I'm not in a fringe area (only 10 miles from broadcast towers), but I have done nothing to improve my reception and have actually done some things that hurt reception for the purpose of aesthetics.
I have an HDTV with butterfly ears (Terk TV5), and the antenna is only about 3.5 ft off the ground hidden behind the TV. Lots of trees in our line of site, and this is on the ground floor of a two story house.
I've had good luck with digital compared to analog reception. In fact, digital reception is much, much better for me. Every analog channel comes in with snow, static, blur, you name it. Every corresponding digital channel comes in with perfect clarity, and rarely do they go out.
On the odd occasion when I have lost the HD signal, I've flipped over to the corresponding analog channel to compare, and it was usually so static-filled as to be unwatchable, so it wasn't a loss. Occasionally I have to tweak the antenna for a second, but that's it.
That is interesting, but your post is why I continue to read Slashdot nonetheless. The cycle continued and Slashdot self-corrected that culmination of ignorance, as evidenced by your post which was modded to Score:5, Interesting.
Re:Well, not to defend an evil empire or anything,
on
Mandriva Linux 2006 Review
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The bigger issue here is that most people re-installing WinXP these days on personal computers do not use a standard hologram CD. They use a OEM customized recovery CD or recovery partition hidden on their hard drive. In those cases the OEM has already made most of the difficult decisions, and the user may be asked only to pick a timezone and an initial password - nothing but that. The perception of Windows being easier to install persists for this reason.
This is not a defense of Microsoft, but if we're going to argue that Windows is just as hard/easy to install as Linux, we should take into account the experience most end users actually have and frame our arguments in that context.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed, but there lack of thought makes for some good deals to be had if you hunt around before they normalize the pricing in a more sensible way.
Case in point: Wagner's entire Ring Cycle (14 discs) for $13.98
http://www.amazon.com/Der-Ring-der-Nibelungen/dp/B000QZSUYW/ref=sr_1_12/102-0259559-1788957?ie=UTF8&s=dmusic&qid=1190848521&sr=1-12
Admittedly not the best recording out there, but also not the worst (check the Amazon reviews...), and for $14 an affordable entry to the Ring Cycle.
I'm not in a fringe area (only 10 miles from broadcast towers), but I have done nothing to improve my reception and have actually done some things that hurt reception for the purpose of aesthetics.
I have an HDTV with butterfly ears (Terk TV5), and the antenna is only about 3.5 ft off the ground hidden behind the TV. Lots of trees in our line of site, and this is on the ground floor of a two story house. I've had good luck with digital compared to analog reception. In fact, digital reception is much, much better for me. Every analog channel comes in with snow, static, blur, you name it. Every corresponding digital channel comes in with perfect clarity, and rarely do they go out.
On the odd occasion when I have lost the HD signal, I've flipped over to the corresponding analog channel to compare, and it was usually so static-filled as to be unwatchable, so it wasn't a loss. Occasionally I have to tweak the antenna for a second, but that's it.
That is interesting, but your post is why I continue to read Slashdot nonetheless. The cycle continued and Slashdot self-corrected that culmination of ignorance, as evidenced by your post which was modded to Score:5, Interesting.
The bigger issue here is that most people re-installing WinXP these days on personal computers do not use a standard hologram CD. They use a OEM customized recovery CD or recovery partition hidden on their hard drive. In those cases the OEM has already made most of the difficult decisions, and the user may be asked only to pick a timezone and an initial password - nothing but that. The perception of Windows being easier to install persists for this reason.
This is not a defense of Microsoft, but if we're going to argue that Windows is just as hard/easy to install as Linux, we should take into account the experience most end users actually have and frame our arguments in that context.