Look sharp,
Julius: you may have thought the debate over white space internet was over since the
FCC approved the Google- and Microsoft-backed plan and the industry's
gearing up to make it reality, but part of the new gig is learning that nothing's ever over while NAB still has lawyers at its disposal -- the prickly broadcasting organization has filed suit to stop the tech from hitting the market. As usual, NAB says that despite all the convoluted geolocation sensing and interference detection measures the
White Spaces Coalition promises to implement, TV signals will be interfered with, and that's not okay. Of course, we've heard all these arguments for years now, and while white space devices have had a
rocky test history, they've been
successful recently -- it seems like NAB is taking advantage of
confusion at the FCC following the
delayed DTV transition to try and pull the rug out while no one's looking. A bastard move, to be sure, but we doubt it's going to be successful -- going up against both the government and the heavy hitters of the tech industry is rarely a winning idea.
posted Mar 4th 2009 2:46PM
I'm sorry if this sounds ignorant, but what is the FCC? I keep hearing a lot about them here, but never actually managed to find out who/what they are/do.
Federal Communications Commission, it's a United States government agency, you can guess what they do by their name :).
Haha, laughing_skullx, you dummy.
Actually very few of us in the states really hav eno idea what they do except cause headaches...and I'm even in broadcasting!
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers". - (Act IV, Scene II).
Nilay excepted, of course.
We also need a discovery and audit of the NAB books -- would not be surprised if the wireless telecom companies subsidized this suit to maintain their oligopolies in another display of anti-competition.
Actually, it's mostly the wireless microphone companies and their customers that are pushing this since the tests of these devices have ALWAYS screwed up wireless microphones. The mic companies don't have other frequencies to use and the mic purchasers don't want to have to buy entire new setups (since a good wireless microphone setup (mic, transmitter and receiver)) can cost well over a thousand dollars and some theaters have twenty or thirty mics.
There have been doom and gloom articles about this in the various audio and event production magazines for years. My guess is that it'll all be fun and games until some damn kids wireless laptop screws up the audio at the Superbowl.
@Unistrut - You mean after spending thousands on a mic setup, you can't even change the frequency it uses in case of interference? Or should I assume you can change it but all the choices would be affected by this?
@Unistrut
The irony is that the wireless microphone industry was able to succeed because they had access to unlicensed portion of spectrum. Sure, I'm sure there may be some interference a few times, but the "smart radio" technology is getting at detecting what's the best path without interfering in nearby bands. I'll take a sporting event, or Dolly Parton concert screwup in exchange for cheap, pervasive, and wireless access to high-speed Internet.
High end mics typically have about 10 channels on a rotary switch, and they are sold on a couple of different frequency bands. But if you really have 20-30 mics in a theater, you're probably using all the channels and bands, or close to it.
I've rarely seen this in reality though. I was on a light crew for 15 years, and the vast majority of shows use wired mics for 95% of the show, and wireless mics for possibly one or two leads that need to move around a lot.
But I guess you could have 20 wireless mics in the mic locker for redundancy. And it would be a lot of money to replace all of them.
I didn't know we were allowed to just sue the FCC whenver we feel like it. My grandparents and all their DTV-transition-impaired friends are going to be pleased to hear this!
I don't think you can sue the government but it's been a while since government class in high school lol
bear with me on this...
digital terrestrial TV transmissions don't really make much sense when you've got satellites. ok, a satellite is enormously expensive but it provides phenomenal bandwidth for digital TV, and you can cover vast numbers of people even those in remote regions. The only thing you need to cater for is people living on the north side of steep hills and thus out of coverage.
In comparison, putting up a mesh of transmitting towers, relays, back-haul circuits etc is also expensive and often leaves people disenfranchised in remote areas. It's really only good for areas of high population density and where you want a local TV station.
At least with cable you have the possibility of a back-channel and thus internet!
If "White Space" means free internet for us, then to hell with NAB!
it dosen't.
Okay, show of hands, who actually has a tv antenna on their roof? I know I don't.
I do, the previous owner of the house installed it, and we never even used it.
It's a huge yagi antenna, btw, and the roof is not easily accessible, so I guess it will stay there until it's time to fix the roof.
Can I even sell it?
The big problem isn't necessarily with TV transmissions but with things people don't think of. For instance, during the Stuperbowl there is frequency coordination between all of the TV, Radio and NFL associations to make sure no one steps on each other in the wireless bands. If this goes through, and cell phone (for one) will use the "white noise" portion, I can assure you, you'll hear people's cell phone conversations on TV. There isn't enough padding between the white space and usable wireless frequencies.
The same holds true in theatres. The mic systems in theatres are wireless.
Every hear a weird buzzing sound through a speaker (phone, TV, radio or stereo)? That's a blackberry. It's happening already. Do you really think that consumer electronics are going to be able to get there act together fast enough so they don't step on what is already there? I highly doubt it.
Well said. I'm not sure why this site seems to have a grudge against the NAB.
The NAB's biggest problem is they've forgotten they are renters of spectrum, not owners...
Sic 'em Julius !!!