At this point all the
snazzy new websites and re-focused marketing efforts in the world aren't going to get Google, Microsoft, and the other members of the White Spaces Coalition anywhere if they don't actually demonstrate the broadband-in-between-TV-signals tech in action -- and it looks like that's proving to be harder than expected. For the
second time in seven months, a prototype device has
failed testing at the hands of the FCC, although this time it wasn't because it was interfering with TV signals -- it just wouldn't stay powered on. Microsoft says the power issue is "unrelated to the technology points we're trying to prove," but
as usual, those prickly pears at the NAB aren't being shy about this latest setback, calling it proof that white space broadcasts are "risky technology that has proven to be unworkable." At this point we're honestly torn -- we hate to side with the NAB and we had high hopes for the white spaces concept, but it just doesn't look like it's panning out. Maybe it's time to move on to
bigger and better things, eh?
posted Feb 12th 2008 9:55AM
"We're not in the software business, we're into ads now."
If I had $4.6 billion every time a wire came loose during a presentation I'd be richer than Bill Gates :)
true. but then again if you got 4.6 BILLION dollars every time something went wrong....well....lets just say that id be happy if only one thing went wrong ever :P
I just really hope these things die a horrible death. At my place, I can barely drag in our local stations in digital, and they're already on their final channel at full power and that's with a fancy antenna outside. If I bring it inside, there's almost nothing, analog or digital, so I find it hard to believe that a $100 device will be able to 'detect' signals my $100 Terk antenna can't.
I just see my neighbors firing something up that doesn't 'notice' one of our local channels, and then interfering with my signal.
they just need more developers, developers, developers...
His head looks too small.
In traditional print media, running a photo with a story that is not a photo from the story should be accompanied by the caption “file photo”.... to do otherwise would be considered deliberately misleading.
Remember when Time magazine took a bunch of heat for doctoring a cover shot of OJ?
Journalism is evolving I guess, but I think the truth remains constant.
But Steve Ballmer is actually an evil otherworldly creature capable of distorting the air around him. You didn't know that?
Supposedly it's an ability that people named "Steve" are born with.
Frankly the use of this photo is starting to get old.
Whatever humor mileage Engadget thinks is getting out of this has long since expired to the point where only MS bashes, and Apple fanatics find it remotely funny. And besides it has nothing to remotely do with the story and serves as nothing more than s*it for the anti-MS trolls to buzz over.
There's a difference between journalism and blogging, even if it's a really high-traffic blog...
In an ironically related post -- Hi Ted. I'd recognize that picture anywhere!
Yep .. I agree that people should identify when they use stock photos or photos from other sources.
People need to understand that this is in no relation to journalism. Journalism is never to have opinion is in it other than facts.
Of course every newspaper and TV news source violates this every day, but somehow they still call themselves journalist.
Engadget is a blog. It has no obligation to even report the truth. They can lie all they want if they feel like it. They probably won't get much comments and traffic, but it's their choice.
And a blog is what? The concept and the word have existed for how long? Is a website still just a blog when it has multiple paid writers and is owned by a corporation that takes in advertising dollars?
Should we not question the rules, roles, and applications of the new media?
At a former job, a couple times a month I would have to deal with the press/bloggers. The problem is that the bloggers would demand full access just like the press. They would want access to upper level (or even top) management, all product information just like the press, and would demand press passes for conferences with all the priveleges of that press pass. But then they would turn around, not "report" accurately nor fairly, and use misleading pictures such as the one above. When called on it, the first thing is to hide under the "I'm a blogger, not a reporter" unbrella. Look at political blogs, they want to be treated like the press, but then go to court so that they do not get labelled "press" so they do not have to abide by election laws. This site used words like "source" (http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/16/iphone-delayed-until-october-leopard-delayed-again-until-januar/) and even called themselves "reporter" (http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/17/regarding-yesterdays-apple-news/) on a post causing an APPL stock drops.
Blogs switch back and forth between "blogger" and "reporter" when it fits their needs. If bloggers want to voice opinion rather than undistorted fact, then more power to them. But don't turn around and want to be taken seriously. Don't try to be treated like the WSJ, but act like The National Enquirer. And certianly don't ask to have the same priveleges as the press.
Blog is short for Web Log or the spewing of someone's thoughts on the web. More recently it's become ad bait... but that's another story.
What better way to handle a embarrassing set back then a big smile and jazz fingers! And then secretly killing the tech that was suppose to test the equipment before the public test.
The unit wouldn't stay powered on. This was not a second failure for their proof of concept, it was a failure of materials. Now, when the unit comes back from the shop and starts interfering with signals, THEN we will all start raising eyebrows and exchanging sidelong glances.
It is a concept that is still being tested! Just because the goal has not been reached does not mean that the goal is unreachable.
"The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence."
Give them time and we will see if I can finally get broadband at my house (which is relegated to dial-up because AT&T and Time Warner don't want to run wiring to it, and satellite is too expensive).
Hmm, something Microsoft is involved in fails?
Just wanted to say I always enjoy Nilay's posts. They're in engadget's trademark irreverent style, but always display intelligence. Unfortunately I can't say the same about all the editors, particularly the one that rhymes with Smurf, who seems to confuse being a smart-ass with being witty.
...and no I'm not his mom...
But isn't it the case that a number of companies submitted White Space devices last time, and it was just the MS one that failed. So it's not the technology which fails to meet these tests, but rather the failure of one particular company ...
For some reason this picture is friggen hilarious.
separated at birth?
http://www.swapsale.com/Creature_From_Black_Lagoon_3.jpg
also available in 3-D:
http://www.3dimages.co.uk/gallery/d/714-2/Creature+exBLagoon.jpg
According to the Wireless Innovation Alliance, the broken device was set aside, and an identical, but not broken, device actually passed the test:
http://wirelessinnovationalliance.com/index.cfm?objectid=0A102F34-1D09-317F-BBEBFB1A0A5B8CE3