LG chooses COFDM

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Richard C. wrote:
> X-No-archive: yes
>
> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:spOmd.1537$Tq6.1058@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>The fact that 8-VSB cannot be received mobile is a testimony to how bad it
>>was designed.
>>
>
> ==============================
> Why?
> Do you watch HDTV in your car?
>
>
Most vehicles will have TV capability in the back seat soon. That could
be HD if you could receive it. Since you can't with 8-VSB I guess you
won't be able to watch it in the US. In Japan and Australia you will be
able to watch HD in your car. Their will be a number of ways you can do
that. With a normal seat back display, with a pair of glasses that
deliver 1080p to an individual or with a dlp projector. MIT has one the
size of a credit card one inch thick based on LED technology.

In Japan I expect you will see portable HD receivers with projection
capability that can be used anywhere since the diversity antennas are
built in to the receive device which can be the size of a cell phone.
The MIT projector is meant to attach to a cell phone, lap top or PDA for
projecting a screen size of up to 30 inches or so.

Cars are not the only portable/mobile use. There are a thousand
different scenarios where mobile reception would be great. On your boat
to watch the game while cruising etc.

The "Do you watch HDTV in your car?" BS is getting a little old don't
you think? We all know that people will take whatever device they want
to where ever they want and use it. People do all kinds of dangerous
things while driving.

The temptation to watch video while driving has been available for years
now it is not knew. The fact that a broadcast can now be received while
mobile changes nothing. It is pretty obvious that you should not drive
while watching a video whether broadcast or not.

Bob Miller

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

numeric wrote:
>
>
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> How can you say that a certain amount of snow or distortion is the
>> equivalent of a certain period of time with NO signal.
>>
>
> What happens to a COFDM signal at the threshold? Does it have the cliff
> edge effect like 8VSB, or is it more like analog?
>
Digital is digital. COFDM has the same cliff effect that any digital
modulation would have. The difference is that the cliff affect only
happens with COFDM when you have too little signal. That is a given with
any broadcast technology. But with COFDM you do not have loss of signal
because of interference from multipath either static or dynamic in most
cases. You only have loss of signal when you are too far from the source
or there is too much clutter between you and the source. And with COFDM
you can have many transmitters in a SFN (Single Frequency Network) so
that the chance of being without a signal is greatly diminished.

So that we could drive over most of Manhattan at speeds ranging up to 80
mph (West Side Highway at 3 am) with no loss of signal, no cliff affect
while receiving from a 100 Watt transmitter.

Bob Miller

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
>
>> If 8-VSB is so good why did LG, the owners of most of the IP royalty
>> rights to 8-VSB choose COFDM for their DMB mobile video broadcasting
>> to cell phones?
>
>
> The same reason that LG chose CDMA for the phones that they produce for
> Verizon and SPRINT, and choose GSM for the phones that they produce for
> Cingular and T-Mobile.
>
> Note, by the way, that what is being discussed is not broadcast
> television, much less HDTV. It is 18fps video content provided by the
> mobile phone providers.
>
> Consequently, it is off-topic for alt.tv.tech.hdtv. Bob Miller knows
> this, but being a psychotic crackpot, continues to interject into a
> forum where he isn't wanted.
>
> -- Mark --
>
It is not 18fps and not provided by the mobile phone provicers. Qualcomm
will build their own overlay COFDM network and use QVGA video at up to
30 frames per second and high-quality stereo audio. They did this
because they are addressing small screens on cell phones. They could
have increased the bit rate to HD if they wanted to and decreased the
number of video programs.

In the question of why did LG chose COFDM for their DMB network it is
not analogous to suggest it is for the same reason as they build CDMA
phones or GSM phones for different customers. They build those phones
because that is what the customer ordered.

In the case of the DAB spectrum in Korea using COFDM LG was in the
decision making process. There was not a customer dictating. LG chose
COFDM because 8-VSB would't work period.

HD is just a resolution. How we receive it and whether the modulation
works in on topic. An example of LG choosing COFDM over 8-VSB is
germain. The modulation does not know what resolution it is delivering
nor does it matter. The only questions are can the modulation deliver
enough bits to support the resolution desired and how easy is it to
receive. Any example of good reception and high bit rate and what
modulation others chose and why is on target.

Bob Miller

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote :


>Your second url,
>http/neasia.nikkeibp.com/nea/200404/techana_298749.html
>talks of the DMB-T modulation being developed in China which is NOT
>based on Eureka 147 COFDM but is based on COFDM. Eureka 147 is an early
>version of COFDM that was developed for the DAB (Digital Audio
>Broadcasting) spectrum and this is what is being used in Korea. They are
>using it however to broadcast both audio and video. That is what they
>are doing in Guangdong.
>
>The DMB being used in Guangdong on the DAB spectrum to deliver audio and
>video is NOT the same DMB-T being developed by Tsinghua University in
>Shenzhen.

Yes I know, but Radio Foshan use DAB Eureka 147 (DMB) for their tests
also. As I know the chinese government had chosen DAB Eureka 147 for a
problem of cost. I will search this document with the english
translation. Radio Foshan had ordered recently 12 DAB eureka 147 with
the multiblock mode to Itelco China to provide 4 DAB Eureka 147
ensemble.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Nicolas Croiset wrote:
> Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote :
>
>
>
>>Your second url,
>>http/neasia.nikkeibp.com/nea/200404/techana_298749.html
>>talks of the DMB-T modulation being developed in China which is NOT
>>based on Eureka 147 COFDM but is based on COFDM. Eureka 147 is an early
>>version of COFDM that was developed for the DAB (Digital Audio
>>Broadcasting) spectrum and this is what is being used in Korea. They are
>>using it however to broadcast both audio and video. That is what they
>>are doing in Guangdong.
>>
>>The DMB being used in Guangdong on the DAB spectrum to deliver audio and
>>video is NOT the same DMB-T being developed by Tsinghua University in
>>Shenzhen.
>
>
> Yes I know, but Radio Foshan use DAB Eureka 147 (DMB) for their tests
> also. As I know the chinese government had chosen DAB Eureka 147 for a
> problem of cost. I will search this document with the english
> translation. Radio Foshan had ordered recently 12 DAB eureka 147 with
> the multiblock mode to Itelco China to provide 4 DAB Eureka 147
> ensemble.
>
You are right they have chosen to use DAB Eureka 147 called DMB for
audio and video in 1.25 MHz DAB channels in China. But that has nothing
to do with the fact that China is also developing another modulation
that happens to be called the same thing which is unfortunate. They are
two completely different things however.

In choosing DAB Eureka 147 DMB for problems of cost has nothing to do
with the fact that they are working on an national DTV broadcast
modulation to work on 8 MHz channels that uses a completely different
modulation called DMB-T and that this modulation uses an advanced
version of COFDM not the Eureka 147 version.

http/www.reed-electronics.com/eb-mag/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA420994
"U.S. companies are also working with China to develop digital TV
technology. China sees an opportunity to jump in because the DTV market
has been so slow to develop in the United States and Europe. The
government is expected to choose by year's end between proposals from
two universities: Tsinghua and Jiaotong. Beijing-based Tsinghua is
developing Digital Multimedia Broadcasting-Terrestrial (DMB-T) chips
with U.S.-based Legend Silicon, one of whose investors is Intel Capital,
the venture capital arm of Intel."

Bob Miller

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

> that the chance of being without a signal is greatly diminished.
>
> So that we could drive over most of Manhattan at speeds ranging up to 80
> mph (West Side Highway at 3 am) with no loss of signal, no cliff affect
> while receiving from a 100 Watt transmitter.

Manhattan NY is not the same as MAnhattan KS.

Try your 100 watt transmitter on a 200 foot tower there and see how many
people you get.

Repeat with COFDM at 19.3 Mb/sec at 1 MW on a 2000 foot tower.

Repeat with 8-VSB at 19.3 Mb/sec at 1 MW on a 2000 foot tower.

You will find that the last one will get you the biggest audience
by far.

Doug McDonald

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

> But with COFDM you do not have loss of signal
>because of interference from multipath either static or dynamic in most
>cases.

Golly BOB, did you forget to mention that ACCORDING TO YOU this is no longer a
significant issue with the latest gen of 8VSB receivers?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>Most vehicles will have TV capability in the back seat soon. That could
>be HD if you could receive it.

Golly BOB, high definition on a 7" screen in the back seat? You see BOB, this
alone shows your total ignorance of high definition and what it is. You are
beyond belief. There is NOBODY that could benefit, let alone SEE, the benefits
of high definition on a flip down screen in the back seat of a car. UNREAL.

>Since you can't with 8-VSB I guess you
>won't be able to watch it in the US.

Your innane argument is totally destroyed by my first comment above. But since
you obviously no nothing about HD, I'm sure this will elude you too. You are
indeed the Minister of Misinformation

>The "Do you watch HDTV in your car?" BS is getting a little old don't
>you think?

No BOB, your ignorance of HD is getting MORE than a 'little old'.

>People do all kinds of dangerous
>things while driving.

And you and your buddies have been the most 'dangerous' thing in the
development and transition of HD in this country. Your greed at the potential
expense of everyone else is personally revulting.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>Consequently, it is off-topic for alt.tv.tech.hdtv. Bob Miller knows
>this, but being a psychotic crackpot, continues to interject into a forum
>where he isn't wanted.

BINGO! It's absolutely staggering how this dope continues to discuss broadcast
schemes in OTHER countries with NO HD, changes in broadcast schemes in THIS
country that have already been decided, but yet, virtually NEVER discusses high
definition. Hey BOB, why don't you go on to an audiophile forum and discuss
medicine?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>LG chose
>COFDM because 8-VSB would't work period.

Funny BOB, it works damn well in THIS country.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Vidguy7 wrote:
>>But with COFDM you do not have loss of signal
>>because of interference from multipath either static or dynamic in most
>>cases.
>
>
> Golly BOB, did you forget to mention that ACCORDING TO YOU this is no longer a
> significant issue with the latest gen of 8VSB receivers?

According to me the latest 5th gen receivers is not out yet, is easily
defeated by both dynamic and static multipath but works in a minimally
acceptable way to provide a plug and play experience.

It is far inferior to any COFDM being used.

The US is now rapidly becoming a third world country whose government is
for sale to the highest bidder. It is becoming a dumping ground for cast
off technology by others. 8-VSB is a good example. If you want to see
the cutting edge in consumer technology you have to go to other countries.

Bob Miller

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>The US is now rapidly becoming a third world country whose government is
>for sale to the highest bidder.

Don't give us your political bullshit. We see through it BOB.

It is becoming a dumping ground for cast
>off technology by others. 8-VSB is a good example. If you want to see
>the cutting edge in consumer technology you have to go to other countries.

You mean the same GLORIOUS 8VSB technology that brings me FREE OTA HD from CBS,
ABC, NBC, FOX etc? That 'cast off technology'. BOB you are a bullshit artist
'supreme'.

 

[Gman]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <XFWmd.1919$Tq6.1821@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Richard C. wrote:
>> X-No-archive: yes
>>
>> "Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:spOmd.1537$Tq6.1058@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>>>The fact that 8-VSB cannot be received mobile is a testimony to how bad it
>>>was designed.
>>>
>>
>> ==============================
>> Why?
>> Do you watch HDTV in your car?
>>
>>
>Most vehicles will have TV capability in the back seat soon. That could
>be HD if you could receive it. Since you can't with 8-VSB I guess you
>won't be able to watch it in the US. In Japan and Australia you will be
>able to watch HD in your car. Their will be a number of ways you can do
>that. With a normal seat back display, with a pair of glasses that
>deliver 1080p to an individual or with a dlp projector. MIT has one the
>size of a credit card one inch thick based on LED technology.

Almost half the states in the USA have either made it illegal or are making it
illegal to have a tv playing while a vehicle is in motion at the same time. So
basically youd have to park and watch. GIVE IT UP BOB!!!


>
>In Japan I expect you will see portable HD receivers with projection
>capability that can be used anywhere since the diversity antennas are
>built in to the receive device which can be the size of a cell phone.
>The MIT projector is meant to attach to a cell phone, lap top or PDA for
>projecting a screen size of up to 30 inches or so.
>
>Cars are not the only portable/mobile use. There are a thousand
>different scenarios where mobile reception would be great. On your boat
>to watch the game while cruising etc.
>
>The "Do you watch HDTV in your car?" BS is getting a little old don't
>you think? We all know that people will take whatever device they want
>to where ever they want and use it. People do all kinds of dangerous
>things while driving.
>
>The temptation to watch video while driving has been available for years
>now it is not knew. The fact that a broadcast can now be received while
>mobile changes nothing. It is pretty obvious that you should not drive
>while watching a video whether broadcast or not.
>
>Bob Miller
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

GMAN wrote:

>
> Almost half the states in the USA have either made it illegal or are making it
> illegal to have a tv playing while a vehicle is in motion at the same time. So
> basically youd have to park and watch. GIVE IT UP BOB!!!
>

Again the reality is more like this....

http/seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/199985_celltech17.html

"At last count, 38 states, including Washington, prohibit TVs that are
viewable by drivers. Many of these laws are two decades old, and specify
a device that receives a signal -- which exempts DVD players, gaming
units and more. So far, only Louisiana and California have made it
illegal for the driver to watch DVDs or videos unless the car is in park
or the emergency brake is on -- the way manufacturers recommend they be
installed before they can be used.

About 176,000 in-dash DVD players are expected to be sold this year, up
from 120,000 last year, according to the Consumer Electronics Association.

But some drivers are dismantling the systems that prevent them from
playing while the car is moving. Others have installed them in
dashboards, passenger visors and rearview mirrors.

The laws simply aren't keeping up with new technology.

"I don't think even five years ago that legislators contemplated the
idea of being able to receive a fax in your car or watch a DVD," said
Matt Sundeen of the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Presently, Washington doesn't prohibit the use of DVD players,
electronic games, computers, or personal digital assistants (PDAs) while
driving. Since the state doesn't restrict the use of hand-held phones,
it's not illegal to drive while text messaging, e-mailing, taking
pictures, surfing the Web, etc., on your phone.

There is a $101 fine for driving with a television in view, but that's it."

In view of the driver that is.

Even if your vehicle doesn't have a TV screen installed in the back seat
as the article mentions what is to stop you from bringing in any of
thousands of devices that have video screens on them including cell
phones, laptops, PDA's, portable DVD players, portable DTV's, portable
video players or just a mirror so you can comb your hair while driving?

And as the article states your "more than half of the states" is in fact
only two, Louisiana and California so maybe I shouldn't give it up
according to your theory. Of couse we are not targeting vehicles and
especially not drivers. We are targeting mobile reception of TV signals.
In the end a vehicles driver has always had a lot of things they could
do while driving like changing clothes or putting on makeup. It is up to
the common sense of the driver and that little voice called self
preservation to save the day.

No law is going to stop mobile reception of DTV signals. Satellite TV
can be received mobile right now.

Bob Miller

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

X-No-archive: yes

"Bob Miller" <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:k1Xmd.29252$KJ6.15179@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> So that we could drive over most of Manhattan at speeds ranging up to 80
> mph (West Side Highway at 3 am) with no loss of signal, no cliff affect
> while receiving from a 100 Watt transmitter.
>
==============================
I am sure glad that I do not live anywhere that YOU drive.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <ehgnd.2607$Tq6.169@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Bob Miller
wrote:
> "At last count, 38 states, including Washington, prohibit TVs that are
> viewable by drivers. Many of these laws are two decades old, and specify
> a device that receives a signal -- which exempts DVD players, gaming
> units and more. So far, only Louisiana and California have made it
> illegal for the driver to watch DVDs or videos unless the car is in park
> or the emergency brake is on -- the way manufacturers recommend they be
> installed before they can be used.
>
> About 176,000 in-dash DVD players are expected to be sold this year, up
> from 120,000 last year, according to the Consumer Electronics Association.
>
> But some drivers are dismantling the systems that prevent them from
> playing while the car is moving. Others have installed them in
> dashboards, passenger visors and rearview mirrors.
>
> The laws simply aren't keeping up with new technology.

In the UK it's illegal to use a TV screen where it is visible by the driver,
but I don't know exactly how this is specified, i.e. whether the law refers
to a TV receiver, or a display screen, and I don't know if there are legal
restrictions in the way the equipment is wired, or simply that it mustn't be
used while driving. And for legal purposes it's also necessary to specify
what's meant by "driving", i.e. moving/not moving, engine running or not,
handbrake on/off, key in ignition, or simply being in posession of the key.
Whatever the specification is, it must exclude information screens, some of
which use the same kind of display as a TV set or DVD player, but show
different information. My satellite navigation system for instance has a
little screen that shows a map, but was factory fitted to presumably legal.

In the UK it was recently made illegal to use a hand held mobile phone while
driving. According to the leaflet that my phone network sent out to all
users, it is illegal to hold the phone while the engine is running. As far as
I know, there are no specific restrictions for any other hand held devices
such as cameras, electric shavers etc.

There is, however, the offence of "Driving without due care and attention",
which you would think would be all that was necessary to control any kind of
stupid behaviour while driving a vehicle, if only they'd apply it more often.
Trying to update the law to take account of specific items of new technology
is, as you point out, a race that the law is bound to lose.

Rod.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>No law is going to stop mobile reception of DTV signals. Satellite TV
>can be received mobile right now.

BOB, the laws are ON THE BOOKS. What part of that don't you understand? Are you
now advocating that people break the law just so YOU can profit from your
mobile COFDM schemes. Are you not only selfish but are now encouraging people
to break the law. My God BOB, you really ARE a slime.

The FACT is it is UNSAFE to watch TV and drive at the same time. It is
distracting for the driver to have the thing even playing in the back seat.
With the direction the laws are going in with cellphones across the country, do
you 'really' think that the same trend won't apply to the rest of the states
where there is currently no law? Are you that naive? Nah, you're just
desperate. Why don't you do something else for a living rather than trying to
stop the FREE high definition that is available via our glorious 8VSB system?
BOB, you are indeed our resident Snake Oil Salesman.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Bob Miller wrote:
> The US is now rapidly becoming a third world country whose government is for
> sale to the highest bidder. It is becoming a dumping ground for cast off
> technology by others. 8-VSB is a good example. If you want to see the cutting
> edge in consumer technology you have to go to other countries.

Then why don't *you* leave, Psycho Bob?

-- Mark --

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

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>Even if your vehicle doesn't have a TV screen installed in the back seat
>as the article mentions what is to stop you from bringing in any of

I question whether more than half of the vehicles in the USA even HAVE
a back-seat passenger even once in any given week.

>No law is going to stop mobile reception of DTV signals.

But 8-VSB can! Which is why it's a great idea!

Incidentally, does 8-VSB have reception problems for mobile
*PEDESTRIANS*? (walking or jogging)?

Gordon L. Burditt

 

[Poldy]

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv,alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <jGXmd.29271$KJ6.12456@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Bob Miller <robmx@earthlink.net> wrote:

> It is not 18fps and not provided by the mobile phone provicers. Qualcomm
> will build their own overlay COFDM network and use QVGA video at up to
> 30 frames per second and high-quality stereo audio. They did this
> because they are addressing small screens on cell phones. They could
> have increased the bit rate to HD if they wanted to and decreased the
> number of video programs.

Nobody wants to watch video on cell phones.

You are the weak link. Goodbye!