Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
 ·PenTeleData
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
1 edit | reply to BF69
Re: Here's the problem
said by BF69  :So because someone may use a device ilelgally it should be baned? People drive drunk so using your logic cars should be banned. No, it's because of the potential for widespread abuse, which is just one concern out of many.
My main concern is how it affects TV reception in fringe areas.
White space devices are like BPL. They may sound like a good idea, but in reality they are going to cause much more problems than they solve. |
|
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000 | You certainly have widespread abuse of vehicles, from drunk driving as previously mentioned to speeding, to running red lights. By your logic they should be banned because of widespread abuse and this abuse results in 10,000's of deaths every year. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| said by Bit :You certainly have widespread abuse of vehicles, from drunk driving as previously mentioned to speeding, to running red lights. By your logic they should be banned because of widespread abuse and this abuse results in 10,000's of deaths every year. In other "free" bands such as 2.4GHz and 900MHz it is literally filthy as a sewer with spectrum pollution. The difference between those spaces and white space devices is that white space devices broadcast on actual TV channels, versus 900MHz and 2.4GHz where there isn't much of anything important.
But I do have to ask, how do you propose the FCC is going to handle enforcement if this gets out of hand?
At least with illegally modified vehicles the cops can pull them over. With illegally modded white space devices, it will be not as easy, plus the FCC has shown that it is not interested in any serious effort at enforcement. It will be like the wild west with everyone stepping all over each other and no one giving a shit. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to Eat Me
said by Eat Me :No, it's because of the potential for widespread abuse, which is just one concern out of many. MILLIONS of people abuse alcohol and drive. Thus using your logic ban cars.
My main concern is how it affects TV reception in fringe areas. This has been proven not to be a factor. I live in a fringe area. I'm thinking about ditching cable for OTA. I'm not concerned on bit, but thanks for yours. I'm 100% for this. No one ask you to speak for me.
White space devices are like BPL. They may sound like a good idea, but in reality they are going to cause much more problems than they solve. It's NOTHING like BPL which by the way could have been futher along except a group of whiny little ham bitches that think it's 1929. |
|
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000
·VOIPo
 ·Cox HSI
2 edits | reply to Eat Me
Please...this isn't about interference. This is about an industry lobby not wanting new competitors. The reason they're bitching about this is the same reason they spent millions lobbying against the satellite radio merger.
They don't give two squirts of piss about "fringe" folks. They only concerned with stopping new competition for their membership.
Meanwhile I live and work in densely populated areas and don't suffer in the slightest from so-called sewer-like "spectrum" pollution with my 900MHz, 2.4GHz or 5GHz devices. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to Eat Me
said by Eat Me :In other "free" bands such as 2.4GHz and 900MHz it is literally filthy as a sewer with spectrum pollution. The difference between those spaces and white space devices is that white space devices broadcast on actual TV channels, versus 900MHz and 2.4GHz where there isn't much of anything important. which channels? specifically which MHz range is this supposedly going to affect? Do you even know? |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| reply to BF69
said by BF69 :It's NOTHING like BPL which by the way could have been futher along except a group of whiny little ham bitches that think it's 1929. 'nuff said. Based on this statement you clearly have no clue about interference, what causes it, what levels are acceptable and how it's resolved. From the looks of it you can't tell an electron from an M and M.  |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| reply to BF69
said by BF69 :said by Eat Me :In other "free" bands such as 2.4GHz and 900MHz it is literally filthy as a sewer with spectrum pollution. The difference between those spaces and white space devices is that white space devices broadcast on actual TV channels, versus 900MHz and 2.4GHz where there isn't much of anything important. which channels? specifically which MHz range is this supposedly going to affect? Do you even know? Sure I do. And I know exactly how to render these devices ineffective.
Furthermore, a signal of -114dbm while usable for me with a high gain antenna (which would bring it up above -114dbm) would basically give the green light to a white space device to fire up and pollute away.
I'm sure just like cell phone jammers someone will just make a WSD jammer (it's not that hard) to emit a signal just long enough to render WSD devices in the area ineffective.
This is yet another reason to say NO to WSD's, because they can be shut off very easily.
Finally, testing of these devices was conducted in a very slipshod manner with the FCC again just relying on a half assed test to make a decision. Not surprising when the agency is packed with lawyers and lobbyists who have no clue about RF in the real world. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| reply to Bit
said by Bit :Please...this isn't about interference. This is about an industry lobby not wanting new competitors. The reason they're bitching about this is the same reason they spent millions lobbying against the satellite radio merger. They don't give two squirts of piss about "fringe" folks. They only concerned with stopping new competition for their membership. Meanwhile I live and work in densely populated areas and don't suffer in the slightest from so-called sewer-like "spectrum" pollution with my 900MHz, 2.4GHz or 5GHz devices. As a current sat radio customer (XM), I'd say that the merger has made things a lot worse. They screwed up half the music channels and are now raising the price for second receivers. Since they're now a monopoly, if I want sat radio I can't speak with my feet.
Broadcasters absolutely give a damn about fringe areas. That's the reason many are requesting power increases post analog shutoff. There's a little thing called ratings in this business that matter. |
|
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000
·VOIPo
·Cox HSI
| I've very happy with the merger cause now I don't have to have 2 radios to get Stern and MLB. Meanwhile the NAtB wasn't protesting the merger because they wanted to protect you from evil...it's because a combined service is a stronger competitor against terrestrial radio. |
|
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000
1 edit | reply to Eat Me
-nm- |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to Eat Me
said by Eat Me :said by Bit :Please...this isn't about interference. This is about an industry lobby not wanting new competitors. The reason they're bitching about this is the same reason they spent millions lobbying against the satellite radio merger. They don't give two squirts of piss about "fringe" folks. They only concerned with stopping new competition for their membership. Meanwhile I live and work in densely populated areas and don't suffer in the slightest from so-called sewer-like "spectrum" pollution with my 900MHz, 2.4GHz or 5GHz devices. As a current sat radio customer (XM), I'd say that the merger has made things a lot worse. = if it wasn't for the merger neither would exist right now. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to Eat Me
said by Eat Me :Sure I do. And I know exactly how to render these devices ineffective. I would like to know which TV channels would be getting interference. Since you seem to know.
I'm sure just like cell phone jammers someone will just make a WSD jammer (it's not that hard) to emit a signal just long enough to render WSD devices in the area ineffective.
So then using your logic cell phones should be banned. So people won't use cell phone jammers. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | reply to Bit
What a surprise. Another Stern fan who doesn't mind trashing sat radio for Howard. |
|
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Los Angeles, CA
·DSL EXTREME
·Brand X Internet
·RoadRunner Cable
·Vonage
4 edits | reply to Eat Me
Re: Here's the problem
said by Eat Me :said by Bit :You certainly have widespread abuse of vehicles, from drunk driving as previously mentioned to speeding, to running red lights. By your logic they should be banned because of widespread abuse and this abuse results in 10,000's of deaths every year. In other "free" bands such as 2.4GHz and 900MHz it is literally filthy as a sewer with spectrum pollution. The difference between those spaces and white space devices is that white space devices broadcast on actual TV channels, versus 900MHz and 2.4GHz where there isn't much of anything important. But I do have to ask, how do you propose the FCC is going to handle enforcement if this gets out of hand? At least with illegally modified vehicles the cops can pull them over. With illegally modded white space devices, it will be not as easy, plus the FCC has shown that it is not interested in any serious effort at enforcement. It will be like the wild west with everyone stepping all over each other and no one giving a shit. BOY are you wrong-and in bed with the big guys! MILLIONS OF USERS use both bands you have commented about every day-SUCCESSFULLY!! If you take at the number of users in those bands (wireless routers and access points, cordless telephones, audio/video devices and countless other devices) and divide by the size of the two bands in mHz, you'd see that there are literally MILLIONS of users per mHz! How can you in good conscience compare this to low band VHF where under 50 DTV stations will result in 30 mHz of prime VHF spectrum to mostly lay fallow-spectrum that could benefit THOUSANDS of AM radio stations, among others?
White space is a GOOD idea-and the NAB should spend less time fighting it and more time wasting their time and money promoting IBOC-which interferes with fellow broadcasters FAR WORSE then white space ever would! |
|
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000
2 edits | reply to Eat Me
XM's music channels sucked ass pre merger. Don't like it, cancel. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | They had a ton more subs than Sirius did before Stern came on board, so they were doing something right. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| reply to BF69
With a share price of 13 cents today I don't think they'll be around much longer.
Sirius was the failing one. If it wasn't for stern they'd be in the digital dustbin and maybe XM would pick up the subs. XM had more subs and a higher share price before Stern came on board Sirius and brought on the knuckle draggers and basically ruined the industry.
|
|
P Ness
You'Ve Forgotten 9-11 Already
Premium
join:2001-08-29
Mineola, NY
clubs: 
| reply to Eat Me
said by Eat Me :What a surprise. Another Stern fan who doesn't mind trashing sat radio for Howard. because that has anything to do with the issue, i am sure he is just a mindless howard stern slave.
the reason for the problems now has more to do with the contracts of both companies and not the merger...the cost would have caused both companies to be in the same situation now instead of the combined company.
Also their debt cost increased 150% because of the destruction of our banking system. not because of the merger.
But you are just a mindless slave to whom, that you keep spouting off this retoric without even investigating the real facts?
"Since they're now a monopoly"
sigh,
Sorry but they ruled its not a monopoly so give it up. if you do not like the music go to the other 700 placed you can get music from. i cancled 2 extra recievers and listen now to www.theradio.com...same music...same service.
GG |
|
