Originally posted by Gordon
View Post
-
Why did the manufacturers fight against DAB+? I haven't heard that before. I thought it was HMG, Ofcom etc. who were against it. -
Government were in favour as were OfCom and the CEG as well as others. The manufacturers claim it would add expense - which is true, every penny in the factory bill of materials counts and multiplies by the time it gets to retail.Originally posted by Dave2002 View Post
In fact these days digital receiver modules are DSPs driven by software and so all that has to happen is that there is dormant software in the box ready to be woken up [but needs memory to hold it] and loaded as required - would DAB+ need a faster DSP? There was a proposal to download software later but the faff [how?] and cost of doing that weighed against it. The spec now calls for DAB+ "out of the box" and this will be tested as well as the normal DAB functions.
The stumbling block in cost was the royalties due to the patent holders of the DAB+ technology. As it happened this was not as big as they claimed and also the last of the DAB patents has expired so they were actually swapping those costs, although there was a net increase. Some manufacturers already made receivers for sales elsewhere that used AAC+and MPEG-2 transport so were already signed up to the patents anyway!! I have a Sony that makes a point of the fact that it is DAB+ ready.
Their other argument was the obvious one that no one plans to transmit DAB+ anyway. Hostage to fortune if you leave it out?Last edited by Gordon; 18-02-13, 16:47.Comment
-
No I don't have a copy of that graph, more's the pity.
DAB+ means I might even become an acolyte of DAB!Comment
-
Turncoat!!Originally posted by An_Inspector_Calls View Post
It would be good to find that graph - I know what you mean and I have looked but haven't found anything yet. Maybe I'll ask around the cronies.Comment
Comment