Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Highspeed Downloads Via DTV

Posted by chrisd on from the something-newish dept.

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.

5 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. Its easy ... Its not in the agreement by MacRonin · · Score: 4, Interesting
    As sick as it sounds from a legal perspective its easy. If I remember correctly very few (if any) of the usage restrictions/promises were in the formal agreement. They were all just verbal promises.

    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.

  2. This is a dead end... by Grech · · Score: 2, Interesting
    for 3 reasons

    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.
  3. Re:Hmmm by skullY · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Sorry, I was assuming that there was a 56K connection using v.90 technology (aka a 56k capable modem). In reality it would probably be something like 40-48k, I guess.
    Er, no, the parent is still right. On a v.90 connection, you really get a 56k down/33k up connection, as the 56k only because your ISP has a digital line (ISDN PRI/BRI, T1, etc) so the signal only goes through one A/D connversion. If your local telco uses an analog connection between CO's (USWest did this around 1998 or so where I was at the time) then the signal will go A->D->A->D, which also ruin 56k downstreams and force 33.6 or lower.

    So, unless you want to pay for ISDN or fiber to your home, you'll have to be satisfied with 33.6k and 200ms ping times.

    --
    When I was able to do my own spam-armoring, you got a chance to email me. Now you can only hope I see your reply.
  4. Clear Channel, the MS of broadcasting by Karl+Cocknozzle · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I don't see how they can do this without breaking thier agreement with the FCC.

    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?
  5. AND... by Newer+Guy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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"