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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
... 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.
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?
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.