Jacob Suter wrote: > Is this the reason for the move to UHF? Back when I lived in the city I > never really saw much/any 'ghosting' on UHF stations, but horrible ghosting > on some VHF (all the transmitters were within a couple miles of each other, > so it wasn't an issue of transmitter/receiver site). Seems like if the > signal is significantly more Fresnel sensitive, UHF would be a logical > choice. > > I still don't understand the 'upgrade' for terrestrial HD. What should have > happened was a push to satellite. There's plenty of spectrum and space in > the Clark belt, and its easier to get a solid signal waving around a 18" > Directv dish than it is to try to 'dx' in some HDTV in most circumstances > (most RVers and truckers I know can peak-aim a single feed directv/dishnet > dish in under 2 minutes) > > JS
1)There isn't as much bandwidth as you think. 2)You lose local content. Locally originated programming is very important, and frequently more interesting. And frankly, I don't watch CNN, etc, or even the network national news. Boring as hell. I only watch the local news.
