Kon, Some of us in the Government proposed switching to DVB-T (or similar COFDM) modulation system so we could EXACTLY do what is needed now in the disaster areas - broadcast highly reliable data to emergency workers in the field. Unlike most wireless technologies that are designed for small cells, a broadcast model for data transmission could use a transmitter many miles away and get data where it is needed. 8VSB would not work in the model, because it is monlithic in its data design - you get (maybe) the 19 Mbps or nothing. In DVB-T, the system was designed to allow seemless roll back to lower data rates (all the way down to 6Mbps I recall) to improve the punch through quality of the signal (more redundancy, more guard channels, etc., more reliability). Here is a case where I will claim I told you so. But people were not interested in preparing for emergencies - it is easier to blame the government after an emergency than it is to fight business interests that would not think beyond their narrow self interest (perpetuating the NTSC and 8VSB franchises). Maybe common sense will prevail in the future, now that we have such a desperate emergency/example to point to. SWL At 01:31 AM 9/5/2005 -0700, Kon Wilms wrote: >On Mon, 2005-09-05 at 08:40 +0200, Jeroen Stessen wrote: >> This is apparently about cell phone networks, not Wifi or DTV. Does >> the fact that she did not mention television make this off-topic ? > >She didn't mention television because there is no plan for television >emergency delivery (and because she probably never even knew it existed >as a delivery medium). Which I find amusing, since the government has >been spoon-fed on the benefits of this approach for over a half-dozen >years now. > >A few years ago we gave a demonstration to one of the senate committees >(one of many demos) on using 100kbits of the DTV spectrum for delivering >escape route maps and other data to stationary receivers in the field. >To quote ex-FEMA director James Lee Witt at the demo - 'if only we had >this technology before 9/11 lives would have been saved'. Guess how many >of those systems got deployed? Big fat zero. Giving the appearance that >you are doing something is cheaper than actually laying down the cash >and deploying a network. Talk is cheap. > >A year ago or so there was a DTV demonstration scheduled for the Miami >area. If I recall it was cancelled due to what amounted to 'lack of >interest'. How ironic that the Gov in one of the affected areas now >slams the network delivery systems. > >Maybe we should instead blast the Gov's office for being incompetent? > >It will take another 9/11 for the government to throw aside the >political vendor games, put the money down, and deploy something that >works. Until then, we are doomed. > >Cheers >Kon > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >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. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.