Digital Over The Air Television not runs better than OTA TV analog. This detail may crash OTA audience too. Jonas > At 6:13 PM -0400 11/1/08, Albert Manfredi wrote: > > > >> Why do broadcasters have any more claim to this spectrum > >> for a "new" service than other potential users of this spectrum? > > > >Because it's their spectrum. Perhaps broadcasters can make the same > >argument about using the DBS spectrum? Or the WiFi spectrum? Or how > >about allowing WSDs in the GPS spectrum? Why not allow broadcasters > >to blast away from their high towers in the 2.4 GHz band, for "new > >services"? Broadcasters have given up 200 MHz of spectrum for cell > >service, in the 1980s and now, so it's not like nothing has changed. > > No Bert, it is NOT their spectrum. It is OUR spectrum. > > And broadcasters purposely decided to use this spectrum in a highly > inefficient manner for a service that most people do not use anymore. > I am not advocating eliminating OTA broadcasting. I am simply saying > that it is time for broadcasters to wake up and stop trying to > convince folks that their service is threatened by the development of > new services that share the portions of "their spectrum" that are > lying fallow. > > The demands for spectrum are far different today than in the era when > broadcasters were LOANED this spectrum to create the TV service. You > noted above a whole series of new spectrum applications that have > enabled the development of huge new industries that help propel our > economy and generate new jobs. > > The spectrum is a precious national resource that should be used to > benefit the people, not special interests who hoard it. The best > economic use of these precious resources is just as important as the > maintenance of legacy services that do not provide significant > benefits to the public. > > We could still have buggy paths that run along every interstate highway... > > > >A good compromise would be to allow only the low VHF for consumer > >devices, and allow sharing of white spaces otherwise only for fixed > >broadband service, where channel assignments can be done > >intelligently. > > Compromise might be a good approach IF the current occupants were > willing to compromise. > > They are not. > > In the face of this kind of obstruction of progress the FCC has > little choice but to force the issue. > > And I completely disagree that it is not possible for devices to be > designed that will work compatibly with the existing broadcast system. > > Regards > Craig > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: > > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at > FreeLists.org > > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word > unsubscribe in the subject line. >