Perhaps someone will suggest an universal remote control. I myself have two "universal" remote controls-- one for a ATSC tuner, and one for a receiver. They are mutually incompatible, as the tuner is sufficiently obscure that its codes are unknown, and A/V receivers, as a class, are ignored by most remote control designers.
Perhaps the engineers responsible think people buy HDTV tuners, and then, completely ignore the dolby digital capabilities of such in favor of good old analog stereo. Ah well.
The Logitech Harmony remotes are reportedly well designed, but they are rather expensive.
Macintosh is even worse: most of the USB hardware I have doesn't even have drivers for Macintosh, so it won't work at all. For supposedly supported hardware, the track record is not much better than on Windows. The only thing that I found works reliably on Macintosh is all-Apple hardware.
Jamie Zawinski's original complaint was with his sound card. His solution: get an Apple and use iTunes. This is all fine and good if you're satisfied with Apple's choice of sound chipsets, but if you want something better, you're at the mercy of third parties.
I happen to have a sonica-USB, from m-audio. It's a little box that provides a TOSlink interface. Among other thinks, this allows me to stream dts and Dolby Digital for surround sound instead of relying on some Dolby ProLogic derivative to properly place the arrows, cave trolls and ballrogs.
Installing Tiger disabled this functionality. Eventually, m-audio supplied the driver, but it was a tad frustrating.
According to the Internet Storm Center, companies can prevent the downloading of adware and spyware from iframeDollars' servers by blocking the IP address 81.222.131.59
Blocking? That's kid's stuff. I'm willing to pay standard rates for successful installation of my DDOS client...
Information to be datacast may be made available to all users of the system or may be encrypted for use only by authorized personnel. KET is working with law enforcement and homeland security agencies to identify how datacasting can help make their operations more effective and efficient.
Oh joy. KET decreases picture quality to provide datacasting services the public isn't allowed to access. To all those Kentucky government types, I say: "Get your own Internet Service Providers, you cheapskates."
At least with educational programming, there's the possibility of utility. For encrypted data services, there's none. None at all.
What do I need to receive data from KET?
You'll need an antenna capable of receiving digital television signals; a 500 MHz Pentium computer or better with Windows® XP, or Windows® 2000 with Service Pack 4 or later installed; Windows MediaPlayer® version 9 or above; and a datacast receiver box. See Equipment and Software for details on the products KET has tested with our system and links to download the KET DataCast software.
I have MacOSX boxes at home. If I was going to get another computer, it might run *BSD, or Linus. Not a virus laden piece of...
HDTV is successful because people like high resolution pictures and Dolby Digital 5.1. I don't have a big screen TV (just a small HDTV), but I know quite a few people who do. And they tell me that 525 line NTSC and 480i SDTV looks quite crude on their expensive TVs. Currently, the population of HDTV owners is dominated by those who value superior video and audio above multicasting. It may seem shallow to you, but dramas, science documentaries, and movies are all enhanced by picture detail that exceeds DVD. The engineers know this, and starve the secondary channels for bits.
Many stores have marketing deals with DirectTV and the like taht discourage them from marketing atsc boxes. As for connectivity, my atsc tuner has outputs for composite, Y/C, component, RGB, DVI, and IEE1394a , so it can be used with most any modern televison. Add an RF converter and one can even connect a coax only TV. However, the higher resolution signals (480p, 720p, 1080i) are only output through RGB, DVI, and component.
So many misconceptions. Multicasting just isn't that popular.
Here's what my local channel map looks like. (subchannels designated with a decimal, rather than with a letter) 4.1 NBC HD 4.2 local weather (SD) 7.1 ABC HD 7.2 local weather (SD) 9.1 CBS HD 9.2 a doppler radar display (SD) 14.1 Univision SD 26.1 PBS Prime SD/ HD in evenings 26.2 PBS SD 26.3 PBS Kids SD (days only) 26.4 PBS Plus SD (days only) 45.1 Fox HD 45.2 Fox SD (mirrors 45.1) 50.1 WB HD
There's also a PAX station, which multicasts infomercials, but I don't care to receive it. Most of prime-time is HD, the rest is usually upsampled SD material.
Ghosting? Multipath with DTV results in intermittant loss of signal. With DTV, either you get a perfect picture, or you don't get a picture at all. Oh sure, on rare occasions you may see macroblocks, or green or puce noise, but those errors are usually a prelude to total signal loss.
Upon graduating college, I received a bill from the library for "losing" a book. The bill was for $75. The book, if purchased at a local bookstore, would cost all of $10.95.
The $75 charge was apparently a consortium-wide standard fee. It would serve as a fine, and would pay for a librarian to determine if the title was still relevant, for cataloguing costs and for rebinding (if necessary),
What happens if the reader checks out an out-of-print book?
These machines haven't yet been released, and are expected to have a shelf life of a couple of years, during which time HDTV is expected to become quite popular (and cheaper)
Besides, it isn't as expensive as it once was. A cheap (but small) 720p display can be purchased for about $400, and a decent "home theatre in the box," is also about $400; less than $200 if you're willing to sacrifice some quality. Yes, you can spend thousands of dollars on a "state of the art" setup, but this has always been true. Besides, many people will have already purchased a "home theater" system of some sort to watch DVDs.
Sony is likely to include a Bluray player in the PS3, and I've heard mentions of Microsoft pushing HD-DVD in its console. The PS2 introduced many to DVD-- perhaps the next generation console will serve a similar function
Quite honestly, there's very little story here. The XBox ran a stripped down version of Windows 2000, and the XBox 360 will run a modified version of that.
Scientific American and Popular Mechanics don't publish original research. Nature does, but it also summarizes interesting papers published elsewhere, in the belief that most of its non physicist readers prefer not to scour physics preprint services for the odd paper on complex systems.
th the promise of new powers attainable by tapping into the hateful energies of the dark side, it was only a matter of time before the order self-destructed. Internecine struggle by power-hungry Sith practioners dwindled their numbers. One Sith had the cunning to survive. Darth Bane restructured the cult, so that there could only be two -- no more, no less -- a master, and an apprentice. Bane adopted cunning, subterfuge, and stealth as the fundamental tenets of the Sith order. Bane took an apprentice. When that apprentice succeeded him, that new Sith Lord would take an apprentice.
I didn't bring up Reed. Someone else did-- without realizing that the kinds of radio networks that Reed likes have no relation to HAM radios, emergency radio services, or any of the other spectrum uses that would be affected by BPL.
Claiming that the number of listeners makes a difference is very Zen.
The last few decades have seen a tremendous growth in wireless communication. The most popular examples are cellular voice and data networks and satellite communication systems. These and other similar applications have moti- vated researchers to extend Shannon's information theory for a single-user channel to some that involve communication among multiple users. A few such examples are the multiple- access channel, the broadcast channel, and the interference channel. The exact capacity region is, however, known in the most general case only for the multiple-access channel, while the broadcast capacity region is known only for few specific channels, like the additive white Gaussian noise channel and the deterministic channel [7], and even fewer results are available for the interference channel [23]. It should be further noted that the above applications as well as the channel models used for analyzing them involve mainly single-hop wireless communication.
It should be pointed out that Ham radios (nor most any other affected device) are not the smart receivers David Reed has in mind.
From Salon's article:
The problem isn't with the radio waves. It's with the receivers: "Interference cannot be defined as a meaningful concept until a receiver tries to separate the signal. It's the processing that gets confused, and the confusion is highly specific to the particular detector," Reed says. Interference isn't a fact of nature. It's an artifact of particular technologies. This should be obvious to anyone who has upgraded a radio receiver and discovered that the interference has gone away: The signal hasn't changed, so it has to be the processing of the signal that's improved. The interference was in the eye of the beholder all along. Or, as Reed says, "Interference is what we call the information that a particular receiver is unable to separate."
You don't need to digitize or compress the video. The particular digital television standard varies from country to country-- an Australian tuner will not work in the US, and vice versa.
If you still connect your DVD player to a television set using a composite or even a S/Video connector, odds are that you'll see no improvement with digital television. But if you connect your DVD player up to your monitor using component video, and want your television programs to be displayed with the same level of detail and accuracy, you can buy a ATSC tuner, set it for 480i or 480p (depending on your existing set's sophistication), Connect the spdif out to a suitable input on your stereo, and enjoy "5.1" surround sound.
Now, it won't match the detail of a 720p or 1080i set, but upgrading your display can wait, if it has to, On the other hand, if all you have is an old set with composite or RF connectors, maybe upgrading your display would be in your best interest.
The major advantage of HDTV from a computing perspective is that it's already digital-- mpeg2 video, ac3 sound.
Then again, I get my signals OTA, not from cable or satellite. I understand that some satellite and cable companies try to charge extra money for the benefit of a few HD channels.
The major advantage of MacOSX, of course, is that when there's a kernel panic, the system displays a multilingual error message. This could be useful in places such as airports, where the users/hapless bystanders might not speak english.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps someone will suggest an universal remote control. I myself have two "universal" remote controls-- one for a ATSC tuner, and one for a receiver. They are mutually incompatible, as the tuner is sufficiently obscure that its codes are unknown, and A/V receivers, as a class, are ignored by most remote control designers.
Perhaps the engineers responsible think people buy HDTV tuners, and then, completely ignore the dolby digital capabilities of such in favor of good old analog stereo. Ah well.
The Logitech Harmony remotes are reportedly well designed, but they are rather expensive.
Macintosh is even worse: most of the USB hardware I have doesn't even have drivers for Macintosh, so it won't work at all. For supposedly supported hardware, the track record is not much better than on Windows. The only thing that I found works reliably on Macintosh is all-Apple hardware.
Jamie Zawinski's original complaint was with his sound card. His solution: get an Apple and use iTunes. This is all fine and good if you're satisfied with Apple's choice of sound chipsets, but if you want something better, you're at the mercy of third parties.
I happen to have a sonica-USB, from m-audio. It's a little box that provides a TOSlink interface. Among other thinks, this allows me to stream dts and Dolby Digital for surround sound instead of relying on some Dolby ProLogic derivative to properly place the arrows, cave trolls and ballrogs.
Installing Tiger disabled this functionality. Eventually, m-audio supplied the driver, but it was a tad frustrating.
According to the Internet Storm Center, companies can prevent the downloading of adware and spyware from iframeDollars' servers by blocking the IP address 81.222.131.59
Blocking? That's kid's stuff. I'm willing to pay standard rates for successful installation of my DDOS client...
SGI did design and build "Project Columbia", which was (for a brief interval in 2004), the fastest computer in the world.
Oh joy. KET decreases picture quality to provide datacasting services the public isn't allowed to access. To all those Kentucky government types, I say: "Get your own Internet Service Providers, you cheapskates."
At least with educational programming, there's the possibility of utility. For encrypted data services, there's none. None at all.
I have MacOSX boxes at home. If I was going to get another computer, it might run *BSD, or Linus. Not a virus laden piece of
HDTV is successful because people like high resolution pictures and Dolby Digital 5.1. I don't have a big screen TV (just a small HDTV), but I know quite a few people who do. And they tell me that 525 line NTSC and 480i SDTV looks quite crude on their expensive TVs. Currently, the population of HDTV owners is dominated by those who value superior video and audio above multicasting. It may seem shallow to you, but dramas, science documentaries, and movies are all enhanced by picture detail that exceeds DVD. The engineers know this, and starve the secondary channels for bits.
Why the fuck would I agitate for a Windows only datacasting service? Besides, I happen to like HD.
Samsung SIR-T165. It's a bit buggy, though, and is no longer made, though you can sometimes find it at discounters. So, do your research...
Many stores have marketing deals with DirectTV and the like taht discourage them from marketing atsc boxes.
As for connectivity, my atsc tuner has outputs for composite, Y/C, component, RGB, DVI, and IEE1394a , so it can be used with most any modern televison. Add an RF converter and one can even connect a coax only TV. However, the higher resolution signals (480p, 720p, 1080i) are only output through RGB, DVI, and component.
or you could use antennaweb
So many misconceptions. Multicasting just isn't that popular.
Here's what my local channel map looks like. (subchannels designated with a decimal, rather than with a letter)
4.1 NBC HD
4.2 local weather (SD)
7.1 ABC HD
7.2 local weather (SD)
9.1 CBS HD
9.2 a doppler radar display (SD)
14.1 Univision SD
26.1 PBS Prime SD/ HD in evenings
26.2 PBS SD
26.3 PBS Kids SD (days only)
26.4 PBS Plus SD (days only)
45.1 Fox HD
45.2 Fox SD (mirrors 45.1)
50.1 WB HD
There's also a PAX station, which multicasts infomercials, but I don't care to receive it. Most of prime-time is HD, the rest is usually upsampled SD material.
Ghosting? Multipath with DTV results in intermittant loss of signal. With DTV, either you get a perfect picture, or you don't get a picture at all. Oh sure, on rare occasions you may see macroblocks, or green or puce noise, but those errors are usually a prelude to total signal loss.
Upon graduating college, I received a bill from the library for "losing" a book. The bill was for $75. The book, if purchased at a local bookstore, would cost all of $10.95.
The $75 charge was apparently a consortium-wide standard fee. It would serve as a fine, and would pay for a librarian to determine if the title was still relevant, for cataloguing costs and for rebinding (if necessary),
What happens if the reader checks out an out-of-print book?
These machines haven't yet been released, and are expected to have a shelf life of a couple of years, during which time HDTV is expected to become quite popular (and cheaper)
Besides, it isn't as expensive as it once was. A cheap (but small) 720p display can be purchased for about $400, and a decent "home theatre in the box," is also about $400; less than $200 if you're willing to sacrifice some quality. Yes, you can spend thousands of dollars on a "state of the art" setup, but this has always been true. Besides, many people will have already purchased a "home theater" system of some sort to watch DVDs.
Sony is likely to include a Bluray player in the PS3, and I've heard mentions of Microsoft pushing HD-DVD in its console. The PS2 introduced many to DVD-- perhaps the next generation console will serve a similar function
The Xbox 360 is not the sine qua non of the computing world. Moreover, it doesn't even run the bourne again shell. What kind of console it that?
They dare to mock the sacred name of Linux!
Quite honestly, there's very little story here. The XBox ran a stripped down version of Windows 2000, and the XBox 360 will run a modified version of that.
At least until someone hacks the machine.
Scientific American and Popular Mechanics don't publish original research. Nature does, but it also summarizes interesting papers published elsewhere, in the belief that most of its non physicist readers prefer not to scour physics preprint services for the odd paper on complex systems.
Perhaps this is the advisory you seek
I didn't bring up Reed. Someone else did-- without realizing that the kinds of radio networks that Reed likes have no relation to HAM radios, emergency radio services, or any of the other spectrum uses that would be affected by BPL.
Claiming that the number of listeners makes a difference is very Zen.
MIMO is Zen?
More such papers are available from David Reed's Open Spectrum page.
But hey, it isn't my field.
From Salon's article:
Two points:
You don't need to digitize or compress the video.
The particular digital television standard varies from country to country-- an Australian tuner will not work in the US, and vice versa.
If you still connect your DVD player to a television set using a composite or even a S/Video connector, odds are that you'll see no improvement with digital television. But if you connect your DVD player up to your monitor using component video, and want your television programs to be displayed with the same level of detail and accuracy, you can buy a ATSC tuner, set it for 480i or 480p (depending on your existing set's sophistication), Connect the spdif out to a suitable input on your stereo, and enjoy "5.1" surround sound.
Now, it won't match the detail of a 720p or 1080i set, but upgrading your display can wait, if it has to, On the other hand, if all you have is an old set with composite or RF connectors, maybe upgrading your display would be in your best interest.
The major advantage of HDTV from a computing perspective is that it's already digital-- mpeg2 video, ac3 sound.
Then again, I get my signals OTA, not from cable or satellite. I understand that some satellite and cable companies try to charge extra money for the benefit of a few HD channels.
The major advantage of MacOSX, of course, is that when there's a kernel panic, the system displays a multilingual error message. This could be useful in places such as airports, where the users/hapless bystanders might not speak english.
An English major who finds the second person (thou, you) to be indistinguishable from the first (I, We)? Inconceivable!