You mean like how "they" always assume worst case?
Peak Oil will hit in 2005 they told us, but that year came and went. They should have used a more conservative estimate and said 2030 will be the year, instead of going with worst case. IPv4 will probably run out in 2020 +/- a year or two.
>>>Because no president before Obama has ever made bad decisions on a large scale.::eye roll::
Right on! It's disgusting to see Obama posters with Hitler mustaches. I used to carry round a sign with Bush == Hitler, but to do it to Obama? Sacrilege.
- Then they turned-off analog broadcast, so the DVR was obsoleted too.
- Now I have to upgrade my browser to get IPv6 (whatever that is).
- Next I guess somebody will tell me the New Internet Explorer doesn't work on my XP netbook, or that I have to upgrade my radio to Digital Audio Broadcast
Mine usually last 1 or 2 times..... still nowhere near the 15-20 times advertised by lying manufacturers (or greens). Try Walmart. They have Philips' CFLs which is probably the best brand you can get (it's German-made) but still die very early.
"So assuming 1000 hours [typical life of my short-lived CFLs] that's 45 watts * hours == 45000 watt hours saved." - BTW the best way to save energy? Turn your Heat off during the day and night. You'll save MILLIONS of watthours per year, not just a few.
Your calculations only work if CFLs last as long as advertised. They typically don't. My CFLs have been burning out at the same frequency as my regular bulbs.
So assuming 1000 hours (typical life of normal 60 watt bulb) that's 45 watts * hours == 45000 watt hours saved.
Now I have to drive the damn Mercury-laced CFL to the recycling center (versus my regular bulbs which I just bury in the backyard with other biodegradable crap). It's 50 miles away or about 4 gallons burned round-trip. 4 gallons of gasoline == 460,000 watt hours burned (estimated).
-45,000 Whrs saved +460,000 wasted driving to recycle center ====== 415,000 MORE watt-hours used. See? Just as I said. CFLs use MORE energy not less. PLUS you have to add in the cost of the recycling center itself (which also burns energy capturing the mercury in a safe manner). C'mon. Are Congressmen so dumb they can't figure this out by themselves PRIOR to passing bad laws that outlaw incandescents? Incandescents are better for the environment.
You clearly don't understand transmitting data "back" to a favorite radio station (upto 50-60 miles distant) would require erecting a gigantic antenna and a 10,000 watt power supply.
Duh.
How on earth can people graduate from college with Engineering or Science degrees, and yet not understand the basics? Complexity is not the issue with creating a "backchannel" from user to station. POWER is the issue in order to overcome the huge distance.
- If the US followed international standards we'd be stuck with 325 line TV (used in UK and mainland EU from 1930s to 1980s). i.e. junk
- If the US followed international standards we'd be stuck with DAB radio which is junk.
- If the US followed standards we'd be stuck with MUSE HDTV which is junk (even though Japanese developed it).
- If the US followed standards we'd be stuck with DVB-T HDTV which is junk (doesn't have the 100 mile range necessary in the mostly-empty US).
- If the US followed standards we'd be stuck with GSM which is junk (at least compared to the Code-Division Multiplexing we currently use).
I think you get the idea.
Sometimes the US picks the better format. NTSC, 8VSB, HDR, CDMA - all better. NTSC had ~150 more lines than the early European standard. 8VSB works perfectly to reach across the largely empty Midwest (100 mile range). HDR has CD and Surround Sound quality, which is obviously better than the monoaural of DAB/MPEG1. And so on.
Sure AM is easy NOW but it wasn't easy when it was first developed in the 1910s or 20s.
Same with IBOC/HDR/ Right now it's hard to receive, but fast-forward to the year 2020 and we'll probably be doing it with $1 microcontrollers. It might even be a lab exercise in a college student's class.
A lot of Europe's programs on DAB were demoted from stereo to mono, to make more room. Others still have stereo but sound terrible. In contrast America's IBOC/HDR provides CD quality across two different channels (per station). Or FM quality across three channels (HD1/HD2/HD3). It sounds a LOT better than DAB does, while providing 3-4 times more choices than the old analog FM had.
The only reason the switch to digital is happening in the radio (well, audio)... could generate a lot of money for some people.
FLAW with your reasoning: Neither the AM nor FM bands are being sold off. When the analog-to-digital transition is complete, they will be the same size as always (530-1710 kHz and 88-108 MHz). At least that's the case in the US and Canada.
Even in Europe, I don't think your argument holds up. DAB occupies a portion of VHF channels 2-13. FM occupies the space between 6 and 7. Neither is any more valuable than the other.
The US does have RDS and my IBOC/HD Radio decodes it just fine, streaming the text across the screen. However it only exists on older analog stations. The stations that switched to digital eliminated RDS to make room for HD2/HD3 subchannels.
Good news: In 2022 or so, HD Radio will be patent free and then you don't need to deal with iBiquity any more.
Good news 2: It's probably only a matter of time until somebody hacks the data and reveals the hidden "secrets" so you don't need to pay iBiquity.
another AM Stereo debacle
Not the same thing. AM Stereo died because the 1979 FCC did not pick a single standard, which led to 3 different versions of AMS and confused customers. Therefore it died in the US, but succeeded in Europe and Australia (where a single standard was picked upfront).
This time the FCC is doing the right thing by picking a single digital standard and promoting it. Yes takeup is slow by so too was the digital TV takeup. When DTV was the same age as IBOC/HDR is now, less then 25% of Americans had the DTV tuner. Customers are simply slow to adopt new standards.
(1) Where are these "instant on" bulbs? I've tried Lights of America, GE, and Philips, and they ALL take 3-4 minutes to slowly rise from a dim brownish light to a bright white. All of them.
(2) CFLs can NOT be used in enclosed or upside-down fixtures. The trapped heat turns the capacitors into goop, and then they die.
(3) CFLs last 6000-15000 hours? HA! None of mine have. They don't live any longer than a regular bulb. See point 2.
(4) We're not living in the 1960s. Modern coal plants are required by US EPA to scrub their exhaust until there's nothing dangerous, so the argument "incadescents make more mercury" is null and void. Coal factories are not emitting any measurable amount of mercury. And just-built coal plants are 90% efficient so they too emit nothing dangerous.
.
(DON YOUR FLAME SHIELD). Ya know I'm tired of rude, inconsiderate people (not you specifically but in general) who claim "You're full of shit" and "CFLs are the next best thing to a Pentium 20," and ignore REAL WORLD RESULTS from people who have experienced nothing but headaches and trouble with these fancy new lightbulbs. IT'S RUDE to me and other, as if you think we are rednecks with no brains.
Rude!
I've had bulb after bulb die on me, and not live any longer than a regular bulb. They have SERIOUS flaws. Like the government of China has serious flaws. To sit there and say "there is nothing wrong with CFLs" sounds as stupid as when China proclaims everybody is happy. It's a LIE. I'm not happy; not one bit.
In MY experience (the only experience that matters to me) CFLs work about as well as a Yugo car. i.e. Unreliable junk that dies after only 20,000 miles instead of the advertised 100,000 miles on the back of the brochure.
But CFLs end up using MORE energy, not less, because they need special handling.
As some other guy said above: You save watt-hrs on use, but waste kilowatt-hrs on driving your dead bulbs to a special recycling center. "Penny wise; dollar foolish." Saving pennies on your bill; wasting dollars on special disposal.
Say what??? CFLs cost about ten times more than the Edison incadescent bulb. Also in my experience, almost none of them have lasted longer than the incandescents. They keep dying within 1-2 times the span of a regular bulb, thereby actually costing me MORE money to use, not less.
Of course I know why they die so fast. I have enclosed fixtures.
Am I supposed to go out and spend hundreds of dollars changing my home's fixtures from closed to open, just so I can save a few pennies with CFLs? That's bass-backwards. I have a better idea: Let's keep the incandescents because they aren't so damn fragile.
Creating an all-digital service band for DRM or DAB would not work either. Why? No free space in the spectrum. In Europe they were able to eliminate the old analog TV channels 2-13 and repurpose them for DAB, but here in the US this option does not exist (2-13 are occupied by digital TV).
The reason the FCC chose to shoehorn Digital IBOC/HD Radio on top of AM/FM bands was because (1) there was no other place to put it and (2) they knew it was only temporary; that analog would eventually be turned off as was done with analog TV.
Considering I can buy a HD Radio for $40-50 from amazon, the royalty fees must not be too "outrageous". In fact that's cheaper than the cost of a Sirius XM Radio, and you don't need to pay a monthly fee.
FOR ONCE IT SOUNDS LIKE AMERICA IS BETTER THAN EUROPE.
I think I'll faint.;-) Our digital radio provides upto 7 programs in the traditional 0.2 MHz FM slot. The quality can range anywhere from surround sound (1 program) to talk quality (7 programs). Most stations set up at CD quality (2-3 channels).
Same with our DTV where most stations broadcast 1 HD program and 1 SD program in each 6 MHz slot, and both look flawless. We don't have the multiplexing problems you are having in the UK where DAB and DTV sound/look like crap. .
One could say the same thing about Digital TV (a solution looking for a problem), but the benefits outweighed the risk. Where I used to get about 15 analog channels, now digital multiplexing allows me to get 40. Digital squeezes more in the same space and with improved quality (HD rather than VHS).
Same with digital radio. When the transition is finished (2020) you'll have three times as many stations on your FM Dial and twice as many on the AM dial. Plus you'll be able to get DVD quality (i.e. surround sound).
I can't speak for Americans in general, but I know I spend more time listening to the second channel (HD2) than the main radio channel. I would not be able to do that if we were still stuck with analog.
Your color TV is proprietary (developed by RCA in the 1930s and again in the 1950s). Ditto your radio (FM also developed by RCA) and your VCR (developed by JVC) and your CD (Sony/Philips) and DVD (DVD Consortium).
I don't see how that has destroyed society. Do you? On the contrary NTSC-I and NTSC-Color and FM and VHS (but not SVHS or DVHS) are all patent-free and open standards that benefit citizens everywhere. Eventually ATSC and HDR will be open too (around 2020).
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure Fox News will bill it as Obama trying to take over the internet. Your IP address will have to face a death panel!
It's FAUX news - as in fake news.
I hate them.
But I love Obama.
(Score:5, Insightful) - I used to carry round a sign with Bush == Hitler, but to do it to Obama? Sacrilege.
This is too funny. I was being sarcastic and yet the mods appear to agree comparing Bush to Hitler is acceptable.
Some people follow /. less than others and this is the first they ever 'erd of it
You mean like how "they" always assume worst case?
Peak Oil will hit in 2005 they told us, but that year came and went. They should have used a more conservative estimate and said 2030 will be the year, instead of going with worst case. IPv4 will probably run out in 2020 +/- a year or two.
>>>Because no president before Obama has ever made bad decisions on a large scale. ::eye roll::
Right on! It's disgusting to see Obama posters with Hitler mustaches. I used to carry round a sign with Bush == Hitler, but to do it to Obama? Sacrilege.
>>>I'm sure Fox News will bill it as Obama trying to take over the internet. Your IP address will have to face a death panel!
It's FAUX news - as in fake news.
I hate them.
But I love Mister Obama.
And the democrat-owned MSNBC (my favorite channel)
- First they obsoleted my VCR so I got a DVR.
- Then they turned-off analog broadcast, so the DVR was obsoleted too.
- Now I have to upgrade my browser to get IPv6 (whatever that is).
- Next I guess somebody will tell me the New Internet Explorer doesn't work on my XP netbook, or that I have to upgrade my radio to Digital Audio Broadcast
1/3rd a regular bulb's life? Wow that's bad!
Mine usually last 1 or 2 times..... still nowhere near the 15-20 times advertised by lying manufacturers (or greens). Try Walmart. They have Philips' CFLs which is probably the best brand you can get (it's German-made) but still die very early.
oops. FIX:
"So assuming 1000 hours [typical life of my short-lived CFLs] that's 45 watts * hours == 45000 watt hours saved." - BTW the best way to save energy? Turn your Heat off during the day and night. You'll save MILLIONS of watthours per year, not just a few.
Your calculations only work if CFLs last as long as advertised. They typically don't. My CFLs have been burning out at the same frequency as my regular bulbs.
So assuming 1000 hours (typical life of normal 60 watt bulb) that's 45 watts * hours == 45000 watt hours saved.
Now I have to drive the damn Mercury-laced CFL to the recycling center (versus my regular bulbs which I just bury in the backyard with other biodegradable crap). It's 50 miles away or about 4 gallons burned round-trip. 4 gallons of gasoline == 460,000 watt hours burned (estimated).
-45,000 Whrs saved
+460,000 wasted driving to recycle center
======
415,000 MORE watt-hours used. See? Just as I said. CFLs use MORE energy not less. PLUS you have to add in the cost of the recycling center itself (which also burns energy capturing the mercury in a safe manner). C'mon. Are Congressmen so dumb they can't figure this out by themselves PRIOR to passing bad laws that outlaw incandescents? Incandescents are better for the environment.
You clearly don't understand transmitting data "back" to a favorite radio station (upto 50-60 miles distant) would require erecting a gigantic antenna and a 10,000 watt power supply.
Duh.
How on earth can people graduate from college with Engineering or Science degrees, and yet not understand the basics? Complexity is not the issue with creating a "backchannel" from user to station. POWER is the issue in order to overcome the huge distance.
- If the US followed international standards we'd be stuck with 325 line TV (used in UK and mainland EU from 1930s to 1980s). i.e. junk
- If the US followed international standards we'd be stuck with DAB radio which is junk.
- If the US followed standards we'd be stuck with MUSE HDTV which is junk (even though Japanese developed it).
- If the US followed standards we'd be stuck with DVB-T HDTV which is junk (doesn't have the 100 mile range necessary in the mostly-empty US).
- If the US followed standards we'd be stuck with GSM which is junk (at least compared to the Code-Division Multiplexing we currently use).
I think you get the idea.
Sometimes the US picks the better format. NTSC, 8VSB, HDR, CDMA - all better. NTSC had ~150 more lines than the early European standard. 8VSB works perfectly to reach across the largely empty Midwest (100 mile range). HDR has CD and Surround Sound quality, which is obviously better than the monoaural of DAB/MPEG1. And so on.
Sure AM is easy NOW but it wasn't easy when it was first developed in the 1910s or 20s.
Same with IBOC/HDR/ Right now it's hard to receive, but fast-forward to the year 2020 and we'll probably be doing it with $1 microcontrollers. It might even be a lab exercise in a college student's class.
Well I severely disagree with that.
A lot of Europe's programs on DAB were demoted from stereo to mono, to make more room. Others still have stereo but sound terrible. In contrast America's IBOC/HDR provides CD quality across two different channels (per station). Or FM quality across three channels (HD1/HD2/HD3). It sounds a LOT better than DAB does, while providing 3-4 times more choices than the old analog FM had.
The only reason the switch to digital is happening in the radio (well, audio)... could generate a lot of money for some people.
FLAW with your reasoning: Neither the AM nor FM bands are being sold off. When the analog-to-digital transition is complete, they will be the same size as always (530-1710 kHz and 88-108 MHz). At least that's the case in the US and Canada.
Even in Europe, I don't think your argument holds up. DAB occupies a portion of VHF channels 2-13. FM occupies the space between 6 and 7. Neither is any more valuable than the other.
False.
The US does have RDS and my IBOC/HD Radio decodes it just fine, streaming the text across the screen. However it only exists on older analog stations. The stations that switched to digital eliminated RDS to make room for HD2/HD3 subchannels.
Good news: In 2022 or so, HD Radio will be patent free and then you don't need to deal with iBiquity any more.
Good news 2: It's probably only a matter of time until somebody hacks the data and reveals the hidden "secrets" so you don't need to pay iBiquity.
another AM Stereo debacle
Not the same thing. AM Stereo died because the 1979 FCC did not pick a single standard, which led to 3 different versions of AMS and confused customers. Therefore it died in the US, but succeeded in Europe and Australia (where a single standard was picked upfront).
This time the FCC is doing the right thing by picking a single digital standard and promoting it. Yes takeup is slow by so too was the digital TV takeup. When DTV was the same age as IBOC/HDR is now, less then 25% of Americans had the DTV tuner. Customers are simply slow to adopt new standards.
(1) Where are these "instant on" bulbs? I've tried Lights of America, GE, and Philips, and they ALL take 3-4 minutes to slowly rise from a dim brownish light to a bright white. All of them.
(2) CFLs can NOT be used in enclosed or upside-down fixtures. The trapped heat turns the capacitors into goop, and then they die.
(3) CFLs last 6000-15000 hours? HA! None of mine have. They don't live any longer than a regular bulb. See point 2.
(4) We're not living in the 1960s. Modern coal plants are required by US EPA to scrub their exhaust until there's nothing dangerous, so the argument "incadescents make more mercury" is null and void. Coal factories are not emitting any measurable amount of mercury. And just-built coal plants are 90% efficient so they too emit nothing dangerous.
.
(DON YOUR FLAME SHIELD). Ya know I'm tired of rude, inconsiderate people (not you specifically but in general) who claim "You're full of shit" and "CFLs are the next best thing to a Pentium 20," and ignore REAL WORLD RESULTS from people who have experienced nothing but headaches and trouble with these fancy new lightbulbs. IT'S RUDE to me and other, as if you think we are rednecks with no brains.
Rude!
I've had bulb after bulb die on me, and not live any longer than a regular bulb. They have SERIOUS flaws. Like the government of China has serious flaws. To sit there and say "there is nothing wrong with CFLs" sounds as stupid as when China proclaims everybody is happy. It's a LIE. I'm not happy; not one bit.
In MY experience (the only experience that matters to me) CFLs work about as well as a Yugo car. i.e. Unreliable junk that dies after only 20,000 miles instead of the advertised 100,000 miles on the back of the brochure.
But CFLs end up using MORE energy, not less, because they need special handling.
As some other guy said above: You save watt-hrs on use, but waste kilowatt-hrs on driving your dead bulbs to a special recycling center. "Penny wise; dollar foolish." Saving pennies on your bill; wasting dollars on special disposal.
Say what??? CFLs cost about ten times more than the Edison incadescent bulb. Also in my experience, almost none of them have lasted longer than the incandescents. They keep dying within 1-2 times the span of a regular bulb, thereby actually costing me MORE money to use, not less.
Of course I know why they die so fast. I have enclosed fixtures.
Am I supposed to go out and spend hundreds of dollars changing my home's fixtures from closed to open, just so I can save a few pennies with CFLs? That's bass-backwards. I have a better idea: Let's keep the incandescents because they aren't so damn fragile.
P.S.
Creating an all-digital service band for DRM or DAB would not work either. Why? No free space in the spectrum. In Europe they were able to eliminate the old analog TV channels 2-13 and repurpose them for DAB, but here in the US this option does not exist (2-13 are occupied by digital TV).
The reason the FCC chose to shoehorn Digital IBOC/HD Radio on top of AM/FM bands was because (1) there was no other place to put it and (2) they knew it was only temporary; that analog would eventually be turned off as was done with analog TV.
Considering I can buy a HD Radio for $40-50 from amazon, the royalty fees must not be too "outrageous".
In fact that's cheaper than the cost of a Sirius XM Radio, and you don't need to pay a monthly fee.
FOR ONCE IT SOUNDS LIKE AMERICA IS BETTER THAN EUROPE.
I think I'll faint. ;-) Our digital radio provides upto 7 programs in the traditional 0.2 MHz FM slot. The quality can range anywhere from surround sound (1 program) to talk quality (7 programs). Most stations set up at CD quality (2-3 channels).
Same with our DTV where most stations broadcast 1 HD program and 1 SD program in each 6 MHz slot, and both look flawless. We don't have the multiplexing problems you are having in the UK where DAB and DTV sound/look like crap.
.
DRM+ probably drains batteries faster because it's using MPEG4 (versus MPEG1 MP2 for DAB) which requires more processing power, more watts, et cetera.
IBOC/HD Radio also uses MPEG4. It gives you near-CD quality at only 40 kb/s
I'm in the US.
One could say the same thing about Digital TV (a solution looking for a problem), but the benefits outweighed the risk. Where I used to get about 15 analog channels, now digital multiplexing allows me to get 40. Digital squeezes more in the same space and with improved quality (HD rather than VHS).
Same with digital radio. When the transition is finished (2020) you'll have three times as many stations on your FM Dial and twice as many on the AM dial. Plus you'll be able to get DVD quality (i.e. surround sound).
I can't speak for Americans in general, but I know I spend more time
listening to the second channel (HD2) than the main radio channel.
I would not be able to do that if we were still stuck with analog.
Your color TV is proprietary (developed by RCA in the 1930s and again in the 1950s). Ditto your radio (FM also developed by RCA) and your VCR (developed by JVC) and your CD (Sony/Philips) and DVD (DVD Consortium).
I don't see how that has destroyed society. Do you? On the contrary NTSC-I and NTSC-Color and FM and VHS (but not SVHS or DVHS) are all patent-free and open standards that benefit citizens everywhere. Eventually ATSC and HDR will be open too (around 2020).