Home cinema - OTA sucks by design

HomeCinemaBanter (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/index.php)

- High definition TV (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)

- - OTA sucks by design (http://www.homecinemabanter.com/showthread.php?t=3673)

"Bob Miller" wrote in message
hlink.net...
:
: I suggest that reception problems, cost of receivers, lack of receivers that
: would both be inexpensive enough and ACTUALLY available for converting DTV
: signals to analog TV sets are some of the main problems that there is a
: disaster in the US DTV transition.

====================
What disaster?
Care to provide some real basis for that insane claim?
====================
:
: So what would you suggest the reason is for the DTV OTA disaster if not the
: above?

=========================
Once again, there is no disaster.
==========================
:
: You can't say lack of programming because people are buying HDTV receivers
: to watch DVDs and cable and satellite while ignoring OTA receivers which
: would allow them to receive HD programs OTA where most of the HDTV content
: is.

========================
Virtually ALL HD receivers handle OTA.
You are obviously ignorant of the facts concerning a subject you love to spout forth
upon.
=========================
:

"Bob Miller" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"John 'Shaggy' Kolesar" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 07:29:30 -0700, wrote:

"Bob Miller" wrote in message
...

:
: No so far HDTV OTA is a flop, everywhere.

=================
Really?
What world are you living in?
====================

I imagine there can be all sorts of reception problems when you live
under a bridge.

John.

I suggest that reception problems, cost of receivers, lack of receivers
that
would both be inexpensive enough and ACTUALLY available for converting DTV
signals to analog TV sets are some of the main problems that there is a
disaster in the US DTV transition.

If we had converted or did convert now to DVB-T COFDM those problems would
be solved. SDTV converters are available at as low as $50 NOW with COFDM.
Reception is simply not a problem whether you are moving or stationary. No
need for rotors and directional antennas to avoid multipath. Multipath is
your friend with COFDM DVB-T.

Living under a bridge would not be a problem with COFDM either.

So what would you suggest the reason is for the DTV OTA disaster if not
the
above?

You can't say lack of programming because people are buying HDTV receivers
to watch DVDs and cable and satellite while ignoring OTA receivers which
would allow them to receive HD programs OTA where most of the HDTV content
is.

That last sentence should read that people are buying HDTV monitors not
"HDTV receivers". That is people are buying the HDTV monitors but ignoring
the OTA receivers.

So why are people specifically not buying OTA receivers? They are buying
them in droves in Europe and they don't even have the biggest draw for DTV
OTA, HDTV.

In Berlin 95% of people have cable or satellite and the OTA DTV does not
offer HDTV and yet they are buying all the receivers they can get. Why?

Something does not make sense here. We have the killer ap, HDTV. People
ARE
buying HDTV sets but they are NOT BUYING THE OTA RECEIVERS!!!

In Europe they do not have the killer ap, HDTV. People are buying OTA DTV
receivers. They don't have to, they have more cable customers than we do.

Why? The receivers are inexpensive, they work plug and play with no fancy
antenna cost or legwork and they are available, lots of choice.

BTW BMW and Mercedes have announced that they will be including DTV
receivers in their vehicles.

So make another joke or try to answer the questions.

"Bob Miller" wrote in message hlink.net...
....
The DTV OTA transition is an utter disaster by any measure in the US and the
mandate will not help.

I suppose I could be faulted for feeding the trolls but I think that
leaving his bizarre comments unanswered would be a worse mistake. Bob
make statements that, while they could be characterized as opinion,
are just so remote from reality that they are utterly misleading. This
newsgroup is a little backwater for discussion of the topic of HDTV
but it is indexed by Google and many may casually look for information
here. Anyone truly interested in the topic needs to visit
www.avsforum.com to see a lively, wide ranging discussion.

Anyone who visits a place like AVS Forum will realize that HDTV is a
reality in the US (ahead of anywhere else, at this point, since the
Japanese had an expensive false start with analog technology). In any
regulatory transition like this one from NTSC to ATSC standards, which
is slated to run from 1998 to 2006, there will be many incidents and
conflicts. It is expensive and many parties will gain while others
will lose. But I think it can safely be said that it is all over
except for the shouting. In Minneapolis - St Paul all of the NTSC
stations are on the air also with their corresponding ATSC stations.
I'd be curious to hear how many other locations are also "done". The
technicians here and elsewhere have issues of proper synchronization
between audio and video some times. An HD program is occasionally sent
in SD because someone fails to flip a switch.

But it is done. You can go to stores, buy the equipment, install it
and it works. Check in on some of those forums and see how impressed
many are with the results. As is ALWAYS the case with technology we
have a self selected minority of early adopters who voluntarily pay
higher prices, put up with technical glitches so they can have today
what others patiently wait to have much later. We are still in the
early adopter stage which always starts slowly -- recall personal
computers in the 70's, prerecorded video in the 80's, internet
commercialization in the 90's, DVD's in the late 90's and now HDTV.
They seem like they will forever remain hobbyist niches and then the
price and technology reach a certain unpredictable point and it
becomes ubiquitous. Don't forget that Bill Gates published a book in
1995 and didn't mention the internet (later editions were edited). I
suppose by Bob Miller's reasoning the internet was doomed.

Bob's continual complaints of the failure of OTA TV should be viewed
in context. If he were to claim that the history of NTSC OTA from the
fifties to the present is a disaster I would be inclined to agree.
Initially everyone received TV by antenna and it held 100% of the
market. Until the advent of satellite TV there were many places where
OTA reception was not feasible. That made cable TV a reality going
back at least into the sixties. What was surprising was how popular
cable became in cities where it should have been possible to get the
same signals for free. But OTA reception of NTSC was often
disappointing. Since cable TV operators were able to charge directly
for their service, premium channels like HBO were created and the rest
is history. Currently cable penetration is somewhere around 70%.

The reason I bother with all this exposition is that OTA TV is
CURRENTLY a disaster. What is interesting is that ATSC has the
potential to change that dramatically. Watching ATSC stations is like
watching DVD video but in the case of HD programs it is dramatically
better. If there is a problem with a station's signal you may lose it
but normally it has none of the manifold defects of NTSC reception.
Despite Bob's continual drumbeat of gloom and doom all I have to do is
turn it on and watch (like Monday night's football game) to see that
in my case his thesis has no basis. It's here, it works, it's cool
(and free).

"Steve Bryan" wrote in message
om...
"Bob Miller" wrote in message
hlink.net...
...
The DTV OTA transition is an utter disaster by any measure in the US and
the
mandate will not help.

I suppose I could be faulted for feeding the trolls but I think that
leaving his bizarre comments unanswered would be a worse mistake. Bob
make statements that, while they could be characterized as opinion,
are just so remote from reality that they are utterly misleading. This
newsgroup is a little backwater for discussion of the topic of HDTV
but it is indexed by Google and many may casually look for information
here. Anyone truly interested in the topic needs to visit
www.avsforum.com to see a lively, wide ranging discussion.

Anyone who visits a place like AVS Forum will realize that HDTV is a
reality in the US (ahead of anywhere else, at this point, since the
Japanese had an expensive false start with analog technology). In any
regulatory transition like this one from NTSC to ATSC standards, which
is slated to run from 1998 to 2006, there will be many incidents and
conflicts. It is expensive and many parties will gain while others
will lose. But I think it can safely be said that it is all over
except for the shouting. In Minneapolis - St Paul all of the NTSC
stations are on the air also with their corresponding ATSC stations.
I'd be curious to hear how many other locations are also "done". The
technicians here and elsewhere have issues of proper synchronization
between audio and video some times. An HD program is occasionally sent
in SD because someone fails to flip a switch.

But it is done. You can go to stores, buy the equipment, install it
and it works. Check in on some of those forums and see how impressed
many are with the results. As is ALWAYS the case with technology we
have a self selected minority of early adopters who voluntarily pay
higher prices, put up with technical glitches so they can have today
what others patiently wait to have much later. We are still in the
early adopter stage which always starts slowly -- recall personal
computers in the 70's, prerecorded video in the 80's, internet
commercialization in the 90's, DVD's in the late 90's and now HDTV.
They seem like they will forever remain hobbyist niches and then the
price and technology reach a certain unpredictable point and it
becomes ubiquitous. Don't forget that Bill Gates published a book in
1995 and didn't mention the internet (later editions were edited). I
suppose by Bob Miller's reasoning the internet was doomed.

Bob's continual complaints of the failure of OTA TV should be viewed
in context. If he were to claim that the history of NTSC OTA from the
fifties to the present is a disaster I would be inclined to agree.
Initially everyone received TV by antenna and it held 100% of the
market. Until the advent of satellite TV there were many places where
OTA reception was not feasible. That made cable TV a reality going
back at least into the sixties. What was surprising was how popular
cable became in cities where it should have been possible to get the
same signals for free. But OTA reception of NTSC was often
disappointing. Since cable TV operators were able to charge directly
for their service, premium channels like HBO were created and the rest
is history. Currently cable penetration is somewhere around 70%.

The reason I bother with all this exposition is that OTA TV is
CURRENTLY a disaster. What is interesting is that ATSC has the
potential to change that dramatically. Watching ATSC stations is like
watching DVD video but in the case of HD programs it is dramatically
better. If there is a problem with a station's signal you may lose it
but normally it has none of the manifold defects of NTSC reception.
Despite Bob's continual drumbeat of gloom and doom all I have to do is
turn it on and watch (like Monday night's football game) to see that
in my case his thesis has no basis. It's here, it works, it's cool
(and free).

In your case it works. You have no dropouts at all. That is wonderful. And
if no one had any problems with ATSC you would be right. But they do. In a
high percentage of cases ATSC does not work as well as NTSC does. This was
documented by the MSTV test of 2000. And when ATSC fails it is catastrophic,
you get a blank screen. With the failed NTSC broadcast you at least could
many times still follow the game even when you had a plane fly over that
caused interference. With ATSC you lose it completely. ATSC is far inferior
to NTSC because of this IMO. And it is why ATSC is continuing and will
continue to follow the ongoing NTSC failure. People are used to the
reliability of cable and satellite. If you want them to go back to OTA you
have to offer something at least as good as cable or satellite reception.
Satellite is not even that good. They have dropouts in thunderstorms in New
York City and that is why my wife said we had to get rid of Dish. And the
dropouts on ATSC are a thousand times worse than Dish.

I have a Yagi antenna aimed at the Empire State Building which is on 34th
St. I am in the East River at what would be 66th St. I have full view of the
ESB and its 1200 foot antennas and am all of 32 blocks away. The are
transmitting at high power levels probably a MegaWatt or higher. I get Fox,
CBS and a Spanish channel. You can't watch them however. The dropouts come
with incredible regularity. There is all kinds of dynamic multipath in this
city as in many others and in many other non city areas.

At the same time COFDM is being broadcast from below Canal St. from an
antenna at 400 ft. altitude. I have no line of sight to that antenna. My
receive antenna is a 4 inch vertical omni antenna that cost $4.00 and the
power level of the broadcast is a 100 Watt transmitter. I have no problem
receiving the COFDM broadcast. In fact I can take my $65 receiver and my $4
antenna and put it on the dashboard of my car and can receive that COFDM
signal all over Manhattan while moving. In fact can receive while going 75
mph on the FDR Drive.

Why are we wrestling with this disaster of a modulation when a far better
one exist? Actually three far better ones exist. Why are we going through
this farce? You talk of less expensive receivers ATSC coming. With COFDM
they are here. How many do you want?

It is amazing how people who are lucky enough to get decent reception
suggest that this is true of most people. It is not. I find your comments
bizarre, that a sample of one, yourself, proves ATSC is OK. And your reading
of the AVSFORUM is amazing also. All over the AVSFORUM people talk of
incredible reception problems and the lengths they have to go to for a
signal. The AVSFORUM had turned off more people on HDTV than anything else.
I have read numerous post there where people say just that, they will wait
for things to work.

Bob Miller wrote:

In your case it works. You have no dropouts at all. That is wonderful. And
if no one had any problems with ATSC you would be right. But they do. In a
high percentage of cases ATSC does not work as well as NTSC does. \

Please cite some facts to back up this statement. The combined history
of the poster's to this newsgroup put lie to that statement. Virtually
everyone who has tried to receive ATSC and reported here has had
excellent results.

The few who have not had success also report having very poor NTSC
reception. Other reports of poor reception come from cases of
co-location of high power NTSC and low power ATSC broadcasts or other
reasons that have more to do with transition than modulation.

Even your poster boy for ATSC failure, Mark Shubin, reports that he has
received Philadelphia ATSC in his Manhattan apartment.

Matthew

--
http://www.mlmartin.com/bbq/

Thermodynamics For Dummies: You can't win.
You can't break even.
You can't get out of the game.

Matthew L. Martin ) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
Virtually
everyone who has tried to receive ATSC and reported here has had
excellent results.

The few who have not had success also report having very poor NTSC
reception. Other reports of poor reception come from cases of
co-location of high power NTSC and low power ATSC broadcasts or other
reasons that have more to do with transition than modulation.

Two interesting stories:

The local PAX and WB are unwatchable for me on analog. Partly this is
because their antennas are not clustered with the rest, and so I am not
pointed at them. Even if I point at them, though, I wouldn't watch signals
that bad no matter how important the show. Their ATSC channels, though,
are just fine. The WB station is digital 51 at 125kW and analog 50 at
2450 kW, with both broadcasting from the same tower. Both co-location
*and* adjacent channels, and digital is better than analog. PAX doesn't
have adjacent channels, but the transmitters are co-located, with channel
66 analog at 3400kW and channel 43 digital at 90kW.

Second, a guy down the street from me was having problems with one digital
station, and I was just fine. We're in the path of hurricane Isabel, so
we both took down our outside antennas, and he hooked up a Zenith Silver
Sensor indoor antenna temporarily. When he did, the problem channel was
fine. After looking at the outdoor antenna, it turns out something was
wrong with it that apparently caused problems with just that one channel.

--
Jeff Rife |
301-916-8131 | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverThe...ortOfKings.gif