Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 10:17:25 -0700
From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[Note: This item comes from reader John Pickens. DLH]
At 10:06 -0700 9/15/03, John Pickens wrote:
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 10:06:54 -0700
To: dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: John Pickens <jpickens@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Dewayne-Net] FCC SEEKS TO PROMOTE DIGITAL TV, HDTV ROLLOUT
Mime-Version: 1.0
What is being standardized is actually a hybrid analog-digital
technology. The (lowest) physical layer is still MPEG over 6Mhz RF
channels - and is designed for transport over coaxial cable
infrastructures. Also is 1-way only, so does not enable 2-way services.
One view is that this is a good thing and will enable the consumer to
have more choice with less equipment (back to where "cable-ready" was 10
years ago). Another view is that this is too little, too late - and is
standardizing a technology that is not relevant for future looking
in-home connectivity.
A whole new generation of homeowner options are appearing for accessing
video - multi-TV video servers (both embedded systems and PC-based
systems), tablets, PDAs - and broadband (DVD quality bitrates) streaming
video (IP/Ethernet). The vast majority of these systems are not MPEG
6Mhz RF channel based. They are based upon ethernet, and transports that
look like ethernet (802.11 wireless, HomePNA, HomePlug).
An ethernet TV (10/100/1000), stripped of all of today's connectivity
options, analog coax, analog RBG, analog component, and the newly
standardized cable FCC connectivity option - 1-way hybrid analog-digital
MPEG RF coax - would probably be $100 cheaper (list). Is that a scenario
interesting to consumers/manufacturers?
Perhaps it is time to open a public dialog about standardization of
future-looking digital TV standards - i.e. TV over IP/Ethernet. (No
position statement implied as the preferred forum for such a dialogue.)
J
Archives at: <http://Wireless.Com/Dewayne-Net>
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>