The DTV Transition in the US is just SICK!

[Guest]

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

kw5kw wrote:

> I live on the west side FT Worth. (I) Don't even go towards Dallas
> unless absolutely necessary!

My feeling EXAACTLY!


>
>
>
> I go out 20 towards Sweetwater and then up 84 to Lubbock.
>
> I also go 287 towards Wichita Falls and on in to Amarillo.
>
> And Around Ft. Worth the only real drop-outs are downtown Ft. Worth
> with the buildings, but that was ALWAYS the case, nothing new to me.


So, Bob Miller, there you have it .... mobile 8-VSB reception in
a very typical part of Mid America. I used to live right there.
Cedar Hill, where the towers are, is about 25 miles from
downtown Ft. Worth ... much farther than your transmitter inside
Manhattan. And note that he does NOT say "gets real ghosty" to
the analog performance ... it gets "snowy" and fades away.

COFDM can't fix "snowy and fades away".

The towers on Cedar hill are not even the greatest of monsters,
they are about 1700 feet HAAT. Yet it provides MOBILE TV service across
a vast area of typical America.

I'd like permission to post your stuff on the professional
mailing list were Bob Miller remains the only COFDM gadfly, the
others have given up and presumably moved to heaven in Berlin.


One more question: what fraction of the distance between Ft. Worth and
Lubbock and Ft. Worth and Amarillo can you get DTV from one or another
place? The Ft. Worth stations are of course full power ... but are the
others? Does it make a difference whether they are UHF or VHF?

Doug McDonald

 

[Guest]

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

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:coq1rm$hr6$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
: kw5kw wrote:
:
<snip>
:
: I'd like permission to post your stuff on the professional
: mailing list were Bob Miller remains the only COFDM gadfly, the
: others have given up and presumably moved to heaven in Berlin.
:

sure you have it
:
: One more question: what fraction of the distance between Ft. Worth
and
: Lubbock and Ft. Worth and Amarillo can you get DTV from one or
another
: place? The Ft. Worth stations are of course full power ... but are
the
: others? Does it make a difference whether they are UHF or VHF?

long reply but here goes

This was on my last trip about 1.5 months ago.
Equipment:
USDigital HDTV Receiver from Wal-Mart plugged into a 700 watt inverter
(just what I have). (It (inverter) also powers lap-top and other
electronics as necessary.) Amplified (12v) mobile diapole from Radio
Shack that is >25 years old using 75ohm coax. 13" RCA CRT 120/12v
color set using composite video / ausio in for DTV, built in tuner for
analog. (no splitter, manually change antenna from STB to TV if
changing... better for both analog and digital if no splitter in
mobile install... I've tried it, I know.)

Ditital Stations listed only

West on 20

near DFW
27 and 58 are the worst... only available to intersection of I20 and
I30 west of ft worth. (Aledo Hill)
ABC (VHF) next fades out about Weatherford.
Fox, CBS, NBC, WB, UPN, PBS stations are last to go about the Parker
County line. some 30 miles west of my house. This is about 10 miles
before the analog signal gives up the ghost. But, it is really in and
out by now anyway.

Near Abilene
You can pick up NBC and CBS about Cisco. (Abilene Stations) and ABC
and UPN come in as you enter Abilene (Sweetwater stations). NBC and
CBS leave about Sweetwater, while ABC and UPN stay in until Snyder on
US 84

Near Lubbock
PBS, FOX, NBC come in as you top the hill at Post and stay in until
after you turn north on US 385 outside of Littlefield.

Near Amarillo
West Side up us 60 from Hereford
Can begin picking up CBS and PBS (both VHF) near Umbarger, Fox and
ABC (UHF) come in near Canyon.
East Side
FOX and ABC cut out just past Claude (US 287) while CBS and PBS last
almost to Clarenton.

Near Wichita Falls
East Bound on 287
CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox all come in as you near Iowa Park.
West Bound 287
CBS, NBC, ABC, and Fox all come in as you near Bowie.

Hope this helps
Russ
:
: Doug McDonald
:

 

[Guest]

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

HDTV is a waste of resources . A digital anamorphic 720x480 would have
worked just as good for most people and would have been faster and cheaper
to implement.

Americans are so full of a supersized mentality. You can see it on
everything from their TV sets to their wastelines. The idiots on this NG
think everybody has the space for a 65 inch TV, or even a 42 inch TV, plus a
dedicated home theater.

NTSC was a simple standard that has lasted for almost 40 years. DTV
should be a simple standard, too.

Europe may not have HDTV, but they have far more digital TV. They aren't
pigs like Americans, they are fine with their smaller television sets, and
they aren't so self-absorbed that they demand a "home theater". They may
not have huge houses but they also don't have 35 million people living with
food insecurity, 45 million people without health insurance, and a further
90 million under-insured. Oh, and they didn't kill 101,300 people for fuel
for their oversized cars.

 

[Guest]

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

>Even the CEA which was the
>central player in promoting ignorance and deception in forcing 8-VSB on
>us is completely out to lunch when it comes to HDTV. You would think
>they would want to promote HD wouldn't you?

Hey you DOPE, BOB, this has NOTHING to do with 8VSB. You are a damn JERK. I
swear you are. Satellite and cable do NOT, repeat do NOT, broadcast via 8VSB.
The public's ignorance of the OTA broadcast standard has ZIPPO to do with the
transition. I am SICK & TIRED of your freaking BULLSHIT BOB! Get a damn life
and stop embellishing, LYING, distorting and TWISTING the facts. You are a damn
Snake Oil Salesman.

People, do NOT believe ANTHING this Snake Oil Salesman says, NOTHING.

 

[Guest]

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

>You can buy COFDM receivers in convenience stores in the UK for $42 in
>one sale today. The regular price is $57.75.

And how much HD do they receive BOOBY BOB? ZERO, NADA, ZILCH, ZIPPO. This is an
HD forum.

 

[Guest]

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

>Whats wrong with mobile HDTV? If HD is so good, and I think it is, why
>not be able to easily receive it while mobile, portable or fixed?

If HD is so good in YOUR "mind" BOB, why don't YOU own one???? And as to
receiving HD on a mobile device, this simply PROVES how damn ignorant you are
about HD. HD is TOTALLY, 100% wasted on a teeny weeny screen. NOBODY but NOBODY
would know it's HD. But hey, you no nothing about HD so your statement makes
perfect sense.

 

[Guest]

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

>I lent a 2nd generation STB to a friend to see if he liked DTV,
>over Thanksgiving. When he came back in Monday he
>said that it worked great, no problem, just set the antenna on
>the TV set.

BOOBY does not want to hear things like this. Of course, fear not, BOOBY will
file this away in the "I never heard that" file.

 

[Guest]

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

>I'd like permission to post your stuff on the professional
>mailing list were Bob Miller remains the only COFDM gadfly, the
>others have given up and presumably moved to heaven in Berlin.

BOB is hopeless. He suffers from some serious disorder that forces his to lie,
distort & embellish. I guess losing big bucks on a FAILED modulation scheme can
do that to a person.

 

[Guest]

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

>> Well, they are watching FREE OTA HDTV, which makes the cable
>> and satellite companies unhappy.
>>
>=====================================
>I think that is exactly what is happening.
>OTA is expanding.

BOB does not want to hear this either!!! He MUST live in his little dream
world. He MUST live in the past. He can NOT deal with the reality of today.
This is why he lives his life in Britain, Germany and any other country that
does not have 8VSB.

 

[gerry]

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

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:37:02 -0600, Doug McDonald
<mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote:

>Bob Miller wrote:
>> "About half of the 5 million to 6 million U.S. households with an HD set
>> but without a cable or satellite HD programming package think they are
>> watching HDTV, Leichtman says, citing the results of a consumer survey
>> his firm recently conducted."
>>
>> http/www.hoovers.com/free/news/detail.xhtml?ArticleID=NR200411293020.33_2b7b0029d8284980
>
>
>Well, they are watching FREE OTA HDTV, which makes the cable
>and satellite companies unhappy.
>

Especially when most people got into cable tv just because analog OTA
reception was so bad. I could see dropping cable completely if the
local broadcasters would improve their product.

 

[David]

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

"magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> spewed in message
news:FEbsd.84436$jE2.16982@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
> HDTV is a waste of resources .... *snip*

I made the mistake of letting you out of the blocked senders list for a few
days... back in you go.

For good this time.

 

[Guest]

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

See in-line:

"magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<FEbsd.84436$jE2.16982@bignews4.bellsouth.net>...
> HDTV is a waste of resources . A digital anamorphic 720x480 would have
> worked just as good for most people and would have been faster and cheaper
> to implement.
>
> Americans are so full of a supersized mentality. You can see it on
> everything from their TV sets to their wastelines. The idiots on this NG
> think everybody has the space for a 65 inch TV, or even a 42 inch TV, plus a
> dedicated home theater.
>

Rather amusing comments, of course europe has no overweight people
(except our elderly women), right? I don't think you have to be
American to want "the best" and you should really educate yourself...
the HDTV standard is the high-end of the DTV standard created by the
ATSC which is an International body.

You don't need a 65" set to enjoy the quality of HDTV (although, the
larger the set the more noticable the enhanced quality seems to be),
and I thin you should note that not all Americans have gigantic sets
in their living room. HD looks quite nice on sets as small as 30";
which, by the way, have droped down to about $650 in the US (you can
get a Sanyo set with HDTV tuner for that in a local US Walmart these
days).



> NTSC was a simple standard that has lasted for almost 40 years. DTV
> should be a simple standard, too.
>

It's funny because if you think about it, most of the complications
with DTV came from consumer confusion about NTSC and DTV standards.
For example, perhaps they don't understand why they need a "special
tuner" to pick up DTV, or perhaps they don't understand which plug to
hook their antenna into. Perhaps an HD set without an HD tuner and
they believe they are watching HDTV, perhaps they have hooked up an HD
cable box with improper cables that aren't capable of handling HD
bandwidth.

NTSC had the advantage of being the first technology of its kind. DTV
has the disadvantage of being a transition technology. The consumer
has to educate themselfs, and unfortunately when you throw up that
requirement you remove the simplicity of it.

However, the answer is not to avoid HD all togeather. You recommend
720x480, which by the way isn't even a DTV standard. The highest DTV
resolution before crossing over to HD is 704x480 and the complexities
in recieving that signal are no less than full HD (1080i/720p), the
consumer still has to have a tuner and proper cables.

> Europe may not have HDTV, but they have far more digital TV. They aren't
> pigs like Americans, they are fine with their smaller television sets, and
> they aren't so self-absorbed that they demand a "home theater".

So there really isn't much weight to your argument. Seriously, who
wouldn't want a home theater? Who wouldn't want to watch movies closer
to their native aspect ratio on a widescreen set. I sense a
considerable amount of resentment in the subtext of your message
towards Americans.


> They may
> not have huge houses but they also don't have 35 million people living with
> food insecurity, 45 million people without health insurance, and a further
> 90 million under-insured.

The health care system in the UK is garbage. The UK solution is to
lower the standard for everyone and give everyone something. In the US
there is a health care problem, but at least for the majority of
Americans (middle class and above) there is quality health care that's
readily available to meet the needs of the people.

In a capitalistic society the government isn't as involved. It's the
responsibility of the people to take care of themselfs a bit more and
with that comes a lot more opportunity (career and otherwise) than a
citizen of the UK or really anywhere else in the world would have.

It's not a perfect system, but it's a damn good one. If you want to
base success on quality of life and, frankly wealth, then the success
of Captialism over other systems speaks for itself. The fact that US
consumers can have home theaters is their reaping the rewards of their
economic system.


> Oh, and they didn't kill 101,300 people for fuel
> for their oversized cars.

I don't agree with the war either, but I'm not anti-Captialistic.
That's not to say that capitalism isn't without its flaws. When you
build a society based on the acqusition of things (consumption)
there's going to be side effects. People are looking out for
themselfs, but I think this behavor is actually very human I think it
persist in all economic structures it's just controlled by a select
few (government) that reap the real benefits. In Capitialism the
"elite" may only represent 2% of the whole, but at least the
opportunity to enter that group does exist.

 

[Guest]

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

On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, magnulus wrote:
> HDTV is a waste of resources . A digital anamorphic 720x480 would have
> worked just as good for most people and would have been faster and cheaper
> to implement.

As Psycho Bob says, nobody needs HDTV, 480p is good enough.

Sock puppet.

-- 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.tv.tech.hdtv,alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:FEbsd.84436$jE2.16982@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
> HDTV is a waste of resources . A digital anamorphic 720x480 would have
> worked just as good for most people and would have been faster and cheaper
> to implement.
>
> Americans are so full of a supersized mentality. You can see it on
> everything from their TV sets to their wastelines. The idiots on this NG
> think everybody has the space for a 65 inch TV, or even a 42 inch TV, plus
> a
> dedicated home theater.
>
> NTSC was a simple standard that has lasted for almost 40 years. DTV
> should be a simple standard, too.
>
> Europe may not have HDTV, but they have far more digital TV. They aren't
> pigs like Americans, they are fine with their smaller television sets, and
> they aren't so self-absorbed that they demand a "home theater". They may
> not have huge houses but they also don't have 35 million people living
> with
> food insecurity, 45 million people without health insurance, and a further
> 90 million under-insured. Oh, and they didn't kill 101,300 people for
> fuel
> for their oversized cars.

You have been watching too many Michael Moore films (no doubt in SD).

Perhaps you should consider emigrating to this paradise on Earth that is
Europe.

Wait... let me guess, you have post election stress trauma?

 

[Guest]

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

"David" <davey3@home.com> wrote in message
news:X7GdnS-D270QMSzcRVn-rA@comcast.com...
> "magnulus" <magnulus@bellsouth.net> spewed in message
> news:FEbsd.84436$jE2.16982@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>> HDTV is a waste of resources .... *snip*
>
> I made the mistake of letting you out of the blocked senders list for a
> few days... back in you go.
>
> For good this time.

thanks... I forgot too

 

[Guest]

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

magnulus (magnulus@bellsouth.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> Europe may not have HDTV, but they have far more digital TV.

No, they have *far* less digital TV.

The US has over 1000 stations broadcasting digital, plus two DBS companies
(with 100% digital channels) with close to 20 million total subscribers,
plus countless cable companies (each with 20 to 200 digital channels) with
70M or so total subscribers.

--
Jeff Rife | Sam: Hey, how's life treating you there, Norm?
SPAM bait: |
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | Norm: Beats me...then it kicks me and leaves me
spam@ftc.gov | for dead.

 

[Guest]

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

>>
>>Well, they are watching FREE OTA HDTV, which makes the cable
>>and satellite companies unhappy.
>>
>
>Especially when most people got into cable tv just because analog OTA
>reception was so bad. I could see dropping cable completely if the
>local broadcasters would improve their product.
>

I certainly agree. My community, Modesto CA, population 200k, 60 miles
from transmitter towers, used to be a forest of 30ft TV masts, but
mostly gone now as people moved to cable and satellite to get a
reliable signal. Hardly anyone knows that OTA HDTV even exists. Ask at
Sears and am told that one antenna sold, was returned; someone has a
friend with OTA DTV but it conks out when a car drives by. Ask at Best
Buy, told that they have an antenna but not hooked up as reception
poor, only one salesman has heard of ATSC. Ask at Circuit City, told
that one set with ATSC receiver hooked to antenna, not reliable.

I don't know anyone with an HDTV set, but everyone I know complains
that cable is too expensive, a constant battle between the cable
provider and the city over the service. If the networks would promote
OTA DTV and if it worked well with a small antenna, it might really
take off.


charlie

 

[Guest]

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

Phil Ross wrote:
> <rant>
> If the FCC had banned manufacturers from including NTSC receivers in ANY
> television 5 years ago, it wound not be the issue that it is today.

No the issue today would be how do you regulate the airwaves with no FCC
in existence and how well is our government running with a whole new set
of Congresspersons and President from a third party neither Republican
or Democrat since the voters would have thrown the whole crowd of them out.

If the government had mandated 8-VSB receivers into all TV sets 5 years
ago we would have hell to pay today. There would be class action suits
against everyone consumers could find because of DTV sets that didn't
work. You would have a recession in the consumer electronics the like we
have not seen because of the higher price of all TV sets. CRT's analog
are still 80% of sales. The higher prices for these would kill sales.
The number of returns of HDTV sets would be an unacceptable high percentage.

And we would not be any better off with this monstrous black eye of a PR
debacle making the acceptance of HD OTA even worse.

All parties involved UNDERSTOOD this five years ago. That is why there
are few 8-VSB receivers at retailers. That is why most HD buyers don't
have access to any HD OTA or subscription. That is why there have been a
minuscule number of integrated HD sets.

The s**t didn't work! With the advent of 5th gen receivers this could
all finally start to change. What a waste!

> They are still making sets with analog receivers, so of course, the folks that buy
> one of those sets will be pretty pissed if suddenly they can't watch TV on
> their brand new set in 2007. I have a 42" plasma for my living room, and
> get all of my HD content OTA, but do you think that I can find a small (20")
> TV with an integrated ATSC tuner for my bedroom? Lots of LCD "monitors" or
> sets with NTSC tuners, but why would I buy one of those now, since I would
> have to get a STB in a few years to watch the damn thing. I suppose that
> there is always cable or a dish, but why would I want to pay those scalpers
> for something that I can get off the air today?
> </rant>
>
> "Blue Cat" <bluecat22@go.com> wrote in message
> news:19ksd.27595$Dm2.7396@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>

The government has to get on with the transition. That is why the White
House, the Senate (McCain), the House, (Barton) and the FCC (Ferree and
Powell) all are in the news. The push is on. They will disregard the 85%
rule or interpret it to mean digital TV to your cable or satellite
provider and not to your OTA receiver at home. This way they will have a
deadline of 2009.

However there is still the matter of the consumer in 2009. They vote!

Bob Miller

 

[Guest]

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

gerry wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:37:02 -0600, Doug McDonald
> <mcdonald@SnPoAM_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>
>>Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>>>"About half of the 5 million to 6 million U.S. households with an HD set
>>>but without a cable or satellite HD programming package think they are
>>>watching HDTV, Leichtman says, citing the results of a consumer survey
>>>his firm recently conducted."
>>>
>>>http/www.hoovers.com/free/news/detail.xhtml?ArticleID=NR200411293020.33_2b7b0029d8284980
>>
>>
>>Well, they are watching FREE OTA HDTV, which makes the cable
>>and satellite companies unhappy.
>>
>
>
> Especially when most people got into cable tv just because analog OTA
> reception was so bad. I could see dropping cable completely if the
> local broadcasters would improve their product.
>
>
I think you will get your chance. Local broadcasters will do one SD
program with MPEG2 and use the rest of their spectrum to deliver a
subscription based service including HD and SD. You will get a free SD,
maybe enhanced SD, of every broadcast channel in your area and say 50 to
70 cable subscription channels on top of that for about 35% less than
cable charges.

Bye Bye cable!

Bob Miller

 

[David]

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

"Charles H. Tieman" <curious8@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:ras3r0pk7m4klqitvju1gf0p3vh4nqaqbo@4ax.com...
> someone has a friend with OTA DTV but it conks out when
> a car drives by.

I've been surfing DTV newsgroups and HDTV forums for ~5 years.

Your posting above is the first and only I have ever seen of it's type.
Unresolved 8VSB reception problems involving nearby traffic?

Can you provide any additional details about this?
Is your "friend of someone" using the correct HDTV antenna?
Is it possible he's using this model :

http/www.smarthome.com/7744ad.html

I suspect "Friend of someone" is possibly using Romex or BX or lamp cord
for downlead. Did he use chewing gum or scotch tape for his wire splices.
Did he attach F-connectors using a hammer? If so, what brand?
(of F-connectors).

Please look into this and post back to us ASAP.

Anyway, to be fair, complaints like "OTA COFDM DTV conks
out when a tiny, 25cc scooter drives by" have been very
common postings over the past ~5 years in the British and Australian
[COFDM] newsgroups/forums.