A Religious War In Process
Part I
Digital Terrestrial Broadcasting
Are You About To Lose HDTV and DTV.
Why? Digital Disagreements
 hile the standard setting process for digital high-definition television & DTV was open through its nine year history (1987 to 1995) the computer industry entered late and thus failed to secure all technical advantages. The unanimous vote for the Grand Alliance standard by the ATSC came in late 1995. The computer industry said later they had not been invited early enough to effectively impact the process. When they did show up, they were not listened to. The ATSC standard, they say, is dominated by the outdated desires of a failing television industry with disregard for a shared future TV is destined to have with the computer. The standard 
submitted to the FCC on November 28, 1995 is claimed computer-unfriendly due to the inclusion of an interlace scanning format. The broadcast community argues that the computer has been taken fully into account. They point to the inclusion of progressive scanning formats within the FCC submission as more than ample evidence. Computer people argue that displays will be influenced by the signal parameters and any inclusion of interlace scanning would perpetuate, by dent of lower costs, interlace displays. A fierce debate rages as to whether interlace high-definition displays are generaly "inferior" for computer usage. Many in the broadcast industry--though certainly not all--insist that inclusion of interlace scanning is the only cost-effective means for inaugurating the digital broadcast era, and, importantly, they say, produces a better motion picture. All agree that progressive scanning is a goal to reach in the future when technically affordable. Broadcasters say that after 20 years of development, costing billions of dollars, there is still but a skimpy amount of interlace high-definition production equipment with which to build a new broadcasting industry. To abandon the interlace equipment at this stage would add five or more years to the start-up for high-definition television/DTV, plus another billion dollars or more in development cost (which must be born alone by broadcasters). Strongly supportive of this view is NBC (General Electric) with engineering vp, Stan Baron (currently president of SMPTE), as its primary spokesperson. Equipment maker, Sony, rejects the request for excluding interlace scanning, saying it is wasteful to all their previous interlace 1125/60 investments and it would be years before sufficient progressive scanning equipment could be made and deployed to drive a transition to DTV. In recent months progressive scanning equipment has come on the market from Poloroid/BTS, though at a costly premium (progressive cameras @ $600,000 each w/lens included vs. third generation interlace chip cameras @ $110,000 or less, w/lens included). The Chairman of the FCC, Reed Hundt, has said repeatedly that only when a cross-industry agreement is reached on a DTV standard will he vote for any specificity. Failing to reach agreement will cause him to vote only for a "modem" or bit rate standard that will mandate no specific operating parameters (scanning lines and frame rates) but will insure non-interference between all licensed signal providers. The manufacturers of program production equipment (cameras, switchers, routers, special effects devices, editors, etc.) and television sets are terrified of this prospect and therefore unwilling to cause development of, or build professional equipment and DTV HDTV receivers. Manufacturers believe unalterably that the broadcast model insists upon specific standards between the signal providers and the receivers. Looking at the "Road Ahead", Microsoft's Bill Gates has assumed the lead in opposition to the ATSC standard, declaring that the inclusion of interlace scanning impairs the future of the computer and must be reconsidered by the FCC before he or the computer industry at large will endorse it as the new terrestrial transmission standard. Given opportunity from the resulting interlude a new candidate for a standard has been submitted by the computer industry (CICATS) based upon the work of technical Oscar winner, Gary Demos. Being used as a negotiation chip by Gates, the Demos system differs enough from what has already been tested under the ACATS guidance that a new round of testing is likely to be required (politically driven, if not technically). That would push the DTV startup dates far into the future and, many say, leave it vulnerable to still more (read endless) technical submissions to consider (thus a permanent postponement of a decision to employ DTV). Some think this delay is authored by the computer industry for some obscure reasons, while the cmputer industry says they want to get on with the transition so they can bid for the returned NTSC channels. Another set of problems: Lastly, there remains bitter infighting in Congress regarding the terrestrial spectrum required for a digital transition. There are many who favor auctioning of the new digital frequencies as the superior means for allocation and government revenue. Others, most notably the current administration, favor the auctioning of the old analog channels upon their mandated return to the FCC in 5 to 20 years. None of the issues above are moving towards solution. Rather they have remained stuck fast producing general deadlock. Neither broadcast--favoring interlace, nor computer--favoring its elimination have shown any signs of compromise or capitulation. A general deadlock precludes the FCC Chairman from voting for a specific standard, which if carried through the Commission means there will be no transition to digital terrestrial television driven by either the manufacturers or the signal providers. It has become the end of the road for this movement until a change is realized. These important differences would appear resolvable among "reasonable" people. But even The goal of this independent web service is to help forge the a new industry wide agreement which can lead to the FCC setting a standard and allowing all in the "industry" to step forward together. The documents to be found on these pages make clearer the arguments expressed above--formal and informal alike--all from the authors of the unresolved issues. The formal documents come from the public record--respondents to the FCC's Notice Of Proposed Rule Making, Congressional hearings, and En Banc hearing of the FCC. Since we do not have all submissions as yet, we welcome their transmittal to us by electronic mail or standard mail. The informal submissions are those which travel the world via EMail and other means--offering you a "wire tap" of the industry for your eavesdropping. With neither its value well recognized nor optimal provisions made for its deployment the high-definition DTV movement is dead. If we cannot reach the consensus essential for encouraging the FCC to cast at least three of their four votes for a specific standard, we must regrettably and forcefully place our 12 year international reputation on the line with a resounding declaration that the HDTV and digital terrestrial television movement is, at least for the time being, dead. Far too much time, talent, and money have been spent on far too little economic progress. No matter the seductive appeal of the final product it is a duty to ourselves, families, and friends to leave with unequivocal clarity an unfruitful field and move on to things which are progressing and will compensate us for our talents and time. My fervent hope is, of course, that we can avoid abandoning the field and instead arrive together at the answers for successfully commercializing DTV--thus providing the nation and all who follow with a fantastic new era in communications quality--job number one.
Copyright 1999 |
