HDTVNEWS.COM Says It All
The FCC is also a PR engine sent regularly abroad by the Commerce Department to promote the interests of US communications companies. How could the FCC act on this Sinclair petition precipitously without damaging their credibility? No one wants to look flaky to the rest of the world. Besides, even if there was to be an inclusion of COFDM which COFDM would that be? How long would it take to make the determination? How long then to evaluate existing or new channel allotments...interference calculations, etc. And what if someone new walked through the FCC doorways when the standard was open for public comments and said, "hey, look at this guys!" There could be no end of delay and the world could jump ahead of the US, even all of the Americas who are dependent to a large measure on what the US does.
Sinclair's petition had carefully stated that broadcaster's would assume all responsibility for interference. That argument seemed odd to many since the FCC was created in the first place at the behest of broadcasters complaining about other broadcasters blatantly interfering.
The FCC was in no hurry to respond to the Sinclair petition. When finally they were forced into the open after several embarrassing confrontations with other Government agencies, including the DoD, they finally denied further action on the petition. There would be no request for public comments--the usual procedure following acceptance of a petition. The FCC added, however, that they would address the modulation issue during a larger investigation in their upcoming biennial review covering the entire DTV roll out. Comments on the roll out are due May 17; Replies due June 16. by NPRM. Action by: the Commission. (Adopted: March 6, 2000. Dkt No.: MM- 00-39. (FCC No. 00-83) News Media Contact: David Fiske (202) 418-0500. MMB Contact: Gordon Godfrey at (202) 418-2190 or Mania Baghdadi at (202) 418-2120.)
Sinclair claimed a victory, but not as much as did Gary Shapiro over at CEA. Shapiro said in effect that everyone could settle down with confidence now and let the roll-out continue using 8-VSB--the right American DTV standard. Ostroff claimed his victory came when the FCC said their biennial review would take into account the indoor antenna issue. That would prove more practical than the usual 40 foot mast antenna used for decades by the FCC as its standard method for determining receivability and interference. Ostroff would be involved in the work of developing criteria for indoor antenna for the FCC, and for the industry.
How would Sinclair keep the fire under those 8-VSB feet now? "We will not take it to the press," said Ostroff. "We will have enough things working for us behind the scenes." To some that signaled trouble for Sinclair's momentum. They had suffered a major rebuke by the government observed internationally. But they didn't have to wait long for a new break.
Brazil undertook evaluation of the competing DTV transmission systems. First reports appeared in a surprise news release from their scientific agency ALBERT/SET with again disappointed results for 8-VSB supporters that gave fresh fuel to COFDM factions. Even using the most advanced 8-VSB prototype receivers the multipath handling, said the report, was not equal to that of COFDM. They could not recommend it for use in Brazil. The question of distance was not such an issue in Brazil, said Mark Richer at the ATSC in explaining why the advertised benefit of 8-VSB did them no good. , as it is in the USA. Robert Graves wrote another letter.
While praise for their scientific integrity was heaped on Brazil's ALBERT-SET by ATSC members other 8-VSB advocates said there were still some inconstancies in the testing process. Perhaps more data soon to be taken would lead to different conclusions. Graves again offered his view and explanations, which can be found on the ATSC.org web site.
This latest test report from Brazil was followed by still another one conducted by NBC. Even with the help of RCA and others who have invested heavily in the 8-VSB standard, NBC came to the same conclusion as did Sinclair. Some said they took their report to the FCC but it was not found as part of the public record. Reports circulated on the Internet. Mark Schubin ran into NBC's Peter Smith in a "chance" meeting in New York and confirmed that they had done this testing and with those same results as Sinclair. Schubin was also given a new digital RCA DCT100 receiver to test in his New York apartment as well as one with a new Motorola chip, but non-disclosure agreements make him unable to deliver a full report on all of his findings. He has written in his famous Monday Memo some results for the RCA box. He certainly found reception difficulties in the canyons of NYC, which comes as no great surprise.
|
VISIT HDTV COUNTRY HEADQUARTERS
Looking at their multi-billion dollar 8-VSB investments as potential write-offs when Brazil's surprise report surfaced, the ATSC members began to consider in earnest just what could be done to salvage everything. If Brazil goes with COFDM, they reasoned, the others like dominos could fall until the US was left an orphan. Mexico had said just before Brazil's revelation that 8-VSB was not good for them either but, like Canada, could only ponder what else they could do being a boarder nation. Little recourse is theirs but to follow the US, or to sway the US away from 8-VSB. Again, more letters from Robert Graves went to Mexico.
We hear that Canada has run COFDM and 8-VSB comparative tests as well. Reports are coming to the NAB I am told. Since there is no documentation I will not comment here on just rumors. I will speculate, however, that Ken Davies, former CBC stalwert who has long held the view that COFDM was the better way, is now consulting...presumably with his fellow Canadians. If so, one can trust he is doing so with considerable influence for COFDM.
So, it has been a period of troubled waters. "I don't know how these guys could possibly make the important business decisions they have had to make in this horrible environment of doubt," said CEA president, Gary Shapiro in an Email to HDTV News. This was his most sympathetic and heart felt expression towards his members I had heard. Shapiro made one more blast on March 3rd where he accused broadcasters in a press release of offer excuses in an effort to delay the DTV transition.
Moving Towards reconciliation
Zenith's Vice-President of Engineering Richard Lewis, who in previous interviews with HDTV News denounced the testing methodology used by Sinclair, stood up at the DTV-6 Conference in Las Angeles at the intercontinental Hotel and broke the ice by publicly praising Nat Ostroff for having the courage to bring these deficiencies to public discussion. Robert Graves added his sincere thanks immediately following with words of appreciation for Ostroff's contribution and he invitated Ostroff to come to the Task Force and help with his fellow broadcasters find a solution.
Does this somehow signal as well the beginning of the end for 8-VSB? Those rushing to judgment like to think so. More likely than not this new forum--the ATSC Modulation Task force--will come to understand the full potential of both modulation schemes and weigh their findings against the "cost" of opening up the standard at the FCC. The Task Force will determine if 8-VSB has reached a stage in its development where all can agree on it for the US market and more, or find that it is time to move on.
I have not mentioned one person in this article who has played a significant and educational, if not often annoying role in this modulation debate. That would be Dermot Nolan, the man that the EU's DG XIII anchor Adam-Watson-Brown credits with single-handedly knocking out the HD-MAC initiatives in Europe ten years ago. Dermot Nolan has put up a relentless campaign to see that his beloved COFDM standard is adopted around the world...to give harmony at last to what has been an era of standards cacophony.
Nolan was asked by me last night if some nation is or region of the world is likely to be somehow advantaged in this coming era of ubiquitous digital television and one dominant standard. Nolan seems to have summed up all of his arguments in an uncharacteristically peaceful response, which I leave here whole unedited for your appraisal.
My question to Nolan: Considering the enormity of the revolution we are in now--the e-commerce and e-business-to-business online projected into the trillion dollar categories--is this modulation system in your view integral to the success of e-commerce? Is there a bigger win for someone should they walk off with the global standard? Does it boost or advantage any region of the world in particular should COFDM get a global nod?'
Dermot Nolan: You raise a number of very interesting questions: last year there were 40 million digital TV homes globally and 100 million Internet homes. This year there are 200 million Internet homes and far fewer digital TV homes. It has taken the Internet a mere five years to reach the penetration it took radio fifty years to achieve, according to Marconi.
The main thing about COFDM is that apart from the fact that it's fine with fixed antenna, is that it's ideal for portable and mobile devices. The trend in society is towards mobility: here there is one mobile digital phone for every household just five years after digital services were launched. They are much more advanced in the GSM nations than the US because they fix a standard and economies of scale take over, whereas the US is a ragbag of incompatible standards. The main reason the Internet is SO powerful is that its based on one standard: TCP/IP which gives it universality.
|
