The DTV Fiasco

A friend of mine just reminded me about this article in EDN by Paul Rako.

http://tinyurl.com/9sl2mu

Sigh

ZAP

I like to point out to people how a DVD looks on a standard TV.  I then tell them that is what analog TV is suppose to look like.

  Over the air. The time delay changing channels I guess it has to buffer up the frames before it switches over, try surfing.

This is going to be a mess as people scrap their old TVs and what about the power usage of the new stuff?  The guv is forcing this on us I wonder what the percent change in energy usage will be, will it be up or down?

does this have anything to do with energy usage?
is not the need to buy new gear a coincident benefit for tv makers.
is it not that the cell phone providers can pay whatever it takes to commandeer the EM spectra currently used by broadcast tv
yeah the quality digital transmission is poor, surfing slow, and any errors/weak signal/ distortion will be drop-outs as opposed to snow in analog land.
solution; don't watch tv!

I think digital switch-over is a good thing for television. We are currently switching off analogue just now in the UK.

Unfortunately, it looks like your country is making a rather dismal job of implementing it.

I was working in terrestrial broadcast television circa 1990-2000 and remember reading a lot about the 8-VSB vs. COFDM controversy in the trade rags at that time. It seemed like the technically inferior system was winning out for political reasons. I'm no longer involved in over-the-air broadcast so I haven't kept up with developments since then, though I have no doubt that the situation is totally fucked up thanks to the Bush-era FCC and assorted nefarious interests.

This whole DTV thing has to do with a act congress passed way back in 1990's, IIRC 1996 to be exact.

Why? Well, the broadcast spectrum was getting crowded. To understand what that means, picture a radio that has a hundred stations between 97.1 and 97.3. On a radio like this, it would be really hard to tune in to the station you want. And if you wanted to start a radio station at 97.2, it would be really hard to find a space to broadcast without all the other stations drowning you out. The broadcast spectrum works in a similar way, and it's getting mighty crowded. to my understanding anyway.
By converting all TV to DTV, Congress will free up parts (or "bands") of the broadcast spectrum, because a digital signal takes up less "space" than an analog signal. That means more room for public safety and emergency services like police, fire and medical. And more room for new services, like wireless.

So why the urgency?  because it's said public safety and emergency services need additional spectrum space. With increased security in mind, Congress established a "hard" DTV transition deadline that requires all full-power television stations to cease analog broadcasts on February 17, 2009. Already, more than 1,600 television stations throughout the United States are broadcasting digital programs.

If you ask me one all those new TV's that are nice and flat use more power then their analog counterpart. Plus I am sure someone is getting their fair share of profits and kick backs in the process.

Actually, Pucho, it's all about money and don't believe anyone who tells you otherwise.

8 VSB is better on multipath than 64 QPSK, but that's about it.
Cable uses QPSK cause multipath isn't horrible.

I think that the FCC's incompetence transcends the guy soiling the chair in the oval office.  Just like any other government agency. 

But a new day is dawning, so I'll give the "New Hopeful FCC" plenty of time to prove me wrong!  Hmmm, will "FCC Chairman Sandy Burglar" be the fresh "Irish Spring" breeze of change?  :eye roll:
"And I like it too!!" [/Irish babe accent]
Mike

NewYorkDave said:

Actually, Pucho, it's all about money and don't believe anyone who tells you otherwise.

Click to expand...

I agree.

obama-asks-congress-for-analog-tv-shutdown-delay

http://i.gizmodo.com/5126573/obama-asks-congress-for-analog-tv-shutdown-delay

sheesh, how long do people need to get rid of a ridiculously old standard?
NTSC = "never the same color"

Here's an interesting article from Broadcast Engineering:

http://broadcastengineering.com/news/delaying-dtv-deadline-compounds-complexity-transition-0115/index.html

His new pick to head the FCC is someone he played basketball with in the past, so his pick-up team, I mean cabinet is coming together nicely.

For those inclined to superficial analysis (like language patterns) it's worth note that basketball is a team sport so suggests rudimentary understanding of teamwork within a group context. #43's sport of choice is mountain/off road biking which is all about individual effort.

Draw your own conclusions.

If I was president I'd make Kobe an administration advisor so he could play on my team.  ;D


JR

Unfortunately, it looks like your country is making a rather dismal job of implementing it.

Click to expand...

In the U.S. we have the finest government money can buy.

Back in the '80s, the "HD" stood for "high definition" and was supposed to be about making pretty pictures , e.g. wide-screen movies without pan and scan. In the '90s the M.P.E.G. came up with all its compression schemes and soon HDTV was about carving up a 6 MHz channel into little digitally-compressed slices so that various "services" could run, for example, all infomercials all the time. Besides not picking COFDM, the more robust system, we don't even have an HDTV picture standard but instead have the dueling formats of 1080i and 720p. Not only was the FCC lining its pockets but it totally abdicated any regulatory oversight.

chris319 said:

soon HDTV was about carving up a 6 MHz channel into little digitally-compressed slices so that various "services" could run, for example, all infomercials all the time.

Click to expand...

Amen, amen, amen! When it became obvious to me that that was the direction things were taking, I lost all enthusiasm for the "digital future" of television.

NewYorkDave said:

chris319 said:

soon HDTV was about carving up a 6 MHz channel into little digitally-compressed slices so that various "services" could run, for example, all infomercials all the time.

Click to expand...

Amen, amen, amen! When it became obvious to me that that was the direction things were taking, I lost all enthusiasm for the "digital future" of television.

Click to expand...

I'd be OK with all this if:

1. The HDTV standard were COFDM;

2. It were legislated that each 6 MHz channel may be divided into one slot not less than 3 MHz wide and a maximum compression ratio of 2:1, and any number of narrowband slots not less than 1 MHz wide and maximum 6:1 compression ratio (maximum 4 digital slots);

3. Standard progressive scan picture format -- 720p, whatever -- with a 2:1 aspect ratio. A few years back Hollywood wanted a 2:1 aspect ratio but were told basically that they were too late, which they were.

4. Put the entire service on UHF. This would simplify the design of receiving antennas.

Gawd forbid the FCC should legislate any of this and put quality of service to the owners of the spectrum (you and me) ahead of corporate interests.

I like the way you think. The public at large has forgotten that the airwaves belong to them.
As usual, commerce and corruption trump quality and public service.

When the FCC "auctions" spectrum to, say, Nextel, who now owns it? Does Nextel own it in perpetuity or is it a long-term lease?

So much for the public owning the airwaves.

EDN's Paul Rako vents some more on the DTV fiasco:

http://tinyurl.com/cwtfhj

I think he's really pissed now.

ZAP