Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>
> ____/ Mark Kent on Tuesday 11 November 2008 15:42 : \____
>
>>
>>
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>>
>>> ____/ Phil Da Lick! on Thursday 06 November 2008 12:45 : \____
>>>
>>>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>
>>>>> White spaces vote gets FCC approval
>>>>>
>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>> | The Federal Communications Commission voted unanimously Tuesday to
>>>>> | release unused broadcast TV spectrum for unlicensed use, giving
>>>>> | technology leaders Google, Microsoft and others a victory in their bid
>>>>> | to create a next-generation version of Wi-Fi.
>>>>> `----
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=19&entry_id=32304
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Unwise. How long until devices using this range start interfering with
>>>> each other?
>>>
>>> What about smart radios? Covered in:
>>>
>>> Dan Gillmor, creator of the phrase, "Distributed Journalism" 16 (2005)
>>> http://www.archive.org/details/e-dv262_02_dan_gillmor_009.ogg
>>>
>>> Dan Gillmor, creator of the phrase, "Distributed Journalism" 17 (2005)
>>> http://www.archive.org/details/e-dv263_03_dan_gillmor_001.ogg
>>>
>>
>> Oh, I know how to build such things, but that's not the issue - the
>> issue is migration. For example, if there are, say, 1 million
>> hospital systems susceptible to EM radiation, and they cost, say, £1,000
>> each to replace on average, who pays?
>>
>> Similarly, let's say that there are 80 million radios (broadcast
>> receivers) in the UK which are susceptible, again, who pays?
>>
>> What about ADSL receivers for broadband - there are about 10 million
>> of these out there - who pays to replace them with "smart" ones, and so
>> on.
>>
>> My issue is about the existing plant, not about what could be done if
>> there weren't any.
>
> As Gillmore says, this may take /many/ years, but let's make it gradual. That's
> like saying, why make CDs when we already have cassette tapes and CDs can make
> old stereos obsolete (like portable music players do)?
>
> There's a serious issue here which is risk. Still, should this impede progress?
>
The three-technology problem always brings these issues. It means that,
in the main, we need to seek evolution routes rather than revolution
routes. An interesting example is the migration in the UK from the
amazingly high-quality PAL+NICAM analogue TV/dig audio broadcasting
systems. Moving to DVB (freeview) in massively inferior in most
respects compared with PAL, although it does allow scores of channels
where the analogue system could only easily accommodate five.
The approach? The set-top box - it means that even "legacy" B&W and
colour PAL TVs can continue to provide useful service once we've all
been downgraded to DVB.
So, my point remains - it's not where the target should be, it's how we
get there without making existing plant obsolete overnight...
--
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |
|
|
