Truce in HDTV spec war, but no victory

Deal opens door for 1998 digital-TV shipments

Under intense pressure from the FCC, the broadcast industry and the computer industry called a truce in their long-running Interlace War. The truce removes the last obstacle to FCC approval of a format specification for high definition television ( hdtv ). Approval will probably be voted in Decemberthe FCC is that anxious to get goingand channel assignments are expected to be complete by April. Commercial production of hdtv sets can then begin, with first consumer sales in mid-1998.

The war. Most of the technical problems of moving to hdtv were solved several years ago. Programs would be encoded digitally with multiple resolution options. Displays would have a 9:16 (height:width) aspect ratio, wider than today's 3:4 tv screens but closer to the Hollywood movie standard. By 1994, only one question was still undecided: whether the picture would use interlaced scanning, like today's tv sets, or progressive scanning, like today's computers. Interlacing helps hide the flicker from moving objects on the screen, especially on low-quality displays. Unfortunately, it also degrades the readability of text and graphics.

The computer industry initially was quite enthusiastic about hdtv . It hoped that mass production would mean large-screen, high-resolution displays at consumer pricesthe ideal monitors for low-cost computers. It admitted that progressive scanning would initially cost a bit more (mainly for additional ram ) but pointed out that having a single standard would boost production volumes enough to neutralize the difference in the long run.

But when the so-called Grand Alliance of tv makers, broadcasters and settop box designers submitted its proposed hdtv standard to the FCC in ????, the computer industry was dismayed to see that interlaced scanning was still part of the spec. It howled outrage, and the FCC ruled that there was not enough industry consensus to proceed.

The deal. There the matter rested until earlier this year, when FCC commissioner Susan Ness and chairman Reed Hundt set a deadline. Under intense pressure, the computer and broadcast industries compromised. The proposed spec would be silent about the scan format, and thus would allow either one. The market would decide which would prevail.

When the deal was announced on November 27, spokesmen for the computer industry said brave words about how the superior quality of progressive scanning would lead to market domination. Broadcasters expressed gratitude that another Betamax- vhs war had

been averted.

Lasting peace? We think the computer industry was whistling past the graveyard. Given a choice, consumers will probably opt for interlaced sets. First, all existing tv shows are interlaced, and the superior quality of progressive scanning is hard to see in I Love Lucy reruns. Second, we are told that consumers don't want to read text on their tv s. Third, a progressive-scan display costs a couple bucks more to manufacture.

Thus the economies of mass production won't spill over to the computer business. Too bad for them; but it's also bad news for online publishers, whose output is mainly text and graphics.

Net influence. Two factors may yet save the day. First, because the main difference between interlaced and progressive sets will be the ram complement, we may see field-upgradable tv s. Initially configured for interlace, some sets may have sockets for conversion kits. People will buy upgradable sets because they will also be usable for surfing the Internet, which is the second hopeful factor. Surveys are starting to show a serious decrease in tv watching. The decrease is attributed to the Net, and we think that trend will continue as publishers move more and more content online.