USB2 HDTV

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

USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html

by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
actually advertise them also.

The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that force
feeds us junk.

Bob Miller
89 answers Last reply
More about usb2 hdtv
  1. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Bob Miller wrote:
    > USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.
    >
    > http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html
    >
    > by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
    > actually advertise them also.
    >
    > The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that
    force
    > feeds us junk.

    This IS junk. The vast majority of HD viewers want to experience the
    viewing on a large scale, not on their 15 or 17" monitors.
  2. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Bob Miller wrote:
    > USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.
    >
    > http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html
    >
    > by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
    > actually advertise them also.
    >
    > The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that
    force
    > feeds us junk.

    In addition, IT'S NOT HD!!!

    You stick with your 50 year old NTSC tuners bob.
  3. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Bob Miller wrote:
    > Larry Bud wrote:
    > > Bob Miller wrote:
    > >
    > >>USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.
    > >>
    > >>http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html
    > >>
    > >>by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
    > >>actually advertise them also.
    > >>
    > >>The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that
    > >
    > > force
    > >
    > >>feeds us junk.
    > >
    > >
    > > In addition, IT'S NOT HD!!!
    > >
    > > You stick with your 50 year old NTSC tuners bob.
    > >
    > But it is HD, read the article,
    >
    > "The three products require a CPU with a minimum frequency of 600MHz
    for
    > regular TV viewing, 866MHz for MPEG-2 recording and 2.4GHz for HDTV.
    All
    > of the new TV tuners also need at least 128MB of RAM and currently
    run
    > on the Windows XP operating system, the company said."

    It says it's an NTSC tuner. Explain how you get HD over NTSC.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    > > It says it's an NTSC tuner. Explain how you get HD over NTSC.
    >
    > Again read the article. "It" is three different receivers.
    >
    > "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital
    TV
    > (DVB-T) receiver."
    >
    > and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"

    So what, DVB-T doesn't necessarily mean HD. It doesn't say it does
    ATSC, however it specifically states it supports NTSC. If it does
    support ATSC, where are the specs? 720p, or 1080i?? And if it does
    support ATSC, what the hell is your beef?

    Anyway, it still doesn't solve the issue of a small screen size.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, Bob Miller wrote:
    > "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital TV
    > (DVB-T) receiver."

    Yawn. DVB-T != HDTV

    > and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"

    That doesn't say that it can *display* HDTV. It just says that the
    computer has to be at least 2.4GHz to process an HDTV signal (even if it
    only displays SD).

    Psycho Bob Miller frequently makes selective and highly misleading
    presentations. Among other things, he claims that vaporware press
    releases constitute currently-available products, and implies that these
    products do more than the press releases actually claim.

    -- Mark --

    http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
    Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
    Si vis pacem, para bellum.
  6. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Bob Miller wrote:
    > USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.
    >
    > http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html
    >
    > by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
    > actually advertise them also.
    >
    > The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that force
    > feeds us junk.
    >
    > Bob Miller


    But you're an idiot. So....

    There are tons of HDTV PC cards available now with 8-VSB. This device
    you pointed out is basically just an external tuner card. What's the
    big deal?
  7. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Bob Miller wrote:
    > USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.
    >
    > http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html
    >
    > by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
    > actually advertise them also.
    >
    > The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that
    force
    > feeds us junk.
    >
    > Bob Miller

    Is THIS what your 8VSB vs COFDM argument has come down to? Man
    BOOBSTER, you appear to be more and more desperate every day. This
    looks like you've scraped the bottom of the barrel. Pathetic.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Bob Miller wrote:
    > Few manufacturers support
    > or make 8-VSB products. This one doesn't. Most don't. It is almost
    > impossible to get a manufacturer to make 8-VSB receivers.

    Golly BOOBSTER,its been about 24 hours since you last said something
    like this. I guess you just 'forgot' that there are a TON of 8VSB
    receivers, all incorporated into satellite receivers from every service
    and every manufacturer. Poor BOOBSTER, add senility to his growing list
    of ailments.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    cjdaytonjrnos...@cox.net wrote:
    >> Are you going to ignore my post Bob?
    > Chip

    Of course he will Chip!!! BOB MILLER ignores ALL posts that are factual
    and prove the fallacy of his lying statements. I've had a Sony HD100,
    HD200, RCA DTC100, HD Tivo etc., all of which have beautifully
    functioning 8VSB receivers. But lying BOB will simply ignore your post,
    my post and the myriad of posts that say the same thing or relate the
    excellent experiences with 8VSB reception. This "man" is a lying SOB of
    the worst kind. He has no shame, no pride and serves as the
    spokesperson for COFDM. Nuff said!
  10. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Larry Bud wrote:
    > Bob Miller wrote:
    >
    >>USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.
    >>
    >>http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html
    >>
    >>by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
    >>actually advertise them also.
    >>
    >>The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that
    >
    > force
    >
    >>feeds us junk.
    >
    >
    > In addition, IT'S NOT HD!!!
    >
    > You stick with your 50 year old NTSC tuners bob.
    >
    But it is HD, read the article,

    "The three products require a CPU with a minimum frequency of 600MHz for
    regular TV viewing, 866MHz for MPEG-2 recording and 2.4GHz for HDTV. All
    of the new TV tuners also need at least 128MB of RAM and currently run
    on the Windows XP operating system, the company said."

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

    Larry Bud wrote:
    > Bob Miller wrote:
    >
    >>Larry Bud wrote:
    >>
    >
    >
    > It says it's an NTSC tuner. Explain how you get HD over NTSC.
    >

    Again read the article. "It" is three different receivers.

    "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital TV
    (DVB-T) receiver."

    and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"

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

    On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Stephen Neal wrote:
    >> Yawn. DVB-T != HDTV
    > It does in Australia...

    No it doesn't. *Some* DVB-T in Australia is HDTV. Some is not.

    > I'm not a Bob supporter - but DVB-T doesn't equal Standard Def, any more
    > than ATSC 8VSB equals High Def. Both are deployed and both can and do carry
    > standard and high def services.

    Hence the inequality.

    This device might be interesting if it is capable of producing a data
    stream from incoming DVB-T broadcast television, and that data stream can
    be rendered on a computer monitor in high definition.

    If so, then it looks like the DVB-T world finally has a product that does
    what ATSC tuner cards in the US have done for a few years.

    It would be interesting to see what kind of antenna is required for use
    with this card. Bob would have us believe that you just plug the dongle
    into your laptop and voila! you have a portable HDTV that will work in
    your car as you're driving through a tunnel.

    -- Mark --

    http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
    Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
    Si vis pacem, para bellum.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Larry Bud wrote:

    >
    > So what, DVB-T doesn't necessarily mean HD. It doesn't say it does
    > ATSC, however it specifically states it supports NTSC. If it does
    > support ATSC, where are the specs? 720p, or 1080i?? And if it does
    > support ATSC, what the hell is your beef?
    >
    > Anyway, it still doesn't solve the issue of a small screen size.
    >
    This receiver is a DVB-T receiver and it can receive HDTV signals. That
    means HDTV.

    It does not support ATSC, that is the point. Few manufacturers support
    or make 8-VSB products. This one doesn't. Most don't. It is almost
    impossible to get a manufacturer to make 8-VSB receivers. I know I am
    trying to find one.

    Many manufacturers make DVB-T receivers of all kinds. In the UK this
    list has 91 different models and there are many more not listed.

    http://www.radioandtelly.co.uk/freeviewreceivers.html

    This is after only two years of broadcasting in the UK. We have been
    doing 8-VSB in the US for seven years, where are the products? Where are
    ones that work?

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

    >> But it is HD, read the article,
    >>
    >> "The three products require a CPU with a minimum frequency of 600MHz
    >for
    >> regular TV viewing, 866MHz for MPEG-2 recording and 2.4GHz for HDTV.
    >All
    >> of the new TV tuners also need at least 128MB of RAM and currently
    >run
    >> on the Windows XP operating system, the company said."
    >
    >It says it's an NTSC tuner. Explain how you get HD over NTSC.

    Two of the three have NTSC and PAL/SECAM. The other one does DVB-T
    (digital TV). It doesn't directly SAY that includes the HDTV formats
    other than the later reference to 2.4GHz for HDTV.

    Is there any product out there that does analog and digital TV in
    one box, with seamless switching between them (e.g. you get both
    analog and digital channels by repeatedly pushing the "channel up"
    button on the remote)? In the US, this would be a NTSC/ATSC combo
    receiver, but I'm not limiting the question to the US. Of course,
    the usefulness of such a product goes down as the analog turn-off
    date approaches.

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

    >> "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital TV
    >> (DVB-T) receiver."
    >
    >Yawn. DVB-T != HDTV
    >
    >> and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"
    >
    >That doesn't say that it can *display* HDTV. It just says that the
    >computer has to be at least 2.4GHz to process an HDTV signal (even if it
    >only displays SD).

    I didn't see anything in there about a display *AT ALL*, and the
    term "receiver" to me doesn't imply one. But it's still an interesting
    product for use in a do-it-yourself DVR project.

    Aren't there already existing products that fit in a computer, and
    allow the computer to generate a signal you can feed to any HDTV
    monitor and get HDTV resolutions? (outputting what? HDMI, DVI,
    or component video?) In other words, a "HDTV video card" which can
    generate 720p or 1080i pictures. Or am I mistaken about this?


    >Psycho Bob Miller frequently makes selective and highly misleading
    >presentations. Among other things, he claims that vaporware press
    >releases constitute currently-available products, and implies that these
    >products do more than the press releases actually claim.

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

    Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:

    > This is after only two years of broadcasting in the UK. We have been
    > doing 8-VSB in the US for seven years, where are the products? Where are
    > ones that work?
    >
    > Bob Miller

    I have two of them in my house, a Sony HDD-200
    and an LG-3200a. Both work great, Bob.
    Chip

    --
    -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
    Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
  17. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Gordon Burditt wrote:
    >>>But it is HD, read the article,
    >>>
    >>>"The three products require a CPU with a minimum frequency of 600MHz
    >>
    >>for
    >>
    >>>regular TV viewing, 866MHz for MPEG-2 recording and 2.4GHz for HDTV.
    >>
    >>All
    >>
    >>>of the new TV tuners also need at least 128MB of RAM and currently
    >>
    >>run
    >>
    >>>on the Windows XP operating system, the company said."
    >>
    >>It says it's an NTSC tuner. Explain how you get HD over NTSC.
    >
    >
    > Two of the three have NTSC and PAL/SECAM. The other one does DVB-T
    > (digital TV). It doesn't directly SAY that includes the HDTV formats
    > other than the later reference to 2.4GHz for HDTV.
    >
    > Is there any product out there that does analog and digital TV in
    > one box, with seamless switching between them (e.g. you get both
    > analog and digital channels by repeatedly pushing the "channel up"
    > button on the remote)? In the US, this would be a NTSC/ATSC combo
    > receiver, but I'm not limiting the question to the US. Of course,
    > the usefulness of such a product goes down as the analog turn-off
    > date approaches.
    >
    > Gordon L. Burditt

    I have an ATSC receiver that scans for all stations analog and digital
    and you simply click though them all. I can't tell you what the name is
    at the moment though.

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

    "Gordon Burditt" <gordonb.rjjn5@burditt.org> wrote in message
    news:4241b987$0$88039$16895aa@news.airnews.net...
    >>> "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital TV
    >>> (DVB-T) receiver."
    >>
    >>Yawn. DVB-T != HDTV
    >>
    >>> and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"
    >>
    >>That doesn't say that it can *display* HDTV. It just says that the
    >>computer has to be at least 2.4GHz to process an HDTV signal (even if it
    >>only displays SD).
    >
    > I didn't see anything in there about a display *AT ALL*, and the
    > term "receiver" to me doesn't imply one. But it's still an interesting
    > product for use in a do-it-yourself DVR project.
    >
    > Aren't there already existing products that fit in a computer, and
    > allow the computer to generate a signal you can feed to any HDTV
    > monitor and get HDTV resolutions? (outputting what? HDMI, DVI,
    > or component video?) In other words, a "HDTV video card" which can
    > generate 720p or 1080i pictures. Or am I mistaken about this?

    Yup, I've been using the Myhd card now for awhile. Before that I had the
    Accessdtv card for about three years, but had to change it out for windows
    XP.
    They work well, we've always had solid OTA recordings [NYC area] of many
    different HD shows. I'm up to 3 IDE harddrives [1 terabyte total] and 3 USB2
    drives [650 gigs total] now, and I still need more for satellite recordings.
    :-)
  19. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
    > Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >
    > > This is after only two years of broadcasting in the UK. We have been
    > > doing 8-VSB in the US for seven years, where are the products? Where
    > > are ones that work?
    > >
    > > Bob Miller
    >
    > I have two of them in my house, a Sony HDD-200
    > and an LG-3200a. Both work great, Bob.
    > Chip

    Are you going to ignore my post Bob?
    Chip

    --
    -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
    Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
  20. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> wrote in
    news:1111598459.616751.306880@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

    >
    > Bob Miller wrote:
    >> USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.
    >>
    >> http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html
    >>
    >> by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
    >> actually advertise them also.
    >>
    >> The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that
    > force
    >> feeds us junk.
    >
    > This IS junk. The vast majority of HD viewers want to experience the
    > viewing on a large scale, not on their 15 or 17" monitors.

    We-ellll, the thing is, if this device would capture an HDTV signal into
    my computer, my video card is quite capable of spitting out a 1080i
    signal to my big monitor across from my easy chair! :-)

    And popping audio across to the stereo is no big deal either. It will
    even take all six Dolby 5.1 signals on one of its inputs! And the sound
    interface in the computer will deliver it. Plus one would hope that the
    programming could be snaffled to hard drive for posterity.


    --
    Dave Oldridge+
    ICQ 1800667

    A false witness is worse than no witness at all.
  21. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    But what is the quality of that videocard conversion circuitry and
    components...
    I'd bet not as good as most high end Plasma/DLP/LCD displays or DVD players
    and especially the iSCAN HD+.

    It just wouldn't fit my needs at all, but that's just me.

    Dave Oldridge wrote:

    >
    >We-ellll, the thing is, if this device would capture an HDTV signal into
    >my computer, my video card is quite capable of spitting out a 1080i
    >signal to my big monitor across from my easy chair! :-)
    >
    >And popping audio across to the stereo is no big deal either. It will
    >even take all six Dolby 5.1 signals on one of its inputs! And the sound
    >interface in the computer will deliver it. Plus one would hope that the
    >programming could be snaffled to hard drive for posterity.
    >
    >
    >
    >

    --
    Ric Seyler
  22. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    We have had USB2 HD tuner in US for over a year. It is Sasem OnAir USB
    HDTV. Besides receiving 8VSB it also does clear QAM from cable and has
    full support for DVHS. It was discontinued couple weeks ago. New model
    is coming out in 2 weeks.
    They also are building a new website. http://www.usbhdtv.com/


    --
    CKNA, Posted this message at http://www.SatelliteGuys.US
  23. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Top posting is considered bad usenettiquette. (I do so here to make this
    point ;-)

    RicSeyler wrote:
    > But what is the quality of that videocard conversion circuitry and
    > components...
    Extremely good. Nvidia and ATI have invested large amounts of money into
    hardware-level HDTV support in their video chipsets.
    > I'd bet not as good as most high end Plasma/DLP/LCD displays or DVD players
    > and especially the iSCAN HD+.
    You're mixing apples and oranges here.
    >
    > It just wouldn't fit my needs at all, but that's just me.
    Exactly...right tool for the job.
    >
    > Dave Oldridge wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> We-ellll, the thing is, if this device would capture an HDTV signal
    >> into my computer, my video card is quite capable of spitting out a
    >> 1080i signal to my big monitor across from my easy chair! :-)
    >>
    >> And popping audio across to the stereo is no big deal either. It will
    >> even take all six Dolby 5.1 signals on one of its inputs! And the
    >> sound interface in the computer will deliver it. Plus one would hope
    >> that the programming could be snaffled to hard drive for posterity.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
  24. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:Iii0e.2028$gI5.318@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > Many manufacturers make DVB-T receivers of all kinds. In the UK this list
    > has 91 different models and there are many more not listed.
    >
    > http://www.radioandtelly.co.uk/freeviewreceivers.html
    >
    > This is after only two years of broadcasting in the UK. We have been doing
    > 8-VSB in the US for seven years, where are the products? Where are ones
    > that work?
    >
    > Bob Miller

    The BBC started broadcasting DVB-T services in the UK in mid-1998, not far
    off 7 years ago.... even so we still don't have any HD OTA receivers out of
    that list of 91 products, in fact often they barely manage acceptable SD.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    I have my laptop DVI output going to my Sharp HD LCD and optical S/PDIF
    going from my laptop to my home theater receiver. I think you will see more
    integration between computers and home theater as time goes on also.

    Steve


    "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:1111598459.616751.306880@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > Bob Miller wrote:
    >> USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.
    >>
    >> http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html
    >>
    >> by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
    >> actually advertise them also.
    >>
    >> The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that
    > force
    >> feeds us junk.
    >
    > This IS junk. The vast majority of HD viewers want to experience the
    > viewing on a large scale, not on their 15 or 17" monitors.
    >
  26. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    You go Alex!
    Clay
    "Alex Perez" <aperez@gmailDAWT.com> wrote in message
    news:yRl0e.12001$m31.124547@typhoon.sonic.net...
    > Top posting is considered bad usenettiquette. (I do so here to make
    this
    > point ;-)
    >
    > RicSeyler wrote:
    > > But what is the quality of that videocard conversion circuitry and
    > > components...
    > Extremely good. Nvidia and ATI have invested large amounts of money
    into
    > hardware-level HDTV support in their video chipsets.
    > > I'd bet not as good as most high end Plasma/DLP/LCD displays or
    DVD players
    > > and especially the iSCAN HD+.
    > You're mixing apples and oranges here.
    > >
    > > It just wouldn't fit my needs at all, but that's just me.
    > Exactly...right tool for the job.
    > >
    > > Dave Oldridge wrote:
    > >
    > >>
    > >> We-ellll, the thing is, if this device would capture an HDTV
    signal
    > >> into my computer, my video card is quite capable of spitting out
    a
    > >> 1080i signal to my big monitor across from my easy chair! :-)
    > >>
    > >> And popping audio across to the stereo is no big deal either. It
    will
    > >> even take all six Dolby 5.1 signals on one of its inputs! And
    the
    > >> sound interface in the computer will deliver it. Plus one would
    hope
    > >> that the programming could be snaffled to hard drive for
    posterity.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >
  27. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:Iii0e.2028$gI5.318@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > Larry Bud wrote:
    >
    [snip]
    >
    > This is after only two years of broadcasting in the UK.

    Sorry Bob - you aren't correct. There have been over five years of official
    DVB-T broadcasting in the UK DVB-T broadcasts started officially in
    November 1998. The BBC, ITV/C4 and SDN/Channel Five all ran FTA services on
    three multiplexes, OnDigital had the other three multiplexes for pay-TV
    encrypted services. Initially receivers were only available via purchase
    (£200+) or subscription (with a box loaned for the period of subscription,
    or purchased in the very early days) from ONDigital/ITVDigital - the pay-TV
    provider.

    FTA only receivers became available just as ITVDigital collapsed - in fact
    that is when I bought mine (2001ish?)

    Freeview was the system that replaced the half of the UK DVB-T network that
    ITV Digital previously had - with the BBC getting 1/3 of this half, and the
    other 2/3 of the half going to Crown Castle for commercial, FTA advertising
    funded, channels. It took a while for the bidding and re-organisation to
    take place, and it launched in the latter half of 2002. However this was
    only a re-launch - not the full launch.

    However only when Freeview launched did DVB-T really take-off in the UK.

    > We have been doing 8-VSB in the US for seven years, where are the
    > products? Where are ones that work?

    We launched DVB-T at pretty much the same time as 8-VSB officially launched
    ATSC in the US. Unofficially the BBC had been running a test DVB-T service,
    as I'm sure test ATSC 8-VSB services had been operated, for a number of
    years prior to the official launch.

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

    "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:1111598459.616751.306880@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > Bob Miller wrote:
    >> USB2 HDTV capable receiver, neat.
    >>
    >> http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050315PR205.html
    >>
    >> by 2025 8-VSB will have products like this. If and when they may
    >> actually advertise them also.
    >>
    >> The rest of the world gets neat DTV products we get a MANDATE that
    > force
    >> feeds us junk.
    >
    > This IS junk. The vast majority of HD viewers want to experience the
    > viewing on a large scale, not on their 15 or 17" monitors.

    However a PC with DVB-T or 8-VSB ATSC reception capabilities can make a
    pretty good PVR, and is just as capable of feeding a large screen TV via
    DVI, HDMI, VGA or Component links. It also allows for easy archiving,
    recording scheduling, as well as other "convergence" stuff.

    I'm running a DVB-T capture card in a Windows MCE PC (albeit not in HD cos
    I'm in the UK). With an RGB VGA->RGB SCART connection, and a custom Windows
    mode of 1024x576 feeding my Sony 16:9 28" standard def TV, I have a pretty
    neat Home Media Centre, allowing me to record and replay broadcast digital
    TV MPEG2, from a decent EPG, burn it losslessly to DVD etc. The RGB picture
    quality I get is as good as my set top box.

    I imagine many of the benefits of this are relevant to HD as well.

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

    "Gordon Burditt" <gordonb.rjjn5@burditt.org> wrote in message
    news:4241b987$0$88039$16895aa@news.airnews.net...
    >>> "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital TV
    >>> (DVB-T) receiver."
    >>
    >>Yawn. DVB-T != HDTV
    >>
    >>> and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"
    >>
    >>That doesn't say that it can *display* HDTV. It just says that the
    >>computer has to be at least 2.4GHz to process an HDTV signal (even if it
    >>only displays SD).
    >
    > I didn't see anything in there about a display *AT ALL*, and the
    > term "receiver" to me doesn't imply one. But it's still an interesting
    > product for use in a do-it-yourself DVR project.
    >
    > Aren't there already existing products that fit in a computer, and
    > allow the computer to generate a signal you can feed to any HDTV
    > monitor and get HDTV resolutions? (outputting what? HDMI, DVI,
    > or component video?) In other words, a "HDTV video card" which can
    > generate 720p or 1080i pictures. Or am I mistaken about this?

    Right you are.

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

    "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:1111600200.205592.229580@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    >> > It says it's an NTSC tuner. Explain how you get HD over NTSC.
    >>
    >> Again read the article. "It" is three different receivers.
    >>
    >> "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital
    > TV
    >> (DVB-T) receiver."
    >>
    >> and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"
    >
    > So what, DVB-T doesn't necessarily mean HD. It doesn't say it does
    > ATSC, however it specifically states it supports NTSC. If it does
    > support ATSC, where are the specs? 720p, or 1080i?? And if it does
    > support ATSC, what the hell is your beef?

    If it is USB2 and supports DVB-T, it is likely that it will support HD in
    Australia. USB1 devices are limited by USB1 bandwith restrictions, so don't
    have enough capacity to stream HD MPEG2 streams to a PC.

    USB2 does, and so USB 2 DVB-T receivers are in demand in Aus, where they are
    better suited for HD reception. I believe Hauppauge have just launched a
    USB2 version of their Nova-T USB to cater for just this market.

    >
    > Anyway, it still doesn't solve the issue of a small screen size.

    Well that isn't a function of the USB tuner or the PC, just of the display.
    PCs are more than capable of driving 1080i/720p 16:9 displays (plasmas,
    CRTs, DLPS etc.) via component, VGA, HDMI or DVI interfaces.

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

    MattK wrote:
    > "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:Iii0e.2028$gI5.318@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    >
    >>Many manufacturers make DVB-T receivers of all kinds. In the UK this list
    >>has 91 different models and there are many more not listed.
    >>
    >>http://www.radioandtelly.co.uk/freeviewreceivers.html
    >>
    >>This is after only two years of broadcasting in the UK. We have been doing
    >>8-VSB in the US for seven years, where are the products? Where are ones
    >>that work?
    >>
    >>Bob Miller
    >
    >
    > The BBC started broadcasting DVB-T services in the UK in mid-1998, not far
    > off 7 years ago.... even so we still don't have any HD OTA receivers out of
    > that list of 91 products, in fact often they barely manage acceptable SD.
    >
    >
    The present Freeview venture started 2 years and a few months ago.
    Before that there was a lower powered, 1/2 kW ERP per transmitter
    subscription service. None of these receivers could exist except the one
    offered by that company. So these 91 receivers were all born in the last
    27 months with more to come.

    Here is another USB2 stick COFDM HDTV receiver from Technotrend.

    http://www.lavienumerique.com/index.php?preaction=galerie&id_photo=27387&description=TNT%20ou%20DVB-T,%20du%20pareil%20au%20m%EAme%20

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

    "Mark Crispin" <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote in message
    news:Pine.LNX.4.63.0503231012301.16641@shiva1.cac.washington.edu...
    > On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, Bob Miller wrote:
    >> "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital TV
    >> (DVB-T) receiver."
    >
    > Yawn. DVB-T != HDTV

    It does in Australia...

    DVB-T receivers with USB2 rather than USB1 interfaces are required to send
    MPEG2 at HD data rates via USB. This is a requirement for Australian HD -
    hence they are appearing on the market. Hauppauge also have a DVB-T USB2
    solution which is particularly relevant to Aus, where USB 1 DVB-T receivers
    can only deliver SD streams.

    >
    >> and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"
    >
    > That doesn't say that it can *display* HDTV. It just says that the
    > computer has to be at least 2.4GHz to process an HDTV signal (even if it
    > only displays SD).

    However many PCs are capable of running 1280x1024 - which is the 4:3
    resolution required to display 1280x720 letterboxed.

    AIUI the requirements of the PC for DVB-T USB 2 receivers and 8-VSB ATSC USB
    2 receivers are likely to be pretty much the same - and not dissimilar from
    their PCI internal equivalents.

    I'm not a Bob supporter - but DVB-T doesn't equal Standard Def, any more
    than ATSC 8VSB equals High Def. Both are deployed and both can and do carry
    standard and high def services. Sure there are more ATSC 8VSB High Def
    services than DVB-T High Def services - but it doesn't mean there are none.

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

    "Stephen Neal" <stephen.neal@nospam.as-directed.com> wrote in message
    news:d1t2ea$nm5$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
    >
    > "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:Iii0e.2028$gI5.318@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    >> Larry Bud wrote:
    >>
    > [snip]
    >>
    >> This is after only two years of broadcasting in the UK.
    >
    > Sorry Bob - you aren't correct. There have been over five years of
    > official DVB-T broadcasting in the UK DVB-T broadcasts started officially
    > in November 1998.

    Doh! And neither am I correct. It's late and I had a brain-fade. Of course
    there have been over 6 years of official DVB-T broadcasting in the UK.
  34. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    RicSeyler <ricseyler@SPAMgulf.net> wrote in
    news:v6l0e.49639$6g7.44912@bignews1.bellsouth.net:

    > But what is the quality of that videocard conversion circuitry and
    > components...
    > I'd bet not as good as most high end Plasma/DLP/LCD displays or DVD
    > players and especially the iSCAN HD+.
    >
    > It just wouldn't fit my needs at all, but that's just me.

    I dunno....it looks pretty good on my TV when I render a still pic to 1920
    by 1080 out of Vue d'Esprit 5. A can't really fault it there.

    (the video card, I mean). I haven't had any HD mpeg or DivX stuff to try
    it on with moving stuff, but remember, the actual conversion is not done by
    the video card so much as by the computer driving it. I think 2.4ghz 64-
    bit CPU with 2 gb of RAM can handle that much arithmetic.

    --
    Dave Oldridge+
    ICQ 1800667

    A false witness is worse than no witness at all.
  35. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Stephen Neal wrote:
    > "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:Iii0e.2028$gI5.318@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    >
    >>Larry Bud wrote:
    >>
    >
    > [snip]
    >
    >>This is after only two years of broadcasting in the UK.
    >
    >
    > Sorry Bob - you aren't correct. There have been over five years of official
    > DVB-T broadcasting in the UK DVB-T broadcasts started officially in
    > November 1998. The BBC, ITV/C4 and SDN/Channel Five all ran FTA services on
    > three multiplexes, OnDigital had the other three multiplexes for pay-TV
    > encrypted services. Initially receivers were only available via purchase
    > (£200+) or subscription (with a box loaned for the period of subscription,
    > or purchased in the very early days) from ONDigital/ITVDigital - the pay-TV
    > provider.
    >
    > FTA only receivers became available just as ITVDigital collapsed - in fact
    > that is when I bought mine (2001ish?)
    >
    > Freeview was the system that replaced the half of the UK DVB-T network that
    > ITV Digital previously had - with the BBC getting 1/3 of this half, and the
    > other 2/3 of the half going to Crown Castle for commercial, FTA advertising
    > funded, channels. It took a while for the bidding and re-organisation to
    > take place, and it launched in the latter half of 2002. However this was
    > only a re-launch - not the full launch.
    >
    > However only when Freeview launched did DVB-T really take-off in the UK.

    OK November 1st or December 1st 2002 was when the current Freeview was
    launched. The ERP transmitter power was doubled on average to, I keep
    saying one kW but it is more like 3 kW and a decent group of programs
    was offered. How many receivers were available before that?

    Bob Miller
    >
    >
    >>We have been doing 8-VSB in the US for seven years, where are the
    >>products? Where are ones that work?
    >
    >
    > We launched DVB-T at pretty much the same time as 8-VSB officially launched
    > ATSC in the US. Unofficially the BBC had been running a test DVB-T service,
    > as I'm sure test ATSC 8-VSB services had been operated, for a number of
    > years prior to the official launch.
    >
    > Steve
    >
    >
  36. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Mark Crispin wrote:
    > On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, Stephen Neal wrote:
    >
    >>> Yawn. DVB-T != HDTV
    >>
    >> It does in Australia...
    >
    >
    > No it doesn't. *Some* DVB-T in Australia is HDTV. Some is not.
    >
    >> I'm not a Bob supporter - but DVB-T doesn't equal Standard Def, any more
    >> than ATSC 8VSB equals High Def. Both are deployed and both can and do
    >> carry
    >> standard and high def services.
    >
    >
    > Hence the inequality.
    >
    > This device might be interesting if it is capable of producing a data
    > stream from incoming DVB-T broadcast television, and that data stream
    > can be rendered on a computer monitor in high definition.
    >
    > If so, then it looks like the DVB-T world finally has a product that
    > does what ATSC tuner cards in the US have done for a few years.
    >
    > It would be interesting to see what kind of antenna is required for use
    > with this card. Bob would have us believe that you just plug the dongle
    > into your laptop and voila! you have a portable HDTV that will work in
    > your car as you're driving through a tunnel.

    That is just about right. Plug a dongle into your laptop and have a
    portable HDTV that works in your car as you drive thru a tunnel. On a
    USB receiver we demonstrated in Toronto we had an antenna similar to one
    you find on a WiFi card. Worked great.

    In this video we drove under the UN in what is almost a tunnel on the
    East side of Manhattan with perfect reception and drove thru a five
    block tunnel under Park Ave. between 33rd and 38th st. with a breakup
    for a few seconds just as we were about to exit, not on the video. This
    was with one transmitter at one kW below Canal at 6th Ave. Both events
    shocked even us since our plan to service New York would have many
    transmitters at up to 50 kW each so our receiver would have signals from
    at least three and possibly more at any given point. The signal follows
    us into the Lincoln Tunnel for a couple blocks before fading. If we had
    repeaters near each entrance we think we might achieve reception though
    the entire tunnel.

    www.viacel.com/bob.wmv

    Bob Miller
    >
    > -- Mark --
    >
    > http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
    > Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
    > Si vis pacem, para bellum.
  37. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

    CKNA wrote:
    > We have had USB2 HD tuner in US for over a year. It is Sasem OnAir USB
    > HDTV. Besides receiving 8VSB it also does clear QAM from cable and has
    > full support for DVHS. It was discontinued couple weeks ago. New model
    > is coming out in 2 weeks.
    > They also are building a new website. http://www.usbhdtv.com/
    >
    >
    Wouldn't you want to have a seamless overlap of models? Seems ominous
    that their site is under construction while they discontinue a model and
    wait a few weeks for the new one.

    We will see. How does their antenna compare to a WiFi card antenna? Or
    do they have to depend on a Silver Sensor or better?

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

    "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:Dco0e.2281$gI5.1249@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    >> The BBC started broadcasting DVB-T services in the UK in mid-1998, not
    >> far off 7 years ago.... even so we still don't have any HD OTA receivers
    >> out of that list of 91 products, in fact often they barely manage
    >> acceptable SD.
    > The present Freeview venture started 2 years and a few months ago. Before
    > that there was a lower powered, 1/2 kW ERP per transmitter subscription
    > service.

    Not entierly true.

    Long before the 'Freeview' consortium was created there were two choices at
    launch in 1998; a 'free to view' package of around 15 channels, and a
    further subscription service from ONdigital/ITV Digital which subsequently
    collapsed.

    The national and local free OTA services were always given priority with
    digital frequency planning and ended up with better coverage than the
    ONdigital subscription package. For example in 1998/99 here in London the
    main free to air services were transmitted at 10kW, whilst most of the
    subscription services transmitted on multiplexes at 3?kW.

    Since it was soon realised that DVB-T reception was hopeless with such low
    ERPs a programme of numerous transmitter improvements were started, but not
    completed until after the subscription service had collapsed and relaunched
    by 'Freeview'. Furthermore they realised that the multiplexes allocated with
    the poorest frequencies (i.e. those with highest levels of incoming
    co-channel interference and poorer TX characteristics) still wouldn't work
    properly so changed the broadcast parameters to a more robust FFT variant to
    help.

    > None of these receivers could exist except the one offered by that
    > company. So these 91 receivers were all born in the last 27 months with
    > more to come.
    >

    There were integrated digital TVs available before 'Freeview' existed which
    could receive the free OTA channels. Alternatively you could buy a set-top
    box without subscription but they initially cost £400. The lack of cheaper
    boxes wasn't helped by the Government who mandated that every set-top box
    and integrated digital TV sold in the UK must have conditional access
    support for the encrypted subscription service.

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

    On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, MattK wrote:
    > The lack of cheaper
    > boxes wasn't helped by the Government who mandated that every set-top box
    > and integrated digital TV sold in the UK must have conditional access
    > support for the encrypted subscription service.

    But, but,...

    Psycho Bob Miller says that there's no such thing as a mandate in the UK.
    That, even in spite of a socialist government which thoroughly regulates
    every other aspect of life, with television the market in the UK is
    completely free to choose what it wants without government interference or
    mandates! And that's why they choose COFDM, because that's the choice of
    a free market! And that's why digital set top boxes which work with
    rabbit ears perfectly with no impulse noise problems cost only UKP 18; and
    that all those STBs will automatically upgrade to HDTV.

    You wouldn't contradict Psycho Bob with facts? Who'da thunk it?!?

    -- Mark --

    http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
    Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
    Si vis pacem, para bellum.
  40. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Sorry you don't like it, but that's how I prefer to post.
    Much easier for me to read threads without the damn scrolling,
    and makes things easier to follow.

    If I'm replying to a certain section of a post, I will post under the
    relevant parts
    to make the thread coherent. And trim the fat.

    A woman showing her ankles in public used to be considered bad etiquette,
    but the times change...
    Do a Google I've been doing this Usenet Thingie for years and years and
    years.
    I also post with HTML headers, because I prefer that also and I don't
    know of
    a single person who still has to pay by the byte, like we did in the
    early 90's..
    Once again time moves on, heck it's the 21st century.... But thanks for
    your concern.

    Alex Perez wrote:

    > Top posting is considered bad usenettiquette. (I do so here to make
    > this point ;-)
    >

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

    If you happy with your setup, then that's all that matters.
    I didn't mean to fault it, just wouldn't be my approach.


    Dave Oldridge wrote:

    >
    >I dunno....it looks pretty good on my TV when I render a still pic to 1920
    >by 1080 out of Vue d'Esprit 5. A can't really fault it there.
    >
    >
    >

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

    MattK wrote:
    > "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:Dco0e.2281$gI5.1249@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    >
    >>>The BBC started broadcasting DVB-T services in the UK in mid-1998, not
    >>>far off 7 years ago.... even so we still don't have any HD OTA receivers
    >>>out of that list of 91 products, in fact often they barely manage
    >>>acceptable SD.
    >>
    >>The present Freeview venture started 2 years and a few months ago. Before
    >>that there was a lower powered, 1/2 kW ERP per transmitter subscription
    >>service.
    >
    >
    > Not entierly true.
    >
    > Long before the 'Freeview' consortium was created there were two choices at
    > launch in 1998; a 'free to view' package of around 15 channels, and a
    > further subscription service from ONdigital/ITV Digital which subsequently
    > collapsed.
    >
    > The national and local free OTA services were always given priority with
    > digital frequency planning and ended up with better coverage than the
    > ONdigital subscription package. For example in 1998/99 here in London the
    > main free to air services were transmitted at 10kW, whilst most of the
    > subscription services transmitted on multiplexes at 3?kW.
    >
    > Since it was soon realised that DVB-T reception was hopeless with such low
    > ERPs a programme of numerous transmitter improvements were started, but not
    > completed until after the subscription service had collapsed and relaunched
    > by 'Freeview'. Furthermore they realised that the multiplexes allocated with
    > the poorest frequencies (i.e. those with highest levels of incoming
    > co-channel interference and poorer TX characteristics) still wouldn't work
    > properly so changed the broadcast parameters to a more robust FFT variant to
    > help.
    >
    >
    >>None of these receivers could exist except the one offered by that
    >>company. So these 91 receivers were all born in the last 27 months with
    >>more to come.
    >>
    >
    >
    > There were integrated digital TVs available before 'Freeview' existed which
    > could receive the free OTA channels. Alternatively you could buy a set-top
    > box without subscription but they initially cost £400. The lack of cheaper
    > boxes wasn't helped by the Government who mandated that every set-top box
    > and integrated digital TV sold in the UK must have conditional access
    > support for the encrypted subscription service.
    >
    > :-)
    >
    >
    So would it be accurate to say that the subscription service with loaner
    receivers was pretty successful but failed because of poor football
    contracts and to low powered transmitters while the original free
    channel offering failed because of costly receivers and limited free
    content offering?

    Whatever the sweet spot was reached with the re-launch which had an
    adequate free content offering and lower cost receivers. As I remember
    it the re launch was an instant hit though most gave it little chance.

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

    Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
    > MattK wrote:
    > > "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > > news:Dco0e.2281$gI5.1249@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
    > >
    > >>>The BBC started broadcasting DVB-T services in the UK in mid-1998, not
    > >>>far off 7 years ago.... even so we still don't have any HD OTA
    > >>>receivers out of that list of 91 products, in fact often they barely
    > >>>manage acceptable SD.
    > >>
    > >>The present Freeview venture started 2 years and a few months ago.
    > >>Before that there was a lower powered, 1/2 kW ERP per transmitter
    > >>subscription service.
    > >
    > >
    > > Not entierly true.
    > >
    > > Long before the 'Freeview' consortium was created there were two
    > > choices at launch in 1998; a 'free to view' package of around 15
    > > channels, and a further subscription service from ONdigital/ITV Digital
    > > which subsequently collapsed.
    > >
    > > The national and local free OTA services were always given priority
    > > with digital frequency planning and ended up with better coverage than
    > > the ONdigital subscription package. For example in 1998/99 here in
    > > London the main free to air services were transmitted at 10kW, whilst
    > > most of the subscription services transmitted on multiplexes at 3?kW.
    > >
    > > Since it was soon realised that DVB-T reception was hopeless with such
    > > low ERPs a programme of numerous transmitter improvements were started,
    > > but not completed until after the subscription service had collapsed
    > > and relaunched by 'Freeview'. Furthermore they realised that the
    > > multiplexes allocated with the poorest frequencies (i.e. those with
    > > highest levels of incoming co-channel interference and poorer TX
    > > characteristics) still wouldn't work properly so changed the broadcast
    > > parameters to a more robust FFT variant to help.
    > >
    > >
    > >>None of these receivers could exist except the one offered by that
    > >>company. So these 91 receivers were all born in the last 27 months with
    > >>more to come.
    > >>
    > >
    > >
    > > There were integrated digital TVs available before 'Freeview' existed
    > > which could receive the free OTA channels. Alternatively you could buy
    > > a set-top box without subscription but they initially cost £400. The
    > > lack of cheaper boxes wasn't helped by the Government who mandated that
    > > every set-top box and integrated digital TV sold in the UK must have
    > > conditional access support for the encrypted subscription service.
    > >
    > > :-)
    > >
    > >
    > So would it be accurate to say that the subscription service with loaner
    > receivers was pretty successful but failed because of poor football
    > contracts and to low powered transmitters while the original free
    > channel offering failed because of costly receivers and limited free
    > content offering?
    >
    > Whatever the sweet spot was reached with the re-launch which had an
    > adequate free content offering and lower cost receivers. As I remember
    > it the re launch was an instant hit though most gave it little chance.
    >
    > Bob Miller


    Hey Bob, are you going to continue to ignore my posts?
    You know that 8-VSB works just fine, but you keep denying it.
    Why is that Bob? My two ota tuners work great! Please respond!
    Chip

    --
    -------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
    Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
  44. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    "Stephen Neal" <stephen.neal@nospam.as-directed.com> wrote in message
    news:d1t2rh$o3r$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
    >
    > "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:1111600200.205592.229580@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    >>> > It says it's an NTSC tuner. Explain how you get HD over NTSC.
    >>>
    >>> Again read the article. "It" is three different receivers.
    >>>
    >>> "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital
    >> TV
    >>> (DVB-T) receiver."
    >>>
    >>> and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"
    >>
    >> So what, DVB-T doesn't necessarily mean HD. It doesn't say it does
    >> ATSC, however it specifically states it supports NTSC. If it does
    >> support ATSC, where are the specs? 720p, or 1080i?? And if it does
    >> support ATSC, what the hell is your beef?
    >
    > If it is USB2 and supports DVB-T, it is likely that it will support HD in
    > Australia. USB1 devices are limited by USB1 bandwith restrictions, so
    > don't have enough capacity to stream HD MPEG2 streams to a PC.
    > USB2 does, and so USB 2 DVB-T receivers are in demand in Aus, where they
    are
    > better suited for HD reception. I believe Hauppauge have just launched a
    > USB2 version of their Nova-T USB to cater for just this market.
    >> Anyway, it still doesn't solve the issue of a small screen size.
    > Well that isn't a function of the USB tuner or the PC, just of the
    display.
    > PCs are more than capable of driving 1080i/720p 16:9 displays (plasmas,
    > CRTs, DLPS etc.) via component, VGA, HDMI or DVI interfaces.
    > Steve

    I wonder why it requires 2.4 GHz minimum CPU speed, the ATSC cards that have
    been available since 1999 need 400mHz minimum
  45. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    <vidguy7@aol.com> wrote in message
    news:1111621638.337058.252370@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    >
    > cjdaytonjrnos...@cox.net wrote:
    >>> Are you going to ignore my post Bob?
    >> Chip
    >
    > Of course he will Chip!!! BOB MILLER ignores ALL posts that are factual
    > and prove the fallacy of his lying statements. I've had a Sony HD100,
    > HD200, RCA DTC100, HD Tivo etc., all of which have beautifully
    > functioning 8VSB receivers. But lying BOB will simply ignore your post,
    > my post and the myriad of posts that say the same thing or relate the
    > excellent experiences with 8VSB reception. This "man" is a lying SOB of
    > the worst kind. He has no shame, no pride and serves as the
    > spokesperson for COFDM. Nuff said!
    >
  46. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    Mark Crispin wrote:
    > On Thu, 24 Mar 2005, MattK wrote:
    >
    >> The lack of cheaper
    >> boxes wasn't helped by the Government who mandated that every set-top box
    >> and integrated digital TV sold in the UK must have conditional access
    >> support for the encrypted subscription service.
    >
    >
    > But, but,...
    >
    > Psycho Bob Miller says that there's no such thing as a mandate in the UK. That, even in spite of a socialist government which thoroughly
    > regulates every other aspect of life, with television the market in the UK is completely free to choose what it wants without government
    > interference or mandates! And that's why they choose COFDM, because that's the choice of a free market! And that's why digital set top
    > boxes which work with rabbit ears perfectly with no impulse noise problems cost only UKP 18; and that all those STBs will automatically
    > upgrade to HDTV.
    >
    > You wouldn't contradict Psycho Bob with facts? Who'da thunk it?!?

    Never said that all those receivers would upgrade to HDTV. Don't think
    they will. If the UK so mandated in the past they have learned their
    lesson since this mandate no longer exist must to the dismay of TopUpTV
    I am sure.

    Also I don't think rabbit ears would be the preferred antenna with UHF.

    There is no mandate in the UK regarding COFDM receivers that I know of.

    Bob Miller

    > -- Mark --
    >
    > http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
    > Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
    > Si vis pacem, para bellum.
  47. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    <cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net> wrote in message
    news:20050323161353.810$XY@newsreader.com...
    > cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
    >> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >>
    >> > This is after only two years of broadcasting in the UK. We have been
    >> > doing 8-VSB in the US for seven years, where are the products? Where
    >> > are ones that work?
    >> >
    >> > Bob Miller
    >>
    >> I have two of them in my house, a Sony HDD-200
    >> and an LG-3200a. Both work great, Bob.
    >> Chip
    >
    > Are you going to ignore my post Bob?
    > Chip

    You probably know all this Chip, but...

    On AVS forum in Q2 1999, [God that was along time ago..] the long, long
    awaited [first HDTV receiver] RCA DTC-100 became available.

    User reports began flooding in [mine included] The VAST majority of posters
    were amazed by how well the unit worked with HDTV OTA reception. It was
    always the same comments: "I can't get squat here for any television
    reception, this DTC-100 Rocks!'.

    For about a year, BM had been posting his usual lies there about the "utter
    failure" of our system and the "superiority" of the British system.

    He totally ignored _every single_ positive report that came in and went on a
    day and night blitzkrieg of non-stop posting. Lying, denying and distorting
    like there was no tomorrow. It was unreal.

    Everyone got wise to his datacasting horseshit and told him to STFU with his
    non-stop propaganda, he refused, then he was thrown off the forum.

    Too bad he has to be here.
  48. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    cjdaytonjrnospam@cox.net wrote:
    >> Hey Bob, are you going to continue to ignore my posts?
    > You know that 8-VSB works just fine, but you keep denying it.
    > Why is that Bob? My two ota tuners work great! Please respond!
    > Chip


    Liike I said Chip, don't hold your breath. The lying BOOBSTER will
    ignore all factual statements and posts in favor of a few 'cherry
    picked' posts he can find on other forums he's been kicked off of as
    the result of his chronic lying.
  49. Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

    "David" <davey@whom-body.net> wrote in message
    news:16SdnctN46lP3d7fRVn-tg@comcast.com...
    > "Stephen Neal" <stephen.neal@nospam.as-directed.com> wrote in message
    > news:d1t2rh$o3r$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
    >>
    >> "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >> news:1111600200.205592.229580@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
    >>>> > It says it's an NTSC tuner. Explain how you get HD over NTSC.
    >>>>
    >>>> Again read the article. "It" is three different receivers.
    >>>>
    >>>> "The first one, currently named VideoMate DVB-T Stick, is a digital
    >>> TV
    >>>> (DVB-T) receiver."
    >>>>
    >>>> and it needs a computer with at least "2.4GHz for HDTV"
    >>>
    >>> So what, DVB-T doesn't necessarily mean HD. It doesn't say it does
    >>> ATSC, however it specifically states it supports NTSC. If it does
    >>> support ATSC, where are the specs? 720p, or 1080i?? And if it does
    >>> support ATSC, what the hell is your beef?
    >>
    >> If it is USB2 and supports DVB-T, it is likely that it will support HD in
    >> Australia. USB1 devices are limited by USB1 bandwith restrictions, so
    >> don't have enough capacity to stream HD MPEG2 streams to a PC.
    > > USB2 does, and so USB 2 DVB-T receivers are in demand in Aus, where they
    > are
    >> better suited for HD reception. I believe Hauppauge have just launched a
    >> USB2 version of their Nova-T USB to cater for just this market.
    >>> Anyway, it still doesn't solve the issue of a small screen size.
    > > Well that isn't a function of the USB tuner or the PC, just of the
    > display.
    >> PCs are more than capable of driving 1080i/720p 16:9 displays (plasmas,
    >> CRTs, DLPS etc.) via component, VGA, HDMI or DVI interfaces.
    > > Steve
    >
    > I wonder why it requires 2.4 GHz minimum CPU speed, the ATSC cards that
    > have been available since 1999 need 400mHz minimum


    Because the hardware on the ATSC card takes the load off the CPU. ;-)


    >
    >
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

HDTV Digital TV Products Home Theatre