Slashdot Mirror


Satellite TV From a Moving Car

An anonymous reader sent us an article about an in-car digital satellite television system. that can stay trained on the satellite even while moving. Of course, Most amusing is all the comments about how TV in cars is for passengers, because as we know, the drivers are too busy talking on their cell phones.

285 comments

  1. Now if I could figure out..... by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 4, Funny

    Where to mount my Tivo....wait.. will it work with my Tivo? I might miss something on tv while I am talking on my cell phone.

    1. Re:Now if I could figure out..... by dubdays · · Score: 1

      No, you just talk and watch at the same time...these new cars practically drive themselves for you anyway.

    2. Re:Now if I could figure out..... by jhkoh · · Score: 2, Informative
    3. Re:Now if I could figure out..... by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      Well, I've got some good news for you, Wal*Mart now sells cheap inverters, so it's entirely possible for you to hook up your Tivo. Considering that yesterday I saw an amateur radio operator with about 3 rigs and 9 antennas on his car, I don't think you should have too many problems fitting an LCD screen and a PVR in your car.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    4. Re:Now if I could figure out..... by RoundSparrow · · Score: 1

      Actually... it can be more complicated. Even though DirecTIVO gets the channel listings from the bird, the phone line is still used for Tivo software updates.

      It is best to have a phone line at least for the first updates... after that I think you get a nag screen after 30 days, but not too bad.

    5. Re:Now if I could figure out..... by adamjaskie · · Score: 1

      Just put a phone jack in your garage, and keep a 25 foot phone cord in your trunk. Once a week or so, plug the phone line in and let it update itself.

      --
      /usr/games/fortune
    6. Re:Now if I could figure out..... by RadioActiveLamb · · Score: 1

      Outfit your Tivo with the AirNET card. Your Tivo will get the updates when the vehicle is parked in your garage via wifi.

      --
      Tag line, copyright 2004 RadioActiveLamb
    7. Re:Now if I could figure out..... by Illbay · · Score: 1
      What would be funny is if you were too busy watching your TiVo and commenting about the show to a friend on your cell-phone to notice certain important facts about your driving.

      And the cops would have to beep in on call-waiting to inform you that you'd had an accident.

      --
      Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
  2. All we need now... by DarkHand · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...are toilets in our cars and we never have to leave!

    1. Re:All we need now... by markxsd · · Score: 1

      toilets in our cars Will you get a hands free set for that??

    2. Re:All we need now... by Jade_Siren · · Score: 1

      Have you ever ridden those commercial buses? even the cleanest ones have a nasty smelling bathroom. can you imagine what your car would smell like. I know I'd never want to be in it.

    3. Re:All we need now... by Darksoul+TSO · · Score: 1
  3. heh dvd? by rwven · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Kinda reminds me of those DVD players that pop out of the head unit. My friend wants to get one of those so he can watch movies while driving. Kinda scares me to say the least. I think this is somewhat overdoing it. Cars are transportation, not audio/visual entertainment. As if there arent enough distractions already...

    1. Re:heh dvd? by NightSpots · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Cars are transportation, not audio/visual entertainment. As if there arent enough distractions already.

      There's no reason it can't be entertainment for the passengers. It just takes people being personally responsible for once in their lives.

      Anyone with kids knows that travelling is much, much easier if you give them something to do on long trips. DVDs in the headrests so the kids can watch/play from the back seat are a GOOD THING.

      Realistically, these shouldn't be much of a problem. The people who drive while watching will eventually hit something, and hopefully what they hit won't be a person. After that they'll either learn very quickly not to do it again, or go broke repairing everything they keep hitting. Eventually they will either learn not to do it, or they won't be able to afford a satellite dish.

    2. Re:heh dvd? by bpowell423 · · Score: 2, Informative

      hmmm... I think that in most states, it's illegal to have a TV mounted where the driver can see it. There's a reason TVs/DVDs (and now satellite, apparently) are showing up in vehicles... kids. It's a life saver on long trips. Of course, I realize the union of the sets "/.'ers" and "have kids" is rather small...

    3. Re:heh dvd? by Acidic_Diarrhea · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Excuse me but when I've got my kids confined in the car for long periods of time, I'd rather we discuss current events, history, science, and literature than have them zonked out in front of a passive entertainment device. Long car trips is a great time to talk to your kids - they can't get away. Try it out.

      --
      I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
    4. Re:heh dvd? by ozbon · · Score: 1

      or they'll be in jail for killing someone while driving. (Is there still the charge of vehicular homicide?)

      or they'll be dead themselves.

      --
      I say we take off and nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure...
    5. Re:heh dvd? by swestcott · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think most kids get enough TV how about talking to your kids or better yet on long trips I get a good audio book booth kids and parents can enjoy The Harry Potter books are excellent and we have enjoyed them many times we are currently listening to the Series of Unfortunate Events very funny for kids and adults.

    6. Re:heh dvd? by djupedal · · Score: 1

      I have an LCD and I enjoy TV, DVD, computer, game system and rear bumper cam in my pickup. I can also playback video from my Sony DV cam. There are tons of uses for it. Try it, you'll like it.

    7. Re:heh dvd? by CableModemSniper · · Score: 1

      You mean the intersection of the sets "/.ers" and "have kids" right? I'd imagine the union to be pretty big.

      --
      Why not fork?
    8. Re:heh dvd? by corbettw · · Score: 1

      The only problem with audio books is, you can't learn basic punctuation if you're just listening to someone read a story.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    9. Re:heh dvd? by racermd · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to harp on the same issue as everyone else, I'm going to pick a new one:

      This is a great solution for people that already have a DirecTV account and want digital satellite radio for their car but don't want to pay for the new service (they tend to lose money on the equipment just to make it back in spades on your monthly payment). The digital music channels from DTV are decent, although you don't have the talk-radio stations that XM and Sirrius offer.

      Speaking as a person that takes long road trips bi-annually, this is also an advantage, as it's possible to receive "real" TV programming while out in the middle of nowhere (as opposed to fuzzy, OTA local broadcasts that you'll get only when in range).

      Of course, there's a few drawbacks. Clearly this won't work unless there's line-of-sight to the actual satellite. And you won't be able to order PPVs. (remember that a dedicated phone line connection is required for the unit to phone home with. Hrm: maybe OnStar can offer this?)

      There is clearly some demand for this product, else it wouldn't have been developed. However, the price is higher than most would be willing to pay, and it's still a fairly large unit to install, so SUVs and RVs are the only real candidates at present. The two problems seem to cancel each other out though: People with SUVs and RVs tend to have a little extra disposable income.

      I wouldn't mind this on my vehicle for those long road trips, but it doesn't make sense as I only do this every other year. I'll wait until it's smaller and cheaper before I get one.

      --
      My sources are unreliable, but their information is fascinating. -- Ashleigh Brilliant
    10. Re:heh dvd? by arivanov · · Score: 1

      Frankly, I would be embarassed if I my kids grow up to be cretinous offspring that cannot read a book and will destroy the vehicle if it does not get its MTV fix for 5 minutes. You should first think are you doing things right as a parent before going and buying things like this.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    11. Re:heh dvd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'd rather we discuss current events, history, science, and literature than have them zonked out in front of a passive entertainment device.

      If that's possible it's great, but if you have kids you'd know it doesn't always work that way. Try to talk to a three year old about literature for eight hours.

    12. Re:heh dvd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about kids that are too young to read or listen to books, but aren't going to be sleeping through the trip.

      My two year old watching Baby Einstein DVDs and the latest NickJr shows learns more words and phrases through the repetition, than staring off into space.

    13. Re:heh dvd? by Acidic_Diarrhea · · Score: 1, Insightful
      First of all, you should not be taking a 3 year old on an eight hour car drive. They are not built for that much sitting at a time. You should plan your trips with plenty of stops where they can get out and have fun. I'm not talking about stopping at a rest area and letting them walk around for ten minutes. I'm talking about finding attractions and museums along the way where they can spend an hour or two out of the car. Yes, if you've got a long distance to travel - this trip will take a much greater amount of time but that's a sacrifice you should make for your kids - or take a plane. And obviously when talking to your children, you cater the topic of conversation to the age of the child. Honestly, this is so typical of Slashdot. Make a good point that, when used with common sense, is a perfectly suitable system and then you get some Slashbot replying with an example where it doesn't work. Yes, there are times where things don't work! Nothing is absolute so you should work within the framework and bend it when needed.

      And who is so stupid that they can't figure out that discussing Nietzsche with a 3 year old is not something I was suggesting in my original post? Oh, it's that AC.

      --
      I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
    14. Re:heh dvd? by pabloa · · Score: 1

      OMG!!! Talk to your kids?? Instead of putting on a video/DVD?? You should be arrested for failure to turn the mind of of a minor to mush!

      Seriously though, I have taken many road trips with my now 3 kids. The conversations and fun that transpired during those trips was priceless.

      Talk to your kids, listen to audiobooks, play car counting games, Be a family!!

      --
      Peace,Love and Magic
    15. Re:heh dvd? by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      "First of all, you should not be taking a 3 year old on an eight hour car drive. They are not built for that much sitting at a time."

      As a toddler in the late 1970s and small child in the early 1980s, I dealt with 8-9 hour flights to Europe quite often and didn't make a fuss. Why? Because my mom talked to me and threw me a coloring book now and then. That, and I was taught from an early age to not be a whiny brat. If 3 year olds can't handle a long trip, then the parents are doing something wrong.

    16. Re:heh dvd? by ReTay · · Score: 1

      "Cars are transportation, not audio/visual entertainment. "

      Let me guess....You don't have kids?
      As someone who has kids and has to do lots of driving it is much easyier on him (and me) if he can zone out with some cartoons or the discovery channel. I will aggree that anyone who watches TV and drives should loose their license. But I would apply that to computing and driving as well.

    17. Re:heh dvd? by Teknon · · Score: 0

      These are all good ideas. I have another one. How about borrowing a book from yor local public library and having someone other than the driver read it out loud. Granted, this is a little difficult in a one parnet environment, but works great with two.

    18. Re:heh dvd? by hummassa · · Score: 1

      which will serve them right.

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    19. Re:heh dvd? by Acidic_Diarrhea · · Score: 1
      You misunderstood my statement.

      A 3 year old may remain perfectly well-behaved for long periods of time. That is not an unreasonable expectation. But if you were to consult some notable books on child psychology (which you obviously have not) you would realize that I was not talking about a child's ability to behave on long trips but rather the psychological and developmental impacts of long trips on a very young child. Go do some research and stop trying to brag about something you did over 20 years ago.

      --
      I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
    20. Re:heh dvd? by bpowell423 · · Score: 1
      You mean the intersection of the sets "/.ers" and "have kids" right? I'd imagine the union to be pretty big.
      yeah, that's what I meant.
    21. Re:heh dvd? by bpowell423 · · Score: 1
      Excuse me but when I've got my kids confined in the car for long periods of time, I'd rather we discuss current events, history, science, and literature than have them zonked out in front of a passive entertainment device. Long car trips is a great time to talk to your kids - they can't get away. Try it out.

      We're talking about a 3-year old here, so discussing current events, etc isn't going to get you very far. We don't let him watch much TV anyway, so watching a little Winnie-the-Pooh on the way to grandma's house is a nice treat.
    22. Re:heh dvd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      As has already been posted to another fucking moron, "there are times where things don't work! Nothing is absolute so you should work within the framework and bend it when needed. And who is so stupid that they can't figure out that discussing Nietzsche with a 3 year old is not something I was suggesting in my original post?"

      I'm so tired of you idiots on Slashdot coming out of the woodwork and nit picking because you're too stupid to realize how to apply what I tell you. Fuck you idiots. You just landed on my foes list jackass.

    23. Re:heh dvd? by micromoog · · Score: 1
      I think this is somewhat overdoing it.

      Understatement . . . how about "criminal neglect"?

    24. Re:heh dvd? by h0mer · · Score: 1

      I used to work at a car stereo shop and you are correct. For any screens that were mounted in the front of the car (except for LCDs for a rear-view camera) we were required to wire it so no picture was displayed if the ignition was in the "on" position.

      However, it's a fairly simple process to defeat that and watch DVDs while you drive. Please don't do that.

      I can think of a few movies that I'd like to listen to without visuals though..

      --


      I'm on top of my game like I'm standin' on Xbox.
    25. Re:heh dvd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, now you're being an ass to people whe agree with you. I think you've had too much coffee today.

    26. Re:heh dvd? by wwest4 · · Score: 1

      that's interesting - i wonder if such laws are restricted to television sets - how about a dash pc?

    27. Re:heh dvd? by Spirilis · · Score: 1

      This seems to be a new trend in car enthusiasts... lots of people at maxima.org have done it. I have no idea why people put out cash to buy such junk.

      Hell, if you want true suspense and entertainment, just deck out your suspension and go autocrossing on some deserted backcountry roads... you might even get to see the cops, or kill somebody! Talk on the cellphone at the same time for maximum effect.

      Or not. Do not drive dangerously on public roads, go to a racetrack or autocross event instead :)

      --
      the real at&t mix
    28. Re:heh dvd? by BBPing · · Score: 0

      That is what Slashdot is for.

    29. Re:heh dvd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Frankly, I would be embarassed if I my kids grow up to be cretinous offspring that cannot read a book and will destroy the vehicle if it does not get its MTV fix for 5 minutes. You should first think are you doing things right as a parent before going and buying things like this.


      Ummm... For many kids, car ride + reading = projectile vomiting. My kid reads everything he can get his hands on, but I do not encourage him to read in the car.

      I don't see a need for entertainment for "regular" car trips, but try to go more than a couple of hours, and yes, TV/video/valium is very helpful.

    30. Re:heh dvd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is an audio book any better than a DVD? And those Harry Potter books are CRAP!.

    31. Re:heh dvd? by adamjaskie · · Score: 1

      What about a book or music? Cheaper, and less distracting to the driver. Of course, you could always just mount the screen so it is visible only to back seat passengers.

      --
      /usr/games/fortune
    32. Re:heh dvd? by rwven · · Score: 1

      remind me to never drive with you...

    33. Re:heh dvd? by Syrrh · · Score: 1

      Great! Instantly convert Disney flicks into educational films about personal responsibility. Instead of having to squirm through the part where Nemo's mom is killed, they can watch their REAL mother being grilled by police officers!

    34. Re:heh dvd? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      "Arewethereyet arewethereyet arewethereyet arweth..."
      "Shut up, or we'll talk about the situation in Iraq again."

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    35. Re:heh dvd? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I hated my parents' music, and they weren't a big fan of mine, when I took long road trips with them. I read better without the distraction, anyway.

      I was very fortunate to not be one of the people who gets car sick reading. I'd have gone loony.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    36. Re:heh dvd? by shepd · · Score: 1

      >What about a book or music?

      Reading books while being driven about causes motion sickness.

      Listening to Raffi all day causes homicidal rage. :-)

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    37. Re:heh dvd? by ReTay · · Score: 1

      Accually mine just uses his laptop. And I just run a lighter adapter cord to his seat in the back. He seems to enjoy watching his cartoons on that. But unless your /child/process/ has a laptop I can't see buying one JUST for in car entertainment. but a flip down screen like many auto makers have as an option would work fine.

    38. Re:heh dvd? by phreaqhopp · · Score: 0

      I have to say one thing. We never had these problems with drivers in the seventies using CB radios. Maybe it is the type of people using communication equipment while driving that is the problem ie. SOCCER MOMS

    39. Re:heh dvd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      i was doing it to save karma you moron.

      duh

      fucktard.

    40. Re:heh dvd? by Illbay · · Score: 1
      In Frederick Pohl's 1970s SF novel "Man Plus," he speculates that by the 1990s (when the events in the story take place) you climb into your car, drive it out onto the main road then set the autopilot while the car zips you along at 80 mph using the "smart road" system, and you drink coffee and watch "The Today Show."

      (Preposterous of course. If he'd REALLY been on target with his predictions, it would've been "Fox and Friends.")

      --
      Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
    41. Re:heh dvd? by rwven · · Score: 1

      lol...i wonder if that will EVER happen. i'm not sure a lot of people are ready to surrender control of their vehicles to a computer...

    42. Re:heh dvd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't from a film either...

    43. Re:heh dvd? by Illbay · · Score: 1
      'Course that wasn't the only thing being surrendered in the novel "Man Plus."

      The main character, in order to be able to land on Mars and live there without an artificial environment, was surgically and genetically modified. The procedure also required him to lose all of his reproductive equippage.

      Talk about "giving your all" for science...

      --
      Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
  4. This is great... by BradNelson · · Score: 1

    We're finally succeeding in breaking ourselves away from this mind-numbing machine.

    1. Re:This is great... by Adm1n · · Score: 0, Troll

      It's bad enough American parents can't raise children without using the TV as a babysitter now they ensure the successful brainwashing during road trips. (Your right I'm not a parent and I think there should be a number of tests involved like can you afford to send them to university? Will you have the time required to teach and train them a good moral fabric? Will you read to them every night?..yes I think testing should be involved prior to having children, but than again where would the lower classes come from overseas?)
      I don't watch TV (of any kind) and neither should you, if your children cannot read then fine install a DVD and at least CONTROL the content that makes it into those precious impressionable cerebellums. Instead of having them surf the satellite waves for more capitalist indoctrination via network syndication and marketing plans?
      Then again, it's a car, what ever happened to 100 bottles of beer? The horse game? and other fun road trip pastimes that foster communication and no wait this is the information age, why not just get an uplink and jack-in?
      Next up, the en-suv Microwave with Built in convection oven for the "I'm going to my friends party and want to roast the whole pig on the way", followed by "Tired of having to visit the plastic surgeon between casting interviews"..."Now you to can have a facelift while you drive with the "INSTA-Mexican-Doctor in the glove compartment", uses GPS to navigate the features of your face, and will also peel any fruit for you while you drive....I can see it now, soon the highways will be yet another even grosser form of mass consumption than the home...wait no ...scratch that already are. SUV's are already the most dangerous thing on the road, they have already killed more Americans and Canadians than any gun, that's right point it at your head and "Feel good" in your new "I'm bigger than You" vehicle. You can now kill numerous pedestrians, animals, family members and other such things while driveing drunk and walk away, that is if it doesent flip first. linkey

    2. Re:This is great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jeezus... seig heil, there, fella. Are we feeling a little elitist today?

  5. We do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is called a mayonaise jar. Just a little tricky to get the chicks to use it, but that should not be a problem here.

    1. Re:We do by ePhil_One · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall a car mod that basically allowed one of the rear seats to flip up and exposed a toilet seat over a "access panel". Now, I'm pretty sure you'd want to be stopped when you use the device (There's a lot of wind turbulence under you car at speed, if you get my drift) but its a start.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
  6. Is that a new type of phone? by v3rb · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Is that like an animation cel? Since cel came from cellulous I am assuming this new phone is made from plant matter and recyclable. So while these people are polluting the environment with their monsterous SUVs at least they are being environmentally conscious with their phone choice.

    1. Re:Is that a new type of phone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tool

  7. In case of Slashdotting.... by Lord+of+haha · · Score: 0

    Sandy Montag doesn't worry now when he takes his young children on a long drive in his SUV. He has a new toy that most parents will understand -- an in-car digital satellite television system.

    With hundreds of channels of entertainment, from the Disney Channel to HBO, to keep them occupied, they're silent. "It's like you don't even have them. You can baby-sit and drive at the same time,'' Montag said.

    Montag, a New York sports agent, was one of the first customers to get his hands on the TracVision A5, a product designed to bring the clear, digital satellite TV signals into passenger vehicles anywhere in the country, even while they are in motion.

    Mobile satellite TV technology has been around for years, but it has been useful only on boats, buses and RVs with enough space to mount a big, bulky satellite dish.

    Now, TracVision-maker KVH Industries Inc. of Middletown, R.I., has built a low-profile, saucer-shaped antenna designed to mount unobtrusively to the roof rack of a regular van, sport utility vehicle or car.

    The TracVision A5 system, which began shipping in September, will probably appeal for now to the limited audience of tech enthusiasts with the money and interest to buy the latest trendy gadgets. The company makes it clear that the system works best on the open road where there are few obstructions, and not in a major city where buildings can block the satellite signal.

    The system, including a rooftop antenna, floor-mounted receiver and remote control, is priced at $3,500. In-car video screens, which can cost $300 to $2,500, and the monthly satellite service fee, are extra.

    TracVision supports DirecTV, whose subscriptions range from $34 to $88 per month, depending on the level of service. Add an additional $200 to $400 for professional installation costs, which vary depending upon the complexity of the installation and the hourly labor rate.

    For now, KVH is hoping to catch the eye of a growing number of people who are already spending $1,000 or more to outfit their new family vans and SUVs with surround-sound speakers, DVD players, LCD monitors mounted to the roof or inside seat headrests, and wireless headphones.

    KVH hopes to sell 12,000 units during the first year. Much further down the road, KVH has set its sights on a broader audience of consumers and hopes to lower the retail price to around $200, said James LeBelle, KVH national sales manager.

    "Our goal is the soccer mom,'' LeBelle said during a recent trip to San Francisco to demonstrate the TracVision A5 system in a specially outfitted Lincoln Navigator luxury SUV.

    That would reach the growing market of motorists who have gone from drive- in theaters to driving theaters.

    The Consumer Electronics Association, the Washington trade group that represents about 1,200 companies involved in the consumer electronics industry,

    projects sales of in-car mobile video entertainment and navigation units sold in the United States by the end of 2003 will reach 386,000 units and generate about $542 million in revenue. That's an increase from 316,000 units and $452 million last year.

    DVD players go into dashes

    The rapid rise of the DVD player, the fastest-selling home consumer electronics device in history, is also fueling the in-car entertainment craze, with the trade group projecting sales of 176,000 in-dash DVD players by the end of 2003, compared with 120,000 last year. The group also estimates about 159,000 flip-down screens will be installed this year.

    Operating on the assumption that motorists will be looking for more than just prerecorded DVD movies to display on those video screens, KVH designed the TracVision A5 to plug into existing car video systems.

    The publicly traded KVH, founded in 1978, sells mobile satellite communications equipment to the RV and marine markets as well as the military. The company made its first mobile TracVision antenna in 1995.

    One of the company's most high-profile customers is one of Montag's

  8. DVD Movie Murder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Twenty-eight-year-old Erwin "Jamie" Petterson Jr. was arraigned in Kenai Superior Court on four charges of second-degree murder in the killing of an Anchorage couple. Troopers say he was watching a movie on a DVD player installed in his dashboard when the crash occurred. (http://www.msnbc.com/local/ktuu/M295450.asp)

    Guy was supposed to go to trail last August but I haven't seen anything about him in the news for months.

    http://www.accidentsjusthappen.com

    1. Re:DVD Movie Murder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know which is scarier: That some idiot is watching a DVD while driving or that some district attorney is so bad at math he charges a man 4 times for the murder of a couple.

    2. Re:DVD Movie Murder by Illbay · · Score: 1
      Guy was supposed to go to trail last August...

      Wow. By that comment I presume you mean the "death penalty" in Alaska consists of them giving you a half-day or so head start, and then they track you down with sharpshooters, like the film "The Naked Runner."

      Yikes!

      --
      Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
  9. Wierd Al had this years ago.... by BillBrasky · · Score: 1

    "I got a satellite dish on the trunk of my car, so I can watch MTV while I drive"

  10. Solves #1 problem by q-the-impaler · · Score: 0

    Gatorade bottle; has a wide mouth. Diapers solve both problems, but that Depends on if you are man/woman enough to wear them.

    --
    Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
  11. Hey, that was easy! by varjag · · Score: 0, Funny

    How 'bout a cable TV in my car? And while we are at it, I want pizza delivery in there too.

    --
    Lisp is the Tengwar of programming languages.
  12. Another application... by dubdays · · Score: 1

    When are they going to come out with this for the Segway?

    1. Re:Another application... by pvt_medic · · Score: 1

      this isnt much different than the segway, i would hardly consider this a revolutionary device, just like the segway using existing technology in a new way.

      --
      30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
      Score:5, Troll
  13. ROAD TRIP! by wud · · Score: 1

    I WANT ONE!!!

    I'm in a band, and occasionally we drive a few thousand miles to play a show, switching drivers every few hours. This would be perfect for us, break up the routine of listening to the same george carlin cd over and over again. Ever been cramped in a car with 4 guys and a full set of equipment? Anything that helps us ignore each other is good.

    --
    wud
    1. Re:ROAD TRIP! by beady · · Score: 5, Funny

      Will be pretty sweet when you can hack this, and send signals of your band performing live to the big media mogul who just happens to be travelling through town... of course you may need to bounce it off a few satellites on the way... it all seems too easy!

    2. Re:ROAD TRIP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that you MrBiGGGGGGGGGG?

  14. Safety by Grey_14 · · Score: 0

    Well, I would hope they would either be mounted behind the drivers seat, (like in minivans) or not be able to be active while driving, was there not a system like this a few years ago? It couldnt be activated while the car was in 'drive', or was that for a phone?

  15. Maybe pointless by bananaape · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    When I was a kid, and we went on family vacations, it turned out there was a lot to see outside of the car.

    1. Re:Maybe pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing outside the car except Outside, which is evil, and should be avoided at all cost, and cars with funny bumper stickers. But how many times can you see the Japanese car with the bumper sticker that says, "BUY AMERICAN" before you get tired of that?

    2. Re:Maybe pointless by dr_db · · Score: 1

      Obviously you never travelled through Manitoba/Saskatchewan...

    3. Re:Maybe pointless by silverbax · · Score: 1

      You must have gone on completely different road trips than I did...and twenty billion stand up comics...

      Let's see, what would I rather see on a long boring road trip through Arkansas or Oklahoma, a DVD of Finding Nemo or...trees? Yeah, we don't have trees where I live...nice to stare at it for 16 hours...

      When I was a kid I dreamed of a TV in the car on long road trips...

    4. Re:Maybe pointless by Teknon · · Score: 0

      or Nevada

      Acctually though, I would agree that most of the time there is some interesting stuff outside the car. It is nice, however, to have someting inside the car to occupy yourself when there isn't

    5. Re:Maybe pointless by satterth · · Score: 1

      yeah, take your eyes off the road for even a second, and your either in a pothole that some people could mistake for a crater or you up the ass end of some tractor pulling something way too large to even fit on the road.

      --
      Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
  16. With hundreds of channels of entertainment, from the Disney Channel to HBO, to keep them occupied, they're silent. "It's like you don't even have them. You can baby-sit and drive at the same time,'' Montag said.

    This is nothing. I'm waiting for the garage-to-living-room solution, so I need never worry that my kids' eyes aren't safely glued to a screen.

    Waitaminnut, I don't have kids.

    Then again, if I did have kids, I could get this system and it'd be like I didn't even have them. Hmm.

    Please excuse me--I need to go talk to my wife about kicking out a tax cut or two...

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    1. Re:Oy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You head out there and find out you already have some....

      Doh!

  17. Is portable satelite Internet far behind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe that's what they mean by high-speed Internet. Now I can slashdot at 70!

  18. I wonder... by SharpFang · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...how well do those work under viaducts, in tunnels, in cities behind big buildings, in high mountains, in forests and mostly everywhere where large part of the sky is obscured.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:I wonder... by hookedup · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was just wondering the same thing in relation to XM Radio, to which i found this:

      XM-Radio is a Satellite Based Radio Broadcast System that operates around 2.3 GHz from two 15,000 watt satellites; one named "ROCK," at 115 Degrees West, the other named "ROLL" at 85.0 Degrees West. The significance of this service and that of Sirius Radio, a similar service, is that these services need to "fill in" the shadows caused by buildings and other structures that may block the satellite signal. To accomplish this, XM-Radio alone will set up about 1,500 high-power terrestrial repeaters. Each market will typically have dual repeaters at 2337.485 MHz and 2340.015 MHz. A hefty buffer is an integral part of each receiver, and is very practical when going through tunnels.

      Using a buffer of sorts for the signal would definitely deal with this issue. As for XM using 1,500 repeaters, i'm not really sure if this would be done for TV signals also.

    2. Re:I wonder... by billyt007 · · Score: 1

      The company makes it clear that the system works best on the open road where there are few obstructions, and not in a major city where buildings can block the satellite signal.

      --
      Open Source, Open Standards, Open Minds
    3. Re:I wonder... by sporty · · Score: 1

      Hah! Easy problem. Easy solution. Use something like tivo and buffer tv by say, the amount of time you expect to be out of line-of-sight.

      And most everywhere isn't obscured... just those who live in cities. On the open road, you mostly have clear skies.

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    4. Re:I wonder... by KORfan · · Score: 1

      Well. the article said,

      "The satellite signal remains strong as long as the antenna is within the line of sight of the orbiting satellites, which are in the southern part of the sky. As with any satellite signal, tall buildings, mountains, trees or even luggage on the roof rack can block that signal and disrupt the video."

      It went on describe an occurrence or two.

    5. Re:I wonder... by bluesnowmonkey · · Score: 1

      ...how well do those work under viaducts, in tunnels, in cities behind big buildings, in high mountains, in forests and mostly everywhere where large part of the sky is obscured.

      It probably doesn't work well at all where there's no line-of-sight to the satellite. (Why would that include the tops of mountains?) Luckily, that's only about 0.004% of the landscape.*

      (*) My estimate.

    6. Re:I wonder... by GizmoToy · · Score: 1

      Sure, that'd help you for the time you're out of sight of the satellites, but what happens when the buffer catches up... Yup, that's right, the buffer has no signal for the length of time you had no signal.

      Simply moving the gap to a different time is not a solution...

    7. Re:I wonder... by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Not tops, but valleys between them. Most roads in highland area run through valleys (signal obscured in >>50% cases, depending on valley orientation) or mountain slopes (signal obscured in less than 50%, when it's the N, NE, NW side of the mountain) don't they? And that usually includes longer periods of time (needed to drive from behind a mountain, rather large objects, they are) so you'd need really huge buffer and a deep lag after realtime program to have transmission there uninterrupted.

      In cities, you'd think you drive past a skyscrapper, and no problem, buffer helps. You forget about such "obstacles" as traffic lights, traffic jams and such though, that can hold you longer than your buffer could stand it.

      There are large chunks of country covered with forests too, so that's not 5s break if you drive through some either. Luckily for you, there's fewer and fewer of those.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    8. Re:I wonder... by sporty · · Score: 1

      Um.. yes it is. Unless you usually drive underground all the time. Most of the time, one who drives outside of large metropolitan cities have line of sight. Once you are in line of sight, it'll re-buffer.

      Or don't you see that.

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    9. Re:I wonder... by Holi · · Score: 1

      Rebuffer with what. TV is not TCP/IP type Connection, it's more like a UDP type connection, your not gonna get the information you missed when you lost the signal, so that time you lost is going to be saved in the tivo as a black screen.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    10. Re:I wonder... by sporty · · Score: 1

      Duh. Point is to at least have tv at all, not necessarily keep a continuous stream.

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    11. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Backpedaling with a dash of salt won't get you out of this one, mister. Clearly you were originally thinking that the TV show would magically not skip by using a buffer: "buffer tv by say, the amount of time you expect to be out of line-of-sight." This is in direct contradiction to your most recent post, "Duh. Point is to at least have tv at all, not necessarily keep a continuous stream."

      Summary of this thread:

      • You came up with a bad idea.
      • It took two different people explaining your fallacy in two different ways before you got it.
      • You attempted to reverse your position, adding "Duh" to make it seem like you're the intellectual giant among men.
      Just admit you're wrong, and learn from your mistakes. Keep up the current course, though, and your foot's on a heartbreaking train to mouth-town.
    12. Re:I wonder... by the+uNF+cola · · Score: 1

      whoa. meta trolling. dude. he was right to begin with.

      --

      --
      "I'm not bright. Big words confuse me. But Wanda loves me and that should be enough for you." - Cosmo

    13. Re:I wonder... by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Way to change your argument when somebody else proves that you're wrong.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  19. MNF Show Prep for Madden by Bonewalker · · Score: 1
    One of the company's most high-profile customers is one of Montag's clients, John Madden, the famed former Oakland Raiders coach and TV football analyst who travels to assignments on a private bus dubbed the Madden Cruiser.

    I can just see John driving to the next Monday Night Football (Somebody's gotta feel this!) spot in his Madden Cruiser, loading up Madden 2004 on his PS2 and the three plasma's he's got in there. He loads up the two teams, has his lackey's play a simulation game, while he works on remembering his lines from the game, so he can get them just right on MNF. That's why Al Michaels sucks...he doesn't have his own built-in show prep. He has to go improv.

  20. If you can do it in airplanes... by SamDrake · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...then I guess you can do it in an SUV. I'm always amazed by the system that JetBlue uses, which must be similar to this one - JetBlue has DirecTV onboard, and their antenna system tracks the satellite during most manoeuvers. Only when the plane goes into a really steep bank during final approach will the sat go out for a few seconds.

    1. Re:If you can do it in airplanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only when the plane goes into a really steep bank during final approach will the sat go out for a few seconds.

      if the plane goes into a steep bank, then i think you've got bigger problems than just your sat going out....

    2. Re:If you can do it in airplanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How often do planes fly under tunnels and through rows of tall buildings?

    3. Re:If you can do it in airplanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly once.

      After it does that, you need another plane.

    4. Re:If you can do it in airplanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you can do it in airplanes, then I guess you can do it in an SUV.

      Umm, what's "it"?

  21. Finally!, No more moments away ... by burgburgburg · · Score: 1

    from the beloved T.V.. No more depriving my children of the advertising messages and targetted programming. No more time away from that soothing glow. As we're driven through this great country of ours, we don't EVER have to look at anything but the beautiful, wonderful T.V.. Look, I'm drooling. I'm going to sell a kidney to ensure having enough money for this.

  22. If you think that's bad. by MongooseCN · · Score: 1, Funny

    Try watching someone ride a bike while talking on a cell phone. Sounds dumb, but I used to see it in Boston all the time when I rode my bike to work. One guy was slowly wobbling down the street while talking on a cell phone. He continued to wobble down the street and through a red light and was greeted with an ensemble of blaring car horns. Luckily the cars braked fast enough before creaming him. Something needs to be done about banning cell phones while driving (or biking). A huge insurance increase on your car if you're caught driving with a cell phone would be nice.

    1. Re:If you think that's bad. by ObiWanKenblowme · · Score: 1

      Wonderful, just what we need - more reasons for insurance payments to go up. How about instead we leave the insurance the way it is and drastically increase the fines/punishments when someone plows through an intersection, regardless of whether they were on the phone, putting on makeup, eating, reading, watching tv, daydreaming, etc.?

      It's easier (at least it seems to be around here) to talk your way out of a ticket for actually getting into an accident than it is for speeding. Shouldn't that be the other way around?

      --
      Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.
    2. Re:If you think that's bad. by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 1
      One guy was slowly wobbling down the street while talking on a cell phone. He continued to wobble down the street and through a red light...

      I think there's a point where we need to stop making rules and just let natural selection take over.

    3. Re:If you think that's bad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Natural selection would rock, if it weren't for modern medicine saving people when natural selection tries oh-so hard to kill them off.

    4. Re:If you think that's bad. by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      How bright could this fellow have been if he didn't pull off the road to finish his conversation? I've had quite a few near-hits of stupid bicyclists in my town. Stupid bicycle behavior seems to be on the rise. I routinely see adults run red lights, riding on the opposite side of the road (10mph bike + 35mph car = more carnage), and whip across two lanes of traffic without so much as a warning. I've almost flattened children who decided to cut in front of my car on a blind intersection (crossing my path in the perpendicular while I had a green light) while riding on the sidewalks. Kids also like to do a loop in front of oncoming traffic.

      I can only guess at the thinking behind this. Stupidity? A Jackass-inspired sport? The funny part is that they were all wearing those cheap plastic helmets. That's like playing Russian roulette, but wearing kneepads for protection. It just goes to show that you can't fight stupidity. Motorcycle helmet laws didn't make drivers any smarter, bicycle helmets won't make riders any smarter. I have little hope for mobile phone bans unless the penalties have real financial consequences.

      I do like your insurance idea. An insurance penalty is more costly and leaves less responsibility on traffic courts. It makes a lot of sense, because all of us pay higher rates as a result of these morons doing millions of dollars worth of property damage and bodily injury. I'd also like to see insurance companies classify drivers, and perhaps give drivers re-tests to qualify drivers for additional discounts. Insurance companies already adjust premiums for other higher risk categories, such as smokers, so people who drive around with their mobile phones on should represent a higher risk as well.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    5. Re:If you think that's bad. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      So you're relying on the insurance company to not rob you silly every month?

      You're insane. I can't imagine a more corrupt organization that I'm legally required to do business with than car insurers. They're ALL crooks.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    6. Re:If you think that's bad. by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      Really? I've had the same insurer for 14 years, my premiums are low, and they haven't tried to scam me yet. I'm quite thankful that someone else's insurance company pays me for their policyholder's stupidity, the other option being that I pay out of my own pocket.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    7. Re:If you think that's bad. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      If your premiums are so low, you must not have made a claim in the last 14 years.

      I base my contention on the fact that many insurers pay out 20-40% of their gross as settlements. That's a lot of overhead. (or profit.)

      I think that if we're required by law to do business with a (car) insurance agency, that agency should not be permitted to seek a profit. After all...we like free markets, don't we?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    8. Re:If you think that's bad. by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      Eh, well, there are regulations that specifically deal with what insurance companies do with their policy money. They must have a certain amount available for the payment of claims. What does that have to do with what you said? I have no idea, I'm rambling again.

      And you are indeed correct, I haven't made a claim in 14 years. However, other people have hit my car, and I'm glad they had insurance.

      I could fill hours of video tape with dangerous driver footage. Some of these idiots are just plain lucky, and one of these days, they're going to do property damage (or kill someone), they'll get their policy dropped, and we'll end up paying part of the bill. (Like the SUV idiot I saw earlier this year that plowed over a crosswalk "halt for pedestrian" sign in a school zone; Ten seconds later and she would have killed two kids. She didn't even stop to investigate the scraping sound of the sign wedged under her vehicle.)

      I don't know if I would call a profit cap "free market". And as unsavory as compulsory insurance coverage may be, it keeps the good drivers from being financially screwed by idiot drivers. I don't think insurance companies ever sit on enough money to pay all claims, so a non-profit may not be in the best financial position during, say, a bad winter with an unusual amount of collisions.

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    9. Re:If you think that's bad. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      And those regulations were lobbied for by...guess who? The insurance industry.

      There are all kinds of stupid drivers out there. Me, I think we should make it way harder to be a driver.

      A profit cap is not a free market, it is a control on a corporation that is profiteering in a non-free market.

      I don't begrudge you the right to purchase insurance if you want it. I begrudge the insurance companies their legal entitlement to my dollars.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    10. Re:If you think that's bad. by ThisIsFred · · Score: 1

      Me, I think we should make it way harder to be a driver.

      I am in total agreement with you there, and that's what my sentiment boils down to.

      Thanks for your replies. :o)

      --
      Fred

      "A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
      -RMS
    11. Re:If you think that's bad. by Moofie · · Score: 1

      NP. Always happy to have a polite discussion. But then I come to /. Guess I'm a glutton for punishment. : )

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  23. big deal? by The+Other+White+Boy · · Score: 1

    so the big deal of this is the fact that the satellite can maintain a signal while the car is moving? isn't this exactly what my Sirius satellite radio has been doing for a while now? or any of the bojillions of XM radios that come in Chevys now?

    1. Re:big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so the big deal of this is the fact that the satellite can maintain a signal while the car is moving? isn't this exactly what my Sirius satellite radio has been doing for a while now? or any of the bojillions of XM radios that come in Chevys now?

      Actually yes when you compare the two systems (satellite radio vs satellite TV) It's easier to hone on a terrestrial signal or one of several satellites doing figure eights in the sky versus tracking one (or three for you HDTV fans) in geosynchronous orbit over Mexico while moving around on the streets.

      XM and Sirius were designed with mobility in mind (Hey, we've always taken our music around with us). Sirius uses three satellites doing the figure eight trick to cover all the US while XM uses a combination of satellites and ground repeaters to ensure their signal is received everywhere (This is why XM has two antenna jacks on their boxes versus Sirius' one jack). DirectTV's and Dish Networks' were designed to use stationary satellite dishes pointed in one direction and tilt at all times. This is especially true with HDTV where the dish has to track three satellites (101, 111 and 113 I believe. 101 is standard DTV while 111 and 113 are the HDTV's. You can tell the difference between multi LNB dishes versus HDTV dishes b/c the HDTV dish is wide and much more curved. This reflects the signals from 111 and 113 to the outer LNBs while the center LNB is pointed at 101. Dish Networks is a totally different beast, which I know very little about except for the HDTV dishes require 22KHz tone generators to work.)

      Satellite TV was never designed to be mobile, and making it such is a real feat.

    2. Re:big deal? by The+Other+White+Boy · · Score: 1

      huh. learn something every day. =)

    3. Re:big deal? by Moofie · · Score: 1

      You might give some thought to the difference in required bandwidth.

      This technology has been available for some time, but this is the first viable "consumer-level" (IE doesn't require an RV) solution.

      Which you'd know if you'd read the article.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    4. Re:big deal? by wolrahnaes · · Score: 1

      Since when did the old versions require a RV?

      I have a TracVision S3 on my RV, and I could easily mount it on the roof of my truck if I wanted to. Obviously, the low profile nature of this new one is preferable over the 12" high dome needed for the S3, but it is still just as usable.

      I wish I could afford one of the TracNet systems. I drool at the idea of WiFi accessible internet access wherever my vehicle is. Too bad it's many thousands of dollars and only supports downstream (for now, you have to use a cellular or landline uplink).

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
  24. Behind the times... by Ibanez · · Score: 1

    I remember, even 5 years ago, when I got my first car and started looking into car audio and such, the place I went had satellite equipment for mobile homes and such. One of the options was the one that would stay trained on the satellite. And judging by the age on the posters and ads, it was probably much older than that.

    This certainly is nothing new...

    Blake

    1. Re:Behind the times... by dr_db · · Score: 1

      It's new that it tracks while the vehicle is in motion. The units on the old moter homes would pop up a dish antenna and train it on the satellite when the unit was parked.

    2. Re:Behind the times... by Moofie · · Score: 1

      This one is also not a three foot sphere. It's a phased array antenna a few inches thick, small enough to fit atop a passenger car.

      So, yeah, this IS new. Useless to me, but new nonetheless.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  25. HEY! by thung226 · · Score: 1

    Now I can get DirectTV with the Sunday Ticket!

    Since I'm in a high rise with strict restrictions on placing things outside of my window, all I have to do is get this and sit in the car every Sunday to watch football.

    All I need now is a car...

    --
    -n-
    1. Re:HEY! by LordKaT · · Score: 1

      Heh, if you read the DirecTV User Agreement, you can't get sunday ticket. Unless you hack the card, that is.

      --LordKaT

  26. This is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    These tracking systems can be used against you by the MLB spy satellites to calculate your squalor index without your expressed written consent or even implied oral consent.

  27. limos? by Suppafly · · Score: 1

    Haven't limo's had satellite tv for a long time? isn't that what those boomerang shaped things on the back are?

    1. Re:limos? by Micro$will · · Score: 1

      No, those are for regular broadcast TV. You know, the kind that's free as in "Free Beer, not Freedom from bad Programming"

    2. Re:limos? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a standard TV antenna.

    3. Re:limos? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They's had this for RV's for years, this is nothing new or special. on Rv's its just a sta dish in a bubble on a motorized dish aimer. I've seen them for years.

    4. Re:limos? by marfpilf · · Score: 1

      The boomerang is for a boost over the air reception.

  28. All we need now...Car dump. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "...are toilets in our cars and we never have to leave!"

    It makes the claims of having a shitty car easier.

  29. Can I get one for my bike ? by Space+cowboy · · Score: 1

    ... subject says it all, really :-)

    Simon

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
  30. You insensitive clod! by PFactor · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I live in my car, you insensitive clod!

    --
    Don't believe anything I say. I crash test crack pipes for a living.
    1. Re:You insensitive clod! by rwven · · Score: 0

      what can i say :( i'm such a jerk ;)

  31. How about some conversation by jwjcmw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "It's like you don't even have them. You can baby-sit and drive at the same time"

    Isn't it great that we don't have to pay attention to our children anymore in the car just like we don't pay attention to them at home. Why would we need to when the TV/computer/video game is there to "baby-sit" them? We can plug them in at any time...they don't talk to us about any of their inane, childish ideas. We can blissfully act like we are still freewheeling non-parents going off on some big adventure than like the haggard parents we really are who have been forced to "care" for these inferior beings.

    I have three of those annoying little brats, ages 3,5, and 7. I know how blissful a moment to yourself is, and how seductive it is to plug them in and tune them out.

    But you really need to remember that they will be getting their values/ambitions from whatever is raising them. I think most people would not want to think that they are basically raising their children to be ignorant, negative consumers, but they need to watch the shows their children watch, and pay close attention to the advertising that comes along with those "children's" shows.

    As fast as the world goes today, being in the car for a while might be one of the few times that a family can actually talk to each other for an extended period of time. Listen to those children, don't tune them out.

    </rant>

    1. Re:How about some conversation by q-the-impaler · · Score: 1, Interesting
      I think most people would not want to think that they are basically raising their children to be ignorant, negative consumers...
      First they have to realize that they are ignorant, negative consumers themselves.
      A lot of people I know act more like grandparents than parents (i.e. spoil them, babysit them, give them back to the people who raise them [daycare and school]). And they don't see that they are doing anything wrong.
      --
      Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
    2. Re:How about some conversation by mrtroy · · Score: 1

      thanks for typing what I was thinking when I read that.

      That wasnt even implying that the TV is a babysitter, it flat out said it.

      No wonder kids today are going to be more fucked up then we are! Well maybe not THAT bad...

      --
      [I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
    3. Re:How about some conversation by Galvatron · · Score: 1
      I agree with the general sentiment in your post, but I think long car trips are something of a special case. Kids can get extremely antsy, and car trips longer than about 2 hours can start really start taking a toll. It's just not reasonable to expect people to carry on a 3 hour conversation with their 4 year old. Hell, I don't think there are many adults I'd want to talk to for 3 hours at a stretch, which is why my car has a CD player.

      I suppose the better alternative is to avoid long trips where possible, but sometimes it's unavoidable, or sometimes the benefits outweigh the negatives. So I agree that one should not use TV as a babysitter at home, but on trips longer than a couple hours, I see no problem.

      --
      "The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
    4. Re:How about some conversation by hummassa · · Score: 1

      I agree to some extent, but... have you tried really long trips? My 4yo gets very, very uncomfortable after some time. I really, really think that some cartoon AFTER the conversation would be really good.

      --
      It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    5. Re:How about some conversation by jwjcmw · · Score: 1
      I'll agree that just about anything is ok in moderation...and I have definitely used the laptop with a dvd on long trips...but I also remember long trips when I was a kid, and playing games like road sign bingo, and singing silly songs. My wife and I have been trying to do more of that lately, and the kids eat it up, and the time seems to go faster. It's like we have lost the ability to think creatively in situations like that.

      Another aspect that has changed in travel today is the vehicle. We have a minivan, and the only effective way of putting the carseats in puts two of the kids all the way in the back. Even in the middle row, they are much farther back than in a car. There are definite advantages to the size and capacity of a minivan, but personal communication is not one of them. There are times we think we would be much better off with a large sedan/wagon like our parents had.

    6. Re:How about some conversation by Kid+Zero · · Score: 1

      I have three of those annoying little brats, ages 3,5, and 7.

      Oh... I see your problem already.

    7. Re:How about some conversation by fermion · · Score: 1
      I think that it is a matter of how you raise your kids. If a parent raises them with cable tv, video games, fast food, and mega churches that resemble broadway productions more than contemplative sacred spaces, then forcing them to sit for even an hour in car without full sensory immersion is abuse. The child has never been given the tools, has never learned self control, has never had to entertain themselves.

      When I was kid I spent hours in the car, on a plane, or just waiting for something to happen. I also spent much time in front of the TV and admittedly abuse it. OTOH, i along with my siblings were taught the methods so we could sit quietly, or converse, or create. So I believe a happy balance can be created in which the car can have a TV, but it is sometimes turned off on long trips so that the kids can have time for the scenery, themselves and each other.

      And yes, I have had a car load of kids for long trips. And no one missed the TV or video games.

      As far as the 'are we there yet' problem, perhaps they can be taught to enjoy the process as much as the final result.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    8. Re:How about some conversation by imaginate · · Score: 1

      Hey, remember when being uncomfortable was *part of* the car trip? Remember when you had to look out the window and watch the rest of the world go by?

      I'm not trying to be an old curmudgeon (I'm only 26), but geez - isn't it *good* for kids to see some of the outside world rather than the media-populated faux-real blitz? For some kids, car trips are the only time they DO see the world outside of their local living area, and I think it's important somehow...

      Car trips are a lesson in patience, they're a lesson in using one's imagination to entertain oneself, and they're a lesson in how a small group of people can *deal with* each other in a cramped space (for a measly few hours or days, no less!).

      I *hate* that my niece gets "bored" all the time, when all she does is get stuck in front of a television. She has never learned to entertain herself, has forgotten the imagination that she had when she was too young for TV. I guess it just seems sad to me.

    9. Re:How about some conversation by Ian+Bicking · · Score: 1
      The problem is parents these days are always doing things with their children. Children don't have unstructured time anymore, their lives are filled with activities, and when there's no good activity we fall back on the passive activities of TV and video games.

      Without a TV I didn't spend lots of time interacting with my parents in the car. Some time, I suppose, but mostly I occupied myself, I stared out the window, or I "interacted" with other children in the car. It's not like without TV people will all just start talking with each other all the time, or even that they should do so.

      Parents just don't need to try so hard. Children can amuse themselves, at least when they are forced to. Children shouldn't be spoiled with all this programmed time.

  32. Re:Cell phones by ePhil_One · · Score: 3, Funny
    Look, it's obvious that cell phones are distracting too, but does ANYONE question that it must be more dangerous for a driver to be watching television vs talking on a phone ?

    Personally, I think having kids in the car is far more distracting than cell phones. And from experience, I've been hit by a woman driving on the shoulder fighting with her kids, but I've never been hit by someone talking on their cell phone.

    Plus, think of the benefits of banning children from cars. Its healthier for them (It will cut way back on the number of children killed in car accidents), Parents will have a hard time getting kids to movies and nice restaurants where they can annoy me, and it will improve the resale value of the cars since there will be far fewer juice stains on the back seats.

    Everybody wins.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
  33. Don't like 6 rappers already have that? by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

    I could swear that Busta Rhymes had that in the headrests of his Lamborghini (a 2-seater). Still, why not just duct tape the kid's mouths shut? If you want them to stop fighting or whining in the car, maybe having one parent TALK to them would be a cheaper solution than a satellite TV system for the back seat.

    --
    stuff |
  34. $400 rebate from Comcast by q-the-impaler · · Score: 0

    Screw satellite TV in my car. Comcast offers me money for to ditch-my-dish. What they need to do is have some sort of San Francisco trolley thing going on so we don't have to have long extension coax.

    --
    Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
  35. Beamed information wants to be free. by Thinkit3 · · Score: 1

    Isn't DirectTV official evil(tm)? So now what, do they tow your car if they suspect you don't have a "license"?

    --
    -Libertarian secular transhumanist
    1. Re:Beamed information wants to be free. by jared_hanson · · Score: 1

      Beamed information wants to be aggregated, transmitted up to a satellite and then transmitted back down. The satellite has to be launched into space and the transmission equipment needs to be engineered. Seems to me, the information is doing everything it can to cost money.

      Who would you suggest pay for this. I hardly doubt DirecTV is willing to foot the bill without a return on an investment. I'd laugh if you suggested a completely government run broadcast industry.

      Let's test this theory of yours: What is your social security number. After all, information just wants to be free. Oh, and don't give me that lame content versus key answer. Keys are designed to lock up content. The key is probably why you consider DTV evil. They use it to lock up content, increasing the likelyhood you will pay for their service. So, if you don't give me your SSN, you are just as evil as DTV.

      Now, reason through that.

      --
      -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
  36. Poor parenting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It's like you don't even have [kids]."

    Is this what we have come to? People, if it's so painful to have kids, DON'T HAVE THEM! How much of our shared experience (at least in the car-oriented US) with our families revolves around the hours spent cooped up together during summer roadtrips? What will these kids today have to think back on? How great it was that Tony Soprano, right about mile 138, had some deep insight at his therapist's office?

  37. Bad idea because I was by www.sorehands.com · · Score: 4, Funny
    It is a bad idea. I was rear-ended by this woman on a cell phone who was too busy talking. It nocked my laptop off the front seat, interrupted my IRC chat and incomming fax and landed on the dinner I was cooking on the floor of the front seat.


    Can't these people pay attention and not do anything else while driving. I now have to get a new laptop for the car. Jeeeezzz.

  38. Simple by Micro$will · · Score: 1

    They don't work.

    My question is, now that we can have TV anywhere we want, will they actually put something on that's worth watching?

  39. Old news by djupedal · · Score: 2, Funny

    We've had this in South Korea (SkyLife) for over a year....yawn. Once again, you guys assume it doesn't count if it's not in your backyard.

    Gives you something to watch while sitting in the routine 10 kilometer jam.

    1. Re:Old news by mblase · · Score: 1

      Once again, you guys assume it doesn't count if it's not in your backyard.

      Well, thanks for the information. The next time this American wants to watch South Korean programming in his car, he'll know just where to import the tech and be the "first on the block".

    2. Re:Old news by djupedal · · Score: 1

      Again, a narrow western perception. Programming in Korea isn't strictly Korean.

      BBC, TF1, CNN, HBO, ESPN, Star. Languages from French to Farsee....English to Japanese....Chinese to Croate. Signed and subtitled, the effort is made for a larger community.

    3. Re:Old news by mblase · · Score: 1

      Signed and subtitled, the effort is made for a larger community.

      I hate subtitles. They get in the way. I even delete Spanish-language programming from my TV remote when I find it.

    4. Re:Old news by Quikah · · Score: 1

      Oh, we are so sorry to have offended you. How foolish of us to not know of a Korean service from a Korean only webpage.

      --
      Q.
  40. they forgot to mention "Phased Array" by skelley · · Score: 2, Funny

    My understanding is that the "260 antenna elements that help draw in the signal" is basically a small fairly cheap phased array antenna system. You know, like on an Aegis cruiser. So with the proper emitter and a Beowulf like cluster of TracVisions ........

  41. Spoiler warning? by eMartin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Of course, Most amusing is all the comments about how TV in cars is for passengers, because as we know, the drivers are too busy talking on their cell phones.

    Seriously, what's the deal with giving away the best part of the article without a spoiler warning?

  42. Couldn't have been too far behind... by LamerX · · Score: 1

    Considering that we managed to get digital satelllite radio in the car, it shoudln't be surprising that this wasn't very far behind. But what's nice about satellite radio is how it cuts out when you drive by some trees, or under a bridge. It's great.

  43. prior art... by B00yah · · Score: 1

    I seem to remember in the original Wayne's World movie, that the big wig record exec had sattelite in his limo...that how Garth, the closet hacker, beamed in the video of Wayne's GF (tia carrera) in so he could see it....

    Mega Happy Ending!

  44. TV in a car? by Mullen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With hundreds of channels of entertainment, from the Disney Channel to HBO, to keep them occupied, they're silent. "It's like you don't even have them. You can baby-sit and drive at the same time,'' Montag said.

    Am I the only America left that thinks this is gross? I pulled up next to a Lincoln Navigator, the other day, that had TWO flat panel screens in it and they were both on watching TV. Now, this seems like a great idea to keep the kids nice and quite, but how does a kid see the world while on a road trip? If I am going to haul the kids and wife off to a National or State Park, they are to be looking out the windows and not watching DVD movie or some Cartoon. I can't imagine how this is good for America's kids. Should we just surrender to the terrorists now since the future generations will have a attention span to short to track Al-Qaeda down?

    --
    Linux O Muerte!
    1. Re:TV in a car? by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 1
      Now, this seems like a great idea to keep the kids nice and quite, but how does a kid see the world while on a road trip?

      Since today's family vehicles are so grossly oversized, most kids aren't tall enough to see anything but sky, anyways.

      Thus, you need at least one TV and a closed-circuit camera if you want them to see anything. Why not add a satellite dish to the mix?

      --

      Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    2. Re:TV in a car? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I don't jerk off every night in my filthy, unlit room - the terrorists have won.

    3. Re:TV in a car? by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's not like there's anything to look at in the sky, like CLOUDS AND ALL THE THINGS YOU CAN IMAGINE THEM TO BE. No, let's put on SpongeBob and raise them like veal instead.

    4. Re:TV in a car? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See the world?

      You've never driven across Nebraska, have you?

      After 7 hours of flat and green and pavement -- my eyes wanted to commit suicide.

    5. Re:TV in a car? by Sketch · · Score: 1
      "Now, this seems like a great idea to keep the kids nice and quite, but how does a kid see the world while on a road trip? If I am going to haul the kids and wife off to a National or State Park, they are to be looking out the windows and not watching DVD movie or some Cartoon."

      I'm not sure that's really a new thing. When my parents dragged me off to some national park every year when I was a kid, I read books and comics in the back of the van for the entire trip. I just wasn't very interested.

      Now, 15-20 years later, I'm out taking my own trips to places like that and enjoying it. Of course, I'm also not stuck in the back of a van anymore, I'm driving a sports car. Getting there is half the fun. ;)

      Sketch

      --
      -- OpenVerse Visual Chat: http://openverse.com
    6. Re:TV in a car? by strike2867 · · Score: 1

      We already have an attention span too short to track Al-Queda down. In a recent press statement Bush said finding Osama Bin Laden was not a current priority. Im too busy reading to find the exact quote.

      --

      Vote for new mod!!! Score:-2,Imbecile
    7. Re:TV in a car? by Quikah · · Score: 1

      Geez, I am glad I am not your kid. Most of the trip is incredibly boring, reading books, listening to CDs or playing gameboy is about all I ever did in the car until we got to the destination.

      --
      Q.
    8. Re:TV in a car? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That has nothing to do with attention span . . . that's called "backpedaling because we realized we have no chance and the more we harp on it the dumber we look".

    9. Re:TV in a car? by Valdrax · · Score: 1

      No, you're not the only only thoroughly revolted by this, but you're in the definite minority. Ever since the TV came into people's lives in the 50s, American parents have been looking for more and more ways to get their kids to tune out so that they'll shut up. It isn't good for America's kids, and it's the growing root of America's dysfunctional attitude and miniscule attention span. If I ever have kids, I'm making damn sure that we don't have TV in my car nor cable TV in my house.

      As for the last comment, what makes you think our current generation has the attention span to track al-Qaeda down? We still haven't nabbed Osama bin Laden or Sadaam Hussein, and I'll bet you money that neither failure will do a thing to hurt GWB in the polls. The majority of Americans can't even remember why we went to war with Iraq and how badly the President lied to us.

      Anyone else find it ironic that the guy who's advocating this system has the same last name as the fireman protagonist from "Fahrenheit 451?"

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    10. Re:TV in a car? by Rew190 · · Score: 1

      With this kind of logic, I assume you have no TVs (in car or at home), much less video game systems, right?

      I fail to see what the huge difference is that makes it OK to watch TV at home but not in a car.

      Really, this is a knee-jerk reaction.

  45. on cell phones in cars by Evil+Willow · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I am hard pressed to see the difference between talking on a cell phone and talking with passengers in the vehicle. Watching how people tend to interact, I'm imagining someone swiveling all over the seat while talking to several people in the car. I am also hard pressed to see the differecnce in someone dialing a number and changing the radio station, or searching for a CD.


    Yes, cell phones can be a distraction, but are they any more of a distraction than the many, many things people do in their cars? I watch people read the paper across the steering wheel, I watch them put on makeup, I watch them eat entire meals, I even watch them search around the backseat of their cars - All while driving. If you take a hard look at what a lot of people do in their cars, cell phones are by far the least of the problem.


    There are a lot of places people dont need to be talking on their cell phones - Movie Theaters comes to mind as a prime example. Because of this I believe its become quite the trend to frown upon seeing anyone on a cell phone any time. The reality is they do have a place and they are here to stay - get used to it.

    1. Re:on cell phones in cars by BrK · · Score: 1

      I am hard pressed to see the difference between talking on a cell phone

      The main difference is that talking to passengers, or twiddling the radio doesn't tie up one of your free hands for many minutes at a time. You are *technically* s'posed tohave both hands on the wheel. Talking on a hand-held phone will ensure this doesn't happen. Also, the radio is placed such that you don't have to move your eyes too far to see it, and intereact with it, it also has large buttons that are easy to see/find/push. The cellphone on the other hand is overall about twice the size of a chicklet, with keys proportionally smaller.

      Overall, I'm not against the use of cellphones while driving, but a good headset coupled to a phone with a voice-dial capability should be the baseline requirement.

      --
      -This sig intentionally left blank
    2. Re:on cell phones in cars by jCaT · · Score: 1

      There are a number of factors. When talking to passengers in the car, you will not:

      - take your hands off the wheel to use the phone
      - take your eyes off the road to answer the phone
      - take your eyes off the road to dial an outgoing call
      - use BOTH your eyes and hands to write down a phone number someone is telling you

      And not only that, but the people in the car have the ability to know when to shut up and just let you drive, since they're seeing exactly what you are. People on the phone have no idea and they'll continue to ask you questions for which they are probably expecting a fairly quick answer to.

    3. Re:on cell phones in cars by Fapestniegd · · Score: 1

      Your cell phone won't say Oh Shit! When you are about to hit someone. A passenger will.

    4. Re:on cell phones in cars by Evil+Willow · · Score: 1
      I acknowledge and agree with most of the comments here, but I think there is a difference in the comparison. I'm not discussing how things should be done, but the normal practices I observer while driving on a daily basis.


      Keeping both hands on the wheel - When was the last time you actually saw someone with both hands on the wheel. Seriously. If I had to give a percentage on a normal basis I'd say its around 35%.


      Passengers knowing when to shut up - I dont know who you're friends are but most of my friends dont know when to shut up to save their jobs, let alone when they are becoming a distraction. One is in the backseat flipping through CDs. His girlfriend is trying to pass up something to the front, the passenger is babbling on and on. It just doesnt happen.


      More heated discussions on the phone - So, you've never had your girlfriend decide that this is the perfect time to argue over something? When on the phone and the call gets too heated for me to drive, I can hang up. Try telling your gf to shut up in the middle of an argument!


      Plus, all of this focuses on conversations with others. The main point I am making is that people do equally if not far more distracting things while driving the car on a daily basis!

    5. Re:on cell phones in cars by Moofie · · Score: 1

      As an aside, I don't understand why our hyper-smart phones nowadays don't have a "Push this button to record ten seconds of this call" feature.

      I mean, ZERO PHONES have this. Am I stupid? Why doesn't this exist? Do they have this feature in Japan? If not, we're not going to see it here in the states for at least 10 years...

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  46. Re:I wonder...- Works OK in most areas by RoundSparrow · · Score: 3, Informative

    These are pretty common on RV's these days. I full time in a 1987 Bluebird Wanderlodge bus (both mobile office and home).

    We installed a Tracstar SV360 9 months ago, one of the low-profile ones. This is supposed to be one of the better units.

    They work ok... yes, signal skips under bridges.

    I5 in southern Oregon is pretty much useless with mountain and tall trees next to the highway.

    DirecTV requires you to point "toward Texas" for the bird, so northern states are much worse. And these dishes tend to be smaller, so clounds can hurt you too. Seattle is not a good place for this... steep angle to aim and clouds consipire against you.

    I use the in-motion dish for "instant on" more than watching while cruising. It is nice to pull over at a rest area and be able to turn on the news for a few minutes.... since the in-motion always has signal lock, no need to wait to align like the lesser dishes.

    When camping in wooded areas, you pretty much decide what your priority is. Nice woodeed spot or clear TV reception? Low tech is often better for camping. 100' of coax and a regular dish on a tripod is much better for camping... as you can always carry the dish out into a clear area. So having a fancy expensive in-motion system isn't always the best... it depends on your needs.

  47. How fast can you go and have it still work by pozzy1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I want to know if Im cruizing along at 80mph will it still work. I saw this in popsci I think a long time ago and it had a top speed of 45mph. I didnt see them even address this at all. Im not going to slow down so I can watch tv.

    --
    http://www.wickedtoast.com
    1. Re:How fast can you go and have it still work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think if you go faster than the speed of light you will begin to watch the broadcast in reverse.

  48. nothing new by PDG · · Score: 1

    These are the same system they've had available for Motorhomes for years. All they did was mount it on top of a car instead, no biggie.

    --
    "Where is my mind?"
  49. laws and such by EvilOpie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't know where the submitter of the article lives, but in New York it's illegal for a TV to be placed in a vechile within view of the driver. Then again it's also illegal for a driver here to use a cell phone that's not hands free, and we know how well people obey that law.

    Ah well, this is kinda a neat idea regardless. I mean, satellite TV for vechiles is not exactly a new idea, though before now they've been traditionally reserved for RV's and such, but this may be the first practical application for smaller cars.

    --
    -Through the server, over the router, off the firewall... Nothing but 'Net!
  50. Simple-Road Show. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "My question is, now that we can have TV anywhere we want, will they actually put something on that's worth watching?"

    I recommend the PBS "Who wants to be a millionaire?" aka Antique Road Show.

  51. Reception by fractalrock · · Score: 1

    I'm wondering about reception problems while driving...a hard-mounted satellite receiver has enough problems providing a good signal due to bad weather, birds, etc. How well could a vehicle-mounted receiver perform? A mobile dish would have to be:

    1) smaller in circumference;

    2) hidden, therefore somewhat shielded;

    3) constantly moving;

    4) lower to the ground than most home-mounted dishes, therefore more obstacles.

    With all of the aforementioned issues I just can't see it working well. Of course, if the technology is out there ready for me to buy and install in my vehicle, then surely it has been proven....or am I assuming too much?

    1. Re:Reception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the tracvision is over 3' wide, larger than the normal satellite dishes. It takes you FULL roof rak to mount it. You basically lose the functionality of your roof rack to get TV. Plus you still have to buy a receiver and subscription for your car.

      DVD's seem much easier and cheaper to me.

    2. Re:Reception by Moofie · · Score: 1

      You're assuming it's a dish.

      It's not. It's a phased array antenna. It's flat. And horizontal. You know, like a car roof.

      Read the damn article.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  52. Ah, the new generation of parenting by mblase · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With hundreds of channels of entertainment, from the Disney Channel to HBO, to keep them occupied, they're silent. "It's like you don't even have them. You can baby-sit and drive at the same time,'' Montag said.

    I have my own kids -- four of them now. I grew up in a family of five kids, two parents. So I know full well what it's like to have them arguing, complaining, fighting, and griping all through a long car trip.

    But I still maintain that drugging them into submission with non-stop video signals is not the best solution. It's easy enough to get into that habit at home -- sit the kids in front of the TV after school until dinner, then after dinner until bedtime. They're entertained, you have peace and quiet. Then when they get older, you wonder why they're thirty pounds overweight before they've hit puberty and never do their homework at night.

    TV, either in the car or at home, should be a privilege. Give it to them when they've earned it, and turn it off when it's done. I prefer a DVD player to satellite TV, because (1) there's no commercials, (2) I can control what they do and don't watch, and (3) when the show's over, it's over--there's nothing "coming up next" unless I say there is.

    Our kids would be overjoyed to have satellite TV in the car for our periodic 3-hour drives to my in-laws. Instead we give them toys, books, children's music, and Magna-Doodle drawing boards. Works just as well, the noise is minimal, and their brains actually continue to develop instead of just rotting away inside their skulls.

    1. Re:Ah, the new generation of parenting by dr_db · · Score: 1

      What I really wanted to do was place one or two of those panels (I have *alot* of kids) in with a couple gamecubes - in my life, it seems to be the only thing (besides movies) that they don't fight over much.

    2. Re:Ah, the new generation of parenting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, studies have been done. The government report that TV destroys braincells was compiled without a study, no evidence, nothing. TV stimulates all the same regions a book does, as well as other regions, and stimulates some of them considerably more. Toys and books, on the other hand, lend themselves well to throwing at other children, causing blunt trauma and destroying brain cells.

    3. Re:Ah, the new generation of parenting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, instead of the possibility of stupid kids, you just homogenius boring middle-managers instead. Great plan!

      News flash: TV can be stimulating too. I grew up with no restrictions on my TV viewing. I'm teaching as a 2nd year grad student at a top-20 university. My mother actually _discussed_ what was on TV with me and _found_ things about it that were interesting and stimulating, rather then relying on the "educational" material which is uniformly boring, and uniformly uniform (PC, non-racist, etc).

    4. Re:Ah, the new generation of parenting by mblase · · Score: 1

      The government report that TV destroys braincells was compiled without a study, no evidence, nothing.

      I have sufficient anecdotal evidence that kids who watch television continue on to buy crappy music, get addicted to mindless sitcoms and are motivated by advertisers to crave worthless crap in order to look more like their favorite celebrities. If that's not brain damage, I don't know what is.

    5. Re:Ah, the new generation of parenting by strike2867 · · Score: 1

      Lets get this straight. The government is made up of people payed by the entertainment industry. And it says tv is good for you. Wow!!!!

      /*ive just jumped up and ran over to my tv*/

      --

      Vote for new mod!!! Score:-2,Imbecile
  53. I wish... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately here in the US, people avoid taking responsibility for hitting something. They would first try to blame the car company or the DVD manufaturer or SOMEONE other than themself. It's sad, and judges who don't throw those cases out immediately are an enormous threat to society.

  54. busses have by jiminim · · Score: 1

    A few years back when my university was actually having a winning football season, I was a member of the pep band who got to ride one of the satellite equipped buses. It was great because we got to catch the ESPN replay of our game.

  55. nothing new-Article reading-the missing skill. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "These are the same system they've had available for Motorhomes for years. All they did was mount it on top of a car instead, no biggie."

    [From the article]
    "Mobile satellite TV technology has been around for years, but it has been useful only on boats, buses and RVs with enough space to mount a big, bulky satellite dish.

    Now, TracVision-maker KVH Industries Inc. of Middletown, R.I., has built a low-profile, saucer-shaped antenna designed to mount unobtrusively to the roof rack of a regular van, sport utility vehicle or car."

    One of these days Slashdotters will actually read the article, but I'm not holding my breath. I don't look good in blue.

    1. Re:nothing new-Article reading-the missing skill. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you expect from a STUPID MAC ZEALOT. Pity him

  56. newclear power from oxygen/water? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    actually, that would be easier/smarter than trying to watch tv in your car.

    back to stuff that doesn't matter at all.

  57. Re:Simple-Road Show. - PBS by RoundSparrow · · Score: 2, Interesting

    PBS is the most problem channel for 'on the road'! If you are a full time RVer or trucker, you can get Distant Network service that allows you special options.

    I guess the big problem is sports. People with RV's would go to sports games and have tailgate parties in the parking lot of the stadium during regional blackouts!

    You have to sign a special waiver to get the local network feeds when mobile. DirecTV does directional broadcast of 'local channels' only to the regions they are required. Once you drive out of your region, you can't get your local channels.

    They let you get around this by getting ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX from both New York and Los Angeles. Problem is that you can't get UPN / WB / PBS when you are outside your "home area". When you full time in a RV (no house, just live in your RV) - this is a pain - as your home area is just where you get your mail sent, not really where you are!

    PBS is the most problem. They really want those local pledge drives, so they won't let you have the "national PBS feed" unless your "home area" is in a place where there is no local PBS channel on DirecTV. So 90% of the locations you can't get the national PBS feed if you have the Distant Network package.

  58. Re:I wonder...- Works OK in most areas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TV and camping. Never thought those went together. I guess I'll bring my laptop next time.

  59. Madden... by Theaetetus · · Score: 1
    It "didn't make a lot of sense,'' because you could do the same thing by going to a hotel or restaurant, said Madden, who has no financial stake or promotional deals with KVH, although KVH did supply the TracVision equipment for the Madden Cruiser for free to promote its products.

    Isn't the 'free equipment in exchange for promotion' a 'promotional deal'? Ah, well.

    -T

  60. I have one of these setups... by EvilCabbage · · Score: 1

    ... and it makes a huge difference to passengers during the 6+ hour trips I use the car for. It is no more a distraction to me than listening to the radio or a CD.

    It's all about self control though. I'm sure some dumbass would try to blame the system for distracting him/her, when they shouldn't have been trying to watch the damn thing in the first place..

  61. Japan's had these for years by Jon_E · · Score: 1

    Of course they do much more useful things with them than just watch TV and hollywood pre-digested birdfood .. I've seen them used for active directions (a 3d overlay of the street you're on with colored arrows showing you where to turn), showing traffic congestion (imagine seeing the accident on your screen rather than contributing to the rubbernecking delay), video conferencing (drop your cell-phone into a slot and have realtime voice and video .. of course most of their cell-phones have the same connector base), digital camera and video playback .. man the US is so far behind, that if this is slashdot worthy news .. it's embarrassing.

  62. Re:I wonder...- Works OK in most areas by RoundSparrow · · Score: 1

    I work 50 to 60 hour workweeks like most hard-working geeks. My "home office" is a RV. So I always "camp with my laptop"...

    If you have the skill it isn't that hard to do. Sprint and Verizon will give you unlimited internet for $80/month to use on your laptop. We have ours shared with a WiFi network using a laptop running OpenBSD 3.4 with pf firewall.

    A cubicle with high-speed internet is fun for a while, but it gets old. I'll suffer with high latency (250ms) cell phone internet to have the freedom to park my home office where I want to go.

    With the WiFi uplink the cell phone, it isn't that expensive... and sitting at picnic table in the woods is a great place to hack code.

  63. Data. Can I Use Data Service With this thing???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This would be great form my moble business if i could hook it up to my computer. I did not see in the article if I could use directTV's data service with this thing.

    Does anyone have any more info...

    Thanks

  64. Home Version? by Jac_no_k · · Score: 1

    If antennas could be this discreet, why do DirecTv and Dish use the ugly dish antennas. With an antenna like this, I could probably lay it flat on the roof and the Home Owners Assocation won't complain. From the support aspect it's probably easier since the antenna being bumped will be less likely to affect signal.

    Oh well, I already installed the ugly dish antenna at my house and the HOA hasn't noticed yet.

    1. Re:Home Version? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      If they complain tell them to Shove It FCC Regulations [www.fcc.gov] forbid HOA's from restricting recievers unless they are over a certain size limit

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  65. Works about as well as... by malakai · · Score: 1
    They work under viaducts, in tunnels, and behind large buildings about as often as slashdot readers _READ_ the article.

    The satellite signal remains strong as long as the antenna is within the line of sight of the orbiting satellites, which are in the southern part of the sky. As with any satellite signal, tall buildings, mountains, trees or even luggage on the roof rack can block that signal and disrupt the video.
  66. Man, I pity your kids by hummassa · · Score: 1

    The endless talking dad's kids... hehe.
    More serious, there is only a short period of time I can keep the attention of my 4yo boy. Especifically, my personal record is 1h20. After that, he (a) sleeps [best case], (b) vomits, or (c) jumps up and down and makes me generally crazy.
    And I only have one kid.
    If and when I get another, they will pick each other and fight. Unless Dragonball ZYXk is on to the older and Clifford the Giant Red Dog is on to the younger.
    I am ordering one of these now, and another next year. Maybe I can sneak one into the steering wheel too, and commute watching Enterprise (if it does not get cancelled).

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    1. Re:Man, I pity your kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I pity your kids, and whomever gets crushed by your monster SUV when you're watching TV while driving. Cretin.

      P.S. your kids are spoiled.

  67. cell phones worse than talking to passengers by RowdyReptile · · Score: 1
    I am hard pressed to see the difference between talking on a cell phone and talking with passengers in the vehicle.

    Tom, of 'Click and Clack' says it here:

    Tom: And why is it more distracting than having a conversation with a passenger? Well, for one thing, a passenger can see when you're trying to merge into traffic, or back out of a driveway, and will usually understand if you stop speaking and concentrate on the task at hand. The person on the other end of the cell phone has no idea what's going on with you. Not to mention that you never have to take your eyes off the road and "dial" the person in the passenger seat.

    I agree with these arguments, and add that a cell phone conversation is often more focused and requires more attention than idle chatter with a passenger.
    --

    You want a sig? I can get you a sig... Hell, I can get you a sig by 3 o'clock this afternoon... with nail polish.
    1. Re:cell phones worse than talking to passengers by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I don't care what the person on the other end of my phone (hypothetically speaking, as I don't have one) thinks. If I stop talking, it's because I'm doing something else. If they can't understand that, so what?

      Would you argue that you shouldn't be allowed to have "focused" conversations with passengers?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    2. Re:cell phones worse than talking to passengers by phreaqhopp · · Score: 0

      what about CB radios??? We did not have this social problem in the 70's when everyone had CB radios in their cars. Why then do we focus on cell phones as being the problem. Maybe we should focus on the real problom. The idiots who can't chew gum and and walk let alone drive with or withot a cell phone. ie. soccer moms!

  68. Fly lately? by sklib · · Score: 1

    There are a few airline companies that offer live tv for people to watch while on the plane. This probably works the same way -- they have a dish in the cargo compartment somewhere that rotates to compensate for the plane's tilting and whatnot. It goes offline whenever there's too much turbulence or something like that, but most of the time it works fine.

    Naturally the car-based service won't work in the lincoln tunnel, or probably even anywhere with a lot of buildings, but it would probably work fine for what it was designed for: something to let the kids watch cartoons while driving someplace out in the burbs where it's all trees and lawns and soccer fields.

    --
    -S
    1. Re:Fly lately? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a dish. It's a slotted array antenna. This minimizes mechanical/physical movement of the antenna.

  69. Re:Cell phones by karnal · · Score: 1

    Those aren't juice stains, by the way...

    --
    Karnal
  70. 2 questions by Kohath · · Score: 1

    1. Does it get local channels?
    2. Dos it work with Starband?

    1. Re:2 questions by barleyguy · · Score: 1

      >>1. Does it get local channels?
      2. Does it work with Starband?

      1. Yes. Assuming you are legal qualified, and are driving within your local spot beam, assuming that your particular locals are from a spot beam.

      2. No. Starband is a bidirectional feed. However, it may be able to get DirectPC, which uses a phone line for the upbound side. You'd have to use a cell phone for upbound.

      --
      --- "So THAT's what an invisible barrier looks like!" - Time Bandits
  71. Did this strike anyone else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moreover, in most states, including California, it's illegal for drivers to watch television while driving.

    ...MOST states!??!

  72. Dual Stream... by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    This CAN be done but won't be "100% reliable". Imagine the signal is sent twice on two channels. One of them with 3min advance, and one "in realtime". The "in advance" signal goes to 3min-deep buffer, the realtime one is streamed. Once there's a disturbance in the "realtime" signal, you get switched to "backup copy" that was being made for 3 minutes before and for 3 mins, or until you regain normal signal, you get data from the buffer. Once you're outside the "problem area", you're switched back to "realtime" and buffer starts filling again. Still, if some disturbance appears exactly 3 mins apart (or there's a lot of "line noise" or it lasts as long etc) you won't have "backup copy" of what's about to be played (it didn't record 3 mins ago) and there's a break.

    Other method: A piece, say 3 mins of the program (but maybe more) is replayed over and over on fast forward - a moving "resend" window, buffered and played in "slow motion"=normal. So as long as you don't run out of buffer space, it's enough you regain transmission for a short moment to fill your buffer and play from it until you regain connection again.
    Could be made as "packet transmission" - say, every 1s fragment of the stream gets resent 200 times in 1s intervals (simultaneously with next packets added to the "moving window" and "expired" (sent 200 times already) removed), replayed 200s later (once last piece is sent), and TV at the other end reassembles them and catches only those missing in the "puzzle". Of course this creates 200 times more "air traffic" than normal...

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:Dual Stream... by Moofie · · Score: 1

      That's a great idea! Double the required bandwidth for your service, to provide a feature that 1/100 of your userbase will care about! You'll make MILLIONS!

      But, it will cost you tens of millions to launch the extra satellites, so I think you're fooked.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  73. The modern family by swb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is an invention of the 18th century. Until that time the rich simply forked their children over to governnesses, teachers, etc and forgot about them until their kids challenged them for their holdings.

    Everyone else either worked as many offspring as they could sire in the fields, sold them off as indentured servants, or, if they didn't need or want more, comitted post-natal abortion.

    The idea that one actually had some involvement with their kids is historically kind of new. The idea of "childhood" itself is even newer; it used to only last until you were old enough to do meaningful work. The fact that it now lasts until the mid-20s or the end of college is a very new phenomenon and probably as unhealthy as selling them off as servants when they turned 10.

    1. Re:The modern family by mblase · · Score: 1

      The idea that one actually had some involvement with their kids is historically kind of new.

      Yeah, I'm sure it wasn't until the last century or two that humankind finally figured out that children who spend time with their mothers actually take longer to starve.

      Incidentally, you forgot to argue that your "historical" approach to parenting was somehow better than loving and teaching them on an ongoing basis. Simply saying it's "unhealthy" don't make it so.

    2. Re:The modern family by Jahf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Amazing how you can aspire to take one culture's historically bad sense of family and assume that it applied to everyone from that time. And even then your examples are acutely pessimistic. Are you trying to tell me that before 1701 there wasn't a single father or mother in western society who paid attention to their children and loved them for their own sake instead of for some ascribed selfish desire?

      Revisionist at best. And all of the things you mention as having existing before the 18th century still exist today in pretty much all cultures to some degree. Those selfish nasty actions don't invalidate the love that many families share.

      I see your point, but it's a very very small point that mostly illustrates why I'm glad my viewpoint of the world isn't any more cynical than it is. Your view is quite depressing.

      --
      It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
    3. Re:The modern family by swb · · Score: 1

      Are you trying to tell me that before 1701 there wasn't a single father or mother in western society who paid attention to their children and loved them for their own sake instead of for some ascribed selfish desire?

      That's just pedantic. I don't doubt that parents felt some kind of emotional tie to their children; it's biologically driven, up to a point. After that it's a culturally driven emotional facade.

      Up until fairly recently in western cultures, more kids meant more mouths to feed, and the pressure was intense to begin with to feed one's self; there wasn't a charity or food shelf or anything of that sort. Kids were welcomed for their labor output or their salability for their labor output. If they couldn't meet those needs, they were a drag on the family, not a lovable asset.

      It's not cynical -- life was hard and cruel. I'm not advocating that's the way one should live or should want to live, but it was the *reality* of family life for centuries. I'm personally glad (and like everyone else, a benificiary) for the changing attitudes about children and family.

      But liking and wanting a warm, soft and fuzzy family ideal doesn't mean that it isn't new or the way that it had always been.

    4. Re:The modern family by Jahf · · Score: 1

      Do us a favor, don't have kids. My post wasn't the pedantic one.

      --
      It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
  74. "Conversation" with a 5-year-old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Are we there yet?"
    "Are we there yet?"
    "When are we going to get there?"
    "How long is it going to take?"
    "Are we there yet?"
    "I have to go."
    "I'm hungry."
    "Are we there yet?"

    Yeah, I'd hate to interrupt that conversation with a little SpongeBob!

  75. Hell, somebody can't take a joke. by hummassa · · Score: 1

    Look at my other posts in this thread, man, no need to get all nervous...
    And, FYI, I drive an economy car (20km/l) AND I pay attention to the road (most of the time :)
    Besides, my kid is not spoiled, and I have a meaningful and stable relation with him.

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
  76. JetBlue uses this in their aircraft by doormat · · Score: 1

    To deliver DirecTV to all the seats on their aircraft...

    --
    The Doormat

    If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    1. Re:JetBlue uses this in their aircraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      except the JetBlue system is not passive.

      http://www.jetblue.com/havefun/directv/howitwork s/ howitworks.asp

  77. Modern Day Luke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "But I was going to Walmart to pick up some power inverters!"

    "You can waste time with your friends when your chores are done."

  78. FYI: JetBlue's System (Quicktime or Windows Media) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.jetblue.com/havefun/directv/howitworks/ howitworks.asp

  79. FYI: How JetBlue's System Works (Quicktime) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.jetblue.com/havefun/directv/howitworks/ howitworks.asp

  80. DirecPC - Internet Anywhere ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This will be vary cool for anyone who needs access to the intenet on the road!

    Assuming two way satalite internet is still around... (havn't checked for a while -sucked back then too)

  81. My childhood road trips by raygundan · · Score: 1

    Were all spent with my nose in a book. Several books, usually. And I turned out fine.

    Oh, wait-- I'm a HUGE FREAKING DORK.

    1. Re:My childhood road trips by swb · · Score: 1

      Haha, mine too, including while AT Disneyworld.

  82. DUPE by Nefrayu · · Score: 1

    Funny, the same thing has been up on /. before...
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/09/004625 7&mode=thread&tid=129

    --
    Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.
  83. ONE WORD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Overpass

  84. ONE OTHER WORD! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Theft. Its easy to mount, that means its easy to unmount!

  85. This is BAD. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will cut way back on the number of children killed in car accidents

    But this way number of surviving children will increase, haven't you heard about "demographical bomb", overpopulation etc? I think they should make phone calls in cars mandatory, place TV screens in the dashboards, forbid using seatbelts and airbags, cancel all speed limits, maybe this would bring the population to more reasonable levels! And how much cheaper cars could get, without all that safety stuff!

  86. Bad Driving, Bad Parenting by Valdrax · · Score: 1

    The people who drive while watching will eventually hit something, and hopefully what they hit won't be a person. After that they'll either learn very quickly not to do it again, or go broke repairing everything they keep hitting.

    Statistically speaking, it's most likely to be a car -- with at least one person inside. In the mean time, that person who may have once been a responsible driver has to suffer injury and loss of property because of the lack of responsibility of the first driver. Considering my luck in driving, I don't want to be a "learning example" for some self-possessed moron who is enjoying their "freedom" to make use of their "rightfully earned property."

    By the way...

    Anyone with kids knows that travelling is much, much easier if you give them something to do on long trips. DVDs in the headrests so the kids can watch/play from the back seat are a GOOD THING.

    You know what my sister and I did as kids on road trips? We read BOOKS. That's right, books -- those little, fun, and informative things made out of paper that actually engage a kids mind rather than shutting it off. When we weren't doing that, we were playing with our toys or *horrified gasp* talking with our parents as a family. Maybe if more parents were interested in raising their children instead of pacifying them, our society wouldn't be so incredibly fubared right now.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    1. Re:Bad Driving, Bad Parenting by Rew190 · · Score: 1

      You know what my sister and I did as kids on road trips? We read BOOKS. That's right, books -- those little, fun, and informative things made out of paper that actually engage a kids mind rather than shutting it off.

      You must not have a TV set or anything on that idea in your car or home then, because that would make you hypocritical (a person of your intelligence and stature would obviously not lower him/herself to "shut off" your mind).

      Maybe if more parents were interested in raising their children instead of pacifying them

      Ugh, these knee-jerk reactions make me want to vomit. This is nothing more than a cool entertainment toy, it's not implied anywhere that it's being used to "pacify" kids. This kind of elitism is absolutely ridiculous and short-sighted. If I choose to get a TV stream coming into my vehicle so my family can catch ER or C.S.I., it doesn't mean that I'm less of a parent than you because you choose not to give them that option. It's a satellite receiver for an automobile, a tech toy, not a direct attack against your idea of correct parenting. Please make the distinction.

      PS: Maybe you should start looking at some movies that aren't quite as mainstream before you arrogantly imply that movies (in general) shut off the brain...

    2. Re:Bad Driving, Bad Parenting by Descartes · · Score: 1

      Did you read the article?

      They quote a woman saying that it's like the kids aren't even there. Personlly, I don't see how you can be doing a good job raising your kids if you are excited when it seems like they don't exist.

      Granted, kids can be annoying in cars. But if you didn't know that when you had them, you're an idiot. Don't want annoying kids? Don't have kids.

    3. Re:Bad Driving, Bad Parenting by Rew190 · · Score: 1

      I definitely agree with that aspect, but to shun the technology because some idiots use it to shut their kids up instead of just giving them something to do if they choose is idiotic.

  87. cha-nai-oh by djupedal · · Score: 1

    Nice of you to admit it. Apology accepted. Do your best next time :)

  88. How about some imagination... by hummassa · · Score: 1

    You have a serious point here. If you read my other comments in this thread, you will notice I think of the well-being of my kid, but maybe some discomfort is still better. I have to put my foot in my mouth for a while and try to force my brain into thinking. If I had points, I would moderate you Insightful....

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
    1. Re:How about some imagination... by imaginate · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the reply - I did read the rest of your posts and I figured you were thinking of the well being of your kid. In fact, I know that I can't really talk because I don't have a kid and I don't know the feeling of wanting to give *anything* for a bit of peace (I'm sure I'll be there at some point though).

      What I've realized is that I do believe in the value of silence. It gives people time to think for themselves, to be with their own thoughts, and it allows them to realize that those thoughts are often more worth thinking than the ones pushed on them by people trying to sell advertising. And I remember that, sure, I did my share of griping on car trips along with my brother, but I think it probably only amounted to 20-30 minutes out of an 8 hour drive. The time not spent in conversation (you're right, one can only converse so much), was spent fantasizing, looking, watching, thinking... and I wouldn't now give that time for anything.

      I remember deserts and mountains I've seen out the car window, Volkswagon Beetles with out of state plates (if you've ever played that game you know), laughing at other drivers, wondering who those other people are... and all the rest. And I think part of it was because my parents were able to convey the fact that driving was enjoyable (most of the time). I think it's about showing your child the enjoyment to be found in the world, in themselves, and in their perception of it - and if it takes some time listening to the little guys bitch, then I think it's worth it.

    2. Re:How about some imagination... by spoco2 · · Score: 1

      So very, very true... Great comment indeed.

      I have a 3 month old, so not old enough to be doing any sort of self entertaining yet in the car (it's either sleeping, crying or hitting the soft toy bug that we hang near him... so I suppose that is some sort of entertainment)... but when he and his future siblings are old enough you can be darn sure we'll be talking/singing with them in the car, giving them books to read/colour in, travel games to play (I used to play travel games of scrabble etc with my brother)... yes they'll whinge... yes they'll make the trip unbareable at times, but overall... it makes them and you better people...

  89. Re:Oh no... by Big_Ass_Spork · · Score: 0

    ...actually I do drive a 2001 Dodge Stratus. Works for me...

  90. Well, eventually........ by ShadowRage · · Score: 1

    Living in your car wont be such a bad thing.
    screw houses, get a car.

  91. Shifts mental focus away from current reality by swb · · Score: 1

    I think it shifts your mental focus away from your physical reality to the artificial reality where the conversation takes place.

    For brief conversations which don't demand a lot of mental acuity, it's not that much more distraction than music or passengers or whatever. For complex conversations, it's deeply distracting -- you drive on autopilot.

    And the same can happen in reverse. I refuse to engage most people calling from cell phones because you can end up with "autopilot" conversations, where they don't say anything or just say "yeah" a lot.

  92. INTARWEBBBBBB by redJag · · Score: 1

    I can't believe no one has mentioned using this technology for internet access as you parade around the country in your SUV. This will be highly demanded........

  93. Having a bad day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet you have lots of bad days. If you can't be calm and civil, stay out of the conversation, or get some therapy.

  94. Rip out the gyros and put it on the roof by leob · · Score: 1

    I'd like to get rid of that ugly dish with an ugly contraption to receive signal from two satellites; where can I get the same flat thing to put on my roof, but without GPS and the gyros?

  95. Try DirecPC as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The same 'mobile' dishes that do TV signal can also do DirecPC data service as well. Granted this is only 1-way and requires a cellular-type uplink... I've done this and it seems to work well!

  96. Indoor installation by michaelhood · · Score: 0

    For what its worth, you can install the dish indoors aimed through a window if you have a clear view of the skies over Mexico (Southeast for us in CA, Southwest for people out East). Check it out. DirecTV has a free install right now 3-room deal going right now. $14.00 to get it setup.
    No, I don't work for DTV, I just took advantage of that deal recently. =)

  97. TracNet not new by inicom · · Score: 1

    TracNet's dbs antenna for yachts retrofitted for auto use is not new. It has been available for high-end customers at least a year down in South Florida. Once again slashdot gets the scoop on old news. The only new part of the story is that the new kvh antenna, the tracvision, is now low profile and actually designed for auto use.
    KVH is at here

    --
    -a.e.mossberg
  98. This is great...Drudgery. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dishwasher?

  99. ummm... excuse me, I need to go to the by iamhassi · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one that noticed it looks like a toilet seat?

    --
    my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  100. Heads up display by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally, I'm still waiting for those HUDs that were promised to us way back when with the flying cars. Speaking of which, just think of it: sat TV projected on to the windshield while you're driving. The big screen experience!

  101. What will people say in 10-20 years? by SurgeonGeneral · · Score: 1

    Look at the size of this thing! That is one massive antenna. Just strap a 4'-3' peice of electronic equipment to the roof rack of your utility vehicle and you're off! yeah ... It reminds me of those giantic portable phones they had back in World War 2 that came in a huge box. This is one of those gems thats breaking news today, but people will look back on in 10-20 years and gasp.

    --
    -- "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains." Jean Jacques Rousseau
  102. Proprietary, slapped-together hardware by SkewlD00d · · Score: 1
    user manual, installation manual (down). If they go out of biz, or decide not to support it, you're screwed. There's an unintegrated RF to IR converter, only 101* local channels (within the spot beam for your "home" area), no PPV, buggy receiver software from RCA/Thompson (power-cycle panacea the tech support harps on, and neither Thompson nor DirecTV will acknowledge, much less fix), and only their proprietary, custom receiver. Not to mention the $3500 price. Sounds like this PoS RCA DirecTV receiver I have that makes wierd noises when you scroll the guide, and randomly resets and freezes. LMAO!! The user manual claims "change channels when signals are weak because satellite signals are like broadcast ones" is bullshit, DirecTV and DISH, which use the exact same digital signal transmission techniques for their datastreams, use a more-or-less unified digital (TDM) datastream, except for the spot (locals; tend to be "stronger") and three satellite positions geostationary orbital. More "Quality" equipment w/ slick advertising.

    A simple, active, multi-phase patch antenna w/o LNBs (you add your own/installer provides) (for DISH & DirecTV, similar to one dish directv/dish quad LNBs, but sorta ghetto plus dish's locals on 61.5*) would be suffient w/ a wider range could be sold for the same and other purposes, and even used where a normal antenna wouldn't fit/be desired in a fixed location and at odd angles.

    --
    The biggest trick the devil pulled was letting lawyers become politicians so they can write the laws.
  103. God forbid you talk to your children, or GASP ... by JasonBigham · · Score: 1

    ... watch the road.

  104. All information wants to be free. by Thinkit3 · · Score: 1

    If I do give out my social security number, it is very hard to keep it from being copied. Once information is beamed everywhere on Earth, it's hard to keep it from being captured and decoded.

    --
    -Libertarian secular transhumanist
    1. Re:All information wants to be free. by jared_hanson · · Score: 1

      You are making my point for me. If information wants to be free, you should not even try to keep it from being copied. It should be distributed openly, hence you should be willing to give me your SSN.

      The only reason to protect the information with a key, and to keep that key secret, is because the information protected has value (read, is not free). In the case of your SSN, it is protecting personal information. In the case of DirecTV, it is protecting the content and the service they provide. It is not cheap to run a satellite TV business, so they need to protect the content to ensure its value.

      Extending this argument (which you appear not to disagree with) yeilds the reason why copyright and intellectual property are not evil. Copyright is simply a key used to protect information that has inherent value. Just as you will not give out your SSN due to the data it protects, creative professionals defend their copyright because of the work it protects.

      I hope this is becoming clearer for you now.

      You are acting like a hypocrite by directly contradicting your beleifs. Unless you can back up your beleifs with a solid argument, you should stop promoting them.

      --
      -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
  105. Addendum: by jared_hanson · · Score: 1

    Once information is beamed everywhere on Earth, it's hard to keep it from being captured and decoded.

    I want to clarify something. In the case of DirecTV beaming their signal, it is still hard to keep it from being decoded. This is because it is encrypted and the decryption is incredibly difficult.

    What they are not broadcasting is the decryption key, in much the same way you are not giving out your SSN.

    If information wants to be free and has no inherent value, DirecTV would just broadcast unencrypted audio/video signals. And, you would just give out your SSN. Anyone could pick up free tv and anyone could look up your private personal details.

    However, I'm sure you want to limit people's ability to do this, because those details are private (which is where their value lies.) The value in DirecTV's broadcast lies in the business expenses, which is why they don't broadcast unencrypted. Copyright is a legal key protecting creative works because their is value in the time spent creating them.

    Anyway, this turned more long winded than I intended. But, I just wanted to rephrase. I'd like to here your response to these arguments.

    --
    -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
  106. Property versus Information by Thinkit3 · · Score: 1

    Take information versus a banana, land, or a concert ticket. You can copy information, and the original is still there. You cannot do that with a banana. You can copy a land deed, but not the land. You can copy a concert ticket, but you can't shove two people in the same seat. Laws to prevent the free copying of information try to set up an artificial scarcity, and that is what is evil.

    --
    -Libertarian secular transhumanist
    1. Re:Property versus Information by jared_hanson · · Score: 1

      Laws to prevent the free copying of information try to set up an artificial scarcity, and that is what is evil.

      This is where you are misunderstood. Technology alone gives us a way to make information scarce. It is called encryption, and has been around for a long time. You can copy the encrypted stream over and over, but it is entirely meaningless without the decryption algorithm.

      In the DirecTV example, there are no laws requiring them to encrypt their broadcast. They do it to preserve the value in the service they run. Take credit card transactions, surely that information needs to be scarce, and scarcity is acheived by encrypting the data. Your SSN is a form of encrpytion for your personal data, albeit a pretty weak one. (Incidentally, you have ignored the issue entirely of why you refuse to give it out. I suspect because you realise that it invalidates your argument.)

      Now, on to the copyright issue. I think you come at it from the wrong angle. Copyright actually grants you the rights to copy data which you have purchased. You can be sure that, given the chance, most companies would encrypt everything they sell you and you could only access it on authorized devices. This is where the term "right" fits in copy"right". As a law, it is designed to give you the rights to make copies of that information which you own. It has been used sucessfully to argue against the DMCA. So, it can't be all bad now, can it?

      Now, I suspect you take issue with not being able to give copies of the data to everyone you know. Your desire to do this is ludicrous, as the information is not rightfully yours, in a moral sense as well as a legal sense. Sure, you are not stealing, per se, but you can't discount the fact that the information has value. The value flows in the reverse direction as the information. So, by you becoming the transmitter, you have lessened the value of the original creator. Even you admit the value of information, de facto, in not giving out your SSN.

      In short, encouraging the abolition of copyright, will only encourage the originators of the information to encrypt everything. At least with the way the system currently works, your rights are protected by law.

      --
      -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.