Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I Was Wrong!

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:44:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

And I freely admit it!!

I said that in the last quarter of 2004 the sale of COFDM receivers in
the UK would come close to a million. I even said a million at times.

Sales up until December 11th came in at 1.3 million that that does not
include the critical last two shopping weeks before Christmas. It may
hit 1.6 or 7 million in the final count.

1.6 million in the US which is SIX times the size of Merry Old England
would have been 9.6 million and I believe that because of the dynamics
of the US the number would have been even larger.

I have stated that sales of COFDM receivers would continue to accelerate
from already very high numbers contrary to the pundits in the UK who
have consistently said that a leveling off or actual decline was just
around the corner. These same pundits also said that the digital
transition in the UK would fail from the beginning.

My nerve failed and I have underestimated the power of a good product
with a proper modulation.

How is this, in the first quarter they will sell over a million
receivers and for the year 2005 they will sell 5.5 million on top of the
6 million they have already sold.

In the US that would be 6 + 5.5 = 11.5 times 6 or 69 million receivers
sold in the same three years. IF however you go back to when we started
7 years ago we would have had sales to date of close to the 85% of home
in the US to qualify for the analog turnoff by the end of this year
2005, a full year before the original 2006 deadline. There are 109
million homes in the US. 85% equals 92.5 million.

Incredible as it may seem with COFDM we would be approaching that number
right now.

Bob Miller

More about : wrong

Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:44:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:mOBEd.3509$Ii4.3223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> And I freely admit it!!
>
> I said that in the last quarter of 2004 the sale of COFDM receivers in the
> UK would come close to a million. I even said a million at times.
>
> Sales up until December 11th came in at 1.3 million that that does not
> include the critical last two shopping weeks before Christmas. It may hit
> 1.6 or 7 million in the final count.

Hey Bob,

You're beginning to sound like a second-rate detergent
commercial now.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:44:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Wow!!! You finally admit that COFDM has no future. That is truly a step to
recovery. How are those therapy sessions going? Seems like they are
helping. I really hope things get better for you this year.

Jeff


"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:mOBEd.3509$Ii4.3223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> And I freely admit it!!
>
> Bob Miller
Related resources
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:44:03 PM

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

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:44:02 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
wrote:

>And I freely admit it!!
>
>I said that in the last quarter of 2004 the sale of COFDM receivers in
>the UK would come close to a million. I even said a million at times.
>

UK == ZERO Hidef broadcasts.

But, that didn't stop Bob from posting his spew to the
"alt.tv.tech.hdtv " newsgroup.

FYI.. Last weekend(1/8 - 1/9), I enjoyed watching several playoff
football games and BattleStar Galactica 2003 all in Hi-Definition.
It's such a shame that poor bob missed it, since he doesn't own a
HDTV receiver.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:44:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Perhaps Bob Miller would like to explain why, in Tokyo:

.. just a mile from the broadcasting tower, COFDM terrestrial digital HDTV
still pixellates at times (I witnessed it first-hand)

.. five miles from the broadcasting tower, you can't get COFDM terrestrial
digital HDTV at all

.. within the COFDM terrestrial digital HDTV service area, you must have a
rooftop directional yagi to receive the signal

.. the programming schedule for terrestrial digital TV isn't printed in the
newspapers (but cable and satellite are) because there's not enough demand
for it yet

Bob Miller has utterly misrepresented the situation in Japan. I know this
now from first-hand experience. When confronted with first-hand
information, he puts his fingers in his ears and screams "you're wrong,
you're wrong, you're wrong!"

The membership of these newsgroups knows that he has misrepresented the
situation in the US.

He has probably also misrepresented the situation in the UK, Berlin
Germany, and Australia.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 12:02:07 AM

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

"Tim Keating" <NotForJunkEmail@directinternet11.com1> wrote in message
news:3i26u0hcicjt46h33cu2afrcgvmmj25h30@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:44:02 GMT, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>>And I freely admit it!!
>>
>>I said that in the last quarter of 2004 the sale of COFDM receivers in
>>the UK would come close to a million. I even said a million at times.
>>
>
> UK == ZERO Hidef broadcasts.
>
> But, that didn't stop Bob from posting his spew to the
> "alt.tv.tech.hdtv " newsgroup.
>
> FYI.. Last weekend(1/8 - 1/9), I enjoyed watching several playoff
> football games and BattleStar Galactica 2003 all in Hi-Definition.
> It's such a shame that poor bob missed it, since he doesn't own a
> HDTV receiver.

That's the problem, you can name all the HD programs from memory,
which shows the lack of programming. Can you name all the SD programs
from last weekend?
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 12:59:24 AM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:mOBEd.3509$Ii4.3223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> And I freely admit it!!
>
> I said that in the last quarter of 2004 the sale of COFDM receivers in the
> UK would come close to a million. I even said a million at times.
>
> Sales up until December 11th came in at 1.3 million that that does not
> include the critical last two shopping weeks before Christmas. It may hit
> 1.6 or 7 million in the final count.
>
> 1.6 million in the US which is SIX times the size of Merry Old England
> would have been 9.6 million and I believe that because of the dynamics of
> the US the number would have been even larger.
>
> I have stated that sales of COFDM receivers would continue to accelerate
> from already very high numbers contrary to the pundits in the UK who have
> consistently said that a leveling off or actual decline was just around
> the corner. These same pundits also said that the digital transition in
> the UK would fail from the beginning.
>
> My nerve failed and I have underestimated the power of a good product with
> a proper modulation.
>
> How is this, in the first quarter they will sell over a million receivers
> and for the year 2005 they will sell 5.5 million on top of the 6 million
> they have already sold.
>
> In the US that would be 6 + 5.5 = 11.5 times 6 or 69 million receivers
> sold in the same three years. IF however you go back to when we started 7
> years ago we would have had sales to date of close to the 85% of home in
> the US to qualify for the analog turnoff by the end of this year 2005, a
> full year before the original 2006 deadline. There are 109 million homes
> in the US. 85% equals 92.5 million.
>
> Incredible as it may seem with COFDM we would be approaching that number
> right now.
>
> Bob Miller

I still don't get what this has to do with HDTV? Do Americans really care
when they are comfortably hooked up to their cable or sat boxes?
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 12:59:25 AM

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

>
> I still don't get what this has to do with HDTV? Do Americans really care
> when they are comfortably hooked up to their cable or sat boxes?
>
>

Bob cares because his business model depends on mobile HDTV. He's
losing a lot of money because the US didn't go with COFDM. Oh well!
Bob, it's time to either 1) move to a different country, or 2) find
another business model.

In both cases, please stop spamming this list.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 1:25:47 AM

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

Gomer Jones wrote:
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:mOBEd.3509$Ii4.3223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>And I freely admit it!!
>>
>>I said that in the last quarter of 2004 the sale of COFDM receivers in the
>>UK would come close to a million. I even said a million at times.
>>
>>Sales up until December 11th came in at 1.3 million that that does not
>>include the critical last two shopping weeks before Christmas. It may hit
>>1.6 or 7 million in the final count.
>>
>>1.6 million in the US which is SIX times the size of Merry Old England
>>would have been 9.6 million and I believe that because of the dynamics of
>>the US the number would have been even larger.
>>
>>I have stated that sales of COFDM receivers would continue to accelerate
>>from already very high numbers contrary to the pundits in the UK who have
>>consistently said that a leveling off or actual decline was just around
>>the corner. These same pundits also said that the digital transition in
>>the UK would fail from the beginning.
>>
>>My nerve failed and I have underestimated the power of a good product with
>>a proper modulation.
>>
>>How is this, in the first quarter they will sell over a million receivers
>>and for the year 2005 they will sell 5.5 million on top of the 6 million
>>they have already sold.
>>
>>In the US that would be 6 + 5.5 = 11.5 times 6 or 69 million receivers
>>sold in the same three years. IF however you go back to when we started 7
>>years ago we would have had sales to date of close to the 85% of home in
>>the US to qualify for the analog turnoff by the end of this year 2005, a
>>full year before the original 2006 deadline. There are 109 million homes
>>in the US. 85% equals 92.5 million.
>>
>>Incredible as it may seem with COFDM we would be approaching that number
>>right now.
>>
>>Bob Miller
>
>
> I still don't get what this has to do with HDTV? Do Americans really care
> when they are comfortably hooked up to their cable or sat boxes?
>
>
In this part of the country satellite drops out during rain squalls.
Enough time so that my wife demanded that we cancel it.

Not so comfortable with sat.

And they charge a lot for these services when with the $50 receiver in
the UK you get 30 channels of widescreen DTV and a bunch of digital
radio for ZERO. Of course they do pay a tax for TV there to support such
as the BBC. Expect to see 50 channel OTA cable type offerings on top of
being able to receive all the FREE DTV channels there are already there
in the US.

Polls show that from 30% to over 50% of American homes would switch to a
free service like the one offered in the UK and drop cable and or
satellite. I think a combo service of free and subscription plus access
to all the normally free channels will be a killer when offered.

When offered these OTA services customers will benefit from the FREEness
and be able to subscribe to OTA cable like programming also. Coupled
with Internet delivery via broadband of premium PPV content for niche
services I think a OTA service in the US will kill cable and satellite
sooner than most think possible. In the UK satellite has seen new
customer sales dry up in the last 20 months as Freeview grew. In 20
months they have 6 million customers and will have 11.5 million by the
end of this year. SKY satellite has only 7 million. And now they are
offering a OTA subscription service as well, TopUp. Who needs cable and
satellite.

The use of the PVR will also multiply the perceived number of channels
that OTA can deliver by making 3 am prime time for any prerecorded content.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 1:25:48 AM

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

Move to the UK Bob! Maybe we can collect enough money to provide you a one
way ticket. I am sure your wife would appreciate it also. She must get
very tired of your COFDM ramblings.

Jeff


"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:LhDEd.3676$pZ4.3049@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Gomer Jones wrote:
>> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:mOBEd.3509$Ii4.3223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>>>And I freely admit it!!
>>>
>>>I said that in the last quarter of 2004 the sale of COFDM receivers in
>>>the UK would come close to a million. I even said a million at times.
>>>
>>>Sales up until December 11th came in at 1.3 million that that does not
>>>include the critical last two shopping weeks before Christmas. It may hit
>>>1.6 or 7 million in the final count.
>>>
>>>1.6 million in the US which is SIX times the size of Merry Old England
>>>would have been 9.6 million and I believe that because of the dynamics of
>>>the US the number would have been even larger.
>>>
>>>I have stated that sales of COFDM receivers would continue to accelerate
>>>from already very high numbers contrary to the pundits in the UK who have
>>>consistently said that a leveling off or actual decline was just around
>>>the corner. These same pundits also said that the digital transition in
>>>the UK would fail from the beginning.
>>>
>>>My nerve failed and I have underestimated the power of a good product
>>>with a proper modulation.
>>>
>>>How is this, in the first quarter they will sell over a million receivers
>>>and for the year 2005 they will sell 5.5 million on top of the 6 million
>>>they have already sold.
>>>
>>>In the US that would be 6 + 5.5 = 11.5 times 6 or 69 million receivers
>>>sold in the same three years. IF however you go back to when we started 7
>>>years ago we would have had sales to date of close to the 85% of home in
>>>the US to qualify for the analog turnoff by the end of this year 2005, a
>>>full year before the original 2006 deadline. There are 109 million homes
>>>in the US. 85% equals 92.5 million.
>>>
>>>Incredible as it may seem with COFDM we would be approaching that number
>>>right now.
>>>
>>>Bob Miller
>>
>>
>> I still don't get what this has to do with HDTV? Do Americans really
>> care when they are comfortably hooked up to their cable or sat boxes?
> In this part of the country satellite drops out during rain squalls.
> Enough time so that my wife demanded that we cancel it.
>
> Not so comfortable with sat.
>
> And they charge a lot for these services when with the $50 receiver in the
> UK you get 30 channels of widescreen DTV and a bunch of digital radio for
> ZERO. Of course they do pay a tax for TV there to support such as the BBC.
> Expect to see 50 channel OTA cable type offerings on top of being able to
> receive all the FREE DTV channels there are already there in the US.
>
> Polls show that from 30% to over 50% of American homes would switch to a
> free service like the one offered in the UK and drop cable and or
> satellite. I think a combo service of free and subscription plus access to
> all the normally free channels will be a killer when offered.
>
> When offered these OTA services customers will benefit from the FREEness
> and be able to subscribe to OTA cable like programming also. Coupled with
> Internet delivery via broadband of premium PPV content for niche services
> I think a OTA service in the US will kill cable and satellite sooner than
> most think possible. In the UK satellite has seen new customer sales dry
> up in the last 20 months as Freeview grew. In 20 months they have 6
> million customers and will have 11.5 million by the end of this year. SKY
> satellite has only 7 million. And now they are offering a OTA subscription
> service as well, TopUp. Who needs cable and satellite.
>
> The use of the PVR will also multiply the perceived number of channels
> that OTA can deliver by making 3 am prime time for any prerecorded
> content.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 1:36:38 AM

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

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:

> In this part of the country satellite drops out during rain squalls.
> Enough time so that my wife demanded that we cancel it.
>
> Not so comfortable with sat.
>
> And they charge a lot for these services when with the $50 receiver in
> the UK you get 30 channels of widescreen DTV and a bunch of digital
> radio for ZERO. Of course they do pay a tax for TV there to support such
> as the BBC. Expect to see 50 channel OTA cable type offerings on top of
> being able to receive all the FREE DTV channels there are already there
> in the US.
>
> Polls show that from 30% to over 50% of American homes would switch to a
> free service like the one offered in the UK and drop cable and or
> satellite. I think a combo service of free and subscription plus access
> to all the normally free channels will be a killer when offered.
>
> When offered these OTA services customers will benefit from the FREEness
> and be able to subscribe to OTA cable like programming also. Coupled
> with Internet delivery via broadband of premium PPV content for niche
> services I think a OTA service in the US will kill cable and satellite
> sooner than most think possible. In the UK satellite has seen new
> customer sales dry up in the last 20 months as Freeview grew. In 20
> months they have 6 million customers and will have 11.5 million by the
> end of this year. SKY satellite has only 7 million. And now they are
> offering a OTA subscription service as well, TopUp. Who needs cable and
> satellite.
>
> The use of the PVR will also multiply the perceived number of channels
> that OTA can deliver by making 3 am prime time for any prerecorded
> content.

Notice that there is NO mention of HD content. Bob, GO AWAY!!!!!
No one here wants to hear your rantings about how you got screwed!
We don't care how the system is modulated. We want to watch HD!
Chip

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
January 12, 2005 12:23:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:HyXEd.4427
<
> Well my source says 1.3 million from October 1st thru December 11th. Your
> November sales of 500k does not dispute that. They had to sell some number
> between December 11th and 25th. So if you are right that would make is
> something south of 1.6 like 1.5 million? We will see. Whatever the number it
> is far higher than most predicted including me.

Well, problem is the sale of analogue equipment still exceeds these figures,
what's the point of 500k digital boxes if 700k new analogue TV's and VCR's have
just been added to the pile?

In sheer numbers there's more equipment dependent on the analogue signals now
than when digital started in 1998.


Az.
January 12, 2005 1:07:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
news:I06Fd.620157$O24.89706@news.easynews.com...
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:HyXEd.4427
> <
> > Well my source says 1.3 million from October 1st thru December 11th.
Your
> > November sales of 500k does not dispute that. They had to sell some
number
> > between December 11th and 25th. So if you are right that would make is
> > something south of 1.6 like 1.5 million? We will see. Whatever the
number it
> > is far higher than most predicted including me.
>
> Well, problem is the sale of analogue equipment still exceeds these
figures,
> what's the point of 500k digital boxes if 700k new analogue TV's and VCR's
have
> just been added to the pile?
>
> In sheer numbers there's more equipment dependent on the analogue signals
now
> than when digital started in 1998.
>

But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the last 15
years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital receivers can
now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would have us
believe.


>
> Az.
>
>
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 1:07:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

ivan wrote:

>
> But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the last 15
> years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital receivers can
> now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would have us
> believe.
>

The fact that DTV in the US does not have that natural backwards
compatibility explains exactly why the DTV rollout in the US is on a
different time scale than DTV in Europe.

Matthew (no, it's not the modulation scheme)

--
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 12, 2005 6:56:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> ivan wrote:
>
>>
>> But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the
>> last 15
>> years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital
>> receivers can
>> now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would
>> have us
>> believe.
>>
>
> The fact that DTV in the US does not have that natural backwards
> compatibility explains exactly why the DTV rollout in the US is on a
> different time scale than DTV in Europe.
>
> Matthew (no, it's not the modulation scheme)
>

Any digital receiver should be able to connect to an analog TV in the
US. That is not the problem. In the US no one has offered a similar
service to the UK's Freeview. USDTV is the closest but offers only 12
subscription channels while in the UK you have 30 free channels.

The combination of inexpensive receivers and 30 free channels is a
powerful combo. Expect 50 subscription channels plus the regular free
OTA broadcast channels to start being offered in larger markets in the
US once 5th gen receivers appear.

Bob Miller
(its all about modulation which will become apparent with 5th gen 8-VSB
receivers and COFDM networks) The first rule is that you have to have
something that works before it can be successful.
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 6:56:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>> ivan wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the
>>> last 15
>>> years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital
>>> receivers can
>>> now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would
>>> have us
>>> believe.
>>>
>>
>> The fact that DTV in the US does not have that natural backwards
>> compatibility explains exactly why the DTV rollout in the US is on a
>> different time scale than DTV in Europe.
>>
>> Matthew (no, it's not the modulation scheme)
>>
>
> Any digital receiver should be able to connect to an analog TV in the
> US. That is not the problem. In the US no one has offered a similar
> service to the UK's Freeview. USDTV is the closest but offers only 12
> subscription channels while in the UK you have 30 free channels.

Which has nothing to do with the modulation scheme.

> The combination of inexpensive receivers and 30 free channels is a
> powerful combo. Expect 50 subscription channels plus the regular free
> OTA broadcast channels to start being offered in larger markets in the
> US once 5th gen receivers appear.

Right! Like that's going to happen. The business model for that really
hasn't been proven.

> Bob Miller
> (its all about modulation which will become apparent with 5th gen 8-VSB
> receivers and COFDM networks) The first rule is that you have to have
> something that works before it can be successful.

8-VSB does work now. There are only a few locations where multipath is
severe enough to warrant waiting for a fifth generation receiver.

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
January 12, 2005 7:39:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:IMbFd.5369$Ii4.4892@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> > ivan wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the
> >> last 15
> >> years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital
> >> receivers can
> >> now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would
> >> have us
> >> believe.
> >>
> >
> > The fact that DTV in the US does not have that natural backwards
> > compatibility explains exactly why the DTV rollout in the US is on a
> > different time scale than DTV in Europe.
> >
> > Matthew (no, it's not the modulation scheme)
> >
>
> Any digital receiver should be able to connect to an analog TV in the
> US. That is not the problem. In the US no one has offered a similar
> service to the UK's Freeview. USDTV is the closest but offers only 12
> subscription channels while in the UK you have 30 free channels.
>
> The combination of inexpensive receivers and 30 free channels is a
> powerful combo. Expect 50 subscription channels plus the regular free
> OTA broadcast channels to start being offered in larger markets in the
> US once 5th gen receivers appear.
>
> Bob Miller
> (its all about modulation which will become apparent with 5th gen 8-VSB
> receivers and COFDM networks) The first rule is that you have to have
> something that works before it can be successful.
>
>
I have to agree with Matthew on this one Bob.

A single universal Scart lead carries component (RGB) composite video,
stereo sound, auto w\s switching etc, which means that the majority of even
quite elderly receivers can make ideal monitors for digital TV.

Also virtually every home in the UK has a rooftop UHF antenna, in which case
if the customer is receiving reasonable quality analogue from a transmitter
equipped for digital transmissions, then in the majority of cases it's
usually merely a question of plugging in the antenna and the Scart lead to
the DTT receiver and away they go, although in some areas (due to limited
spectrum) they may have to upgrade their antenna to one of a different
group.
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 7:44:23 PM

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:LhDEd.3676$pZ4.3049@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Gomer Jones wrote:
>> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:mOBEd.3509$Ii4.3223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>>>And I freely admit it!!
>>>
>>>I said that in the last quarter of 2004 the sale of COFDM receivers in
>>>the UK would come close to a million. I even said a million at times.
>>>
>>>Sales up until December 11th came in at 1.3 million that that does not
>>>include the critical last two shopping weeks before Christmas. It may hit
>>>1.6 or 7 million in the final count.
>>>
>>>1.6 million in the US which is SIX times the size of Merry Old England
>>>would have been 9.6 million and I believe that because of the dynamics of
>>>the US the number would have been even larger.
>>>
>>>I have stated that sales of COFDM receivers would continue to accelerate
>>>from already very high numbers contrary to the pundits in the UK who have
>>>consistently said that a leveling off or actual decline was just around
>>>the corner. These same pundits also said that the digital transition in
>>>the UK would fail from the beginning.
>>>
>>>My nerve failed and I have underestimated the power of a good product
>>>with a proper modulation.
>>>
>>>How is this, in the first quarter they will sell over a million receivers
>>>and for the year 2005 they will sell 5.5 million on top of the 6 million
>>>they have already sold.
>>>
>>>In the US that would be 6 + 5.5 = 11.5 times 6 or 69 million receivers
>>>sold in the same three years. IF however you go back to when we started 7
>>>years ago we would have had sales to date of close to the 85% of home in
>>>the US to qualify for the analog turnoff by the end of this year 2005, a
>>>full year before the original 2006 deadline. There are 109 million homes
>>>in the US. 85% equals 92.5 million.
>>>
>>>Incredible as it may seem with COFDM we would be approaching that number
>>>right now.
>>>
>>>Bob Miller
>>
>>
>> I still don't get what this has to do with HDTV? Do Americans really
>> care when they are comfortably hooked up to their cable or sat boxes?
> In this part of the country satellite drops out during rain squalls.
> Enough time so that my wife demanded that we cancel it.
>
> Not so comfortable with sat.
>
> And they charge a lot for these services when with the $50 receiver in the
> UK you get 30 channels of widescreen DTV and a bunch of digital radio for
> ZERO. Of course they do pay a tax for TV there to support such as the BBC.
> Expect to see 50 channel OTA cable type offerings on top of being able to
> receive all the FREE DTV channels there are already there in the US.
>
> Polls show that from 30% to over 50% of American homes would switch to a
> free service like the one offered in the UK and drop cable and or
> satellite. I think a combo service of free and subscription plus access to
> all the normally free channels will be a killer when offered.


I too would agree that free is good, but then again there isn't a lot of
motivation in the US to provide something for free. The most telling part of
this post is subscription (see you have to pay after all).

> When offered these OTA services customers will benefit from the FREEness
> and be able to subscribe to OTA cable like programming also. Coupled with
> Internet delivery via broadband of premium PPV content for niche services
> I think a OTA service in the US will kill cable and satellite sooner than
> most think possible. In the UK satellite has seen new customer sales dry
> up in the last 20 months as Freeview grew. In 20 months they have 6
> million customers and will have 11.5 million by the end of this year. SKY
> satellite has only 7 million. And now they are offering a OTA subscription
> service as well, TopUp. Who needs cable and satellite.
>
> The use of the PVR will also multiply the perceived number of channels
> that OTA can deliver by making 3 am prime time for any prerecorded
> content.
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 7:54:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

ivan wrote:
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:IMbFd.5369$Ii4.4892@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>>
>>>ivan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the
>>>>last 15
>>>>years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital
>>>>receivers can
>>>>now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would
>>>>have us
>>>>believe.
>>>>
>>>
>>>The fact that DTV in the US does not have that natural backwards
>>>compatibility explains exactly why the DTV rollout in the US is on a
>>>different time scale than DTV in Europe.
>>>
>>>Matthew (no, it's not the modulation scheme)
>>>
>>
>>Any digital receiver should be able to connect to an analog TV in the
>>US. That is not the problem. In the US no one has offered a similar
>>service to the UK's Freeview. USDTV is the closest but offers only 12
>>subscription channels while in the UK you have 30 free channels.
>>
>>The combination of inexpensive receivers and 30 free channels is a
>>powerful combo. Expect 50 subscription channels plus the regular free
>>OTA broadcast channels to start being offered in larger markets in the
>>US once 5th gen receivers appear.
>>
>>Bob Miller
>>(its all about modulation which will become apparent with 5th gen 8-VSB
>>receivers and COFDM networks) The first rule is that you have to have
>>something that works before it can be successful.
>>
>>
>
> I have to agree with Matthew on this one Bob.
>
> A single universal Scart lead carries component (RGB) composite video,
> stereo sound, auto w\s switching etc, which means that the majority of even
> quite elderly receivers can make ideal monitors for digital TV.
>
> Also virtually every home in the UK has a rooftop UHF antenna, in which case
> if the customer is receiving reasonable quality analogue from a transmitter
> equipped for digital transmissions, then in the majority of cases it's
> usually merely a question of plugging in the antenna and the Scart lead to
> the DTT receiver and away they go, although in some areas (due to limited
> spectrum) they may have to upgrade their antenna to one of a different
> group.
>
>
In the UK you have very low power levels and an older version of COFDM
that does not allow for SFNs.

Here in the US there is little need for rooftop antennas for much of the
coverage area of a typical DTV station since they are operating at as
much as 1,000,000 Watts. I think the highest powered transmitter in the
UK is 20,000 Watts with the average being in the 1000 Watts or less.

From test we did with 5th gen 8-VSB receivers I would think 90% of
homes in the US will be able to receive 8-VSB plug and play without a
rooftop antenna. This makes for an even more interesting market in the
US than in the UK where as you say with 1000 Watt transmitters and no
SFN capability rooftop antennas are needed by many.

Recent polls show that 30 to 50% of US cable and satellite customers
would switch to such as service if offered. That is a 50 channel PVR
supported OTA service. I doubt if cable and satellite can survive even
that initial attack. Long term cable and satellite stand no chance
against the combined OTA fixed broadcast (8-VSB), mobile broadcast
(COFDM) and wireless Internet ala carte delivery of content IMO.

The UK is showing the way and you are NOT some special case. Similar
offerings will work virtually everywhere.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 8:03:55 PM

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

Gomer Jones wrote:
>
> I too would agree that free is good, but then again there isn't a lot of
> motivation in the US to provide something for free. The most telling part of
> this post is subscription (see you have to pay after all).

The combo of free and subscription is the key IMO. Free meaning
advertiser supported and the "motivation" is the $50 billion in ad
revenue per year. In the UK you now have a OTA subscription service,
TopUp TV, offered alongside Freeview.

USDTV is such a combo offer in the US but they still have the wrong
receiver and wrong compression MPEG2. By the end of the year they may
have 5th gen receivers, more programming, MPEG4 and be in Los Angeles.

Bob Miller
>
>
>>When offered these OTA services customers will benefit from the FREEness
>>and be able to subscribe to OTA cable like programming also. Coupled with
>>Internet delivery via broadband of premium PPV content for niche services
>>I think a OTA service in the US will kill cable and satellite sooner than
>>most think possible. In the UK satellite has seen new customer sales dry
>>up in the last 20 months as Freeview grew. In 20 months they have 6
>>million customers and will have 11.5 million by the end of this year. SKY
>>satellite has only 7 million. And now they are offering a OTA subscription
>>service as well, TopUp. Who needs cable and satellite.
>>
>>The use of the PVR will also multiply the perceived number of channels
>>that OTA can deliver by making 3 am prime time for any prerecorded
>>content.
>
>
>
January 12, 2005 8:59:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:TCcFd.5052$pZ4.4395@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> ivan wrote:
> > "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:IMbFd.5369$Ii4.4892@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >
> >>Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> >>
> >>>ivan wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the
> >>>>last 15
> >>>>years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital
> >>>>receivers can
> >>>>now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would
> >>>>have us
> >>>>believe.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>The fact that DTV in the US does not have that natural backwards
> >>>compatibility explains exactly why the DTV rollout in the US is on a
> >>>different time scale than DTV in Europe.
> >>>
> >>>Matthew (no, it's not the modulation scheme)
> >>>
> >>
> >>Any digital receiver should be able to connect to an analog TV in the
> >>US. That is not the problem. In the US no one has offered a similar
> >>service to the UK's Freeview. USDTV is the closest but offers only 12
> >>subscription channels while in the UK you have 30 free channels.
> >>
> >>The combination of inexpensive receivers and 30 free channels is a
> >>powerful combo. Expect 50 subscription channels plus the regular free
> >>OTA broadcast channels to start being offered in larger markets in the
> >>US once 5th gen receivers appear.
> >>
> >>Bob Miller
> >>(its all about modulation which will become apparent with 5th gen 8-VSB
> >>receivers and COFDM networks) The first rule is that you have to have
> >>something that works before it can be successful.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I have to agree with Matthew on this one Bob.
> >
> > A single universal Scart lead carries component (RGB) composite video,
> > stereo sound, auto w\s switching etc, which means that the majority of
even
> > quite elderly receivers can make ideal monitors for digital TV.
> >
> > Also virtually every home in the UK has a rooftop UHF antenna, in which
case
> > if the customer is receiving reasonable quality analogue from a
transmitter
> > equipped for digital transmissions, then in the majority of cases it's
> > usually merely a question of plugging in the antenna and the Scart lead
to
> > the DTT receiver and away they go, although in some areas (due to
limited
> > spectrum) they may have to upgrade their antenna to one of a different
> > group.
> >
> >
> In the UK you have very low power levels and an older version of COFDM
> that does not allow for SFNs.
>
> Here in the US there is little need for rooftop antennas for much of the
> coverage area of a typical DTV station since they are operating at as
> much as 1,000,000 Watts. I think the highest powered transmitter in the
> UK is 20,000 Watts with the average being in the 1000 Watts or less.
>
> From test we did with 5th gen 8-VSB receivers I would think 90% of
> homes in the US will be able to receive 8-VSB plug and play without a
> rooftop antenna. This makes for an even more interesting market in the
> US than in the UK where as you say with 1000 Watt transmitters and no
> SFN capability rooftop antennas are needed by many.
>
> Recent polls show that 30 to 50% of US cable and satellite customers
> would switch to such as service if offered. That is a 50 channel PVR
> supported OTA service. I doubt if cable and satellite can survive even
> that initial attack. Long term cable and satellite stand no chance
> against the combined OTA fixed broadcast (8-VSB), mobile broadcast
> (COFDM) and wireless Internet ala carte delivery of content IMO.
>
> The UK is showing the way and you are NOT some special case. Similar
> offerings will work virtually everywhere.
>
However the success of DTT in the UK is IMO due in no small way to the fact
that other than the outlay of a few pounds for the DTT receiver (now being
sold alongside the tins of baked beans in my local supermarket!) in the
majority of cases the main components are already in place, i.e. a
compatible TV 'monitor' and an existing rooftop antenna, plus as you have
already pointed out the incentive of being able to receive many more 'free'
TV and radio channels by simply pushing in a couple of plugs.

I honestly believe that if the average digital viewer would have had to of
purchased a new TV and antenna, as well as the receiver, then we would more
likely have 50,000 digital viewer's, rather than the estimated circa 5
million that we have at present.



> Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 8:59:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

ivan wrote:

> However the success of DTT in the UK is IMO due in no small way to the fact
> that other than the outlay of a few pounds for the DTT receiver (now being
> sold alongside the tins of baked beans in my local supermarket!) in the
> majority of cases the main components are already in place, i.e. a
> compatible TV 'monitor' and an existing rooftop antenna, plus as you have
> already pointed out the incentive of being able to receive many more 'free'
> TV and radio channels by simply pushing in a couple of plugs.
>
> I honestly believe that if the average digital viewer would have had to of
> purchased a new TV and antenna, as well as the receiver, then we would more
> likely have 50,000 digital viewer's, rather than the estimated circa 5
> million that we have at present.

There is also the point that if the cost of replacing existing kit was
in the range of $1000 to $15000, as it has been until recently in the
US, the uptake rate would be similarly depressed.

Rather than accept such simple explanations for the relatively slow
rollout of HDTV in the US, bob clings to his wacko theory that "It's the
modulation, stupid".

Matthew
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 9:30:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

ivan wrote:
>
> However the success of DTT in the UK is IMO due in no small way to the fact
> that other than the outlay of a few pounds for the DTT receiver (now being
> sold alongside the tins of baked beans in my local supermarket!) in the
> majority of cases the main components are already in place, i.e. a
> compatible TV 'monitor' and an existing rooftop antenna, plus as you have
> already pointed out the incentive of being able to receive many more 'free'
> TV and radio channels by simply pushing in a couple of plugs.
>
> I honestly believe that if the average digital viewer would have had to of
> purchased a new TV and antenna, as well as the receiver, then we would more
> likely have 50,000 digital viewer's, rather than the estimated circa 5
> million that we have at present.

I agree. If they had too. But they don't in the UK or in the US. If you
buy an 8-VSB digital receiver you can plug it into an analog TV set in
the US. What we are missing is a receiver that works, that is less
expensive, 30 plus channels of free DTV and any interest on the part of
broadcasters to tell the customer about the OTA proposition.

The arrival of a receiver that works, the 5th gen receiver from LG,
Hisense or Toshiba, would change all that if that ever happens. There
will be other USDTVs, there will be more content and there will be
promotion. The only thing is our receivers will still cost more, around
$200 but subscription services like USDTV will supply free or close to
free receivers.

Bob Miller
>
>
>
>
>>Bob Miller
>
>
>
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 9:30:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
> ivan wrote:
>
>>
>> However the success of DTT in the UK is IMO due in no small way to the
>> fact
>> that other than the outlay of a few pounds for the DTT receiver (now
>> being
>> sold alongside the tins of baked beans in my local supermarket!) in the
>> majority of cases the main components are already in place, i.e. a
>> compatible TV 'monitor' and an existing rooftop antenna, plus as you have
>> already pointed out the incentive of being able to receive many more
>> 'free'
>> TV and radio channels by simply pushing in a couple of plugs.
>>
>> I honestly believe that if the average digital viewer would have had
>> to of
>> purchased a new TV and antenna, as well as the receiver, then we
>> would more
>> likely have 50,000 digital viewer's, rather than the estimated circa 5
>> million that we have at present.
>
>
> I agree. If they had too. But they don't in the UK or in the US. If you
> buy an 8-VSB digital receiver you can plug it into an analog TV set in
> the US. What we are missing is a receiver that works,

This we have as so many posts in alt.tv.tech.hdtv testify. You, of
course, ignore them just as you ignored Marc Shubin's statement that he
did get ATSC reception in his apartment with early ATSC receivers. You
ignored them because the station was in Philadelphia.

> that is less
> expensive, 30 plus channels of free DTV and any interest on the part of
> broadcasters to tell the customer about the OTA proposition.

OTA is likely to continue being successful in the US, especially as
consumers discover that they can receive better quality HDTV OTA than
they will typically get from cable or satellite providers.

> The arrival of a receiver that works, the 5th gen receiver from LG,
> Hisense or Toshiba, would change all that if that ever happens. There
> will be other USDTVs, there will be more content and there will be
> promotion. The only thing is our receivers will still cost more, around
> $200 but subscription services like USDTV will supply free or close to
> free receivers.
>

That business model has not been proven to be applicable, much less
profitable. Just how many subscribers does USDTV have, as a percentage
of OTA receivers sold?

Matthew
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 11:59:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> ivan wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> However the success of DTT in the UK is IMO due in no small way to
>>> the fact
>>> that other than the outlay of a few pounds for the DTT receiver (now
>>> being
>>> sold alongside the tins of baked beans in my local supermarket!) in the
>>> majority of cases the main components are already in place, i.e. a
>>> compatible TV 'monitor' and an existing rooftop antenna, plus as you
>>> have
>>> already pointed out the incentive of being able to receive many more
>>> 'free'
>>> TV and radio channels by simply pushing in a couple of plugs.
>>>
>>> I honestly believe that if the average digital viewer would have had
>>> to of
>>> purchased a new TV and antenna, as well as the receiver, then we
>>> would more
>>> likely have 50,000 digital viewer's, rather than the estimated circa 5
>>> million that we have at present.
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree. If they had too. But they don't in the UK or in the US. If
>> you buy an 8-VSB digital receiver you can plug it into an analog TV
>> set in the US. What we are missing is a receiver that works,
>
>
> This we have as so many posts in alt.tv.tech.hdtv testify. You, of
> course, ignore them just as you ignored Marc Shubin's statement that he
> did get ATSC reception in his apartment with early ATSC receivers. You
> ignored them because the station was in Philadelphia.
>
>> that is less expensive, 30 plus channels of free DTV and any interest
>> on the part of broadcasters to tell the customer about the OTA
>> proposition.
>
>
> OTA is likely to continue being successful in the US, especially as
> consumers discover that they can receive better quality HDTV OTA than
> they will typically get from cable or satellite providers.
>

Wow, continue to be successful? In Australia they talk of failure and
they have 7 times the sales of DTV receivers OTA as we do per capita. LG
announces that they are not even going to build 5th gen stand alone
receiver because there is no demand. Most consumers are avoiding the
mandated integrated sets as I predicted. Some success. What BTW would
you call failure? Would people have to be physically attacking broadcast
stations throwing their 8-VSB receivers at them?


>> The arrival of a receiver that works, the 5th gen receiver from LG,
>> Hisense or Toshiba, would change all that if that ever happens. There
>> will be other USDTVs, there will be more content and there will be
>> promotion. The only thing is our receivers will still cost more,
>> around $200 but subscription services like USDTV will supply free or
>> close to free receivers.
>>
>
> That business model has not been proven to be applicable, much less
> profitable. Just how many subscribers does USDTV have, as a percentage
> of OTA receivers sold?

Obviously it hasn't been proved yet, it hasn't been tried yet. There are
no 5th gen receivers to build a business with. USDTV is surviving with
4th gen receivers and MPEG2. What they need is 5th gen and MPEG4. They
know that.

What is happening in the UK, Italy and Berlin are instructive to what
will happen here when we do have decent receivers and therefore someone
offering decent business plans.

Bob Miller
>
> Matthew
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 11:59:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

Once again, bob is given incontrovertable facts and asked direct
questions but all he does is change the subject and provide no answers.
You would think he was running for office.

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 13, 2005 7:58:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Matthew L. Martin wrote:

>
> This we have as so many posts in alt.tv.tech.hdtv testify. You, of
> course, ignore them just as you ignored Marc Shubin's statement that he
> did get ATSC reception in his apartment with early ATSC receivers. You
> ignored them because the station was in Philadelphia.

I don't ignore Mark's reception of a Phily station. Both he and I think
it is a joke. He could not receive more than two stations, one with the
antenna positioned in the middle of his living room on the floor on a
book and the other, maybe the Phily station on top of a bookcase in the
corner. Mark lives only a mile from the Empire State Building.

The good news is that when we tested the 5th gen receiver at his
apartment it worked very well. We received 8 or 9 stations with a simple
loop antenna. No manufacturer would even allow Mark to say that they had
tested in his apartment before the 5th gen receiver. That actually is
WHY I tested it. I knew before hand that LG was confident that their 5th
gen would work when they did not require a non-disclosure. The FIRST
TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED! Which tells it all and tells it like it is.

Pics here of Mark Shubin's apartment and test
http://public.fotki.com/robmx/5th_generation_test/

Posters on AVSForum are nashing their teeth because of the LG
announcement that they will not produce an 8-VSB 5th gen stand alone
receiver.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=143ba7f...

Bob Miller
January 13, 2005 7:17:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"ivan" <ivan'H'older@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:34kb4oF4dfc9aU1@individual.net...
<
> But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the last 15
> years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital receivers can
> now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would have us
> believe.

It means we aren't progressing, in actual terms we're moving backwards. More
*new* analogue equipment has shipped over the last year than DVB boxes, so
digital hasn't even kept pace with the growth of equipment added last year let
alone eaten into the existing pile of 80m+ analogue devices.

The same has been true every year since 1998, there is more new analogue kit
since 1998 than there has been digital boxes, and that's ignoring the existing
installed base.

The tipping point when digital first out sells analogue equipment may be
2008-10, this is the bullshit timeframe intended for complete switch-off of the
signal! In reality digital may have only commanded 51% of new sales by that
date.


Az.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 7:38:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech wrote:
> "ivan" <ivan'H'older@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:34kb4oF4dfc9aU1@individual.net...
> <
>
>>But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the last 15
>>years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital receivers can
>>now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would have us
>>believe.
>
>
> It means we aren't progressing, in actual terms we're moving backwards. More
> *new* analogue equipment has shipped over the last year than DVB boxes, so
> digital hasn't even kept pace with the growth of equipment added last year let
> alone eaten into the existing pile of 80m+ analogue devices.
>
> The same has been true every year since 1998, there is more new analogue kit
> since 1998 than there has been digital boxes, and that's ignoring the existing
> installed base.
>
> The tipping point when digital first out sells analogue equipment may be
> 2008-10, this is the bullshit timeframe intended for complete switch-off of the
> signal! In reality digital may have only commanded 51% of new sales by that
> date.
>
>
> Az.
>
>
Unless of course sales of digital receivers double next year and the
year after.

Bob Miller
January 13, 2005 7:39:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:TCcFd.5052$pZ4.4395@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
<
> In the UK you have very low power levels and an older version of COFDM that
> does not allow for SFNs.
>
> Here in the US there is little need for rooftop antennas for much of the
> coverage area of a typical DTV station since they are operating at as much as
> 1,000,000 Watts. I think the highest powered transmitter in the UK is 20,000
> Watts with the average being in the 1000 Watts or less.

The ERP powers in the US take the biscuit, especially when you consider that
some are VHF or very low down in Band-IV UHF.

The highest ERP for DTT in the UK is 20kW at Crystal Palace covering London :-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/reception/tv_transmitters/tv_digit...

Sutton Coldfield covering the second city is only at 8kW, and at least two of
those muxes are directly adjacent to 1000kW analogue channels. The QAM16 muxes
are receivable with a simple bow antenna on a 1st generation box, given the
circumstances Freeview shouldn't actually work.

Of course COFDM requires more power, hrm.


Az.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 7:39:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> The ERP powers in the US take the biscuit, especially when you consider that
> some are VHF or very low down in Band-IV UHF.
>
> The highest ERP for DTT in the UK is 20kW at Crystal Palace covering London :-
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/reception/tv_transmitters/tv_digit...

"Covering London"...big deal. When you can pick that signal up in
Birmingham, let us know.

This is the size difference between the US and the UK. The transmitter on
top of the Empire State Building is responsible for covering all of Long
Island, the tip of which is nearly 100 miles away from the ESB. That's
about the same difference as the distance from London to Birmingham.

Likewise, the transmitters in downtown Washington, DC, are responsible
for covering parts of West Virginia over 90 miles away.

> Of course COFDM requires more power, hrm.

It does, if you don't use multiple tiny transmitters and SFN. An SFN network
won't work in the US because of the great areas of low population density
that have to be served. You can't put up towers every 30 miles in Montana
and Wyoming, because each tower would only serve 1 or 2 households.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/SupportTraining.gi...
January 13, 2005 8:16:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
news:qaxFd.693729$2W1.56439@news.easynews.com...
> "ivan" <ivan'H'older@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:34kb4oF4dfc9aU1@individual.net...
> <
> > But as virtually every TV receiver and VCR manufactured during the last
15
> > years is equipped with at least one Scart socket, and digital receivers
can
> > now be purchased for under £40, this is hardly the problem you would
have us
> > believe.
>
> It means we aren't progressing, in actual terms we're moving backwards.
More
> *new* analogue equipment has shipped over the last year than DVB boxes, so
> digital hasn't even kept pace with the growth of equipment added last year
let
> alone eaten into the existing pile of 80m+ analogue devices.
>
> The same has been true every year since 1998, there is more new analogue
kit
> since 1998 than there has been digital boxes, and that's ignoring the
existing
> installed base.
>
> The tipping point when digital first out sells analogue equipment may be
> 2008-10, this is the bullshit timeframe intended for complete switch-off
of the
> signal! In reality digital may have only commanded 51% of new sales by
that
> date.
>
>
That wasn't really my point, which was that any one of those newly acquired
analogue TV's VCR's DVD recorders can very simply be upgraded to 'full'
Digital compatibility with just a single universal lead, at 'anytime' the
owner chooses to go digital.


> Az.
>
>
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 8:30:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech wrote:
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:TCcFd.5052$pZ4.4395@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> <
>
>>In the UK you have very low power levels and an older version of COFDM that
>>does not allow for SFNs.
>>
>>Here in the US there is little need for rooftop antennas for much of the
>>coverage area of a typical DTV station since they are operating at as much as
>>1,000,000 Watts. I think the highest powered transmitter in the UK is 20,000
>>Watts with the average being in the 1000 Watts or less.
>
>
> The ERP powers in the US take the biscuit, especially when you consider that
> some are VHF or very low down in Band-IV UHF.
>
> The highest ERP for DTT in the UK is 20kW at Crystal Palace covering London :-
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/reception/tv_transmitters/tv_digit...
>
> Sutton Coldfield covering the second city is only at 8kW, and at least two of
> those muxes are directly adjacent to 1000kW analogue channels. The QAM16 muxes
> are receivable with a simple bow antenna on a 1st generation box, given the
> circumstances Freeview shouldn't actually work.
>
> Of course COFDM requires more power, hrm.
>
>
> Az.
>
>
We like things big here.

When in doubt pick the biggest number. It has to be the best.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 8:37:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

ivan wrote:
>
> That wasn't really my point, which was that any one of those newly acquired
> analogue TV's VCR's DVD recorders can very simply be upgraded to 'full'
> Digital compatibility with just a single universal lead, at 'anytime' the
> owner chooses to go digital.

Agreed, I don't understand his reasoning on this one.

The 1.5 or 1.6 million receivers sold in the last quarter will likely
be equaled by sales in the first quarter of 2005 and doubled in the last
quarter of 2005. This is not going to take all that long. I think each
sale is having an affect on two new sales.

Word of mouth is the most powerful sales tool. Both ways. Here in the US
it has stalled our transition in its tracks OTA. A couple of test of a
new 5th gen receiver and everyone is interested in OTA again. All kinds
of possibilities resurface.

No advertising just word of mouth amplified by the Internet.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 8:37:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
>
> No advertising just word of mouth amplified by the Internet.
>

You still haven't found a major network affiliated TV station that has
gone out of business, have you?

You still haven't said how many USDTV receivers are subscribed to the
USDTV service.

Matthew
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 8:37:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Matthew L. Martin (nothere@notnow.never) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> You still haven't said how many USDTV receivers are subscribed to the
> USDTV service.

Very, very few, I'd imagine.

Word is getting out that these receivers are inexpensive and fairly good
ATSC tuners with no need for a subscription and no extra fee if you don't
subscribe.

Add to that the fact that they are sold at WalMart with very liberal return
policies, and a lot of people are buying them even for just a few OTA
channels.

--
Jeff Rife |
| "Resistance...is *futile*"
|
| -- Data, "Star Trek: First Contact"
January 13, 2005 8:37:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:2fyFd.5790$pZ4.879@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Aztech wrote:
> > "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:TCcFd.5052$pZ4.4395@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > <
> >
> >>In the UK you have very low power levels and an older version of COFDM
that
> >>does not allow for SFNs.
> >>
> >>Here in the US there is little need for rooftop antennas for much of the
> >>coverage area of a typical DTV station since they are operating at as
much as
> >>1,000,000 Watts. I think the highest powered transmitter in the UK is
20,000
> >>Watts with the average being in the 1000 Watts or less.
> >
> >
> > The ERP powers in the US take the biscuit, especially when you consider
that
> > some are VHF or very low down in Band-IV UHF.
> >
> > The highest ERP for DTT in the UK is 20kW at Crystal Palace covering
London :-
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/reception/tv_transmitters/tv_digit...
> >
> > Sutton Coldfield covering the second city is only at 8kW, and at least
two of
> > those muxes are directly adjacent to 1000kW analogue channels. The QAM16
muxes
> > are receivable with a simple bow antenna on a 1st generation box, given
the
> > circumstances Freeview shouldn't actually work.
> >
> > Of course COFDM requires more power, hrm.
> >
> >
> > Az.
> >
> >
> We like things big here.
>
> When in doubt pick the biggest number. It has to be the best.
>

Yes Bob, but sometimes the bigger they are.....


> Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 8:45:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

ivan wrote:

>
> Yes Bob, but sometimes the bigger they are.....
>
I can finish that. One of the spams I received this morning has the answer.

Bigger includes

1080i over 720P

MegaWatts of power over any discussion of a modern SFN network.

Big antennas with rotors over smart receivers.

Our FCC talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk when it comes to
technology and broadcasting. Instead of leading they follow an ignorant
Congress manipulated by special interest.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 8:55:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

ivan wrote:

>
> Yes Bob, but sometimes the bigger they are.....
>

One other point. I find it ironic that most of the smaller HDTV sets are
the ones that can handle 1080i while most of the larger ones, Plasmas
and RPTVs are 720P. The smaller sets can't do justice to the purpose of
HDTV, to give you that theater experience, and any benefit that 1080i
offers, like when nothing is moving , while the larger screens are great
with 720P.

On the other hand 1080P (true 1080P content) on an Sony SXRD is
phenomenal. Better than any theater experience I have ever had except IMAX.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 9:45:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
>>The ERP powers in the US take the biscuit, especially when you consider that
>>some are VHF or very low down in Band-IV UHF.
>>
>>The highest ERP for DTT in the UK is 20kW at Crystal Palace covering London :-
>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/reception/tv_transmitters/tv_digit...
>
>
> "Covering London"...big deal. When you can pick that signal up in
> Birmingham, let us know.

You can pick up the same signal in Birmingham its just that it is
broadcast from Malvern or such. The UK does not use SFNs BTW. The
version of COFDM they chose does not support it.
>
> This is the size difference between the US and the UK. The transmitter on
> top of the Empire State Building is responsible for covering all of Long
> Island, the tip of which is nearly 100 miles away from the ESB. That's
> about the same difference as the distance from London to Birmingham.
>
> Likewise, the transmitters in downtown Washington, DC, are responsible
> for covering parts of West Virginia over 90 miles away.
>
>
>>Of course COFDM requires more power, hrm.
>
>
> It does, if you don't use multiple tiny transmitters and SFN. An SFN network
> won't work in the US because of the great areas of low population density
> that have to be served. You can't put up towers every 30 miles in Montana
> and Wyoming, because each tower would only serve 1 or 2 households.
>
See what I mean Aztech? The astounding ability to deny. Even the
theoretical difference in power levels between COFDM and 8-VSB have been
discounted by every country including such as China, Russia and
Australia but when you are in denial you say things like "tiny
transmitters". In the real world the power differential is non-existent.
At typical US and similar power levels, say a MegaWatt, COFDM and 8-VSB
will have similar reception characteristics at the radio horizon with
COFDM taking the cake because of multipath. I have offered the challenge
that at ANY location that an 8-VSB advocate picks where they can receive
8-VSB I will be able to receive COFDM MOBILE. I will drive around the
8-VSB reception site. ANYWHERE!! No one showed up in Toronto or New York
when we were operational there.

The theoretical power advantage of 8-VSB would only show up where you
are using low power transmitters like in the UK and what did the UK
chose? COFDM. What works GREAT at low power in the UK? COFDM. Sirius and
XMRadio didn't pick 8-VSB for their repeaters, they chose COFDM.
Qualcomm wants to cover the entire US with a DTV broadcast. What did
they chose? COFDM. Anyone that has the POWER of choice choses COFDM. The
only population in the world that chose 8-VSB was the US broadcaster.
Why? They didn't have a choice. They want, think, sleep and dream must
carry and Congress threatened them verbally and specifically that if
they voted for 8-VSB in January of 2001 they would be crucified with
loss of multicast must carry and early return of spectrum and possible
loss of all spectrum. LG's big parties for Congressman Tauzin and others
paid off big time. Expect that the drug companies will now be picking
your pockets even more that Tauzin is a $2 million a year lobbyist for
the drug industry.

An SFN with COFDM can have MegaWatt transmitters to if you want them.
They can have any power level you want. In Montana it may make sense to
have higher power transmitters and bigger cells. BTW the 8-VSB community
is all excited about making 8-VSB work with SFN's. They only disparage
COFDM for the things it can do that 8-VSB can not while they are
feverishly trying to get 8-VSB up to doing the same things.

Been that way from the beginning. Mobile, SFNs, on channel repeaters and
receivers that could work with multipath.

One out of four isn't bad after only 7 years of trying. They have a
receiver that works with static multipath pretty good. Nothing like
COFDM though.

Now all they have to do is get SFN's, Mobile, on channel repeaters and
dynamic multipath problems fixed. I give them about 35 years to
accomplish that at the rate they are going.

Now if we could only get one of those 5th gen receivers on the market or
a Linx or something. Anything that works and I mean works for the
industry not for a select few of self appointed early adopters who have
done a great job of intimidating anyone who comes within their range
away from OTA DTV with "there are no problems unless you are stupid or
so poor you can't afford a $5000 DTV".

A decent receiver is all we need to get the digital transition moving.
What gives? I can't get anyone on the phone to give me an answer. I am
starting to think in conspiratorial terms again. Why and who doesn't
want to see the digital OTA transition successful? Cable and satellite
are two, retailers who are making money selling satellite maybe, the
CEA, I don't know why.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 9:45:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

> See what I mean Aztech? The astounding ability to deny. Even the
> theoretical difference in power levels between COFDM and 8-VSB have been
> discounted by every country including such as China, Russia and
> Australia

except America

In the USA it works just like theory says it should.

Recently my most distant station has been very weak,
because of a thermal inversion (accompanying fog) that results
in the signal not being "bent" in the same direction as the
earth's curvature. The analog station is unwatchable ... and
in fact just looking at it I can't tell if there is any
serious multipath, but using a signal averaging scope I can
tell, and as usual it is a perfect signal. The digital
signal is working OK for such a situation ... there are
occasional minor glitches but nothing anywhere near
unwatchable.

And what is the S/N? it's been varying from 15 to 17 dB,
that's what. At the same bitrate COFDM needs 19 dB even for
a perfect signal (which this is), so it would not work AT ALL.

And oh yes ... don't tell me to get a better preamp ...
mine has a 0.6 dB NF.

So much for your idea that the ATSC system does not provide
a useful service in power situations were COFDM does not.

Doug McDonald

Doug McDonald
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 9:45:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> > "Covering London"...big deal. When you can pick that signal up in
> > Birmingham, let us know.
>
> You can pick up the same signal in Birmingham its just that it is
> broadcast from Malvern or such.

That is *not* the same signal. It is a repeat of the same signal, which
is very different.

--
Jeff Rife | "Space. It seems to go on and on forever. But
| then you get to the end and a gorilla starts
| throwing barrels at you."
| -- Philip J. Fry, "Futurama"
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 9:47:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:

> "Covering London"...big deal. When you can pick that signal up in
> Birmingham, let us know.
>
Notice the use of "big" in big deal. Deals have to be big here to.

Bob Miller
January 13, 2005 11:27:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"ivan" <ivan'H'older@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
<
> That wasn't really my point, which was that any one of those newly acquired
> analogue TV's VCR's DVD recorders can very simply be upgraded to 'full'
> Digital compatibility with just a single universal lead, at 'anytime' the
> owner chooses to go digital.

Lol, well indeed, and I could pull all the weeds out my garden, but when is this
going to happen?

Despite the miraculous success of Freeview analogue kit will continue to out
sell digital equipment right into the switch-off time period, I suppose they can
hope for sales of 90m DVB units in December 2007 alone ;) 

There would have to be some kind of big bang to suddenly transform the current
predicament of the majority of viewers still relying on analogue signals, in
addition to converted 'digital homes' still reliant on them for secondary sets.
Not to mention all that new analogue kit being added every day, potentially
convertible or not.

Many other countries will be converted before us, in the US and most European
countries there is an extensive cable installed base in 80-90% of homes, whilst
the UK is primarily dependent on terrestrial signals. In Berlin the use of
terrestrial PAL was so sparse it was cheaper to cut off the signal and give away
DVB-t boxes, try doing that at Crystal Palace!

In reality this is nothing different to the transitions of yesteryear, i.e.
listless and protracted.


Az.
January 13, 2005 11:52:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:etyFd.6442$Ii4.4339@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> ivan wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes Bob, but sometimes the bigger they are.....
>>
> I can finish that. One of the spams I received this morning has the answer.
>
> Bigger includes
>
> 1080i over 720P
>
> MegaWatts of power over any discussion of a modern SFN network.

You have to look at our digital relative to analogue powers. I mean 1000kW
analogue PAL isn't exactly an inconsequently ERP, yet digital will go out at 8kW
from the same site on a directly adjacent channel.

If COFDM required more power in non-SFN uses then our network with signals x125
weaker than analogue would fall apart, yet it doesn't, at those levels any
variety digital modulation should fall apart.


Az.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 12:40:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> That's not far from the model that forms the backbone of the network, there are
> various high power big sticks in each population centre, it's certainly closer
> to a small collection of powerful sites than cell style SFN. There are 80 main
> sites that cover the majority of the UK, in terms of Freeview this is in excess
> of 78% of the country

In the US style, this would be done with less than 10 sites. That's the
point I'm making about 8VSB in the US. It requires much higher power
because it has to serve much larger areas. If there were 8 "auxilliary
transmitters" for each "main transmitter", the US could easily make do
with 200kW as the absolute max for any digital TV transmitter.

> They get away with 8kW for the same coverage area served by a 1000kW analogue
> channel then you tell me COFDM uses too much power!

It does when you try to get signal even a tiny bit farther. The quality
falls off faster than the square of the distance, so a "big stick" would
require 500kW (or more) to cover the same area that 5-10 "little sticks"
cover with 8-20kW each.

> Err... putting things on different frequencies by definition isn't a Single
> Frequency Network. We don't have a SFN by any stretch, if we had a SFN then
> identical multiplexes carrying the same data would be emitted on the same
> frequencies across the country from a cell-phone type network.

I assume your receivers are "intelligent" and know which frequencies are
assigned to which channel in each location. Because if this, they can hunt
for the best signal on one channel among the multiple frequencies. This
gives similar results to an SFN, because SFN isn't a purely additive
system.

> > As for "many times 20kW"...our local PBS uses 75kW at 549.25MHz to serve
> > an area of nearly 10,000 square miles. This is with a 2290kW analog
> > station on an adjacent channel.
>
> So the analogue transmission is x30 stronger than the digital eqvilient.

Again, signals fall off faster than the square of the distance. Because
of this, the US has less difference between the power levels because of
the "all or nothing" nature of digital vs. the "well, it's snowy, but it's
a picture" nature of analog.

--
Jeff Rife | Coach: What's the story, Norm?
|
| Norm: Thirsty guy walks into a bar. You
| finish it.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:27:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech (az@tech.com) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> "Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
> news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
> <
> > Not much in it :-
>
> http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-pala...

Reading this says that 40 miles is the limit of reception for the
Crystal Palace *include* some "relay stations". Turn off those relay
stations and see how far the signal gets. You'll see that you'd need
100kW at least to cover the same area. 8VSB at 100kW in the US
covers 60 miles or more with no problem.

The point being to all this is that there have been *no* "big stick"
COFDM tests because it just doesn't work well for that sort of design.
It works well for the "lots of little sticks" design. Unfortunately,
this is impossible in the US, so COFDM has zero chance of being used
seriously for TV.

--
Jeff Rife | "As usual, a knife-wielding maniac
| has shown us the way."
|
| -- Bart Simpson
January 14, 2005 2:37:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
news:HtDFd.712464$lR6.110769@news.easynews.com...
> "Aztech" <az@tech.com> wrote in message
> news:VnDFd.711958$O24.104508@news.easynews.com...
> <
>> Not much in it :-
>
> http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/crystalpalace/crystal-pala...

This is quite interesting :-
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0886190.html

Emley Moor would be about #11 at 1083ft, which doesn't quite fit into the model
of small SFN towers as seen in other countries.


Az.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:22:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Aztech wrote:
>
>>As for "many times 20kW"...our local PBS uses 75kW at 549.25MHz to serve
>>an area of nearly 10,000 square miles. This is with a 2290kW analog
>>station on an adjacent channel.
>
>
> So the analogue transmission is x30 stronger than the digital eqvilient. In the
> UK analogue transissions are x125 stronger than digital for the same coverage
> areas, if COFDM required more power then the network would have fallen apart
> before it started.
>
>
I'm afraid he doesn't want to hear it Aztec. But there it is COFDM using
1/4th the power of 8-VSB for the same coverage.
> <
>
>>Stations in the 1000kW range serve 20,000 square miles. This would allow a
>>transmitter in London to serve Southampton and Dover.
>
>
> Not much in it :-
> http://tx.mb21.co.uk/gallery/brookmanspark/brookmans-pa...
>
Great site! Thanks.

Bob Miller
>
> Az.
>
>
>
!