It's 2005. Are 5th gen OTA tuners available yet?

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

Lately I've been reading a bit on this newsgroup and it seems that 5th
generation OTA tuners were going to be released by the 4th quarter of
2004. Are there any out yet? Could anybody list brands and models?
Thanks.
25 answers Last reply
More about 2005 tuners
  1. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    igorcarajo@yahoo.com wrote:
    > Lately I've been reading a bit on this newsgroup and it seems that 5th
    > generation OTA tuners were going to be released by the 4th quarter of
    > 2004. Are there any out yet? Could anybody list brands and models?
    > Thanks.
    >
    Not out yet in fact Rich Peterson reports that LG has NO plans to
    produce a stand alone STB of their own using 5th gen. Hisense and
    Toshiba may still plan on using LG's chip to make 5th gen however.

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

    On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:59:39 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
    wrote:

    >igorcarajo@yahoo.com wrote:
    >> Lately I've been reading a bit on this newsgroup and it seems that 5th
    >> generation OTA tuners were going to be released by the 4th quarter of
    >> 2004. Are there any out yet? Could anybody list brands and models?
    >> Thanks.
    >>
    >Not out yet in fact Rich Peterson reports that LG has NO plans to
    >produce a stand alone STB of their own using 5th gen. Hisense and
    >Toshiba may still plan on using LG's chip to make 5th gen however.
    >
    >Bob Miller

    You don't announce something like that until you sell off the 4th gen
    boxes. marketing 101.

    Otherwise, no one buys the old ones.
  3. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    In article <1105378691.546477.121060@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
    <igorcarajo@yahoo.com> wrote:

    > Lately I've been reading a bit on this newsgroup and it seems that 5th
    > generation OTA tuners were going to be released by the 4th quarter of
    > 2004. Are there any out yet? Could anybody list brands and models?
    > Thanks.
    >
    I've got a 4th gen LG LST-4200A that has worked flawlessly since day
    one. What's wrong with a good 4th gen?

    --
    Deja Moo: I've seen this bullshit before.

    My address has been anti-spammed.
    Please reply to: scasse@invalid.net replacing invalid with sonic.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:vgAEd.3435$Ii4.1738@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > igorcarajo@yahoo.com wrote:
    >> Lately I've been reading a bit on this newsgroup and it seems that 5th
    >> generation OTA tuners were going to be released by the 4th quarter of
    >> 2004. Are there any out yet? Could anybody list brands and models?
    >> Thanks.
    >>
    > Not out yet in fact Rich Peterson reports that LG has NO plans to produce
    > a stand alone STB of their own using 5th gen. Hisense and Toshiba may
    > still plan on using LG's chip to make 5th gen however.
    >
    > Bob Miller

    If the 5th gen is so much better why no STB from LG? Now it sounds
    like Hisense may not. What's the problem? Does LG want too much?
    Production problems? I'm will to try one.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Otto Pylot wrote:
    > In article <1105378691.546477.121060@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
    > <igorcarajo@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Lately I've been reading a bit on this newsgroup and it seems that 5th
    >>generation OTA tuners were going to be released by the 4th quarter of
    >>2004. Are there any out yet? Could anybody list brands and models?
    >>Thanks.
    >>
    >
    > I've got a 4th gen LG LST-4200A that has worked flawlessly since day
    > one. What's wrong with a good 4th gen?
    >
    4th generation receivers work in some locations but not those which are
    multipath challenged. That means in places with trees, wind, airplanes
    and buildings. 4th generation especially has problems with reception
    with indoor antenna because of multipath both static and dynamic. That
    means that people walking around the room can cause loss of signal as
    can static multipath from signals bouncing around the room.

    The success of DTV OTA depends on having receivers that work for
    everybody not just a few. Receivers that work in all conditions not just
    when things are just right and you have the rooftop rotorized antenna
    pointed the right way.

    The ideal receiver would work with an antenna that could be included in
    the HDTV set or simply placed on top and be a simple loop, rabbit ears
    or monopole $2 antenna. It should work in New York City apartments and I
    personally believe it should work in the back seat of your car, on a
    train, on your boat or in a bus, in the back of our 16 wheeler or at the
    beach. With COFDM antennas small enough to fit on cell phones work very
    well. This video of three screens are receiving mobile in the worst RF
    environment in the world, New York City from a 100 Watt transmitter. The
    antennas range from a three inch omni monopole to a 15 inch monopole.

    www.viacel.com/bob.wmv

    For the life of me I can't imagine why you would want to leave any of
    those scenarios out if you didn't have to. That is if you could have a
    receiver that did all of the above and more why not? Why wouldn't you
    want to receive OTA DTV on your boat? How about on a portable TV that
    has a screen but also lets you plug in 1080P glasses? The antenna is
    built into these portable DTVs. (COFDM)

    http://www.i4u.com/article2231.html
    http://makeashorterlink.com/?R1D7213F9
    http://www.followmedia-tv.com/

    and these phones with minuscule antennas. Wouldn't these antennas look
    better on your roof?
    http://www.itmedia.co.jp/mobile/0308/08/sanyo.html
    Video demo
    http://www.wirelesswatch.jp/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=741

    And in spite of the FCC the US, as this article notes, may actually be
    getting back to the cutting edge with cell phone DTV (COFDM of course)
    in Pittsburgh of all places.
    http://cellphones.engadget.com/entry/1234000483023527/

    This article says that DVB-H will clean the clock of DMB-T being offered
    by S. Korean companies. Before this is over LG and friends are going to
    be sorry they picked the 8-VSB modulation. It forced them to then find a
    Mobile modulation (DMB-T) to satisfy their broadcasters. Now they are
    riding two horses both of which are the wrong ones. DMB-T uses an old
    form of COFDM so even the loser has the right modulation sort of.

    How about combining a gizmo like this with 80 Gigs of video and music files
    http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/01/10/silverscreen/index.php

    with glasses like these with 1080P HDTV capability.
    http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/01/10/silverscreen/index.php

    COFDM and its DVB-T and DVB-H win in the end world-wide and that means
    here in the US also. Just a matter of time.

    So why did we give up all these possibilities? Channels 2 thru 51 can't
    do any of this. They could do HDTV just like 8-VSB with COFDM and have
    all these capabilities. Why don't we? Why are we one of the few
    countries in the world that can't? Australia and Japan can and they also
    can do HD. France will and they will have HD. We can't. Why? Did we get
    something in return? We made a big sacrifice. We have to have rooftop
    antennas (at least till later this year). We don't have mobile
    reception, why not? What did we get for the sacrifice? DUH!!! NOTHING?
    Wrong answer.

    What we got was higher royalty payments, ten times higher. Nice trade,
    lose a lot of functionality and get to pay more money for the
    privilege. And while the royalty payments that we pay (remember 10 time
    higher for 8-VSB than COFDM) go to a foreign corporation, LG, the
    royalties that most other countries citizens pay (10% of our payments)
    go to mostly US patent holders. Isn't that weird? IN an age when the US
    exports IP. That is what we sell mostly. We have elected to send IP
    royalty payments overseas to a foreign company while the rest of the
    world thinks our IP (Intellectual property) is better. AND IT IS! COFDM
    is American and it is far better.

    And LG isn't shy about telling its shareholders how much, $100,000,000
    per year it was worth once the FCC MANDATED receivers in every DTV set.

    4th generation receivers do not work well in most apartments in
    Manhattan. I know because I have tried four and OWN two. I have tried
    over a number of years COFDM and 8-VSB in different cities and different
    conditions.

    5th generation LG receivers are the first 8-VSB receivers that work in
    static multipath decent enough TO BE SOLD. In my opinion NO receiver
    that has been sold to date should have been. We should not even have
    started our digital transition in the US until we had a receiver that
    worked at least as well as LG 5th generation receivers. The FCC has let
    us down. They did not look out for the consumer which is their PRIMARY
    job. They specifically looked out for LG Industries. Go figure.

    You have to ask yourselves why the FCC first of all picked a modulation
    that was so flawed and second why did they stick with it so long. Why
    did they believe LG and others when they said that they would have fix
    for 8-VSB that would make it work MOBILE and have no problem with
    reception with simple indoor antennas IN SIX MONTHS starting January
    11th 2001. We have to date only seen a 5th generation receiver. It is
    not even on the market yet and it does not work MOBILE nor does the
    E-VSB that was supposed to specifically work mobile.

    The 5th gen receiver is 4 1/2 years LATE! And its getting later every
    day. And now we hear that LG will not even make stand alone receivers.
    They will only include them in their HDTV sets. That will give them a
    MAJOR competitive advantage. And Hisense says they will not deploy 5th
    generation receivers till their current stocks run out, six months, a
    year?? I don't know.

    In 2000 the FCC had a review of both COFDM and 8-VSB. They then had a
    test (allowed by the FCC) that was conducted by the industry, that was
    brazen in your face fraud. In the last hour of the last FCC
    administration they re-affirmed 8-VSB on January 19th 2001.

    And now we hear that our Chairman of the FCC Powell is frustrated at the
    pace of the DTV OTA transition. He could have turned it around many
    times. He could turn it around today. He won't because he does not have
    the best interest of the public at heart.

    I would like to think otherwise but it has been too long a wait for any
    actions from the FCC that would suggest otherwise.

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

    Bob Miller wrote:
    > Otto Pylot wrote:
    > > In article <1105378691.546477.121060@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
    > > <igorcarajo@yahoo.com> wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>Lately I've been reading a bit on this newsgroup and it seems that
    5th
    > >>generation OTA tuners were going to be released by the 4th quarter
    of
    > >>2004. Are there any out yet? Could anybody list brands and models?
    > >>Thanks.
    > >>
    > >
    > > I've got a 4th gen LG LST-4200A that has worked flawlessly since
    day
    > > one. What's wrong with a good 4th gen?
    > >
    > 4th generation receivers work in some locations but not those which
    are
    > multipath challenged. That means in places with trees, wind,
    airplanes
    > and buildings. 4th generation especially has problems with reception
    > with indoor antenna because of multipath both static and dynamic.
    That
    > means that people walking around the room can cause loss of signal as

    > can static multipath from signals bouncing around the room.
    >
    > The success of DTV OTA depends on having receivers that work for
    > everybody not just a few. Receivers that work in all conditions not
    just
    > when things are just right and you have the rooftop rotorized antenna

    > pointed the right way.
    >
    > The ideal receiver would work with an antenna that could be included
    in
    > the HDTV set or simply placed on top and be a simple loop, rabbit
    ears
    > or monopole $2 antenna. It should work in New York City apartments
    and I
    > personally believe it should work in the back seat of your car, on a
    > train, on your boat or in a bus, in the back of our 16 wheeler or at
    the
    > beach. With COFDM antennas small enough to fit on cell phones work
    very
    > well. This video of three screens are receiving mobile in the worst
    RF
    > environment in the world, New York City from a 100 Watt transmitter.
    The
    > antennas range from a three inch omni monopole to a 15 inch monopole.
    >
    > www.viacel.com/bob.wmv
    >
    > For the life of me I can't imagine why you would want to leave any of

    > those scenarios out if you didn't have to. That is if you could have
    a
    > receiver that did all of the above and more why not? Why wouldn't you

    > want to receive OTA DTV on your boat? How about on a portable TV that

    > has a screen but also lets you plug in 1080P glasses? The antenna is
    > built into these portable DTVs. (COFDM)
    >
    > http://www.i4u.com/article2231.html
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?R1D7213F9
    > http://www.followmedia-tv.com/
    >
    > and these phones with minuscule antennas. Wouldn't these antennas
    look
    > better on your roof?
    > http://www.itmedia.co.jp/mobile/0308/08/sanyo.html
    > Video demo
    >
    http://www.wirelesswatch.jp/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=741
    >
    > And in spite of the FCC the US, as this article notes, may actually
    be
    > getting back to the cutting edge with cell phone DTV (COFDM of
    course)
    > in Pittsburgh of all places.
    > http://cellphones.engadget.com/entry/1234000483023527/
    >
    > This article says that DVB-H will clean the clock of DMB-T being
    offered
    > by S. Korean companies. Before this is over LG and friends are going
    to
    > be sorry they picked the 8-VSB modulation. It forced them to then
    find a
    > Mobile modulation (DMB-T) to satisfy their broadcasters. Now they are

    > riding two horses both of which are the wrong ones. DMB-T uses an old

    > form of COFDM so even the loser has the right modulation sort of.
    >
    > How about combining a gizmo like this with 80 Gigs of video and music
    files
    > http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/01/10/silverscreen/index.php
    >
    > with glasses like these with 1080P HDTV capability.
    > http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/01/10/silverscreen/index.php
    >
    > COFDM and its DVB-T and DVB-H win in the end world-wide and that
    means
    > here in the US also. Just a matter of time.
    >
    > So why did we give up all these possibilities? Channels 2 thru 51
    can't
    > do any of this. They could do HDTV just like 8-VSB with COFDM and
    have
    > all these capabilities. Why don't we? Why are we one of the few
    > countries in the world that can't? Australia and Japan can and they
    also
    > can do HD. France will and they will have HD. We can't. Why? Did we
    get
    > something in return? We made a big sacrifice. We have to have rooftop

    > antennas (at least till later this year). We don't have mobile
    > reception, why not? What did we get for the sacrifice? DUH!!!
    NOTHING?
    > Wrong answer.
    >
    > What we got was higher royalty payments, ten times higher. Nice
    trade,
    > lose a lot of functionality and get to pay more money for the
    > privilege. And while the royalty payments that we pay (remember 10
    time
    > higher for 8-VSB than COFDM) go to a foreign corporation, LG, the
    > royalties that most other countries citizens pay (10% of our
    payments)
    > go to mostly US patent holders. Isn't that weird? IN an age when the
    US
    > exports IP. That is what we sell mostly. We have elected to send IP
    > royalty payments overseas to a foreign company while the rest of the
    > world thinks our IP (Intellectual property) is better. AND IT IS!
    COFDM
    > is American and it is far better.
    >
    > And LG isn't shy about telling its shareholders how much,
    $100,000,000
    > per year it was worth once the FCC MANDATED receivers in every DTV
    set.
    >
    > 4th generation receivers do not work well in most apartments in
    > Manhattan. I know because I have tried four and OWN two. I have tried

    > over a number of years COFDM and 8-VSB in different cities and
    different
    > conditions.
    >
    > 5th generation LG receivers are the first 8-VSB receivers that work
    in
    > static multipath decent enough TO BE SOLD. In my opinion NO receiver
    > that has been sold to date should have been. We should not even have
    > started our digital transition in the US until we had a receiver that

    > worked at least as well as LG 5th generation receivers. The FCC has
    let
    > us down. They did not look out for the consumer which is their
    PRIMARY
    > job. They specifically looked out for LG Industries. Go figure.
    >
    > You have to ask yourselves why the FCC first of all picked a
    modulation
    > that was so flawed and second why did they stick with it so long. Why

    > did they believe LG and others when they said that they would have
    fix
    > for 8-VSB that would make it work MOBILE and have no problem with
    > reception with simple indoor antennas IN SIX MONTHS starting January
    > 11th 2001. We have to date only seen a 5th generation receiver. It is

    > not even on the market yet and it does not work MOBILE nor does the
    > E-VSB that was supposed to specifically work mobile.
    >
    > The 5th gen receiver is 4 1/2 years LATE! And its getting later every

    > day. And now we hear that LG will not even make stand alone
    receivers.
    > They will only include them in their HDTV sets. That will give them a

    > MAJOR competitive advantage. And Hisense says they will not deploy
    5th
    > generation receivers till their current stocks run out, six months, a

    > year?? I don't know.
    >
    > In 2000 the FCC had a review of both COFDM and 8-VSB. They then had a

    > test (allowed by the FCC) that was conducted by the industry, that
    was
    > brazen in your face fraud. In the last hour of the last FCC
    > administration they re-affirmed 8-VSB on January 19th 2001.
    >
    > And now we hear that our Chairman of the FCC Powell is frustrated at
    the
    > pace of the DTV OTA transition. He could have turned it around many
    > times. He could turn it around today. He won't because he does not
    have
    > the best interest of the public at heart.
    >
    > I would like to think otherwise but it has been too long a wait for
    any
    > actions from the FCC that would suggest otherwise.
    >
    > Bob Miller

    Thank you for the very informative review. This is a silly question,
    but who is "LG"? Also, how can I find out which tuners belong to which
    generation? I have a Motorola HDT100 and I'm very dissatisfied with it.
    Should I wait until somebody releases a 5th generation tuner or is
    there something already decisively better than what I have now?
  7. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    >4th generation receivers work in some locations but not those which are
    >multipath challenged. That means in places with trees, wind, airplanes
    >and buildings

    When will you EVER stop lying BOB? I live in an area, like many here, that has
    all of the above issues and I get wonderful 8VSB reception. Are there
    exceptions? Of course there are. Hey, I get lousy COFDM reception in many areas
    in the N.Y. Metro area. Your generalizations are inaccurate and are
    deliberately meant to mislead. In other words BOB, you are a LIAR!


    >The success of DTV OTA depends on having receivers that work for
    >everybody not just a few.

    There is NO modulation scheme that will "work for everybody". AM & FM radio
    doesn't "work for everybody". Get real BOB. Folks, this is why we call BOB our
    "Resident Snake Oil Salesman". He doesn't want you to get OTA HDTV. His
    business schemes would rather steal that from you so he can make a profit in
    his failed ventures.

    >The ideal receiver would work with an antenna that could be included in
    >the HDTV set or simply placed on top and be a simple loop, rabbit ears
    >or monopole $2 antenna.

    The ideal receiver wouldn't need an antenna. Next?

    >It should work in New York City apartments and I
    >personally believe it should work in the back seat of your car,

    Of course BOB. Where you can enjoy all the resolution of HDTV on an 8" screen.
    OY VEY!!!

    >The antenna is
    >built into these portable DTVs. (COFDM)

    As in NON-HD portable DTVs.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Vidguy7 (vidguy7@aol.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
    > >4th generation receivers work in some locations but not those which are
    > >multipath challenged. That means in places with trees, wind, airplanes
    > >and buildings
    >
    > When will you EVER stop lying BOB? I live in an area, like many here, that has
    > all of the above issues and I get wonderful 8VSB reception.

    I'm wondering exactly where there aren't trees, wind, and buildings in the
    US where there is an HDTV display. Since *everyplace* has those, and
    multipath is only a problem for a small percentage of installations, I'm
    curious where Bob thinks people live in the US.

    > >The ideal receiver would work with an antenna that could be included in
    > >the HDTV set or simply placed on top and be a simple loop, rabbit ears
    > >or monopole $2 antenna.
    >
    > The ideal receiver wouldn't need an antenna. Next?

    Again, this makes me wonder if Bob has ever used an AM or FM radio or a
    cell phone. The data carried on those is far less than HDTV, yet you
    *have* to have antennas for all of them, and many times an "indoor" antenna
    won't work at all.

    > >It should work in New York City apartments and I
    > >personally believe it should work in the back seat of your car,

    There is no TV system that even close to as good as reception as cell phone
    technology, so they are *all* useless for mobile *or* in New York City
    apartments...without extra antennas that is.

    Bob repeatedly thinks he can repeal the laws of physics. This is one of
    the big signs of self-delusion.

    --
    Jeff Rife | "This? This is ice. This is what happens to
    | water when it gets too cold. This? This is
    | Kent. This is what happens to people when
    | they get too sexually frustrated."
    | -- Chris Knight, "Real Genius"
  9. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    igorcarajo@yahoo.com wrote:
    > Bob Miller wrote:
    >
    >>actions from the FCC that would suggest otherwise.
    >>
    >>Bob Miller
    >
    >
    > Thank you for the very informative review. This is a silly question,
    > but who is "LG"? Also, how can I find out which tuners belong to which
    > generation? I have a Motorola HDT100 and I'm very dissatisfied with it.
    > Should I wait until somebody releases a 5th generation tuner or is
    > there something already decisively better than what I have now?
    >

    LG is a S. Korean company that bought Zenith a few years back. With the
    purchase LG bought the IP royalty rights to 8-VSB the US, Canadian,
    Mexican and S. Korean digital TV standard. The rest of the world went or
    will go with COFDM.

    Zenith as the last standing US TV manufacturer was promised in a
    backroom deal, among many players, that they would get the monopoly on
    the US DTV modulation. This has now been transferred to LG. Canada and
    Mexico sort of have to go along with our poor decision because of border
    issues. TV RF signals tend to disregard borders.

    There are no 5th gen receivers yet. They were supposed to arrive last
    quarter and this quarter but it doesn't seem likely now for whatever
    reason. Hisense waiting for depletion of their inventories and LG
    sensing that it may be best for them to only sell the receiver as an
    integrated one. That way no one can buy an HD monitor from a competitor
    and a reciever from them. I think this is a wise business decision short
    term. Lousy for the US consumer though.

    Hey our Congress gave them a corner on the market and they finally can
    take advantage of it. There are much larger margins on the integrated HD
    sets than the IP rights on the OTA stand alone receiver.

    Toshiba also has rights to use LG's 5th gen technology. I expect that
    they will come out with only integrated sets also.

    You can only expect 5th gen receivers from such as USDTV where there is
    a business model to sell stand alone 8-VSB OTA receivers to those who
    already have analog and or digital TV sets.

    Hisense should have 5th gen receivers by September.

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

    Jeff Rife wrote:

    (snipped)
    >
    > There is no TV system that even close to as good as reception as cell phone
    > technology, so they are *all* useless for mobile *or* in New York City
    > apartments...without extra antennas that is.
    >
    > Bob repeatedly thinks he can repeal the laws of physics. This is one of
    > the big signs of self-delusion.
    >

    COFDM works FAR better than cell phone technology. When we were
    initially testing COFDM in New York City years ago we were able to
    receive a signal where NO cell phone would work in a canyon of building
    at right angles to the signal while mobile. Our transmitter was 22 miles
    away while the cell sites were many and within less than a couple of
    miles at most. This was true for Verizon, AT&T and Sprint cell phone
    reception.

    In fact one of the powers in cell phone technology, Qualcomm is building
    a COFDM national DTV broadcast network. Qualcomm owns around 25 pattens
    on COFDM and has over 50 more in the works. It was recently suggested
    that Qualcomm sees COFDM as the future replacement for their CDMA cell
    technology.

    COFDM in fact is used in almost all new RF technology.

    If you have ever used a cell phone in Manhattan you should judge the
    reception seen in this video of COFDM in Manhattan against your own
    experience. This COFDM reception is coming from ONE 100 Watt
    transmitter. Your cell phone relies on MANY cell transceivers in
    Manhattan. Which one is best? You decide.

    www.viacel.com/bob.wmv

    Jeff there is a DTV modulation system that is far superior to anything
    you have experienced and easily superior to any cell technology.

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

    X-No-archive: yes

    "Vidguy7" <vidguy7@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:20050111132815.29260.00000021@mb-m21.aol.com...
    > >4th generation receivers work in some locations but not those which are
    >>multipath challenged. That means in places with trees, wind, airplanes
    >>and buildings
    >
    > When will you EVER stop lying BOB? I live in an area, like many here, that
    > has
    > all of the above issues and I get wonderful 8VSB reception. Are there
    > exceptions? Of course there are. Hey, I get lousy COFDM reception in many
    > areas
    > in the N.Y. Metro area. Your generalizations are inaccurate and are
    > deliberately meant to mislead. In other words BOB, you are a LIAR!
    >
    >
    =====================================
    I have to second that.
    I am in Seattle and have trees, wind, airplanes and buildings.
    BOTH of my HD receivers work excellently.
    =====================================
  12. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    From the post below Quoting myself....

    "The 5th gen receiver is 4 1/2 years LATE! And its getting later every
    day. And now we hear that LG will not even make stand alone receivers.
    They will only include them in their HDTV sets. That will give them a
    MAJOR competitive advantage. And Hisense says they will not deploy 5th
    generation receivers till their current stocks run out, six months, a
    year?? I don't know. "

    One of many post where I said that LG would deliver 5th gen receivers in
    integrated sets.

    Bob Miller wrote:
    > Otto Pylot wrote:
    >
    >> In article <1105378691.546477.121060@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
    >> <igorcarajo@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> Lately I've been reading a bit on this newsgroup and it seems that 5th
    >>> generation OTA tuners were going to be released by the 4th quarter of
    >>> 2004. Are there any out yet? Could anybody list brands and models?
    >>> Thanks.
    >>>
    >>
    >> I've got a 4th gen LG LST-4200A that has worked flawlessly since day
    >> one. What's wrong with a good 4th gen?
    >>
    > 4th generation receivers work in some locations but not those which are
    > multipath challenged. That means in places with trees, wind, airplanes
    > and buildings. 4th generation especially has problems with reception
    > with indoor antenna because of multipath both static and dynamic. That
    > means that people walking around the room can cause loss of signal as
    > can static multipath from signals bouncing around the room.
    >
    > The success of DTV OTA depends on having receivers that work for
    > everybody not just a few. Receivers that work in all conditions not just
    > when things are just right and you have the rooftop rotorized antenna
    > pointed the right way.
    >
    > The ideal receiver would work with an antenna that could be included in
    > the HDTV set or simply placed on top and be a simple loop, rabbit ears
    > or monopole $2 antenna. It should work in New York City apartments and I
    > personally believe it should work in the back seat of your car, on a
    > train, on your boat or in a bus, in the back of our 16 wheeler or at the
    > beach. With COFDM antennas small enough to fit on cell phones work very
    > well. This video of three screens are receiving mobile in the worst RF
    > environment in the world, New York City from a 100 Watt transmitter. The
    > antennas range from a three inch omni monopole to a 15 inch monopole.
    >
    > www.viacel.com/bob.wmv
    >
    > For the life of me I can't imagine why you would want to leave any of
    > those scenarios out if you didn't have to. That is if you could have a
    > receiver that did all of the above and more why not? Why wouldn't you
    > want to receive OTA DTV on your boat? How about on a portable TV that
    > has a screen but also lets you plug in 1080P glasses? The antenna is
    > built into these portable DTVs. (COFDM)
    >
    > http://www.i4u.com/article2231.html
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?R1D7213F9
    > http://www.followmedia-tv.com/
    >
    > and these phones with minuscule antennas. Wouldn't these antennas look
    > better on your roof?
    > http://www.itmedia.co.jp/mobile/0308/08/sanyo.html
    > Video demo
    > http://www.wirelesswatch.jp/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=741
    >
    > And in spite of the FCC the US, as this article notes, may actually be
    > getting back to the cutting edge with cell phone DTV (COFDM of course)
    > in Pittsburgh of all places.
    > http://cellphones.engadget.com/entry/1234000483023527/
    >
    > This article says that DVB-H will clean the clock of DMB-T being offered
    > by S. Korean companies. Before this is over LG and friends are going to
    > be sorry they picked the 8-VSB modulation. It forced them to then find a
    > Mobile modulation (DMB-T) to satisfy their broadcasters. Now they are
    > riding two horses both of which are the wrong ones. DMB-T uses an old
    > form of COFDM so even the loser has the right modulation sort of.
    >
    > How about combining a gizmo like this with 80 Gigs of video and music files
    > http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/01/10/silverscreen/index.php
    >
    > with glasses like these with 1080P HDTV capability.
    > http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/01/10/silverscreen/index.php
    >
    > COFDM and its DVB-T and DVB-H win in the end world-wide and that means
    > here in the US also. Just a matter of time.
    >
    > So why did we give up all these possibilities? Channels 2 thru 51 can't
    > do any of this. They could do HDTV just like 8-VSB with COFDM and have
    > all these capabilities. Why don't we? Why are we one of the few
    > countries in the world that can't? Australia and Japan can and they also
    > can do HD. France will and they will have HD. We can't. Why? Did we get
    > something in return? We made a big sacrifice. We have to have rooftop
    > antennas (at least till later this year). We don't have mobile
    > reception, why not? What did we get for the sacrifice? DUH!!! NOTHING?
    > Wrong answer.
    >
    > What we got was higher royalty payments, ten times higher. Nice trade,
    > lose a lot of functionality and get to pay more money for the privilege.
    > And while the royalty payments that we pay (remember 10 time higher for
    > 8-VSB than COFDM) go to a foreign corporation, LG, the royalties that
    > most other countries citizens pay (10% of our payments) go to mostly US
    > patent holders. Isn't that weird? IN an age when the US exports IP. That
    > is what we sell mostly. We have elected to send IP royalty payments
    > overseas to a foreign company while the rest of the world thinks our IP
    > (Intellectual property) is better. AND IT IS! COFDM is American and it
    > is far better.
    >
    > And LG isn't shy about telling its shareholders how much, $100,000,000
    > per year it was worth once the FCC MANDATED receivers in every DTV set.
    >
    > 4th generation receivers do not work well in most apartments in
    > Manhattan. I know because I have tried four and OWN two. I have tried
    > over a number of years COFDM and 8-VSB in different cities and different
    > conditions.
    >
    > 5th generation LG receivers are the first 8-VSB receivers that work in
    > static multipath decent enough TO BE SOLD. In my opinion NO receiver
    > that has been sold to date should have been. We should not even have
    > started our digital transition in the US until we had a receiver that
    > worked at least as well as LG 5th generation receivers. The FCC has let
    > us down. They did not look out for the consumer which is their PRIMARY
    > job. They specifically looked out for LG Industries. Go figure.
    >
    > You have to ask yourselves why the FCC first of all picked a modulation
    > that was so flawed and second why did they stick with it so long. Why
    > did they believe LG and others when they said that they would have fix
    > for 8-VSB that would make it work MOBILE and have no problem with
    > reception with simple indoor antennas IN SIX MONTHS starting January
    > 11th 2001. We have to date only seen a 5th generation receiver. It is
    > not even on the market yet and it does not work MOBILE nor does the
    > E-VSB that was supposed to specifically work mobile.
    >
    > The 5th gen receiver is 4 1/2 years LATE! And its getting later every
    > day. And now we hear that LG will not even make stand alone receivers.
    > They will only include them in their HDTV sets. That will give them a
    > MAJOR competitive advantage. And Hisense says they will not deploy 5th
    > generation receivers till their current stocks run out, six months, a
    > year?? I don't know.
    >
    > In 2000 the FCC had a review of both COFDM and 8-VSB. They then had a
    > test (allowed by the FCC) that was conducted by the industry, that was
    > brazen in your face fraud. In the last hour of the last FCC
    > administration they re-affirmed 8-VSB on January 19th 2001.
    >
    > And now we hear that our Chairman of the FCC Powell is frustrated at the
    > pace of the DTV OTA transition. He could have turned it around many
    > times. He could turn it around today. He won't because he does not have
    > the best interest of the public at heart.
    >
    > I would like to think otherwise but it has been too long a wait for any
    > actions from the FCC that would suggest otherwise.
    >
    > Bob Miller
  13. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
    > "The 5th gen receiver is 4 1/2 years LATE!

    A 5th gneration ATSC receiver may be "4-1/2 years late", but it's *still*
    here earlier than $100 HDTV-capable COFDM receivers. It's also here before
    SD COFDM receivers that don't lose the signal when the washing machine turns
    on.

    --
    Jeff Rife | "The Babylon Project was our last, best hope
    | for peace.... It failed."
    |
    | -- Commander Susan Ivanova, 2260
  14. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    >"The 5th gen receiver is 4 1/2 years LATE! And its getting later every
    >day.

    Um, exuse me BOB, but where were the original timetables for a 5th gen
    receiver? Without that you can not HONESTLY say (I know that's a word that
    probably isn't in your vocabulary) they're 4 1/2 years late.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Vidguy7 wrote:

    >>"The 5th gen receiver is 4 1/2 years LATE! And its getting later every
    >>day.
    >
    >
    > Um, exuse me BOB, but where were the original timetables for a 5th gen
    > receiver? Without that you can not HONESTLY say (I know that's a word that
    > probably isn't in your vocabulary) they're 4 1/2 years late.

    I can say they are 4 1/2 years late because after the MSTV test when it
    was determined that 8-VSB was " disappointing" and in need of a massive
    "fix"l, LG and others said they would work on it round the clock and
    have a receiver that worked with indoor antennas in multipath
    environments in six months. That was January and February of 2001. They
    said similar things in June of 2000 before Congressional hearings and
    they said in 1999 that they had chips that SOLVED the mobile and indoor
    antenna problems of 8-VSB.

    Take your pick, all lies, 4, 4 1/2 or 5 years ago.

    Bob Miller

    BTW before the Congressional hearings they said that some tweaking was
    needed before they could also walk around the hearing room floor with
    their antenna as Sinclair did with COFDM. A matter of weeks or months
    before 8-VSB would match COFDM. Never suggested it would be better.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    >I can say they are 4 1/2 years late because after the MSTV test when it
    >was determined that 8-VSB was " disappointing" and in need of a massive
    >"fix"l, LG and others said they would work on it round the clock and
    >have a receiver that worked with indoor antennas in multipath
    >environments in six months. That was January and February of 2001. They
    >said similar things in June of 2000 before Congressional hearings and
    >they said in 1999 that they had chips that SOLVED the mobile and indoor
    >antenna problems of 8-VSB.
    >
    >Take your pick, all lies, 4, 4 1/2 or 5 years ago.
    >
    >Bob Miller

    Well considering that I and many had a first gen receiver that worked
    beautifully and successive ones that worked equally well or better, I'd say
    they met their "deadline" long long before the 4 1/2 years. You see BOB, you
    will NEVER acknowledge that todays 8VSB receivers, or for that matter, other
    earlier gen 8VSB receivers, worked very well for the majority of people using
    them. You have constantly ignored the VAST majority of posters here that
    expressed their pleasure with the reception they were obtaining with these
    earlier gen receivers. But hey BOB, that's just the way you do things. Ignore
    all the positives and spin, twist, distort and lie until it seems that 8VSB
    simply doesn't work. The FACT is BOB, that your LIES don't work. Virtually
    everyone here knows you for what you are, our resident Snake Oil Salesman.


    >
    >BTW before the Congressional hearings they said that some tweaking was
    >needed before they could also walk around the hearing room floor with
    >their antenna as Sinclair did with COFDM. A matter of weeks or months
    >before 8-VSB would match COFDM. Never suggested it would be better.
    >

    Ah yes BOB, how I've missed our "walk around the floor of the Congressional
    hearings". You haven't mentioned that one for at least a couple of weeks. You
    had me worried. BOB, you are truly, honestly, without a doubt, pathetic.
  17. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Jeff Rife wrote:

    > Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
    >
    >>"The 5th gen receiver is 4 1/2 years LATE!
    >
    >
    > A 5th gneration ATSC receiver may be "4-1/2 years late", but it's *still*
    > here earlier than $100 HDTV-capable COFDM receivers. It's also here before
    > SD COFDM receivers that don't lose the signal when the washing machine turns
    > on.
    >
    How convenient. There is no market for COFDM HD receivers in the US so
    there are no HD COFDM $100 receivers.

    COFDM does not lose signal when you turn on a washing machine. How many
    sources of impulse noise do you think there are in an hour drive thru
    Manhattan? This video shows no impulse noise problems

    www.viacel.com/bob.wmv

    Current 8-VSB receivers have more problem with impulse noise than COFDM
    receivers.

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

    Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
    > > A 5th gneration ATSC receiver may be "4-1/2 years late", but it's *still*
    > > here earlier than $100 HDTV-capable COFDM receivers. It's also here before
    > > SD COFDM receivers that don't lose the signal when the washing machine turns
    > > on.
    > >
    > How convenient. There is no market for COFDM HD receivers in the US so
    > there are no HD COFDM $100 receivers.

    Oh, so now Australia has no HDTV? I think *they* would like US$100
    HDTV-capable COFDM receivers, instead of having to pay the US$471.92
    they currently run.

    Funny that you can buy an ATSC receiver (every one of which is HDTV-capable)
    for less than US$200, even though sales are so dismal (according to Bob)
    that volume prices have yet to kick in.

    --
    Jeff Rife |
    | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/RhymesWithOrange/NoWetFood.gif
  19. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    >A 5th gneration ATSC receiver may be "4-1/2 years late", but it's *still*
    >here earlier than $100 HDTV-capable COFDM receivers. It's also here before
    >SD COFDM receivers that don't lose the signal when the washing machine turns
    >on.

    Jeff, remember the days when BOB claimed those receivers would be FREE! And as
    far as his wonderful COFDM reception is concerned, I once again invite anyone
    with XM radio in the N.Y. area to discuss how 'wonderful' COFDM is. It's so
    "wonderful" that I've gone back to FM radio. Unreal.
  20. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Jeff Rife wrote:
    > Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
    >
    >>>A 5th gneration ATSC receiver may be "4-1/2 years late", but it's *still*
    >>>here earlier than $100 HDTV-capable COFDM receivers. It's also here before
    >>>SD COFDM receivers that don't lose the signal when the washing machine turns
    >>>on.
    >>>
    >>
    >>How convenient. There is no market for COFDM HD receivers in the US so
    >>there are no HD COFDM $100 receivers.
    >
    >
    > Oh, so now Australia has no HDTV? I think *they* would like US$100
    > HDTV-capable COFDM receivers, instead of having to pay the US$471.92
    > they currently run.

    Australia is a very small market with only around 4 million households.
    There are no economies of scale that would cause prices to reach what
    they are in the UK or what they would be in the US or China.
    OZ receiver list
    http://www.dba.org.au/index.asp?sectionID=18

    Notice that the price of an SD COFDM receiver in OZ is $199 in Australia
    dollars or $154 in US. In the UK you can buy an SD COFDM receiver for
    $37 on sale.

    The difference is mainly the market size. What is incredible is the wide
    range of COFDM receivers that are available for such an incredibly small
    market. And what is also enlightening is that they are buying these
    receivers at 7 times the rate we are buying 8-VSB receivers.

    Bob Miller


    >
    > Funny that you can buy an ATSC receiver (every one of which is HDTV-capable)
    > for less than US$200, even though sales are so dismal (according to Bob)
    > that volume prices have yet to kick in.
    >
  21. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
    > > Oh, so now Australia has no HDTV? I think *they* would like US$100
    > > HDTV-capable COFDM receivers, instead of having to pay the US$471.92
    > > they currently run.
    >
    > Australia is a very small market with only around 4 million households.
    > There are no economies of scale

    Guess what...less than 5 million households have ATSC receivers in the US,
    and prices for ATSC HDTV receivers are *already* half that of Australian
    COFDM HDTV receivers.

    --
    Jeff Rife | "The Babylon Project was our last, best hope
    | for peace.... It failed."
    |
    | -- Commander Susan Ivanova, 2260
  22. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    Jeff Rife wrote:
    > Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
    >
    >>>Oh, so now Australia has no HDTV? I think *they* would like US$100
    >>>HDTV-capable COFDM receivers, instead of having to pay the US$471.92
    >>>they currently run.
    >>
    >>Australia is a very small market with only around 4 million households.
    >>There are no economies of scale
    >
    >
    > Guess what...less than 5 million households have ATSC receivers in the US,
    > and prices for ATSC HDTV receivers are *already* half that of Australian
    > COFDM HDTV receivers.
    >

    Once again, bob will ignore facts. You can bet on it.

    --
    Matthew

    I'm a contractor. If you want an opinion, I'll sell you one.
    Which one do you want?
  23. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    >COFDM does not lose signal when you turn on a washing machine.

    Funny BOB, neither do ANY of my 4 HD receivers, receiving 8VSB, lose their
    signal when our washing machine is running. WHEN will you stop your chronic
    lying BOB? Are you not bright enough to see you have utterly ZERO credibility
    here? Somehow in your twisted mind you seem to think that coming up with a new
    lie or distortion every day will enhance your credibility. Frankly BOB, you
    insult the intelligence of each and every reader of this ng. Your desperation
    is very clear to all.
  24. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    >Funny that you can buy an ATSC receiver (every one of which is HDTV-capable)
    >for less than US$200, even though sales are so dismal (according to Bob)
    >that volume prices have yet to kick in.

    Jeff, you're going to give this man a headache with facts. BOB does not like
    facts and simply discards them as if they didn't exist.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    >Australia is a very small market with only around 4 million households.
    >There are no economies of scale that would cause prices to reach what
    >they are in the UK or what they would be in the US or China.

    So again BOB compares apples to oranges. His excuse for expensive COFDM
    receivers where there IS HD, is 'economy of scale'. He then goes on to compare
    prices in the U.K., where numbers are not a problem and where almost nobody has
    an HD receiver. What a wonderful world BOB lives in. You can come up with an
    excuse, even though it's absurd, for almost any scenerio. Yes indeedy Booby,
    you are our resident Snake Oil Salesman!

    >And what is also enlightening is that they are buying these
    >receivers at 7 times the rate we are buying 8-VSB receivers.
    >

    Hey Mr. Distorter of the Truth, do your numbers take into account EACH AND
    EVERY HD SATELLITE RECEIVER SOLD? No? I didn't think so.
Ask a new question

Read More

HDTV TV Newsgroup Home Theatre Product