[opendtv] Re: "It can't be done"

  • From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 15:09:38 -0500

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

>> Craig, your a few years too late; they've already spent that
>> money on the current new system.
> Sorry Dale, but I still have little sympathy. The investment
> to date is relatively small, and many of the assets that have
> been acquired will continue to have value if used properly in
> the new infrastructure.

I have little sympathy for the entire thread, as long as the only issue
on the table is use of large area SFNs.

I think Dale was being very gracious and overly diplomatic. There is
nothing written anywhere that insists that large area SFNs are *the* way
to create the "proper infrastructure" you speak of. It's simply not
supported by the facts. It makes a lot more sense to design a proper and
reliable infrastructure without basing its design on a bad idea.

Any scheme that is bound by the laws of physics to create variable dead
zones, which will change shape according to multiple factors including
weather conditions, and which requires use of many more towers than
otherwise needed, in my book qualifies as improper use of spectrum.

You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: