Comments on: DVB-H Mobile TV – deployed, coming soon, and coming…. later!

By: GaryTheGeek

GaryTheGeek — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:45:30 +0000

Chris, while I agree with you tactics EC and Ms. Reding are deploying here being somewhat disturbing in today’s world I have to say T-DMB certainly do not represent any efficiency over DVB-H.
Why is DAB 1.5MHz channel raster “more efficient” than DVB-H 5MHz? Even in UK there would be spectrum available e.g. UHF ch 36. Should ofcom being able to make any decisions in any meaningful time frame, that is.
Also “upgrading” any DAB network (VHF or L-band) to support mobile handheld use case would cost you about the same as building everything from scratch.
Anyway, the slooooow uptake of mobile is likely a market inertia issue, not a technology issue. To prove that point, please analyze uptake of ISDB-T one seg in Japan vs T-DMB in Korea vs. MediaFLO in USA.

By: Chris P

Chris P — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:25:06 +0000

The spectrum cannot be ‘reused’ it can replace DVB-H however that would mean shutting off or reducing the number of channels transmitted over DVB-T transmissions, which wont happen. DVB-H requires bandwidth to be available (as does DMB) however the way DVB-H works, it needs one contiguous block of spectrum to work – but DMB does not – that is the advantage of DMB over DVB-H. As a result for example, the UK will not get mobile TV in DVB-H format until 2012!
I am not knocking the technology of DVB-H, the choice of DVB-H will slow down transmission and ultimately adoption of Mobile TV in Europe.

By: Jurjen

Jurjen — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 20:17:12 +0000

Agreed that DVB-T is a different system, but the spectrum and infrastructure (radio towers) still can be re-used together with DVB-H.

The back-end systems and decoders are different that is correct. I have a good source for this and evidence

By: Chris P

Chris P — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:50:54 +0000

Apologies for the awful grammar and spelling, I didnt really read it through before posting.

By: Chris P

Chris P — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:48:27 +0000

Jurjen – DVB-T Is a totally different system! Of course DVB-T is spread around Europe but DVB-T cannot be converted to work with DVB-H. Bandwidth has to be made available – which is larger parts for the vast majority of coutries it isnt.

Yes it might be a good idea to standardise across Europe (a big issue is obviously language – do you think Dutch people will be happy to watch Polish TV?) obviously for economies of scale etc and for the ‘EU project’ however my bone is whether the EU have made the right choice. Nokia have been particularlly good at lobbying the EU, they have the funds of course and it is an EU company so I cant see why the EU went for DVB-H.

By: Jurjen

Jurjen — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:31:04 +0000

I disagree with the fact that DVB-H is a wrong choice. If you look at the Dutch market you will see that DVB-T has already been launched. The infrastructure and frequency of DVB-T can be re-used for DVB-H. So in my opinion it is a very smart choice.

A large advantage is that European consumers can take their DVB handset and enjoy free-to-air channels all over Europe, if every country sticks to DVB-H. The subscription part is still fragment and depending on the protections standards out there.

By: Chris P

Chris P — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 11:01:09 +0000

I think the EU Commission have made a huge error in judgement by choosing DVB-H. The way DVB-H works is far more inefficient and requires a large block of bandwidth to work. At least if DMB had been chosen it could start transmissions far sooner (ie from now) and cheaper (upgrading the existing DAB network). But efficiency doesnt usually win, marketing does and DVB-H have a huge backer in the name of Nokia. We in the Uk wont be seeing decent coverage of DVB-H for some time (maybe 2011!?) because of lack of bandwidth. Nokia have had the phones ready for a while now (N92) however chosing DVB-H has slowed down that rollout.