Future watch: A look ahead (part 1)
Jerry Whitaker
12/30/97
Broadcast Engineering
Copyright 1997 Intertec Publishing Corporation, a PRIMEDIA Company. All rights reserved.
As we approach 1998, and come close to the year 2000, I'm reminded of two quotes, one dead wrong and one dead on:
1. "Everything that can be invented has been invented." Charles Duell, head of the U.S. Patent Office, 1899.
2. "Science has not yet mastered prophecy. We project too much for the next year and yet far too little for the next 10." Neil Armstrong, astronaut.
Consumers have demonstrated an insatiable appetite for new electronic gadgets. TV broadcasters have, in the past, been the benefactors of this growth market. Now, as consumers branch out from traditional over-the-air entertainment sources to other media, broadcasters have a new ball game with which to deal. The continuing decline in network viewership is just one indicator of this trend. Although it is true that one reason for lower viewership at the flagship networks is the plethora of choices, thanks in large part to cable, it is also undeniable that many people are turning off their televisions and turning on their computers for information, entertainment and shopping.
HDTV: Coming to a station near you "Standardization at the present stage is dangerous. It is extremely difficult to change a standard, however undesirable it may prove, after the public has invested thousands of dollars in equipment. The development goes on and will go on. There is no question that the technical difficulties will be overcome."
This warning does not address the problems faced by high-definition television (HDTV) or the delivery of video by fiber to the home. The writer is addressing the problems faced by television in a book published in April 1929. Technology changes, but the problems faced by the industry do not.
HDTV, the subject of great debate in technical circles over the past decade or so, is a reality. The Grand Alliance digital system, having been endorsed by the FCC, is ready for practical applications ranging from over-the-air television to computer games. The road that brought us to the Grand Alliance system is long and convoluted. Few industry experts could have predicted the outcome of this standardization battle when it began in 1987.
In 1989, I served as the editorial director of Broadcast Engineering. As part of a 30-year anniversary issue, I organized a think-tank panel of five experts to offer predictions on how technology would reshape the communications business over the coming five years. One of the questions was HDTV. Our prediction, printed in May 1989, follows:
"High-definition television is an extremely complex subject, but that won't stop us from offering a few predictions. For starters, broadcasters will participate in HDTV, really ATV (advanced television; something less than 'true' HDTV), by 1992. By that date, a compatible 6MHz system will have been endorsed by the FCC and field tested. A few pioneering broadcasters will rush to put ATV on the air. Programming will be limited at first, using movies and other material shot on 35mm film and delivered by satellite from the program supplier or network. Certainly presenting a Movie of the Week in high-definition will be as appealing to audiences in 1992 as Bonanza in color was in 1965."
"The ATV system selected by the FCC will be a hybrid of one or more of the systems currently being proposed. It will provide an improved picture with a 16:9 aspect ratio. There will be provisions in the ATV format for further image enhancement if, and when, additional spectrum becomes available. It never will become available, however, because the land mobile industry will grab it first. For the average TV viewer, ATV on a high-tech TV set will look spectacular. Purists and professionals will know the difference, but ma and pa consumer will not."
"Simulcasting of ATV and standard NTSC will not occur. This idea has been proposed as a way to effect an orderly transition from current technology to full-bandwidth HDTV. Although the goal is laudable, it will not be practical. There are too many demands on spectrum for the FCC to allocate still more to television." So much for predicting the future; we were wrong _ at least 80% wrong.
Viewed from the vantage point of 1989, the basic assumptions made were reasonable, and not one of the 35,000 readers of this magazine wrote or called to dispute our conclusions. We failed, however, to anticipate one key element in the development of HDTV technology: digital compression.
In fact, if the FCC had stuck to its initial target date for deciding upon a new HDTV transmission standard (1991), an analog-based system would now be in place. Digital technology simply was not ready at that time.
All things considered, the process that led to the DTV standard for the United States was a textbook case of how the standardization process should work. Systems were proposed, evaluated, revised and evaluated again. In the end, an ideal system emerged.
Fast forward to 1997 TV industry veterans are quick to point out that even with the advantage of compatibility for monochrome viewers, it took 10 years of equipment development and programming support from RCA and NBC before the general public starting buying color receivers in significant numbers. From 1953 - when the NTSC color system was approved - until 1963 or so, sales of color sets languished. RCA, under the direction of David Sarnoff, continued to push the technology by pouring tens of millions of dollars into program production, network infrastructure, station upgrades and receiver design. It is conceivable that color would have continued to go nowhere if David Sarnoff had not been there to push it.
This is an important point to consider as stations move - as directed by the FCC - to DTV. The problems I see facing the broadcast industry are twofold:
1. Consumers are not asking for DTV because they really don't know what it is.
2. David Sarnoff is no longer among us.
There is virtually no consumer awareness of DTV in general, and HDTV in particular, aside from infrequent news media coverage, which usually focuses on the computer/multimedia aspects of the standard. A visit to your local consumer electronics superstore will likelyconfirm my recent observation during a trip to Fry's Electronics in San Jose, CA.
I must pause for a moment and explain that Fry's is to Silicon Valley electronics/computer geeks what Wrigley Field is to baseball fans. It is a generally accepted practice to take time off from work in themiddle of the day with no more explanation than, "I'm going to Fry's." Having put this visit in context, a check of the extensive selection of TV sets on hand revealed not one hint that DTV was here or that HDTV was around the corner. No widescreen sets. No demonstrations in the back room. No posters. No banners. Nothing. |
