Broadcasters Petition FCC for ATSC 3.0 Rollout
- Thread starter jxg0754
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 131
- Views 12K
For more reading on the Shannon limit, see Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noisy-channel_coding_theorem
See also here: http://www.tvtechnology.com/insight/0083/reviewing-next-generation-error-correction-codes/217512
But in short, it's the theoretical maximum amount of information that can be transmitted over a noisy channel. The goal of any new digital communications technology is to get as close to the Shannon limit as possible. Suffice it to say that ATSC 1.0 isn't very close to the Shannon limit.
For more on constellations in general, and to see the diagrams referenced below, see Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constellation_diagram
The constellation is a way of visualizing a digital signal. In the Wikipedia article, you can see how 8PSK and 16QAM are shown in a constellation. In ATSC 1.0, which has three bits per symbol like 8PSK, the Q axis is ignored, so you get 8 vertical lines instead of 8 dots, but the concept is the same. But in all three cases, the dots/lines are spaced an equal distance apart, as you can see for the two cases shown on Wikipedia. ATSC 3.0 is flexible in that stations will be able to make choices. It will have some traditional constellations available as options, but also some constellations where the dots aren't spaced equally apart, and while I won't pretend that I understand the theory around it, it's supposed to make the signal more robust.
Does that help?
- Trip
See also here: http://www.tvtechnology.com/insight/0083/reviewing-next-generation-error-correction-codes/217512
But in short, it's the theoretical maximum amount of information that can be transmitted over a noisy channel. The goal of any new digital communications technology is to get as close to the Shannon limit as possible. Suffice it to say that ATSC 1.0 isn't very close to the Shannon limit.
For more on constellations in general, and to see the diagrams referenced below, see Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constellation_diagram
The constellation is a way of visualizing a digital signal. In the Wikipedia article, you can see how 8PSK and 16QAM are shown in a constellation. In ATSC 1.0, which has three bits per symbol like 8PSK, the Q axis is ignored, so you get 8 vertical lines instead of 8 dots, but the concept is the same. But in all three cases, the dots/lines are spaced an equal distance apart, as you can see for the two cases shown on Wikipedia. ATSC 3.0 is flexible in that stations will be able to make choices. It will have some traditional constellations available as options, but also some constellations where the dots aren't spaced equally apart, and while I won't pretend that I understand the theory around it, it's supposed to make the signal more robust.
Does that help?
- Trip
The FCC must approve the standard first, They will put it out for public comment before the end of the month, At this time Broadcasters want to have a voluntary transition where one or a few stations transition to the new standard and carry what all is currently in that market and most likely more with ATSC 3.0, While those 3.0 stations .1's and possibly .2's are also carried on a ATSC 1.0 station in that market, With the FCC's TV Station Incentive Auction also ongoing I think that a transtion to 3.0 could occur at a very fast pace especially if wirless companies want their spectrum sooner than 39 months after the auction closes
I recall Sprint was pretty much the only wireless company behind Wi-Max
Fast? As in "Dish Soon?"
No hardware in consumer hands. Maybe TiVo has placed bets on a new series of compliant hardware.
But TVs need the new "decoder ring."
And a new OTA module for Dish still won't be of much use, unless it dumbs it down to something the current DVR can record.
Hopper 4, coming "soon," with ATSC 3 and HEVC decoding, HDR and wide color space, 2 bells and 3 whistles?
I'd be stunned if consumer TVs would be ATSC compliant for Christmas 2016. Heck, 2017 holidays would be FAST.
I believe a mandate should be imposed. Sure, I've come around on allowing an early voluntary adoption, but it should be like UHF channels and digital signals: REQUIRED. That is the only way we can more or less force broadcasters to adopt it. Guaranteed receive ability. And the possibility of even more sub channels, so HS basketball can be covered, and we finally get that long coveted grass growing channel.
No hardware in consumer hands. Maybe TiVo has placed bets on a new series of compliant hardware.
But TVs need the new "decoder ring."
And a new OTA module for Dish still won't be of much use, unless it dumbs it down to something the current DVR can record.
Hopper 4, coming "soon," with ATSC 3 and HEVC decoding, HDR and wide color space, 2 bells and 3 whistles?
I'd be stunned if consumer TVs would be ATSC compliant for Christmas 2016. Heck, 2017 holidays would be FAST.
I believe a mandate should be imposed. Sure, I've come around on allowing an early voluntary adoption, but it should be like UHF channels and digital signals: REQUIRED. That is the only way we can more or less force broadcasters to adopt it. Guaranteed receive ability. And the possibility of even more sub channels, so HS basketball can be covered, and we finally get that long coveted grass growing channel.
WiMAX. Now there's a word I haven't heard in a while. I wonder how many tech execs blanch at hearing it and grab their wallets tightly.
I'd like to know who these "commercial broadcasters" are. I find it difficult to believe any commercial broadcaster would be petitioning the FCC to have to spend money on new technology that likely will produce little if any new income. Now I can see the other side of the business doing it, the people involved in the hardware/software side. They're trying to force the industry to buy their equipment and products by getting the FCC to institute a new standard, but broadcasters? Heck it's less than 10 years since they were forced to spend all that money to convert to digital, I find it hard to believe they themselves would actually be pushing for a new incompatible technology.
Heaven forbid that people might watch TV delivered via a "last mile" of USB rather than Internet Protocol.
As more than a few enduring DIRECTV 4K lament, a DVR doesn't have to be able to "do" UHD to record and serve up UHD content.
Precisely my point. There's a huge groundswell of excitement over a new technology and six years later, Sprint drove the last nail in the WiMAX coffin on March 31, 2016 (having been delayed several months by vigorous legal action from the State of Massachusetts).
If the standard isn't mandated, it won't happen. It really is that simple and it is how we got where we are today going back to 1953 when the NTSC chose the RCA color television system.
Sprint bought WiMAX through its acquisition of Clearwire and almost immediately began shutting it down.
There were probably two dozen carriers involved at one time but that's ancient history.
Wow the hate towards new technology,And a Sprint and Wi-Max comparrison with the Clearwire spinoff that led to Softbanks purchase of Sprint that led to the repurchase of Clearwire which operated under the Clear brand,
Who is the CTA and the long list members http://www.cta.tech/ Did everyone by a new TV with ATSC 1.0? Must they with 3.0?
Dish with their famous programming disputes! If they can find some way to not pay retrans with an ATSC 3.0 tuner that'll be FAST
If the wireless companies can get their spectrum quicker by funding a transition to 3.0 that'll be FAST or have the FCC do it that'll still be FAST
Ever hear of the Pearl Group? http://www.pearltv.com/ What about APTS http://www.apts.org/
Plus for some stations all that may have to be replaced is the exciter that's explained on this page http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/93925/nab-asks-fcc-to-ok-nextgen-broadcasting/page/2
Heaven forbid i purchase these two devices on new egg!
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...t_ethernet_usb_adapter-_-12-623-004-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...7151&cm_re=wd_my_cloud-_-22-236-771-_-Product
Yep.
But never underestimate the Feds and Pollies ability to screw things up. Remember the last cowardly delay in adopting ATSC?
But never underestimate the Feds and Pollies ability to screw things up. Remember the last cowardly delay in adopting ATSC?
I wasn't really into Broadcast TV at the time, sure i watched stuff, but using an antenna didn't materialize
Can't hate something that doesn't exist yet. You can, however, compare it to other incomplete standards and recent gubmint mandates.
No, some are still operating with their free digital converter boxes (as are many who are using cable with older TVs)
I can't imagine what a free converter box might do and how it would be hooked up to the IP world when the ATSC 1.0 stations are ultimately removed. Old TVs were designed to live for many years and new TVs are designed to last for around seven.
That's just the antenna end of things. The infrastructure to adapt the station-end facilities is likely to be quite a bit more sophisticated than what the stations are using now and I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that is what jeepguy is on about. Further, because of simulcasting (as recommended by the petition in lieu of a conversion mandate), the existing modulators and broadcast equipment will typically have to remain in place doing what they are doing today and the argument about bandwidth savings is a baldface lie up to the point that most everyone replaces all of their old TVs.
I can't imagine what kind of drugs they were on in suggesting that compelling content would drive a market conversion. I wonder what the business model is to be able to offer must-have OTA content that would drive people to buy new TVs with the new tuners rather than turning to services that will allow them to use their old TVs for a modest monthly price.
