[opendtv] Re: News: DTV Boxes Could Cost $1 Billion
- From: "Dale Kelly" <res0xtey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 19:53:42 -0700
And, my original question was: can/will Motorola utilize the 5th or higher
generation technology in it's $65 converter box? That is a great price, if
so.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dale Kelly" <res0xtey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 7:04 PM
Subject: [opendtv] Re: News: DTV Boxes Could Cost $1 Billion
> Frank Wrote:
> > "Reception equal to, or better than, NTSC" is never going to be true for
> all the people all the time, even with the most perfect DTV receiver that
> one can conceive. We've been through all this many times -- the problem of
> the 'digital cliff,' the FCC DTV Planning Factor basis of 'DTV reception
> wherever Grade 3 NTSC reception is possible,' etc.
>
> I very aware of this and that is why I stated that NTSC reception should
be
> replicated by the proposed DTV converter box "as best practical". Clearly
> we're dealing with different dynamics and, as you very well stated below,
> there can never be a complete match. However, my original point was that,
if
> the free Set Top box approach to speeding the transition is to be
> successful, it must be based upon the best current technology. Until
> recently, there truly was no ATSC receiver technology capable of providing
> the required performance (IMO).
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eory Frank-p22212" <Frank.Eory@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 3:55 PM
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: News: DTV Boxes Could Cost $1 Billion
>
>
> > >From: "Dale Kelly" <res0xtey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 12:37:09 -0700
> >
> > >>Give them a converter box and they can continue using that old NTSC
> > >>set until it dies. If they buy a new TV with an integrated ATSC
> > >>receiver, their problem is solved and they don't need a government
> handout.
> >
> > >That was understood and makes sense. My concern is to assure, as best
as
> > >practical, that the DTV box provide reception equal to, or better than,
> NTSC
> > >and a statement to that effect from Motorola would be helpful.
> >
> > "Reception equal to, or better than, NTSC" is never going to be true for
> all the people all the time, even with the most perfect DTV receiver that
> one can conceive. We've been through all this many times -- the problem of
> the 'digital cliff,' the FCC DTV Planning Factor basis of 'DTV reception
> wherever Grade 3 NTSC reception is possible,' etc.
> >
> > The biggest problems I see with reception 'guarantees' are (1) VHF to
UHF
> transition, which will require some OTA viewers to install new antennas,
(2)
> DTV ERP and (3) comparisons of DTV to NTSC where NTSC is worse than Grade
3.
> >
> > This last one is especially difficult. For example, how many people will
> watch a very snowy NTSC broadcast of high-value content (like a football
> game), if that is the best they can get? You can't expect such a consumer
to
> find any comfort in the fact the he "just missed" having perfect DTV
> reception by only 1 or 2 dB, when he's looking at a blank screen. On the
> other hand, he will get perfect DTV video on other channels or in other
> reception conditions where NTSC was far less than perfect. From a
reception
> perspective -- as perceived by individual consumers -- not by engineers
> taking measurements -- some things will be better, but some will be worse.
> >
> > DTV is *not* equal to NTSC, and DTV reception will never equal NTSC
> reception, just as apples will never equal bananas. You could say that
with
> advanced receivers, with stations at full power, etc., that for most
people,
> most of the time, DTV reception will be better than NTSC reception. But
that
> still doesn't help the guy who misses it by 1 dB on the day of the big
game,
> who wishes he could still receive the snowy NTSC version rather than
nothing
> at all.
> >
> > >Many of those refusniks do live in poorer urban environs and I assume
> there
> > >will be a backlash should current reception not be replicated.
> >
> > There will be a backlash for many reasons, but I think reception issues
> will be far down on the list.
> >
> > -- Frank
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >
> > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> FreeLists.org
> >
> > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
>
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: