OTA DTV hits ONE%

"Bob Miller" wrote in message
...
State of the OTA DTV transition


In less than a year after analog turnoff Congress will begin holding
hearings on the best way to eliminate free OTA broadcasting and
subsidize those crazy ONE% that still depend on OTA DTV.

http://www.advanced-television.com/2...2_nov16.htm#t5


The report is non-sense; there is no attempt to explain the 4% claim. They
claim 53% cable, DBS or Telco and 4% OTA. There is no explanation of how
households were counted that may have DBS and OTA or cable and OTA.



Maybe there is a simple solution. The cable and DBS rates may be
artificially too low due to government rules and regulation. Eliminate all
regulations, including must carry, and let cable and DBS decide their own
rates. I'll bet as the rates for cable and DBS go higher, so will the
percentage of OTA. Higher percentage of OTA will also produce new OTA HD
channels. On the other hand, maybe the reported OTA percentage is low due to
deliberate agenda driven manipulation.

I am one of those crazy’s that still depend of OTA DTV, though mostly for
HDTV. I do not want a subsidy from Congress if ever OTA should fail and
shall vote against any Congress member, in my jurisdiction, that supports a
subsidy for cable or satellite in lieu of OTA broadcasting.



Why OTA?



1. While DBS or cable only provide one market; I can receive several markets
digital OTA.

2. I can receive all OTA sub channels; while not all sub channels may be
available on cable or DBS.

3. OTA is free and provides the best HD, DBS and cable are generally second
rate.

4. No need to provide personal data for OTA. DBS require name, SS number and
address, cable requires name and address, do not know about SS number for
sure, never subscribed to cable.

5. No OTA subscriber agreements or commitments, as is required for DBS.

6. No proprietary DVR required for digital OTA. Using a PC provides the user
maximum flexibility over recording and archiving methods.

7. ATSC 8VSB HD works, excellent range, solid signal! On the other hand, I
sincerely hope that the ATSC M/H (mobile handheld) system fails; it will
ruin HDTV for the sake of a few **** heads that want dumb ass mobile
handheld devices. See
http://www.atsc.org/news_information...posals_07.html

Nick Danger wrote:

"Brian Kraft" wrote in message
reenews.net...
Nick Danger wrote:

...by February, things will be sorted out

My mostly rural county is so conservative, within a week of analog
shutoff I expect grassroots protests to spring up, such as farmers
parking their tractors on the well manicured lawn of City Hall.

How many millions of dollars will they have contributed to the new
president's campaign? Do you think anyone in government will care about
them?

I would guess that cable and satellite will offer "First six months
free" plans and that will placate a lot of people - especially since
they'll now be getting many more channels than they were getting OTA.
They must already be sitting on a lot of returned boxes with analog
outputs that people have been returning as they've gone to HDTV, so they
won't even have to manufacture new ones. The satellite companies will
still have to install dishes, but somehow they are able to do that now
without recouping the cost. After these six-month-free plans expire, the
people will have been sufficiently sedated and conditioned that they
will willingly pay their monthly fees. At worst, we may see a version of
the subprime mortgage meltdown, but in this case it will be only
converter boxes that get repossessed, not houses.

The NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) is telling Congress that
they are planning on spending $700 million to advertise and educate the
public at the last minute on the OTA DTV transition.

It will be interesting to see the content of that advertising and
education. I expect it will be very slanted to cable and satellite. Most
broadcasters by then will have deals in place to get paid for their free
OTA content from cable and satellite subscription payments.

I can't see them spending $700 million to truly educate people on how to
avoid those cable and satellite subscription payments that they covet so
much.

There never has been so blatant a conflict of interest than broadcasters
conflict with the free spectrum they own which requires them to deliver
a free OTA service and the must carry laws that allow them access to
their competitors, cable and satellite, networks.

In the end it is all about taking as much money out of the publics
pockets as possible using the power of the government to do it.

Bob Miller

Bob Miller

numeric wrote:
"Bob Miller" wrote in message
...
State of the OTA DTV transition


In less than a year after analog turnoff Congress will begin holding
hearings on the best way to eliminate free OTA broadcasting and
subsidize those crazy ONE% that still depend on OTA DTV.

http://www.advanced-television.com/2...2_nov16.htm#t5


The report is non-sense; there is no attempt to explain the 4% claim. They
claim 53% cable, DBS or Telco and 4% OTA. There is no explanation of how
households were counted that may have DBS and OTA or cable and OTA.



Maybe there is a simple solution. The cable and DBS rates may be
artificially too low due to government rules and regulation. Eliminate all
regulations, including must carry, and let cable and DBS decide their own
rates. I'll bet as the rates for cable and DBS go higher, so will the
percentage of OTA. Higher percentage of OTA will also produce new OTA HD
channels. On the other hand, maybe the reported OTA percentage is low due to
deliberate agenda driven manipulation.

I am one of those crazy’s that still depend of OTA DTV, though mostly for
HDTV. I do not want a subsidy from Congress if ever OTA should fail and
shall vote against any Congress member, in my jurisdiction, that supports a
subsidy for cable or satellite in lieu of OTA broadcasting.



Why OTA?



1. While DBS or cable only provide one market; I can receive several markets
digital OTA.

2. I can receive all OTA sub channels; while not all sub channels may be
available on cable or DBS.

3. OTA is free and provides the best HD, DBS and cable are generally second
rate.

4. No need to provide personal data for OTA. DBS require name, SS number and
address, cable requires name and address, do not know about SS number for
sure, never subscribed to cable.

5. No OTA subscriber agreements or commitments, as is required for DBS.

6. No proprietary DVR required for digital OTA. Using a PC provides the user
maximum flexibility over recording and archiving methods.

7. ATSC 8VSB HD works, excellent range, solid signal! On the other hand, I
sincerely hope that the ATSC M/H (mobile handheld) system fails; it will
ruin HDTV for the sake of a few **** heads that want dumb ass mobile
handheld devices. See
http://www.atsc.org/news_information...posals_07.html

Lots of good reasons for OTA. So why are broadcasters not telling the
public about them? And to project to the future, why won't broadcasters
truly tell the public all about the virtues of OTA?

Simple, because every customer that stays with OTA is lost revenue to
the broadcaster.

Few **** heads? Hardly, future Iphones and the dozens of imitations all
are going to demand real time DTV along with every laptop and hundreds
of portable DTV sets from every Consumer Electronics manufacturer in the
world.

Your "few **** heads" will include virtually every individual US citizen
in a few years. A vast market and a major change in the way Nielson will
rate TV viewership. Instead of HOUSEHOLDS and how many TV sets each has
and what are they connected to, it will be individuals and how many
different devices that individual has to view DTV on.

The future of TV as I said back in 1999 is to be part of a universal
device that has different display formats. When you leave your house or
just go to a different part of it you will have a choice of DTV
receivers with different size screens or types of view devices. It could
be a small LCD or a pocket projector or a heads up display.

Your living room remote will be truly a universal remote. It will have
its own screen and you can take it with you since it will be have its
own receiver, be a computer and cell phone/WiFi phone.

And it will be capable of receiving HD content whether your screen size
at any given moment is capable of HD or not. But HD will be available
mobile or fixed at any screen size you want. A heads up display or
pocket projector will be capable of 1080P.

The question is will current broadcasters be able to deliver such
content with 8-VSB and MPEG2. No. Others will be able to do so. Will
broadcasters stand for this? No. And if they still actually own channels
2-51, if Congress has not already taken them back and auctioned them
what will broadcasters do?

They will demand the same tools as their competitors, better modulation
and codecs. They may first try to stay within the bounds of 8-VSB and
its mobile derivatives but that will be an inefficient dead-end that
should kill them off once and for all.

If they are smart they will demand a change in modulation and codec soon
after the analog turn-off around the time Congress starts having
hearings on the FAILED OTA TRANSITION.

Bob Miller

"Bob Miller" wrote

The US OTA DTV transition is a total grotesque failure.

Isn't that what your family, friends and other associates have been telling
you about your childish 'Viacel' daydream?

When are you going to wake up?



--
“There’s nothing on it worthwhile, and we’re not going to watch it in this
household, and I don’t want it in your intellectual diet.”
- Philo T. Farnsworth

In article ,
"Tantalust" wrote:

"Bob Miller" wrote

The US OTA DTV transition is a total grotesque failure.

Isn't that what your family, friends and other associates have been telling
you about your childish 'Viacel' daydream?

When are you going to wake up?

Actually, I don't want him to wake up. Imagine Bob goes on to try to
wrack the next human advance. Yikes!

"Stephen Chu" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Tantalust" wrote:

"Bob Miller" wrote

The US OTA DTV transition is a total grotesque failure.

Isn't that what your family, friends and other associates have been
telling
you about your childish 'Viacel' daydream?

When are you going to wake up?

Actually, I don't want him to wake up. Imagine Bob goes on to try to
wrack the next human advance. Yikes!


More like his next money-making bonanza wetdream . :-(

go on broadcasting in analog for some as yet unknown period of time.

Bob Miller

OK, say for a minute that what you say is true. So what? What can I
do about it? Should I write my Congressman? And tell him what?? You
rant and rave but don't have any solutions.

NadCixelsyd wrote:
go on broadcasting in analog for some as yet unknown period of time.

Bob Miller

OK, say for a minute that what you say is true. So what? What can I
do about it? Should I write my Congressman? And tell him what?? You
rant and rave but don't have any solutions.


I have a simple solution. The FCC holds an in depth wide open public
test of state of the art modulations and codecs and compares them to
what we have now and then weighs the cost of continuing with 8-VSB and
MPEG2 with the cost and benefits of switching to the best modulation and
codec that exist today and consider if they even want to cement in a new
codec and modulation or leave open what codec and modulation a
broadcaster can use.

I have mentioned these possibilities many times.

Bob Miller

"Bob Miller" wrote in message
...
NadCixelsyd wrote:
go on broadcasting in analog for some as yet unknown period of time.

Bob Miller

OK, say for a minute that what you say is true. So what? What can I
do about it? Should I write my Congressman? And tell him what?? You
rant and rave but don't have any solutions.

I have a simple solution. The FCC holds an in depth wide open public
test of state of the art modulations and codecs and compares them to what
we have now and then weighs the cost of continuing with 8-VSB and MPEG2
with the cost and benefits of switching to the best modulation and codec
that exist today and consider if they even want to cement in a new codec
and modulation or leave open what codec and modulation a broadcaster can
use.

I have mentioned these possibilities many times.

Bob Miller

Why do you enjoy being ridiculed?
Why can't you admit that your ["let's switch modulations"] contrivance
flunked?

I have mentioned these possibilities many times.

Bob Miller

No, you did not answer my question: What do you want me (or anyone
else on this forum) to do about it?