Blast From the Past: Kill the 8VSB Frankenstein

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

David just reminded me of this. Time to revisit the good old days.

Broadcast Engineering, August, 2000 by Brad Dick Editor

http://www.findarticles.com/p/arti [...] i_64335375

Bob Miller

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

David wrote:
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:xon4e.697$An2.310@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>David just reminded me of this. Time to revisit the good old days.
>>
>>Broadcast Engineering, August, 2000 by Brad Dick Editor
>>
>
> http://www.findarticles.com/p/arti [...] i_64335375
>
>>Bob Miller
>
>
> And you were laughed at again, as usual, after the original post:
>
> http://makeashorterlink.com/?C10E623DA
>
> Ho hum......discrediting 8VSB while praising Cofdm, all for your EXTREMELY
> OBVIOUS PERSONAL AGENDA: to make scads of money with some loathsome mobile
> advertising conspiracy.
>
> I didn't write it David, the editor of Broadcast Engineering did. It
was in 2000 and the article reads like it was written yesterday. He was
spot on as to the condition of the transition and the suitability of
8-VSB then and virtually nothing has changed since.

It is actually incredible to re-read it.

"The reality is that 8VSB deserves to be put to death quickly. It never
worked well. Broadcasters don't want it. Consumers don't want it. It
doesn't do what it needs to do. The fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD)
created by the technology's disappointing performance and the ATSC's
refusal to effectively address these concerns have done more to derail
the launch of U.S. DTV than even our FCC - and that's saying something!"

Or this gem.

"About the only ones pushing to keep this laboratory mistake on life
support are the technology's patent interest holder (Zenith), its chief
PR flack (ATSC) and, of course, the CEA, which will say anything to
generate a sale. Thanks to politics, this junkyard assembly of a
technology continues to live on.

Way back in July 1994, Broadcast Engineering magazine practically begged
this industry to pause long enough to allow the testing of COFDM
technology. In an editorial, we stated the potential benefits of COFDM
far outweighed the possible 15-month delay that would be incurred. Now
look at the mess we're in."

He is talking about the mess in 2000. It is virtually the same mess in 2005.

He goes on..

"8VSB has had almost six years to make itself work and it still doesn't.
We should not gamble on promised future fixes that might make tomorrow's
8VSB as good as COFDM is today.

The solution is to kill 8VSB now. God help us if the doctor (Kennard) is
able to say, "It's alive. It's alive.""

William Kennard was the Chairman of the FCC then. We have been though
the entire term of another Chairman with no change. 8-VSB has now had 11
years to get it to work and the best they can do is make a prototype
that they can't build for a profit even when LG doesn't have to pay
itself the outrageous IP royalty of $5 per receiver.

Bob Miller

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

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:HzI4e.1262$lP1.329@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> David wrote:
>> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:xon4e.697$An2.310@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>>>David just reminded me of this. Time to revisit the good old days.
>>>
>>>Broadcast Engineering, August, 2000 by Brad Dick Editor
>>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.findarticles.com/p/arti [...] i_64335375
>>
>>>Bob Miller
>>
>>
>> And you were laughed at again, as usual, after the original post:
>>
>> http://makeashorterlink.com/?C10E623DA
>>
>> Ho hum......discrediting 8VSB while praising Cofdm, all for your
>> EXTREMELY OBVIOUS PERSONAL AGENDA: to make scads of money with some
>> loathsome mobile advertising conspiracy.
>>
>> I didn't write it David, the editor of Broadcast Engineering did. It
> was in 2000 and the article reads like it was written yesterday. He was
> spot on as to the condition of the transition and the suitability of 8-VSB
> then and virtually nothing has changed since.
>
> It is actually incredible to re-read it.
>
> "The reality is that 8VSB deserves to be put to death quickly. It never
> worked well. Broadcasters don't want it. Consumers don't want it. It
> doesn't do what it needs to do. The fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD)
> created by the technology's disappointing performance and the ATSC's
> refusal to effectively address these concerns have done more to derail the
> launch of U.S. DTV than even our FCC - and that's saying something!"
>
> Or this gem.
>
> "About the only ones pushing to keep this laboratory mistake on life
> support are the technology's patent interest holder (Zenith), its chief PR
> flack (ATSC) and, of course, the CEA, which will say anything to generate
> a sale. Thanks to politics, this junkyard assembly of a technology
> continues to live on.
>
> Way back in July 1994, Broadcast Engineering magazine practically begged
> this industry to pause long enough to allow the testing of COFDM
> technology. In an editorial, we stated the potential benefits of COFDM far
> outweighed the possible 15-month delay that would be incurred. Now look at
> the mess we're in."
>
> He is talking about the mess in 2000. It is virtually the same mess in
> 2005.
>
> He goes on..
>
> "8VSB has had almost six years to make itself work and it still doesn't.
> We should not gamble on promised future fixes that might make tomorrow's
> 8VSB as good as COFDM is today.
>
> The solution is to kill 8VSB now. God help us if the doctor (Kennard) is
> able to say, "It's alive. It's alive.""
>
> William Kennard was the Chairman of the FCC then. We have been though the
> entire term of another Chairman with no change. 8-VSB has now had 11 years
> to get it to work and the best they can do is make a prototype that they
> can't build for a profit even when LG doesn't have to pay itself the
> outrageous IP royalty of $5 per receiver.
>
> Bob Miller

As I keep telling you, I'm genuinely saddened by the fact that people like
you and Ostroff and Dick were denied the huge piles of money you might have
made with some offensive mobile advertising nuisance.

And why aren't you keeping us current on the less-than-ideal situation in
Australia?

"DTV in Australia hasn't degraded into a total joke (yet.. and hopefully
never), but its still not something to be bragged about to my overseas
friends. "

http://www.dtvforum.info/lofiversi [...] 15759.html

Probably partly due to word-of-mouth horror stories about refrigerators,
scooters, hair dryers, etc, etc, etc...impulse noise ruining reception
there.

My thanks go out to the ATSC and the FCC for our fantastic 8VSB/HDTV system.

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

X-No-archive: yes

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:xon4e.697$An2.310@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> David just reminded me of this. Time to revisit the good old days.
>
> Broadcast Engineering, August, 2000 by Brad Dick Editor
>
> http://www.findarticles.com/p/arti [...] i_64335375
>
> Bob Miller
================================
It looks like you are out of date:
Publication Not Found
The publication you requested could not be loaded. Either the content has
been removed or the request is invalid.

Give it up!
I get wonderful OTA!


begin 666 icon_alert.gif
M1TE&.#EA$P`2`/<``%=65_OZ^_S\_?O[_#4\5OK[_D1(44%%33H]04-&2O[_
M__;V]<FX6Z&66*"56)^56)R25[&JA/_2`/_3`/_4`/G.`/;,`//*`//+`._&
M`.W#`,FU3H-U,YR15[6NC.SGT/_1`.? $N2_&<&B%KV?%U931N_KVO#NYO_(
M`/_)`/_*`/_+`/?"`/7 `/;#!/3!!=O&=MS)@__!`/_"`/_#`/[%!?W%!O_)
M&]^S(O_2.MVV-__::J&,2)R)2O_NNUQ61//QZ_^[`/^\`/^]`/^^`/*Q`/^_
M"_Z^"_V^#?_#(\^D+?_-0O##2?_=??_@B][+E>#/H/^U`/^V`/^Y`/ZV`.VH
M`.JH`O^\'-RM.&!/)/_28MJU5_[49__8=O_;@?_?DO_DH__EI?^P`/^S`,N.
M!.NE!O^P".FY3->L2]BM4?K/<?_8@/_8@?_:B__=C__=DN/4L^77N+6JDONJ
M`.2I-M"?0+&*..*Q4N*S6."S6MRQ7MNR8NO ;.J_:_?+<_3)=//(<_G.>-BT
M:-JU;MJW<O?1@_S;F?K9F?G8F/?7F;ZH>]_&E?[EL>#)G)6(;K*GD>WBS.[D
MT.OBT#DW,_CW]=N\@MR^A9F):^31KN74M')J7&QF6^G>R_'KX//NY5Q95%=5
M4FQJ9_CV\_?T\/___^#@X,;&QKN[NP``````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
M`````````````````````"'Y! ``````+ `````3`!(```C^`$D)'"@P4AU(
M!!,J'$"HT* `"B.2RM3'!Q],$A.*V@.&41@]HS(.; 1(3JA'?Q).4I#Z)/
M"$ EPM,IHP)+?@QI2K#I4*!*"B1*NO/FRZ4#CMRPH<,IH@!!:MHX463 SA4S
M<](44!CGC)<U3=!,(A-%S)@R<!)2VL*EBY8D58F2)%"A4L"PA"8CB9$@
M1Y0@&2)$" )$B3P8"T9'CAHP9-7@`Z&&#!HT9-'"<$!BCA0H4*5:X^$&@Q(L5
M*5*H8 %#@0D1%$!(F#UA! <2LW-3"/&!@08,%X('KV"A`G#A&#)L\-#A@?/G
6#AHX>/X<0H12IDYIW\Z]NZE2`0$`.P``
`
end

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

Richard C. wrote:
> X-No-archive: yes
>
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:xon4e.697$An2.310@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>David just reminded me of this. Time to revisit the good old days.
>>
>>Broadcast Engineering, August, 2000 by Brad Dick Editor
>>
>>http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CVJ/is_2000_August/ai_64335375
>>
>>Bob Miller
>
> ================================
> It looks like you are out of date:
> Publication Not Found
> The publication you requested could not be loaded. Either the content has
> been removed or the request is invalid.
>
> Give it up!
> I get wonderful OTA!
>
>
>
Pops right up for me. Try it again.

Written by the editor of the top TV broadcast engineering publication.

Broadcast Engineering, August, 2000 by Brad Dick Editor

http://www.findarticles.com/p/arti [...] i_64335375

"8VSB technology is a Frankenstein, built from the scraps of other
failed ideas. Angry broadcasters now march on the castle of ATSC. Chants
of "Kill the beast!" get louder. Users pound upon the castle gate
demanding verifiable performance while the monster's ATSC medical team
frantically attempt to salvage the beast from its deserved demise.

The reality is that 8VSB deserves to be put to death quickly. It never
worked well. Broadcasters don't want it. Consumers don't want it. It
doesn't do what it needs to do. The fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD)
created by the technology's disappointing performance and the ATSC's
refusal to effectively address these concerns have done more to derail
the launch of U.S. DTV than even our FCC - and that's saying something!

About the only ones pushing to keep this laboratory mistake on life
support are the technology's patent interest holder (Zenith), its chief
PR flack (ATSC) and, of course, the CEA, which will say anything to
generate a sale. Thanks to politics, this junkyard assembly of a
technology continues to live on.

Way back in July 1994, Broadcast Engineering magazine practically begged
this industry to pause long enough to allow the testing of COFDM
technology. In an editorial, we stated the potential benefits of COFDM
far outweighed the possible 15-month delay that would be incurred. Now
look at the mess we're in.

I've heard lots of arguments for keeping 8VSB. Most center on three points:

* Next generation receivers will solve any reception problems;

* It will be too expensive to convert 8VSB receivers in the field; and,

* Changing to COFDM would result in an unacceptable delay in implementation.

All three statements are untrue.

Consider these key points:

* Broadcasters need flexibility with DTV technology to compete and
develop new services and adapt to marketplace demands. Otherwise they
won't support it. No one wants just a digital version of our analog system.

* 8VSB does not, today, provide for portable or mobile service. COFDM does.

* The conversion cost to COFDM is not the billions quoted by some 8VSB
proponents. Given the few receivers actually in the field, we're talking
relatively small change to convert. In a statesman-like manner, Sinclair
has even offered to pay for replacement STBs for its current viewers.
Bottom line: conversion will not be expensive.

* A delay in implementation is preferable to adopting an inferior
system. Anyone remember the color wheel?

* STB manufacturers have stated COFDM products can be on retail shelves
in 12 months.

* DTV is being delayed primarily because of the FUD factor. Dump 8VSB
and you eliminate the key excuse to not implement DTV.

8VSB has had almost six years to make itself work and it still doesn't.
We should not gamble on promised future fixes that might make tomorrow's
8VSB as good as COFDM is today.

The solution is to kill 8VSB now. God help us if the doctor (Kennard) is
able to say, "It's alive. It's alive.""

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

"Mark Crispin" <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote in message
newsine.LNX.4.63.0504061226400.6274@shiva2.cac.washington.edu...
> On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, David wrote:
>> "DTV in Australia hasn't degraded into a total joke (yet.. and hopefully
>> never), but its still not something to be bragged about to my overseas
>> friends. "
>> http://www.dtvforum.info/lofiversi [...] 15759.html
>
> Even better quotes from that page:
>
> "The Australian public has not bought into the technology, and it is
> anticipated that digital television will be taken up by less than 50 per
> cent of Australian households by 2008."
>
> "No digital TV sets, expensive STBs, programs polluted by inline
> advertisements, no full EPG, not every channel has HD and DD5.1. No
> multi-channeling. And they're wondering why there's no interest in uptake
> for DTV."
>
> "Just wondering why they keep pushing for digital STBs, shouldn't TVs with
> built-in digital tuners be available ASAP? Do retailers/importers make
> more profit selling analogue TVs? Or is it that stocks for Digital TVs
> just could not be procurred?"
>
> Someone should tell these wild and crazy Aussies about the US$30 COFDM DTV
> STBs and the TVs with integrated COFDM tuners that are "flying off the
> shelves." Psycho Bob Miller says it's so; you can bet the reputation of
> Psycho Bob's company, Viacel, that it is so!
> -- Mark --
> http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
> Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
> Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Well. . I'd like to be a wild and crazy Aussie myself someday. ;-)

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> Larry Bud wrote:
> >>was in 2000 and the article reads like it was written yesterday. He
> >
> > was
> >
> >>spot on as to the condition of the transition and the suitability
of
> >>8-VSB then and virtually nothing has changed since.
> >
> >
> > Nothing has changed except about 95% of the prime time programming
is
> > in HD, nearly every major sporting event is HD, I have 20+ HD
channels
> > to choose from 24/7/365.
> >
> > Yeah, nothing has changed....
> >
>
> Yes, nothing has changed. EVEN though one of the main reasons people
> should be interested in the DTV transition, programming in HD, has
> increased substantially and the best way to get that HD programming
> would still be OTA if we had a decent modulation, nothing has changed
on
> the OTA front.

Works fine for me and the 4 people I know with OTA High Def, and my pic
quality with Voom is outstanding.

Enjoy your standard def, Bob!

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

"none" <not@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:Xns96327F7E7EE38not@151.164.30.44...
> "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Works fine for me and the 4 people I know with OTA High Def, and my
>>pic quality with Voom is outstanding.
>
> Enjoy your VOOM till the end of the month.
> <http://www.voom.com/>
>
> After voom goes dark, I wonder if the OTA portion of VOOM STBs will
> still work?

I think that turning off the OTA receiver will be a parting "gift" of
cablevision.