Ask FCC to pressure LG to release vital HDTV receiver chip!

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

Ask FCC to persuade LG to release 5th generation receiver chip!
Chairman Michael K. Powell: Michael.Powell@fcc.gov
Commissioner Kathleen Q. Abernathy: Kathleen.Abernathy@fcc.gov
Commissioner Michael J. Copps: Michael.Copps@fcc.gov
Commissioner Kevin J. Martin: KJMWEB@fcc.gov
Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein: Jonathan.Adelstein@fcc.gov

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

It is time to write the FCC and ask them to put moral pressure on LG
Electronics to release their 5th generation HDTV receiver chips as a
stand alone HDTV receiver. Owners of HDTV ready sets, and owners of
integrated HDTV sets with poorly performing HDTV tuners built in,
should be able to upgrade to a receiver that really works.

Below is a copy of the letter I sent to all of the above officials. If
the FCC takes action because four people complain about obscenity on
TV, perhaps they can make a call to LG if enough of us speak up.

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

"It has come to our attention that Korean based LG Electronics is
withholding their new 5th generation over-the-air HDTV receiver chip
from stand alone receivers, because it wants to force consumers into
purchasing all new LG televisions with the chip built in. The 5th
generation chip is the first chip design that really works, as older
generation chips have a success rate of only about 50%. The new chip
has a 90% success rate at picking up digital television signals, and
there are thousands of HDTV ready sets out there that need good
receivers to make them work as advertised."

"I know the FCC does not control LG Electronics, but a phone call to LG
stressing the need for ethical business practices would be in order.
After all, LG and other manufacturers sold us a technology that does
not work as advertised. The least they can do is allow consumers the
right to buy the technological fix for the problem as soon as it become
available."
Sincerely, etc, etc.

------------------------------------
IB

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

inkyblacks@yahoo.com wrote:
> Ask FCC to persuade LG to release 5th generation receiver chip!
> Chairman Michael K. Powell: Michael.Powell@fcc.gov
> Commissioner Kathleen Q. Abernathy: Kathleen.Abernathy@fcc.gov
> Commissioner Michael J. Copps: Michael.Copps@fcc.gov
> Commissioner Kevin J. Martin: KJMWEB@fcc.gov
> Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein: Jonathan.Adelstein@fcc.gov
>
> ----------------------------------
>
> It is time to write the FCC and ask them to put moral pressure on LG
> Electronics to release their 5th generation HDTV receiver chips as a
> stand alone HDTV receiver. Owners of HDTV ready sets, and owners of
> integrated HDTV sets with poorly performing HDTV tuners built in,
> should be able to upgrade to a receiver that really works.
>
> Below is a copy of the letter I sent to all of the above officials. If
> the FCC takes action because four people complain about obscenity on
> TV, perhaps they can make a call to LG if enough of us speak up.
>
> ---------------------------------
>
> "It has come to our attention that Korean based LG Electronics is
> withholding their new 5th generation over-the-air HDTV receiver chip
> from stand alone receivers, because it wants to force consumers into
> purchasing all new LG televisions with the chip built in. The 5th
> generation chip is the first chip design that really works, as older
> generation chips have a success rate of only about 50%. The new chip
> has a 90% success rate at picking up digital television signals, and
> there are thousands of HDTV ready sets out there that need good
> receivers to make them work as advertised."
>
> "I know the FCC does not control LG Electronics, but a phone call to LG
> stressing the need for ethical business practices would be in order.
> After all, LG and other manufacturers sold us a technology that does
> not work as advertised. The least they can do is allow consumers the
> right to buy the technological fix for the problem as soon as it become
> available."
> Sincerely, etc, etc.
>
> ------------------------------------
> IB
>
It is nice to see someone from AVSForum saying it like it is for a
change. But you exaggerate, 8-VSB works "only about 50%" come now!!

You are smart to post such info here because it will disappear from
AVSForum ASAP. Their sponsors hate such negative truth telling. Saying
such things is almost as saying the dreaded "COFDM" on AVSForum.

Yes this will work. Send emails to the FCC. I already have. But better
send them to your Congresspersons. And be a bit more emphatic. Say that
you bastards stuck us with this lousy 8-VSB modulation. The least you
could do is get the CHIEF beneficiary of you misguided policy, LG, to
sell a decent receiver that they finally have.

Remember they said they has such a receiver (even better it was supposed
to work mobile) back in 1999. And when the MSTV test in 2000 showed that
all 8-VSB receivers on the market s**ked big time they promised to fix
it within SIX months. It has been SIX months plus 4 1/2 years. The LEAST
they can do now that they have a FIXED receiver is SELL it.

The plan seems to be not to sell stand alone 5th gen receivers but to
maximize profits by only selling 5th gen 8-VSB receivers in the big
ticket high profit margin HDTV sets. That way someone can't buy a 5th
gen LG receiver and a Sony HD monitor. Also people can't buy a stand
alone receiver and use it with a SD TV. That may be there bigger worry.
That outfits like USDTV could build SD wireless cable OTA networks and
people might find that they are satisfied with a better image on their
analog sets short circuiting sales of HD sets.

This must be stopped!! NOT!

Bob Miller

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

robmx@earthlink.net (Bob Miller) wrote in
newsUWFd.6819$pZ4.1424@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
> Bert Hyman wrote:
>> inkyblacks@yahoo.com () wrote in
>> news:1105736937.573495.56410@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>
>>>"I know the FCC does not control LG Electronics, but a phone call
>>>to LG stressing the need for ethical business practices would be
>>>in order.
>>
>>
>> Threats from an agency of a foreign government fall under "ethical
>> business practices"?
>>
>> Now, that's interesting.
>>
> What business is the US government in?

These days, they're in EVERY business.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@visi.com

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

Bert Hyman wrote:
> robmx@earthlink.net (Bob Miller) wrote in
> newsUWFd.6819$pZ4.1424@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
>
>>Bert Hyman wrote:
>>
>>>inkyblacks@yahoo.com () wrote in
>>>news:1105736937.573495.56410@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>"I know the FCC does not control LG Electronics, but a phone call
>>>>to LG stressing the need for ethical business practices would be
>>>>in order.
>>>
>>>
>>>Threats from an agency of a foreign government fall under "ethical
>>>business practices"?
>>>
>>>Now, that's interesting.
>>>
>>
>>What business is the US government in?
>
>
> These days, they're in EVERY business.
>
Well they sure messed up the DTV transition. Whenever they had a choice
to make they made the wrong one.

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

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 inkyblacks@yahoo.com wrote:
> "It has come to our attention that Korean based LG Electronics is

Why is the fact that LG is a Korean company at all relevent?

Is it because you (a sock puppet of Bob Miller) are a racist as well as a
liar, crackpot, and snake oil salesman?

Perhaps, many years ago, a Korean girl once told Bob Miller that he was a
creep and should leave her alone. That might explain Bob Miller's
vendetta.

I have seen for myself how well COFDM based HDTV works in Tokyo. Less
than 2 miles from the transmitting tower, and the picture pixillates.
More than 5 miles away, and there's no reception at all! And you have to
have a rooftop directional yagi to get the signal even if you are in the
service area.

So much for Bob Miller's snake oil.

-- Mark --

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

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

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 inkyblacks@yahoo.com wrote:
> > "It has come to our attention that Korean based LG Electronics is
>
> Why is the fact that LG is a Korean company at all relevent?
>
> Is it because you (a sock puppet of Bob Miller) are a racist as well
as a
> liar, crackpot, and snake oil salesman?
>
> Perhaps, many years ago, a Korean girl once told Bob Miller that he
was a
> creep and should leave her alone. That might explain Bob Miller's
> vendetta.
>
> I have seen for myself how well COFDM based HDTV works in Tokyo.
Less
> than 2 miles from the transmitting tower, and the picture pixillates.

> More than 5 miles away, and there's no reception at all! And you
have to
> have a rooftop directional yagi to get the signal even if you are in
the
> service area.
>
> So much for Bob Miller's snake oil.
>
> -- Mark --
>
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public
debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.

---------------
Boy, people on the Internet sure are insane! Being called a "racist"
for posting the fact that LG is Korean? People should get their brains
washed out with soap and water before they post. I just want better
HDTV, that's all, and I don't know any Bob Miller.
Get a life you nut cases!

IB

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

That's just silly. LG is in business to make money for their owners. The
will sell next generation receiver chips when they think it is profitable.
--
>
> It is time to write the FCC and ask them to put moral pressure on LG
> Electronics to release their 5th generation HDTV receiver chips as a
> stand alone HDTV receiver. Owners of HDTV ready sets, and owners of
> integrated HDTV sets with poorly performing HDTV tuners built in,
> should be able to upgrade to a receiver that really works.
>
> Below is a copy of the letter I sent to all of the above officials. If
> the FCC takes action because four people complain about obscenity on
> TV, perhaps they can make a call to LG if enough of us speak up.
SNIP

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

If the LG chip is the what it is cracked up to be, why don't they license it
out to any companies that want it?. LG could make a bundle of money and we
as consumers would benefit as well..
Norm

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

Tim Keating wrote:
>
> Most of us know about COFDM achilles heal, Impulse noise. Just a
> single noise event takes out thousands of data packets. A little bit
> more, ends up corrupting a majority of the data packets.
>
> I imagine that the impulse noise in a high density metropolis,
> like Tokyo, is several orders of magnitude worse than the spread out
> population density of Australia..

New York has at least as much impulse noise as Tokyo. This one hour
video showing the reception of COFDM from a 100 Watt transmitter should
show a lot of impulse noise problems if you and Mark are correct.

www.viacel.com/bob.wmv

This video is taken of mobile reception in areas of the city where
reception of 8-VSB is impossible even with a fixed receiver and
directional antennas. And the power of the transmitters are a 1000 times
the power we were using.

Impulse noise is a canard used by those who have no experience with the
actual broadcast of either COFDM or 8-VSB. We have been using both.


>

> Agree'd, Bob has been doing his Jihad against HDTV for years on
> end.. I'm just glad the US stayed with their original (8VSB) choice..
>
> I like my HDTV and I enjoy watching all of the free OTA, (H)DTV
> programming provided by my one time investment, in a HDTV receiver
> set-top box, and a small(2ft) outside antenna.

The reality is that 8-VSB has been a bust for seven years now. With new
5th gen receivers it has a chance of being accepted. Your two foot
outside antenna is unacceptable to 90% of Americans. 5th generation
receivers are the first 8-VSB receivers that should ever have been sold.

My Jihad is NOT against HDTV, never has been and I think by now Tim
Keating should know that. I would argue that mindless arguments that
8-VSB is good enough for you so therefore it is good enough for everyone
have hurt HDTV more than anything. Switching to COFDM would have been
the best thing for HD from the beginning.

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

Google search reveals a press release titled


Sinclair praises new LG Electronics DTV receiver chips

Wanna bet Sinclair has some minor patent included in the 5th
generation
receivers?

"Following the money" probably would explain this troll post and Bob
Miller's
self serving followups.




begin 666 search%3fq=sinclair+LG&lc1=news&lc2=&uc1=Sinclair praises new LG Electronics DTV receiver chips&uc2=.dat
J1TE&.#EA`0`!`(#_`,# P ```"'Y! $`````+ `````!``$```$!,@`[
`
end

begin 666 search%3fq=sinclair+LG&lc1=news&lc2=&uc1=Sinclair praises new LG Electronics DTV receiver chips&uc2=.dat
M1TE&.#EA`0`!`)$``````/_______P```"'Y! $```(`+ `````!``$```("
$3 $`.P``
`
end

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

Frank Provasek wrote:
> Google search reveals a press release titled
>
>
> Sinclair praises new LG Electronics DTV receiver chips
>
> Wanna bet Sinclair has some minor patent included in the 5th generation receivers?
>
> "Following the money" probably would explain this troll post and Bob Miller's self serving followups.
>
>
Both Sinclair and Bob Miller (myself) have major self interest at stake.
Sinclair is a broadcaster who has many licenses across the US. They
would like to use that spectrum for something other than delivering
their signal to the cable companies headend. They were the first
broadcaster to show major interest in OTA digital broadcasting as most
other broadcasters were willing to let others such as the CEA decide
what modulation that the US would use.

Most broadcasters were willing to just focus on must carry where they
make all their money and where most of their viewers have migrated.
Sinclair saw otherwise. They saw that cable was a competitor and that
all broadcasters has long term was their OTA spectrum and if used
correctly OTA had a bright future.

Sinclair tested 8-VSB and found it wanting. Later after hearings more
test were done that while they were secret and fraudulent could not hide
the horrible showing that 8-VSB was receivable indoors and easily within
the coverage area of most stations 26% of the time.

CBS did a test in Phily that was far more fraudulent claiming 96%
reception while leaving out the inner 10 mile ring around the
transmitter and not mentioning NON reception if the could not get NTSC
either. Without those two "discrepensies" the 96% would have fallen back
near the 26%.

Bob Miller has the same interest. He wants/wanted back in 1999 a
modulation that works and was delighted when the 8-VSB crowd announced
that the latest 2nd or third generation 8-VSB chip sets had solved all
the problems that Sinclair had pointed out and that now 8-VSB worked
both indoors and mobile.

I had no problem with that nor did Sinclair. That is what was needed and
now we supposedly had it. Unfortunately we found out that they were
lieing then and later in test they committed fraud. Both the MSTV and
CBS test done in secret were totally bogus.

Neither Bob Miller of Sinclair has anything to do with LG or their
patents. Virtually all 8-VSB patents are owned by a French company or LG
of Korea. Most of the COFDM patents are owned by American firms. All
that Sinclair or Bob Miller wants is a working modulation so that a
business plan that can be profitable can be implemented and we can get
on with the digital transition. We have been waiting for 7 years.
Sinclair tested the 5th gen receiver first and then we did for the
reason stated. We were the ones most interested in actually using OTA
digital.

We were hopefully that the 5th gen receiver worked and it does. End of
story.

Bob Miller