Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 20, 2009, at 10:46 PM, John Duncan Yoyo wrote: But the FCC already has sold off the bandwidth. I don't understand why they don't lease this sort of thing rather than sell it off wholesale. It should be continuing revenue not a one time thing. Political ideology. Once you sell off a public asset it is hard to get it back. Recall that RR had a plan to sell off weather forecasting. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
The debate may be over, but the consequences are not. One consequence that's ongoing: TV reception that's eccentric at best. So why not talk about it? Among other things, useful information can be exchanged: e.g. which types and brands of antenna work best, where to get them, and other tips. This is especially important for those of us who live in apartments and can't put a big antenna on the roof. I'd love to have cable or satellite, but that's a Let them eat cake solution to the problem. (Have you ever noticed how many ways there are to say, Let them eat cake? While, in a strictly historical sense, Marie Antoinette may not have actually said it, other people have been saying it in one form or another ever since.) --Constance Warner On Jun 20, 2009, at 1:09 PM, t.piwowar wrote: On Jun 20, 2009, at 11:49 AM, mike wrote: This kind of thing is done with almost every topic, it's just not noticed when it is already your view. Can you say, 'The debate is over' ? These kinds of so called debates aren't good for anyone on any topic. How often do we get real news on the RIAA? Ever hear the letters EFF on network or cable news when talking about copyright cases? That's is a tough one. On one hand we have the Supreme Ayatollah who says The election is over. On the other hand you have those corrupt cons/neocons who will scream No until hell freezes over. There will always be dissenters who will not shut up. At some point a reasonable person has to say it is time to move on. With the RIAA a reasonable person might say it is time to go back and fix mistakes of the past. This may be a question that has no answer. ** *** ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http:// www.cguys.org/ ** ** *** * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 21, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Constance Warner wrote: The debate may be over, but the consequences are not. One consequence that's ongoing: TV reception that's eccentric at best. So why not talk about it? Among other things, useful information can be exchanged: e.g. which types and brands of antenna work best, where to get them, and other tips. This is especially important for those of us who live in apartments and can't put a big antenna on the roof. I saw the transition as an opportunity to upgrade and had many of my questions answered beforehand on this list. Based on what I learned here I replaced my SD Replay with an HD Tivo. I also learned here that DTV transmitter power was set much lower than it was for SD. So I decided to get an outdoor antenna. Not being suicidal I hired Fairfax Antenna to do the job. As one would expect from a pro, they immediately told me that I still needed both VHF and UHF. They knew about 7 and 9. So I had an easy transition at home. The Tivo service even downloads new channel assignments so I have no need to rescan. My TV at the office was a do-it-yourself job and did not go as smoothly. However, I think the channel 9 problem was caused by the station because the problem went away without my doing anything. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
There's a lot of this going on these days, and not just at the Fed level. Many states are selling the rights to the future income from the tobacco settlement and from their toll road tolls. And it's not ideology, just shortsighted desire by both parties for revenue to spend . t.piwowar wrote: On Jun 20, 2009, at 10:46 PM, John Duncan Yoyo wrote: But the FCC already has sold off the bandwidth. I don't understand why they don't lease this sort of thing rather than sell it off wholesale. It should be continuing revenue not a one time thing. Political ideology. Once you sell off a public asset it is hard to get it back. Recall that RR had a plan to sell off weather forecasting. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Constance Warnercawar...@his.com wrote: The debate may be over, but the consequences are not. One consequence that's ongoing: TV reception that's eccentric at best. So why not talk about it? Among other things, useful information can be exchanged: e.g. which types and brands of antenna work best, where to get them, and other tips. Of course we will continue to discuss this just as we continue to discuss other computer topics. There a number of aspects concerning this digital transition that are actually still being debated and will continue to be for some time to come. A very important aspect is the digital television receiver. The receiver is critical to the signal chain and can have a great impact on the ability of the viewer to be able to receive a broadcast. The receiver is as important to receiving a signal as is the antenna or the transmitter and its power and location relative to the viewers location. There are no standards mandated by the FCC for television receivers. Never have been. Not even for the now pretty much deceased analog system. Receivers can be as good or as crappy as the manufacturer wants them to be. Recent calls for standardization have been beaten back by industry, headed up by the lobbying of the Consumer Electronics Association. The 8-VSB digital broadcast system was dictated by the FCC to be the standard for broadcasts in the United States. This system was chosen over the system used by most of the other nations of the world, and is used by only three countries, Canada, the United States and, if I am not mistaken here, New Zealand. Back in the early days of analog, the United States decided to go with an inferior standard than was chosen by most of the rest of the world. and we have probably done it again. The 8-VSB system is generally regarded as the most troublesome in terms of being able to obtain good reception under adverse conditions as compared to the COFDM system used by most of the rest of the world. Our system is more prone to interference, and it is that interference that is causing a lot of our current reception problems, especially in urban areas. This is where some minimum receiver specification standards would be of great help. Receivers can be designed to include circuitry and components that can help to minimize multipath interference that causes loss of signal and pixellation problems. Some receivers are a lot more sensitive to low signal levels than are others, and can thus capture a signal than could not otherwise be received. Receiver sensitivity and the ability to fend off interference problems is much more important with our new digital TV than it was with the old analog system, and is the reason why standards for receivers is now being debated. The manufacturing industry has thus far been successful in convincing the FCC that the marketplace should be the one and only determining factor involved in sorting out this end of the problem, while others maintain that some minimum standards would be of immense help in offsetting receptions problems that were both anticipated as well as being a reality. There is a royalty fee that is paid to Zenith Corp., the holder of the 8-VSB patent, and this royalty fee ranges from $24 to about $41 per DTV television set that is sold. The amount of the fee is dependent upon the screen size of the TV set. I do not know what the fee is for each converter box, but there is one. Those royalty fees are quite steep, and add to the cost of digital TV sets. Since the fee is the same regardless of the quality of the signal processor, wouldn't it be to the benefit of the consumer if the signal processor met certain minimum standards in terms of capability? Many think so, but the industry disagrees. In fact, it is very difficult for consumers to obtain and be able to compare receiver specs other than screen size and resolution. If there were mandated standards, those specs would most likely be widely available and could be of great assistance to consumers when they are making purchasing decisions. Broadcasters like the 8-VSB system because it is cheaper to operate than the COFDM system. The 8-VSB system allows for less transmitter power to get a usable signal to the receiver under ideal conditions, but the trade-off is being more prone to multipath interference on the receive end under typical conditions. That being said, two networks, CBS, and ABC if memory serves me well, initially objected to the 8-VSB system being chosen over COFDM because of the known reception problems, but the story has it that extreme lobbying by Zenith and an amalgam of patent holders relative to the 8-VSB system held sway and we have what we now have. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 21, 2009, at 1:47 PM, Steve at Verizon wrote: There's a lot of this going on these days, and not just at the Fed level. Many states are selling the rights to the future income from the tobacco settlement and from their toll road tolls. And it's not ideology, just shortsighted desire by both parties for revenue to spend . This is a consequence of the inability to raise sufficient current revenue through taxation. And that is a consequence of the squealing hogs who insist that mansions and private jets are a more worthy expenditure than taking care of children and the infirm: the Gold as God crowd. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
Damn those who think of themselves and their family before the State.. On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 1:39 PM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Jun 21, 2009, at 1:47 PM, Steve at Verizon wrote: There's a lot of this going on these days, and not just at the Fed level. Many states are selling the rights to the future income from the tobacco settlement and from their toll road tolls. And it's not ideology, just shortsighted desire by both parties for revenue to spend . This is a consequence of the inability to raise sufficient current revenue through taxation. And that is a consequence of the squealing hogs who insist that mansions and private jets are a more worthy expenditure than taking care of children and the infirm: the Gold as God crowd. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 21, 2009, at 4:07 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: In fact, it is very difficult for consumers to obtain and be able to compare receiver specs other than screen size and resolution. That was my major gripe when shopping for a converter box. I'm sure that the Tivax box I have at the office is not as good as the RCA box I have at home, but the Tivax box got better reviews. I wonder if the FCC could require some key specifications to be disclosed by vendors. After all the acclaimed free market can not function in the absence of information. Back when I used to be a high- fidelity fan I routinely compared specifications on various types of gear. So strange to have that information kept secret. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 21, 2009, at 4:44 PM, mike wrote: Damn those who think of themselves and their family before the State.. Using words to hide true meaning. What is the State. This is not North Korea or Iran. This is a democratic state. There is nothing wrong with people banding together to take care of common concerns like taking care of sick children or providing medical care for the infirm. I see nothing to commend a cruel dog-eat-dog regime. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
Indeed, indeed...people..the community banding together...not the STATE demanding it under penalty of imprisonment. On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 2:10 PM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Jun 21, 2009, at 4:44 PM, mike wrote: Damn those who think of themselves and their family before the State.. Using words to hide true meaning. What is the State. This is not North Korea or Iran. This is a democratic state. There is nothing wrong with people banding together to take care of common concerns like taking care of sick children or providing medical care for the infirm. I see nothing to commend a cruel dog-eat-dog regime. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
This is a consequence of the inability of our elected officials to behave like adults and not repeatedly overspend the current levels taxation. And that is a consequence of the squealing hogs who insist that anything is a worthy expenditure: the state as God crowd. FTFY * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
Using words to hide true meaning. What is the State. This is not North Korea or Iran. This is a democratic state. That only shows how little you know of our system. It is a republic, not a democracy. If it were a democracy, the citizenry would be voting every single thing up or down. There is nothing wrong with people banding together to take care of common concerns like taking care of sick children or providing medical care for the infirm. I see nothing to commend a cruel dog-eat-dog regime. Sorry for you 49.9%, but we 50.1% have plans for you. If you have any objections, the complaint line forms out back. Pick up a complimentary blindfold and cigarette on the way out. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 4:49 PM, t.piwowart...@tjpa.com wrote: I wonder if the FCC could require some key specifications to be disclosed by vendors. After all the acclaimed free market can not function in the absence of information. Back when I used to be a high-fidelity fan I routinely compared specifications on various types of gear. So strange to have that information kept secret. The ready availability of important specs about televisions is nothing at all like it is, and has been, in the the audio world. It is almost as if the makers are not anxious to reveal their specs to the buying public. To a degree, this is the fault of the consumers themselves. Neither the ordinary consumer or their governmental representatives have pushed for this, and lest we forget, our governmental representatives are consumers just like us. Look how hard it has been to get reasonably informative ingredient and nutrition labeling on food products, and food is much more important to our lives than any TV set...at least among folks that I hang out with. What are the chances for mandated TV spec availability? Zilch. What are the chances for the voluntary availability of TV set receiver specs? Less zilch, but not promising at all. So here we now are. The industry and the industry regulator, the FCC, have handed the reception problems off to the typically non-expert consumer to solve. On top of that daunting chore, we can't even get the necessary info about how well a given TV set's receiver is expected to perform except through internet forums that are, for the most part. opinions and anecdotal experiences. While not useless, such forums do not constitute actual laboratory measurements of the performance of the TV receiver circuitry. That is what we, the unwashed public needs in order to do our work. Do the right thing, TV manufacturers. Make those missing specs as readily available as you do your screen size, resolution and contrast ratios. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
Ther Problem with Socialism (what the liberals want) is that You Eventually Run Out Of Other Peoples Money Illogical Tom wrote: On Jun 21, 2009, at 4:44 PM, mike wrote: Damn those who think of themselves and their family before the State.. Using words to hide true meaning. What is the State. This is not North Korea or Iran. This is a democratic state. There is nothing wrong with people banding together to take care of common concerns like taking care of sick children or providing medical care for the infirm. I see nothing to commend a cruel dog-eat-dog regime. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 21, 2009, at 6:47 PM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: While not useless, such forums do not constitute actual laboratory measurements of the performance of the TV receiver circuitry. That is what we, the unwashed public needs in order to do our work. Do the right thing, TV manufacturers. Make those missing specs as readily available as you do your screen size, resolution and contrast ratios. Consumer Reports perhaps? Their last review of set top boxes was not very thorough. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
I have to wonder who thought that digital TV was such a terrific idea, anyway. On WAMU on Kojo's show on Tuesday, he had 2 digital experts. From listeners who called or emailed in with the now-familiar complaints, the experts had--basically--one counter-argument: Sports will be so much clearer! Gee, fellas, I guess that makes it all worthwhile, missing stations and everything. BTW, I'm in inner Montgomery County and I get Channel 9--usually in little bits and pieces. --Constance Warner * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 3:27 AM, Constance Warnercawar...@his.com wrote: I have to wonder who thought that digital TV was such a terrific idea, anyway. On WAMU on Kojo's show on Tuesday, he had 2 digital experts. From listeners who called or emailed in with the now-familiar complaints, the experts had--basically--one counter-argument: Sports will be so much clearer! Gee, fellas, I guess that makes it all worthwhile, missing stations and everything. BTW, I'm in inner Montgomery County and I get Channel 9--usually in little bits and pieces. Everyone who wanted to make money as a result of the transition are the ones who wanted digital TV. That includes TV manufacturers, all the companies that make the communications equipment that would be required to execute the changeover, all the companies that make the communications equipment that would be purchased by government and industry when they inherit the old frequencies that TV used to use, and on and on. There were many warnings by experts about how problematic reception would be for much of the public, and those warnings did cause concern within the broadcast industry, but the digital steamroller was already moving and would not be stopped. All the reservations about the changeover were offset by numerous promises and grand visions about how much the public would gain when the changeover occurred. Congressional inquiries were told about how television sets would be essentially turned into computers and viewers could use their sets to shop, to arrange for customized viewing experiences, on-demand programming and all sorts of visionary ways to use TV in the digital age. None of that ever came to pass. Can you say BS? So today, all that is left for anyone involved in the transition to say is, as you put it, Sports will be so much clearer! Sure...if you can get it on your digital TV. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
This kind of thing is done with almost every topic, it's just not noticed when it is already your view. Can you say, 'The debate is over' ? These kinds of so called debates aren't good for anyone on any topic. How often do we get real news on the RIAA? Ever hear the letters EFF on network or cable news when talking about copyright cases? On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 5:45 AM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.comwrote: On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 3:27 AM, Constance Warnercawar...@his.com wrote: I have to wonder who thought that digital TV was such a terrific idea, anyway. On WAMU on Kojo's show on Tuesday, he had 2 digital experts. From listeners who called or emailed in with the now-familiar complaints, the experts had--basically--one counter-argument: Sports will be so much clearer! Gee, fellas, I guess that makes it all worthwhile, missing stations and everything. BTW, I'm in inner Montgomery County and I get Channel 9--usually in little bits and pieces. Everyone who wanted to make money as a result of the transition are the ones who wanted digital TV. That includes TV manufacturers, all the companies that make the communications equipment that would be required to execute the changeover, all the companies that make the communications equipment that would be purchased by government and industry when they inherit the old frequencies that TV used to use, and on and on. There were many warnings by experts about how problematic reception would be for much of the public, and those warnings did cause concern within the broadcast industry, but the digital steamroller was already moving and would not be stopped. All the reservations about the changeover were offset by numerous promises and grand visions about how much the public would gain when the changeover occurred. Congressional inquiries were told about how television sets would be essentially turned into computers and viewers could use their sets to shop, to arrange for customized viewing experiences, on-demand programming and all sorts of visionary ways to use TV in the digital age. None of that ever came to pass. Can you say BS? So today, all that is left for anyone involved in the transition to say is, as you put it, Sports will be so much clearer! Sure...if you can get it on your digital TV. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 20, 2009, at 3:27 AM, Constance Warner wrote: On WAMU on Kojo's show on Tuesday, he had 2 digital experts. From listeners who called or emailed in with the now-familiar complaints, the experts had--basically--one counter-argument: Sports will be so much clearer! Makes me think of the commercials Meyer Emco is running that show competing techs respond to customer questions with deer-in-the- headlights stares. Sadly Kojo too often puts on would-be experts who think the exposure will gain them status as experts. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 20, 2009, at 8:45 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: There were many warnings by experts about how problematic reception would be for much of the public, and those warnings did cause concern within the broadcast industry, but the digital steamroller was already moving and would not be stopped. The old transmitting equipment is still mostly in place. Just a word from the FCC could get it turned back on. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 20, 2009, at 11:49 AM, mike wrote: This kind of thing is done with almost every topic, it's just not noticed when it is already your view. Can you say, 'The debate is over' ? These kinds of so called debates aren't good for anyone on any topic. How often do we get real news on the RIAA? Ever hear the letters EFF on network or cable news when talking about copyright cases? That's is a tough one. On one hand we have the Supreme Ayatollah who says The election is over. On the other hand you have those corrupt cons/neocons who will scream No until hell freezes over. There will always be dissenters who will not shut up. At some point a reasonable person has to say it is time to move on. With the RIAA a reasonable person might say it is time to go back and fix mistakes of the past. This may be a question that has no answer. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
That's the problem, guys like you who just want to blame the 'other side'. Both are responsible. Keep blaming your bogey men..the cons/neomicrosoftians. On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 10:09 AM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Jun 20, 2009, at 11:49 AM, mike wrote: This kind of thing is done with almost every topic, it's just not noticed when it is already your view. Can you say, 'The debate is over' ? These kinds of so called debates aren't good for anyone on any topic. How often do we get real news on the RIAA? Ever hear the letters EFF on network or cable news when talking about copyright cases? That's is a tough one. On one hand we have the Supreme Ayatollah who says The election is over. On the other hand you have those corrupt cons/neocons who will scream No until hell freezes over. There will always be dissenters who will not shut up. At some point a reasonable person has to say it is time to move on. With the RIAA a reasonable person might say it is time to go back and fix mistakes of the past. This may be a question that has no answer. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Jun 20, 2009, at 1:23 PM, mike wrote: That's the problem, guys like you who just want to blame the 'other side'. Both are responsible. Keep blaming your bogey men..the cons/neomicrosoftians. You are a strange man. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
Perhaps, never truer words have you spoken. On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 10:41 AM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Jun 20, 2009, at 1:23 PM, mike wrote: That's the problem, guys like you who just want to blame the 'other side'. Both are responsible. Keep blaming your bogey men..the cons/neomicrosoftians. You are a strange man. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 11:59 AM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Jun 20, 2009, at 8:45 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: There were many warnings by experts about how problematic reception would be for much of the public, and those warnings did cause concern within the broadcast industry, but the digital steamroller was already moving and would not be stopped. The old transmitting equipment is still mostly in place. Just a word from the FCC could get it turned back on. But the FCC already has sold off the bandwidth. I don't understand why they don't lease this sort of thing rather than sell it off wholesale. It should be continuing revenue not a one time thing. -- John Duncan Yoyo ---o) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
I still have neither 7 or 9 and I'm inside the Beltway. Ellen H. - Original Message - From: phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 12:23 AM Subject: Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9 On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:03 PM, t.piwowart...@tjpa.com wrote: Finally today. Signal strength is between 85 and 90, which is plenty good enough, but not the 100 I get with most other stations. Hooray! The problem with digital OTA transmissions has been well exhibited by our local governments. They have pretty much all switched to digital modes of radio comms from analog, and have suffered a series of well publicized problems as a result. OTA TV viewers are now experiencing many of the same issues. OTA digital is quite prone to all sorts of interference problems. When OTA DTV works well it is good, but when it doesn't work well, it is very bad. Would you rather have a highly reliable, albeit lower resolution television service, or a higher resolution unreliable one? Think about that in computer terms. Which you you rather have in a computer? One that is somewhat slower but very reliable, or a faster one that craps out routinely? Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Ellen Rains Harrisel...@goodshiptabasco.com wrote: I still have neither 7 or 9 and I'm inside the Beltway. Those two channels did migrate from temporary UHF digital frequencies to VHF frequencies on June 12. A VHF capable antenna would probably be needed to receive them now while a UHF antenna was needed earlier. From inside the beltway, a fairly simple VHF antenna such as the venerable rabbit ears should work. However, these digital transmissions are highly prone to all sorts of anomalies as opposed to the previous analog mode of television signal transmission. We have all now entered a highly complex and potentially troublesome era of TV broadcast reception, which is going to leave a lot of folks wondering if the available programing is really worth the effort to be able to receive it. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
I have a digital antenna that ties into a coax plug marked digital on my fancy TV, with my analog cable plugged into the analog coax plug. I have room for many other inputs, but no other antennae - Original Message - From: phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 5:13 PM Subject: Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9 On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Ellen Rains Harrisel...@goodshiptabasco.com wrote: I still have neither 7 or 9 and I'm inside the Beltway. Those two channels did migrate from temporary UHF digital frequencies to VHF frequencies on June 12. A VHF capable antenna would probably be needed to receive them now while a UHF antenna was needed earlier. From inside the beltway, a fairly simple VHF antenna such as the venerable rabbit ears should work. However, these digital transmissions are highly prone to all sorts of anomalies as opposed to the previous analog mode of television signal transmission. We have all now entered a highly complex and potentially troublesome era of TV broadcast reception, which is going to leave a lot of folks wondering if the available programing is really worth the effort to be able to receive it. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] I Got 9
Finally today. Signal strength is between 85 and 90, which is plenty good enough, but not the 100 I get with most other stations. Hooray! * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] I Got 9
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:03 PM, t.piwowart...@tjpa.com wrote: Finally today. Signal strength is between 85 and 90, which is plenty good enough, but not the 100 I get with most other stations. Hooray! The problem with digital OTA transmissions has been well exhibited by our local governments. They have pretty much all switched to digital modes of radio comms from analog, and have suffered a series of well publicized problems as a result. OTA TV viewers are now experiencing many of the same issues. OTA digital is quite prone to all sorts of interference problems. When OTA DTV works well it is good, but when it doesn't work well, it is very bad. Would you rather have a highly reliable, albeit lower resolution television service, or a higher resolution unreliable one? Think about that in computer terms. Which you you rather have in a computer? One that is somewhat slower but very reliable, or a faster one that craps out routinely? Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
