Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

I recently travelled to Japan. One of the reasons for my trip was to
investigate, study, and report on the status of digital television in
Japan, including the performance of mobile digital television reception.

I am pleased to report that, contrary to the claims of one "Psycho" Bob
Miller, the Japanese have not repealed the laws of physics.


As part of this effort, I purchased a Sharp PW-TC900 "Papyrus" Japanese
portable digital television (actually, a handheld dictionary/encyclopedia
tool with 1seg capability):

This is a very recent model, released in December 2006, and represents the
state-of-the-art of Japanese mobile television; and more to the point it
represents a substantial improvement over earlier models. I needed a
newer shirt-pocket dictionary tool anyway (mine was over 10 years old), so
this was a no-brainer purchase.

Here is the info about it (in Japanese):
http://www.sharp.co.jp/products/pc_m...900/index.html
What the picture does not show is that there is a rod antenna that needs
to be pulled out and extended in order to watch digital TV. Some more
pictures that show the antenna:
http://www.sharp.co.jp/products/pc_m...00.html#t13707

It fits in a shirt pocket. It's kinda cute. The dictionary/encyclopedia
functions probably aren't useful unless you can read Japanese. I'm using
them a lot.


First some background about Japanese digital television:

Japanese digital television channels use ISDB-T, and are divided into 14
segments. One segment is a guard segment between channels, leaving 13
usable segments. HDTV broadcasts use 12 segments; SD broadcasts use 4
segments. Effectively, the choices for a Japanese broadcaster boil down
to a single HD channel, or 3 SD subchannels. Either way, a single segment
is left over.

That single segment can transmit a 320x240 video image. This is 4:3, so a
widescreen program (which are the overwhelming majority of programs in
Japan) are 320x180. Subtitles are often put in the unused 320x60 viewing
area.

I did not observe any broadcasters using 3 SD subchannels, and I inspected
four different markets. That does not mean that it isn't done; just that
I did not see it. All the broadcasters are primarily in HD, and go to SD
only for old 4:3 programming. Even cartoons are mostly 16:9.

This means that, unlike the USA, there is no way for a broadcaster to have
an HD primary channel and an SD secondary channel.

Japanese broadcast markets are quite small, with seemingly little greater
than a 20 mile radius before all the channels are different. Then again,
unless you're on the expressway at one of the few times when there is no
traffic jam (hah!), you'll probably spend enough time in a market to watch
a complete TV program or two.

There is *no*, nada, zip effort, to produce mobile televisions that
receive the primary HDTV broadcast. Nor does there seem to be any
intention to do such a thing. The idea is that one-seg is the solution
for mobile, and that broadcasters should simulcast HDTV with one-seg.

Rabbit ear antennas are non-existant, even on smaller TVs. It just isn't
possible, neither for analog nor digital. Japanese homes are constructed
to strict building codes with extensive amounts of metal reinforcement.
The Japanese have high and complex TV masts on their roofs that make the
most gonzo US outdoor antenna look puny by comparison. Often, they have a
mast AND cable AND satellite.

I have a 1988 vintage Casio TV-410 handheld analog TV with Japanese
channels. It has an extended rod antenna, much like a 1960s
transistor radio, and indoor reception is extremely spotty.


OK, so how does 1seg do?

320x180 is a small viewing area. Not as small as the 1" analog TV-410,
but still quite small. It can be zoomed to 480x272 on the PW-TC900, but
like most zoomed TV the picture looks ratty. It's still 320x180. After
trying it in both ways I left it at 320x180 since the picture was cleaner
that way.

Indoor reception is just as spotty as with analog. The difference is that
where analog gets snow, 1seg pixelates and drops out, often for seconds at
a time.

Don't believe Psycho Bob's claims that impulse noise isn't a problem. It
is. This isn't as much a problem for the living room HDTV since it's
being fed by a gigantic rooftop antenna and/or cable, but for 1seg it
basically means that the start of any motor causes it to hiccup.

Often the cause is indeterminate. It just suddenly goes from full bars to
zero bars, stays that way for a few seconds, then comes back.


But what about mobile reception?

I spent a considerable amount of time testing reception while riding in
cars, commuter trains, and long-distance trains.

Simply put, it doesn't work.

As commented in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1seg
the signal quality deteriorates quickly when the vehicle is in motion.
We're talking major pixellation and dropouts every few seconds.

An external diversity (Mickey Mouse ears on your car!) antenna helps, but
then it isn't exactly handheld any more.

The Japanese constributor who wrote the above-mentioned Wikipedia article
commented that "the purpose of service is still unclear". This is an
understatement, to say the least.

If you're willing to "assume 1seg viewing position" and hold that
position, you'll get a TV picture and sound.


What about 1seg cell phones?

I'm glad that you asked. I'm a customer of SoftBank in Japan, and I
happen to have their latest catalog in front of me. Out of 23 3G phones,
only two have television capability; one is 1seg and the other is dual
1seg/analog. Two (out of 6) non-3G phones have television capability, and
both are analog-only.

Put another way, 1seg is a fringe part of the cell phone market. 20 out
of the 23 3G phones have GSM roaming capabilities outside of Japan, but
neither of the 3G television phones have it. I consider international
roaming to be quite a bit more important than TV on a phone! Neither of
the 3G TV phones have GPS either.


Conclusion:

ISDB-T is either HD plus 1seg, or up to 3 SD plus 1seg. You can't have an
HD main channel and an SD subchannel as is common in the US.

Rabbit ears and other indoor antennas are generally unsuitable for both
ATSC and ISDB-T.

1seg exists, and it works for some definition of "working". I found that
reception was satisfactory only if I sat down at a location where I got a
good signal. It did not work well in cars or above-ground trains, and it
did not work at all in underground trains.

Japan has very small TV market areas. Just a short distance from Kanazawa
and you're in Toyama with all different channels. Many of these stations
are affiliated with others in other market areas, but the idea of being
able to travel any distance and watch a program from beginning to end is
just not realisitic.

1seg is a toy. It has a very high neat-o factor, but it is a fringe
product and aimed at techies on the fringes who must have the latest toys.
The Japanese are not rushing out to watch TV on 1seg.

Just about everybody has HDTV, though, and has had it for many years
thanks to cable or satellite. Terrestrial digital broadcasts are just
another source.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

So remember, whenever Psycho Bob Miller talks about COFDM based digital TV
systems in foreign countries, remember that the laws of physics apply no
matter what: if the input signal suchs badly enough, no modulation can
recover.

Also remember that mobile television is a toy. People are buying HDTV.
They are not buying into mobile.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 23:17:16 -0800, Mark Crispin
wrote:

[...] "the purpose of service is still unclear". This is an
understatement, to say the least.

Same thought was on the tip of my tongue throughout the entire
article.

Why is this service considered important? Personally, I have
absolutely no desire to watch TV on such a small screen, in public
places, riding on a bus or in a car.

I spend a fair amount of time in the back of NYC cabs, where even if I
try to read, I get dizzy from all the motion. I'm sure it wouldn't be
any different trying to watch TV on a handheld device.

What's the primary application for one of these?

A_C

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

"Mark Crispin" wrote in message
da.com...
So remember, whenever Psycho Bob Miller talks about COFDM based digital TV
systems in foreign countries, remember that the laws of physics apply no
matter what: if the input signal suchs badly enough, no modulation can
recover.

Also remember that mobile television is a toy. People are buying HDTV.
They are not buying into mobile.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

I see mobile HD as something you have in the back seat of a limo, and you
watch it on the way home from the airport. Not a market of any meaningful
size.

OTH, there is mobile non HD TV in the US, supplied by some cellular
providers. This makes more sense, because you are served from the nearest
cell tower. The newest version actually simulate broadcasting, because if 3
people in the same cell watch the same program, they will all be sharing the
same RF channel/time slot. You might say they are put on a party line.

Tam

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Agent_C wrote:
Why is this service considered important? Personally, I have
absolutely no desire to watch TV on such a small screen, in public
places, riding on a bus or in a car.

I think that's the point. Mobile TV is very much a fringe/toy market.

The standard argument made when the skeptics dismiss a new technology is
that historically the skeptics have been wrong about other technologies
that turned out to be so disruptive they completely replaced the previous
technology. Numerous examples abound: trains, automobiles, TV, Internet,
etc.

However, often the skeptics are right; and they have a particularly good
track record when the new technology has a comparable in existing
technology.

In the case of mobile digital TV, the comparable is mobile analog TV.
Mobile analog TV has been around for years. My Casio TV-400 (US channels)
and Casio TV-410 (Japan channels) handheld analog 2" screen TVs are both
1988 products. The form factor is about the same as a 1960's transistor
radio. That technology was essentally perfected at that time; today's $50
handheld analog TVs (sold in blister packs) are largely unchanged.

These handheld analog TVs work fairly well, especially outdoors when
seated someplace. But, other than once or twice when they first buy it,
most people don't use them within a vehicle. You occasionally see someone
at a football game tracking another game with one. I have mine within my
daily bag so I can turn on the TV news in the event of a disaster.

But, for the most part, the fate of a handheld analog TV is to sit
someplace unused, collecting dust.

Those who claim that handheld digital TVs are somehow different mistakenly
believe that the problem is that handheld analog TVs don't work well. The
problem with that assumption is that it's wrong.

With a small screen, analog signal problems (ghosting and snow) are
minimized. Reception that would be unbearable in a large screen is quite
acceptable on a bitty TV. There isn't much of a digital advantage.

However, when we consider signal *disruption*, matters are different.
You may have a burst of video interference, or audio hiss, on analog; but
it is of short duration. In digital, the picture pixellates and freezes,
and the audio goes quiet, for several seconds.

The result is that digital is actually *worse*.

People with satellite radio in their cars know this problem quite well.

I spend a fair amount of time in the back of NYC cabs, where even if I
try to read, I get dizzy from all the motion. I'm sure it wouldn't be
any different trying to watch TV on a handheld device.

As the kids say, "well, duh!"

I found that mobile TV, analog or digital, was utterly impractical in a
car (as a passenger). A train or ferry is a different matter, but it is
rare that train or ferry schedules overlap with TV program schedules; and
for long-distances you'll cross markets.

The necessity to use earphones furthered the inconvenience.

My fellow passengers generally had their eyes glued to their mobile
phones, but they were either texting (mail or SMS) their contacts or
playing games. Nobody was watching TV, even those few who had TV cell
phones.

Most TV cell phones on the market today are analog. SoftBank has one
1seg-only model, one 1seg/analog model, and two analog-only models.
Although the end of analog has been announced, that is outside of the
expected lifetime of today's cell phones. We can probably expect that
1seg will take over.

Nonetheless, TV cell phones are a fringe in the market. Given a choice
between a TV cell phone and one with PIM, GPS, and foreign roaming
capabilities, I would choose the latter. So do most Japanese.

What's the primary application for one of these?

It's a toy.

The ubiquitous (in both US and Japan) seat-mounted DVD player is a much
better choice for entertaining children on long car trips (especially
since there is parental control over the material).

Similarly, a portable DVD player is a much better choice for
self-entertainment on long train travel.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
I see mobile HD as something you have in the back seat of a limo, and you
watch it on the way home from the airport. Not a market of any meaningful
size.

You're mistaken -- 1seg is not HD. 1seg is mobile digital TV, at 320x240
resolution. That isn't HD by anybody's definition.

There is no mobile HD anywhere in the world.

OTH, there is mobile non HD TV in the US, supplied by some cellular
providers.

You meant to say "mobile non-TV video content".

This makes more sense, because you are served from the nearest
cell tower. The newest version actually simulate broadcasting, because if 3
people in the same cell watch the same program, they will all be sharing the
same RF channel/time slot. You might say they are put on a party line.

That's essentially how 1seg works, only it's broadcast on a miniscule
subchannel by TV broadcasters.

I have little doubt that someone will eventually figure out how to
piggyback such a thing on ATSC, just as closed captions and stereo were
piggybacked on NTSC (and color was piggy-backed on the monochrome!).
320x240 isn't that much of a bitstream.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

"Mark Crispin" wrote in message
nda.com...
On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
I see mobile HD as something you have in the back seat of a limo, and you
watch it on the way home from the airport. Not a market of any meaningful
size.

You're mistaken -- 1seg is not HD. 1seg is mobile digital TV, at 320x240
resolution. That isn't HD by anybody's definition.


I know that. I was alluding to ideas some people on this newsgroup are
pushing, that ATSC is no good because it won't work mobile. What's the frame
rate on the JA 320x240 ?

Tam
***************************
There is no mobile HD anywhere in the world.

OTH, there is mobile non HD TV in the US, supplied by some cellular
providers.

You meant to say "mobile non-TV video content".

This makes more sense, because you are served from the nearest cell
tower. The newest version actually simulate broadcasting, because if 3
people in the same cell watch the same program, they will all be sharing
the same RF channel/time slot. You might say they are put on a party
line.

That's essentially how 1seg works, only it's broadcast on a miniscule
subchannel by TV broadcasters.

I have little doubt that someone will eventually figure out how to
piggyback such a thing on ATSC, just as closed captions and stereo were
piggybacked on NTSC (and color was piggy-backed on the monochrome!).
320x240 isn't that much of a bitstream.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
I know that. I was alluding to ideas some people on this newsgroup are
pushing, that ATSC is no good because it won't work mobile. What's the frame
rate on the JA 320x240 ?

I don't know. 1seg seemed a bit jerky to me compared to the HDTV of the
same channel. 1seg's maximum video bitrate is only 128kbit/s. Audio is
64kbit/s, and additional data broadcasting is the remaining 60kbit/s.

Since most Japanese TV programming is 16:9, the video is 320x180 rather
than 320x240.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

I just saw in today's NY Times, that Verizon is going to announce on 1/7/07
that they will be offering TV to cellphone customers. They mention 8
channels, including NBC,CBS, Fox, MTV, and possibly ESPN. No technical
details in the article.

Tam
************************************************** **************************
"Mark Crispin" wrote in message
anda.com...
On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
I know that. I was alluding to ideas some people on this newsgroup are
pushing, that ATSC is no good because it won't work mobile. What's the
frame rate on the JA 320x240 ?

I don't know. 1seg seemed a bit jerky to me compared to the HDTV of the
same channel. 1seg's maximum video bitrate is only 128kbit/s. Audio is
64kbit/s, and additional data broadcasting is the remaining 60kbit/s.

Since most Japanese TV programming is 16:9, the video is 320x180 rather
than 320x240.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
I just saw in today's NY Times, that Verizon is going to announce on 1/7/07
that they will be offering TV to cellphone customers. They mention 8
channels, including NBC,CBS, Fox, MTV, and possibly ESPN. No technical
details in the article.

This isn't really broadcast TV, but rather video content delivered via
cell phones. As such, you get to pay for the privilege of receiving it.

Those reception fees are one of the reasons why cell phone providers are
interested in television. The other reason is that the mobile phone
market in most countries of the world is saturated; there are no new
customers out there, thus the only way to acquire more customers is to
steal them from the competition. Hence the addition of bells and whistles
to mobile phones.

It's all an attempt to avoid having to compete by lowering prices.

In Japan, a small number of mobile phones have analog and/or 1seg
(digital) TV tuners, so you don't pay reception fees. These phones
typically lack other, more important, features such as GPS or foreign
roaming capabilities.

Of course, the mobile phone providers also have pay video content.
There's a word in Japanese, "pake-shi" ("death by packet") in which your
mobile phone bill is inflated by the equivalent of hundreds of dollars due
to packet charges associated with downloading video content, games,
ringtones, etc.

The Japanese mobile phone providers also get you by disabling the "free"
bells&whistles functions on the phone if you do not have active mobile
phone service. Put another way, you can't watch OTA TV on an OTA TV
equipped mobile phone after you cancel the mobile phone service.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

Mark Crispin wrote:
All the broadcasters are primarily in HD, and go to SD only for old
4:3 programming. Even cartoons are mostly 16:9.

Mark, would you say that HD program sources are more prevalent in
Japan than in the US? I know that the US's situation--where all six
national commercial broadcast networks have for the past few years
aired about 100% of their prime-time programming (except some reality
shows) in HD--is about seven or eight years ahead of Europe's, but I'd
thought the Japanese deployment (excluding MUSE) was only a step ahead
of Europe's and still behind the US's.

--
URL:http://www.pobox.com/~ylee/ PERTH ---- *

Homemade 2.8TB RAID 5 storage array:
URL:http://groups.google.ca/groups?selm=slrnd1g04a.5mt.ylee%40pobox.com

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On 1/5/2007 1:09 PM, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
"Mark Crispin" wrote in message
da.com...

.. . .
Also remember that mobile television is a toy. People are buying
HDTV. They are not buying into mobile.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding
what to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the
vote.

I see mobile HD as something you have in the back seat of a limo, and
you watch it on the way home from the airport. Not a market of any
meaningful size.

OTH, there is mobile non HD TV in the US, supplied by some cellular
providers. This makes more sense, because you are served from the
nearest cell tower. The newest version actually simulate
broadcasting, because if 3 people in the same cell watch the same
program, they will all be sharing the same RF channel/time slot. You
might say they are put on a party line.

Tam

I'd say there is a HUGE market. Have you noticed how many SUV's and vans
have DVD players. typically watched by children or other family members
sitting in the backseats? How many times have you driven down the road
or stopped at a light and seen a DVD playing? I've already been asked
why a TV tuner isn't available for those screens.

Bernie

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

"Bernie" wrote in message
. ..
On 1/5/2007 1:09 PM, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
"Mark Crispin" wrote in message
da.com...

. . .
Also remember that mobile television is a toy. People are buying HDTV.
They are not buying into mobile.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what
to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the
vote.

I see mobile HD as something you have in the back seat of a limo, and
you watch it on the way home from the airport. Not a market of any
meaningful size.

OTH, there is mobile non HD TV in the US, supplied by some cellular
providers. This makes more sense, because you are served from the nearest
cell tower. The newest version actually simulate broadcasting, because if
3 people in the same cell watch the same program, they will all be
sharing the same RF channel/time slot. You might say they are put on a
party line.

Tam

I'd say there is a HUGE market. Have you noticed how many SUV's and vans
have DVD players. typically watched by children or other family members
sitting in the backseats? How many times have you driven down the road
or stopped at a light and seen a DVD playing? I've already been asked
why a TV tuner isn't available for those screens.

Bernie

There are certainly ways of watching analog TV in a car if you really want
to. I think that DVDs have pretty much taken over that market. 20 years ago
I would (very) accasionally see a car , usually a limo, with a TV antenna on
it - but not any more. Live TV in a car would make sense for sports, though.
Since a car antenna would have less gain than rabit ears, and be close to
the ground, it would be hopeless on a trip.
Tam

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, Yeechang Lee wrote:
Mark, would you say that HD program sources are more prevalent in
Japan than in the US? I know that the US's situation--where all six
national commercial broadcast networks have for the past few years
aired about 100% of their prime-time programming (except some reality
shows) in HD--is about seven or eight years ahead of Europe's, but I'd
thought the Japanese deployment (excluding MUSE) was only a step ahead
of Europe's and still behind the US's.

Your impression is largely correct.

However, most Japanese OTA TV programming is widescreen, even if non-HD,
and has been that way for years. I don't know how it's done, but somehow
Japanese 4:3 and 16:9 TVs both do the right thing on analog channels.

In addition to MUSE, there is some HD on cable and satellite. However,
most cable channels are still SD, and many (particularly foreign origin)
are 4:3. Not surprising.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, Bernie wrote:
I'd say there is a HUGE market. Have you noticed how many SUV's and vans
have DVD players. typically watched by children or other family members
sitting in the backseats? How many times have you driven down the road
or stopped at a light and seen a DVD playing? I've already been asked
why a TV tuner isn't available for those screens.

A DVD player makes sense for kiddie entertainment. A TV tuner does not.

With a DVD, you can control what the youngsters are watching; and more
importantly you aren't distracted by a sudden burst of loud audio for
advertisements.

Furthermore, a DVD is immune to reception disruptions, which (contrary to
the claims of one Psycho Bob Miller) still happen quite often with
COFDM-based modulation.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
Live TV in a car would make sense for sports, though.
Since a car antenna would have less gain than rabit ears, and be close to
the ground, it would be hopeless on a trip.

Cars in Japan with 1seg tuners have to have Space Cadet diversity antennas
to work at all. And remember that this is to get piddly 320x180 video.

And you lose the signal as soon as you get 20 miles from town.
Fortunately Japanese traffic jams mean that that'll take an hour or so.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

"Mark Crispin" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
Live TV in a car would make sense for sports, though. Since a car antenna
would have less gain than rabit ears, and be close to the ground, it
would be hopeless on a trip.

Cars in Japan with 1seg tuners have to have Space Cadet diversity antennas
to work at all. And remember that this is to get piddly 320x180 video.

And you lose the signal as soon as you get 20 miles from town. Fortunately
Japanese traffic jams mean that that'll take an hour or so.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Also, I bet you lose the signal every time a truck or bus passes between you
and the station. Even on a short trip like New York to Philadelphia, you
would probably get no signal in at least the middle 1/3, because people
there have rooftop antennas (or cable).

Tam

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

Tam/WB2TT wrote:
"Mark Crispin" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
Live TV in a car would make sense for sports, though. Since a car antenna
would have less gain than rabit ears, and be close to the ground, it
would be hopeless on a trip.
Cars in Japan with 1seg tuners have to have Space Cadet diversity antennas
to work at all. And remember that this is to get piddly 320x180 video.

And you lose the signal as soon as you get 20 miles from town. Fortunately
Japanese traffic jams mean that that'll take an hour or so.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Also, I bet you lose the signal every time a truck or bus passes between you
and the station. Even on a short trip like New York to Philadelphia, you
would probably get no signal in at least the middle 1/3, because people
there have rooftop antennas (or cable).

Tam


Not true. It only depends on the design of the broadcast network. If you
have enough signal you will be able to receive the signal anywhere. If
the network provides enough signal between Philly and New York you will
get reception. Diversity in broadcast sites and your receiver helps with
Doppler affects.

If you mean with the current US network design and 8-VSB you can forget it.

In Japan they have not built out their OTA network. They have only added
most of their prefectures in the last few months at low power. In time
they will have a ubiquitous network that will work well mobile or fixed
in most of the country.

The US will have the same with new broadcasters. It is just a shame that
we will go on wasting prime RF real estate on channels 2-51 using the
garbage modulation 8-VSB.

Bob Miller

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

Bob Miller wrote:
Tam/WB2TT wrote:


Also, I bet you lose the signal every time a truck or bus passes
between you and the station. Even on a short trip like New York to
Philadelphia, you would probably get no signal in at least the middle
1/3, because people there have rooftop antennas (or cable).

Tam

Not true. It only depends on the design of the broadcast network. If you
have enough signal you will be able to receive the signal anywhere. If
the network provides enough signal between Philly and New York you will
get reception. Diversity in broadcast sites and your receiver helps with
Doppler affects.


Bob Miller

Diversity in broadcast sites = repeater stations?

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
Also, I bet you lose the signal every time a truck or bus passes between you
and the station.

As the kids say, "well, duh!" ;-)

Sometimes, the dropouts had no obvious cause. The signal bar just dived
from full bars to zero bars for no apparent reason other than the fact
that we were moving. Then it would go back to full bars.

Even on a short trip like New York to Philadelphia, you
would probably get no signal in at least the middle 1/3, because people
there have rooftop antennas (or cable).

Actually, the situation in Japan is effectively that you would pass
through several markets, each with a different set of stations (hence you
would have to rescan your receiver), on the NYC - Philly trip.

I was able to receive both NYC and Philly analog channels in Middlesex
County, NJ during my childhood in the 1960s. Nothing of the sort would
happen in Japan. Instead, I would have been receiving the New Brunswick
TV channels, which would be different from the Newark TV channels, which
would be different from the NYC TV channels.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

Jeff Shoaf wrote:
Bob Miller wrote:
Tam/WB2TT wrote:


Also, I bet you lose the signal every time a truck or bus passes
between you and the station. Even on a short trip like New York to
Philadelphia, you would probably get no signal in at least the middle
1/3, because people there have rooftop antennas (or cable).

Tam

Not true. It only depends on the design of the broadcast network. If
you have enough signal you will be able to receive the signal
anywhere. If the network provides enough signal between Philly and
New York you will get reception. Diversity in broadcast sites and your
receiver helps with Doppler affects.


Bob Miller

Diversity in broadcast sites = repeater stations?



They can use on channel repeaters and even translators also but an SFN
is not built using repeaters. An SFN is having multiple sites
transmitting the same signal at the same time in sync. You can have an
SFN and also use on channel repeaters and even translators.

Bob Miller

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, Bob Miller wrote:
Also, I bet you lose the signal every time a truck or bus passes between
you and the station. Even on a short trip like New York to Philadelphia,
you would probably get no signal in at least the middle 1/3, because people
there have rooftop antennas (or cable).
Not true. It only depends on the design of the broadcast network. If you have
enough signal you will be able to receive the signal anywhere. If the network
provides enough signal between Philly and New York you will get reception.

Psycho Bob once again makes several meaningless statements:
"Not true. If pigs had large enough wings, they could fly.
Therefore, I am right in saying that pigs can fly."

There isn't "enough signal", anywhere in the world. Not in the US, not in
Japan, not in Europe, and not in Australia.

Psycho Bob can talk all he wants about how pigs could fly if only they had
large enough wings. The fact remains that pigs can't fly.

If you mean with the current US network design and 8-VSB you can forget it.

If you mean with the current Japanese network design and ISDB-T you can
forget it too.

In Japan they have not built out their OTA network. They have only added most
of their prefectures in the last few months at low power. In time they will
have a ubiquitous network that will work well mobile or fixed in most of the
country.

Since Psycho Bob predicts this, it will not happen.

The US will have the same with new broadcasters. It is just a shame that we
will go on wasting prime RF real estate on channels 2-51 using the garbage
modulation 8-VSB.

Since Psycho Bob predicts this, it will not happen either.

I am Psycho Bob Miller

Yes, we know that you are a Psycho Bob.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, Bob Miller wrote:
They can use on channel repeaters and even translators also but an SFN is not
built using repeaters. An SFN is having multiple sites transmitting the same
signal at the same time in sync. You can have an SFN and also use on channel
repeaters and even translators.

More flying pigs. This isn't what is being done in Japan.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

Bob Miller wrote:
Jeff Shoaf wrote:


Not true. It only depends on the design of the broadcast network. If
you have enough signal you will be able to receive the signal
anywhere. If the network provides enough signal between Philly and
New York you will get reception. Diversity in broadcast sites and
your receiver helps with Doppler affects.


Bob Miller

Diversity in broadcast sites = repeater stations?



They can use on channel repeaters and even translators also but an SFN
is not built using repeaters. An SFN is having multiple sites
transmitting the same signal at the same time in sync. You can have an
SFN and also use on channel repeaters and even translators.

Bob Miller


Won't fly in the US - there's already a backlash against cell phone
towers. It's the "not in my backyard" syndrome - even if folks wanted
mobile HD, they wouldn't want it bad enough to agree to even more
skyline pollution.

There's another discrepancy in your postings: you claim that
broadcasters don't want to pay the power bill to broadcast OTA via our
current standard, but you expect them to put up multiple transmitters in
multiple locations and pay to power and maintain them all...

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

Jeff Shoaf wrote:
Bob Miller wrote:
Jeff Shoaf wrote:


Not true. It only depends on the design of the broadcast network. If
you have enough signal you will be able to receive the signal
anywhere. If the network provides enough signal between Philly and
New York you will get reception. Diversity in broadcast sites and
your receiver helps with Doppler affects.


Bob Miller

Diversity in broadcast sites = repeater stations?



They can use on channel repeaters and even translators also but an SFN
is not built using repeaters. An SFN is having multiple sites
transmitting the same signal at the same time in sync. You can have an
SFN and also use on channel repeaters and even translators.

Bob Miller


Won't fly in the US - there's already a backlash against cell phone
towers. It's the "not in my backyard" syndrome - even if folks wanted
mobile HD, they wouldn't want it bad enough to agree to even more
skyline pollution.

There's another discrepancy in your postings: you claim that
broadcasters don't want to pay the power bill to broadcast OTA via our
current standard, but you expect them to put up multiple transmitters in
multiple locations and pay to power and maintain them all...


No discrepancy. Broadcasters see no return on their electricity monthly
investment in OTA broadcasting especially on UHF channels where the
power bills can be 10 times what they are on VHF. They see every
customer watching them OTA as a freeloader who is not paying them a
subscription fee on cable.

They have little interest in OTA since it is a nightmare of reception
problems.

If on the other hand they had a decent modulation OTA they could see
their OTA spectrum in a different light. Ease of reception and a vast
new market of portable and mobile viewers that cable and satellite can
not compete for would entice them to not only embrace their OTA spectrum
but be willing to spend more to see that they is ubiquitous reception of
their signal in their entire coverage area.

An SFN that consist of multiple transmitters would cost far less to
maintain, cost far less for rent, cost far less in electricity cost and
would be far more reliable than the current single high powered stick
network design.

Transmitters that are solid state need little maintenance and use as
little as 100 Watts of power can be used. They can overlap so that if
one is out little or no loss of coverage is experienced. They can be
placed on lower towers or even apartment buildings and do not rely on
being on the highest point in a market. If one tower or building owner
demands to much you can find another nearby that will offer a much
better bargain.

Compare trying to negotiate a place on the Empire State Building and the
space and power to operate at a MegaWatt to negotiating for say 10
sites on short towers or buildings in the New York market at 100 Watts.
Piece of cake and low cost for an SFN, extremely expensive and fragile
high power on the ESB.

Notice how many tall towers fall in the US or have fires that take out
stations for extended periods. Think WTC and 9/11. Think Moscow and
their TV tower fire. Think about the accidents that happen every year in
the US. The job of being a tower guy in the US is far more dangerous
than fishing for King Crab off of Alaska.

We negotiated for three sites in Manhattan for solid state transmitters,
power and antenna sites on building rooftops. Total cost was under $4000
per month and we could have done it for less.

Had no problem finding sites. Every building we talked to could not stop
calling us back to see if we were still interested even six months after
we were done with our experimental license.

Bob Miller

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

Bob Miller wrote:
Jeff Shoaf wrote:
Bob Miller wrote:
Jeff Shoaf wrote:


Not true. It only depends on the design of the broadcast network.
If you have enough signal you will be able to receive the signal
anywhere. If the network provides enough signal between Philly and
New York you will get reception. Diversity in broadcast sites and
your receiver helps with Doppler affects.


Bob Miller

Diversity in broadcast sites = repeater stations?



They can use on channel repeaters and even translators also but an
SFN is not built using repeaters. An SFN is having multiple sites
transmitting the same signal at the same time in sync. You can have
an SFN and also use on channel repeaters and even translators.

Bob Miller


Won't fly in the US - there's already a backlash against cell phone
towers. It's the "not in my backyard" syndrome - even if folks wanted
mobile HD, they wouldn't want it bad enough to agree to even more
skyline pollution.

There's another discrepancy in your postings: you claim that
broadcasters don't want to pay the power bill to broadcast OTA via our
current standard, but you expect them to put up multiple transmitters
in multiple locations and pay to power and maintain them all...


No discrepancy. Broadcasters see no return on their electricity monthly
investment in OTA broadcasting especially on UHF channels where the
power bills can be 10 times what they are on VHF. They see every
customer watching them OTA as a freeloader who is not paying them a
subscription fee on cable.

They have little interest in OTA since it is a nightmare of reception
problems.

If on the other hand they had a decent modulation OTA they could see
their OTA spectrum in a different light. Ease of reception and a vast
new market of portable and mobile viewers that cable and satellite can
not compete for would entice them to not only embrace their OTA spectrum
but be willing to spend more to see that they is ubiquitous reception of
their signal in their entire coverage area.

An SFN that consist of multiple transmitters would cost far less to
maintain, cost far less for rent, cost far less in electricity cost and
would be far more reliable than the current single high powered stick
network design.

Transmitters that are solid state need little maintenance and use as
little as 100 Watts of power can be used. They can overlap so that if
one is out little or no loss of coverage is experienced. They can be
placed on lower towers or even apartment buildings and do not rely on
being on the highest point in a market. If one tower or building owner
demands to much you can find another nearby that will offer a much
better bargain.

Compare trying to negotiate a place on the Empire State Building and the
space and power to operate at a MegaWatt to negotiating for say 10
sites on short towers or buildings in the New York market at 100 Watts.
Piece of cake and low cost for an SFN, extremely expensive and fragile
high power on the ESB.

Notice how many tall towers fall in the US or have fires that take out
stations for extended periods. Think WTC and 9/11. Think Moscow and
their TV tower fire. Think about the accidents that happen every year in
the US. The job of being a tower guy in the US is far more dangerous
than fishing for King Crab off of Alaska.

We negotiated for three sites in Manhattan for solid state transmitters,
power and antenna sites on building rooftops. Total cost was under $4000
per month and we could have done it for less.

Had no problem finding sites. Every building we talked to could not stop
calling us back to see if we were still interested even six months after
we were done with our experimental license.

Bob Miller

You're making the assumption that every place in the US is like NY City
- it's not. A bunch of us have been assuming that you're only out for
yourself and your failed business plans, but maybe not - maybe you just
assume that everyone in the US lives in a big city.

Where I live, there aren't enough tall buildings around to provide
anywhere near the coverage needed for your SFNs. And there's a lot of
resistance to adding additional towers. The OTA broadcasters in my area
are either on top of a relatively isolated mountain or in a tower farm
in a plains area. Broadcasters would have to build towers all over the
place to get anywhere near the coverage they're getting now.

The area I live in is called the "piedmont triad" - "piedmont" because
we're between the mountains and the coast and "triad" because there's
three large cities in the area (large being relative - in size, the
cities are ranked between 3rd and 7th in the state, population-wise and
area-wise), but only one of the cities has any tall buildings and
they're all clustered within 5 miles of each other. The SFN idea just
ain't gonna happen around here.

Most of the US is still rural - maybe not population-wise, but certainly
area-wise. So your plan may work in NY, LA, Chicago, Atlanta, and
maybe even in Charlotte, but it isn't gonna work in little old King, NC.
Or even Greensboro, NC.

You know, the government in the US was framed in the constitution so
that the relatively low population density rural areas would have just
as much say in the government as the high-population density areas. And
maybe that's why 8VSB was chosen - so that the relatively rural areas
could continue to receive OTA, only enhanced now with HDTV.

And to emphasize, there aren't enough tall buildings in large areas of
the US for the SFN idea to work w/o putting up a bunch more towers. And
the local broadcasters in those rural areas don't have the money to
build and maintain that kind of infrastructure.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, Bob Miller wrote:
No discrepancy. Broadcasters see no return on their electricity monthly
investment in OTA broadcasting especially on UHF channels where the power
bills can be 10 times what they are on VHF. They see every customer watching
them OTA as a freeloader who is not paying them a subscription fee on cable.

Then why do so many UHF channels use their "must carry" rights to force
cable systems to carry them, even though that means that they don't get
any fees?

They have little interest in OTA since it is a nightmare of reception
problems.

There are plenty of cable-only broadcasters. There is nothing that forces
a broadcaster to be OTA.

Nobody would shed a tear if PAX/i were to go off the air and be
cable-only. Why don't they?

Why did CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX spend a huge amount of money on OTA HDTV
equipment if they don't intend to use it?

If on the other hand they had a decent modulation OTA they could see their
OTA spectrum in a different light. Ease of reception and a vast new market of
portable and mobile viewers that cable and satellite can not compete for
would entice them to not only embrace their OTA spectrum but be willing to
spend more to see that they is ubiquitous reception of their signal in their
entire coverage area.

There is no ubiquitous OTA reception anywhere in the world, especially not
for mobile devices. That exists only in Psycho Bob imagination.

An SFN that consist of multiple transmitters would cost far less to maintain,
cost far less for rent, cost far less in electricity cost and would be far
more reliable than the current single high powered stick network design.

So you claim. That claim is not yet supported by practical engineering
experience.

Like most advocates, you gloss over very real technical problems; and you
take no responsibility for any failings in your rosy predictions.

False prophets used to be burned at the stake or stoned. What should we
do with a Psycho Bob?

Compare trying to negotiate a place on the Empire State Building and the
space and power to operate at a MegaWatt to negotiating for say 10 sites on
short towers or buildings in the New York market at 100 Watts. Piece of cake
and low cost for an SFN, extremely expensive and fragile high power on the
ESB.

So the ESB said that they wouldn't do business with a Psycho Bob.
Interesting.

Notice how many tall towers fall in the US or have fires that take out
stations for extended periods. Think WTC and 9/11. Think Moscow and their TV
tower fire. Think about the accidents that happen every year in the US.

And the more frequent failure of nodes in an SFN (which can also be due
to network communication problems) results in outages to the regions
served by those nodes. So you trade extremely rare global failures which
much more common localized failures.

We negotiated for three sites in Manhattan for solid state transmitters,
power and antenna sites on building rooftops. Total cost was under $4000 per
month and we could have done it for less.

So why aren't you using it now?

Had no problem finding sites. Every building we talked to could not stop
calling us back to see if we were still interested even six months after we
were done with our experimental license.

Everybody wants to take money from a sucker.

Too bad for you that you couldn't get a permanent license.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, Jeff Shoaf wrote:
You're making the assumption that every place in the US is like NY City -
it's not. A bunch of us have been assuming that you're only out for yourself
and your failed business plans, but maybe not - maybe you just assume that
everyone in the US lives in a big city.

Psycho Bob looks at the map and sees two coasts of megapolis with "flyover
country" in between.

Such thinking is especially prevailent in New York City.

Where I live, there aren't enough tall buildings around to provide anywhere
near the coverage needed for your SFNs.

I have a suggestion. Since New York City residents can afford to pay $1
million and more for an apartment, let's tax them to install a complete
SFN infrastruture for the rest of the country. What's more, we don't let
them move out of NYC.

We can call it the Bob Miller SFN Tax, and give everybody in NYC his
address and phone number if they have questions.

And there's a lot of resistance to
adding additional towers.

So, we'll tax the NYC people more to put them on power poles that are
already up. Maybe every two or three poles would be good enough.

The OTA broadcasters in my area are either on top
of a relatively isolated mountain or in a tower farm in a plains area.
Broadcasters would have to build towers all over the place to get anywhere
near the coverage they're getting now.

Try Puget Sound, with hills and glacial valleys everywhere (Puget Sound
being an example of the latter that is filled with water). The cell phone
companies are still trying to create some measure of reliability for cell
phone use while in a moving vehicle. Lots of transmitters everywhere, yet
it still doesn't work.

I live in a mobile phone dead zone, yet I can reliably receive most of the
Puget Sound OTA broadcasters. The exceptions are the ABC channel (which
sadly DirecTV doesn't yet carry in HD yet) and an independent. That
independent channel was shop-at-home for a long time so I didn't care, but
now they have Japanese animation on 45-3 so it's actually worth watching.

The SFN idea just ain't gonna happen around here.

Not if we tax NYC out the wazoo, and put a wall around it so they can't
leave.... ;-0

Most of the US is still rural - maybe not population-wise, but certainly
area-wise. So your plan may work in NY, LA, Chicago, Atlanta, and maybe even
in Charlotte, but it isn't gonna work in little old King, NC. Or even
Greensboro, NC.

As the kids say, "well, duh!" ...

You know, the government in the US was framed in the constitution so that the
relatively low population density rural areas would have just as much say in
the government as the high-population density areas.

This is what the Democrats want to change now that they are in power.
So-called "blue America" is the high-population density areas, whereas
"red America" are the rural areas. That's what abolishing the Electoral
College is all about -- how dare "flyover America" consider itself to have
rights.

And maybe that's why
8VSB was chosen - so that the relatively rural areas could continue to
receive OTA, only enhanced now with HDTV.

And that's why ISDB-T was chosen for Japan, which is heavily urbanized and
simply does not have the vast rural areas that the US has. Japan consists
of a megapolis and sheer, largely-undevelopable mountains. Even Japanese
agriculture mostly takes place in nooks and crannies in otherwise dense
urban areas.

There are rural hamlets in Japan in the mountains, but these can be served
with a small local transmitter, just as is done in remote villages of
Alaska and Canada.

The fallacy of the Psycho Bob way of thinking is the assumption that local
environmental conditions don't need to be considered.

And to emphasize, there aren't enough tall buildings in large areas of the US
for the SFN idea to work w/o putting up a bunch more towers. And the local
broadcasters in those rural areas don't have the money to build and maintain
that kind of infrastructure.

Maybe Psycho Bob will agree to a special NYC tax in order to get his SFN.
Let's say something like $10,000/resident-year. A hundred or so billion
isn't enough to build a national SFN network, of course, but we'll just
keep the Bob Miller Tax for NYC residents going until it's all built. And
we'll have a wall to keep the NYC residents inside until that happens.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On 1/6/2007 7:01 PM, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
"Bernie" wrote in message
. ..
On 1/5/2007 1:09 PM, Tam/WB2TT wrote:
"Mark Crispin" wrote in message
da.com...
. . .
Also remember that mobile television is a toy. People are buying HDTV.
They are not buying into mobile.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what
to eat for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the
vote.
I see mobile HD as something you have in the back seat of a limo, and
you watch it on the way home from the airport. Not a market of any
meaningful size.

OTH, there is mobile non HD TV in the US, supplied by some cellular
providers. This makes more sense, because you are served from the nearest
cell tower. The newest version actually simulate broadcasting, because if
3 people in the same cell watch the same program, they will all be
sharing the same RF channel/time slot. You might say they are put on a
party line.

Tam

I'd say there is a HUGE market. Have you noticed how many SUV's and vans
have DVD players. typically watched by children or other family members
sitting in the backseats? How many times have you driven down the road
or stopped at a light and seen a DVD playing? I've already been asked
why a TV tuner isn't available for those screens.

Bernie

There are certainly ways of watching analog TV in a car if you really want
to. I think that DVDs have pretty much taken over that market. 20 years ago
I would (very) accasionally see a car , usually a limo, with a TV antenna on
it - but not any more. Live TV in a car would make sense for sports, though.
Since a car antenna would have less gain than rabit ears, and be close to
the ground, it would be hopeless on a trip.
Tam


It's interesting that all of the replies to my comment focus on
transmitting the TV signals akin to transmitting current TV signals or
mobile phone signals. When someone asked me about it originally they
were thinking in terms of satellite radio which is available wherever
you are in the continental US. And thinking in terms of satellite TV.

Bernie

Report from Japan: January 2007 update
 

On Mon, 8 Jan 2007, Bernie wrote:
It's interesting that all of the replies to my comment focus on
transmitting the TV signals akin to transmitting current TV signals or
mobile phone signals. When someone asked me about it originally they were
thinking in terms of satellite radio which is available wherever you are in
the continental US. And thinking in terms of satellite TV.

Some satellite TV systems installed in RVs are usable while the vehicle is
in motion. Of course, this is only viewable by passengers in the cabin,
and not by the driver.

This requires a dome antenna instead of a dish. As with most such
matters, there are tradeoffs; domes generally don't perform as well as
dishes, and since they're permanently mounted on the roof you don't have
the option of positioning the antenna separately from the vehicle. Many
RVers prefer to have a dish on a tripod or stand that can be relocated as
needed, since the best place to park is not necessarily the best place for
the satellite antenna.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.