FCC approves voluntary ATSC 3.0 adoption.

[goaliebob99]

As you've learned from AT&T's (DIRECTV's) UHD efforts, having the capacity (RDBS) for something doesn't mean jack if they can't find the content to bother turning it on.

Which I don't get. It's not like there isn't content up there. SES has a 12 channel UHD mux up there that they could carry including Nasa UHD. It's like when DirecTV was bought out by ATT, the entire UHD Push just stopped. Almost like the people who were in charge of that push just vanished. To me, that's wasted bandwidth as there is no point in having that capacity available if your only going to let it sit. If you have it, use it.

 

[Voyager6]

Which I don't get. It's not like there isn't content up there. SES has a 12 channel UHD mux up there that they could carry including Nasa UHD. It's like when DirecTV was bought out by ATT, the entire UHD Push just stopped. Almost like the people who were in charge of that push just vanished. To me, that's wasted bandwidth as there is no point in having that capacity available if your only going to let it sit. If you have it, use it.

What we don't know is what is the cost of that content. If they are charging a premium for it, then it may not be worth acquiring with the limited number of 4K sets hooked up. Are we going to be looking at an UHD charge like we had for HD when it first became available?

 

[navychop]

It will be a loss leader (OTA) for the first few years, no doubt. But for whatever reason, they are pushing it so I expect it to happen. But widespread public acceptance may be slow, unless they can convince us great unwashed masses there’s good reason to adopt. And I expect free or heavily subsidized boxes for the first few years.

I wonder if those ATSC 3 UHD TVs will report all watching habits, including DVDs, like my Sony does? Gotta remember to block that.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[Voyager6]

It will be a loss leader (OTA) for the first few years, no doubt. But for whatever reason, they are pushing it so I expect it to happen. But widespread public acceptance may be slow, unless they can convince us great unwashed masses there’s good reason to adopt. And I expect free or heavily subsidized boxes for the first few years.

I wonder if those ATSC 3 UHD TVs will report all watching habits, including DVDs, like my Sony does? Gotta remember to block that.


Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

That's what they want. An active internet account will be necessary for the "interactive" content.

 

[harshness]

It will be a loss leader (OTA) for the first few years, no doubt.

Who are you expecting to absorb those costs?

But for whatever reason, they are pushing it so I expect it to happen.

Who are "they"?

But widespread public acceptance may be slow, unless they can convince us great unwashed masses there’s good reason to adopt. And I expect free or heavily subsidized boxes for the first few years.

Again, who is going to provide the subsidies and for how long? Absent a gubmint mandate, it could be a rather long time.

I wonder if those ATSC 3 UHD TVs will report all watching habits, including DVDs, like my Sony does? Gotta remember to block that.

Anything is possible and if they're looking for revenue, that's a well-established source. On the other hand, I'm not sure they want advertisers to know the most specific viewer details that may be revealed (like what causes them to jump channels).

On top of this, the metrics gathered would be uniquely those of OTA viewers and that's a relatively small (and notoriously famous for not parting with their money) bunch.

 

[harshness]

SES has a 12 channel UHD mux up there that they could carry including Nasa UHD.

Regrettably, little of the content they offer is name-brand TV. Much of it is demos and clips.

There's a place for eye candy on a limited basis, but it isn't something you can depend on for engaging content every viewing session. For its part, Voom offered movies.

 

[Bruce]

It's like when DirecTV was bought out by ATT, the entire UHD Push just stopped. Almost like the people who were in charge of that push just vanished.

What 4K content was coming and even if it was why would it been stopped because of Direct TV and AT&T.

There has not been and still not one story or even rumor of a broadcaster ( cable or OTA ) offer a 4K version of their channel and I doubt it will happen anytime soon.

There is a big difference between HD to 4K and when we went from SD to HD, TV Manufacturers was sponsoring content then to show off their new HD sets, that is not happening now because there is a ton of 4K content, it just happens to be online, so Manufacturers are not sponsoring and Broadcasters do not feel the need to upgrade, it is not worth it to them financially to fast track offering a 4K channel.

 

[Voyager6]

ATSC 3.0 is mostly about the efficient use of bandwidth. Being able to put several HD streams with HDR will be a big economic incentive to stations. Adding HDR to the HD stream will be the key.
How ATSC 3 Changes Broadcasting for the Better (It's Not Just 4K) - Studio Daily

Broadcasters will have quite a bit of latitude to decide what to do with their ATSC channels. Friedel said a single 6 MGz ATSC 3.0 channel has 36 "capacity units." (That's almost a threefold increase over the original ATSC spec, which offered 13 capacity units.) That means an ATSC 3.0 channel can hold a single UHD program, multiple HD programs (they take up six or 12 units each, depending on frame rate), or up to 36 SD programs.

It's not enough capacity, however, that bandwidth will not remain a primary concern. And that might mean that the future of broadcasting is not in UHD at all, but in high dynamic range (HDR) — or, rather, in what broadcasters are calling "HDR+".

HDR is mostly thought of as a 4K technology, since the first TV sets to enable it are UHD models, but there is no good reason HD content can't be encoded in HDR, then upres'd to 4K by the TV set. That's where HDR+ comes in. It's an HD-resolution stream that features HDR, wide color gamut, and 10-bit color depth (to eliminate the color banding that is arguably the most unsightly characteristic of HDTV images). Matthew Goldman, SVP of Technology, Media and Entertainment at Ericsson, said the increased payload when HDR+ content is delivered to consumers is at most 20% more than a standard HD stream, while HFR (60p to 120p) could require a 30% increase in bandwidth to the home and 4K can increase the required bandwidth by as much as 250%.

"If you want to get the best bang for the bit, what are you going to do?" Goldman asked the audience rhetorically. "I think you should look at doing 1080p HDR+. If you have the bandwidth, do the 4K. But if you don't have it, seriously, take a look at this. You can get, for a small increase in bandwidth, a much better user experience."

 

[harshness]

What 4K content was coming and even if it was why would it been stopped because of Direct TV and AT&T.

It wasn't at all because DIRECTV started forwarding UHD that they stopped. They stopped because they had to put up or shut up and they perhaps weren't as ready to deliver as they claimed.

We were assured multiple times by people in high places that UHD was coming but their sources have pretty much all pulled back from their original promises.

 

[harshness]

ATSC 3.0 is mostly about the efficient use of bandwidth. Being able to put several HD streams with HDR will be a big economic incentive to stations.

At the same time, more channels spreads out your viewership and advertisers don't like that idea one bit as customers become hard to pin down.