Sinclair's Nat Ostroff Challenges 8VSB Performance Claims and Calls for DTV Reception Standards

"Reliance on an anticipation of performance and a trust that things will get better with time just don't cut the musturd when millions, if not billions, of dollars are at stake."

I feel compelled to respond to Jules Cohen's remarks carried in your newletter this week. With all due respect to Jules:

The first point that Jules made was that DTV should not be expected to work any better than NTSC. Why??? They actually found two locations in Charlotte where DTV worked when NTSC was "less than satisfactory". I wonder how many sites in Charlotte were actually tested? Two good sites is not statistically significant. However, I would challenge the thesis that DTV need only be as good as NTSC. In our tests in Baltimore we have now found that COFDM can provide perfectly stable digitally perfect pictures where NTSC produces CCIR grade two or worse. Why then settle for anything less than the best performance? Just as good as NTSC, though not demonstrated in the field to this writter, is now no longer good enough. Why? Because it has been demonstrated to be possible and because experience now is that 8VSB does not work with simple antennas that do receive NTSC today! Jules also seems to believe that if the public demanded good indoor reception the consumer industry can produce a receiver that will do the job. Then why not do it now? It is not just indoor reception. It is outdoor reception with simple antennas that don't need to be rotated to receive each station in the market. I would suggest that the public demands that now, we have just not heard their voice. Do we really expect the public to install a separate antenna and rotator for each TV set in the home?

Jules is not a broadcaster. He does not have to make a living by selling advertising. He does not have a board of directors and a public stock that demands performance every quarter and I don't imagine he has billions of dollars at risk everyday in the broadcasting business. In short, he can afford to rely on a hope and a prayer that the consumer electronics industry, by thier good will, will meet the broadcaster's need to do tomoorow with digital what we can do today with NTSC. That is; reach into our marketplace in a ubiquitous fashion without asking the consumer to go to extra-ordinary efforts to get our product. The broadcaster needs reception by simple antennas as a prerequisite to the sucessful rollout of DTV. Jules may not accept that but I can assure you that every rational businessman-broadcaster does get it. If there is evidence to support Jules's proposition that the consumer electronic manufacturers have the ablity to make 8VSB work for simple antennas today then I think it is time to put that evidence into the public domain. Promises and unsupported representations just are not good enough. there is much to much at stake.

I also disagree with the contention that testing and reconsideration would take three years to complete. That may have been true before all of the leg work that has already been done in preparing the computer models that exist today. A testing effort to determine the D/U levels can be done very quickly, if not already known. Then the computer programs can use this input to run the necessary studies. The technical effort is a 90 day wonder. The political effort will depend on how the broadcast industry responds. If we chose to bicker and fight then it will be a long process. If we instead come together in the realization that we must not settle for anything less than the best system that can serve the public by creating the easiest reception system possible, the time will be cut to months, not years. The FCC stands ready to consider the industry's requests. They can make the necessary changes quickly, in the interest of the consumer. If 8VSB can be improved now is the time to show us how. If it can't then it is time to demand something better.

Reliance on an anticipation of performance and a trust that things will get better with time just don't cut the musturd when millions if not billions of dollars are at stake.

My apologies to Jules but we clearly have different points of view.

Nat Ostroff