You seem to have nothing useful to say, but only call him names. Why
are you so afraid to let him have his say?

Then you have no real idea of BOB's history. He HAS been caught in numerous
lies. We are not 'afraid' of him speaking, but it is important to also have the
opposite side speak, in other words, the TRUTH. Believe what you like, I could
care less.

Vidguy7 wrote:
Since they were not paying attention, not very worried about their OTA
broadcasting and very concentrated on their must carry rights they did
not participate a lot in the decision making process that led up to the
modulation decision that chose 8-VSB.


If, as you claim (and you are virtually ALWAYS wrong), the broadcasters "knew"
that COFDM was better, then they could have found SOMEONE within their
organizations to carry on the fight. BOB, stop your CRAP!

While broadcasters have recently begun to show a renewed interests in
OTA broadcasting because of the 5th gen receiver test and because of
USDTV, their main concern is still must carry of all the capacity of
their 6 MHz channel by cable. They are still in no mode to fight for a
better modulation while their bread and butter issue is still on the table.

It is only after that issue is settled and they also see competition
from those using COFDM which so far only exist in the radio broadcaster
area where XM and Sirius are becoming a major irritant to terrestrial
radio broadcasters. Broadcasters are also beginning to pay attention to
what is happening in Europe.


Later when a more forward thinking broadcaster, Sinclair, discovered
that COFDM was far better than 8-VSB they paid a little attention.


You mean the same "forward thinking" broadcaster that later gave their SEAL OF
APPROVAL to 8VSB? BOB, stop your CRAP!!

Sinclair was the first broadcaster to show interest in the LG 5th gen
receiver and tested it. They then claimed that this was the first 8-VSB
receiver that was good enough for fixed reception using 8-VSB. Just good
enough.

Nat Ostroff, their chief engineer and the one responsible for the COFDM
test years ago had another take on the subject after many ballyhooed as
you are that Sinclair had somehow approved 8-VSB as being as good as
COFDM. Here is what he had to say on September 28th 2004...

"I am reading this thread and cannot believe that the readers have
forgotten the bitter fight that I and others put up to get the option to
have a COFDM
alternative placed in the ATSC standard. After several years of fighting
intentional misinformation and political manipulation of technical data we
lost that battle. Unfortunately the song lyric that says "you don't know
what you got till it is gone" seems to apply to our current situation.

We do have Zenith to thank for sticking with their promise to make
significant improvements to 8VSB reception. For that we all should be
grateful. Unfortunately we don't have the advantage of a COFDM service
with all of its mobile and small antenna reception options but at least
we have
something that might serve as a fixed indoor service for over the air
DTV. Of course the advantages of COFDM are going to be enjoyed by
companies like
Qualcomm who are building a COFDM based service on a nationwide basis
using the TV UHF frequency band. The present outcome is to their
advantage and our
distress."

Nat Ostroff


When LG and Harris and other special interest who had a lot riding on
8-VSB voiced opposition to the broadcasters belated interest in COFDM,
they did so because they thought that they were about to reap a quick
windfall as HD mania


You mean the same windfall that YOU were expecting to reap with a COFDM
modulation scheme? The same windfall that you didn't reap and have been
exceedingly bitter ever since? The same windfall that you didn't reap and now
blame everybody and everything for its failure? THAT windfall BOB? BOB, stop
your CRAP!

You continue to misread our situation. We are held up in our use of
COFDM because the digital transition in the US is going so slowly. 8-VSB
is in our way because until the transition is over channels 52 thru 69
cannot be used for COFDM broadcasting. Some have been sold and others
wait to be sold but investors including us are waiting to use our paid
for spectrum while broadcasters who never paid for the same spectrum
squat on it waiting for an 8-VSB receiver that works so that they can
have some kind of business plan that allows them to turn off their
analog transmitters.

8-SVB gives us the opportunity to use COFDM that would not exist
otherwise. But the failure of 8-VSB to allow for the digital transition
to happen also keeps us from using our spectrum. Why do you think we
were testing 5th gen receivers?

They pulled every string in Washington DC to attack the broadcasters and
the politicians did the dirty work of threatening the broadcasters with
loss of spectrum and loss of must carry rights.


Ah, we're now back to the conspiracy theories and the big bad government
explanations. Hey folks, as I pointed out above, BOB will blame everyone and
everything for his failure to bet on the right horse. BOB, stop your CRAP!

No conspiracy theory. You can read the testimony of Congress. The
threats were real and published. We were talking to many broadcasters at
the time they admitted to being terrified of Congress. They still are
willing to admit to that.


New broadcasters will appear who will deliver OTA programming to
fixed and mobile devices. This will siphon viewership from OTA, cable
and satellite.


Interesting BOB. How will receiving OTA programming in a mobile envronment (see
folks, BOB never considers that most states don't even allow you to use a
cellphone without a hands free device, let alone a freaking TV....this guy
lives on another planet) take away from cable and satellite IN THE HOME? BOB,
stop your fear tactics and cut the CRAP!!!

60% of SUV's already come with TV screens in the back seat. Another 20%
will have them installed in the after market. People can bring any of a
thousand hand held mobile DVD players into a vehicle for use in the
front or back seat. This is not something that we are talking about
happening in the future. It has already happened. The delivery of a
mobile TV service is also a current reality. You an get satellite
reception in your vehicle.

Whether or not a new wireless broadcast cable like service that works
fixed as well as mobile and is half the price of cable is to be seen. I
think it is a slam dunk myself. It will work with in car installed TV
screens as well as with cell phones, PDA, mobile DVD players etc. About
six receivers per household more than HDTV. Where each household will
have one or two HDTV sets someday, a mobile SD/ED service would have six
receivers per household by 2008.


Broadcasters will not be shy about this threat because it
will be wildly successful.


Golly BOB, as 'wildly successful' as the COFDM revolution you predicted years
ago? You remember, the COFDM revolution you said would destroy 8VSB. You
remember BOB, that revolution that NEVER HAPPENED! BOB, stop your CRAP!!

Never happened because of the incredible dam built by 8-VSB. It not only
stymied the digital transition for channels 2 thru 51 it has stopped all
progress with new services destined for channels above that. If COFDM
had been allowed in 2000 50 million homes would have transitioned to OTA
digital TV by now.

It already is happening in other countries.


Yeah BOB, we also remember the countries you 'said' would go to COFDM but
didn't. But ofcourse you had excuses for THOSE too. BOB, stop your CRAP!

S. Korea would have gone COFDM but 8-VSB was saved in the nick of time
by the 5th gen receiver. For years broadcasters in S. Korea refused to
go on the air with 8-VSB. The agreement worked out allows for the use of
COFDM in two other frequencies for mobile otherwise there would have
been no deal.


The death of cable is openly discussed already in other countries
because of the success of OTA ventures there.


That's great BOB, we live in the U.S. where cable is the predominant means of
delivery and will be for a long time. No imminent 'cable death' in this
country. But hey BOB, you've always been more concerned about what's happening
in China, England and wherever else than what's happening here. In fact BOB,
one of your big problems is you've never been able to understand that what's
good for other countries may not be good for this country. So BOB, stop your
CRAP!!!

Cable is the predominate form of delivery in Germany and satellite in
the UK, both in Italy. OTA is causing cable and satellite to go berserk
all over Europe. The death of cable has just became a topic of
discussion there. In the UK in two years OTA has 6 million customers.
Murdocks Sky satellite venture has 7 million. His sales have dropped to
almost zero while OTA will sell ONE MILLION receiver just this quarter.



COFDM will be allowed in a heartbeat and little or NO attention will be
given to the plight of the consumer who has bought an 8-VSB receiver.


And folks, the above is at the HEART of all of BOB's lies. He has forever tried
to instill fear in the hearts of any potential buyers by FALSELY, repeat
FALSELY stating that the death of 8VSB is imminent. He's been saying it for
YEARS. The only thing that happens in the interim is that 8VSB gets more and
more entrenched, investments in the 8VSB infrastructure grow and grow AND
improvements in the 8VSB technology continue to gain and gain to the point
where saying that COFDM is superior to 8VSB is laughable. BOB wants to put a
STOP to all 8VSB tuner purchases. He will lie, distort and embellish to get his
evil deeds accomplished. BOB, stop your CRAP!!!!!!!

Not so in fact after testing 5th gen receivers I have predicted that
next year we will see the sale of 3 to 5 million OTA 8-VSB receivers and
that the transition may now take place. I expect a number of USDTV
ventures also. In 2006 I have said that 15 million receivers will be
sold. Many of those will be received for free by customers of
subscription services like USDTV. USDTV is almost to ZERO already
selling 8-VSB receivers for $19.95.



The consumer has always been given ZERO
consideration by the FCC and Congress in the digital TV transition.

Bob Miller

"Charles H. Tieman" wrote
I must say that I don't trust you, or your buddies who endlessly bad
mouth Bob Miller.

Charlie,
You're leaving out about 500 AVS Forum members who (very loudly)
demanded that Miller be thrown off the forum (in year 2000).

Also, try a google groups search and read about how numerous Miller lies
and distortions have been revealed and clearly disproved.

Miller admitted to using his own daughter's internet account to sneak back
on the AVS forum, *after being ejected*.

Sorry, everything Vidguy says is true.

Charles H. Tieman ) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
I must say that I don't trust you, or your buddies who endlessly bad
mouth Bob Miller. I don't know this technology well enough to make my
own judgment, but Bob gives us names, dates and his opinion of the
technology. His version of history may not be correct, but it is quite
believable to me.

You seem to have nothing useful to say, but only call him names. Why
are you so afraid to let him have his say?

OK, here goes with some facts.

FACT #1
The OTA digital TV standard in the US is fixed in stone. It is the ATSC
standard which uses 8-VSB modulation. The standard won't change until
decades after any device you buy today that is ATSC-compliant has crumbled
into dust from frequent use. You can bet your life savings on this fact.

FACT #2
Bob is upset that Fact #1 is a fact, because he put all *his* life savings
into a competing system, which lost due to being technically inferior for
the US market. He will blame this loss on anything but the technical
issues to keep people from buying current technology so that a "slow
uptake" will allow him to retain some small shred of self-esteem for
backing a loser.

FACT #3
In the US, 8-VSB is by far technically superior to COFDM for digital TV
for a few simple reasons:
- Size...our country is the largest in terms of distance from transmitters
to intended receivers *and* has more distinct stations broadcasting.
Other countries (which Bob uses as models of "success") have either very
small coverage areas or use repeaters to send the *same* signal across
a wide area. Neither of these would work in the US for financial reasons
(broadcasters don't want to spend the money).

Likewise, using COFDM with a "single transmitter" model would require
a *lot* more power for the same coverage. More power means more electric
bills for broadcasters, so once again it becomes financially infeasible.

- HDTV...HDTV was a consideration from the beginning in the US. Other
countries thought only of digital TV, but the US needed a system that
could handle the HDTV data rate (about 19Mbps) within the 6MHz bandwidth
of TV channels in the US. Currently, only ATSC has done this *anywhere*
on a commercial level.

As an aside, in my fringe area OTA TV stinks, but the broadcasters
claim that we get satisfactory reception so I'm forced to pay for
network service from DirecTV.

It's likely that you should be happy that ATSC is the US standard, then.
You could probably receive digital broadcasts right now, since you
probably already have an outdoor antenna, while an urban-centric COFDM
transmission would leave you just as far out in the cold.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/TractorBeam.jpg
|
|

They are still in no mode to fight for a
better modulation while their bread and butter issue is still on the table

Then it doesn't mean as much to them as you make it out to be.

It is only after that issue is settled and they also see competition
from those using COFDM which so far only exist in the radio broadcaster
area where XM and Sirius are becoming a major irritant to terrestrial
radio broadcasters.

With the numerous COFDM dropouts of XM radio, I don't think terrestrial
broadcasters should be too concerned.

Broadcasters are also beginning to pay attention to
what is happening in Europe

Europe is NOT the U.S. BOB. You just don't seem to understand the difference.

Sinclair was the first broadcaster to show interest in the LG 5th gen
receiver and tested it.

No BOB, it was more a question of Sinclair being the ONLY broadcaster to do
everything in their power to stop 8VSB. They finally stopped their
obstructionist stance. Let's be accurate for once BOB.

Nat Ostroff, their chief engineer and the one responsible for the COFDM
test years ago had another take on the subject after many ballyhooed as
you are that Sinclair had somehow approved 8-VSB as being as good as
COFDM

And, to tell the OTHER side of the story BOB, Sinclair was doing everything
they could to avoid SPENDING the money that was necessary to upgrade to HD for
fixed locations. They other things they wanted to make money on. THAT was the
real reason for their obstructionist stance.

We are held up in our use of
COFDM because the digital transition in the US is going so slowly.

And this is more than partly due to people like YOU, companies like SINCLAIR
etc. that did everything in their power to thwart the digital transition. I
just love when guys like you talk about "how tough" the digital transition has
been, when it's been people like YOU that have caused it. You speak out of both
sides of your mouth BOB, and frankly it's pretty ugly to watch.


But the failure of 8-VSB to allow for the digital transition
to happen also keeps us from using our spectrum.

Read above. Additionally BOB, the technical merits (or lack thereof) of 8VSB
had ZILCH to do with the transition. People didn't go to stores and say "Oh,
this is an 8VSB receiver? I only want to buy a COFDM receiver". C'mon BOB, get
real.

No conspiracy theory. You can read the testimony of Congress. The
threats were real and published.

As well they should have been!!!! If the threats weren't made, then
broadcasters would have simply dragged their feet even more. Without a threat,
what would have been the incentive?

60% of SUV's already come with TV screens in the back seat. Another 20%
will have them installed in the after market.

So, since the kiddies can get to watch Shrek in the back seat, this will cause
the downfall of cable? C'mon BOB, get real. Do the drivers not watch TV when
they get home. Your 'logic' is non-existant.

People can bring any of a
thousand hand held mobile DVD players into a vehicle for use in the
front or back seat.

So are you advocating drivers watching their portable DVD players? My argument
is still valid since we both know that drivers will not be watching. None of
this will have any impact on cable or satellite.

Never happened because of the incredible dam built by 8-VSB.

The dam that CONTINUES to be built. You just don't get it do you? Do you think
that 8VSB is any LESS entrenched than it was 2 years ago BOB? It's MORE
entrenched than ever. Get over it. It's over for you BOB. And I'll predict this
with 100% certainty: When all your other 'predictions' don't come true as well,
you'll have a whole mess of excuses to blame on those too. They will range from
government conspiracies, to unfair trade to God knows what. But they'll be
there....your excuses ALWAYS are.

S. Korea would have gone COFDM but 8-VSB was saved in the nick of time
by the 5th gen receiver.

Baloney! You've always got excuses for the myriad of absurd predictions you
make. When will you realize that NOTHING you say ever comes true? NOTHING.
Spreading fear won't work BOB, it never does. Tell the truth, it's refreshing.

OTA is causing cable and satellite to go berserk
all over Europe.

Which brings me to another point which you rarely, if ever, get. This is an HD
forum. You do everything BUT discuss HD. The countries you mention don't have
HD, never did. You continue to compare countries with entirely different
geographies and countries that have no HD. When you can get around to
discussing HD, give us a call.

Not so in fact after testing 5th gen receivers I have predicted that
next year we will see the sale of 3 to 5 million OTA 8-VSB receivers

And again, your making this ABSURD assumption that the customer knows the
difference between a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th gen receiver. Do you really
believe this crap BOB? REALLY? Christ, they don't even know the difference
between 8VSB and COFDM. Many of them don't the difference between AM & FM.
C'mon, give us a break! PLEASE!!

Vidguy7 ) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
And, to tell the OTHER side of the story BOB, Sinclair was doing everything
they could to avoid SPENDING the money that was necessary to upgrade to HD for
fixed locations. They other things they wanted to make money on. THAT was the
real reason for their obstructionist stance.

And then there is Sinclair's history of just what the company puts its money
and time into. Between the used-car lot and the anti-Kerry ad disguised
as a half-hour news piece, they're pretty much the laughingstock of the
broadcast industry.

From those sorts of choices, their fight against ATSC and 8-VSB makes perfect
sense. Like Bob, they seem to always do the wrong thing.

--
Jeff Rife |
SPAM bait: | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/RhymesW...ienceFinal.jpg
|
|

Jeff Rife wrote in message ...
Vidguy7 ) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
And, to tell the OTHER side of the story BOB, Sinclair was doing everything
they could to avoid SPENDING the money that was necessary to upgrade to HD for
fixed locations. They other things they wanted to make money on. THAT was the
real reason for their obstructionist stance.

And then there is Sinclair's history of just what the company puts its money
and time into. Between the used-car lot and the anti-Kerry ad disguised
as a half-hour news piece, they're pretty much the laughingstock of the
broadcast industry.

From those sorts of choices, their fight against ATSC and 8-VSB makes perfect
sense. Like Bob, they seem to always do the wrong thing.


That's funny, I thought CBS and Dan Rather had the lock on the
laughing stock of the broadcast industry. Or if what they did wasn't
bad enough, how about the genius at CBS that cut off the ending of
their prime time show to tell everyone that Arafat had died. That
made about as much sense as interrupting with the latest status of the
guy in the movie Weekend at Bernie's.

Jeff Rife wrote in message ...
Matthew L. Martin ) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
Yes, I agree! Only difference is the cost of these useless tuners is
a lot less than the ones currently being mandated for HD.

If the FCC had mandated digital cable ready ATSC tuners day one, they
would be cheap by now, too.

Correct.

Secondly, nobody really knows how much an NTSC cable/OTA tuner adds to the
price of a set. Last I looked, a standalone NTSC cable/OTA tuner cost
around $80 (although I'm sure there are places you can get them cheaper if
you hunt).

With standalone ATSC tuners selling for $200, I'm not sure the real cost
of the tuner is much different, and that's without a full mandate for the
ATSC tuner that would allow economies of scale.


For arguments sake, suppose it cost $100. What you want is the vast
majority of consumers, who will never use the thing because they have
cable or sat, to pay for it. Multiply out how much consumer money is
being poured down the drain. And exactly what is the purpose? It's
like forcing PC manufacturers to install quality stereo sound or a DVD
player early in the technology lifecycle in every PC so some get a
free ride, while others unfairly pay for it.

There are many things the FCC could have done to hasten the adoption
of digital TV, but this is one that makes the least sense.

Chet Hayes wrote:

There are many things the FCC could have done to hasten the adoption
of digital TV, but this is one that makes the least sense.

Cite two things that the FCC could have done that make more sense than
insisting that the enabling technolgy be available day one?

Matthew

Chet Hayes wrote:
Jeff Rife wrote in message ...

Matthew L. Martin ) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:

Yes, I agree! Only difference is the cost of these useless tuners is
a lot less than the ones currently being mandated for HD.

If the FCC had mandated digital cable ready ATSC tuners day one, they
would be cheap by now, too.

Correct.

Secondly, nobody really knows how much an NTSC cable/OTA tuner adds to the
price of a set. Last I looked, a standalone NTSC cable/OTA tuner cost
around $80 (although I'm sure there are places you can get them cheaper if
you hunt).

With standalone ATSC tuners selling for $200, I'm not sure the real cost
of the tuner is much different, and that's without a full mandate for the
ATSC tuner that would allow economies of scale.



For arguments sake, suppose it cost $100. What you want is the vast
majority of consumers, who will never use the thing because they have
cable or sat, to pay for it. Multiply out how much consumer money is
being poured down the drain. And exactly what is the purpose? It's
like forcing PC manufacturers to install quality stereo sound or a DVD
player early in the technology lifecycle in every PC so some get a
free ride, while others unfairly pay for it.

There are many things the FCC could have done to hasten the adoption
of digital TV, but this is one that makes the least sense.

Like pick a real modulation system instead of the junk that is 8-VSB.
There is NO mandate in the UK and citizens there, in a free country,
have decided to buy ONE MILLION DTV COFDM receivers this quarter. This
is in a country where there are only 25 million households. Some
(include me) expect sales in the UK to even climb higher next year.
Pundits continue to predict a leveling off or drop in sales but they
will again be proved wrong. The same pundits that said DTV was dead on
arrival two years ago.

This level of sales says that free OTA DTV in the UK will pass satellite
next year and NO MANDATE NECESSARY. Let freedom ring!!! Except in the US
where other posters would suggest our citizens are to dumbass to to buy
8-VSB. I think our citizens are smartass and recognize a turkey when
they see one. This from the Guardian today...

Freeview 'to overtake Sky Digital in 2005'
Owen Gibson, chief reporter
Wednesday November 17 2004
The Guardian


The BBC-backed free-to-air digital service Freeview is set to break the
5 million homes barrier by the end of the year, with industry experts
predicting it will overtake Sky Digital by Christmas 2005.

Sales estimates from manufacturers and retailers for 2004 show that by
the end of the year they expect to have shifted 3 million Freeview
boxes, taking the total to over 5 million.

Current sales are running at an estimated 50,000 a week for the boxes,
which offer viewers 30 channels for a one-off payment of between £40
and £80, confounding expectations that demand would tail off following
an initial rush.

David Chance, who runs "pay TV lite" service Top Up TV offering Freeview
customers an extra 10 channels for a monthly fee of £7.99, predicted
sales would top 8 million by the end of next year.

"Freeview box sales in the calendar year will exceed 3 million units.
The Freeview box population will be in 5 million homes by the end of the
year," said Mr Chance, who is also an ITV director and a former BSkyB
deputy chief executive.

"The run rate next year could well be another 3 million. By December
2005, the Freeview platform could be as big as Sky, which is a very big
milestone," he told a Broadcasting Press Guild lunch.

Mr Chance said that Top Up TV, which launched earlier this year, was
gaining momentum now there were more Freeview boxes in the shops that
featured the card slot necessary to upgrade to the pay-TV service.

There are now three Freeview boxes available that are compatible with
the Top Up TV cards, with three more due to go on sale in the new year
through high street stores including Argos and Dixons.

He predicted the company would comfortably meet its break-even target of
250,000 customers within two years of launch, as more compatible boxes
became available and ITV realised the benefits of promoting the switch
to digital terrestrial TV rather than satellite or cable.

Audiences for the five traditional channels are affected far less when a
viewer switches to Freeview than when they subscribe to Sky or cable.

Mr Chance said the company was also benefiting from a growing
frustration among those who had bought boxes that weren't compatible
with the cards required to upgrade to Top Up TV.

"The majority of people who call up and can't get it are very
frustrated. They were never told the Freeview box they were buying could
not receive all the services on the DTT platform.

"The focus of their frustration is directed at the BBC. They are really
****ed off at the Beeb because it is the BBC's cross-promotional
activities that are really driving the take-up of Freeview," he said.

Former BBC director general Greg Dyke admitted in his book earlier this
year that part of the rationale behind the launch of the digital
terrestrial service was to flood the market with "dumb" boxes incapable
of turning the BBC's channels into "pay as you go" services at a later
date.

Because most Freeview boxes did not contain the card slots or encryption
technology required to operate a pay-TV service, Mr Dyke concluded that
leading the launch of the service following the collapse of ITV Digital
was "important to the BBC defensively".

But Mr Chance said the tide was turning and that retailers were
starting to stock more equipment compatible with Top Up TV in an effort
to avoid disgruntled customers returning their boxes to the shop.

The adapters with card slots typically cost around £65, compared with
£40 for the cheapest Freeview set top boxes.

"It leads to a significant number of customers taking their boxes back
to Dixons and wanting to change them. This is causing the multiple
retailers to start to say they will change their range next year to move
from stocking 10% of compatible boxes to 50% to 75%. It's quite an
important development," he said.

While he agreed with Mr Dyke that it was probably a mistake for BSkyB to
get involved in the launch of Freeview, he also agreed with Sky chief
executive James Murdoch that its success would have little impact on the
company in the long term.

Mr Chance agreed with Mr Murdoch's prognosis that pay-TV penetration
would reach 80% within the next 10 to 15 years and that once Freeview
penetration reaches 10 million it will begin to dip again as those
customers move on to pay-TV.

· To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email
or phone 020 7239 9857

· If you are writing a comment for publication, please mark clearly
"for publication".