AVS Official Topic - The FCC & Broadcast Spectrum - Page 25 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #721 of 2861 Old 09-08-2010, 01:16 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
justalurker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Michiana, South of the Border
Posts: 1,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenglish View Post

I have to wonder what kind of game Charlie is playing.

On the one hand, he says he is carrying locals from ALL the DMAs, yet he wants to provide "Distant Networks" to people within those markets. That totally defeats the purpose of the system, since those viewers could be served by watching their own DMA via those local-in-to-locals. The only reason I see that he wants to provide Distants is to taunt the broadcasters (and, maybe, make some extra money).

And, the FCC seems to be falling for it.

It is something that is best understood when looking at the entire situation.

At the base level, "Charlie" only wants to provide *a* channel of each network to every customer. If there is an affiliate in that market who is willing to be carried he'll carry it. If there is no affiliate of a particular network DISH (like DirecTV) must look elsewhere for an affiliate to import.

Without any further court or FCC action DISH could import a neighboring affiliate ("significantly viewed" stations) BUT that still leaves counties and communities that would be missing a major network. Both satellite providers need distant signals to fill in these gaps. Charlie's current battle is to regain permission to deliver distants so DISH can deliver fill these final gaps.

The law prohibits delivery of distants to a customer who has an affiliate of that network in their market. (Grandfathering doesn't apply to DISH customers as DISH was unable to deliver distants for several years.)

Rhetorically Charlie WOULD like to deliver any local TV station to any customer anywhere in the US - but that isn't legal and isn't what Charlie is attempting to do with current actions. He is simply fulfilling the network's goal of 100.0% coverage of the population by attempting deliver some affiliate to every customer. Those in market affiliates who refuse carriage don't help with that goal.

I wish DISH would choose different affiliates to import. There are some markets where a distant has been brought in where a closer SV station was available. But with the current law it is easier to carry a distant.

If Congress would remove "consent to carry" from the law and make all stations "must carry" (which will be needed if broadcast spectrum is removed) there will be less need for distants. The closest affiliates could serve the need. Stations refusing carriage need to lose their exclusive rights to their market. It is their responsibility to deliver the network that they agreed to be an affiliate of. Too many have turned their responsibility to deliver into permission to deny viewing of the network content.
justalurker is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #722 of 2861 Old 09-08-2010, 01:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DroptheRemote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 4,606
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkreichen1968 View Post

Limiting OTA will hurt the poor the most. Arguing that it should be limited because a small percentage of people currently utilize it shows a general disregard for those who do utilize it, especially those who do so out of economic necessity. That is the logical end of your argument.

Reallocating broadcast spectrum to better match utilization will not be a burden that falls unduly on the poor. Eliminating broadcast TV completely, MIGHT actually be a burden for the poor, but nothing in what the FCC has discussed is going to come anywhere close to eliminating broadcast TV. Using your class warrior fallacy of the poor, I could take any headline from the home page at CNN and find a way that it impacts the poor disproportionately. And that would prove absolutely nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkreichen1968 View Post

Opening local DMAs to "competing" stations from the same network will hurt local affiliates especially in small markets. Arguing for such shows a general disregard for local broadcasters. That again is the logical end of your argument.

Here, I could give a rat's ass about local affiliates -- that is, if they can't compete without artificial limitations to choice (and if they can, I hope they take the money they make and open another station). If you're telling me that a local station in Strawberry Falls can't compete with a distant network or out-of-market local, then I'd have to say that the local station is not properly motivated to or capable of serving the needs of those local viewers, in which case it doesn't really matter much which CBS, NBC, ABC or FOX station the folks in Strawberry Falls tune to.

If the good citizens of Strawberry Falls have no reason to want to watch the local station, why force them to do so? The point of local broadcast TV is serving the local market -- it's not a jobs program for the broadcast industry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkreichen1968 View Post

I really think it isn't dishonest to call that general disregard hate, and you have shown over and over again in your arguments a general disregard for anyone other than yourself. Whenever I point it out you take offense, but in reality you should take it to heart and change. Care about someone other than yourself for a change!!!

Flail way, brother. When all you've got left is making it personal, anyone who is actually paying attention knows you've lost the argument. Over and over again.

Doug


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ISF & THX Video Calibration
Real-time Twitter Home Theater News
DroptheRemote is offline  
post #723 of 2861 Old 09-08-2010, 04:06 PM
Member
 
OrlandoOTA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dkreichen1968 View Post

Opening local DMAs to "competing" stations from the same network will hurt local affiliates especially in small markets. Arguing for such shows a general disregard for local broadcasters. That again is the logical end of your argument.

Of course, not all the DMAs are nice neat lines that do not overlap. As a result, many of us watching OTA tv have been watching out of market stations for a LONG time. In fact, when my parents first came to town, it was not possible to watch ANY local TV in Orlando, as the first station here was not on the air until July 1954. Even up into the 80's it was quite common in many older neighborhoods to see the antenna systems that were used to pick up tv from Jacksonville and Tampa. Up to the early 80's in fact Cocoa and Melbourne, which are points in the far east portions of the Orlando DMA had 3 stations from Tampa on their Cable. ( 8,13,44). Channel 8 was NBC and Channel 13 was CBS, and 44 was independent at the time. Two of the 3 directly competed with Orlando Channel 2 and 6 which were also on that cablesystem. Of course the crazy rules we now have were not yet in effect.

Several of the stations from an adjacent DMA (Tampa) are viewable in Orlando. In fact, several of the stations Grade B cover the downtown area, so this is not even a fringe area issue. If the station is watchable OTA, in the DMA, I cannot think of a good reason it should not be available via Local into Local. In fact, one of the Tampa stations that recently changed RF channels to avoid co-channel problems with one of the Orlando Channels was reported to be receivable on an indoor antenna at a point less than 1 mile from the NE corner of the Tampa DMA.

While it is true that neither Tampa nor Orlando are small markets, Gainsville clearly is. This is the market that seems to have done everything possible for certain portions of their market, and also certain portions of the Orlando DMA near Ocala to receive ANY service from NBC. Especially in this case, I think out of market stations are needed.

Ocala is in the Orlando DMA, but with the exception of one station, there is no translators or grade B coverage there. Those with OTA usually watch out of market stations from Gainsville.

I think the rules need to be revised. Maybe more stations will think about retransmission consent if a video provider were allowed to substitute another station in the event an agreement could not be reached. I think any station whose grade B reaches the county should be allowed to be carried.
OrlandoOTA is offline  
post #724 of 2861 Old 09-08-2010, 04:52 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
justalurker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Michiana, South of the Border
Posts: 1,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrlandoOTA View Post

Of course, not all the DMAs are nice neat lines that do not overlap.

Actually the DMAs do have nice neat lines that do not overlap. It is the coverage area of the stations that does not match the nice neat DMA lines. People's OTA antennas do not refuse to receive stations due to an artificial line on a map and cable system rebroadcasts do not require a station to be in the customer's DMA to be rebroadcast. (There are major differences between cable and satellite carriage rules that I won't get into here ... but the point is that DMA lines are exact.)
justalurker is offline  
post #725 of 2861 Old 09-08-2010, 05:41 PM
Senior Member
 
HoTatII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: South Los Angeles
Posts: 237
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrlandoOTA View Post

Of course, not all the DMAs are nice neat lines that do not overlap. As a result, many of us watching OTA tv have been watching out of market stations for a LONG time. In fact, when my parents first came to town, it was not possible to watch ANY local TV in Orlando, as the first station here was not on the air until July 1954. Even up into the 80's it was quite common in many older neighborhoods to see the antenna systems that were used to pick up tv from Jacksonville and Tampa. Up to the early 80's in fact Cocoa and Melbourne, which are points in the far east portions of the Orlando DMA had 3 stations from Tampa on their Cable. ( 8,13,44). Channel 8 was NBC and Channel 13 was CBS, and 44 was independent at the time. Two of the 3 directly competed with Orlando Channel 2 and 6 which were also on that cablesystem. Of course the crazy rules we now have were not yet in effect.

Several of the stations from an adjacent DMA (Tampa) are viewable in Orlando. In fact, several of the stations Grade B cover the downtown area, so this is not even a fringe area issue. If the station is watchable OTA, in the DMA, I cannot think of a good reason it should not be available via Local into Local. In fact, one of the Tampa stations that recently changed RF channels to avoid co-channel problems with one of the Orlando Channels was reported to be receivable on an indoor antenna at a point less than 1 mile from the NE corner of the Tampa DMA.

While it is true that neither Tampa nor Orlando are small markets, Gainsville clearly is. This is the market that seems to have done everything possible for certain portions of their market, and also certain portions of the Orlando DMA near Ocala to receive ANY service from NBC. Especially in this case, I think out of market stations are needed.

Ocala is in the Orlando DMA, but with the exception of one station, there is no translators or grade B coverage there. Those with OTA usually watch out of market stations from Gainsville.

I think the rules need to be revised. Maybe more stations will think about retransmission consent if a video provider were allowed to substitute another station in the event an agreement could not be reached. I think any station whose grade B reaches the county should be allowed to be carried.

How do you apply the old analogue TV service signal grades of A, B, C, etc. to DTV with its cliff effect?

With DTV you either have the signal or you don't, and there is really no graceful degradation of the signal to allow for any varying grades of service.
HoTatII is offline  
post #726 of 2861 Old 09-08-2010, 06:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Scooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Youngsville, NC USA
Posts: 5,062
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 15
How about "if you get a viewable signal 90% of the time, it's considered Grade A" ?

Ok - so that probably won't work, it takes more sophisticated signal meters to tell with digital - ones that let you measure in dBm units and the like.

You CAN put antennas on your owned and/or controlled property...

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Being A Beacon of Knowledge in the darkness of FUD
Scooper is offline  
post #727 of 2861 Old 09-08-2010, 06:28 PM
Member
 
klandry7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Paincourtville, la
Posts: 192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrlandoOTA View Post

I think the rules need to be revised. Maybe more stations will think about retransmission consent if a video provider were allowed to substitute another station in the event an agreement could not be reached. I think any station whose grade B reaches the county should be allowed to be carried.

Providers already are allowed if the station is "Significantly Viewed". Many just don't want to go through the bother.

http://www.fcc.gov/mb/significantvie...ions050310.pdf
klandry7 is offline  
post #728 of 2861 Old 09-08-2010, 07:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JeffAHayes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Spartanburg, SC
Posts: 2,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I've been MIA from this thread for a good while and I'm not going to even pretend I've tried to catch up; I haven't. From what I see, a good deal of it still looks like the back and forth between Doug and Dan (just glancing at this page).

All I have to add for now is the following article link from yesterday's ZDNet online article links that's titled "Have US Wireless Carriers Gone Mad?" http://www.zdnet.com/blog/cell-phone...17?tag=nl.e589

Most of the article talks about how Verizon (and some other companies, but mostly Verizon) has taken what they consider to be an absolutely stunning new GalaxyS smartphone by Samsung and essentially HOBBLED the version THEY supply (substituting 16 GB of memory with 2 GB and making THEIR $10 monthly subscription navigation service the UNCHANGEABLE DEFAULT service instead of Google Navigation, which the article says is not only free, but works better -- and this is a GOOGLE ANDROID phone). There's more...

At any rate, the article points out just HOW the wireless companies are dictating the terms of even how the phones they provide (and users PAY for) work, and what features are available, etc., and THIS is what Congress and the FCC want to pin the backbone of "nationwide broadband" on? Can you imagine? I'm NOT a big fan of Apple, largely because of the way IT throws its weight around, but the article also mentioned that Apple's the only Smartphone maker than actually has the POWER to keep its distributor from doing this sort of thing.

If the FCC essentially forces broadcast TV off much of its existing frequency base, simultaneously selling/licensing those frequencies to the wireless companies, not only will they have a virtual monopoly in some areas and respects, they'll also need to recoup that huge new investment in more frequency, so I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them pulling more of the sort of stunts Verizon is with that Samsung phone, and then all those folks who like to talk about a free-market economy will end up having to get the government all tangled up in the process because it'll simply get more ridiculous than it already is.
Jeff

Life is the only constant...

JeffAHayes is offline  
post #729 of 2861 Old 09-09-2010, 01:08 AM
Member
 
OrlandoOTA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoTatII View Post

How do you apply the old analogue TV service signal grades of A, B, C, etc. to DTV with its cliff effect?

With DTV you either have the signal or you don't, and there is really no graceful degradation of the signal to allow for any varying grades of service.

I guess these terms are no longer proper. However, based on the Contour maps shown by the FCC, the area just inside of the outer contour line was in the past called grade B. This is the area the station is supposed to be granted in its license, and protected from interference by other stations. Generally in the past it was based upon a rural enviroment with a receiving antenna positioned at 30 feet AGL, and clearly such line does not match any known DMA map.

Maybe I should just call it the service contour, but as outlined below a Court has called the entire service contour map "Grade B".

Weather, night or day, and lots of other factors do affect if a signal can be locked in. There are clearly various grades of service, which we can see now only with a signal meter. Very strong signals will lock almost always, and correspondingly, very weak signals will rarely lock at all. With analog, we could see that effect on the screen, but with digital it is not viewable at all, except with the signal strength meter.

In any case, since people with analog might put up with a lot of snow before considering the signal unviewable, and since digital does not permit lock-in of such marginal signals, it seems to be clear to me that the range of each station has been reduced, even if the FCC does not see it that way.

Maybe signal strength values could be assigned by the FCC for the grades of A and B. The FCC still refers to such signal strength in documentation about the Home Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act, so these terms need to be given meaning.

Since effectively Grade A no longer exists, and certain FCC rules on ownership provide no more than 1 (or 2) stations within a certain Grade A area, a Court recently ruled that the grade B service contour area will be used in place of the grade A, since in effect the FCC no longer has Grade A since ending analog service. This ruling might spell trouble for Fox in the Orlando market. In both Tampa and Orlando, Fox is an O&O. Since Tampa's grade B (service contour) reaches beyond Orlando. in effect unless the FCC re-defines grade A, Fox is violating the rules by having 2 Fox O&Os with coverage in Orlando. Hang on for the ride, this could get quite interesting in many areas.
OrlandoOTA is offline  
post #730 of 2861 Old 09-09-2010, 08:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DroptheRemote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 4,606
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
FYI -- from the monthly Bridge newsletter (http://www.mediabiz.com/thebridge/#top), which focuses on the subscription TV industry:
_____________________________________________________

From Zero Sum to Underwater
About That Shrinking Pie

Just three months ago we wrote about the zero sum game. Some pay TV providers saw their numbers rise; others suffered losses. Overall, the pie remained pretty much the same.

No more.

The second quarter of 2010 marked the first time in pay TV history that subscriber numbers actually shrank. Looking at data reported by the top 12 public MVPDs, total subscribers dipped by nearly 55,000. An analysis by SNL Kagan was far more devastating as the firm estimated a total 216,000 pay TV subs dropping from subscription rolls across the second quarter.

What's causing the drain?

Ah, take your pick ...

• A still lousy economy with unemployment in double digit territory and, according to the National Assn. of Realtors, 4.6% of all home loans in foreclosure at the end of the second quarter? (And, yeah, we know: Nielsen projected an increase of 1M new TV households across this next TV year. Could be ... if you count antennas attached to car roofs.)

• The steady march of over-the-top-TV as Netflix, Apple, Amazon, YouTube et al march into the TV-via-internet business?

• The ever-rising costs of pay TV subscriptions which added to the two above could drive households into any number of savings solutions?

They're all possible. And all likely. And we'll all be holding our breaths to see how Q3 fares in the numbers game. But in the meantime, a look at exactly what did go on in the second quarter of 2010.
_____________________________________________________



FWIW, a quick glance at these numbers indicates that the bulk of subscription losses were for analog rather than digital services. While a customer loss is a customer loss, I'm sure that if given a choice that these companies would much rather lose an analog customer than a digital. For one, the digital customer is surely adding more to the bottom line (maybe double?) and these companies have to be looking forward to winding down their analog networks, as they are particularly inefficient in terms of bandwidth usage. Getting from A to D is still going to be a hairy challenge, and I would say that this is probably the best hope for migration back to free TV, as this part of the subscriber base is probably most cost-inflexible and much less likely to find Internet-based alternatives friendly/acceptable.

Doug


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ISF & THX Video Calibration
Real-time Twitter Home Theater News
DroptheRemote is offline  
post #731 of 2861 Old 09-09-2010, 08:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
dkreichen1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Monument, CO
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Doug,

I have to agree that the low end subscribers will be the first to leave the pay-TV fold. Especially those who signed up for the $10 a month "basic cable" plans last year. (i.e. $25 per month, fewer watchable channels than broadcast TV, cable) The premium channel people will tend to keep their subscriptions. This is to be expected. Ultimately pay-TV should become an added service provider.

I live in one of those areas where I'm on the border between two DMAs. I get all the majors from both Colorado Springs and Denver. I have to consider my signal to be grade A from both. That I consider to be way cool. Wish I could get ION though.

Doug, you often add useful info to this forum. Other times you just P.O. me. Wish you could do the one without the other!!!

Dan

It's 2014 and you're still paying for television?
 

dkreichen1968 is offline  
post #732 of 2861 Old 09-10-2010, 01:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jedi Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
This caused my drain.

• A still lousy economy with unemployment in double digit territory.

• The ever-rising costs of pay TV subscriptions.

• More channels OTA than ever in the best source of HD available.

• Majority of cable channels going down the toilet. Showing reality shows for the lowest common denominator, endless reruns of the same tired worn out shows, and more commercials than ever. Also the screen clutter with the huge logos and ad banners.

• A huge selection of TV Shows and movies available on DVD. If I spent $100 a month on DVDs instead of pay TV I would have a huge library of DVDs. I would get to pay for what I want to watch and I would get to watch it uncut, commercial free, with a clean screen, and in the correct aspect ratio. And when I'm through watching it I get to keep it. No paying more money to watch reruns next month.

Broadcast TV - a vital national public resource
Jedi Master is offline  
post #733 of 2861 Old 09-10-2010, 07:20 AM
Senior Member
 
Tschmidt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Milford, NH
Posts: 303
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroptheRemote View Post

The second quarter of 2010 marked the first time in pay TV history that subscriber numbers actually shrank.

I wonder how much cable TV service take rate is assisted by Internet access? In most areas Cable Internet is much faster then the alternatives such as DSL. If you decide to get Cable for Internet pretty easy to throw in TV rather then install an antenna.
Tschmidt is offline  
post #734 of 2861 Old 09-10-2010, 08:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
dkreichen1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Monument, CO
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tschmidt View Post

I wonder how much cable TV service take rate is assisted by Internet access? In most areas Cable Internet is much faster then the alternatives such as DSL. If you decide to get Cable for Internet pretty easy to throw in TV rather then install an antenna.

Your right, many times cable is the only, or least expensive, reliable source of high speed internet. But, I also know people who have cable internet and then get TV from DirecTV because it's less expensive to do it that way. I also have friends that have a Qwest "40 Mbps" internet connection that is too slow to stream video. That makes cable internet look really good. On the other hand, when Verizon opens an area to FiOS the local cable company always takes a big hit.

While overall subscription TV dropped, telecom TV and satellite continued to grow at the expense of traditional cable.

It's 2014 and you're still paying for television?
 

dkreichen1968 is offline  
post #735 of 2861 Old 09-10-2010, 12:31 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi Master View Post

OTA......the best source of HD available.

You mean other than free-to-air and Blu-ray, I presume?
Rammitinski is offline  
post #736 of 2861 Old 09-11-2010, 01:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jedi Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tschmidt View Post

I wonder how much cable TV service take rate is assisted by Internet access? In most areas Cable Internet is much faster then the alternatives such as DSL. If you decide to get Cable for Internet pretty easy to throw in TV rather then install an antenna.

I pay $20 a month for AT&Ts DSL 1.5 MBps connection and streaming video works great on it. If you are within 30 miles of the broadcast towers you can buy some rabbit ears for $12 and get OTA HD.

Broadcast TV - a vital national public resource
Jedi Master is offline  
post #737 of 2861 Old 09-11-2010, 07:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 5,407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

You mean other than free-to-air and Blu-ray, I presume?

How many people have HD FTA, I wonder?

Ken English, Sr. Engineer, KSL-TV.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the Company positions, strategies or opinions."
kenglish is offline  
post #738 of 2861 Old 09-12-2010, 12:03 AM
Advanced Member
 
dkreichen1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Monument, CO
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenglish View Post

How many people have HD FTA, I wonder?

Isn't free to air satellite its own little hobby? You certainly could get the full HD feeds for PBS that way.

It's 2014 and you're still paying for television?
 

dkreichen1968 is offline  
post #739 of 2861 Old 09-12-2010, 10:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 5,407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Probably not more than a dozen FTA HD channels on Ku band in the U.S. part of the arc. Just PBS and some home-shopping channels according to Lyngsat, plus HD Net (if the info is current).

They show Fashion TV HD as in-the-clear, but their website sounds like that may change.

Ken English, Sr. Engineer, KSL-TV.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the Company positions, strategies or opinions."
kenglish is offline  
post #740 of 2861 Old 09-12-2010, 04:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JimboG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,594
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
FTA is pretty much a non-starter for regularly scheduled, officially available HD broadcasts in the US arc of the sky.

On a separate note, I think that free over the air DTV and HDTV offers a pretty strong anchor on the price of basic cable in the US. Even though 90% of people elect to pay for TV every month, the mere option to drop cable and put up an over the air antenna for the programs that most people watch most of the time helps to keep the cable companies somewhat more honest than they otherwise would be.

While I think that local affiliates should sink or swim based on how well they meet the needs of their local community, I do think that the over the air spectrum's use for free broadcast TV does a great job of keeping everyone honest.

Free over the air HDTV + Tivo HD + Netflix for Blu-ray and streaming = Bliss
JimboG is offline  
post #741 of 2861 Old 09-13-2010, 01:18 AM - Thread Starter
 
BCF68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,463
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
FCC to open up vacant TV airwaves for broadband

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100913/...cc_super_wi_fi

I found this interesting

"The commission's plan would make white spaces available for free, without specific permission, just as it already does for Wi-Fi and Bluetooth."

Great so basically any yahoo can screw up the DTV signals in my area because being in a "fringe area" technically ZERO channels will show up as being used in our area. This will be a total FUBAR situation.

Also if the FCC insists on taking away channels 31-51 from OTA then what white spaces are going to be left exactly?
BCF68 is offline  
post #742 of 2861 Old 09-13-2010, 07:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 5,407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
We're all screwed!

Ken English, Sr. Engineer, KSL-TV.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the Company positions, strategies or opinions."
kenglish is offline  
post #743 of 2861 Old 09-13-2010, 09:48 AM
Member
 
kycubsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Manchester, KY
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


For now, it remains unclear whether the FCC's plan for dealing with interference will go far enough for the broadcast industry, which wants the FCC to require that white-spaces devices include spectrum-sensing technology that can detect when airwaves are already being used. The FCC left that requirement out amid opposition from the tech industry.

This is outrageous.
kycubsfan is offline  
post #744 of 2861 Old 09-13-2010, 10:18 AM
Member
 
theaveng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
SLASHDOT has a story about the FCC taking-away TV channels and giving them to "whitespace" internet devices:

http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/10/...-For-Broadband

Please read and post your comment about how much this sucks. Most slashdotters are in favor of killing Free TV completely, so your opinion to persuade them why it's a bad idea is important.

.

My Free TV streams 19 Mbps == 6000 GB/month per channel. No cellphone can do that. WHY kill off this excellent service??
theaveng is offline  
post #745 of 2861 Old 09-13-2010, 11:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 5,407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
I'm especially worried about the "totally unlicensed" part of all this.
Without some sort of "Call Sign" identifier, it may be impossible to convince a jury of who was actually interfering with who, when everything comes down to people suing over interference-related damages...as we all know will happen.

Ken English, Sr. Engineer, KSL-TV.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the Company positions, strategies or opinions."
kenglish is offline  
post #746 of 2861 Old 09-13-2010, 12:16 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenglish View Post

Probably not more than a dozen FTA HD channels on Ku band in the U.S. part of the arc. Just PBS and some home-shopping channels according to Lyngsat, plus HD Net (if the info is current).

There have been people here that have recently mentioned they still can receive some glorious-looking backhauls of HD network feeds (legally), although I don't recall if it was more than just PBS. I thought they said it was, though.

Anyway, I wasn't really focusing on what's "easily accessible and convenient to receive for the average viewer" - I was more answering to the way that he always speaks in absolutes and from a very egocentric point of view.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #747 of 2861 Old 09-13-2010, 03:15 PM
Advanced Member
 
Desert Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bakersfield California
Posts: 979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I read online that Trinity Broadcasting's SD feeds are all unencrypted and available on Ku band satellite, but TBN HD is encrypted and only on C-band. Why would a religious channel encrypt the HD feed? Do they actually charge cable companies carriage fees for the HD version, but give away the SD version?

How can we say "the digital transition is complete" when thousands of low power stations are still broadcasting in analog?
LOW POWER ANALOG NEEDS TO DIE NOW!!!
Desert Hawk is offline  
post #748 of 2861 Old 09-13-2010, 04:00 PM
Member
 
theaveng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenglish View Post

On the one hand, he says he is carrying locals from ALL the DMAs, yet he wants to provide "Distant Networks" to people within those markets. That totally defeats the purpose of the system, since those viewers could be served by watching their own DMA via those local-in-to-locals.

Because some local DMAs don't provide certain programming that distant DMAs do. Such as ION. Or MyNetTV. Or Univision or TBN. Dish/Directv want to be able to provide those extra channels, and I don't see the harm. Also: My local NBC has an annoying habit of replacing NBC programming with Billy Graham or other telethons. It would be nice to switch to a "distant" NBC station during these times, but you can't with Dish or Directv

Again, I don't see the harm in the FCC letting you do so. [edit] I also like the argument somebody else provided: Why should I be allowed to buy non-local papers from distant Philadelphia, but can't buy Philadelphia TV or Radio on my dish? Answer: There's no logical reason. ----- If you can pick it up with antenna, then you should be allowed to have it added to your Dish service, even if it's outside your local DMA.

My Free TV streams 19 Mbps == 6000 GB/month per channel. No cellphone can do that. WHY kill off this excellent service??
theaveng is offline  
post #749 of 2861 Old 09-14-2010, 07:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 5,407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert Hawk View Post

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I read online that Trinity Broadcasting's SD feeds are all unencrypted and available on Ku band satellite, but TBN HD is encrypted and only on C-band. Why would a religious channel encrypt the HD feed? Do they actually charge cable companies carriage fees for the HD version, but give away the SD version?

Lyngsat hasn't updated the Galaxy 14 info on Trinity in years, but we used to get their HD feed and use it to test our HD receiver. We moved the fixed dish off that bird a while back, so we don't always have it available anymore.
The SD feeds of TBN are available on nearly every satellite in the sky.

Ken English, Sr. Engineer, KSL-TV.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the Company positions, strategies or opinions."
kenglish is offline  
post #750 of 2861 Old 09-14-2010, 07:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 5,407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by theaveng View Post

.... Because some local DMAs don't provide certain programming that distant DMAs do. Such as ION. Or MyNetTV. Or Univision or TBN. Dish/Directv want to be able to provide those extra channels, and I don't see the harm..

The "Distant Network Service" doesn't provide those channels anyway. So, why should your local NBC affiliate lose you as a viewer, when they are on the satellite as your DMA's local-in-to-local? If there are "missing networks", then maybe the DBS providers should be allowed to add those, from an adjacent market or from a national feed. Problem is, the sat companies feel it would make their encryption scheme more complicated. They just want to "turn on" on chunk of programming (the entire DMA), rather than individual channels. It's cheaper for them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by theaveng View Post

Why should I be allowed to buy non-local papers from distant Philadelphia, but can't buy Philadelphia TV or Radio on my dish? Answer: There's no logical reason. ----- If you can pick it up with antenna, then you should be allowed to have it added to your Dish service, even if it's outside your local DMA.
.

If you "can pick it up with an antenna", then no one is stopping you from doing so. The FCC isn't gonna send the cops after you. But, the satellite COMPANIES (note the word "company", as in a "for-profit business") is not allowed to SELL it to you, since they don't have the rights. There's a difference between an individual watching, and a company selling.

Maybe if the copyright laws were changed, to make the satellite and cable companies license and pay fees on every individual program and every channel that they carry, they'd stop playing "word games", and understand why stations have to protect their own turf or go broke.

This has gotten as absurd as the latest campaign that Cable TV has started, where they argue/insinuate that station's are "taxpayer supported" because they broadcast on "the taxpayer's spectrum". But, that deserves it's own thread. (I really WOULD like to make the kind of salary a federal employee makes, though! )

Ken English, Sr. Engineer, KSL-TV.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the Company positions, strategies or opinions."
kenglish is offline  
Reply HDTV Technical

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off