> awareness of COFDM, 8-VSB, QAM and PSK, and their deep technical savvy is
> causing them to vary their purchasing decisions. You are trying to attribute
> buying/adoption rates worldwide solely on technical variables.
>
> "(with surprise) Oh look honey, it uses the 8-VSB modulation scheme!
> Doesn't that have multi-path issues? (now with a sigh) Honey, let's do some
> more research on 8-VSB before buying, and let's just dedicate this day to
> getting the new washer and dryer like we spoke of before. (husband and wife
> walk off, happy in the thought that they avoided a bad technology day)"
>
> NONSENSE!

NONSENSE back at ya!

I never suggested that Joe/Jane have any idea of what 8-VSB or COFDM
are. But retailers do and manufacturers do. They are the ones NOT
advertising OTA anything. And broadcasters are not doing very much
either. The public takes its cues from advertising and word of mouth.
The word of mouth on the Internet and especially from ENTHUSIASTIC early
adopters of 8-VSB OTA receivers is that you have to be real macho with
tech smarts a lot of time and money to get into HDTV OTA. Many early
adopters even say that as soon as they can get their HD fix from cable
or satellite its bye bye to OTA. Go to AVSForum and read the post on the
problems related to antennas, that people are not going to bother with
OTA if they already have satellite or cable. You say as much in your
post below.
>
> Far more realistically, in areas of the world where cable and satellite TV
> services exist (analog or digital), the use of terrestrial (analog or
> digital, 8-VSB or COFDM) falls way off, and in many cases it becomes
> redundant and unnecessary. I don't have the stats, but the number of cable
> and satellite connected viewers in the US far exceeds those that use
> terrestrial. Certainly in other parts of the world where the infrastructure
> is lacking, terrestrial and satellite should have the edge.

Maybe but what we do know is that in OTHER countries that have even MORE
cable and satellite users like Berlin (95% cable or satellite) the
digital transition took off like wildfire with people dropping their
cable and satellite systems for OTA. They have a lot of satellite in the
UK for example and poor Mr. Murdock has seen his sales all but dry up
for his SKY satellite service while OTA sold like a MILLION COFDM
receivers for Christmas this year. (that would be SIX million for
Christmas in the US if we had such a good modulation).

In fact Mr. Murdock is so discombobulated by the incredible success of
OTA DTV in the UK that he is offering a new satellite service with many
free channels. TOO late I think.

When a similar service is offered in the US, and it will be, using 8-VSB
and 5th gen receivers (the first barely decent 8-vSB receiver) you will
see similar impressive sales because NOW we can have a business model
that works, what a concept.
>
> I used to live in a typical US city of 50,000 people (Corvallis):
>
> http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?city=Corvallis&sta...
>
> Yeah we have NTSC *and ATSC* OTA, but everyone I know is cable or satellite
> based so they can get all the zillion programs that have never been and will
> never be put OTA, *and* all the OTA programming they could have gotten is
> also available via cable and satellite, so they can put away any and all
> antennas, and better yet deal with one remote and one tuner that can tune in
> all the programming.
>
> I recently moved out into the country (still work in Corvallis though), and
> satellite dishes dominate, and for a few bucks ($5?), I got local
> programming feeds added to my 100+ station package. Why hassle with two
> remotes and two tuners when I can do everything by the satellite STB.

Why hassle with satellite if you could get all the programming you want
OTA? We canceled satellite here in New York City because of the frequent
loss of signal due to rain fade. Why pay for satellite when most of your
programming can be delivered OTA free or at much less cost? NEVER is a
big word. Expect to see most interesting cable fare delivered OTA in
coming years. The latest MPEG2 can deliver up to 8 programs per
physical 6 MHz OTA channel, MPEG4 will deliver up to 16 programs per
physical channel in the future. Any DTV OTA market can support many
physical channels from 2 thru at least 59 and when you add in PVR
functionality for time shifting the "physical" "now" channel's delivery
capability expands much further.

Neither cable or satellite can compete with the new OTA DTV broadcasting
being born today IMO. Add in the competition from wireless broadband and
megaband Internet and I see no future for either cable or satellite to
the home user.
>
> If I had to rank what goes through Joe/Jane consumers head when they buy, I
> bet it would be:

My list goes more like this
>
> 1) Does it work with my existing cable or satellite service, if that's what I currently have

1) Wow look at that OTA quality! Never saw such quality on cable or
satellite. I don't know anything about compression stuff but cable and
satellite are doing something pretty bad to their quality. This
wireless OTA cable subscription service is a great new service. I can
drop my cable or satellite service, if that is what I currently have,
and save 50% off my monthly bill, get a better quality video while
getting all 20 local stations free in HD and save the $5 the satellite
company wants to charge me for doing NOTHING!!! What nerve charging me
$5 for something that is free. And who needs 200 channels when programs
can be delivered 24/7 to my PVR anyway. I can watch what I want to watch
when ever I want to. If I do have a special request for a program not
offered I can get it delivered over the Internet anyway since most
content providers will deliver most content over the Internet for an ala
carte fee soon.

> 2) Is it digital (don't really know why, but rumor has it digital is good)

2) Surely you jest. Why would I care about whether it is digital or not?
Joe/Jane do not care about digital, modulation or any of that. Just the
quality, quantity and cost of the programming.

> 3) For the TV junkie family, might it be high-definition (little nervous about it, sounds new-ish, could be expensive, but I could brag to the Jones' next door)

3) Jane this is a no brainer. We get better quality at a much lower
price and everything comes over the air to an antenna that we can't even
see since it is built right into the DTV. It works with an HDTV or an
SDTV, it gets lots of channels including all the popular ones. We can
brag to the neighbors that we have better for less and don't pay for
free TV accept for the advertising.

> 4) How do I pay for it (should be #1, but...)

4) Wow look how much we are saving and the receiver is free
> :
> 73) Does it support 8-VSB or CODFM

100) What is COFDM or 8-VSB. (it works with both so what is the
difference and besides there will be services using both in the US)

COFDM is the basis for virtually all wireless broadband deployments.
COFDM is the basis for the new Sirius mobile DTV for cars introduced at
the CES show this week. COFDM is the basis for the Crown Castle national
mobile video network. COFDM is the basis for the Qualcomm national
mobile video network on FORMER TV station UHF channel #55. And COFDM is
the basis for at least two other mobile DTV ventures in the works.

> 74) Does Bob recommend it

Joe/Jane never heard of Bob
> :
>
> I *do* respect the technical debates, but beyond a few of us alpha-nerds
> that think the fate of man kind rests on technology choices, I don't think
> the masses even know or care. My Mom just wants the TV to work, and look
> good.

Your Mom and my Mom both and 8-VSB till now has NOT fit the bill so
neither of them have heard of it. No word of mouth since non of their
friends has it. No advertising so how are they going to find out about
it. NO business plan for broadcasters so they have DELAYED and dragged
their feet for the last 7 years.

NO NOTHING since we have had a DEFECTIVE modulation standard and NO one
had gotten on board this ill fated train wreck.
>
> Thomas Gilg
>
>
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 2:43:53 AM

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

Bob Miller wrote:


>
> I never suggested that Joe/Jane have any idea of what 8-VSB or COFDM
> are.

Actually, you have. Far too many times.

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 1:18:28 PM

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

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>> I never suggested that Joe/Jane have any idea of what 8-VSB or COFDM are.
> Actually, you have. Far too many times.

Let's face it. Bob Miller is a crackpot. He has a psychotic desire to
pollute forums with his nonsense because he bet on the wrong horse and
lost.

He refuses to accept facts, no matter how many times his nonsense has been
refuted.

I speak, read, and write Japanese. I spent considerable time this week in
Japanese electronics stores in Tokyo and spoke with many people. What I
reported was a clear concensus.

OTA digital HDTV is in Japan not, repeat *NOT*, something which is driving
the sale of HDTV televisions. It is available only in limited areas,
requires directional rooftop antennas, and has far less variety than
existing cable and satellite choices.

Shops which demonstrate the HDTV capabilities of a TV always use
satellite. If you insist, they will show you OTA digitial HDTV; but
periodic pixellation makes it unsuitable for general in-shop demos.

Japanese satellite HDTV is more advanced than the current offerings from
DirecTV and Dish. Think of VOOM but with channels that you actually want
to watch. But this has nothing to do with 8-VSB vs. COFDM issues.

Perhaps it is time to form a moderated newsgroup for HDTV issues that can
keep Bob Miller out the way he is kept out of AVSFORUM. We do not have to
subject ourselves to his mental masturbation.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 1:22:41 PM

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

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Bob Miller wrote:
> And here is another report from Japan without all the BS.
> http://www.dibeg.org/news/news-3/news-e3.htm#dn039e

The bullshit is Bob Miller's fantasies.

All that those numbers report is that HDTV TV sets sold in Japan now
include terrestrial HDTV tuners. This should have been the case years ago
in the US, and would have been if it weren't for the criminal actions of
Bob Miller and his gangster clique that attempted to derail OTA HDTV.

In a just society, Bob Miller would be thrown in prison.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 1:26:49 PM

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

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, news.cup.hp.com wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>> The US modulation 8-VSB has not been accepted. Few buy integrated sets in the
>> US despite an FCC mandate.
> You are suggesting that Joe/Jane consumers worldwide have a technical
> awareness of COFDM, 8-VSB, QAM and PSK, and their deep technical savvy is
> causing them to vary their purchasing decisions. You are trying to attribute
> buying/adoption rates worldwide solely on technical variables.

The reason why few integrated sets have been sold in the US is that few
integrated sets have been available.

Two years ago, I could find *no* integrated sets in the US. Last year,
there were only a few. Now, there are a few more.

If the FCC mandate had gone in force in 2000 when it should, there would
have been many more.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 9:46:20 PM

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

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> I never suggested that Joe/Jane have any idea of what 8-VSB or COFDM are.

LIAR!

Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 11:03:37 PM

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

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>>> I never suggested that Joe/Jane have any idea of what 8-VSB or COFDM
>>> are.
>>
>> Actually, you have. Far too many times.

Never have, if you think so could you point out one example please?
>
>
> Let's face it. Bob Miller is a crackpot. He has a psychotic desire to
> pollute forums with his nonsense because he bet on the wrong horse and
> lost.

I did not bet on 8-VSB which has been the wrong horse so far having
delayed our digital transition for many years now. A better modulation,
any COFDM based, is winning out both domestically and in many other
countries including Japan.
>
> He refuses to accept facts, no matter how many times his nonsense has
> been refuted.

I am willing to look at your facts, do you have some? So far it is just
your statements which I think may be biased at least against myself from
reading your post. Could you give us some more concrete examples? Like
respond to the Japanese web site that I listed.

> I speak, read, and write Japanese. I spent considerable time this week
> in Japanese electronics stores in Tokyo and spoke with many people.
> What I reported was a clear concensus.
>
> OTA digital HDTV is in Japan not, repeat *NOT*, something which is
> driving the sale of HDTV televisions. It is available only in limited
> areas, requires directional rooftop antennas, and has far less variety
> than existing cable and satellite choices.

Again I claim as does the web site that I listed that OTA IS driving the
sale of HDTV integrated OTA sets in Japan. Do you have any "facts" to
deny this? Up until the start of broadcasting of OTA HDTV the sale of
sets for satellite HD reception were stagnate. Since the start of OTA HD
the sale of "specifically" integrated OTA HDTV sets have taken off. You
could try to refute these numbers for example. Why would that be so?
>
> Shops which demonstrate the HDTV capabilities of a TV always use
> satellite. If you insist, they will show you OTA digitial HDTV; but
> periodic pixellation makes it unsuitable for general in-shop demos.

Pixallization is a problem with compression not modulation. Maybe they
have a problem with compression. Maybe satellite HD has better
programming which the store thinks is a better sales tool but the
numbers don't lie, people are buying INTEGRATED HDTV sets in ever
greater numbers since the onset of OTA broadcasting. That is sets that
have ISDB-T OTA tuners built in.

Are you suggesting that the number of subscribers to satellite HD
broadcasting are increasing in direct relationship to the numbers
associated with the sale of OTA integrated HD sets? Are you telling me
that the, I thought, very tech savvy Japanese consumer is wasting their
money on OTA receivers but really lusting after satellite HD, something
that has been lagging until now? Do you have the sales figures for
satellite HD?

You speak, write and think Japanese and have access to the Internet, you
must have all the hard facts at your disposal, right?

Again the website
http://www.dibeg.org/news/news-3/news-e3.htm

>
> Japanese satellite HDTV is more advanced than the current offerings from
> DirecTV and Dish. Think of VOOM but with channels that you actually
> want to watch. But this has nothing to do with 8-VSB vs. COFDM issues.

Satellite has its strong points, reception and mobility are not among
them. I predict that satellite in Japan will be replaced by terrestrial
broadcasting.

> Perhaps it is time to form a moderated newsgroup for HDTV issues that
> can keep Bob Miller out the way he is kept out of AVSFORUM. We do not
> have to subject ourselves to his mental masturbation.

I am not kept out of AVSForum. I can post there anytime I want. It is
ideas and opinions and facts that are disagreeable to the moderators and
their corporate sponsors that are deleted from AVSForum. Anyone who post
there has to carefully craft their thoughts not to cross over the line
or they will be summarly deleted.

I quess you would volunteer as the moderator. Personally I would like to
be able to sort though all opinions even yours. Sometimes you learn
something. Sometimes people have facts to offer.

In fact you can self moderate this list. Anyone can just dial me out if
they think I am of no interest. For some reason you haven't.

Bob Miller
>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 8, 2005 11:03:38 PM

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

Bob Miller wrote:

> Mark Crispin wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>>
>>>> I never suggested that Joe/Jane have any idea of what 8-VSB or COFDM
>>>> are.
>>>
>>>
>>> Actually, you have. Far too many times.
>
>
> Never have, if you think so could you point out one example please?
>

Every time you said that the American consumer was avoiding ATSC
receivers because of 8-VSB.

<www.google.com&gt;

Matthew (something like 1000 times or more)


--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 4:03:00 AM

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

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> And here is another report from Japan without all the BS.
>> http://www.dibeg.org/news/news-3/news-e3.htm#dn039e
>
>
> The bullshit is Bob Miller's fantasies.
>
> All that those numbers report is that HDTV TV sets sold in Japan now
> include terrestrial HDTV tuners. This should have been the case years
> ago in the US, and would have been if it weren't for the criminal
> actions of Bob Miller and his gangster clique that attempted to derail
> OTA HDTV.

That fact is they still sell monitors in Japan. You do not have to buy
an integrated HD set and pay additional for an OTA receiver. Or are you
suggesting that there is a government mandate in Japan that requires the
consumer to purchase HD sets with OTA receivers. I wouldn't have a
problem with that if the modulation was ISDB-T like in Japan. At least
they designed a modulation that works. To force the inclusion of pre 5th
gen 8-VSB receivers in US Digital sets IS truly criminal when the
consumer has so emphatically rejected the item.

So far the "derailing" of the OTA digital transition in the US has been
neatly accomplished by 8-VSB.

>
> In a just society, Bob Miller would be thrown in prison.

Charge? Disagreeing with Mark.

Bob Miller
>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 4:13:42 AM

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

Mark Crispin wrote:
>
> The reason why few integrated sets have been sold in the US is that few
> integrated sets have been available.
>
> Two years ago, I could find *no* integrated sets in the US. Last year,
> there were only a few. Now, there are a few more.
>
> If the FCC mandate had gone in force in 2000 when it should, there would
> have been many more.

Force those stupid consumers to buy those integrated sets. Thats what
this free country needs is more force. Make it a law, you have to buy an
HDTV and it has to be integrated. If you can't afford it its off to
debtors prison for you for being both stupid and poor. Is that how they
do it in Japan?

There are few integrated sets in the US because manufacturers, including
LG, are smart enough to know that 8-VSB is a very poor modulation and
that including receivers in HD sets will cost them reduced sales, less
profitable sales and or more returned big clumsy HD sets instead of
small STBs when the buyers find out what reception is like in their
homes. They have found that selling HD sets to those who are satisfied
watching DVDs on them is AOK for now. The logic escapes me. Seems it
would be a lot better to have sold a million COFDM receivers this
Christmas quarter like they did in the UK then to be in the mess we are in.

Don't you get it???? The manufacturers are in the know and they know
that 8-VSB has been c**p. So few of them got involved. Those that did
did so with short production runs. Retailers hide the receivers and
stock very few. Broadcasters are glued to the FCC and the courts
screaming for must carry. It goes on and on. No one is pushing OTA in
the US because the modulation is so bad.

Either I am very remarkable at derailing the HD transition as Mark
suggest or there may just be something to what I am saying don't cha think?

Bob Miller
>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 4:37:29 AM

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

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> Mark Crispin wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I never suggested that Joe/Jane have any idea of what 8-VSB or
>>>>> COFDM are.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually, you have. Far too many times.
>>
>>
>>
>> Never have, if you think so could you point out one example please?
>>
>
> Every time you said that the American consumer was avoiding ATSC
> receivers because of 8-VSB.

People do not have to know anything about COFDM or 8-VSB to avoid buying
an 8-VSB receiver. All they have to know is what their neighbor told
them about the problems with reception that they experienced when they
bought one. That is called word of mouth.

Or they could have avoided buying an 8-VSB receiver because the
salesperson told them any of a thousand lies or truths for that matter
about OTA to steer them away from OTA receivers which most retailers
have not been pushing.

The mechanics of 8-VSB and COFDM never have to enter the picture. 8-VSB
itself has been the reason that people have stayed away. That includes
broadcasters, manufacturers who don't make many and don't advertise them
and retailers who do the same.

8-VSB IS the reason people are avoiding 8-VSB receivers. They don't have
to have a clue or ever heard of COFDM or 8-VSB.

Bob Miller
>
> <www.google.com&gt;
>
> Matthew (something like 1000 times or more)
>
>
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 4:40:37 AM

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

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> Mark Crispin wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I never suggested that Joe/Jane have any idea of what 8-VSB or
>>>>> COFDM are.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually, you have. Far too many times.
>>
>>
>>
>> Never have, if you think so could you point out one example please?
>>
>
> Every time you said that the American consumer was avoiding ATSC
> receivers because of 8-VSB.

And for just the opposite reasons British consumers bought close to a
million COFDM receivers in the last quarter of 2004. Manufacturers are
making a LOT of receivers. A LOT of manufacturers are making COFDM
receivers. Everybody is SELLING them. They are ADVERTISING a lot.
Everyone is ON BOARD and the customers LIKE the product. Sounds like a
winner to me.

Bob Miller
>
> <www.google.com&gt;
>
> Matthew (something like 1000 times or more)
>
>
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:50:49 AM

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

You are pathetic. Get a life!


In article <41E083B9.7030200@earthlink.net>, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
wrote:
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:54:52 AM

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

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Bob Miller wrote:
> That fact is they still sell monitors in Japan.

For computers, yes.

> You do not have to buy an
> integrated HD set and pay additional for an OTA receiver.

Most people in Japan use cable or satellite, and the necessary receivers
are integrated into the set. STBs are quite rare. So it isn't the
slightest bit surprising that terrestrial DTV is also integrated.

Bob Miller lives in a psychotic fantasy world where everybody but him is
wrong. He even argues with people who have first-hand knowledge. I spent
an extensive amount of time investigating the situation in Japan, and Bob
Miller has almost everything wrong.

VERY FEW people receive terrestrial DTV in Japan. The signal doesn't
reach much further than 5 miles from the transmitting tower. Even in the
covered area, pixellation is common.

New HDTVs support terrestrial DTV, but almost all of the buyers use them
with cable or satellite.

Nobody, with the possible exception of Bob Miller, in the US has ever
decided not to buy an integrated HDTV set. Rather, the reason why people
have bought monitors is that integrated HDTV sets were not available.

Remember that anything that Bob Miller says, the exact opposite is true.

>> In a just society, Bob Miller would be thrown in prison.
> Charge? Disagreeing with Mark.

Charges:
abuse of forums
illegal use of the accounts of others (e.g. his daughter) and
sock puppets to post on forums after being banned
having a brain so small that stuffing it in a gnat's anus is
like putting a BB in a boxcar
wasting everybody's time

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 1:20:01 PM

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

In article <Pine.WNT.4.62.0501090844300.3256@Shimo-Tomobiki.panda.com>,
Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:

> Nobody, with the possible exception of Bob Miller, in the US has ever
> decided not to buy an integrated HDTV set. Rather, the reason why
> people have bought monitors is that integrated HDTV sets were not
> available.

Actually, if I could have found an HDTV large-screen monitor, without
audio and without OTA receivers, I would have bought it (assuming that
it would have cost less than one with those features) because all my
reception comes through the satellite receiver.

But there apparently isn't a market for such devices, so I couldn't find
one.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:21:38 PM

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

At the present time, Samsung sells only large screen monitors in their
HDTV DPL line. Their integrated sets are coming out later this year.

Michelle Steiner wrote:

> In article <Pine.WNT.4.62.0501090844300.3256@Shimo-Tomobiki.panda.com>,
> Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:
>
>
>>Nobody, with the possible exception of Bob Miller, in the US has ever
>>decided not to buy an integrated HDTV set. Rather, the reason why
>>people have bought monitors is that integrated HDTV sets were not
>>available.
>
>
> Actually, if I could have found an HDTV large-screen monitor, without
> audio and without OTA receivers, I would have bought it (assuming that
> it would have cost less than one with those features) because all my
> reception comes through the satellite receiver.
>
> But there apparently isn't a market for such devices, so I couldn't find
> one.
>
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:21:39 PM

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

In article <1N-dnRFwOcPuM3zcRVn-iQ@rcn.net>,
wbertram <wbertram@aol.com> wrote:

> At the present time, Samsung sells only large screen monitors in their
> HDTV DPL line. Their integrated sets are coming out later this year.

Huh? Right now, their large-screen sets have OTA tuners and speakers.
I wanted to get a set without those features, because I don't use them.
All the video input comes from the dish receiver (which also receives
OTA digital signals), the DVD player, and (at rare times) the VCR--and
all the audio goes through the AV receiver.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 11:02:50 PM

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

The large screen DLP sets Samsung presently have available for sale do
not have OTA HD tuners. They do have NTSC tuners and speakers. They
are ,arketed as HD Ready.

I am not aware of any company that sells a true, largescreen, monitor
w/o speakers and an NTSC tuner.

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <1N-dnRFwOcPuM3zcRVn-iQ@rcn.net>,
> wbertram <wbertram@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>>At the present time, Samsung sells only large screen monitors in their
>>HDTV DPL line. Their integrated sets are coming out later this year.
>
>
> Huh? Right now, their large-screen sets have OTA tuners and speakers.
> I wanted to get a set without those features, because I don't use them.
> All the video input comes from the dish receiver (which also receives
> OTA digital signals), the DVD player, and (at rare times) the VCR--and
> all the audio goes through the AV receiver.
>
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:31:58 AM

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

Michelle Steiner (michelle@michelle.org) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> Huh? Right now, their large-screen sets have OTA tuners and speakers.
> I wanted to get a set without those features, because I don't use them.

I really want a display without speakers because I don't use them either,
and speakers add significantly to the physical size of the set with respect
to where it will fit.

I also have a fairly high stand, and this rules out displays with speakers
on the bottom (the picture would be far too high then). With no speakers,
I wouldn't have to worry about it.

I don't think I'd give up the built-in tuner, though. If I used cable,
I'd hunt for a set with CableCard. It's nice having one device that can
show you HDTV without the need for any other device in the house being
functional. Without that, if my A/V receiver, HDTV switch, or HD DirecTiVo
went down, I'd have no chance of any TV.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/TechBigot.gif
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:31:59 AM

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

In article <MPG.1c4bb326fe91985d989a72@news.nabs.net>,
Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:

> I don't think I'd give up the built-in tuner, though. If I used
> cable, I'd hunt for a set with CableCard. It's nice having one
> device that can show you HDTV without the need for any other device
> in the house being functional. Without that, if my A/V receiver,
> HDTV switch, or HD DirecTiVo went down, I'd have no chance of any TV.

Well, I don't have cable, just DirecTV. Does a cable card allow you to
receive premium channels and PPV channels? If so, I'd want a set with a
cable card and built-in hard disk if I did have cable.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:32:20 AM

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

In article <lc-dnUU_R6GmSXzcRVn-hA@rcn.net>,
wbertram <wbertram@aol.com> wrote:

> The large screen DLP sets Samsung presently have available for sale
> do not have OTA HD tuners. They do have NTSC tuners and speakers.
> They are ,arketed as HD Ready.

I know.

> I am not aware of any company that sells a true, largescreen, monitor
> w/o speakers and an NTSC tuner.

That's what I said in the first place.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 5:53:44 AM

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

Michelle Steiner (michelle@michelle.org) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> > I don't think I'd give up the built-in tuner, though. If I used
> > cable, I'd hunt for a set with CableCard.
>
> Well, I don't have cable, just DirecTV.

Same here, and the RCA F38310 TV has a built-in DirecTV HD receiver which--
like all DirecTV HD receivers--also receives OTA digital. It's hard
to beat that for the few times I want to just channel-surf. Generally,
though, I just hit one of the DirecTiVos.

> Does a cable card

It's CableCard (tm), if you want to Google it.

> allow you to
> receive premium channels and PPV channels?

Premium, yes. PPV...not yet, since that requires 2-way communications.
That's the next (backward compatible) version.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/BabyBlues/TVDistance.gif
January 10, 2005 11:18:29 AM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote >
> In fact you can self moderate this list. Anyone can just dial me out if
> they think I am of no interest. For some reason you haven't.
> Bob Miller

Well, your bible quotations in an HDTV newsgroup were interesting.

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6qSsd.2387$0r.1586@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "he who is least among you all - he is the greatest" (Luke 9:48) and then
> by taking a towel and basin and doing the dirty job of washing their feet.
> and from I Cor 13:4-8a "As you do unto the least of these my brethren,
> so you do unto me."
>
> Bob Miller (12/6/04)

Born again Christian/COFDM? Now I understand. :- /
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 7:46:39 PM

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

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Bob Miller wrote:
> Hardly, just throwing that back at those who seem to accept Christian
> principles while wishing the worst on their neighbors. Quoting is not the
> same as believing. Its tough to believe in a God who play with the lives of
> children with big waves on a sunny day.

Spare us your religious clap-trap, Psycho Bob.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 8:08:18 PM

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

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Bob Miller wrote:
> The fact remains that the US is NOT a
> completely different animal than the rest of the world.

Oh? What other highly-developed industrialized country in the world has
population distribution comparable to the US?

The only other countries with digital TV that come close are Canada and
Australia, but these countries have their populations concentrated in just
a few large cities.

> In Berlin and the UK
> satellite and cable also exist.

Berlin is a large densely-populated city. It may be similar to large
densely-populated cities in the US, but it is not overall similar to the
US.

The UK is a geographically small, densely-populated island. Once again,
the population distribution is not comparable.

Japan is also a geographically small, densely-populated island, with over
2/3 of its landmass completely useless for settlement and thus the
population is squeezed into an incredibly tight area.

It may be alright for TV broadcasters in these countries to have a 5 mile
radius service area. It is certainly not alright in North America.

> These countries when offered the option of going with a free OTA service
> responded with incredible sales of receivers.

I have seen for myself that Bob Miller's reports of "incredible sales" in
Japan are bullshit. It is true that new HDTV sets have terrestrial
receivers built in, but very few people use them. Almost everybody who
has HDTV in Japan uses cable or satellite.

> Don't need it? Fraction of the programming? Wrong on both counts. OTA will
> offer lower prices, better quality and be able to satisfy all the programming
> requirements of customers used to cable or satellite.

Pure speculation. That isn't the case anywhere in the world today.

> In fact with mobile DTV
> on the horizon it will offer something that cable can't offer.

People watching TV while they drive is *NOT* something that we want.
That is already happening in Japan (despite its illegality) with analog TV
and there is a backlash brewing.

> I think we desperately "need" an alternative to cable and satellite

Other people disagree

> and we
> the citizen should have access to out own spectrum to get those options.

Actually, it is you the failed company owner who wants to steal existing
TV spectrum so you can beam tampon advertisements to city buses.

I think that the existing TV spectrum should be reserved for TV forever.

> Our FCC should be looking out for our interest instead of those
> of the monopolist

They did look out for our interests. They screwed you.

I am pleased and proud that they screwed you. The FCC has done an
excellent job.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 9:56:55 PM

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

David wrote:
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote >
>
>>In fact you can self moderate this list. Anyone can just dial me out if
>>they think I am of no interest. For some reason you haven't.
>
> > Bob Miller
>
> Well, your bible quotations in an HDTV newsgroup were interesting.
>
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:6qSsd.2387$0r.1586@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>> "he who is least among you all - he is the greatest" (Luke 9:48) and then
>>by taking a towel and basin and doing the dirty job of washing their feet.
>
> > and from I Cor 13:4-8a "As you do unto the least of these my brethren,
>
>>so you do unto me."
>>
>>Bob Miller (12/6/04)
>
>
> Born again Christian/COFDM? Now I understand. :- /
>
>
Hardly, just throwing that back at those who seem to accept Christian
principles while wishing the worst on their neighbors. Quoting is not
the same as believing. Its tough to believe in a God who play with the
lives of children with big waves on a sunny day.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 2:34:48 AM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> Force those stupid consumers to buy those integrated sets. Thats what
> this free country needs is more force. Make it a law, you have to buy an
> HDTV and it has to be integrated.

Just to be clear - customers in the US have *two* options. 1) buy a bare
monitor/display/projector that is TV, DTV, HDTV or PC ready, or 2) buy
a device advertised as a "TV", in which case the FCC does require per a
schedule that it also include an ATSC tuner.

> There are few integrated sets in the US because manufacturers, including
> LG, are smart enough to know that 8-VSB is a very poor modulation and
> that including receivers in HD sets will cost them reduced sales, less
> profitable sales and or more returned big clumsy HD sets ...

So I go back to my original posting. Manufacturers are simply responding to
US market demand for ATSC capable displays, and since most customers
are cable or satellite STB based, and in many cases those STBs also provide
ATSC tuners, many customers do not care to buy a fully-integrated TV.

A vast majority of people I know don't need an integrated TV tuner, and
those
that have one generally leave it stuck on AUX or CH 3/4 and let their STB do
all the work.

> No one is pushing OTA in the US because the modulation is so bad.

No one is pushing OTA in the US because very few people need it, and
it carries just a fraction of the programming that cable and satellite do.

The US could have adopted Super-Turbo-Mega-COFDM and the
manufacturing and adoption rate of integrated TV devices would likely
be exactly the same.

You are attributing far to much worldwide usage pattern to COFDM vs. 8-VSB.
Far
simpler explainations exist!

Thomas Gilg
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 3:07:23 AM

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

news.cup.hp.com wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:

>>There are few integrated sets in the US because manufacturers, including
>>LG, are smart enough to know that 8-VSB is a very poor modulation and
>>that including receivers in HD sets will cost them reduced sales, less
>>profitable sales and or more returned big clumsy HD sets ...
>
>
> So I go back to my original posting. Manufacturers are simply responding to
> US market demand for ATSC capable displays, and since most customers
> are cable or satellite STB based, and in many cases those STBs also provide
> ATSC tuners, many customers do not care to buy a fully-integrated TV.
>
> A vast majority of people I know don't need an integrated TV tuner, and those that have one generally leave it stuck on AUX or CH 3/4 and let their STB do
> all the work.
>
>
>>No one is pushing OTA in the US because the modulation is so bad.
>
>
> No one is pushing OTA in the US because very few people need it, and it carries just a fraction of the programming that cable and satellite do.
>
> The US could have adopted Super-Turbo-Mega-COFDM and the manufacturing and adoption rate of integrated TV devices would likely
> be exactly the same.
>
> You are attributing far to much worldwide usage pattern to COFDM vs. 8-VSB.
> Far
> simpler explainations exist!>

> Thomas Gilg
>
>
Those are definitely simpler. The fact remains that the US is NOT a
completely different animal than the rest of the world. In Berlin and
the UK satellite and cable also exist. In fact in Berlin more people
subscribe to cable and satellite than in the US.

These countries when offered the option of going with a free OTA service
responded with incredible sales of receivers. The reception rate in the
US would have been very similar and I believe far stronger than in
either of these other countries.

Don't need it? Fraction of the programming? Wrong on both counts. OTA
will offer lower prices, better quality and be able to satisfy all the
programming requirements of customers used to cable or satellite. In
fact with mobile DTV on the horizon it will offer something that cable
can't offer.

I think we desperately "need" an alternative to cable and satellite and
we the citizen should have access to out own spectrum to get those
options. The monopolist have done a good job of keeping us from it till
now but the obvious is becoming more obvious. OTA is the way to go as
other countries are finding out. Our FCC should be looking out for our
interest instead of those of the monopolist but they follow the same
line as those who oversee our drugs and every other governmental agency,
big monopolist interest first ahead of the citizen's best interest.

If COFDM had been adopted we and others would have been distributing
free HD receivers for the last five years. With 8-VSB it was impossible.
As it is there is one company, USDTV, that has tried to make a go of it
with 8-VSB. They will now succeed because of 5th generation receivers.
It could have happened five years ago and the digital transition could
be history.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 8:37:38 PM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> Those are definitely simpler. The fact remains that the US is NOT a
> completely different animal than the rest of the world.

Every region is a different animal for a multitude of reasons. Fly back
and forth between the US and Europe a few times, and you'll see lots
of differences for no obvious reasons, or for a zillion obvious reasons.

We've been focused on OTA, cable and satellite deployment rates, but
I think there are a zillion other things that factor into the equation. You
or me cannot pin it down to just one or two factors thing like 8-VSB vs.
COFDM, or product return rates, or whatever.

> Don't need it? Fraction of the programming? Wrong on both counts.

In the past 4 locations that I have lived in (in MT and OR), OTA offered
me:

a.. ABC
a.. CBS
a.. NBC
a.. PBS
a.. FOX

Goto www.titantv.com and you can see what OTA programming is available
at any zip code.

On cable and satellite, I generally sign up for a mid-range package, and
I'm currently on dishNetwork "America's Top 60" list, and its pretty
representative of what one gets over cable and satellite. It lists:
a.. ABC Family
b.. Angel One
c.. Arts & Entertainment (A&E)
d.. Auction TV
e.. Beauty & Fashion Channel
f.. BYUTV
g.. C-SPAN
h.. C-SPAN2
i.. Cable News Network (CNN)
j.. Cartoon Network
k.. Catalog TV
l.. Classic Arts Showcase
m.. CNBC
n.. Colours TV
o.. Comcast Sports Net West
p.. Comedy Central
q.. Country Music Television
r.. Court TV
s.. Daystar
t.. Discovery Channel, The
u.. Disney Channel (East)
v.. Disney Channel (West)
w.. E! Entertainment Television
x.. Educating Everyone
y.. ESPN
z.. ESPN Alternate
aa.. ESPN2
ab.. ESPN2 Alternate
ac.. ESPNews
ad.. Eternal Word Television Network
ae.. Familynet
af.. Florida Education Channel
ag.. Food Network
ah.. Free Speech TV
ai.. Good Samaritan Network
aj.. Headline News Network
ak.. Health TV
al.. Healthy Living Channel
am.. History Channel, The
an.. HITN
ao.. Home & Garden Television
ap.. Home Shopping Network, The
aq.. Horseracing TV
ar.. ISHOP
as.. Jewelry Channel, The
at.. Learning Channel, The
au.. Lifetime
av.. Men's Channel
aw.. Music Television (MTV)
ax.. Music Television 2 (MTV2)
ay.. NASA
az.. Nickelodeon/Nick At Night (East)
ba.. Nickelodeon/Nick At Nite (West)
bb.. Northern Arizona University/University House
bc.. PBS You
bd.. QVC Shopping Network
be.. Research Channel
bf.. RFDTV
bg.. Sci-Fi Channel, The
bh.. Shop At Home
bi.. Shop NBC
bj.. Spike TV
bk.. Stuff TV
bl.. Travel Channel, The
bm.. Trinity Broadcasting Network
bn.. Turner Broadcast System (TBS)
bo.. Turner Network Television (TNT)
bp.. TV Games Network
bq.. TV Guide Channel
br.. TV Land
bs.. TV Outlet Mall
bt.. University Of California
bu.. University Of Washington
bv.. USA Network
bw.. VH1
bx.. Weather Channel, The
by.. Worldlink TV
5-10 ABC/CBS/NBC/PBS rooted options vs. the 60 above is a
big difference.

> OTA will offer lower prices, better quality and be able to satisfy all the
> programming requirements of customers used to cable or satellite.

See the programming list difference. As for quality, most deliver the same
MPEG-2 Transport Stream, and reception reliability differences between
all have been a wash.

> I think we desperately "need" an alternative to cable and satellite and
> we the citizen should have access to out own spectrum to get those
> options.

So let's contact the 60-120 some content providers who have yet to
touch OTA, *and* let's create some new standards for secure OTA
broadcasts so that the content providers will trust the OTA ecosystem
as much as they do cable and satellite.

OTA *is* a second class citizen, but its for many more reasons well
beyond COFDM vs. 8-VSB.

Thomas Gilg
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 11:52:55 PM

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

news.cup.hp.com wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>>Those are definitely simpler. The fact remains that the US is NOT a
>>completely different animal than the rest of the world.
>
>
> Every region is a different animal for a multitude of reasons. Fly back
> and forth between the US and Europe a few times, and you'll see lots
> of differences for no obvious reasons, or for a zillion obvious reasons.
>
> We've been focused on OTA, cable and satellite deployment rates, but
> I think there are a zillion other things that factor into the equation. You
> or me cannot pin it down to just one or two factors thing like 8-VSB vs.
> COFDM, or product return rates, or whatever.
>
>
>>Don't need it? Fraction of the programming? Wrong on both counts.
>
>
> In the past 4 locations that I have lived in (in MT and OR), OTA offered
> me:
>
> a.. ABC
> a.. CBS
> a.. NBC
> a.. PBS
> a.. FOX
>
> Goto www.titantv.com and you can see what OTA programming is available
> at any zip code.
>
> On cable and satellite, I generally sign up for a mid-range package, and
> I'm currently on dishNetwork "America's Top 60" list, and its pretty
> representative of what one gets over cable and satellite. It lists:
> a.. ABC Family
> b.. Angel One
> c.. Arts & Entertainment (A&E)
> d.. Auction TV
> e.. Beauty & Fashion Channel
> f.. BYUTV
> g.. C-SPAN
> h.. C-SPAN2
> i.. Cable News Network (CNN)
> j.. Cartoon Network
> k.. Catalog TV
> l.. Classic Arts Showcase
> m.. CNBC
> n.. Colours TV
> o.. Comcast Sports Net West
> p.. Comedy Central
> q.. Country Music Television
> r.. Court TV
> s.. Daystar
> t.. Discovery Channel, The
> u.. Disney Channel (East)
> v.. Disney Channel (West)
> w.. E! Entertainment Television
> x.. Educating Everyone
> y.. ESPN
> z.. ESPN Alternate
> aa.. ESPN2
> ab.. ESPN2 Alternate
> ac.. ESPNews
> ad.. Eternal Word Television Network
> ae.. Familynet
> af.. Florida Education Channel
> ag.. Food Network
> ah.. Free Speech TV
> ai.. Good Samaritan Network
> aj.. Headline News Network
> ak.. Health TV
> al.. Healthy Living Channel
> am.. History Channel, The
> an.. HITN
> ao.. Home & Garden Television
> ap.. Home Shopping Network, The
> aq.. Horseracing TV
> ar.. ISHOP
> as.. Jewelry Channel, The
> at.. Learning Channel, The
> au.. Lifetime
> av.. Men's Channel
> aw.. Music Television (MTV)
> ax.. Music Television 2 (MTV2)
> ay.. NASA
> az.. Nickelodeon/Nick At Night (East)
> ba.. Nickelodeon/Nick At Nite (West)
> bb.. Northern Arizona University/University House
> bc.. PBS You
> bd.. QVC Shopping Network
> be.. Research Channel
> bf.. RFDTV
> bg.. Sci-Fi Channel, The
> bh.. Shop At Home
> bi.. Shop NBC
> bj.. Spike TV
> bk.. Stuff TV
> bl.. Travel Channel, The
> bm.. Trinity Broadcasting Network
> bn.. Turner Broadcast System (TBS)
> bo.. Turner Network Television (TNT)
> bp.. TV Games Network
> bq.. TV Guide Channel
> br.. TV Land
> bs.. TV Outlet Mall
> bt.. University Of California
> bu.. University Of Washington
> bv.. USA Network
> bw.. VH1
> bx.. Weather Channel, The
> by.. Worldlink TV
> 5-10 ABC/CBS/NBC/PBS rooted options vs. the 60 above is a
> big difference.
>
>
>>OTA will offer lower prices, better quality and be able to satisfy all the
>>programming requirements of customers used to cable or satellite.
>
>
> See the programming list difference. As for quality, most deliver the same
> MPEG-2 Transport Stream, and reception reliability differences between
> all have been a wash.

What are you saying? What is always will be? The program list for cable
can be delivered OTA. Will be. MPEG2 is already being replaced by MPEG4
so the transport stream stays the same what does that mean? The
reception is not the same now and it will change in the future. Cable
has horrible quality in New York. Satellite is poor and reception has
drop outs due to rain fade. Both are compressed far below NTSC broadcast
quality. OTA with 5th gen receivers will offer reception and can offer
quality far better than either cable or satellite now offer.
>
>
>>I think we desperately "need" an alternative to cable and satellite and
>>we the citizen should have access to out own spectrum to get those
>>options.
>
>
> So let's contact the 60-120 some content providers who have yet to
> touch OTA, *and* let's create some new standards for secure OTA
> broadcasts so that the content providers will trust the OTA ecosystem
> as much as they do cable and satellite.

Satellite is OTA. Whatever security is required for satellite has been
accepted. The same could be used for OTA. The content owner with the
most to lose, Disney, has accepted OTA security for such as USDTV an OTA
cable like venture. The content providers have already accepted and
trust OTA. It is just a matter of when.
>
> OTA *is* a second class citizen, but its for many more reasons well
> beyond COFDM vs. 8-VSB.

No since the inception of OTA TV there has been a problem with
reception. With that problem removed and with the increase in the
quantity of programming that can be delivered OTA and with the increase
of programming that can be delivered non real time to recording devices
the equations are much different.

OTA now becomes the low cost low maintenance competitor that cable and
satellite cannot compete against. The one fly in the ointment is non
mobility but all that has happened there is that current broadcasters on
channels 2 thru 51 will lose their OTA customers to new broadcasters on
channels above 51 like Qualcomm and Crown Castle.

COFDM and 8-VSB are the key since they are the digital solutions that
allow OTA to compete. Up until 5th gen receivers 8-VSB stood no chance
at all. Now with 5th gen there is a business plan for broadcasters.
COFDM will make up the difference for mobile.

The initial key was reception now it is also quantity. Both can be
easily addressed by OTA at much lower cost than cable and satellite. In
fact an OTA network can be built for less than the yearly maintenance
cost of cable.

Bob Miller
>
> Thomas Gilg
>
>
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 4:31:18 AM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> The program list for cable can be delivered OTA.

Sure, but...

Ever since cable and satellite came online in the US during the 1960-1970,
and
hit major stride during the 1980's, no one has opted to keep OTA programming
on par with cable or satellite programming.

Again, I'm easily filtering out COFDM and 8-VSB as the factor. I'm tossing
us back in
time to show that OTA was marginalized pre ATSC/DVB 8-VSB/COFDM, and its
still being marginalized.

Remembering that the US is capitalistic, and the airwaves are treated as a
different
kind of public resource than is cable and satellite, who do you see wanting
to step
up and put OTA back on par with cable and satellite, in terms of available
programming?

It sounds noble to call for more competition in the broadcast world, but at
the end
of the day someone (a company, an investor) needs to be convinced that OTA
is the way to trump cable, satellite, and now IPTV over the internet. Here
we are
on the verge of rich interactive content that can reach back to the
head-end, content
provider and internet, and you think an investor will jump on a one-way
broadcast
medium?

> The reception is not the same now and it will change in the future.

You bet, but the broadcast industry as a whole tends to cook their
content to the most-common least-common-denominator format so
that it can bounce around in the broadcast ecosystem with minimal
transcoding. Cook HD into 19.39Mbps MPEG-2, and you can
burp it OTA, over cable, I don't know about satellite, over IEEE-1394
(see DTV-Link and the CEA DTV profiles that cite MPEG-2), over
DLNA (see the supported media lists), etc.

Note that I'm upscoping the consideration from "into home" to
"into home and then around the home and between various
in-home devices".

> ... horrible quality ...

I agree. Everyone is still trying to see how cheap they can be on bitrate.

> Whatever security is required for satellite has been accepted. The same
> could be used for OTA.

Satellite is a mix of open-standard and proprietary goo. OTA security could
be beefed up (MPEG-2 TS specifies AES), but what or who in the market
will ante up to make this change happen.

> In fact an OTA network can be built for less than the yearly maintenance
> cost of cable.

You seem to be a big advocate of the OTA opportunity. I can't disagree.

All I'm citing is that OTA has lost traction in the US since the 1970-80s,
and there
is a heck of a lot more to this loss of traction than 8-VSB vs. COFDM.

Thomas Gilg
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 7:06:04 AM

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

news.cup.hp.com wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>>The program list for cable can be delivered OTA.>
>
> Sure, but...
>
> Ever since cable and satellite came online in the US during the 1960-1970, and hit major stride during the 1980's, no one has opted to keep OTA programming
> on par with cable or satellite programming.

Obviously, why would they. OTA didn't work. That is by definition why
cable and satellite hit their "stride". And now they have added another
element, quantity but at the expense of quality. Digital changes all
that. Digital allows (with advanced MPEG4 not yet there) up to 16
programs streams (NTSC quality) where analog does one. And PVR, Tivo
technology increases the delivery capability another 10 fold by making 3
am prime time. Cables 1000 channels doesn't mean as much any more.
>
> Again, I'm easily filtering out COFDM and 8-VSB as the factor. I'm tossing us back in time to show that OTA was marginalized pre ATSC/DVB 8-VSB/COFDM, and its
> still being marginalized.

It is still being marginalized in the US because 8-VSB pre 5th gen is
about on par with analog as far as reception goes, worse if you consider
you lose signal entirely with digital while you could make do with an
impaired analog image. We can't compare digital to analog yet in the US
because we do not have a digital that works yet. With 5th gen 8-VSB or
with COFDM that changes. That is why I compare to the UK, Berlin,
Australia, Italy and Japan. These are countries that have a working
digital transition underway.

The customer in the US has not even been offered OTA DTV in any
meaningful way. And that again is because 8-VSB does not work. Watch the
coming advertising for LG and their 5th gen integrated sets. For the
first time a manufacturer will actively advertise OTA capability in a
big way. They should know all about 8-VSB. They own the patents and they
are doing 90% of any development on the beast. They have NOT been going
out of their way to advertise OTA receivers any more than others till
now. BECAUSE THEY ARE VERY AWARE OF THE POOR PERFORMANCE OF 8-VSB.

And it is going to bite them big time in the world market they are in.
The Chinese are their big competitor over the medium term and the
Chinese are going with either there own Chinese modulation T-DMB (latest
acronym I have seen) or DVB-T, both COFDM. LG is stuck with NO COFDM
technology except Their DMB-T Mobile DAB which is not the Chinese
T-DMB but an old version of COFDM based on Eureka-47 for use with DAB
spectrum. LG is going to lose big time by betting on these two loser
technologies. They must be starting to sweat bullets as it starts to
sink in.
>
> Remembering that the US is capitalistic, and the airwaves are treated as a different kind of public resource than is cable and satellite, who do you see wanting
> to step up and put OTA back on par with cable and satellite, in terms of available programming?

Well you have Emmis Communication trying to rally broadcasters to form a
national partnership for a wireless cable system, USDTV being financed
by a number of broadcasters doing the same, Qualcomm betting an initial
$800 million on a mobile OTA national network, Crown Castle doing the
same. Sirius (announce twice) and XMRadio (announced once) both say they
will offer OTA DTV mobile, one other I can't talk about which is the
most serious of the bunch and of course yours truly who is in the hunt
both with COFDM and now 8-VSB.
>
> It sounds noble to call for more competition in the broadcast world, but at the end of the day someone (a company, an investor) needs to be convinced that OTA
> is the way to trump cable, satellite, and now IPTV over the internet. Here we are on the verge of rich interactive content that can reach back to the
> head-end, content provider and internet, and you think an investor will jump on a one-way broadcast medium?

Remember satellite is all one way and not doing to badly so far. One way
systems can use the Internet, both broadband and dial up and cell phone
networks for two way. They in fact can integrate them to make them seem
seamless. That is what the Qualcomm OTA DTV COFDM network broadcasting
to cell and other small devices hopes to achieve. BTW the DTV spectrum
above channel 51 can be used for broadcast and broadcast with a back
channel. Look up DVB-RCT another COFDM deal. In fact almost all RF
systems coming online in the 802 realm are COFDM two way systems 802.11a
and g, 802.20, WiLan etc.

An investor could buy spectrum above channel 51 today that would allow
broadcasting with DVB-RCT (Return Channel Terrestrial) with the two way
return channel as part of the 6 MHz DTV channel and use it that way or
he could do one way and build or use existing WiLan network or any of
the above or ALL or a number of the above. That is a broadcaster can
have multiple two way connections at the same time using his in channel
space or free spectrum.

His customer could decide to interact, upload or whatever with the
broadcast with any of a number of devices both mobile and fixed from a
desktop computer, a proprietary DVB-RCT transceiver to, in the case of
Qualcomm, CDMA cell phone.
>
>
>>The reception is not the same now and it will change in the future.
>
>
> You bet, but the broadcast industry as a whole tends to cook their content to the most-common least-common-denominator format so that it can bounce around in the broadcast ecosystem with minimal
> transcoding. Cook HD into 19.39Mbps MPEG-2, and you can burp it OTA, over cable, I don't know about satellite, over IEEE-1394 (see DTV-Link and the CEA DTV profiles that cite MPEG-2), over
> DLNA (see the supported media lists), etc.
>
> Note that I'm upscoping the consideration from "into home" to "into home and then around the home and between various in-home devices".

With receivers getting forever cheaper, in the case of COFDM you could
buy a receiver in the UK for $37.57 pre Christmas, you will find OTA
receivers in cell phones, PDA's, laptops, game machines, portable TV
sets, DVD players and your car. They will all have recording ability and
yes you will be able to send video from one to the other but why? You
will most likely have already recorded it automatically on the other
device. But your right you will be able to send stuff that way I just
think it is a trivial part of the puzzle.

I say COFDM because almost all the ways of sending this video in your
home between devices will be with COFDM and most of it will be received
from a COFDM broadcast except for the 8-VSB in your living room. But as
you say that is probably dead meat because the Internet will deliver
most HD content as 1080P ala carte in competition with HD-DVDs soon.

The future doesn't look very good for high maintenance networks like
cable to me. OH you think cable will do all right because it delivers
broadband Internet? Wait till Wireless broadband Internet gets rolling.
>
>
>>... horrible quality ...
>
> I agree. Everyone is still trying to see how cheap they can be on bitrate.
>
>>Whatever security is required for satellite has been accepted. The same
>>could be used for OTA.
>
> Satellite is a mix of open-standard and proprietary goo. OTA security could
> be beefed up (MPEG-2 TS specifies AES), but what or who in the market
> will ante up to make this change happen.
>
What content would not be allowed on a satellite system with current
security? I don't know of any. Do you? So question answered, current OTA
security is good enough for all content provides. Are they nervous? Yes.
Are they withholding content because of security, NO. Except maybe HD
movies but that is a political question more than anything.

>>In fact an OTA network can be built for less than the yearly maintenance
>>cost of cable.
>
> You seem to be a big advocate of the OTA opportunity. I can't disagree.
>
> All I'm citing is that OTA has lost traction in the US since the 1970-80s, and there is a heck of a lot more to this loss of traction than 8-VSB vs. COFDM.
>
Must disagree. It is all about 8-VSB and COFDM. The solution is either
to switch to COFDM or for 5th generation 8-VSB receivers to be on the
market. The question is not the consumer. They don't even know about
COFDM or 8-VSB. It is about broadcasters, investors, manufacturers and
retailers buying into OTA. They have not yet in the US so far. In other
countries they have. What is the difference? The modulation.

We and others I know of would have been in business for the last five
years if either COFDM had been allowed or 8-VSB worked. Now that 8-VSB
looks like it might work at least in a fixed location we are back in the
hunt as are others. The US just wasted five years and stuck itself with
an outmoded modulation and an outmoded MPEG2 for OTA. Some think it was
intentional to kill of OTA as a competitor to cable and satellite and to
allow Congress to sell ALL the TV spectrum. Both satellite and cable are
going with MPEG4.

Bob Miller

> Thomas Gilg
>
>
!