In this case that would be wrong. The headphone manufacturers
complained that good foam costs too much and were allowed
to get away with tissue paper and now everyone pays for
allowing lobbyists and lawyers run the FCC and ignore good
design principles
No, its not just good foam that is
Okay, we agree with Shakespeare ... kill all the lawyers, at least then we
could be allowed to do the engineering AHEAD OF TIME.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Bob Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu wrote:
In this case that would be wrong. The headphone manufacturers
complained that good foam
You forgot to weave the FCC Commissioners into the story somewhere..they
will figure out a way to screw things up
TK, K7TRK
-Original Message-
From: amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org [mailto:amsat-bb-boun...@amsat.org] On
Behalf Of Bob Bruninga
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 10:46 AM
Bob,
I was involved with the 800 mhz fiasco with the public safety bands and
the Phone company!!?? Because of the deluge of complaints and the
monies involved by repairing this, you would think they would learn from
a huge mistake Somehow, we forget the adage we must learn from our
mistakes
In this case that would be wrong. The headphone manufacturers complained
that good foam costs too much and were allowed to get away with tissue
paper and now everyone pays for allowing lobbyists and lawyers run the FCC
and ignore good design principles
On Feb 29, 2012 3:01 PM, Bob Bruninga
Hi Bob(s),
I think the difference here is that, continuing the headphone analogy, the
headphone manufacturers created a line of very popular lightweight
headphones at an affordable price, knowing that the environment they were
going to be used in were to be music rooms and other places with quiet
This is my opinion. It is a mistake in engineering and policy to invalidate
all spectrum in the neighborhood of a service by allowing poor front ends
to control the adjacent spectrum forever. This decision was made to lessen
the cost at the expense of never allowing anything next door. That is
