Atsc 3.0 - Page 60 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 889Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1771 of 1906 Old 05-21-2019, 08:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
SEMIJim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: S.E. Michgan
Posts: 768
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 179 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L View Post
It will be intersting to see how this shakes out.
The broadcast TV industry has shown a remarkable talent for completely misreading what consumers want and shooting themselves in the foot. My guess is they're doing it again and will mainly achieve alienating a goodly portion of what remains of their viewing audience.

Luckily, the NAS I acquired for our networked DVR won't be wasted, because it has a fairly capable surveillance system application built in. And I can always use it for, you know, Network Attached Storage . If Silicon Dust comes out with an ATSC 3.0 network tuner that isn't hopelessly encumbered by DRM, nor prohibitively expensive, I may buy one. But I expect eventually our existing TVs and streaming boxes will be used primarily for Netflix and Amazon Prime.

Numerous, interminable commercial breaks and "targeted advertising" aside: We're not going to go back to watching TV on their schedule. Haven't done so for forty years or more. Not going to resume doing so in five-ten years. I guarantee you the generations that follow mine won't sit still for it.

Ironically: This all means we'll probably see less advertising, rather than more. Funny how that works.
joblo likes this.
SEMIJim is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1772 of 1906 Old 05-21-2019, 02:53 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 914 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L View Post
I have to concur if I can't skip commercials when I record something that recording is of no value to me. I'm aware that the business model is based on watching commercials, but that model has been broken for decades and the networks and stations have survived. I think the baseline plan is to switch everyone to a paid subscription basis. If that is the case the only OTA viewers will be low income folks who are not the target audience. Gen z is already long gone from any real interest if TV, let alone OTA. It will be intersting to see how this shakes out.
Yes, but keep in mind that by the time the DVR had come along, making it so convenient to record broadcast shows and skip through the ads, the vast majority of broadcast TV viewing was done through cable/satellite, not OTA, and the economics of the broadcast industry had changed so that local stations weren't just making money off the ads they aired but also by receiving payment from those cable/satellite carriers. (The rise of DVRs, though, probably led to some negative side-effects, such as the increase of ad time from maybe 6 to 8 minutes per half hour, plus the advent of those obnoxious advertising banners that momentarily clutter up the bottom 20% of the screen while you're trying to watch a show.)

I think if the status quo from several years ago held, with maybe only 10% of all US homes relying on OTA to watch local channels, then broadcasters would continue to shrug at "freeloaders" who buy OTA DVRs and use them to watch their content on-demand while skipping the ads. The stations and their network partners don't make much money off those viewers (no subscription fees, little ad revenue) but there's not enough of those folks to really worry about. Very much a niche.

But the number of folks who watch free OTA TV is now growing thanks to cord-cutters and cord-nevers. And ATSC 3.0 should be easier to reliably tune in glitch-free than is the case with ATSC 1.0. Plus it'll boast better picture and sound quality. So we may well see even greater numbers of free OTA TV viewers in the next few years. Meanwhile, the number of folks who pay for cable/satellite, and thereby indirectly pay subscription fees to their local broadcasters, will continue to trend downward.

So you can understand how local broadcast stations and their network affiliates might be concerned about this trend. On the one hand, they'd rather you watch their content for free via OTA than just not watch at all (because you're instead watching Netflix or YouTube). And with ATSC 3.0, they can serve you more lucrative targeted ads, which helps make up for the fact that you're not indirectly paying the station a subscription fee via cable/satellite.

The big problem, from their perspective, would arise if more and more folks turn to free OTA TV and also use an OTA DVR with it and they use it avoid watching those ads (which would be their only source of income from those free broadcasts).

Now, I'm still a bit skeptical that OTA DVRs will ever break out of a certain niche of tech-y users and really become mainstream consumer electronics products. So maybe they won't ever pose a big enough threat to broadcasters' bottom lines to worry about. But I tend to agree with Dr. Don that they'll want DRM in place for ATSC 3.0 tuners/DVRs -- at least as a contingency plan that they could use in the future.

Imagine this nightmare scenario for local broadcasters: in a few years, increasing numbers of urban and suburban dwellers get home internet through fixed 5G wireless signals. Imagine if AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc. combined a small ATSC 3.0 antenna in with their 5G antenna and then sent both IP streams through the home gateway/router to their TV set-top boxes and other screens throughout the home. Their own cable (IPTV) service might have a less expensive package of channels that excluded your locals (the way Sling TV already does today) but the on-screen channel guide could integrate streaming cable and OTA local channels all together. Cable channels would be recorded to cloud DVR while local channels would be recorded on USB hard drive connected to their gateway/router. I see no good reason why this couldn't happen.
BiggAW likes this.

Last edited by NashGuy; 05-21-2019 at 03:03 PM.
NashGuy is online now  
post #1773 of 1906 Old 05-23-2019, 11:22 AM
Senior Member
 
L David Matheny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SE Ohio
Posts: 470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt L View Post
I have to concur if I can't skip commercials when I record something that recording is of no value to me. I'm aware that the business model is based on watching commercials, but that model has been broken for decades and the networks and stations have survived. I think the baseline plan is to switch everyone to a paid subscription basis. If that is the case the only OTA viewers will be low income folks who are not the target audience. Gen z is already long gone from any real interest if TV, let alone OTA. It will be intersting to see how this shakes out.
I agree that the wasteful U.S. advertising model has been dysfunctional for decades. I will record and watch very few programs if I’m forced to see ads, especially untargeted ads. Paid subscriptions might work if the content is commercial-free, but we won’t pay twice (sub plus ads).
L David Matheny is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1774 of 1906 Old 05-23-2019, 11:40 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 914 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by L David Matheny View Post
Paid subscriptions might work if the content is commercial-free, but we won’t pay twice (sub plus ads).
It seems to be working for Hulu, a majority of whose on-demand streaming customers take the $6 plan with limited ads versus the $12 ad-free plan. (Also, Hulu makes about $9 per month in ad revenue, on average, on those customers on the cheaper plan, which makes it the more profitable option for them.)

Many (though certainly not all) people will pay for content with unskippable ads IF the price is low enough (vs. the ad-free price), IF they really value the content, and IF the ads are done right (not too many, not intruding on the content itself). Hulu limits their ad breaks now to a maximum of 90 seconds and they have an on-screen countdown timer so viewers can see how quickly they'll be returned to the show. They're also introducing non-video ads to the pause screen.

Some industry analysts think that, at some point in the future, Netflix will be forced to follow in Hulu's steps and offer their service both ways, with and without ads, with two sets of prices. I question whether they can stay on their current course for several more years of taking on more and more debt to fund an ongoing flood of new content. But that's another topic...
NashGuy is online now  
post #1775 of 1906 Old 05-24-2019, 10:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Brian Conrad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Martinez, CA, USA
Posts: 7,999
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2277 Post(s)
Liked: 1739
Quote:
Originally Posted by NashGuy View Post
It seems to be working for Hulu, a majority of whose on-demand streaming customers take the $6 plan with limited ads versus the $12 ad-free plan. (Also, Hulu makes about $9 per month in ad revenue, on average, on those customers on the cheaper plan, which makes it the more profitable option for them.)

Many (though certainly not all) people will pay for content with unskippable ads IF the price is low enough (vs. the ad-free price), IF they really value the content, and IF the ads are done right (not too many, not intruding on the content itself). Hulu limits their ad breaks now to a maximum of 90 seconds and they have an on-screen countdown timer so viewers can see how quickly they'll be returned to the show. They're also introducing non-video ads to the pause screen.

Some industry analysts think that, at some point in the future, Netflix will be forced to follow in Hulu's steps and offer their service both ways, with and without ads, with two sets of prices. I question whether they can stay on their current course for several more years of taking on more and more debt to fund an ongoing flood of new content. But that's another topic...
The original cost of the Hulu ad free plan was only $4. That's all our eyes were worth a month. I can't go back because it not only keeps me from grabbing the remote to kill the insipid ad audio but a timesaver too.


The number of broadcast shows I watch can be counted on one hand. I many watch originals, movies and foreign series on Hulu. Some of the foreign series are broadcast OTA in those countries but can't be here.
Brian Conrad is online now  
post #1776 of 1906 Old 05-24-2019, 12:17 PM
UHD Addict
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 35,300
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8900 Post(s)
Liked: 5689
Quote:
Originally Posted by NashGuy View Post
It seems to be working for Hulu, a majority of whose on-demand streaming customers take the $6 plan with limited ads versus the $12 ad-free plan. (Also, Hulu makes about $9 per month in ad revenue, on average, on those customers on the cheaper plan, which makes it the more profitable option for them.)

Many (though certainly not all) people will pay for content with unskippable ads IF the price is low enough (vs. the ad-free price), IF they really value the content, and IF the ads are done right (not too many, not intruding on the content itself). Hulu limits their ad breaks now to a maximum of 90 seconds and they have an on-screen countdown timer so viewers can see how quickly they'll be returned to the show. They're also introducing non-video ads to the pause screen.

Some industry analysts think that, at some point in the future, Netflix will be forced to follow in Hulu's steps and offer their service both ways, with and without ads, with two sets of prices. I question whether they can stay on their current course for several more years of taking on more and more debt to fund an ongoing flood of new content. But that's another topic...
I could not stand the Hulu plan with ads. While there were fewer commercials than from the broadcast version, it was s till way too many. Even if they paid me $100 a month, I still wouldn't watch their $6 plan. I have the $12 ad free plan. WHich doesn't have ads for 99% of the content. ANd the ones that do have an ad, is only a fifteen second spot at the beginning of the program.

Which I can deal with. But if it were a minute long of Ads, then I would be buying those few shows outright, instead of watching them on Hulu.

53TB unRAID2--45TB unRAID3--35TB unRAID1a
TCL 6 Series--Sony UBP-X800--Philips BDP7502--Onkyo HT-S7800
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme
aaronwt is offline  
post #1777 of 1906 Old 05-24-2019, 01:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 914 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwt View Post
I could not stand the Hulu plan with ads. While there were fewer commercials than from the broadcast version, it was s till way too many. Even if they paid me $100 a month, I still wouldn't watch their $6 plan. I have the $12 ad free plan. WHich doesn't have ads for 99% of the content. ANd the ones that do have an ad, is only a fifteen second spot at the beginning of the program.

Which I can deal with. But if it were a minute long of Ads, then I would be buying those few shows outright, instead of watching them on Hulu.
That's cool. But you should know that you are not AT ALL representative of the average US TV consumer. (Nothing wrong with that, just sayin'.)
NashGuy is online now  
post #1778 of 1906 Old 05-24-2019, 06:29 PM
Member
 
BigJeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bloomington, IL
Posts: 143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
https://www.technicolor.com/news/fie...an-environment

Anyone else curious how many ATSC 3.0 receiver devices Technicolor can get their technology into? So far there has been little incentive to include Technicolor support in devices as there haven't been any publicly available content sources encoded using the format. Is it realistic for them to ramp up support so quickly and become a viable HDR variant? As far as I can tell, Technicolor is the one format that offers true SDR BT709 backwards compatibility via a single broadcast stream. If you have Technicolor support in your ATSC 3.0 set top box, it should not be an issue for the STB to reconstitute the HLG or HDR 10 signal for a TV without Technicolor support built in. I don't believe any broadcast groups have announced which HDR variant they intend to use in which situations beyond the general consensus that HLG will be better for live events. If Technicolor technology isn't built into EVERY major manufacturer's ATSC 3.0 TVs, would broadcasters really be willing to waste their bits on HDR & Wide Color Gamut information that won't get decoded by a large number of premium displays?

This is all to say I hope that the industry does not get twisted around the axel trying to cater to lowest common denominator SDR displays in a way that holds back the potential of HDR adoption. As a green field set of technological standards with ATSC 3.0 you'd hope that the broadcaster would be using all the tools at their disposal to differentiate the 3.0 service over the 1.0 service. Those devices who need SDR will still have 1.0 broadcasts for at least the next half decade. It's going to take some coordination between CE manufacturers and broadcasters to work out some HDR format war jockeying prior to the 3.0 commercial launch.

The below paragraph gives a bit of insight on Technicolors prominent position within the set top box space as. The history between LG and Technicolor may explain why LG is one of the early supporters of the Andvanced HDR format.

"Technicolor has acquired several brands recently which is one of the reasons for its significant growth. In 2015, Technicolor acquired Cisco’s television set-top box and cable modem business for $600 million. In 2017, LG Electronics sold its TV set-top box unit to Technicolor for $50 million. Today, Technicolor is one of the world’s largest set-top-box manufacturers."

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
BigJeff is online now  
post #1779 of 1906 Old 05-25-2019, 08:08 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,684
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2123 Post(s)
Liked: 4029
Quote:
Originally Posted by L David Matheny View Post
Paid subscriptions might work if the content is commercial-free, but we won’t pay twice (sub plus ads).
This can't apply to ATSC 3.0 unless a station is carrying a movie channel or PPV events. Standard, linear network and syndicated programming can't easily offer a commercial-free option. What do you see during the breaks.. a blank screen with "Programming will resume shortly?" Stations don't own the rights to off-live carriage of network or syndicated programming. In short, there's nothing an affiliate can provide commercial-free. If you want to watch "NCIS" commercial-free, you still have to stream it via CBS or Amazon or what-have-you.

But this does bring up an interesting option: DVRs that won't skip commercials unless a viewer pays the affiliate to enable that option. Then we're back to a price-point issue where revenue from the commercial-skipping option has to meet or exceed the revenue lost from a shrinkage of advertising viewers. Personally, I don't think you'd get enough people to pay to skip commercials for it to affect ad sales, overall. So, count that ability as an additional revenue stream.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is online now  
post #1780 of 1906 Old 05-25-2019, 08:12 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,684
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2123 Post(s)
Liked: 4029
ATSC 3.0
FCC To Begin Accepting ATSC 3.0 Applications
Commission establishes "streamlined" process.
Phil KurzMay 23, 2019 TVTechnology

WASHINGTON—The FCC will begin accepting licensing applications for Next-Gen TV service via its Licensing and Management System (LMS) on May 28.

The announcement comes following the commission’s completion of a revision to its Form 2100 and changes to LMS to deal with updates to accommodate ATSC 3.0 license applications.

Bird Conservancy Hails Tower Changes promo image
The application must be filed by all full- and low-power TV stations, Class A and TV translator stations –except for licensed channel sharing stations—that intend to transmit 3.0.

Stations currently on air with 3.0 service are operating under Experimental Special Temporary Authority granted by the agency.

The new licensing form and procedure will need to be used going forward by stations voluntarily adopting Next-Gen TV service, including those operating under an experimental STA. Those stations must file a Next-Gen TV license application in LMS no later than the expiration date of their experimental authorization, the agency said.

According to the agency, the 3.0 licensing procedure requires a single step, which is intended to streamline the process when compared to the traditional broadcast licensing process.

Broadcasters wishing to transmit 3.0 from their authorized facilities or those of other broadcasters need simply to file a modification of license application with the commission.

The FCC’s public notice lays out several actions a station may not take until it has filed a Next-Gen TV license application and received approval from the agency. They include moving 1.0 simulcast signal to a temporary 1.0 simulcast host station, launching 3.0 transmissions on a 3.0 host station already converted to 3.0 and several other restrictions.

Broadcasters filing an application must select from one of six options tailored to their reason for filing. They include:

  • Converting an existing 1.0 facility to 3.0 service and identifying a 1.0 simulcast host.
  • Identifying or changing 1.0 simulcast host station.
  • Identifying or changing 3.0 host station.
  • Discontinuing 3.0 guest service.
  • Converting 3.0 facility back to 1.0 service.
  • Discontinuing 1.0 simulcast service on a host station.

The FCC also announced that it is continuing to modify its LMS to accommodate Next-Gen TV license applications for channel sharing stations.

Those changes are expected to be completed by the end of Q3 2019. When it’s finished with the changes, the FCC said it will issue another public notice to tell channel-sharing stations that they may file Next-Gen TV licensing applications with Form 2100.

Until then, the commission will rely on a temporary process for such stations to use before converting an existing 1.0 facility to 3.0 or airing a 3.0 guest signal. That process involves filing for a Legal STA.

https://www.tvtechnology.com/atsc3/f...0-applications

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is online now  
post #1781 of 1906 Old 05-25-2019, 10:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 914 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
But this does bring up an interesting option: DVRs that won't skip commercials unless a viewer pays the affiliate to enable that option. Then we're back to a price-point issue where revenue from the commercial-skipping option has to meet or exceed the revenue lost from a shrinkage of advertising viewers. Personally, I don't think you'd get enough people to pay to skip commercials for it to affect ad sales, overall. So, count that ability as an additional revenue stream.
Yeah, I could imagine a "pay-to-skip-ads-on-OTA-DVR" system becoming a reality (assuming enough folks actually use DVRs with ATSC 3.0), although how it would be implemented could be a mess. Would you have to subscribe to ad-free recordings from each local broadcaster group (e.g. Sinclair, Nexstar, Scripps, etc.) or would there be some sort of nationwide consortium of broadcasters running the initiative so that you pay one monthly fee to get ad-skip across all your OTA channels? Will there be a simple way to quickly link a payment method (e.g. PayPal) to the on-screen app that controls DVR playback so that viewers can opt-in with a couple button presses on their remote control?

As for the bean counters tracking ad revenues vs. subscription revenues, remember that with targeted ads (which is probably the only kind of ad that would be embedded and delivered in the DVR recordings), the advertiser knows exactly how many viewers see their ad through to completion and that's exactly the number of impressions that the advertiser pays for. So there's no guesswork involved. Should be pretty easy for broadcasters to figure out how much ad revenue they lose from ad-skipping on the recordings and therefore know how to optimally price the ad-skip subscription fee.

It actually makes sense that ATSC 3.0 broadcasters would actively encourage the use of OTA DVRs IF they can force ad viewing in the recordings. Allowing viewers to time-shift their broadcasts could dramatically increase the inventory of targeted ad impressions that the stations have to sell to advertisers. Even a show recorded months ago could still be monetized by the broadcaster by simply using the DVR's broadband connection to update the recording with fresh targeted ads. (Although perhaps ads won't be recorded to the local hard drive at all but simply streamed on-demand when the recording indicates it's time to play an ad pod.) All of this is predicated on the idea that an ATSC 3.0 DVR would be required to have a live internet connection to work and I suspect that will be the case.
NashGuy is online now  
post #1782 of 1906 Old 05-25-2019, 01:26 PM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, Tampa Bay
Posts: 16,684
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2123 Post(s)
Liked: 4029
Quote:
Originally Posted by NashGuy View Post
As for the bean counters tracking ad revenues vs. subscription revenues, remember that with targeted ads (which is probably the only kind of ad that would be embedded and delivered in the DVR recordings), the advertiser knows exactly how many viewers see their ad through to completion and that's exactly the number of impressions that the advertiser pays for. So there's no guesswork involved. Should be pretty easy for broadcasters to figure out how much ad revenue they lose from ad-skipping on the recordings and therefore know how to optimally price the ad-skip subscription fee.
Yeah, and I doubt they'll do it as they can't afford to lose many target ad viewers or the whole idea collapses, assuming they ever get enough to make it work in the first place. They need thousands per market. Tall order. So, I think the ad-free experience will be left for the Hulus and CBS:AAs of the world.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is online now  
post #1783 of 1906 Old 05-25-2019, 02:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 7,682
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2269 Post(s)
Liked: 897
If the public gets a whiff that ATSC 3.0 content won't have skippable commercials, that should really help adoption.

Yeah I bet people will be lining up to buy new DVRs which can't skip forward like on demand and streaming.



Why would anyone bother?
joblo, aaronwt, rcman2 and 3 others like this.
wco81 is offline  
post #1784 of 1906 Old 05-25-2019, 05:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 914 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
If the public gets a whiff that ATSC 3.0 content won't have skippable commercials, that should really help adoption.

Yeah I bet people will be lining up to buy new DVRs which can't skip forward like on demand and streaming.



Why would anyone bother?
Well, Hulu with forced ads and CBS:AA with forced ads are both $6 each per month to get on-demand access to primetime content -- not even including sports! -- from ABC, NBC, Fox and CBS. (And in a few years, NBC stuff will leave Hulu for NBCU's own competing service.)

Imagine if you could spend money on an external network-connected box with 2 ATSC 3.0 tuners in it, to feed live TV to any screen on your network. Let's say the up-front cost is $75. You don't pay anything for a 14-day program guide on your OTA channels because that's provided for free if you connect the box to the internet (and thereby opt into targeted ads). Buy a $50 1 TB USB hard drive (or use an old one lying around) and plug it into the box and, bam!, you've got free DVR service with no ongoing fees! Only catch, of course, is that you can't skip the ads on your recordings. (Perhaps the ad load when playing recordings is only 50-60% as much as when watching live TV, since the recordings always feature more lucrative targeted ads. This is the same way that Hulu works.)

So you're saving $12 or more each month by not subscribing to streaming services that would also force you to watch the ads. Your ATSC 3.0 tuner box pays for itself in just over half a year! And don't forget that it will also be able to record from smaller networks too, like Me-TV, COZI TV, etc., which aren't even available as streaming on-demand services at all.

OK, that's the best sales pitch I can come up with.
BiggAW likes this.
NashGuy is online now  
post #1785 of 1906 Old 05-25-2019, 05:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, West of desert
Posts: 5,686
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1970 Post(s)
Liked: 2694
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
If the public gets a whiff that ATSC 3.0 content won't have skippable commercials, that should really help adoption.

Yeah I bet people will be lining up to buy new DVRs which can't skip forward like on demand and streaming.



Why would anyone bother?
People won't buy DVR's anyway, DVR owners have always been a niche compared to DVR renters. Plus now there is that "it's all on demand " brainwashing going on". For most people to adopt 3.0 the old tv's need to die and and it has to be free. Kill ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 will take over sort of like the DTV from analog conversion.

"Espresso is like tequila, when in doubt apply more shots."
tenthplanet is offline  
post #1786 of 1906 Old 05-25-2019, 07:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 7,682
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2269 Post(s)
Liked: 897
True most people get DVRs thru providers.

If they’re going to be so impaired, might as well stick with VOD and streaming.

Accelerate the cord cutt8ng then.
wco81 is offline  
post #1787 of 1906 Old 05-25-2019, 08:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 914 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post
People won't buy DVR's anyway, DVR owners have always been a niche compared to DVR renters.
That's true, but if you can easily create a DVR just by plugging a USB hard drive into any TV with an ATSC 3.0 tuner in it, or into any external ATSC 3.0 tuner device, with no ongoing service fees, then I could see a lot more people using them. This is the way that Sling's $80 AirTV device works, except it's ATSC 1.0 (dual tuner).
NashGuy is online now  
post #1788 of 1906 Old 05-26-2019, 06:11 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CHASLS2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Tampa FL area
Posts: 3,133
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1093 Post(s)
Liked: 491
Bring back the S- VHS VCR. I don't think i will see 3.0 in my lifetime and have no plans to buy a outboard box anyways.

Sony 65" A1E Pioneer Elite DV-59 AVI
OPPO203,103&83 Sony BD player
Pioneer Elite SC61 AVR Acurus 200x 3
Paradigm 60V5'S 490 CC V5
B&W 685 S2's 2 SVS subs
CHASLS2 is offline  
post #1789 of 1906 Old 05-26-2019, 07:37 AM
Advanced Member
 
SEMIJim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: S.E. Michgan
Posts: 768
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 179 Post(s)
Liked: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by NashGuy View Post
It actually makes sense that ATSC 3.0 broadcasters would actively encourage the use of OTA DVRs IF they can force ad viewing in the recordings. Allowing viewers to time-shift their broadcasts could dramatically increase the inventory of targeted ad impressions that the stations have to sell to advertisers.
Perhaps, but, as I noted, earlier: The industry is already shooting itself in the foot in that respect, by making the barrier to entry for DRM support prohibitively high--locking out anybody other than big companies with large development teams and wads of cash.

Right now my wife and I watch probably more TV than is healthy for us. That's mostly because of our networked DVR. And because our networked DVR allows remote viewing: We don't even have to miss programs we really like even when we're away from home. If that networked DVR goes away, and, in the scenarios beings discussed (see below, btw), it will go away.

When that happens we will watch considerably less OTA TV.

Btw: I find it amusing that, when I first brought up the "DRM bogeyman" wrt ATSC 3.0, my concern was dismissed. That DRM would never be applied to regular OTA content. Now it's being discussed almost as if it was an inevitability--just as I suspected it was when I first heard of what ATSC 3.0 was all about.
SEMIJim is offline  
post #1790 of 1906 Old 05-26-2019, 10:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JHBrandt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S. Garland, TX
Posts: 6,703
Mentioned: 65 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2673 Post(s)
Liked: 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post
People won't buy DVR's anyway, DVR owners have always been a niche compared to DVR renters.
I think you missed wco81's point, which AIUI was, "people won't use a DVR that forces them to watch commercials every time they watch a recording." Buying vs. renting is irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post
Plus now there is that "it's all on demand" brainwashing going on.
Well, right now it's brainwashing: getting folks to buy what they could get for free. But if it becomes the only way to access commercial-free video, even those of us who haven't been brainwashed may have to consider it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post
For most people to adopt 3.0 the old TV's need to die and and it has to be free.
I agree, but the definition of "free" seems to be a bit wobbly at the moment. You may not pay directly, but if your ATSC 3.0 tuner costs more due to DRM certification, and your viewing habits are collected for sale to the highest bidder, and your recordings die if the DVR that made them dies, and then mandatory commercials are forced upon you on top of all that, can you honestly call that "free?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenthplanet View Post
Kill ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 will take over sort of like the DTV from analog conversion.
I was hesitant to make that point earlier, but thanks for bringing it up. With all the restrictions it looks like we'll have on ATSC 3.0, as long as ATSC 1.0 is an option I think it will continue to dominate, making ATSC 3.0 a mere niche player in OTA broadcasting. 3.0 will be better for datacasting and watching the Super Bowl and the occasional box-office hit in 4K, but given the choice, most folks will keep watching most OTA in good ol' ATSC 1.0.

So broadcasters have every incentive not to give us a choice. The current FCC regulations requiring "substantially similar" content are a joke. A market's broadcasters could move all their subchannels to ATSC 3.0, drop all their .1 channels to SD, and dump them all on 2 or 3 ATSC 1.0 "lighthouse" transmitters, and still meet the FCC requirement. If you try to stay with ATSC 1.0, your TV will soon look like it did back at the end of the analog era: a dozen or so SD channels. But at least you can record them and skip the commercials.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SEMIJim View Post
I find it amusing that, when I first brought up the "DRM bogeyman" wrt ATSC 3.0, my concern was dismissed. That DRM would never be applied to regular OTA content. Now it's being discussed almost as if it was an inevitability--just as I suspected it was when I first heard of what ATSC 3.0 was all about.
Yes; you and @videobruce were right, and I'll cop to being something of a "DRM skeptic" at first.

But I've never been one of those "this will be the greatest thing since sex" 3.0 hypesters either, so like any good skeptic, once the evidence appeared, I changed my mind. For me, it was an article Dr. Don posted earlier this year that mentioned (almost as an aside) that agreement on DRM was one of the things slowing the arrival of ATSC 3.0 tuners in the US.

Most folks here seemed to take that in stride: "Oh, well, I guess ATSC 3.0 broadcasts will all be encrypted then. Who cares? I want my 4K!" seems to be the overarching attitude. And sure; some folks will happily live with the expense and restrictions imposed by DRM just so they can get an eye-popping picture on a 70" TV screen. But to think it's therefore OK to force that on everyone?

Last edited by JHBrandt; 05-26-2019 at 10:47 AM.
JHBrandt is offline  
post #1791 of 1906 Old 05-26-2019, 11:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 7,682
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2269 Post(s)
Liked: 897
There likely won't be any way to skip commercials unless you can have DVRs like Tivo that you own, which can record UHD HDR content, if it ever comes.

On demand content from the cable companies have commercials, unless it's premium channel content. All basic cable and broadcast network content have commercials if you watch on demand.

Streaming content from Netflix and Amazon Prime don't have commercials but you pay subscriptions for those.

Not sure if those will be sustainable at current prices though.
wco81 is offline  
post #1792 of 1906 Old 05-26-2019, 12:29 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 914 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by SEMIJim View Post
Btw: I find it amusing that, when I first brought up the "DRM bogeyman" wrt ATSC 3.0, my concern was dismissed. That DRM would never be applied to regular OTA content. Now it's being discussed almost as if it was an inevitability--just as I suspected it was when I first heard of what ATSC 3.0 was all about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHBrandt View Post
I think you missed wco81's point, which AIUI was, "people won't use a DVR that forces them to watch commercials every time they watch a recording." Buying vs. renting is irrelevant.Well, right now it's brainwashing: getting folks to buy what they could get for free. But if it becomes the only way to access commercial-free video, even those of us who haven't been brainwashed may have to consider it.I agree, but the definition of "free" seems to be a bit wobbly at the moment. You may not pay directly, but if your ATSC 3.0 tuner costs more due to DRM certification, and your viewing habits are collected for sale to the highest bidder, and your recordings die if the DVR that made them dies, and then mandatory commercials are forced upon you on top of all that, can you honestly call that "free?"I was hesitant to make that point earlier, but thanks for bringing it up. With all the restrictions it looks like we'll have on ATSC 3.0, as long as ATSC 1.0 is an option I think it will continue to dominate, making ATSC 3.0 a mere niche player in OTA broadcasting. 3.0 will be better for datacasting and watching the Super Bowl and the occasional box-office hit in 4K, but given the choice, most folks will keep watching most OTA in good ol' ATSC 1.0.

So broadcasters have every incentive not to give us a choice. The current FCC regulations requiring "substantially similar" content are a joke. A market's broadcasters could move all their subchannels to ATSC 3.0, drop all their .1 channels to SD, and dump them all on 2 or 3 ATSC 1.0 "lighthouse" transmitters, and still meet the FCC requirement. If you try to stay with ATSC 1.0, your TV will soon look like it did back at the end of the analog era: a dozen or so SD channels. But at least you can record them and skip the commercials.Yes; you and @videobruce were right, and I'll cop to being something of a "DRM skeptic" at first.

But I've never been one of those "this will be the greatest thing since sex" 3.0 hypesters either, so like any good skeptic, once the evidence appeared, I changed my mind. For me, it was an article Dr. Don posted earlier this year that mentioned (almost as an aside) that agreement on DRM was one of the things slowing the arrival of ATSC 3.0 tuners in the US.

Most folks here seemed to take that in stride: "Oh, well, I guess ATSC 3.0 broadcasts will all be encrypted then. Who cares? I want my 4K!" seems to be the overarching attitude. And sure; some folks will happily live with the expense and restrictions imposed by DRM just so they can get an eye-popping picture on a 70" TV screen. But to think it's therefore OK to force that on everyone?
Well, FWIW, I've cautioned for quite some time that we didn't know what might happen with regard to DRM in ATSC 3.0. (Some would argue that it violates existing legal "fair use" precedents.) But I've thought DRM in 3.0 is a real possibility. And even now, I'm not predicting that we'll definitely see onerous restrictions imposed on ATSC 3.0 recordings. But I do predict that before ATSC 3.0 tuners hit the US commercial market, the capacity for one or more types of DRM will be embedded to give broadcasters the option to implement restrictions at some point in the future, even if they're not implemented in 2020. Who knows, maybe it'll be the worst-case scenario from the start. Or maybe it'll simply be that network-provided content can't be copied to another hard drive, while you're free to do whatever you like with the local affiliate's content, and there are no restrictions at all on skipping any ads. We'll see...

Well over a year ago I went from someone personally excited about using ATSC 3.0 to more of an attitude of "Eh, it'll probably make live OTA TV better than it is now but I'm still going to rely on subscription streaming services for the vast majority of the viewing I really care about."
aaronwt and tenthplanet like this.

Last edited by NashGuy; 05-26-2019 at 12:33 PM.
NashGuy is online now  
post #1793 of 1906 Old 05-26-2019, 12:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,259
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 791 Post(s)
Liked: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by NashGuy View Post
Well, FWIW, I've cautioned for quite some time that we didn't know what might happen with regard to DRM in ATSC 3.0.
Wow, this is a really interesting discussion. I clicked on this thread because I saw you had posted, and it did not disappoint. I wouldn't discount broadcasters trying to use DRM if it is legal to do so with their main broadcasts, as we've seen many industries shoot themselves in the foot with DRM before. Your scenario with a 5G provider bundling in ATSC 3.0 equipment is really interesting, as that's one way that there would be a mass market for ATSC 3.0 DVRs. The way it is right now, few people have OTA DVRs, and most people who have OTA have it because they don't watch it very much. I've talked to people who do have an antenna, and the typical response is "well I have OTA but I never really watch it". I think that the networks are in big trouble, as their viewership numbers are WAY down over the past decade or so, and the must-see shows that people are talking about around the water-cooler are now coming from Netflix (recently HBO with GoT, but that's over now with nothing anywhere close to replace it). I like the ideas you have about shows that have high live social media engagement, and shows that offer a few episodes for free before going behind a paywall through that network's streaming service, but I don't see either as being nearly as big of a business as where they are today, much less where they were 5-10 years ago.
aaronwt, tenthplanet and NashGuy like this.
BiggAW is offline  
post #1794 of 1906 Old 05-26-2019, 05:38 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, West of desert
Posts: 5,686
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1970 Post(s)
Liked: 2694
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
Wow, this is a really interesting discussion. I clicked on this thread because I saw you had posted, and it did not disappoint. I wouldn't discount broadcasters trying to use DRM if it is legal to do so with their main broadcasts, as we've seen many industries shoot themselves in the foot with DRM before. Your scenario with a 5G provider bundling in ATSC 3.0 equipment is really interesting, as that's one way that there would be a mass market for ATSC 3.0 DVRs. The way it is right now, few people have OTA DVRs, and most people who have OTA have it because they don't watch it very much. I've talked to people who do have an antenna, and the typical response is "well I have OTA but I never really watch it". I think that the networks are in big trouble, as their viewership numbers are WAY down over the past decade or so, and the must-see shows that people are talking about around the water-cooler are now coming from Netflix (recently HBO with GoT, but that's over now with nothing anywhere close to replace it). I like the ideas you have about shows that have high live social media engagement, and shows that offer a few episodes for free before going behind a paywall through that network's streaming service, but I don't see either as being nearly as big of a business as where they are today, much less where they were 5-10 years ago.
It's like I've said to people, there are active users of OTA and OTA dvr's, and then, as you pointed out there are the people who have OTA and rarely use it. The people sinking money into ATSC 3.0 OTA need to hope for the former, there is no money in the later.

"Espresso is like tequila, when in doubt apply more shots."
tenthplanet is offline  
post #1795 of 1906 Old 05-27-2019, 02:36 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,862
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked: 235
There's a lot of discussion about DVRs here.

Do US TVs have built in DVR-functionality like European TVs? My Sony UHD TV has integrated DVB-T2 (roughly equivalent to ATSC 3 in modulation efficiency terms) and DVB-S2 tuners (for satellite). If you plug a hard drive into one of the TV's US ports (it includes a USB 3.0 port) you can time-shift and record TV for later viewing (with the integrated 7-day OTA EPG helping with this) - and some TVs now have a tuner dedicated to this functionality AIUI.

The recordings are encrypted and will only play on the TV that recorded them (though the broadcasts themselves are not encrypted) as this is a requirement for licensing of the EPG used on the HD channels here, and is also a requirement on DVR drives. (DTCP encryption is the most widely used but equivalents are also acceptable) The 'licensed EPG requiring DRM on recordings' requirement was created to avoid encryption of the broadcast, but make distribution of recordings difficult. The EPG compression scheme has been reverse engineered, and third party open source DVR projects allow you to build your own DVR with no DRM (TV Headend is a popular choice)

OTA DVRs are popular in the UK - but now TVs include DVR functionality some people (like my dad) have retired their DVR and just use their TV with a hard drive.
aaronwt, BiggAW, NashGuy and 1 others like this.

Last edited by sneals2000; 05-27-2019 at 02:41 AM.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #1796 of 1906 Old 05-27-2019, 04:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CHASLS2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Tampa FL area
Posts: 3,133
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1093 Post(s)
Liked: 491
I am fine with 480i as most of what i see on OTA - HD is 480i anyways.

Sony 65" A1E Pioneer Elite DV-59 AVI
OPPO203,103&83 Sony BD player
Pioneer Elite SC61 AVR Acurus 200x 3
Paradigm 60V5'S 490 CC V5
B&W 685 S2's 2 SVS subs
CHASLS2 is offline  
post #1797 of 1906 Old 05-27-2019, 07:39 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rabbit73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: S.E. VA
Posts: 3,152
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 822 Post(s)
Liked: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
The recordings are encrypted and will only play on the TV that recorded them (though the broadcasts themselves are not encrypted) as this is a requirement for licensing of the EPG used on the HD channels here, and is also a requirement on DVR drives. (DTCP encryption is the most widely used but equivalents are also acceptable) The 'licensed EPG requiring DRM on recordings' requirement was created to avoid encryption of the broadcast, but make distribution of recordings difficult.
Good solution for the DRM problem.

If you can not measure it, you can not improve it.
Lord Kelvin, 1883
www.megalithia.com/elect/aerialsite/dttpoorman.html
rabbit73 is online now  
post #1798 of 1906 Old 05-27-2019, 09:04 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
NashGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 914 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
There's a lot of discussion about DVRs here.

Do US TVs have built in DVR-functionality like European TVs? My Sony UHD TV has integrated DVB-T2 (roughly equivalent to ATSC 3 in modulation efficiency terms) and DVB-S2 tuners (for satellite). If you plug a hard drive into one of the TV's US ports (it includes a USB 3.0 port) you can time-shift and record TV for later viewing (with the integrated 7-day OTA EPG helping with this) - and some TVs now have a tuner dedicated to this functionality AIUI.

The recordings are encrypted and will only play on the TV that recorded them (though the broadcasts themselves are not encrypted) as this is a requirement for licensing of the EPG used on the HD channels here, and is also a requirement on DVR drives. (DTCP encryption is the most widely used but equivalents are also acceptable) The 'licensed EPG requiring DRM on recordings' requirement was created to avoid encryption of the broadcast, but make distribution of recordings difficult. The EPG compression scheme has been reverse engineered, and third party open source DVR projects allow you to build your own DVR with no DRM (TV Headend is a popular choice)
No, US TVs do not have built-in DVR functionality. I'm not sure a TV model with that functionality has ever been released here. If so, it's very rare. I know that the European and Asian models of my specific LG TV (B6 OLED) -- which differ from mine only in firmware and internal OTA tuner -- have a DVR feature called Time Machine that allows the user to plug in a hard drive and set up recordings. For whatever reason, they removed that feature from my North American model. Maybe because of fear or legal entanglements or maybe because the PSIP program guide data embedded in our ATSC 1.0 broadcasts here isn't very complete or long-range, therefore necessitating LG to license and pay for 7- or 14-day guide data from a third party (Gracenote, TiVo, etc.), and they just didn't want that extra expense.

At any rate, the European system you described sounds like a good one. Seems fair to me that the recordings are encrypted to prevent their redistribution; embedding the DRM in the EPG data is a clever solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post
OTA DVRs are popular in the UK - but now TVs include DVR functionality some people (like my dad) have retired their DVR and just use their TV with a hard drive.
Yes, and I can imagine that OTA DVR usage would likewise become popular in the USA too if consumers could simply plug a USB hard drive into any TV or external tuner box and immediately get free DVR service with a complete 7-day guide. Here too, I could imagine some TV models differentiating themselves with a 2nd OTA tuner to allow for two simultaneous recordings. And since all TVs are now network-connected smart TVs, there's no reason the TV itself, with its connected hard drive, couldn't act as a live and recorded video server for any device on the network through a designated app or URL.
BiggAW likes this.
NashGuy is online now  
post #1799 of 1906 Old 05-27-2019, 09:48 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
There likely won't be any way to skip commercials unless you can have DVRs like Tivo that you own, which can record UHD HDR content, if it ever comes.

On demand content from the cable companies have commercials, unless it's premium channel content. All basic cable and broadcast network content have commercials if you watch on demand.

Streaming content from Netflix and Amazon Prime don't have commercials but you pay subscriptions for those.

Not sure if those will be sustainable at current prices though.
Amazon prime has already started adding commercials. I watched Lost and their was 30 and 35 second commercials playing at the start. Pretty sure they will start sliding in more and more.
Dave Santos is offline  
post #1800 of 1906 Old 05-27-2019, 11:39 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,259
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 791 Post(s)
Liked: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Santos View Post
Amazon prime has already started adding commercials. I watched Lost and their was 30 and 35 second commercials playing at the start. Pretty sure they will start sliding in more and more.
Paid ads or house ads? I've seen a lot of house ads on Prime, but not paid ads. HBO does house ads too, and they are in an entirely different category.
BiggAW is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply HDTV Technical

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off