Now they have to find some one that wants to (and will pay for) watch TV on a 2" screen.

Like I want to pay to watch TV on a 2.5" screen. Thanks but no thanks!

Paris because her workign at NASA makes more sense.

... so I am to watch microTV? No thanks. However, "mobile TV" does make sense if you got a PSP, and are stuck in a long commute in public transportation systems.

But on a standard cellphone display? I doubt it.

If A-VSB is approved, it will be a good thing for all DTV viewers.

The current VSB standard is somewhat more susceptible to interference and distortion of the encoded signal. Multipath, AM interference and doppler shifts in the carrier frequency all affect VSB to a greater extent than DVB-T. This is the trade off for having a more power efficient transmission scheme.

Supposedly, A-VSB will do several things. First off, it will offer improved error resilience in the VSB modulated packets in the form of a new reference signal. This will help DTV receivers when faced with a signal degraded by multipath or doppler shifting. Second, A-VSB will offer new encoding modes that support greater amounts of error correction (at the cost of lower data bitrates). However, since many people have suggested that A-VSB would be rolled out with MPEG4-AVC/H.264 video encoding, such bandwidth losses would be partially offset.

Besides, who needs 1920x1080 video on a 6" screen?

requires yet another standard: multicast over WiMAX

Which isn't a new standard really, but rather what the next generation of "open networks" should use, existing and "open" standards.

I'll buy that for a dollar!

Unless of course there is a xxx-subscription channel available.