Inactive

Live Wall Media Video Processor. Extended to 9/24/2021 Corrected original closing date from 9/21/2021 to 9/22/2021 The new closing date is 9/24/2021(extension) (Questions due 9/23/2021). Questions & R... Live Wall Media Video Processor. Extended to 9/24/2021 Corrected original closing date from 9/21/2021 to 9/22/2021 The new closing date is 9/24/2021(extension) (Questions due 9/23/2021). Questions & Response (9/23/2021) Question 1-5 80NSSC21777222Q-R1 Questions & Answers Please see the below response to Questions: The Solicitation Synopsis and RFQ/SOW state: “This is a Brand Name or Equal to requirement.” But neither document identifies the specific models of Live Wall Media products that are to be matched. Per the FAR: 11.107 Solicitation provision. (a) Insert the provision at 52.211-6, Brand Name or Equal, when brand name or equal purchase descriptions are included in a solicitation. Question 1: Why is 52.211-6 not included in this solicitation? Answer to Questions 1: The clause has been added to the RFQ. 52.211-6 Brand Name or Equal. (a) If an item in this solicitation is identified as “brand name or equal,” the purchase description reflects the characteristics and level of quality that will satisfy the Government’s needs. The salient physical, functional, or performance characteristics that “equal” products must meet are specified in the solicitation. (d) Unless the offeror clearly indicates in its offer that the product being offered is an “equal” product, the offeror shall provide the brand name product referenced in the solicitation. There is no Live Wall Media product referenced in the solicitation. There is a mention of the existing Live Wall Media product, a VP40M Video Wall Processor that was procured in 2014. But there is no mention of the currently desired Live Wall Media product by model number so that an offerer can ensure they are offering an equal product. Question 2: What is the source of the requirements in SOW 5.2 and 5.3? If they are from the Brand Name product, please provide the Manufacture and Model number that is referenced. Answer to Questions 2: There is no single Manufacture and Model number for these requirements. The requirements are a result of market research into reasonable features that the ATOL needs according to present technology. Question 3: What are the Manufacturer and Model Number of the Brand Name products for each of the following deliverables in SOW 7.1: Video Wall Processor Video Output Cards 4K/60 Video Input Cards 4K/60 Streaming Video Inputs 4K/30’ Answer to Questions 3: There is no single Manufacture and Model number for these requirements. The requirements are a result of market research into reasonable features that the ATOL needs according to present technology. The Solicitation Synopsis and RFQ/SOW state: “This is a Brand Name or Equal to requirement.” But neither Question 4: Why does 7.1 require 12x 4K outputs when the displays to be connected (no more than 12) are only HD (1920x1090)? 12x HD outputs are sufficient to drive either the 3x3 Wall B or the 4x3 Wall B at full native resolution. A 4K output driving an HD panel will just scale its output to HD. The 4K output gives no additional benefit over an HD output. When connected to a 2x2 or larger display, both will render the 4K input at the same full native 4K display. Thus a 4K output card is excess to the requirement by a factor of four. See below info for background. Each 4K output is 3840x2160, or 8.3M pixels. Thus the 12 4K outputs together can drive a wall of 99.5M pixels (4x3 of UHD/4k panels). But the existing video wall B for the requested processor is on a 3x3 of 1080 panels which is 5760x3240 which is only 18.6M pixels. (ref 2.1.2) and Wall A is 7680x3240pixels, or 24.9M pixels. The highest existing pixel demand is Wall A at 24.9M pixels. This would be exactly met by 12 HD Outputs (12x1920x1080=24.9M). The 12 4K outputs with 99.5M pixels exceed this by a factor of four. Even if the video wall is upgraded, any new panels would not exceed the current 1920x1080 resolution. Thus there doesn’t appear to be any current or future need for a 99.5M pixel output. Answer to Questions 4: The 4K requirement is to allow for the planned upgrade of the video wall displays to individual 4K displays in the future for flexibility. Question 5: What system need is driving the requirement for 12 4K output cards? Answer to Questions 5: The processor needs to be able to provide 4K video to displays located elsewhere in the ATOL beyond the 3x3 (9 display) video wall. The processor’s twelve (12) 4K output cards allows the processor to also be used on a 4x3 (12 display) video wall when the need arises. End of questions/answers.