Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
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?
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..."
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.
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.
I also live in cincy...
you would be suprised where WKRC goes that cable and dsl services don't.
Actually where my father lives a good phone line is hard to come by, but the TV is a-ok.
As for clear channel radio... don't listen to 700 WLW they will warp your mind into a Nazi.
Get your Unix fortune now!
Um, yeah, if you don't mind destroying analog reception for all the legacy TVs out there... after all,
meaning those 100 lines are being used, just not to transmit the picture data.
Or I might just be talking about something where I have no actual technical competence.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
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
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
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
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".
That's a bad quote. Approximately 100 lines are used for timing information and retracing. Go ask anybody who knows anything about how a TV works if they'd like to do away with their horizontal and vertical sync pulses. Plus, your math is wrong. The refresh rate is 60Hz, not 60MHz. No way you'd be able to do this. Now, it is definitely possible to insert some information in the VBI (vertical blanking interval), but that's normally used by networks to send timing information to affiliate. Ever look at the top of an ABC network signal straight off the satellite? It's loaded with white blips.
FC Closer
... 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.
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?
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.
...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.
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....
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"
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
Huh? Where did you get that idea? Every channel gets exactly enough spectrum for exactly one 1080i HD channel at 19.2 Mb/sec. Any data or additional channels cuts into that bit budget. They can run a 720P signal and a good quality 480P, or 6 really crappy 480P channels like PAX. ANY data transmission costs HDTV quality...and HDTV quality was the whole point in giving the spectrum to the broadcasters in the first place! Do not let these jerks get away with ripping off our public airways!
"How perfectly Goddamn delightful it all is, to be sure" Charles Crumb
The vertical blanking interval has been used for data transmission for years. Install a TV tuner card in a Windows PC and you'll see exactly what is involved. The idea was "enhanced TV". I managed to access a few programs that used this, but for the most part, it's dead. DirecTV and Dish Network and a lot of cable system stripped off the VBI information - they claimed that it was not intentionally, but the truth is that they didn't want any datastreams as compatition to their data offerings.
"How perfectly Goddamn delightful it all is, to be sure" Charles Crumb
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
Hogwash. You can certainly see the difference on the current HDTVs, especially if the bandwidth reduction is being done by a greedy affiliate. (And therefore decoding/recoding to get the bandwidth, there are cleaner ways, but they're more expensive)
KQED in San Francisco is actually fairly committed to DTV and HDTV. They run all the HD PBS programming they can get, and when there isn't any, they simulcast the SD signal, and use the remaining 15Mbps for an HD demo loop. You can clearly see degradation in some of the clips in the demo loop, due to the bandwidth reduction. And that's only a 4.4Mbps reduction, not the 8-9Mbps you suggest.
-Zandr
You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
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.
I've been running your "killer app" for nearly a decade. It's been around longer than that, actually. Check this out... I make a quick 1 minute phone call on my mobile phone to the radio station DJ and, most of the time, they start streaming my requested song to my car very shortly. It's called FM Radio; check it out. Granted, there can be a little bit of latency after request submission, but it works quite well. And other listeners in broadcast range receive the fruits of my excellent musical taste!