Social Feed

It makes me wonder if they can only have a certain number of digital subchannels, that they might have to do secondary affiliations on certain TV stations in the future...

Justin Hill said:

It makes me wonder if they can only have a certain number of digital subchannels, that they might have to do secondary affiliations on certain TV stations in the future...

Click to expand...

There is no contrived limit to the number of subchannels so that's not the issue. During the transition, there will almost certainly have to be some sharing on the ATSC 3.0 channels but since it is unlikely that UHD will be part of the transition, that shouldn't be a problem. We'll have to see what they come up with for a practical limit to the number of streams based on the real-world performance of the encoders.

Of course convincing consumers that they need to upgrade their tuners without dangling something tangible is going to be the biggest issue. Much of what ATSC 3.0 promises is for the benefit of the broadcasters. I'd be interested in what the proponents really think is going to lure us to change because most of the excitement thus far seems to center around the idea that ATSC 3.0 might just work to deliver what we have now with DTV.

harshness said:

There is no contrived limit to the number of subchannels so that's not the issue. During the transition, there will almost certainly have to be some sharing on the ATSC 3.0 channels but since it is unlikely that UHD will be part of the transition, that shouldn't be a problem. We'll have to see what they come up with for a practical limit to the number of streams based on the real-world performance of the encoders.

Of course convincing consumers that they need to upgrade their tuners without dangling something tangible is going to be the biggest issue. Much of what ATSC 3.0 promises is for the benefit of the broadcasters. I'd be interested in what the proponents really think is going to lure us to change because most of the excitement thus far seems to center around the idea that ATSC 3.0 might just work to deliver what we have now with DTV.

Click to expand...

If that is the case, I'll definitely look forward to this new next generation technology as soon as they roll it out.

Justin Hill said:

If that is the case, I'll definitely look forward to this new next generation technology as soon as they roll it out.

Click to expand...

What aspect(s) of ATSC 3.0 are driving your desire to spend money on acquiring and integrating suitable equipment?

harshness said:

What aspect(s) of ATSC 3.0 are driving your desire to spend money on acquiring and integrating suitable equipment?

Click to expand...

I'm interested in five of the newest features of ATSC 3.0:

Advanced Emergency Alerting

IP Transport

Immersive Audio

Ultra High-Definition TV

Robust Mobile Reception

Nothing like watching a 4K video on a 7 inch on a tablet.

Justin Hill said:

I'm interested in five of the newest features of ATSC 3.0:

Advanced Emergency Alerting

Click to expand...

Is this that important? Sounds like a buzzphrase to me. Then again, pretty much all we get from our EBS where I live is Amber Alerts and while important, there isn't much you can do to "enhance" them.

IP Transport

Click to expand...

In that packets can't reasonably be resent, I'm not sure I see the benefit of adding a layer to the protocol pile.

Immersive Audio

Click to expand...

As opposed to Dolby Digital 5.1?

Ultra High-Definition TV

Click to expand...

This could be real if UHD catches on. At this point, I have to wonder if 1080i isn't good enough.

Robust Mobile Reception

Click to expand...

I firmly believe that this one is a baldface lie for most users. The rig that they demoed was essentially a TV receiver and antenna strapped to the back of a wireless phone. Hardly my idea of robust reception in a world where miniature TVs have always been more a curiosity than a tool. Given the numbers of people who claim that they can't get solid OTA with a stationary antenna now, I can't imagine reception on something a phone could support is going to be worth the effort. When was the last time you saw a daily driver with a OTA antenna mounted on it?

If broadcasters and consumers are going to have to lay out millions to implement ATSC 3.0, there must be broader appeal than a fascination with new technology to deliver much the same old thing. The ATSC must take a position that their new standard will make almost everything better, but that doesn't mean that we have to believe what they're say. Where is their evidence?

Could the practical benefits be achieved without all the expense?