Highspeed Downloads Via DTV
NYCadAdept writes " E-insight reports that Clear Channel Communications has begun to provide high speed downloads in Cincinnati, via the broadcast DTV signal of WKRC-TV. You have to use proprietary hardware/software; and you still need a modem for up-stream communications, but it is an interesting alternative for those beyond the reach of xDSL."I don't want to sound rigid, but these frequencies were given in exchange for the analog ones, so I don't see how they can do this without breaking thier agreement with the FCC.
256k/56k is not too bad if the price is right, unfortunately, there's no information.
For $45/month, using cable, I get 1.5M/128k...
At least it's another option for those in the "sticks"
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Stuff like this really pisses me off. First of all, TV wastes tons of spectrum as it is, but when you license someone spectrum for a TV station it should not be used for purpouses such as this. The people doing this have no doubt already looked it over legally and therefore there probaly will not be any action against them. Unbelievable.
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
just think if the encryption/secutiry on this was broken, you could see all kinds of other people's traffic. Also, how much bandwidth for all users is there? I mean, each connection cannot get 256k!
The only problem I can see with the service is that it relies on a 56k connection for an uplink. Does this work? Yes, but it won't satisfy the requirements of many users. I could imagine the latency could become a problem, especially when gaming, and performing other tasks requiring high speeds in both directions. Back in the day, cable providers tried this, and it didn't work for them; what makes them think it will work now?
SkyStream already provides "Internet delivery over DTV", in their own words. DTV Internet is spreading slowly but surely, VisionConsult is looking into Internet@Digital.TV. In Europe, Internet over digital TV set-top boxes where available as early as 1990 according to Re:Think (see the section entitled "Case Study: Digital TV Set-Top Boxes).
What do you think of MusicCity now?
Except for the bad publicity there is no downside for them. We can bitch and complain but since our wonderful leaders didn't see fit to put these restrictions in any formal agreement there is really nothing to enforce, Unfortunately this is exactly what the pundits said would happen.
Now if they take the bad publicity seriously enough we might convince them to actually do some of what they promised but I doubt they will do it all.
Nice to see a spare digital signal used to benefit another form of media, in this case the internet. However, this just seems to be a glaring opportunity for individuals in Cincinnati to hack the signal for free. Seriously, how long could it be before someone makes an open source version of their proprietary code? How about a PCI card that has the same functionality as theirs? Perhaps someone could point to a more technical article?
Actually they were GIVEN to them, under the assumtion that they would give back their old ones, but I had read they the TV stations were refuseing to GIVE back the old freq's, instead they wanted to SELL them back, under the guise of "recouping costs" of switching. Course orginally they were GIVEN the freq's to cover the costs. Damn, this corp BS really pisses me off, some people just don't know when they have it good enough. Oh well, they will probably get their way and the tax payers will just foot the bill.
the only good thing tocome out of clear channel radio that i've ever heard was their sept 11th coverage, i listened nonstop for weeks, after that though it's not worth it, as for their service well.. heh talk about entering the wrong market. i live in cinci, where dsl and cable modem service providers are not in short supply, who wants to tie up their phone line and travel at segway speeds when you can have a better service, that works with everything you already have, for most likely less money .. i've been very pleased with time warner here, they beat the hell out of comcast back in indy wehre i'm from..
I'm sure the DTV spec has some extra room padded into it for the sake of future growth. Some of it is probably unalocated for now and can be used if anyone cares to. If the DTV spec is ever updated to require that that "latent" region be used for something, the service will probably go away. It is really not likely to be a long term solution for anyone, but more of a stopgap measure for people who desparately need it.
Think about it:
Any hey, maybe they are using Steganograpy to encode the data seamlessly into the video signal. :-)
--
The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.
you can hack this! But seriously, this is even less secure than cable. with cable the list of people who are sent your data are at least restricted to those sharing the line with you. But with this, anyone can pick signals off the air and look for info in them.
Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.
As I understand the article, they aren't in any way using something that they were supposed to "exchange." The article says, "transforms a latent portion of the digital television signal..." meaning that this is done on top of all of the other TV services on their bit of spectrum. In other words, they have enough bandwidth to do this in addition to their normal digital TV (this is why broadcasters were so eager to get their hands on these new frequencies). With that aside, it's still a shame that broadcasters will be able to greatly profit off of bandwidth they were given for free, but which is supposed to be the property of everyone.
Easy. The FCC gave them 6mhz worth of spectrum, good for ~19Mbps. The broadcasters have to use some portion of that for no-cost television, but they don't have to use all of it. WRAL in Raleigh uses a portion for an all-news sub-channel, and another chunk for PC data services.
and you still need a modem for up-stream communications, but it is an interesting alternative for those beyond the reach of xDSL
When I lived in northeastern PA, I could get a cable modem with one-way download through the cable and then upload through my phone line. That was about 8 years ago. And even then I didn't see the benefit. Sure, I would potentially get fast download rates, and it was the only broadband available in the area. But even then, many people who get broadband need low upload latency (computer games sending a constant stream to the servers) and unfortunately that just doesn't cut it.
However, my point is this isn't a new solution to people with no xDSL service in their area; it's just a new way to sell the same old crap. If they wanted to really make the money, I think they just need to suck it up and help build the fiber backbones and get telecommunications in those areas up to par with the rest of the world. After all, this would probably give the telecom sector a nice boost. My two cents though...
For anyone seriously interested in the technical and official aspects of DTV, either for Internet or video, be sure to check out the FCC's Digital Television: MM Docket No. 87-268 page. The FCC is reallocating TV channels 52-59 (687-746MHz) for digital broadcasting, perhaps even Clear Channel's Internet will be used on that part of the spectrum. Evidently, Clear Channel wants to convert all analog broadcasts to digital, but 687-746MHz will act as a sort of test bed.
What do you think of MusicCity now?
If they are abandoning their rights to broadcast ... anybody
television with this spectrum, then it's abondoning
the property they "rent/own". So
can grab this space, right?
I am seeing WATER in slashdot, I swear.
Ok, i might be sleepless and drunk, but i am
sure of what i see.
a little water drop, all over the comments.
When i tried to click it, and clicking is my
preffered way of *feeling* things, it said
"alter relationship".
Slashdot is not only getting wet, but it is encouraging
posters to take each other personally.
zzzzZZZZZZZ
I can see it now...
"Tune in tonight at 8/7 central and go on a journey hosted by Th3 PHr34kY M4sT4 as we explore the world of warez by downloading an ISO of Windows XP Corporate!
And stay tuned, because at 11 eastern, we will delve into the world of porn with a download of "Wet and Wild Teens on Spring Break!"
All this and more - *only* on DTV..."
1) When did this Friend/Nuetral/Foe thing show up?
2) Is it just me, or are the Friend & Foe images not available, and
3) Why
.sig last updated Jan. 14, 2000
Rob,
Could you please create a meta-post or tell us what the hell this is all about?
What does it matter if someone is my "friend" or my "foe"?
So far, I've only rated people as neutral... guess I am "friendless".
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Check out this quote from the article:
"As broadcasters, we saw the opportunity to provide a service to the unserved users in those areas while delivering free, high definition television to the viewing public."
How the hell do they propose to offer both HDTV and data at the same time? A 1080i video stream can easily take the full 20Mbps 8VSB channel.
The truth is, they have no intention of carrying HDTV programming, because that would take up all the bandwidth. They will only provide a highly compressed SDTV signal, to keep the FCC off their back, and sell the more profitable internet access as their main business.
This will greatly hurt the DTV conversion process. Who will bother to convert to a digital TV if it offers no advantage over their current cable or satellite service.
1.) Cable Lines ...)
2.) DSL
3.) 56K (phone company garuntees 9600 bps)
4.) Radio Waves (termed wireless)
5.) Cell Phone Waves (GSM
6.) Power Lines
7.) God only knows what else
In all reality I am completely surprised that there are this many options for broadband coming out that I was wondering if anyone has thought to use the obvious ... Internet Pipes (IE T-Lines, OC-Lines, DS-Lines, ... so on ...).
I just can't wait until there's some sort of health risk from TCP/IP being sent via brainwaves soon ...
Don't get me wrong ... I'm happy to see this new option available for broadband.
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
I live in Cincinnati for one. This is being marketed to people who cannot currently get cable internet or DSL.
/. post I can't find one now. No.. I found the FAQ. From there you can surf through the other parts of the site to find more.
They are holding beta testing now, although I've tried to 'refind' the website before for another
They've advertised this as a new way to get broadband in area's where there is none and claim download speeds of 250K, which would make me sign up for $39.95 a month.
The target here around Cincinnati would be the homes that aren't even close to the city but carry the WKRC station [Channel 12, "The new Generation of News!"-which is the same old people.]. This is a huge untapped market in plenty of area around Cincinnati.
As I've said earlier there will be many implementations of 'last mile' solutions. This may actually take off.
Considering Clear Channel 0wns this town's airwaves [thus politics and more!] I expect this service to take off somewhat. It isn't ideal anywhere but beats the similar 'Dish' technology.
Here is a PDF from 12/18/01 about the service... although it's been on TV for almost a year.
Sometimes we here in the 'Nati get things faster. We had HBO-On Demand first, and our Cincinnati Bell was featured as the first to offer 'Internet Call Manager' services. We were putting in Digital [two way] cable years before anyone had Cable Modems [about the time Time Warner bought out both cable services] and DSL was here pretty quick.
Maybe Mark Twain was wrong when he said: "When the end of the world comes, I want to be in Cincinnati because it's always twenty years behind the times."
Get your Unix fortune now!
"You're listening to WKRC in Cincinnati, my children. Let your soul be soothed by the mellow sounds of Venus."
Probably not many would remember that, but it struck me as funny.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
This is probably a DOCSIS variant. You can look
into the DOCSIS specs at:
http://www.cablemodem.com/specifications.html
if you are interested. Basically DOCSIS is the
Data over Cable System Interface Specification.
It's how your cable modem works.
DOCSIS puts your downstream data inside MPEG
frames on a normal 6Mhz television channel.
For cable modem normaly this is the only digital
data on the downstream channel and so the MPEG
framing is largely irrelavent. I'm pretty
sure that your standard digital TV signal is
exactly the same as your DOCSIS signal up until
we get into the contents of the MPEG frame
( which probably is MPEG for digital TV ). Since
You can get about 28Mb/s in a QAM-64 carrier and
compressed HDTV only takes about 19Mb/s, I'd
say this is a creative use of the leftover
bandwidth.
As to the phone dial back... getting a return
signal even over cable is trickier, over
air it is likely to be downright prohibitive
( can you image how much power you would need
to broadcast from your home to get back to the
station? ). Because not all cable providers
originally had cable plants that could provide for
upstream channels, the DOCSIS spec already lays
out neatly specifications for providing for
a dial return path.
I'll almost bet this is what they are doing in
Cincinnati. Doing anything to different would
just make their equipment at their headends
really expensive for no good reason.
1. As other posters have mentioned, broadband's killer apps are gaming, and to a lesser extent, serving(P2P mainly). These depend on upstream latency and banswidth respecively. 56k just doesn't cut it.
2. They did the roll out in Cincinnati. Cincinnati has 3 regional cable providers, all of whom provide Internet access(even if one of them is Insight@Home), a constant churn of CLEC DSL providers, and one of the few ILECs in the country to not have its head lodged in the usual place (Not that Broadwing/Cincinnati Bell doesn't have issues, this just isn't one of them.)
3. They did the roll out in Cincinnati? I live in the Metro area. I watch WKRC-TV. This is the first I've heard of this. This is par for the course for Clear Channel.
It may not be just, but it is fair, and that is more important.
Do not urinate or ejaculate into a TV case, as the capacitor ampage will follow up the liquid stream and fry your nuts. I speak from experience.
That is all.
It's a downstream media. No upstream at all. So you can hack a conection, theoretically, but you won't have anywhere to dial in, to send requests. So you can browse the web, but only what someone else is browsing at that moment. Not veyr useful in my book.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
By riding the broadcast spectrum as audio only, avoiding the royalties demanded by the RIAA, while still collecting their "non payola" from the labels via the "indies". They may be flagrant, but they certainly aren't stupid...
The people this will service will likely have two options: 56k up and downstream OR 56k up and a faster Satellite/DTV downstream. Given these two choices, it wouldn't be a tough decision for me. The 56k up is a constant either way - why not have faster downloads?
The downstream channel would have to be multiplexed among all simultaneous users of the service, which means they can support roughly 30Mbps total modulated bit rate of the channel/256Kbps per user ~ 120 users...Even if we assume a 10x gain due to statistical packet multiplexing, that is still only 1000 users max. I wonder how they plan to deal with congestion... -rkgmd
Games are played by boys aged 5 to 21.
Look out for rogue gods, in that case.
What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey
A couple of years ago, the swedish company named Terracom (owned by the swedish government) created a system for show-off/demo purposes. They used 20 mbit DTV for downlinks and a whopping (*grin*) 9.6 kbit GSM for uplinks, and was created for mobile connections.
They had to adjust the TCP/IP layers to have the uplink not get choked by the ACKs as a ~1 second roundtrip is a lot with a 2000 to 1 download ratio...
This system was (and this still applies) however not legal to put to use in Sweden due to regulations in the swedish "Rundradiolagen" that says something about how public broadcasting systems may (or may not) be used for personal communcations. I'm not very much into the details.
I figure other countries may have similar.
This system was shown at some fair a couple of years ago.
Here we go again, yet another goofy idea that won't go anywhere.
Assuming they run just one SD channel @ 4 Mbits/sec, they will be left with about 15 Mbits/sec remaining. At 256K per user, even with multiplexing giving them about 10x more capacity, they will run out of capacity between 500 to 1000 users, depending on how many concurrent downloads there are at a given moment. Since there is no way to provision more bandwidth from their spectrum allocation. Plus, it looks like they are giving away the receivers / routers for free on their web page.
Since they are billing it as a free service, how much value do they expect to derive from delivering fat files to a 1K user base? Not surprisingly, I'm pretty skeptical about their "plan".
I think I will take a walk down to good old WKRC and have a word with the GM. I'm sure he will have the time to talk to me!
Ligaguinggligagiggagoogoogwillgo
If just somebody would make the most obvious use of that technology: Use it for broadcast IP. Imagine how many video streams, usenet feeds and software mirrors could be run over it.
Emulating unicast by dividing bandwidth on a broadcast medium is anything but elegant.
In the end, they will have 400K to 1.2M of digital bits to play (pay) with...
I don't see how this breaks their agreement - they're not using their analog frequencies to do this, they're using part of their digital allotment to do this. Perfectly legal. The FCC doesn't say what a station will do with all of their bandwidth, as long as they are broadcasting at least 1 compliant DTV station.
Personally, I'd like to see all the stations in a particular area (if FCC regs allow it) pool their DTV allotments together, broadcast 1 SD signal each, and use the rest of the bandwidth for premium services (such as this).
FC Closer
If this is a Clear Channel company, are they going to let you download anything worth downloading, anyways? Or will they have a list?
Damnit, Jim, I'm an anarchist, not a F@#$!^& doctor!
... they use the extra bandwidth and digital broadcasting technology to, say, put more tv stations and programming into a channel. I get few enough broadcast channels as it is (many of which are televangelists), and Clear Channel (the people who make satellite radio look so damned tempting) is wasting perfectly good television bandwidth for this gimmick, this DirecPC wanna-be? And at least satellite internet doesn't rob potential viewing bandwidth from an entire broadcast area (customers of the service or not).
The more I hear about the cluster-fuck HDTV is turning out to be in the US, the more I think that the hundreds or thousands of dollars I'm expected to pay to upgrade my receivers for it will instead go into a 6' C-band dish in the back yard. Broadcasters, cable companies and TV manufacturers can do what they want, I'll still be able to watch the whole thing collapse on C-SPAN and the BBC.
so I don't see how they can do this without breaking thier agreement with the FCC
I think the first sentence of the article answers that:
"...that transforms a latent portion of the digital television signal..."
I believe the key words are 'latent portion'. If their video signal doesn't use all of the bandwidth allocated to them, then any un-used portion could theoretically be 'reused' without contradicting an agreement to 'trade analog for digital frequencies'...
As long as they're still broadcasting their programming in digital, I don't see a conflict...
-- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
... because here in the 'Nati we have one of the highest profile competitions between DSL and Cable (at least that I've heard about) in the country. Cincinnati Bell, our telco, offers a fairly decent DSL service ($40 a month for 768k down/408k up). It's now entering it's fourth year and has finally stabilized into a service I recommend to people. Unfortunately, Cincinnati Bell is also the Man that represses us all. Because they leverage their monopoly power in evil ways they've managed to extend the ability for service to most of the area (at the expense of countless souls, no doubt) and the way their network is set up, no CLEC's stand a chance of offering a competing service across their phone lines. A couple ISP's that have tried (NKY.net, Iglou.com) have all seen their effors squashed, or been confronted with significant obstacles. When Cincinnati Bell wants to win, they win.
:) Maybe they take it up to that crazy Cleveland burg up north. :)
Enough ranting about our evil telco, tho. The other side: Time Warner Cable's service regularly releases ads that just make DSL look silly. Their service ($40 for ~2MB up/down if you're lucky, and dns servers that die when someone sneezes) is tolerable IMHO and they compete very vigorously with CBell, who incidentally never seems to try anything to outdo their cable competition.
There is a point in all this - bad idea for a place to try this service. Maybe somewhere where last-mile is really an issue, or where there isn't such a monumental battle between high-speed services going on. Honestly, good luck in getting anyone to subscribe to this service in Cincinnati. We're all content with our cable/DSL and we're fairly resistent to change. Not that that's a bad thing
---
"how can the same street intersect with itself? i must be at the nexus of the universe!" - cosmo kramer
This is not new. This has been going on in the Raleigh/Durham area for about 1 year. It is called DTV plus. It uses Windows Media version of MPEG4 to deliver content. I tested the 256kb stream and it looks good at 320x240. I also had my hand in a few other video aspects of the project. It is a cool project but I don't think it has made profit yet.
For many years now, Clear Channel has been the powerful, overfunded bully who runs the radio and television industries by owning TONS of stations. That they would operate one of their stations outside the public interest isn't that surprising to me.
This is the company that bought up stations across the country, gutted their staffs, doubled the number of commercials, and started automating stations left and right. Result? Bland, boring, programming (worse than before!) with 25-30 commercial units in an hour becomes acceptable in big markets because, "Clear Channel has more."
Who did what now?
This is not accurate.
Theoretically, the HD signal would take up most of the channel, but practically, with the latest generation of encoders, and the use of variable bitrates, there is always quite a bit of headroom left over.
This generally ranges from about 2Mb/s to over 8 or 9Mb/s depending on the program being broadcast.
Broadcasters can also choose to deliberately reduce the bandwidth even on a 1080i feed to make sure there is headroom. Nobody would really notice with the current generation of HDTV sets available anyway.
WRAL in Raleigh has been doing Datacast for almost a year in conjunction with DTVPlus.
They broadcast a special version of the WRAL website, as well as "video on demand". Basically, the most popular video clips on the website, as well as the various news broadcasts, are sent in a fairly high-speed version and stored on the receiving computers.
Most TV stations expect to be able to, with current and upcoming encoding technology, deliver an HDTV channel, at least one SD channel (albeit a low bitrate channel, such as a weather channel, or classified ads, or something similar), and some sort of datafeed.
An interesting development lately is that Networks seem to be putting in clauses in their affiliate contracts to reserve the excess data bandwidth for the network. I'm not sure how that's going over, but with most local stations being so technology ignorant, I wouldn't be suprised if its getting accepted alot.
and switch to HDTV or die.
I've had my HDTV set for a few months. Houston's cable provides 9 HDTV channels(though not everything broadcast is HD). I found that I've significantly cut back on watching TV shows that are not being sent as an HD signal - because of the image quality. For instance I now watch CSI instead of ER because CBS is broadcasting their evening lineup as HDTV while NBC is just sending an upconverted signal.
TV stations are out for market share. When the SDTV channels find themselves losing market share to the HDTV channels you can bet they'll change their ways.
In Hungary, of all places.
I'm pretty sure it was over three or four years ago - however, they did this with analog signals and not with DSS.
They used a modem connection for upstream, and some clumsy hardware that you plugged between your satellite receiver and the dish for downstream.
It never took off - initial costs were too high, and once they started getting more subscribers the "huge" bandwidth just disappeared as it got divided further and further amongst users.
Now everyone & their sister is on ISDN, ADSL & cable, and the situation's not a whole lot better. Between 6-12 PM all the backbones are fully loaded. Well, that's what you get when they start giving away ADSL for $20 per month.
The broadcasters' agreement is not with the FCC, but with Congress.
The broadcasters agreed to provide favorable coverage to incumbent members of congress. In return, and Congress agreed to give them, free of charge, vast swaths of spectrum worth billions and billions of dollars. The broadcasters would theoretically have to give back the old spectrum they currently use (and also never paid for), but the prerequisites for the spectrum giveback will not be met. (Surprise, surprise!)
Of course, now that the broadcasters and Congress have robbed the taxpayers once, they want to do it again by letting them sell their old spectrum (remember, they didn't pay for that spectrum either). Also, now that the 'Free over-the-air HDTV' cover story has done its job, it can be quietly dropped, and pesky restrictions on the broadcaster's valuable new property are no longer needed. Pretty soon, we'll see that the broadcasters own both the new and old spectrum outright, with no restrictions on use or resale.
It goes without saying that the broadcasters won't pay the government one red cent for the spectrum, since they hold a currency even more valuable in Washington: control of media exposure.
The television stations are under NO obligation to transmit high-definition. They are just supposed to use this is as the primary allocation and cease broadcasting in their current license allocation within the next 9 years.
What they're likely to do is transmit a primary channel non-HD or HD only in prime-time and use 3 other sub-channels or lease those out. This data service. During HD transmissions, they'll have one other channel and a number of lesser bandwidth sub-channels for data.
Read up on 8VSB.
...and being under NDA, I'll try to inform as to what any beta tester can figure out on their own.
1. This is not a competitor to Cable/DSL, both are obviously better. This is targetted to those in the "sticks", outside of Cable/DSL range.
2. Yes, it will use some bandwidth of the DTV signal. Yes, that means that the full-res version of DTV won't be available. But when Cable/DSL expands, it will eliminate this market, leaving the DTV bandwidth ready to be converted back.
3. At the ClearChannel booth at NAB, this was advertised to broadcasters as a way to "help fund your DTV transition." Broadcasters are also wary of converting to DTV, because no one is watching it. (And no one is watching because no one is broadcasting...etc)
4. For security, IPSEC is used. Make your own judgements.
5. Yes, the modem uplink is slow. No, it is not intended for gamers to get great ping times. Yes, it is download-centric.
6. No, ClearChannel does not limit the usage (as of this writing). You can browse, read, download to your heart's content.
7. I don't know anything about pricing.
I'll try to answer more questions if I can. I can also be reached at: sykik(at)yahoo.com
I don't see this as some sort of permanent upgrade. Hopefully, most of the U.S. population will have access to either DSL or cable, or another emerging high-speed Inet access medium within a few more years.
By the time everyone owns really good HDTV's and cares whether or not a station is broadcasting an uncompressed HD signal, the market will hopefully have dwindled for 1-way high speed Inet over a TV signal.
This is nothing new. The University of Kentucky has been doing this for years (and may still be, dunno) over the 'regular' spectrum on several local PBS stations. It's a 9600 newsfeed, with a specialized modem to pull a small out of band stream from the normal broadcast.
It's only news, so everybody sees the same content, no security involved other than having to have the modem, and it's free for anyone to intercept. But the same idea anyway.
Cue is in bankruptcy after losing their single biggest customer a few months ago (I understand it was a million dollar/month acct.). They were in default of their subcarrier leases on Clear Channel FM stations as of November and were disconnected in early December. They were given one more chance to pay and were turned back on a few days later. Alas, they couldn't come up with the $$ and were disconnected for the (final time) last week. I would say that as of right now, they're dead in the water....
If those frequencies fall under the rule of the FCC TV Broadcast Guidelines, wouldn't transmitting porn and naughty words and stuff violate their aggreement with the FCC and incurr them oodles and oodles of fines eventually getting their liscense yanked?
And..the FCC violated their own interference rules to allow DTV. Years ago, I wanted to put a LPTV in the town I lived in. It was to go on channel 19. There was a channel 26 94 kilometers away. The required spacings for an LPTV (operating with 1000 watts) to this station was 100 Km. The required spacings for a FULL POWER TV station (operating with up to FIVE MEGAWATTS) was 92 Km! I called the FCC and asked them to quote the rule of physics that states that 1000 watts of power would interfere MORE then five million watts. They couldn't answer. I even proposed to drop my opwer to 100 watts. They wouldn't allow it. THEN they allowed a DTV station onto the SAME TOWER I wanted on channel 19 with 750 KILOWATTS average power (peak power is five times more). I called them again and again asked them to quote the rule of nature that said that 100 watts was worse for causing interference then 750,000 watts. Same silence. The fact is.....rules concerning most anything are decided by political considerations, NOT the rules of nature and physics. In other words, the dollar rules! A few years ago I saw that the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) was the second biggest lobbyist (read: BRIBER)to Congress. And you wonder why the broadcasters get whatever they want? Here's the latest one: Though broadcasters are limited to a maximum of 8 radio stations they may own outright (100%) in a given city, The FCC has just decided that they may own up to 49% of any (or all) of the ones left over! Ain't this a boon for diversity, huh? Soon we'll be seeing all the stations in a given area owned by two companies operating as a cartel. They'll each own eight, then together own 98% (49% each) of the stragglers. Of course, the 2% left over will be thrown to a minority, and the NAB will trumpet through the land how GREAT this is for minority ownership by allowing the minority one third control! "Shit is still shit no matter how pretty the package"
TV stations broadcast a selection of websites in the DTV bandwidth, which you receive with a special receiver at home that plugs into your computer. To complete the loop, you have to have a connection for uplink to your isp. From what I understand, this is closer to Akamai than to broadband, because you can't request sites, i.e. since this is still a broadcast medium, you will only get the most popular sites. You can't request obscureweblog.org because they would have to put it in the broadcast, and it would take a portion of bandwidth from everyone else.
Two other companies doing this are:
iBlast
Wavexpress
I've tried to do their highspeed video on demand service, yet they refuse to support linux and after their operating system probe(javascript and popups required) their page reports that only win98, w2k, me, and XP{hahaa who uses code that calls home, lol}.
Bottom line, is there are two faiths aboard the net, one proprietary and trashy, one open and free. Those who align themself with the "good guys"{linux crowd}, will be in a far better position later on down the road when that's all who's left aboard.
--Windows bites; Death2snoopware
I'm really surprised I only see _ONE_ reference to DirecPC. I thought slashdot people were supposed to be smart (or at least technically saavy).
DirecPC has had land-line return satellite data delivery for consumers since 1996. They've been doing two-way satellite for quite a while as well. They've managed to screw up both royally but they're not the only game in town. Nebulink is another one-way system and Starband is another two-way. Starband has had several partnerships that got them national exposure (Rat Shack comes to mind). This "new" thing is hardly earth-shattering and is actually a complete waste of time as there are already several companies that are years ahead of them.
but these frequencies were given in exchange for the analog ones, so I don't see how they can do this without breaking thier agreement with the FCC.
Where in the article is there any mention of using analog TV spectrum? For the technoically challenged, 'analog modem' != 'analog TV signal'. DUH!!!
"that's not encryption - it's a new perl script that I'm working on..." - from some Matrix parody
I have a cabin in the woods - totally off the grid (no power, no phone, etc..) Phone is a cell phone with a Yagi directional antenna pointing at the nearest tower, 30 miles away. Power is a box of batteries, an inverter, a generator, and soon wind and solar.
:-) Latency according to traceroute is around 700 msec.
:-)
Internet (and television) is a Dish Network/Starband combination satellite system. This system gives me full Dish Network television (pretty decent) and Starband 2-way Internet (a 1 Watt transmitter now resides in my back yard!).
Advertised speeds on the Starband are 512Mbit downlink and 128K uplink. This is with a Windows PC running their proprietary accelerator software (AS_AGENT) which accelerates web access and general data access. They only support other OSs if you connect the service to a Windows box running some sort of NAT proxy for the rest of your systems (a network). The service is rather like DSL (in as much as it is always on as long as you leave the power on
I don't like Windows, I also don't have the luxury of running a windows box as a "router" due to power constraints and space (it's a tiny cabin, really!) So, assuming things would work OK I connected the modem directly to my Mac OS X box (cube - great for a cabin, no fan and very low power draw - especially with a LCD screen
It works, pretty well, actually. I max out at download speeds of ~25Kbyte/second. I haven't tested upload speeds but they are rather slower in my experience. The biggest bummer is the delay loading web pages and mail due to the latency.
The solution would seem to be a AS_AGENT-like affair. I have been researching using a squid web proxy to create a similar effect to what Starband Windows software does. More as that happens.
You should ask Dr. Wily to build it for you.
I am a sentient ATM.
they don't use the whole HDTV signal. simply put, HDTV provides X amount of bandwith per channel, but as it turns out, good quality can be sent with modern equipment at less than X amount of bandwith. They use the remainder (a significant amount, mind you) 'dead space' as the location for the downstream data. Please do some research before making offhand comments like this chrisd...
man is machine
Anyone have this know how open it is? It'd be kind of neat to have my upstream connection at home and just download mp3s randomly, then tap into the downstream from my car, for instance. With nextel's free incoming calls, I could even have my computer call my car, and get a really slow but usable upstream connection as well.
The one major difference between this and satellite or cable-modem systems is that it is truly wireless. With satellite systems it is wireless, but you still need a fixed dish. 56K dialup can compete with that in just about any location. Radio waves do not require a fixed dish, so they can be accessed from mobile locations, such as cars. If this is marketed properly, for situations where upstream bandwidth is extremely limited or even nonexistant, this could be a great thing for certain mobile uses. Imagine being able to make a quick 1 minute phone call on your mobile phone and then getting Sgt. Peppers streamed to you in your car. That is the killer app, in my opinion.
The analog frequencies are PLANNED to be exchanged, sometime in the future, after there has been 85% acceptance (don't hold your breath).
The FCC has forthrighly authorized broadcasters the additional right of auxiliary applications (Such as Delta V) after meeting their obligations. That obligation consists of a single standard resolution program stream. This takes up about 3-5 megabits per second of the 19.3 authorized. The remaining is available for Delta V or other services. Uncle Sugar get 5% of the top line revenue from these additional services.
Hasnt anyone on here heard of DirecPC?? How is this any different? I used to use DPC before I had access to Cable or DSL. Its definately good for downloading, peak bandwidth was over 2Mbit... VERY quick. Of course most ping times were 1 - 3 seconds... so no online gaming whatsoever.
-Bill
(to the tune of "My Sharona," The Kinks) Oooh my slipjack tuna fish, tuna fish, when you gonna give me a TIME bo-ONUS? Will you bite my fishing lure, fishing lure, twitching at the end of my LINE, time-BONUS? Never gonna stop, don't give up, but don't break the line Always get it up, in the boat, with some bonus time (TIME! TIME! TIME! TIME!) T-T-T-Time bo-Onus! Look, a lipless minnow! Mmm, it looks good! Come and get it, give me a TIME bo-Onus! Beat the barracuda out, get it first! Don't you let him fuck up my TIME bo-Onus! Never gonna stop, don't give up, look "I'm getting good!" Now I've got "great action" with my new Sega Fishing rod! (TIME! TIME! TIME! TIME!) T-T-T-Time bo-Onus! When you gonna speak to me? Speak to me! Say the magic words on your mind: "time-BOnus!" When I lift you from the deck, from the deck Mutter for the very last time, "Time-BOnus!" Never gonna stop, don't give up, but don't break the line Always get it up, in the boat, with some bonus time (TIME! TIME! TIME! TIME!) T-T-T-Time bo-Onus!
Pictures |
and I am going to hack a box to allow me to download faster using it. What am I going to download? Pron, of course.
In Sweden (and also England, that I know of) there is a primitive sort of data-over-tv that has been around for a long time (10 years+) which serves up a page of text and ASCII art at every screen refresh. It had about a thousand pages and you just punched in the number to get it. News, program listings and the like. It was called Text-TV. No uplink, though, so it's the same for everyone.
Bi-directional satellite, has latency issues,
no good for gamers, but for downloaders it
will work .
http://www.starband.com