No More DTV coupons left

This is the place for any magazine-related discussions that don't fit in any of the column discussion boards below.
User avatar
haklesup
Posts: 3037
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 1:01 am
Location: San Jose CA
Contact:

Post by haklesup » Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:27 am

Earlier I made comments about Mobile DTV. Here's more about that system from CES this year
http://www.pddnet.com/Scripts/ShowPR.as ... monCount=0

and its parent organization: www.omvc.org

I still can't tell if it will be free on things like cell phones but it should be free on other mobile devices yet to come.

And yes, Obama did make some remarks about DTV roll out (just google "Obama DTV" for citations). IMO, way too little WAY too late. Such a move would only serve to make the FCC look like a bunch of boob tubes. I think he's trying too hard to please the poor (pandering almost, geez, he's already elected).

Frankly, at least one poor person I know could easily afford a converter box if he would stop smoking for just under a week. It's all about priorities for some.

As ljbeng pointed out, don't get too used to reception and antenna positions until after the changeover.

Bigglez
Posts: 1282
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:39 pm
Contact:

Post by Bigglez » Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:23 pm

haklesup wrote: I still can't tell if it will be free on things like cell phones but it should be free on other mobile devices yet to come.
Thanks for the interesting link. My guess, free-to-air
commercial sponsored content, and cell air-time fees.

How is this different to the early 1990s when voice phone
was 'hijacked' by modem users that stayed connected for
hours? The PSTN was designed for short calls, and frequent
reconfiguration, and switches were therefore non-blocking.

Now we may have cell phone channels hogged for thirty minutes
or an hour by single mobile DTV users. Should be interesting!
haklesup wrote:And yes, Obama did make some remarks about DTV roll out (just google "Obama DTV" for citations). IMO, way too little WAY too late. Such a move would only serve to make the FCC look like a bunch of boob tubes. I think he's trying to hard to please the poor (pandering almost, geez, he's already elected).
IMHO, the electorate has elected a "blank page" with
a very left leaning history. He will likely disappoint many,
who filled that blank page with their personal agenda in the
polling booth.
haklesup wrote:Frankly, at least one poor person I know could easily afford a converter box if he would stop smoking for just under a week. It's all about priorities for some.
The next couple of years are going to be about priorities
for everyone. They were before, of course, but now we
have to tighten our collective belts for the good of the
country.

Perhaps the biggest problem to tackle is the TPS (Tall Poppy
Syndrome). To think that the millennials were the
generation to follow the boomers, who conceived
and executed the Space Program..

We have our share of TPS on this very forum.

User avatar
evahle
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 3:48 am
Contact:

TPS

Post by evahle » Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:58 pm

For those of you that don't know what TPS stands for and don't wish to click on a link, Wikipedia describes it as follows:

Tall Poppy Syndrome (TPS) is a pejorative term used in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand to describe what is seen as a leveling social attitude. Someone is said to be a target of tall poppy syndrome when his or her assumption of a higher economic, social, or political position is criticized as being presumptuous, attention seeking, or without merit. Alternatively, it is seen as a societal phenomenon in which people of genuine merit are criticized or resented because their talents or achievements elevate them above or distinguish them from their peers.

evahle :???:

User avatar
haklesup
Posts: 3037
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 1:01 am
Location: San Jose CA
Contact:

Post by haklesup » Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:14 pm

How is this different to the early 1990s when voice phone
was 'hijacked' by modem users that stayed connected for
hours?
I don't think one needs to use bandwidth to watch mobile DTV. Broadcasters use bandwidth but not viewers. With OTA, reception is a passive act and not on demand, you can choose a channel but just like with regular TV, you see what everyone else does at the same time (DVR not considered)

This is in contrast to WiFi, cellular (3G) or internet on demand video broadcasts of network content where both the broadcaster and viewer are using bandwidth.

Cable does a little of each but they can do whatever they like (almost) with the bandwidth in the wire without federal regulation.

I don't know about all the phone companies but Verizon does offer mobile TV on certain phones in very limited markets. You pay extra, I assume it is a digital cellular delivery product as opposed to actual broadcasting but I am not positive.

Do Tall Poppies make it hard to get to OZ? I'm confused by these offshore idioms.

Bigglez
Posts: 1282
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:39 pm
Contact:

Post by Bigglez » Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:29 pm

haklesup wrote:
How is this different to the early 1990s when voice phone
was 'hijacked' by modem users that stayed connected for
hours?
With OTA, reception is a passive act and not on demand, you can choose a channel but just like with regular TV, you see what everyone else does at the same time
I assumed it was on-demand. Why would anyone give
up a DVR-like service for scheduled broadcasts (narrowcasts)?
haklesup wrote: Do Tall Poppies make it hard to get to OZ? I'm confused by these offshore idioms.
You are far too hip for this room. Care to enlighten us?

User avatar
haklesup
Posts: 3037
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 1:01 am
Location: San Jose CA
Contact:

Post by haklesup » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:11 pm

I assumed it was on-demand. Why would anyone give
up a DVR-like service for scheduled broadcasts (narrowcasts)?
Hence my musings over whether it will be free or not. It may well end up that way, The technical concerns over transmission say nothing about how it gets paid for. As for DVR, a 4G SDHC card can hold over 20 hours of 320x240 MP-4. (a reasonable guess as to Mobile DTV native resolution).

OTOH, TV has been free OTA for years and there is a well developed and understood business model that goes with it. It's far more mature commerce than pay per view (on demand) but since we are used to paying for cable, why not a mobile DTV service. It remains to be seen.

CES also showed numerous new features for home based DTV like sets that stream video from the internet without a box between. I vote for a free TV hardware that's paid for by reporting your viewing habits to advertising agencies
Care to enlighten us?
Surely you've seen the "Wizard of Oz" and the scene where Dorothy and company approach the castle from across a field of Poppies. Was an allegory about something I don't recall or maybe just 60s drug culture affecting the cinema again (what ever happened to that pill popping puppy UnderDog, probably a stroke).

User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Post by MrAl » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:19 pm

Bigglez wrote:
Robert Reed wrote:Bob
Thats strange,because thats exactly what he was accusing and admonishing MrAl of doing.
Sorry if that's all you got from my earlier comments.
Mral made a derogatory remark in public aimed at me
<snip>
Mr. Bigglez,

Prove it or lose it.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.

User avatar
Lenp
Posts: 1453
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by Lenp » Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:35 pm

Here's a link that should prove interesting....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... um_auction

Len

Bigglez
Posts: 1282
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:39 pm
Contact:

Post by Bigglez » Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:14 am

MrAl wrote:Mr. Bigglez,

Prove it or lose it.
Who is Mr Bigglez?

Bigglez
Posts: 1282
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:39 pm
Contact:

Post by Bigglez » Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:15 am

MrAl wrote: Prove it or lose it.
Prove what?
Lose what?

Bigglez
Posts: 1282
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:39 pm
Contact:

Post by Bigglez » Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:25 am

haklesup wrote:
Bigglez wrote:Care to enlighten us?
Surely you've seen the "Wizard of Oz" and the scene where Dorothy and company approach the castle from across a field of Poppies.
Nope...sorry.

Bigglez
Posts: 1282
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:39 pm
Contact:

Post by Bigglez » Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:50 am

haklesup wrote:CES also showed numerous new features for home based DTV like sets that stream video from the internet without a box between.
There's a big difference between high speed internet
connectivity and narrowcast RF broadcasting.

If a cell phone is to receive a TV program data
stream (either in real time or by spooling it on a
PVR) it ties up a cell channel, denying service to
other users of that cell. This costs the cell carrier
revenue.

If the cell phone had a second RF receiver, it
may not tie up the cell RF channel, but it has
to have access to a local "TV data" transmitter.
The end user thinks they got TV-over-cell but the
cell phone is just the data player and the stream
manager.

XM and Sirius have tried to sell radio feeds in
direct competition to free terrestrial broadcasting,
and are not profitable, having decided to join
forces
last July after almost a decade of struggle.

Apart from the technical issues it should be interesting
to see how this plays out for a mobile TV service.

User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Post by MrAl » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:21 am

Bigglez wrote:
Mral made a derogatory remark in public aimed at me
<snip>
You made that statement above. Prove it is true or quit saying it!

When you say someone has made a derogatory remark aimed at
you and it isnt true, that constitutes a derogatory remark aimed
at that someone. Lets see if you can prove that it actually
occurred. Fact is, you cannot.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.

Jim Barrett
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 3:08 am
Location: Milwaukee WI
Contact:

Post by Jim Barrett » Tue Jan 13, 2009 3:44 am

ATTN Bigglez & MrAl,
The adults are trying to have a conversation here and the two of you are being very disruptive.
Please go to your respective corners, take a time out and think about how you've been behaving. :razz:

User avatar
MrAl
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: NewJersey
Contact:

Post by MrAl » Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:10 am

Jim Barrett wrote:ATTN Bigglez & MrAl,
The adults are trying to have a conversation here and the two of you are being very disruptive.
Please go to your respective corners, take a time out and think about how you've been behaving. :razz:

Hi Jim,

Bigglez keeps insisting that i made a derogatory remark toward him
when i did not, and told him 20 times i did not, yet he keeps insisting.
I got fed up, so i am demanding that he either prove that this happened
or stop saying it. Since it didnt actually happen he wont be able to
prove it, so i think he should stop saying it. What do you think?
It was in this thread that he said it again, so it's this thread that
i replied to.
LEDs vs Bulbs, LEDs are winning.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests