
Discuss this Blog Entry 4
I've been saying this for years, that mobile TV is "still pitching a solution in search of a problem." If you're stationary, a portable ATSC TV works. Otherwise, how many would-be viewers are (1) in motion, (2) not driving, and (3) not in a subway? And how many in that group don't already have what they want to watch on their phone or tablet? Not enough for any reasonable business plan.
If stations need to exercise every bit of their bandwidth, let them add more sub-channels, which every ATSC set can pick up without a subscription. That would be a much better use of the public airwaves.
Maybe if they promoted the service? I haven't heard or seen any advertising for it.
Great points. Basically over the air television needs to reinvent itself. Years ago (too many) when I worked in cable television, satellite dishes were just becoming popular. Cable saw the writing on the wall..their monopoly was over. Instead of hoping for the best they did a reinvention. Now getting TV from a cable company is just one slice, there is internet, phone, home security systems, and lots more. Traditional TV is taking a good first step with Dyle, but there are a dozen other directions they could be heading in, and they need to start now.
There is another, more troubling aspect to the delay in getting broadcasters revved up over mobile DTV (MDTV). Content owners are in disagreement with local broadcasters over the rights to network programming. Entangled in this are issues concerning conditional access and content protection. As a bulwark to this offensive, the groups have balkanized into two camps -- Dyle (a.k.a. Mobile Content Venture), spearheaded by NBC and FOX, and MyDTV (a.k.a. the Mobile 500 Alliance), headed up by multiple-station owners Fisher, Hubbard and Sinclair. To make matters worse, some products sold to enable MDTV will not work with transmissions from both camps. Until this stalemate is resolved, MDTV will have a difficult ramp-up.
