Let me be more specific about my disconnects here.
Carrier aggregation is important for a technology that requires cnannel huge channel widths, such as LTE does. It becomes much less important to ASTC or DVB-T2, which operate on 6 to 8 MHz channels. LTE as well as W-CDMA therefore provide carrier aggregation.
The comment about "on demand" video is certainly valid, but it's a non-sequitur. It is true that it takes a two-way network such as LTE to support VOD. You cannot do this with DVB-T or DVB-H. But then, this negates all that was said about the wonders of LTE broadcast. You do NOT "broadcast" VOD. By definition, what goes to an individual viewer only is not "broadcast." So using LTE in MBMS mode, for this type of VOD programming, is an egregious waste of spectrum!
Previous mobile TV efforts, such as DVB-H, were also based on standards. They failed anyway. So just because LTE MBMS is also a standard surely is no guarantor of success.
Bolderdash. The only possible advantage LTE broadcast has over more efficient schemes, such as DVB-H or DVB-NGH, or even DVB-T2 tuned to work most effectively with mobile devives, is that the cell carriers can extract revenue for the LTE broadcasts. They cannot do so if cell users can bypass the carrier's cell network and go directly to the OTA broadcaster's network.
The carrier aggregation issue is an orthogonal discussion. It's useful to LTE, mainly because LTE requires such wide channels, and carriers don't often have slices that are 40 or 80 or more MHz wide. If you look at the numbers, though, you pay a price for LTE broadcast, compared with DVB-T2 for example, in spectral efficiency. In order to approach the spectral efficiency of DVB-T2, the LTE network needs to have very closely spaced towers. You pay price to transmit broadcast over a network designed for two-way unicast.
Those technical issues aside, mobile broadcast has always been a tough call. I guess that people on the go would much prefer to view content on demand than to have to conform to broadcast schedules. LTE will not change that. We've read this type of news item enough times now that I am quite skeptical. Just because something can be done does not mean that it should be done.
Ok. so this means, an additional receiver chip is not needed in the smartphone to receive TV signal, And can use the existing LTE modem with minor modifications. Right? If so that is an interesting proposition. This might have been a reason for DVBH/Mediaflo failure in addition to Internet streaming video.