The Segway HT is not about what it can do now, but about what it promises about the future of human transportation.
Yes, you're absolutely right. The fools that cannot see this have no vision. The segway represents the future of humanity, the start of a new evolution... In the future humans will no longer need legs.
Screw my bike.. Bikes are for suckers. Those fools will be peddling away on the shoulder, while I glide effortlessly on the sidewalk.
And, those walkers.. jostling with the other peasants. Let them dare to cross my path, and the will feel the force of my massive Segway travelling at it's top speed of 12.5 mph.
This seems like a cool box for the Europeans among us. But, for the Americans, it's not very useful. DVB is a European satellite standard. The American satellite services, DirecTV and Dish Network are completely proprietary.
Another factor, that I am sure is not lost on the government leaders in Bangalore, is that Bill Gates is also using this trip to trumpet the Gates Foundation's donation of hundreds of millions of dollars to help the sick/poor of India. Regardless of the motive, Gates' philanthropic efforts are extraordinarily generous. I'm sure this contributes to them speaking up in Bill's defense.
I wonder how Stallman was generally received in India. He has a reputation of being difficult to deal with, and aggressively confrontational on tangential issues (e.g. shouting matches about making sure the transcripts of his speech were freely available). This may be tolerated in the U.S. where his reputation and eccentricities are known. But, in a country less familiar with him, would he just be dismissed as a jackass?
And lastly.. The attitude of the gov't representative in Bangalore is disappointing. India's intellectual wealth is probably it's greatest resource. Particularly in a high-tech center like Bangalore, they should be easily able to employ linux / free software experts. But, the Indian government has never been known as progressive, or embracing of change. Some well placed donations above board, and greased palms under the covers goes a long way.
I think people are blowing this out of proportion. Moxi was an independent company until about 6 months ago, when they were bought by Digeo (Allen's company). So, there was a choice then to scrap all the Linux work and start from the ground up with WinCE or XP-embedded. Or, they could take the easier path and finish their Linux project.
I'm sure the costs or WinXX, and power of Linux were factors in that decision. But, it's not like he just snubbed MS, his cash cow, because Linux was too compelling.
If this actually ships near the first of the year, like the article claims, it will be the first commercial HDTV PVR.
Of course, since they mention that it will be sold as a customized box for cable & satellite services, it's not clear what 'shipping' means. Does that mean that Moxi is done with the platform, or that DirecTV/Dish will be ready to ship a unit that I can buy?
If it's the former, it will be quite a while until we see these.
There is a lot of discussion on delivery of movies via the Internet. Not only here at slashdot, but this is also used as justification for all the DRM stuff in Congress.
But, who would actually use this? Sure, dorm dwellers might want to watch TV & movies on their computer monitor to save space. But, they can already do that with DVD's.
At home, there is no way I'm gonna watch a movie on my 19" monitor rather than my expensive TV. On my big screen, the quality is even more important. I'm looking to upgrade to HDTV on D-VHS or HD-DVD, not downgrade to grainy overcompressed low bitrate formats.
This looks like a good opportunity to realize your limitations. Taking courses at MIT, with the prof's, TA's, & classmates to confer with would be difficult enough.
Taking the same things remotely / autonomously sounds impossible.
When they put the courseware for St. Clair County Community College online, it might me a bit more accessible to us commoners.
Cliff's comments are just as uninformed as the orignal contributor's:
About the only way that this can happen by the recently proposed deadline of July 1st, 2007, without trashing and replacing the majority of our current televisions, American television owners would have to have their TVs "serviced" by a qualified technician to continue to receive broadcast signals. Having a secondary tuner would not work as that would break the "trusted" display chain that Hollywood is seeking to establish.
This is completely incorrect. All that will be needed on existing TV's is a simple DTV receiver that will downconvert the signal to NTSC. All current HDTV receivers do this, and without the need for the HDTV components, the downconverting DTV receiver can be made very cheaply. Especially considering the economies of scale with the millions of boxes needed.
No "qualified technician" needs to service your TV. It's equivalent to hooking up a cable box, and simpler than connecting a VCR.
His point about the "trusted chain" is wrong. Since the output we're talking about here is plain old 480i NTSC, it does not fall into the protected realm. In fact, the threat of the legislation that the Hollywood-owned congressman are proposing is that on an unsecured output (like my analog component video outputs) that the signal will not be available in HD, it will be downconverted to NTSC (or possibly 480p, the level of downconversion is unclear). So, even in the worst case scenario, the 480i NTSC output is still available for existing TV's and VCR's.
Check out the prime time lineup from CBS or ABC. They are already broadcasting a large percentage of High Definition programs. NBC is coming along a bit more slowly, but moving in the right direction, Leno has been in HDTV for years, and in December Conan O'Brien will be in HD. PBS does a lot of really impressive science and nature specials in HD. Even WB is broadcasting some of their lineun in HD this fall.
The only networks talking about doing multicasting are the fringe guys, like PAX. I don't know about you, but I don't care what format they broadcast in, it could be 3D Holodck format, I still wouldn't watch PAX.
There are two completely seperate issues that most here can't seem to see.
One is a purely technology issue: converting a 50 year old analog broadcast system to a modern digital system, with many technical advantages.
The other is political: Hollywood, and the congressmen they own, are trying to subvert the open system to extend their control to unprecedented levels.
Now, even the tech issue is being misrepresented here. What's this garbage about throwing away all existing TV's? A simple digital receiver will output NTSC that your existing TV and VCR can use. These are already available, and will be VERY cheap once people start converting.
The technological advantages are very clear, DTV allows 6x the resolution of DVD's (1920x1080), Dolby Digital 5.1 sound, sub-channels to display more than one program per channel, program guide data included in signal, and a perfect digital picture - free of static/ghosting/fuzzines/etc.
Check out this site for some screenshots to demonstrate the quality of HDTV broadcasts.
As a big fan of HDTV, I hate the Hollywood efforts as much as anyone. But, these misconceptions only cloud the true issues.
Where is all this FUD coming from? It seems that every HDTV article here is based on these same sensational misconceptions.
Every DTV / HDTV receiver available today supports output via standard NTSC. They can downconvert the image to be displayed on any existing TV. Given the economies of scale, with 100's of millions of existing sets, you can expect these DTV receivers to be very inexpensive.
Then, all of those existing TV's with their fuzzy, snowy, shadowed NTSC reception will have a clear digital picture.
Those with cable TV or satellite will be even less effected. As they can do the conversion at the head end. And, when the customer wants to do true HDTV, they can upgrade their set top box.
Other options
on
Tiny Boxen
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
There are several other small boards that would make excellent Linux network servers. But, most of the ones I have seen are not sold in small quantities.
I have struggled with this same problem in the past. Especially when I had a desktop computer at work. All my data was split between several places, and multiple computers at each place.
Getting a laptop helped with having my files available wherever I am. But, I still use multiple systems, so keeping all my data on my laptop wasn't good enough. The best solution for me was to keep everything in a network accessible location.
For some, a My Yahoo! account might be good enough. Online e-mail, address book, notes, pictures, bookmarks, all www accessible. But, only somewhat configurable, advertising based, and limited to what they implement.
I have instead centralized my data on my Linux server, which is remotely accessible via my DSL connection.
Some simple PHP scripts, and a MySQL back end make a great searchable bookmark storage. A WWW frontend to a calendaring system also stored in MySQL. WWW/PHP accessible e-mail accounts (with Spam Assassin filtering out the garbage, and the ability to create many e-mail addresses - one for each service I sign up for, so I can determine who gives my address to spammers), To-Do list in PHP/MySQL. Files could be centrally accessible via Samba or HTTP.
Add a firewall to control access, and VPN if you're really ambitious,and it works like a charm.
The only time I don't have my data is when I have no net access (which is becoming increasingly rare). For those occasions, I need to improve my data synch-ing processes for my Zaurus.
The great thing about this one is support for HDTV. There are severl "roll your own" options for HDTV PVR's. But, this will be the first off the shelf version (assuming it beats The Dish Network's HD PVR to market in the U.S.).
If it supports satellite TV reception, I will be first in line for one of these things.
If not, I will probably stick with my HDTV PCI card, homebrew PVR. Even though it's Windows based, it is an open usage system, which allows more flexibility than a closed system that I assume Sony would provide.
Devices already exist to do this, without their kludgery of needing a laptop to actually do the IR transmission.
The Philips Pronto is the most popular of the fully programmable universal remote. You can control thousands of devices with the Pronto, including X10 modules to control lamps, fans, and other appliances.
It has a PC application to set set the GUI for controlling all the devices. It comes pre-programmed for many devices, and just about any other can be downloaded from various internet sites or manufacturers.
The GUI to program it has a bit of a learning curve. If they wanted to make that process even easier, they could have saved a lot of effort by just making a better config GUI, rather than re-inventing the hardware.
Another option, if you really want a PDA as your remote is the Nevo software for the new iPaq, which includes a more powerful IR transmitter.
I just got back from my first business trip to Tokyo, and I was surprised to see there that they had numerous competing DSL providers, each providing much higher bandwidth at lower prices than you can find in the U.S.
Yahoo!/Softbank had the best offering: 12Mbps DSL for ~ US$19/month!!! This would be amazing in the U.S., but factor in that Tokyo is a ridiculously expensive city, and it's even more amazing. A cappucino in my mid-range business hotel costs ~ $6.
What do we need to do for that kind of service here? I am paying over 3x that much, for a 1.5Mbps DSL service.
Whether the information is on the physical card makes no difference. In fact, most likely you would not want to store much information on the card. Only the basic: name, address, physical characteristics, digitized picture, and that sort should be stored on the card. Just enough to make it roughly equivalent to a current ID, but a bit stronger.
For any effective system, the DB should be centrally managed. Both for revocation of ID's, and for security of the sensitive content.
The card has the person's private key, stored in a physically secure chip. That key can be authenticated against the government's issuing authority (as can the validity of the data on the card).
Then, data can be accessed from the central DB, according to the privileges allowed the requestor of the data, on the authority of the cardholder.
There are obvious security / privacy concerns. Particularly if the entity you fear abuse from the most is the government. But, it has the potential to offer a lot more privacy and security than current completely insecure systems.
The FCC has mandated broadcasters convert to digital broadcasts by 2006. This is an ongoing process, and many (most in my area) already broadcast digitally.
This new mandate addresses TV manufacturers, requiring them to include digital tuners in ALL TV's by 2007. It requires them in all 36" and larger TV's by 2004 (a pretty agressive time line).
This follows the FCC's strong recommendation (not requirement) for the major TV networks to provide at least half of their prime time programming in HDTV. CBS hsa been doing that for a long time, ABC is quickly catching up, and NBC (the laggard) should be there in the new fall season. Fox provides digital widescreen (480p) programming already, and even WB will be doing HDTV in the fall. HBO and Showtime also have a HDTV channel, with a lot of 1080i movies.
So, this is a major step in the FCC's digital conversion plan.
- Make DTV broadcasts available to everyone; well on it's way. - Make more HDTV content available; moving along nicely. - and lastly, make the TV sets that people buy support DTV. This was a bit tougher, because all the other forces effecting the Consumer Electronics industry (like the MPAA). But, this is a swift kick in the ass from the FCC, which should take care of it.
Actually, MANY people own HDTV's. Most of the mid to high end TV's sold over the last few years have been HDTV capable.
But, very few of those people with HD capable sets have taken the next step and bought a HD receiver. Most of those people got their HD and/or Widescreen TV to play DVD's.
So, an HD DVD standard would be the logical next step for this market. (Although I don't have much hope for the Blue-Ray DVD's doing good quality HD). D-VHS will still be much higher quality.
People won't start buying the HD decoders until the marketing picks up. As is obvious here, people don't understand the value of Digital TV, or the amount of programming already out there.
Currently, none of the commercial PVR manufacturers support HDTV. So, if you want to record Digital TV, you need to build your own. By the way, Digital TV is great for PVR's, no compression is needed, the TV program is an MPEG2 stream - making the PVR's job easy. This is very similar to the PVR's for DirecTV.
There are a few choices for HDTV PVR cards: Telemann Hipix - They have a semi-open source project for their Windows drivers. Availability seems to be a problem. AccessDTV - Has some nice features, like pausing live TV. But, they have some drawkacks - Locked video files, so they can only be played back on the same machine - and their PVR guide is a subscription service. MyHD - Newer card, some nice features like DVD vob playback (scaled to 1080i or 720p, looks great!) Hauppage WinTV-HD - Not sure if this is still sold. Not well supported if it is.
Pop one of these into a computer system, add a big hard drive to hold those HD programs (~ 9GB/hr), and off you go.
I use the MyHD card, and I have been using the DVD scaling feature as much as the HDTV reception. I copy my DVD's to the hard drive of my system, and now I have a pretty nice video library, with immediate access - no swapping disks.
As others have pointed out, the USPS could not just come in and 'own' e-mail, they could provide an e-mail service, that people would use only if it provided enough value to justify the cost.
Most likely, the main users would have been business customers, who were willing to pay for the services.
Having a central, semi-trusted authority, employing sound technologies, could have taken e-mail much farther than it is today. Features like:
- Useful encrypted e-mail (i.e. a central certificate authority, with a strong registration process). - Based on a modern protocol with some assurances of identity. SMTP is trivial to spoof, but is so widespread it's impossible to replace. It would take an organization with some clout to promote a new open standard. - SPAM control
When people hear of the USPS doing e-mail, they think of their local mail carriers and laugh. Obviously it would not be run by those people, it would be a group of trained specialists designing and implementing it.
Of course, I still would not trust them with my e-mail, or pay them for the service. But, I bet my employer would. And, I bet I would use the GNU version of their open standards and strong security on my Linux box.
So, I either have fast access for lots of files I don't need fast access for
Why do you assume that there is no need for fast access? Even if fast access is not an issue, how about concurrent access.. if a few people in the office need access to data on DVD's, that jukebox will be doing some major thrashing.
Also, you don't account for the cost of the DVD Media, or the time required to burn hundreds of DVD's.
Slashdot Mirror
The Segway HT is not about what it can do now, but about what it promises about the future of human transportation.
Yes, you're absolutely right. The fools that cannot see this have no vision. The segway represents the future of humanity, the start of a new evolution... In the future humans will no longer need legs.
Screw my bike.. Bikes are for suckers. Those fools will be peddling away on the shoulder, while I glide effortlessly on the sidewalk.
And, those walkers.. jostling with the other peasants. Let them dare to cross my path, and the will feel the force of my massive Segway travelling at it's top speed of 12.5 mph.
This seems like a cool box for the Europeans among us. But, for the Americans, it's not very useful. DVB is a European satellite standard. The American satellite services, DirecTV and Dish Network are completely proprietary.
Another factor, that I am sure is not lost on the government leaders in Bangalore, is that Bill Gates is also using this trip to trumpet the Gates Foundation's donation of hundreds of millions of dollars to help the sick/poor of India. Regardless of the motive, Gates' philanthropic efforts are extraordinarily generous. I'm sure this contributes to them speaking up in Bill's defense.
I wonder how Stallman was generally received in India. He has a reputation of being difficult to deal with, and aggressively confrontational on tangential issues (e.g. shouting matches about making sure the transcripts of his speech were freely available). This may be tolerated in the U.S. where his reputation and eccentricities are known. But, in a country less familiar with him, would he just be dismissed as a jackass?
And lastly.. The attitude of the gov't representative in Bangalore is disappointing. India's intellectual wealth is probably it's greatest resource. Particularly in a high-tech center like Bangalore, they should be easily able to employ linux / free software experts. But, the Indian government has never been known as progressive, or embracing of change. Some well placed donations above board, and greased palms under the covers goes a long way.
I think people are blowing this out of proportion. Moxi was an independent company until about 6 months ago, when they were bought by Digeo (Allen's company). So, there was a choice then to scrap all the Linux work and start from the ground up with WinCE or XP-embedded. Or, they could take the easier path and finish their Linux project.
I'm sure the costs or WinXX, and power of Linux were factors in that decision. But, it's not like he just snubbed MS, his cash cow, because Linux was too compelling.
If this actually ships near the first of the year, like the article claims, it will be the first commercial HDTV PVR.
Of course, since they mention that it will be sold as a customized box for cable & satellite services, it's not clear what 'shipping' means. Does that mean that Moxi is done with the platform, or that DirecTV/Dish will be ready to ship a unit that I can buy?
If it's the former, it will be quite a while until we see these.
There is a lot of discussion on delivery of movies via the Internet. Not only here at slashdot, but this is also used as justification for all the DRM stuff in Congress.
But, who would actually use this? Sure, dorm dwellers might want to watch TV & movies on their computer monitor to save space. But, they can already do that with DVD's.
At home, there is no way I'm gonna watch a movie on my 19" monitor rather than my expensive TV. On my big screen, the quality is even more important. I'm looking to upgrade to HDTV on D-VHS or HD-DVD, not downgrade to grainy overcompressed low bitrate formats.
This looks like a good opportunity to realize your limitations. Taking courses at MIT, with the prof's, TA's, & classmates to confer with would be difficult enough.
Taking the same things remotely / autonomously sounds impossible.
When they put the courseware for St. Clair County Community College online, it might me a bit more accessible to us commoners.
Cliff's comments are just as uninformed as the orignal contributor's:
About the only way that this can happen by the recently proposed deadline of July 1st, 2007, without trashing and replacing the majority of our current televisions, American television owners would have to have their TVs "serviced" by a qualified technician to continue to receive broadcast signals. Having a secondary tuner would not work as that would break the "trusted" display chain that Hollywood is seeking to establish.
This is completely incorrect. All that will be needed on existing TV's is a simple DTV receiver that will downconvert the signal to NTSC. All current HDTV receivers do this, and without the need for the HDTV components, the downconverting DTV receiver can be made very cheaply. Especially considering the economies of scale with the millions of boxes needed.
No "qualified technician" needs to service your TV. It's equivalent to hooking up a cable box, and simpler than connecting a VCR.
His point about the "trusted chain" is wrong. Since the output we're talking about here is plain old 480i NTSC, it does not fall into the protected realm. In fact, the threat of the legislation that the Hollywood-owned congressman are proposing is that on an unsecured output (like my analog component video outputs) that the signal will not be available in HD, it will be downconverted to NTSC (or possibly 480p, the level of downconversion is unclear). So, even in the worst case scenario, the 480i NTSC output is still available for existing TV's and VCR's.
FUD. This is already not true.
Check out the prime time lineup from CBS or ABC. They are already broadcasting a large percentage of High Definition programs. NBC is coming along a bit more slowly, but moving in the right direction, Leno has been in HDTV for years, and in December Conan O'Brien will be in HD. PBS does a lot of really impressive science and nature specials in HD. Even WB is broadcasting some of their lineun in HD this fall.
The only networks talking about doing multicasting are the fringe guys, like PAX. I don't know about you, but I don't care what format they broadcast in, it could be 3D Holodck format, I still wouldn't watch PAX.
There are two completely seperate issues that most here can't seem to see.
One is a purely technology issue: converting a 50 year old analog broadcast system to a modern digital system, with many technical advantages.
The other is political: Hollywood, and the congressmen they own, are trying to subvert the open system to extend their control to unprecedented levels.
Now, even the tech issue is being misrepresented here. What's this garbage about throwing away all existing TV's? A simple digital receiver will output NTSC that your existing TV and VCR can use. These are already available, and will be VERY cheap once people start converting.
The technological advantages are very clear, DTV allows 6x the resolution of DVD's (1920x1080), Dolby Digital 5.1 sound, sub-channels to display more than one program per channel, program guide data included in signal, and a perfect digital picture - free of static/ghosting/fuzzines/etc.
Check out this site for some screenshots to demonstrate the quality of HDTV broadcasts.
As a big fan of HDTV, I hate the Hollywood efforts as much as anyone. But, these misconceptions only cloud the true issues.
Where is all this FUD coming from? It seems that every HDTV article here is based on these same sensational misconceptions.
Every DTV / HDTV receiver available today supports output via standard NTSC. They can downconvert the image to be displayed on any existing TV. Given the economies of scale, with 100's of millions of existing sets, you can expect these DTV receivers to be very inexpensive.
Then, all of those existing TV's with their fuzzy, snowy, shadowed NTSC reception will have a clear digital picture.
Those with cable TV or satellite will be even less effected. As they can do the conversion at the head end. And, when the customer wants to do true HDTV, they can upgrade their set top box.
There are several other small boards that would make excellent Linux network servers. But, most of the ones I have seen are not sold in small quantities.
Such as this board: Nexcom EBC563
It uses the low power / low heat VIA C3. The C3 is MUCH faster than the Geode used in the "OpenBrick". It has 3 NIC's, making it a great firewall.
Now, only if I could buy it, in a small case..
I have struggled with this same problem in the past. Especially when I had a desktop computer at work. All my data was split between several places, and multiple computers at each place.
Getting a laptop helped with having my files available wherever I am. But, I still use multiple systems, so keeping all my data on my laptop wasn't good enough. The best solution for me was to keep everything in a network accessible location.
For some, a My Yahoo! account might be good enough. Online e-mail, address book, notes, pictures, bookmarks, all www accessible. But, only somewhat configurable, advertising based, and limited to what they implement.
I have instead centralized my data on my Linux server, which is remotely accessible via my DSL connection.
Some simple PHP scripts, and a MySQL back end make a great searchable bookmark storage. A WWW frontend to a calendaring system also stored in MySQL. WWW/PHP accessible e-mail accounts (with Spam Assassin filtering out the garbage, and the ability to create many e-mail addresses - one for each service I sign up for, so I can determine who gives my address to spammers), To-Do list in PHP/MySQL. Files could be centrally accessible via Samba or HTTP.
Add a firewall to control access, and VPN if you're really ambitious,and it works like a charm.
The only time I don't have my data is when I have no net access (which is becoming increasingly rare). For those occasions, I need to improve my data synch-ing processes for my Zaurus.
The great thing about this one is support for HDTV. There are severl "roll your own" options for HDTV PVR's. But, this will be the first off the shelf version (assuming it beats The Dish Network's HD PVR to market in the U.S.).
If it supports satellite TV reception, I will be first in line for one of these things.
If not, I will probably stick with my HDTV PCI card, homebrew PVR. Even though it's Windows based, it is an open usage system, which allows more flexibility than a closed system that I assume Sony would provide.
Devices already exist to do this, without their kludgery of needing a laptop to actually do the IR transmission.
The Philips Pronto is the most popular of the fully programmable universal remote. You can control thousands of devices with the Pronto, including X10 modules to control lamps, fans, and other appliances.
It has a PC application to set set the GUI for controlling all the devices. It comes pre-programmed for many devices, and just about any other can be downloaded from various internet sites or manufacturers.
The GUI to program it has a bit of a learning curve. If they wanted to make that process even easier, they could have saved a lot of effort by just making a better config GUI, rather than re-inventing the hardware.
Another option, if you really want a PDA as your remote is the Nevo software for the new iPaq, which includes a more powerful IR transmitter.
I just got back from my first business trip to Tokyo, and I was surprised to see there that they had numerous competing DSL providers, each providing much higher bandwidth at lower prices than you can find in the U.S.
Yahoo!/Softbank had the best offering: 12Mbps DSL for ~ US$19/month!!! This would be amazing in the U.S., but factor in that Tokyo is a ridiculously expensive city, and it's even more amazing. A cappucino in my mid-range business hotel costs ~ $6.
What do we need to do for that kind of service here? I am paying over 3x that much, for a 1.5Mbps DSL service.
Whether the information is on the physical card makes no difference. In fact, most likely you would not want to store much information on the card. Only the basic: name, address, physical characteristics, digitized picture, and that sort should be stored on the card. Just enough to make it roughly equivalent to a current ID, but a bit stronger.
For any effective system, the DB should be centrally managed. Both for revocation of ID's, and for security of the sensitive content.
The card has the person's private key, stored in a physically secure chip. That key can be authenticated against the government's issuing authority (as can the validity of the data on the card).
Then, data can be accessed from the central DB, according to the privileges allowed the requestor of the data, on the authority of the cardholder.
There are obvious security / privacy concerns. Particularly if the entity you fear abuse from the most is the government. But, it has the potential to offer a lot more privacy and security than current completely insecure systems.
The FCC has mandated broadcasters convert to digital broadcasts by 2006. This is an ongoing process, and many (most in my area) already broadcast digitally.
This new mandate addresses TV manufacturers, requiring them to include digital tuners in ALL TV's by 2007. It requires them in all 36" and larger TV's by 2004 (a pretty agressive time line).
This follows the FCC's strong recommendation (not requirement) for the major TV networks to provide at least half of their prime time programming in HDTV. CBS hsa been doing that for a long time, ABC is quickly catching up, and NBC (the laggard) should be there in the new fall season. Fox provides digital widescreen (480p) programming already, and even WB will be doing HDTV in the fall. HBO and Showtime also have a HDTV channel, with a lot of 1080i movies.
So, this is a major step in the FCC's digital conversion plan.
- Make DTV broadcasts available to everyone; well on it's way.
- Make more HDTV content available; moving along nicely.
- and lastly, make the TV sets that people buy support DTV. This was a bit tougher, because all the other forces effecting the Consumer Electronics industry (like the MPAA). But, this is a swift kick in the ass from the FCC, which should take care of it.
Actually, MANY people own HDTV's. Most of the mid to high end TV's sold over the last few years have been HDTV capable.
But, very few of those people with HD capable sets have taken the next step and bought a HD receiver. Most of those people got their HD and/or Widescreen TV to play DVD's.
So, an HD DVD standard would be the logical next step for this market. (Although I don't have much hope for the Blue-Ray DVD's doing good quality HD). D-VHS will still be much higher quality.
People won't start buying the HD decoders until the marketing picks up. As is obvious here, people don't understand the value of Digital TV, or the amount of programming already out there.
Currently, none of the commercial PVR manufacturers support HDTV. So, if you want to record Digital TV, you need to build your own. By the way, Digital TV is great for PVR's, no compression is needed, the TV program is an MPEG2 stream - making the PVR's job easy. This is very similar to the PVR's for DirecTV.
There are a few choices for HDTV PVR cards:
Telemann Hipix - They have a semi-open source project for their Windows drivers. Availability seems to be a problem.
AccessDTV - Has some nice features, like pausing live TV. But, they have some drawkacks - Locked video files, so they can only be played back on the same machine - and their PVR guide is a subscription service.
MyHD - Newer card, some nice features like DVD vob playback (scaled to 1080i or 720p, looks great!)
Hauppage WinTV-HD - Not sure if this is still sold. Not well supported if it is.
Pop one of these into a computer system, add a big hard drive to hold those HD programs (~ 9GB/hr), and off you go.
I use the MyHD card, and I have been using the DVD scaling feature as much as the HDTV reception. I copy my DVD's to the hard drive of my system, and now I have a pretty nice video library, with immediate access - no swapping disks.
As others have pointed out, the USPS could not just come in and 'own' e-mail, they could provide an e-mail service, that people would use only if it provided enough value to justify the cost.
Most likely, the main users would have been business customers, who were willing to pay for the services.
Having a central, semi-trusted authority, employing sound technologies, could have taken e-mail much farther than it is today. Features like:
- Useful encrypted e-mail (i.e. a central certificate authority, with a strong registration process).
- Based on a modern protocol with some assurances of identity. SMTP is trivial to spoof, but is so widespread it's impossible to replace. It would take an organization with some clout to promote a new open standard.
- SPAM control
When people hear of the USPS doing e-mail, they think of their local mail carriers and laugh. Obviously it would not be run by those people, it would be a group of trained specialists designing and implementing it.
Of course, I still would not trust them with my e-mail, or pay them for the service. But, I bet my employer would. And, I bet I would use the GNU version of their open standards and strong security on my Linux box.
Hy HDTV receiver outputs in Hi-Res to an RGB/VGA port or component video port. It can also output in standard 480i NTSC via composite or S-Video.
There will obviously be a huge market for external digital receivers, both for analog TV's and current HDTV's, which do not have internal receivers.
This used to be the most annoying aspect of Internet browsing for me. But, since converting to Mozilla, it's a non-factor. No more popups!
To disable popups & other annoyances:
Edit->Preferences->Advanced->Scripts & Windows
de-select: Open Unrequested Windows, Move or Resize Windows, & Raise or Lower Windows
This feature, along with Tabbed browsing, are the web browser killer features.
Wow, look at that feature list... 20GB storage, 16MB buffer, AM/FM radio, and best of all:
# WMA Digital Rights Management (DRM) support
Those marketroids really know how to sell a product. I'm sure customers will be clamoring for that feature.
For data that has to be online but is not accessed by anyone
I'm not sure what this means.. If noone needs to access it, it doesn't need to be online.
4*200=800. To get 800 gig out of hard drives, you'd need at least 6 160gig
Hmm.. 6 * 160 = 960; 5 * 160 = 800;
Or, 7 * 120GB = 840GB; $770.
So, I either have fast access for lots of files I don't need fast access for
Why do you assume that there is no need for fast access? Even if fast access is not an issue, how about concurrent access.. if a few people in the office need access to data on DVD's, that jukebox will be doing some major thrashing.
Also, you don't account for the cost of the DVD Media, or the time required to burn hundreds of DVD's.