Day Brown has often approached FCC 802.1 regulations on this list with a "badges, we don't need no stinkin badges" attitude ...
Hmm, wonder how well that would go down if he ever really set up a system and went on the air? Bob George wrote: > Day Brown wrote: > >> [...] Drive up US 65 from Little Rock to Branson. Halfway up, when >> you get to Leslie, if you still have a signal, hit the 'scan'. If it >> is on the FM band, it'll pull in *1* station [...] > > > Day, what does this have to do with unlicensed products that exist, and > can communicate at 11Mbps+ at distances over 10 miles *without* > infringing on licensed spectrum such as AM or FM? > >> [...] But in the Ozarks, between the mountains and the fringe >> signals, just about everyone has switched from broadcast to satellite >> dish, and get the Little Rock stations off the dish. > > > I expect it's because they get more variety, and quality is better. No > big mystery! Then again, is satellite free? If not, it sort of argues > against the backwoods innovator image. I'm more impressed with the > Alaskan guys who rigged up those AM antennas that could suck in signals > from the lower 48 states (yes, while still sticking to established rules.) > >> No doubt, the station managers have figured this out, and dont get >> all worked up if their signal dont go so far any more. > > > I'm sure they focus on profix in their market first. The distance the > signal travels may help sell advertising time, but not as much as the > size and demographics of the potential listener population. > >> Do you spoze the car manufacturers are installing weaker FM tuners so >> as to encourage their customers to buy the new Satellite radio >> stuff? Wouldnt the cable and satellite outfits like to *disempower* >> the broadcast outlets? > > > No. I doubt they car mfrs even talk to the satellite radio group, other > than negotiating good deals on a bundle consumers seem willing to pay > for. I'm sure cable and satellite groups WOULD like the broadcast > market, but I can't follow your logic of that relating to the conspiracy > of broadcasters to weaken their signals. > >> If the stations have found it too expensive to hire a local disk >> jockey, and as we see, get their audio from a national feed, then >> they'd be interested in saving 50$ a day in the cost of wattage to >> the transmitter. But of course, they aint interested in talking about >> it. > > > They save money by using a national feed, then need another $50 to > reduce the potential size of their audience for the new feed? I'm lost! > >> [...] The news from the 2.4 gig people about going 15 miles on 15 >> miliwatts suggests that tuners might be designed for lower >> frequencies that could do the same on the FM band, where 250 >> milliwatts is *already legal*. > > > But still NARROWBAND, with all the inherent limitations! That's why > unlicensed uses SPREAD SPECTRUM! > >> [...] But now, back to the Yagi software. tell it how many watts, and >> what the db is of the antenna, and it'll tell you the range... using >> ordinary FM tuners, I'd expect an 8 foot boom with a tuned Yagi to >> go 15 miles to an appropriately aimed tuned Yagi for the receiver. > > > So you go through all this effort and violations of regulation to > achieve something already perfectly doable for a fraction of the price > using existing, unlicensed technologies that are less susceptible to > interference? Using much smaller antennas requiring a fraction of the > space and support required by your 8 foot monster-dish? Why? > > That $70 Linksys device can be paired up with a $20 antenna and some > additional cabling and mounting hardware to do what you're talking > about. Now. Legally. > > - Bob > >
