Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Wal-Mart ATSC DTV/HDTV STB

Tags:
  • Digital TV
  • HDTV
  • Video
  • Home Theatre
Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 10:18:08 AM

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

<http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2...;

Kirk Bayne
alt.video.digital-tv Home Page
<http://www.geocities.com/lislislislis/avdtv.htm&gt;

More about : wal mart atsc dtv hdtv stb

Anonymous
March 12, 2005 2:10:32 PM

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

kryppy wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 07:18:08 GMT, K. B. <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote:
>
>
>><http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2...;
>
>
>
> Hey look, it is a USDTV box. I guess that hardware isn't subsidized
> after all.
>
>
> STB's should be $50.

If you can and do size up for USDTV service, they charge much less than $50.

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 7:54:46 PM

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

kryppy wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 07:18:08 GMT, K. B. <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote:
>
>
>><http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2...;
>
>
>
> Hey look, it is a USDTV box. I guess that hardware isn't subsidized
> after all.
>
>
> STB's should be $50.
>
>
Exactly!! SD STB's should be $50 today and HD STB's should be $75 today.
And they should work plug and play with simple indoor antennas for most
people in the coverage area.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 7:54:47 PM

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

Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
> > STB's should be $50.
> >
> >
> Exactly!! SD STB's should be $50 today and HD STB's should be $75 today.

You mean like in Australia, right. Oh, no, STBs are US$500 there.

Or maybe the UK. No, there's no HD there.

How about those US$75 HD STBs in Berlin? Nope, no HD there either.

Or maybe Japan? Nope, standalone HD STBs are close to US$500 there, too.

How about Korea? From what I can tell, it looks like HD STBs can be had
for about US$300. Still not US$75, but once again only ATSC is able to
provide cheap HD STBs.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/RhymesWithOrange/Obedience...
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 8:17:30 PM

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

Matthew L. Martin wrote:
> kryppy wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 07:18:08 GMT, K. B. <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> <http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2...;
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hey look, it is a USDTV box. I guess that hardware isn't subsidized
>> after all.
>>
>>
>> STB's should be $50.
>
>
> If you can and do size up for USDTV service, they charge much less than
> $50.
>
> Matthew
>
They subsidize the receiver with their subscription based service. In
2000 we offered to do the same with COFDM but the receiver would have
cost ZERO not the $19.95 USDTV charges. And I suggest that the
forerunner of USDTV, WOW TV would have been doing the same as we would
have been doing over the last five years, offering free COFDM receivers
with subscription.

The US would have more than 72 million COFDM HD receivers sold or
distributed by now. HD was a main part of our plan at the time. HD is
very inefficient in the use of the 6 MHz channel. Most of the MPEG-2
transport stream with an HD signal are full of null packets most of the
time. We would have stuffed them with data. There would have been no
room for multicasting. our data signals would have delivered lots of
content including more non-real time HD as demand dictated. That is what
ever the market demanded we would have been able to deliver.

Didn't happen for only one reason. 8-VSB did not work. We are hopeful
after only five years of waste that the 5th gen LG technology will be
delivered and that we will be back to square one, have something that
works minimally.

But since there is no mobile capability the data business plan dies and
we will do multicasting, lots of it, it will prevail in OTA thanks to 8-VSB.

COFDM offered the best of all worlds in 2000. With our plan it locked in
HD and killed multicasting. It offered lots of mobile content without
affecting the HD signal at all since we only used null packets left over
from the HD broadcast. NOT multicasting!! Multicasting takes REAL
bandwidth away from HD. We would have paid a lot for the use of the
opportunistic data capability of the 6 MHz channel. Our ( and many
others) demand for this data carrying capability would have competed
with multicasting and we would have won since we would be able to offer
that data to a much wider market that included mobile. Multicasting with
8-VSB can only be offered to current OTA customers (around 15%) unless
it is content that is compelling enough for cable companies to desire
it. But broadcasters bet that Congress would give them multicast must
carry. Of course if broadcasters are only using their OTA spectrum for
must carry why do we waste this spectrum on them at all. Just give them
must carry monopoly rights, take away their spectrum and use it for
something else.

We lost, COFDM lost, HD lost and multicasting now will win OTA.

Ignorance is bliss.

But over time the incredible success of COFDM both internationally and
in the US will dictate a very early switch to COFDM based modulation.
The need for MPEG-4 will now the driving force. Broadcasters will not
stand for cable and satellite having MPEG-4 while they do not.
Especially since it will increase their content delivery capability by 3
to 4 times which increases the value of their spectrum by an equal amount.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 8:17:31 PM

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

Bob Miller wrote:
> Matthew L. Martin wrote:
>
>> kryppy wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 07:18:08 GMT, K. B. <hotmail.com@lis2lis2> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> <http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2...;
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hey look, it is a USDTV box. I guess that hardware isn't subsidized
>>> after all.
>>>
>>>
>>> STB's should be $50.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you can and do size up for USDTV service, they charge much less
>> than $50.
>>
>> Matthew
>>
> They subsidize the receiver with their subscription based service.

Once again, bob hijacks a thread to rant about the reason that his
business venture failed.

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 3:51:41 AM

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

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>
>>>STB's should be $50.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Exactly!! SD STB's should be $50 today and HD STB's should be $75 today.
>
>
> You mean like in Australia, right. Oh, no, STBs are US$500 there.

DTV STB's are as low as $77 in OZ and $35 in the UK.

The only reason HD COFDM receivers are expensive in OZ is that people
have a choice there of buying an SD for $77 or an HD TEAC DV-B800 STB at
AU$380 or $301.45 US. Not surprising since the market is so small, less
than 20 million people. What is interesting is the number of units being
offered in such a small market, 67 different models including the one
for $77 US. Most people are buying the lower priced SD receiver, it is a
free market after all, which makes the market for HD receivers even
smaller and keeps the price higher.

How many 8-VSB receivers are being sold here? And how do you find them?
How do you find out how many have been sold? In any COFDM country the
number of DTV receivers sold is published at least every quarter. The
CEA in the US has a big problem finding out how many have been sold.
They prefer to talk of DTV products and lump 480P products into that
number. Publishing the real numbers for OTA STB's would be just too
embarrassing.

If the market in OZ was as big as the UK market you could expect HD
Receivers to be on a par with the difference in OZ prices for HD and SD.
or $77/$301 would be the same as $35/$x and $x would be $137 for an HD
receiver in the UK. In the US, a market six time bigger than the UK and
fourteen times bigger than OZ you would expect prices to be even lower
for HD STB's. Especially since we could have been doing this since 2000
while OZ has been at it for a far shorter period.
>
> Or maybe the UK. No, there's no HD there.

Satellite HD there with two more offerings on the way. Lots of talk of
terrestrial HD in the UK now.
>
> How about those US$75 HD STBs in Berlin? Nope, no HD there either.

Satellite HD in Germany with terrestrial HD and MPEG-4 coming to France.
>
> Or maybe Japan? Nope, standalone HD STBs are close to US$500 there, too.

Doesn't seem to be much of a market for STB's in Japan, everyone seems
to be buying integrated sets. They do suggest that the DTV receivers
being added to cell phones will only raise the price of the phone by $45.
>
> How about Korea? From what I can tell, it looks like HD STBs can be had for about US$300. Still not US$75, but once again only ATSC is able to
> provide cheap HD STBs.
>

Well the much larger market of Korea matches the market in OZ at around
$300. We will have to see what happens in France, a much bigger market,
to see what price an HD COFDM receiver goes for there.

COFDM receivers would cost less than $100 in the US today if COFDM had
been allowed in 2000. But most people would have received them for free
with a subscription service no matter what they cost to manufacture.

Bob Miller
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 3:52:25 AM

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

Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
> Jeff Rife wrote:
> > Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
> >
> >>>STB's should be $50.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>Exactly!! SD STB's should be $50 today and HD STB's should be $75 today..
> >
> > You mean like in Australia, right. Oh, no, STBs are US$500 there.
>
> DTV STB's are as low as $77 in OZ and $35 in the UK.

There are no HD STBs in the UK at all, and none Australia for less than
US$500.

Also, post a link for a SD STB in the UK that sells for £24 (which is
US$35 at current exchange rates).

> > Or maybe the UK. No, there's no HD there.
>
> Satellite HD there with two more offerings on the way. Lots of talk of
> terrestrial HD in the UK now.

Post a link for a US$75 HD STB that works in the UK.

> > How about those US$75 HD STBs in Berlin? Nope, no HD there either.
>
> Satellite HD in Germany with terrestrial HD and MPEG-4 coming to France.

Post a link for a US$75 HD STB that works in Berlin.

> > Or maybe Japan? Nope, standalone HD STBs are close to US$500 there, too.
>
> Doesn't seem to be much of a market for STB's in Japan, everyone seems
> to be buying integrated sets.

....because that's all that is currently available. What about legacy
displays? US$500+ for COFDM HDTV STBs for those displays.

> They do suggest that the DTV receivers
> being added to cell phones will only raise the price of the phone by $45.

There are no DTV receivers being added to cell phones in Japan. There are
*analog* TV receivers being added to cell phones in Japan.

But, these aren't HD, anyway, so who cares if they only cost US$45.

> > How about Korea? From what I can tell, it looks like HD STBs can be had for about US$300. Still not US$75, but once again only ATSC is able to
> > provide cheap HD STBs.
> >
>
> Well the much larger market of Korea matches the market in OZ at around
> $300.

More of Bob's strange math. The cheapest HD STBs in Australia are US$500,
but that's "around US$300". I guess those US$77 STBs in Australia really
cost US$125...that's "around US$77".

> COFDM receivers would cost less than $100 in the US today if COFDM had
> been allowed in 2000.

Whoopee, another wrong prediction from Bob. Still oh-for, I see. ATSC
receivers *are* US$200 today, no prediction necessary. The best COFDM
can do is US$500 for and HDTV receiver, even though the same number of
COFDM HD receivers have been sold in Australia as ATSC HD receivers in
the US, at least according to Bob's other posts. I wonder why they can't
get the price down to US$200 there, even though they have the same
quantity of scale.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/RhymesWithOrange/Obedience...
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 2:48:09 PM

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

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>
>>Jeff Rife wrote:
>>
>>>Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>STB's should be $50.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Exactly!! SD STB's should be $50 today and HD STB's should be $75 today.
>>>
>>>You mean like in Australia, right. Oh, no, STBs are US$500 there.

No, as I said the lowest priced HD receiver in OZ is $301. But that is
not true since with a Google I find that the TEAC DVB800 is now being
sold for AU $350 or US$277.

http://www.playnow.com.au/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=pr...;f=1;t=004081


>>
>>DTV STB's are as low as $77 in OZ and $35 in the UK.
>
>
> There are no HD STBs in the UK at all, and none Australia for less than US$500.
>
> Also, post a link for a SD STB in the UK that sells for £24 (which is US$35 at current exchange rates).
>
>
>>>Or maybe the UK. No, there's no HD there.
>>
>>Satellite HD there with two more offerings on the way. Lots of talk of terrestrial HD in the UK now.
>
>
> Post a link for a US$75 HD STB that works in the UK.
>
>
>>>How about those US$75 HD STBs in Berlin? Nope, no HD there either.
>>
>>Satellite HD in Germany with terrestrial HD and MPEG-4 coming to France.
>
>
> Post a link for a US$75 HD STB that works in Berlin.
>
>
>>>Or maybe Japan? Nope, standalone HD STBs are close to US$500 there, too.
>>
>>Doesn't seem to be much of a market for STB's in Japan, everyone seems to be buying integrated sets.
>
>
> ...because that's all that is currently available. What about legacy displays? US$500+ for COFDM HDTV STBs for those displays.
>
>
>> They do suggest that the DTV receivers being added to cell phones will only raise the price of the phone by $45.
>
>
> There are no DTV receivers being added to cell phones in Japan. There are *analog* TV receivers being added to cell phones in Japan.

No, wrong again they are adding DTV receivers to cell phones in Japan.
Terrestrial COFDM ISDB-T, Satellite DTV receivers for cell phones and
DAB Eureka 147 terrestrial also (COFDM also). Most countries including
the US will be awash in DTV cell phones in a few years.
>
> But, these aren't HD, anyway, so who cares if they only cost US$45.

HD is just a resolution why would you need such a resolution on a cell
phone? In fact HD does not make sense until you get to something over
42" IMO where a theater experience begins to take place.
>
>
>>>How about Korea? From what I can tell, it looks like HD STBs can be had for about US$300. Still not US$75, but once again only ATSC is able to
>>>provide cheap HD STBs.

ATSC cannot even provide working STB's in a multipath environment. The
FCC specifically avoided setting any performance standards for ATSC
receivers since no manufacturer could meet the minimal standards they
could have set with a straight face. NO 8-VSB receiver sold to date
should ever have been on the market. The first 8-VSB that meets minimal
standards is the non existent 5th generation from LG.
>>>
>>
>>Well the much larger market of Korea matches the market in OZ at around $300.
>
>
> More of Bob's strange math. The cheapest HD STBs in Australia are US$500, but that's "around US$300". I guess those US$77 STBs in Australia really
> cost US$125...that's "around US$77".

No again, the Legend LSD2 SD-STB sells for AU$99 which is US$ 77. And
as we showed above you can find TEAC HD receivers in OZ for US$277.

http://www.legendmemory.com/modules.php?op=modload&name...
>
>
>>COFDM receivers would cost less than $100 in the US today if COFDM had been allowed in 2000.
>
>
> Whoopee, another wrong prediction from Bob. Still oh-for, I see. ATSC receivers *are* US$200 today, no prediction necessary. The best COFDM
> can do is US$500 for and HDTV receiver, even though the same number of COFDM HD receivers have been sold in Australia as ATSC HD receivers in
> the US, at least according to Bob's other posts. I wonder why they can't get the price down to US$200 there, even though they have the same
> quantity of scale.

Not the same "quantity of scale" whatever that means. A manufacturer of
STB's looking at OZ sees a potential market of 4 million, the same
manufacturer looking at the US sees a market of 109 million and with
COFDM another market of unknown quantity in the US.

The most telling reality in OZ is that this incredibly small market has
attracted so many manufacturers who have so many models of receivers and
who are so active in selling these receivers at retail with advertising
and salesperson training etc. NONE of which you see in the world's
largest and richest market the US when it comes to ATSC. No getting
around it ATSC is a complete flop. A disaster and no one should buy any
ATSC 8-VSB receiver before at least the LG 5th generation receiver is
offered.

In OZ because COFDM allows for the manufacture of SD receivers at a cost
savings over HD and since the public is offered a multicast of both HD
and SD the public has shown that they prefer SD which also has made the
market for HD even smaller. In the US 8-VSB only offers HD because there
is little savings in making an SD limited receiver.

Also the Hisence $200 receiver is now an "inventory item" which they
want to see depleted. I suspect that Hisense considers themselves burned
by this experience. They may not offer another such receiver once this
one is sold out. You may only see Hisense receivers in low cost
integrated HDTV sets in the future. Hisense had basically sold this
receiver to USDTV which was responsible for its marketing at WalMart.

Bob Miller
>
Anonymous
March 14, 2005 3:20:42 AM

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

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>>> STB's should be $50.
>>>
>>>
>> Exactly!! SD STB's should be $50 today and HD STB's should be $75
>> today.
>
[wnip]
> Still not US$75, but once again only ATSC is
> able to provide cheap HD STBs.

Err - or you could equally argue that the world's largest HD broadcast
market, with more HD than any other territory, is selling HD set top boxes
at the lowest cost... Personally I think this is far more a result of the
size of the market, and the relative wealth of the US broadcast industry,
rather than a specific result of the 8VSB modulation scheme.

The fact that the US broadcast industry has the budgets to produce a large
amount of HD programming and has a huge market for sales is probably a
greater reason why receivers are cheaper.

Out of interest how much is the cheapest 8VSB ATSC receiver - presumably
there are SD-output only receivers for those who want to convert their SD
sets in their kitchens and bedrooms, or kids rooms, without wasting money on
HD output stages they are never going to use?

Steve
Anonymous
March 14, 2005 3:31:51 AM

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

Jeff Rife wrote:
> Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>> Jeff Rife wrote:
>>> Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>>>
>>>>> STB's should be $50.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exactly!! SD STB's should be $50 today and HD STB's should be $75
>>>> today.
>>>
>>> You mean like in Australia, right. Oh, no, STBs are US$500 there.
>>
>> DTV STB's are as low as $77 in OZ and $35 in the UK.
>
> There are no HD STBs in the UK at all, and none Australia for less
> than
> US$500.

I think you mean there are no DVB-T HD STBs in the UK - there are DVB-S
receivers on sale for HD-1 via satellite...


>
> Also, post a link for a SD STB in the UK that sells for £24 (which is
> US$35 at current exchange rates).

GBP£29.95 for a Sagem box from Richer Sounds was my first attempt - albeit a
"graded" (i.e. factory refurb job). £50-70 will get you a top-line model -
with 7-day electronic programme guide, digital interactive TV facilities
with digital text services etc., with RGB SCART output, which most decent
European TVs sold since the late 80s (and almost all currently on sale) have
accepted.

One of the major reasons that HD has taken longer to take off in Europe is
that RGB delivered 576/50i in 16:9 actually looks pretty good on average
sized European 16:9 TVs - certainly a hell of a lot better than 4:3 NTSC,
and quite a bit better than 4:3 PAL. The picture quality incentive driving
HD adoption in Europe has only really taken off with the move to larger,
flat-screen displays - and also the requirement for pay-TV and subscription
TV services to have a "killer app" that their multicasting free-to-air
terrestrial digital competitors can't currently broadcast.

In the US HD has been inextricably linked with 16:9 sets in the
"mainstream". In Europe, 16:9 sets are a fact of standard definition life,
and have been for over 10 years.

>
>>> Or maybe the UK. No, there's no HD there.

Not via DVB-T - but DVB-S boxes for HD-1 are on-sale - albeit using MPEG2
and DVB-S - both of which are unlikely to be the European HD standards -
MPEG4 and DVB-S2 are more likely to be the favourites.

[snip]

Steve
Anonymous
March 14, 2005 4:15:03 AM

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

Stephen Neal wrote:
> Jeff Rife wrote:
>
>>Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>>
>>>>STB's should be $50.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Exactly!! SD STB's should be $50 today and HD STB's should be $75
>>>today.
>>
> [wnip]
>
>> Still not US$75, but once again only ATSC is
>>able to provide cheap HD STBs.
>
>
> Err - or you could equally argue that the world's largest HD broadcast
> market, with more HD than any other territory, is selling HD set top boxes
> at the lowest cost... Personally I think this is far more a result of the
> size of the market, and the relative wealth of the US broadcast industry,
> rather than a specific result of the 8VSB modulation scheme.
>
> The fact that the US broadcast industry has the budgets to produce a large
> amount of HD programming and has a huge market for sales is probably a
> greater reason why receivers are cheaper.
>
> Out of interest how much is the cheapest 8VSB ATSC receiver - presumably
> there are SD-output only receivers for those who want to convert their SD
> sets in their kitchens and bedrooms, or kids rooms, without wasting money on
> HD output stages they are never going to use?
>
> Steve
>
>
No there are no SD only converters as we call them. They have been
promised for donkeys years and LG promised to have a $100 unit by 2007
last week.

The more likely course of action though is what they do not what they
say. What they are doing is not producing even HD 5th Generation receivers.

I guess if the government gave them a check for 20 million converters
they might consider it in 2007. The way 8-VSB is set up there is not
much savings in producing an SD unit I am told.

The real problem in the US is that our FCC and MANDATED receivers into
every TV set so that 85% of the population who depend on cable or
satellite can subsidize the 15% who depend on OTA. Sorry that should be
the 4.5% who depend on OTA and can't afford converter STB's. It seems
there are 9% of that 15% who just don't give a damn about TV at all.

Now there you have the Republican's idea of how to do something with our
democratic free market economy. You force 85 households to buy something
that they don't need so that 4.5 households can get it at a lower price.
But then they talk of giving it too those households for free.

So why I ASK in despair do the other 85% have to waste their money on
integrated receivers?
Anonymous
March 14, 2005 4:46:19 AM

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

Stephen Neal wrote:
> Jeff Rife wrote:
>
>>Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>>
>>>Jeff Rife wrote:
>>>
>>>>Bob Miller (robmx@earthlink.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>STB's should be $50.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Exactly!! SD STB's should be $50 today and HD STB's should be $75
>>>>>today.
>>>>
>>>>You mean like in Australia, right. Oh, no, STBs are US$500 there.
>>>
>>>DTV STB's are as low as $77 in OZ and $35 in the UK.
>>
>>There are no HD STBs in the UK at all, and none Australia for less
>>than
>>US$500.
>
>
> I think you mean there are no DVB-T HD STBs in the UK - there are DVB-S
> receivers on sale for HD-1 via satellite...
>
>
>
>>Also, post a link for a SD STB in the UK that sells for £24 (which is
>>US$35 at current exchange rates).

Current exchange rates for US$35 is UK£18.10 but at the time before
Christmas it was UK£20.

Someone had a COFDM receiver on sale for £20 then. I will try to find it
but probably can't.
>
>
> GBP£29.95 for a Sagem box from Richer Sounds was my first attempt - albeit a
> "graded" (i.e. factory refurb job).

£29.95 converts to US$51.61 today. I will look for the lowest price
tomorrow.

Bob Miller

£50-70 will get you a top-line model -
> with 7-day electronic programme guide, digital interactive TV facilities with digital text services etc., with RGB SCART output, which most decent
> European TVs sold since the late 80s (and almost all currently on sale) have accepted.
>
> One of the major reasons that HD has taken longer to take off in Europe is that RGB delivered 576/50i in 16:9 actually looks pretty good on average
> sized European 16:9 TVs - certainly a hell of a lot better than 4:3 NTSC, and quite a bit better than 4:3 PAL. The picture quality incentive driving
> HD adoption in Europe has only really taken off with the move to larger, flat-screen displays - and also the requirement for pay-TV and subscription
> TV services to have a "killer app" that their multicasting free-to-air terrestrial digital competitors can't currently broadcast.
>
> In the US HD has been inextricably linked with 16:9 sets in the "mainstream". In Europe, 16:9 sets are a fact of standard definition life,
> and have been for over 10 years.
>
>
>>>>Or maybe the UK. No, there's no HD there.
>
>
> Not via DVB-T - but DVB-S boxes for HD-1 are on-sale - albeit using MPEG2 and DVB-S - both of which are unlikely to be the European HD standards -
> MPEG4 and DVB-S2 are more likely to be the favourites.
>
> [snip]
>
> Steve
>
>
!