On 1/17/2017 11:23 PM, Bill Pearce wrote:
The little thing they forgot to tell people was that the coverage area with digital is much smaller than analog. So
after the dropdead date, most al stations in the US had to go out and buy newer higher powered transmitters and
antennas to come close to before. One of our local stations is on two transmitters on two different channels, because
the FCC realized how bad things were screwed up. But AG's cellphone buddies got more bandwidth.
Isn't the truth that video content delivery is headed inevitably off the old broadcast system and onto
wire/fiber/satellite delivery? Given limited bandwidth, if the broadcast industry can't pay for what they need, should
they be subsidized by giving them a below market price? I'm not proposing an answer, just asking the question.
Be glad you live close enough to the transmitter.
I am, but it's not a big deal, as there are so many other ways to access the
material.
And pray that we don't have to go digital on FM, cause that will lower coverage
areas too, and screw up sound quality .
You and others can pray. I haven't listened to the radio in years, at least at my instigation. It seems like satellite
and web "radio" give good streams, when I've heard them at restaurants, stores or other peoples' homes. On my own, I've
found I prefer silence or occasional personally chosen music.
Quiet Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|