Question: Freedom_tv: A dbs solution to ota!

#1
Ok, after my recent re-entry here into the world of OTA....and yeah I've done ALOT of research here...and taking into effect like the mess the spectrum is causing, and also things like quality and then the BIGGIE ...COVERAGE...wouldn't (and I'm just tossing some ideas around here to see what you guys think) make more since for everyone to start lobbying for broadcasters to turn there attention towards a DBS styled delivery system?
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#2
Well, problems with using dbs for everyday TV are:

1. The high cost of entry, typically a few hundred dollars per dish / receiver combo.

2. Every TV in a house would need a receiver, unless every TV is on the same channel.

3. Many people are in apartments and rentals where a dish is not allowed.

4. Some locations lack the line of sight neededfor a dish.

5. It kills the whole concept of local news and content.


Although, I wouldn't mind if a lot more of the networks made their content available on Ku band. It would certainly make an investment in a one meter dish more worthwhile than it is now.
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#3
The two real issues for going dbs are local coverage areas and the lack of hand held receivers. But too, dbs takes spectrum also. Your only moving the problem from one band to another. As far as the spectrum issue is concerned here are the facts. Wireless companies are only using 1/3 of the spectrum they control now, use 90% of what they do use to service 2 and 3rd generation phones, and the data market is quickly reaching it's saturation point. I was talking to one of my electrical engineering friends last night, and we were commenting on the high cost of wireless broadband, and the relative lack of need. He said that there were two times in the last year that he could have used a smart phone, and that certainly wasn't worth the added cost. While the people who have smart phones may use more data, and upgrade their phones, the number of people adding new smart phones is going to drop significantly, especially as the economy continues to stagnate. The main spectrum issue isn't the lack of spectrum in the hands of the industry, but that some license holders are setting on spectrum that they are neither using themselves or leasing to someone else. These "warehousers" include several cable TV companies, and the largest spectrum holder of all, Clearwire, who is partially owned by Sprint. Both Clearwire and Sprint are in trouble and there is good reason to believe that much of that spectrum may end up on the market, possibly at clearance pricing, soon. If incentive auctions are authorized there is reason to believe that spectrum values may be so depressed by the time it actually gets organized that the FCC may be forced to call the whole thing off.
 
Last edited:

Trip

Moderator, , , Webmaster of: Rabbit Ears
Staff member
#4
DBS distribution doesn't make sense for local channels. It's really expensive on the transmission side (I can't remember for certain but I want to say $2.2 million/year to lease space on a satellite 24/7, not counting equipment costs or anything like that) and quite an investment on the reception side.

For national channels, not so much. I have a motorized free-to-air satellite setup and use it to watch Al Jazeera and the PBS feeds. The dish is 30", though I want a bigger one. None of the gear was too expensive as it was all used (except my new USB receiver and my motor).

I could easily see a free satellite service complimenting local OTA, but not replacing it. It makes no sense to broadcast channels that are only of local interest nationwide.

- Trip
 
#5
First off...sorry I have a tendency to maybe think WAY OUTSIDE THE BOX and I apologize for this ahead of time....but if u look at the big picture and in the case I'm talking about...the "dish" would come automatically with the new TV...no actual "receiver would be needed" though since all parties would be using the same system... manufacturer's could then modify the chip set/tuner IN the TV to automatically receive the signal from the system....a new standard app driven "program guide" (also standard on ALL NEW SETS) that was divided into several available selections (REGIONAL NETWORKS(AFFILIATES)/ENTERTAINMENT PROGRAMMING(SUB CHANNELS)/APPS (NETFLIX/VUDU/ULTRAVIOLET..etc) would start a set up process upon first being used (using a ZipCode Based System just like Dish and Direct do) and start by infusing the Regional Networks into the system ..since geography is no longer an issue... SUB CHANNELS are also ALL automatically available.....then your APPS are of course based on USE by the individual.
Now..all in all this SAME system could be modified per say using Ku or C the actual delivery method is quite interchangeable and doesn't really matter.
Then based on a ONE DISH available system...apartment complexes....trailer parks...hospitals....and people outta range could modify using one of several available satellites that would become available (obviously trees are an issue REGARDLESS and have to be worked around NO MATTER WHAT U HAVE GOING ON) ....what about that?
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#6
Why don't we just modify ATSC to use 3 MHz channels and MPEG4? ;) Or maybe we could utilize the twisted radiowaves that people are starting to talk about. That is really the type of thing that your talking about, a whole new standard. Only thing is your standard would be a lot more expensive and harder to receive.
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#7
And, still no local content -

But we need to keep thinking, because the FCC is trying to destroy what we have now - that is, a decent, reliable, and free system.
 

Trip

Moderator, , , Webmaster of: Rabbit Ears
Staff member
#8
the "dish" would come automatically with the new TV...
That would be an expensive add-on. Buy a 13" TV and get a 30" or 36" dish... people will look at you like you're insane, plus they'll hate that they're spending an extra $60 on a dish they may not need.

no actual "receiver would be needed" though since all parties would be using the same system... manufacturer's could then modify the chip set/tuner IN the TV to automatically receive the signal from the system....
Technically, most satellite broadcasts already use either DVB-S or DVB-S2, so the standard already exists, just that very few people use FTA satellite in the home, so no TVs have it built in. (And since neither Dish nor DirecTV use it, TV set makers probably would not want to build it in.)

a new standard app driven "program guide" (also standard on ALL NEW SETS) that was divided into several available selections (REGIONAL NETWORKS(AFFILIATES)/ENTERTAINMENT PROGRAMMING(SUB CHANNELS)/APPS (NETFLIX/VUDU/ULTRAVIOLET..etc) would start a set up process upon first being used (using a ZipCode Based System just like Dish and Direct do) and start by infusing the Regional Networks into the system ..since geography is no longer an issue... SUB CHANNELS are also ALL automatically available.....then your APPS are of course based on USE by the individual.
There's already a guide standard in DVB-S/S2 I believe, though I don't think it is on the level you are describing.

Now..all in all this SAME system could be modified per say using Ku or C the actual delivery method is quite interchangeable and doesn't really matter.
If it's based on C-band, it'll be dead on arrival. Nobody outside of the loons like me will be using C-band.

Then based on a ONE DISH available system...apartment complexes....trailer parks...hospitals....and people outta range could modify using one of several available satellites that would become available (obviously trees are an issue REGARDLESS and have to be worked around NO MATTER WHAT U HAVE GOING ON) ....what about that?
Using a "community" satellite dish presents challenges that may have already been solved by DirecTV and Dish but I honestly don't know. My first thought is that you can only use one polarity at a time, so half the satellite's capacity could even be used, but again, that problem may have been solved.

And satellite space is really expensive unless you own the satellite. I can't see them wanting to duplicate the same set of channels across multiple satellites, as you suggest.

A national free to air satellite service wouldn't be a bad thing, I just don't see it as feasible for replacing OTA TV. Why would your local network affiliate want to put itself up on satellite, where you could just as easily choose to watch a different affiliate? Never mind the fact that the networks wouldn't allow it. What benefit do they derive from providing their local programming, most of which is of local interest only, to the entire country? Don't forget that $2.2 million per year estimate I mentioned; that's a lot of money compared to the cost of building out an OTA system (one time cost of less than $1 million, depending on location) plus power bill (measured in thousands, not millions, of dollars).

I know at least one company that is thinking about doing a FTA satellite service aimed at ordinary people in a few years, though how extensive it will be remains to be seen. I think its success will depend in part on which satellite it's on (for the purposes of other programming not provided by the company in question) and what programming it has.

- Trip
 
#11
Well after thinking about all this above I see everyone's point...I'm just thinking that there's a better solution for a delivery system.....with BETTER FREAKING COVERAGE...per say...
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#13
Nobody outside of the loons like me will be using C-band.
If the cost weren't so high, I'd be all over C band. And the wife may have issues with a 6 to 9 foot Big Ugly Dish.

Cband has way more programming I would like right now, Ku programming is lacking. Unless you want to watch religious buffoonery 24/7, that is.
FTA
Ku List:
Free TV Stations in the USA! Iranian channels, Vietnamese channels, Thai channels, Chinese channels, Arabic channels, Christian Channels, and much more....CCTV4, VTV4, GLC, TBN, Tapesh, Iran TV, Azadi, Al Maghrabya

C band list:
Skyvision Satellite Equipment
 
Last edited:

Chips

DTVUSA Member
#14
The reason satellite space is so expensive is because satellites are throw away. When DirecTV first came out, the life expectancy of their satellite was seven years, now perhaps with newer technology you get few more years, but eventually you run out of power and have to put put up a new satellite. There are still a number of people watching TV via rabbit ears in metro areas, and as already mention a dish is not practical for many people.
The FCC would more likely push some type of local streaming TV with perhaps a token OTA presence. The reality is that Smart phones and tablets are booming in many large metros like New York city, or Washington DC and that is where they will run out of spectrum. However they will only get 36 billion if they auction the spectrum in those blocks nationwide. That said the consumer will in the end pay for that 36 billion in paid TV subscriptions and in jobs as the local TV stations are forced off the air, either by the auction or by cable companies that will then become there only pipe to get their signal out.
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#15
Smart phones and tablets are booming in many large metros like New York city, or Washington DC
While the big cities may have a "shortage", here I rely on multiple translators to get the signals over the mountains. What about me? Nobody here is screaming for more spectrum for broadband, and almost every channel is being used for TV. Are we supposed to lose 20 TV channels here just because NY and LA may want more spectrum? What happens then, to all the unused spectrum here? If you dedicate it exclusively to broadband, and nobody needs or uses it... it just sits there unused.
 

Chips

DTVUSA Member
#16
While the big cities may have a "shortage", here I rely on multiple translators to get the signals over the mountains. What about me? Nobody here is screaming for more spectrum for broadband, and almost every channel is being used for TV. Are we supposed to lose 20 TV channels here just because NY and LA may want more spectrum? What happens then, to all the unused spectrum here? If you dedicate it exclusively to broadband, and nobody needs or uses it... it just sits there unused.
Your right. But they won't get 36 Billion unless they auction the spectrum across the nation. Yes most of it will get wasted, whereas it is being used now. But sadly the 36 Billion is part of the equation.
 
#18
well obviously there's no REAL world solution I'm taking it to this problem...I too used to enjoy the creature comforts of C Band but that is only practical in urban settings...I got me thinking though to the pricing which was WAY cheaper than todays.....as a matter of fact...I used to subscribe to a package that was JUST movie channels.......and quite cheap even a time when cable systems we're soaring like they are now...THROUGH the ROOF....
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#19
There is so much variety of free content on C band, and IIRC, my friend always got JUST what he wanted, no less or more, and paid a fair price for it when he subscribed.

I just noticed PB&J has a feed on C band. If only I could afford to buy a setup.
Maybe I will get lucky and find one free someday.
 
#20
This is SUCH a stretch here I'm sure.....but if broadcast is 100 percent digital....why the hell isn't it more readily available on some sort of steaming set top box thing or something?
 
Top