[LINK] More on US Digital TV
Thu, 11 Jan 2001 11:25:26 +1000
I think I take your point about the PAL/NTSC issue ... but I also think to a
certain extent that we're hearing an awful lot of manufacturer obfuscation
re why it's expensive.
So let's roll some realism here. Most of the work will ultimately be done on
one chip of decent size and processing power. To make that one chip doesn't
really justify the prices talked about. The "economy of scale" argument,
given how these things are actually built, is less than honest; a
decoder/controller/receiver chip will be trivially cheap.
The consumer electronics makers are trying to recoup costs, true - not to
develop one multi-standard reconfigurable decoder, but the cost of more than
a decade of Europe-versus-US standards politicking, aborted launches, "HDTV
at last!" prototypes (my first exposure was at the NAB show in 1988), and so
From: Jan Whitaker [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, 11 January 2001 9:16
To: Chirgwin, Richard
Subject: RE: [LINK] More on US Digital TV
At 10:39 AM 11/01/01 +1000, Chirgwin, Richard wrote:
>The tvs and stbs are market specific, but what's new? We went with PAL, the
>US was NTSC ... ever it was thus. Hmm, the US market is big, so I guess we
>should also abandon centimeters for inches?
I think there may be a difference today that didn't exist when the PAL
decision was made. The television set industry didn't exist. So
manufacture sprang up all over the place. Do you think there will be any
effort for an Australian TV manufacturing company, let alone a group of
them, develop to meet this need? I don't. So the reliance will be on the
Japanese manufacturers. Hence my comment about a Euro dependent
consideration of the economies of scale. We don't have it on our own. I
didn't suggest that we change to a US centric model, but asked if the
decision not to is just another thorn in the side of the change.
If a marginal improvement, and poorly considered, and 'build it they will
come' approach such as this is taken, then if there would be any
possibility of it putting down roots, it would help to have at least some
leverage. This incompatibility of the tvs and stbs do not add any
incentive. There is no room for a manufacture gear up failure if the market
isn't large enough in potential after time.
The Herald Sun Connect section had a multipage description of the failure
of this effort as well as some decent descriptions for a lay
audience. Peter Familiari panned the whole thing in much the same way
linkers have. I would think it's probably not worth spending any more
energy on it for now and certainly won't part with any money for converting
myself for many many years if ever. But I do now need an antenna to get
the open broadcast signal because of the deterioration of signal because of
what I assume is changing out of the transmitters. But that's a $100 fix
instead of a $multithousand fix for watching the ABC.
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
email@example.com -- http://www.primenet.com/~jwhit/whitentr.htm