[opendtv] Re: Kennard and Powell to the rescue
- From: Cliff Benham <flyback1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:19:13 -0500
John Willkie wrote:
So, your "interest" in digital is solely to get 1946 to 1956
studio-quality video into analog sets?
Go back and read what I wrote. The sets are from 1946 to 1956, NOT THE
VIDEO!!!!!
That's pretty much what I think your interest is, but I wouldn't have
used the word "solely."
I can guarantee you that studio quality video has improved
significantly in the past 60 years, and that not a word in any of the
various laws, regulations and FCC proceedings would favor your interest.
As I said above....
Your situation is a bit different than most; you are a television
engineer, not merely someone who plays one on the Internet. I also
suspect that you moved to your present location with marginal analog
reception after DTV was initiated by an act of Congress.
1999.
And, I know that there was debate back then whether or how well
digital would replicate analog reception. Isn't this a bet that you lost?
I lost 2 Philly DTV stations but picked up up 3 more from Baltimore.
Sometimes.
What you really could and should have said was that your bad bet meant
that you couldn't get the weather tonight on digital, so you had to
step down to analog.
I could get it from Baltimore, 52 miles distant, but thats not where I
live. The weather from Baltimore only has meaning here once in a while.
However, I suspect that there are several ways of getting the weather,
even in bad weather, and several of them are more efficient than
waiting for someone to dispense a bit of weather information to you
when they do it, on a regular schedule.
I have several weather radios, but the NWS station nearest me is very
weak. The only other one is from the Maryland shore.
Not my weather either. I look at radar loops from NOAA in Mt. Holly,N.J.
and Sterling Va. Good but do not provide the
forecast that the computerized TV weather programs have.
It sounds to me like you need to subscribe to cable to get the same
type of television reception that others consider to be baseline useable.
If I subscribe to anything it will be to a satellite service.
You're right about the FCC, of course. The FCC of 1953 is not the FCC
we have today. Of course, the FCC didn't mandate 8-vSB; Congress did,
and Bill "BJ" Clinton signed it into law. Nor does this FCC mandate
agricultural reports for urban areas, or news, or public affairs
programming. There are no limits on commercial content, nor are
station proposals evaluated on whether they propose to pay for an
Associated Press newswire. Nor are the industries regulated by the
FCC (save mobile telephones and another here and there) in an
expansion mode. Nor is broadcasting the only way to get reliable news
and information between the various editions of newspapers that are
delivered to homes.
Others, without your knowledge and experience, have bigger violins to
play over the next 40 or so days.
But, me, I'm old-fashioned. I always pay attention to broadcast,
satellite, cable and telephone reception/connectivity issues when I
consider moving.
I moved here because the house has a huge backyard with a Southwestern
look and no trees. I get great, FREE C-Band reception.
I even try to anticipate how the situation might change based on
weather, topography, climate, and new construction. I learned this
the hard way, by moving, in 1976, to a location where I soon
discovered, there was no possibility of TV, AM or FM (aside from snowy
audio from one station) reception. Fortunately, Adobe Falls did have
cable television hookups, and it was livable, until/unless the Lake
Murray dam broke.
By the way, nothing I say should be construed to assert that 8-VSB
works perfectly or anything more than "almost adequate." But, I can
receive HDTV signals that travel more than 120 miles to my home.
John Willkie
Sometimes I can too. The key word here is 'sometimes'.
Other related posts:
