BPL draws more media attention ...
John Smith I
Jan Simons PA0SIM
When you don´t see that, may be you are one of the too many managers
with dollar signs in their eyes and without any knowledge.
73 Jan PA0SIM
"John Smith I" <assembl...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:fa5gp9$rlb$3...@news.albasani.net...
> http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/cip/?p=170
>
> Regards,
> JS
John Smith I
> BPL is may be the best example of unsound engineering.
> When you don´t see that, may be you are one of the too many managers
> with dollar signs in their eyes and without any knowledge.
Well, you just keep saying that now ...
Regards,
JS
John Smith
> http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/cip/?p=170
>
> Regards,
> JS
MORE:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/08/23/broadband_over_power/
JS
John Smith
Owen Duffy
@news.albasani.net:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OFDM
Whilst OFDM is the modulation scheme most commonly used to try to work in
the hostile environment that BPL must, it isn't magic, it might have many
advantages in such an environment, but you still need to acheive S/N
ratio over a substantial bandwidth to obtain the required speed to make
it economical.
BPL transceivers work in a high noise environment, the power lines are
polluted with noise that is to some extent limited by existing EMC
standards. (In most jurisdictions, BPL modems must comply with existing
EMC standards. Interestingly, one of our local test houses convinced
themselves that BPL modems could be tested for EMC compliance with the
carriers disables... but they didn't convince the regulator!)
The challenge for BPL developers is to achieve adequate S/N to meet their
speed requirements in a noisy environment when their power levels are
effectively limited by the same emission standards as the other polluters
(eg plasma TVs). Essentially, they are not assured of adequate headroom
to work properly now or in the future. An issue they must want to
address.
There is no comfort for radio users in that challenge, because the
current standards limiting emission are not designed to prevent
interference, merely to reduce the risk of interference. If every metre
of powerline radiated at the permitted limit for EMC, you can forget
about ham radio as you knew it.
Owen
John Smith
> ...
> Owen
I would be highly surprised if BPL ever becomes much more than a pawn in
an attempt to keep major telcos/isps in check and an easy method to get
the net in remote areas.
That said, 2+ million homes in the USA isn't really totally
insignificant. I hold hope for the new 700 Mhz freqs being made free to
all uses/devices/internet-suppliers ... this is where
joe-blow-internet-user really will reap benefits.
However, there is always that unknown wild card which can change the
whole game and at any moment, coming out of left field and in the blink
of an eye!
Regards,
JS
Highland Ham
> expensive to serve remote areas with BPL and the story that it will
> bring high speed Internet to rural areas is little more than BPL's big
> lie.
===========================
Instead of BPL ,would it not be viable for power companies to run fibre
along overhead power wires and provide true HS broadband
this way .
Fibre is non-conductive and hence appropriate in a HV environment.
Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH
John Smith
> ...
> Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH
It is my understanding, only the last short distance to your home is
copper, the rest is fiber. The generous telcos did this SO THAT YOU
COULD KEEP THE PHONE YOU ARE USED TO (or this is the reason given by
telcos, who limit bandwidth by such), except for small copper run, these
lines are already fiber.
Too explain the above better:
When the telcos were faced with implementing the new fiber lines, from
central offices outward, they decided to keep the very end tails of
these runs copper. Their argument was based on the stated reason that
they wanted to keep the end users phones of a design with which the
public was familiar with (awww, they were thinking of us, NOT money! :-)
)--something I NEVER believed to this very day. But, though sheer
coincidence, just happened to benefit the phone companies enormously.
BPL is here to stay--whether you like it or NOT and in one form or
another. Manipulations far from our sight will drive this. An informed
public might help, getting that informed public might take awhile. :-(
Regards,
JS
Regards,
JS
John Smith
> ...
Although it is implied in the above post, I failed to directly mention
telcos would be, most likely, the best choice to implement a
communications system (the business they are already in)--especially
since most of such a system is already in place.
JS
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
Not only that, but they already charge you a tax to support their
their (supposedly) money loosing operations in sparsely populated
areas.
IMHO the real answers to BPL are to run fiber along the electric
right of way (which was done here), or to set up a WiMax MESH network
on power poles.
According to
http://www.wimax.com/education/faq/faq31
average network range would be 4-5 miles. More than enough for most places.
How many people are more than 4 miles from a power pole?
Performance would be good, but latency would be high, which precludes
VoIP, and real time video. It does work fine for web surfing, email
and background delivery of video programs (Democracy player type
systems instead of Joost).
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel g...@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/
John Smith
> ...
> IMHO the real answers to BPL are to run fiber along the electric
> right of way (which was done here), or to set up a WiMax MESH network
> on power poles.
> ...
> Geoff.
I suppose a whole new communication/distribution system, relays, inline
amps, etc., along with a whole new infrastructure to maintain and
support the mess ... speaking about the USA--of course.
Frankly, the telcos, supposedly, have hardened/semi-hardened system to
survive some level of EMP attack, and a complete communications system
already in effect, maintaining lines is already done, etc., etc. ... it
would be cheaper to just bring it out of the stone age and upgrade it to
a user friendly level.
But hey, a whole other system would be great, if you don't mind the
extravagant cost of such ... I am of the opinion that the internet
should be like the public water system--available to everyone at a cost
which even the impoverished can afford--easily.
Regards,
JS
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> I suppose a whole new communication/distribution system, relays, inline
> amps, etc., along with a whole new infrastructure to maintain and
> support the mess ... speaking about the USA--of course.
The problem with that is in the U.S. the concept that the telephone
network is a national resource and should be protected went out with the
1980's.
Competition, low prices and choice are considered far more important
than quality, consistency, and reliability.
Considering that several long distance networks have been built in the
U.S., one more would not hurt. :-)
> Frankly, the telcos, supposedly, have hardened/semi-hardened system to
> survive some level of EMP attack, and a complete communications system
> already in effect, maintaining lines is already done, etc., etc. ... it
> would be cheaper to just bring it out of the stone age and upgrade it to
> a user friendly level.
That's up to you. I'm sure every telco has a plan for becoming a modern
high performance communications provider including voice, data, video,
etc at very competitive rates. I'm also sure these plans only come off
of the shelf to be dusted off and updated because no one wants to see
the status quo changed.
Companies like Vonage, Packet8 and the now defunct SunRocket all came
into existance because VoIP was an end run around the regulations
that kept telcos charging high rates.
> But hey, a whole other system would be great, if you don't mind the
> extravagant cost of such ... I am of the opinion that the internet
> should be like the public water system--available to everyone at a cost
> which even the impoverished can afford--easily.
The problem with that is the cost of sending data. Since the IP part
of the network uses packets of varying size, the latency and throughput
depends upon how you schedule packets.
In a free for all world, small packets wait in line with big ones, which
means all of those BitTorrents kill things like VoIP, on demand video,
etc.
In a use the line the most efficently world, small packets get queued
and sent in a batch after all the big ones are gone.
In a "we want low latency" (fast interactive services) world, small packets
always go to the head of the line and large packets are stuffed in when
there is room for them.
"You pays your money and you takes your choice." It's just that people
expect to pay very little money and still get their choice.
John Smith
> ...
> Geoff.
Your arguments sound very "standard" to me. However, in the real world,
if reality is stripped bare of all lies and manipulations of power and
money, it would look like the plan to bring free wifi to my city:
Companies are available immediately. The cost? Ads on pages. Yet,
instead of my city negotiating how many ads and working out an agreement
to where the ads would always be small, acceptable, and even into future
times--the city is, instead, causing a bidding war between these
companies which will cause them to have to inundate me with ads to be
able to PAY THE CITY (raises, retirement, benefits, cars, gas, parking,
and other perks, etc. for the b*st*rds) for PROVIDING "FREE" WIFI!
I am getting screwed. Every citizen in my city, IMHO, is getting screwed!
Some things just look simple to me ... this stands as a model to how
things are done today--very badly, and internet availability is only a
larger model of the one I just presented.
Indeed, I doubt many which are getting screwed even feel the "lovin'"
the "powers which be" are giving 'em :-(
Regards,
JS
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> Your arguments sound very "standard" to me. However, in the real world,
> if reality is stripped bare of all lies and manipulations of power and
> money, it would look like the plan to bring free wifi to my city:
Been there, done that. Had a company in formation, business plan
written and an angel investor lined up. Start small (a few streets,
the food court at the mall, etc). Some value added services for money, a
brand name picked, and some interesting technology for better location
than GPS.
We even had some interesting technology for providing ads, that we
were going to patent. Although the company never happend, other people
invented it again, but never bothered to patent it, so if we ever
get going again, we can use it. :-)
Then the city of Jerusalem announced that Intel was paying to "wire"
the city with free WiFi and our investor disapeared. It's now 2.5 years later
and we have a tiny, badly run network because the city council refused to
fund it, Intel's free hardware did not cover much (we have a very low radiated
power limit here).
Lots of restaurants now have free WiFi for their customers, because people
would ask the security guard at the door if they had free WiFi and when
they said no, walk on.
Besides funding BPL, didn't Google make a claim to do it and never
deliver? How many places had networks in planing which were abanonded
when they heard who the competition was supposed to be?
> I am getting screwed. Every citizen in my city, IMHO, is getting screwed!
Happens everywhere. Same thing happened in Philly with cable TV. They spent
10 years arguing about the critera, and forced the bidders to sell basic
cable for $2-$3 a month. In the end 3 of 4 sections of the city went to
Comcast, with a minority owned company getting the 4th. The day after
the contract was signed, they sold out Comcast at an enourmous profit.
Before the first wire was laid, the prices went up. The FCC ruled that a
local government could not regulate the price of cable services.
Needles to say, what was supposed to be $2 was closer to $20.
John Smith
> ...
> You do a fine job of chewing my ass, but you completey fail to explain
> how BPL will turn the current economics upside down.
Jim:
To the above:
Frankly, you are just not important enough to "chew your A55." Now
don't get offended--that is just NOT what I am about ...
> You might want to compare the bandwidth of optical cable vs BPL and
> how quickly the Nyquist limit is reached on each before running off so
> at the mouth about bandwidth.
To the above:
This: "The resulting BPL (Broadband Over Powerline) should be a lot
faster than DSL, with theoretical transmission rates hitting between
256k/s and 2.7 MB/s."
From here:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/it.s-electric/directv-offering-powerline-broadbandvoip-289638.php
I may have points to argue, I may be rather "energetic" about arguing
these points. I may not choose my words to "please" others; but, pick
on 'ya by design? Naaaa ...
Oh. And, by the way, BPL is only in its' infancy--count on improvements
on a fast and furious basis.
And, I think here in the USA our phone lines should ALL be optical.
Video Phones in every home, etc. But then, I don't run the USA!
Installing a optical cable and maintaining it in my home would be
wonderful! My TV, stereo, phone, computer, etc. would love it! Well,
I'd have to throw out the ancient phone and get an optical digital
one--but, I'd manage ...
Regards,
JS
John Smith
> ...
> Geoff.
Geoff:
And therein lies the REAL problem(s.) :-(
However, if they can split us into races, creeds, religions, income
brackets, etc. (heck, even maybe groups whose tastes in clothes differ!)
they get power-wealth-perks-etc.--you know what we get (_|_) :-(
Regards,
JS
John Smith
This: "Firms like Rubitec and NetTel Africa at the event unveiled cost
effective technology solutions that will help operators power their cell
cites, tackle their power challenge and ensure continuous quality
service. NetTel unveiled a Broadband carrier technology called BPL that
couples or injects broadband signals at frequency range of 1.705-80MHz
by conduction over Powerlines. Broadband enables the simultaneous
transmission of data, voice and video on the same medium at a speed
faster than the primary rate ISDN at 1.5 (T1) or 2 (E1) Mbit/s, while
Powerline is the medium used for transmission and distribution of
electricity to the utility consumers."
From here: http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=87730
Regards,
JS
John Smith
Some of the "illustrious engineers" here are going to have to hop right
on this one and tell 'em that it just ain't fast enough to do what they
are claiming!!! I am sure they will be embarrassed all over themselves
and thankful ... <smirk>
Regards,
JS
John Smith
More:
Regards,
JS
John Smith
More:
Regards,
JS
John Smith
gwatts
http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public/PubFullText/RTO/TR/RTO-TR-IST-050/$$TR-IST-050-ALL.pdf
"Increase of the existing HF noise floor by widespread use of PLT (BPL
is called Power Line Telecommunications (PLT) in Europe)...will bring up
problems for Military Radio Users as well as for HF Communication
Intelligence (COMINT) in all NATO countries. The signal-to-noise ratio
thus may be reduced for tactical and strategic HF radio as well as for
fixed sensitive COMINT sites."
So not only is BPL a bad idea for amateur radio and shortwave broadcast,
it helps the terrorists! But hey, at least someone on our side makes a
profit (well, maybe).
John Smith
> ...
> So not only is BPL a bad idea for amateur radio and shortwave broadcast,
> it helps the terrorists! But hey, at least someone on our side makes a
> profit (well, maybe).
I believe it is quite certain, BPL is going forward. Everything is
over, except the crying ...
I strongly suspect any problems can be worked out on the fly. We are in
for the ride.
Regards,
JS
John Smith
John Smith
Ed Cregger
Why is anyone worrying about the BPL thing? It is pointless to worry
about things that you cannot change, even when detrimental to you. Worry
is non productive.
There is simply no way in hell that the needs of .5 million folks will
supersede the needs of 300 million folks. Sorry, but it just isn't going
to happen.
Instead of fretting and whining, why not try to come up with work arounds?
For instance, digital phone is probably much more able to handle the BPL
noise than analog phone. Get busy! <G>
Ed, NM2K
Highland Ham
> supersede the needs of 300 million folks. Sorry, but it just isn't going
> to happen.
>
> Instead of fretting and whining, why not try to come up with work arounds?
>
> For instance, digital phone is probably much more able to handle the BPL
> noise than analog phone. Get busy! <G>
Ed , The subject is BPL and its interference to Amateur Radio signal
reception.
You probably already have changed to a digital phone to mitigate
interference from your own (amateur radio)transmissions.
Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH in northern Scotland where (like elsewhere
in the UK) BPL or PLT is not on because of demonstrated interference to
the radio spectrum. Moreover it is commercially not viable because up to
98% of households can get broadband via the telephone line.
Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH
Dave Platt
Highland Ham <abcgm0csz...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> > There is simply no way in hell that the needs of .5 million folks will
>> supersede the needs of 300 million folks. Sorry, but it just isn't going
>> to happen.
>>
>> Instead of fretting and whining, why not try to come up with work arounds?
>Ed , The subject is BPL and its interference to Amateur Radio signal
>reception.
>You probably already have changed to a digital phone to mitigate
>interference from your own (amateur radio)transmissions.
>
>
>Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH in northern Scotland where (like elsewhere
>in the UK) BPL or PLT is not on because of demonstrated interference to
>the radio spectrum. Moreover it is commercially not viable because up to
>98% of households can get broadband via the telephone line.
And I think the latter is an important issue.
Ed, I feel that it's an error to frame the BPL question as "the needs
of .5 million superced[ing] the needs of 300 million folks". That
would be a valid way to consider the issue *only* if it were, in fact,
valid that BPL was the only (or best) answer to "the needs of 300
million folks."
The analyses which have been published so far suggest quite strongly
that the matter is otherwise. Although some BPL proponents have been
claiming that BPL is the answer to the broadband connectivity needs
of under-served rural users (after all, almost everybody gets power
from the mains, right?), I have not seen *any* BPL proposal or
analysis which demonstrates that this is econonically possible. The
mains-BPL technologies which could provide meaningful amounts of
broadband bandwidth require a repeater/amplifier at frequent intervals
along the power lines and/or RF-bypass devices around pole
transformers. The capital costs of installing so many amplifiers /
repeaters appear to be prohibitive.
It appears that technologies such as WiMax will be able to provide
greater amounts of bandwidth, to a larger number of rural customers,
at substantially lower cost, and (by operating in licensed or ISM
spectrum) can do so without polluting the spectrum used by licensed
users of the HF bands.
In urban areas, cable-TV providers have the edge in providing
bandwidth to well-served areas thanks to their extensive installed
wiring plant. The telcos (with DSL) come in second, but DSL's
bandwidth is limited enough in a lot of areas that the telcos seem to
be struggling somewhat. BPL, with even lower bandwidth-per-customer,
looks even less economically viable in urban areas.
So, it's not an issue of "the needs of hams, vs. the needs of everyone
else." Rather, it's more an issue of "the needs of hams, and everyone
else with a stake in HF, vs. the desire of the power companies to make
a few fast bucks."
And, as the ARRL has pointed out, BPL doesn't *have* to create
interference on the ham bands. Motorola has proven otherwise. It
*is* possible to create a BPL-based hybrid system (fiber or
over-the-air microwave to the power pole, then a well-notched BPL down
the low-voltage lines to the house) without causing interference on
the ham bands.
The power companies *can* do it that way, if they wish to... and if
they can make an economic case that BPL is actually a financially
viable business. So far, nobody seems to have demonstrated that, and
the models seem to suggest otherwise.
--
Dave Platt <dpl...@radagast.org> AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
Jim Lux
> John Smith wrote:
>
>> John Smith I wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/cip/?p=170
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> JS
>>
>>
>> http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/09-19-2007/0004666248&EDATE=
>>
>>
>> JS
>
>
>
> Why is anyone worrying about the BPL thing? It is pointless to worry
> about things that you cannot change, even when detrimental to you. Worry
> is non productive.
>
> There is simply no way in hell that the needs of .5 million folks will
> supersede the needs of 300 million folks. Sorry, but it just isn't going
> to happen.
Actually, preventing the "tyranny of the majority" is why a lot of laws
(and for that matter consitutional provisions) exist. Otherwise you
could, to take an extreme example, advocate the speedy euthanasia of all
people over the age of 80 (or choose your preferred small minority), on
the basis that their health care consumes resources that could better be
devoted to improving the life of those that are younger.
John Smith
> ...
> The power companies *can* do it that way, if they wish to... and if
> they can make an economic case that BPL is actually a financially
> viable business. So far, nobody seems to have demonstrated that, and
> the models seem to suggest otherwise.
>
You, obviously, have missed the whole point of just how IMPORTANT
various digital communications over power lines is/are.
1) The power companies can read your meter remotely.
2) You hook your stereo into the power line in one room, you hook up
amplified speakers, to the power line, in various rooms about the home.
3) Your TV tuner exists in one room and monitors in various rooms about
the home control/grab the signal off the power line.
4) Your baby monitor ...
5) Your home security system ...
6) Your home intercom ...
7) Your phone ...
8) Your amateur rig resides in one room ...
9) Various other devices, existing now and coming into existence in the
future ... and, the capability of ALL these devices to interact with one
another provides for the imagination.
10) The complete list boggles the mind.
And, the internet was not even mentioned.
Regards,
JS
John Smith
> ...
> Actually, preventing the "tyranny of the majority" is why a lot of laws
> (and for that matter consitutional provisions) exist. Otherwise you
> could, to take an extreme example, advocate the speedy euthanasia of all
> people over the age of 80 (or choose your preferred small minority), on
> the basis that their health care consumes resources that could better be
> devoted to improving the life of those that are younger.
If that argument had any true merit ...
There are more horse owners in the USA than amateurs, the "tyranny of
the majority" should be limited and those owners allowed freeway access
with their horses (which, predate the automobile!); absurd I tell you;
the reason is blatantly obvious without explanation!
Regards,
JS
Cecil Moore
> If that argument had any true merit ...
Isn't amateur radio one of the inalienable rights?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com
Sal M. Onella
"Ed Cregger" <ecre...@bellsouff.net> wrote in message
news:46F2DA50...@bellsouff.net...
> There is simply no way in hell that the needs of .5 million folks will
> supersede the needs of 300 million folks. Sorry, but it just isn't going
> to happen.
< snip >
> Ed, NM2K
If that were true, we'd be in big trouble -- but it isn't.
Most of the several million (far fewer than 300 million) who might
potentially use BPL don't know what it is, don't know to ask for it and
might not even take it if it were offered. We 0.5 million are organized and
we know exactly what we (don't) want. An organized campaign usually beats a
muddled mob.
As long as we maintain a coherent strategy of opposition, we have the effect
of many times our number.
73,
"Sal"
KD6VKW
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> As long as we maintain a coherent strategy of opposition, we have the effect
> of many times our number.
Do you use Google?
Ed Cregger
Very interesting, Dave. You have cheered me up - believe it or not.
Ed, NM2K
Ed Cregger
I'm a pessimist, as you have probably concluded.
Democracy (yeah, I know, a democratic republic) exists only in fairy
tales. When it comes to money, this country's government runs roughshod
over the American people's needs every time. NAFTA, GATT and a few other
treaties prove this premise to be true. My point is hinged upon the
supposition that if there is money to be made in BPL, it will be
implemented whether it is good for us or not. Worrying about things that
we cannot change is pointless. This comes from a habitual worrier that
is trying to get a grip on it. <G>
Ed, NM2K
John Smith
> John Smith wrote:
>> If that argument had any true merit ...
>
> Isn't amateur radio one of the inalienable rights?
Cecil:
You preach to the choir of "one who respects your logic"; Yes, I
believe so,; well spoken!
Regards,
JS
John Smith
> ...
> I'm a pessimist, as you have probably concluded.
>
> Democracy (yeah, I know, a democratic republic) exists only in fairy
> tales. When it comes to money, this country's government runs roughshod
> over the American people's needs every time. NAFTA, GATT and a few other
> treaties prove this premise to be true. My point is hinged upon the
> supposition that if there is money to be made in BPL, it will be
> implemented whether it is good for us or not. Worrying about things that
> we cannot change is pointless. This comes from a habitual worrier that
> is trying to get a grip on it. <G>
>
> Ed, NM2K
If, and only if, the .5 million amateurs (and who knows how many are
still active--if STILL alive!) control the 350+ million Americans can
justice, fairness and democracy NOT be had! Get real ...
Regards,
JS
John Smith
> ...
> As long as we maintain a coherent strategy of opposition, we have the effect
> of many times our number.
>
> 73,
> "Sal"
> KD6VKW
>
>
Yes, it HAS worked before!
Now, many only wonder why it no longer works?
I ponder ALL this myself--as I have stated--and, on many occasions--I
only wonder why it ever worked???
Regards,
JS
Roy Lewallen
>
> I'm a pessimist, as you have probably concluded.
>
> Democracy (yeah, I know, a democratic republic) exists only in fairy
> tales. When it comes to money, this country's government runs roughshod
> over the American people's needs every time. NAFTA, GATT and a few other
> treaties prove this premise to be true. My point is hinged upon the
> supposition that if there is money to be made in BPL, it will be
> implemented whether it is good for us or not. Worrying about things that
> we cannot change is pointless. This comes from a habitual worrier that
> is trying to get a grip on it. <G>
>
> Ed, NM2K
I tend to agree with Ed. But the bright side of the situation is that,
conversely, if there *isn't* money to be made in BPL, it won't be
implemented. And it looks like there's a decent chance that's the case.
Roy Lewallen, W7EL
John Smith
Jim Lux
Didn't say that ALL tyranny of the majority is suppressed. And, a few
years back, there was huge public outcry in Houston, TX, when a law was
passed making riding a horse on the highway illegal.
"freeways" are a special case anyway.. they're a "limited access
highway" (limited access means that even though your property abuts the
highway, you do not have the right to put a driveway onto it)
>
> Regards,
> JS
Sal M. Onella
"Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <g...@mendelson.com> wrote in message
news:slrnff6p1...@cable.mendelson.com...
> Sal M. Onella wrote:
> > As long as we maintain a coherent strategy of opposition, we have the
effect
> > of many times our number.
>
> Do you use Google?
>
> Geoff.
I do. It's my home page so I can access it with one click.
I imagine I should infer something from your question but, no, nothing. I
asked Google for "BPL" and scanned the results but still nothing came to
mind. What's up?
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> I imagine I should infer something from your question but, no, nothing. I
> asked Google for "BPL" and scanned the results but still nothing came to
> mind. What's up?
Google invested $100,000,000 in Current Communications.
Some hams have been boycotting Google since then.
Geoff,
John Smith
> ...
> Some hams have been boycotting Google since then.
>
> Geoff,
>
When you do "something" as good as Google does it, you can boycott until
hell freezes over--yawn! :-)
Regards,
JS
Sal M. Onella
> Sal M. Onella wrote:
> > I imagine I should infer something from your question but, no, nothing.
I
> > asked Google for "BPL" and scanned the results but still nothing came to
> > mind. What's up?
>
> Google invested $100,000,000 in Current Communications.
>
> Some hams have been boycotting Google since then.
>
> Geoff,
Got it. TKS
However, I'm afraid the effect of hams boycotting Google would be
negligible. Our strength lies in our ability to lobby the governement.
Does this carry enough weight, compared to the dollar-power influence of a
big company? I don't know. I'd like to think there are still government
officials who are uncorrupted.
"Sal"
John Smith
> Got it. TKS
>
> However, I'm afraid the effect of hams boycotting Google would be
> negligible. Our strength lies in our ability to lobby the governement.
> Does this carry enough weight, compared to the dollar-power influence of a
> big company? I don't know. I'd like to think there are still government
> officials who are uncorrupted.
>
> "Sal"
Every Self-Appointed-Guru who got his "Certificate of Guru-ism" from a
Cracker Jack box has forecast it is doomed to failure, can't provide the
necessary bandwidth, would be easy to "jam", "just won't work, etc., etc.
Let's hope somewhere along the line their claims of doom and gloom bear
some small element of truth--so much credibility has been lost by so
many, would be a real shame to see 'em lose more (if that is possible!)
This "credibility gap" has seemingly swallowed many whole ...
Regards,
JS
Michael Coslo
While BPL could indeed be rammed down our throats, the technology
itself is inherently flawed. Other technologies to give out better
broadband access at less danger to the consumer,(BPL does not survive
trips through transformers, so we'll be getting our BPLband through some
pretty high voltage lines. Don't worry though, those isolators work just
about almost all the time!
IOW, as you mentioned, the marketplace will take care of all that.
-73 de Mike KB3EIA -
Michael Coslo
> John Smith wrote:
>> John Smith I wrote:
>>> http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/cip/?p=170
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> JS
>>
>> http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/09-19-2007/0004666248&EDATE=
>>
>>
>> JS
>
>
> Why is anyone worrying about the BPL thing? It is pointless to worry
> about things that you cannot change, even when detrimental to you. Worry
> is non productive.
>
> There is simply no way in hell that the needs of .5 million folks will
> supersede the needs of 300 million folks. Sorry, but it just isn't going
> to happen.
Oy! Take a deep breath Ed! Tisn't that bad, and you're being way too
pessimistic. Right ends up winning out, sometimes just takes a while.
At any rate, it isn't 300 million people, It's just those who can't be
served much of any other way. And that isn't too many. Even then, it
isn't going to serve those people, unless the utilities run fiber until
the "last mile". BPL does not survive trips through the power lines very
well, so fiber is needed almos to the house. And the fiber is what we
want. And once the fiber is there, why not use a technologically better
system to deliver it that last mile.
Hey! I have an idea. Give me that good fiber signal!!
Sometimes I think that BPL is just a trick to get Power utilities to
string up fiber so that private sector companies don't have to. Fiber
up, and once BPL falls on it's face, private companies come in and start
distributing fast broadband.
> Instead of fretting and whining, why not try to come up with work arounds?
>
> For instance, digital phone is probably much more able to handle the BPL
> noise than analog phone. Get busy! <G>
I'm not sure that digital phone would be better. You'll have one S9+
signal interfering with what will almost certainly be a much weaker
digital signal.
- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -
Jim Kelley
John Smith wrote:
Witness the evolution of National Park to Industrial Park.
jk
John Smith
> ...
> Witness the evolution of National Park to Industrial Park.
>
> jk
>
Like some of the Asian countries? You must wait for an opening to be
buried; you can only be buried for a spell; then, you are dug up to make
room for the next one?
Progress, and over-population, does come at some cost ... :-(
Regards,
JS
Jim Kelley
John Smith wrote:
> Jim Kelley wrote:
>
> > ...
>
>> Witness the evolution of National Park to Industrial Park.
>>
>> jk
>>
>
> Progress, and over-population, does come at some cost ... :-(
>
> Regards,
> JS
As a CB'er you wouldn't be expected to know this, but the Amateur
Radio Spectrum has been likened to a National Park.
ac6xg
Michael Coslo
Which reminds me, we were down to Assateague National Park a week ago.
You know the one with all the horses? And like all national parks some
of the critters leave their scat all over the place.......
Any correlation?
John Smith
> ...
> As a CB'er you wouldn't be expected to know this, but the Amateur Radio
> Spectrum has been likened to a National Park.
>
> ac6xg
>
Ten-fer good buddie!
Catch 'yas on the flip-flop! :-)
Regards,
JS
John Smith
John Smith
John Smith
John Smith
John Smith
John Smith
>> ...
This:
"Ambient Corporation (ABTG) closed today at $0.042 with 420,400 shares
traded. Ambient Corporation engages in the design, development,
commercialization, and marketing of broadband over power lines (BPL)
equipment, technologies, and services, recently announced received an
addition to its grant of BPL Equipment Authorization from the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC), which increases Ambient's flexibility
in network design, by allowing the company to utilize both Ambient
inductive couplers and Arteche capacitive couplers on medium voltage
electrical distribution lines."
From here:
http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=25695&cat=1
Regards,
JS
Jim Kelley
John Smith wrote:
Try posting to misc.invest.stocks
Maybe somebody over there will have a use for this information.
ac6xg
art
John, they haven't changed the basic rules! So a company asks if they
can use this or that
and the FCC comes back with a couldn't care less what they use to meet
the existing rules.
So the company now has the liberty to say it has got permission from
the FCC insinuating
but not stating, that a major advance has been made in the industry
at large.
It would appeared so much different if they asked permission to lock
the doors after work every day
and got the same response but that would not have affected the trade
in shares would it?
Regards
Art
John Smith
Actually, if it performs as stated, a rather important step forward! At
this point, who knows:
http://www.ad-hoc-news.de/Aktie/12717491/News/13865716/SOFTWARE.html
JS
John Smith
John Smith
John Smith
John Smith
John Smith
John Smith
John Smith
Christopher Cox
Stupidity continues.
More investment dollars to be funneled to a /dev/null device.
Chris
helm...@worldnet.att.net
BPL sucks! It will turn every power line into an antenna that will
interfer with public saftey, aircraft ,ect, radio transmitions.
Christopher Cox
Well, besides that, I do not understand what BPL is supposed to solve.
It was my understanding this was a solution to the "last mile" problem.
Given the infrastructure in todays society, this leaves a very thin
customer base that would even need to consider BPL as a solution.
Chris
John Smith
Christopher Cox
"The deployment will begin in the state of Michigan, with a network that
will provide service to 10.000 homes in and around Grand Ledge, to the
west of Lansing, the state’s capital."
Wow, I am sure that they would never be able to subscribe to a Cable
service or DSL. BPL's competition in Grand Ledge MI will probably be
faster, cheaper, and more reliable. All this without polluting the
worlds propagated band space with EM radiation.
What a waste.
It is exactly this type of roll out that screams for laws to be enacted
banning BPL as a commercial technology.
http://comcastcable.newtechnologytv.com/mi-grand-ledge-comcast-cable.html
http://www.bandwidth.com/service/US/MI/Grand%20Ledge/OC3/
John Smith
Denny
What is really happening is that the original venture capital
investors now understand that BPL is too flawed and that there will be
no big payday at the end for THEM, so they are busily recruiting 2nd,
3rd, 4th, etc., rounds of financing (i.e. new investors) so they can
recoup their initial venture capital and quietly leave the scene...
You are gonna see BPL trumpeted as the answer to everything in our
lives - manna from heaven, the new tomorrow - as they go through this
thrash to find the new money...
denny / k8do
John Smith
> ...
> What is really happening is that the original venture capital
> investors now understand that BPL is too flawed and that there will be
> no big payday at the end for THEM, ...
Uh, yeah ... <LOL> :-)
JS
Christopher Cox
It certainly would explain BPL's poor growth curve in the test markets
and almost complete lack of stories in the industry magazines.
WIMAX has received much more press, but all the political problems that
Mr. Smith is worried about would possibly come fruition with it's
implementation. The new broadband giants would be todays Cell Carriers
as they are the ones snatching up the licenses.
Chris
John Smith
Jim Higgins
Media attention is one thing, but consumer attention is what really
counts. The following from the ARRL Letter of Nov 9, 2007:
"FCC Releases Broadband Report: The FCC has released their latest
report summarizing the state of broadband in the US as of December
2006. It shows that by December 2006, Internet-access BPL increased
slightly over December 2005, but also shows that it has been
decreasing slightly from a peak that occurred sometime around
mid-2006. According to the report, Broadband over Powerline ended up
with a deployment total of 0.006 percent of the total broadband lines
in the US, compared to 0.011 percent at the end of December 2005. You
can review the report on The FCC Web site
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277784A1.pdf>.
Looks like a drop of 45% for the mid-2006 to end-2006 period. In the
spirit of the season I'd say this turkey is just about done.
John Smith
> Media attention is one thing, but consumer attention is what really
> counts. The following from the ARRL Letter of Nov 9, 2007:
>
> "FCC Releases Broadband Report: The FCC has released their latest
> report summarizing the state of broadband in the US as of December
> 2006. It shows that by December 2006, Internet-access BPL increased
> slightly over December 2005, but also shows that it has been
> decreasing slightly from a peak that occurred sometime around
> mid-2006. According to the report, Broadband over Powerline ended up
> with a deployment total of 0.006 percent of the total broadband lines
> in the US, compared to 0.011 percent at the end of December 2005. You
> can review the report on The FCC Web site
> <http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277784A1.pdf>.
>
> Looks like a drop of 45% for the mid-2006 to end-2006 period. In the
> spirit of the season I'd say this turkey is just about done.
Well, BPL is ONLY meant to supply high speed to rural/remote sites,
homes, business, etc. As fiber goes into those areas (and cheaper
satellite, clearwire, etc.) some reduction will be noted in these--but,
keep your fingers crossed if you hate BPL.
In a perfect world we would all have megabyte speeds via
satellite--someday ...
Regards,
JS
Bert Hyman
<assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In a perfect world we would all have megabyte speeds via
> satellite--someday ...
We'll just have to find a way to make those satellites orbit closer to
the ground to eliminate that long round-trip delay.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN be...@iphouse.com
John Smith
> In news:fh51n4$lv3$2...@news.albasani.net John Smith
> <assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In a perfect world we would all have megabyte speeds via
>> satellite--someday ...
>
> We'll just have to find a way to make those satellites orbit closer to
> the ground to eliminate that long round-trip delay.
>
What?
You don't know about geosynchronous orbits?
Regards,
JS
Bert Hyman
<assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
What's the delay introduced by two 22,000 mile round trips?
John Smith
>> You don't know about geosynchronous orbits?
>
> What's the delay introduced by two 22,000 mile round trips?
>
What?
You don't know about data compaction and multi-threading?
Regards,
JS
Bert Hyman
<assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
How's that going to eliminate the nearly half-second delay for me to get
a character echoed when I'm talking to a remote system via Telnet?
And that's not counting any other delays which might be introduced by
any other players in the connection.
If all you're doing is browsing the Web or watching videos, you'll
probably be happy.
Me, I'll take a terrestrial link any time. My 7Mb/sec DSL line is quite
satisfactory.
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> What's the delay introduced by two 22,000 mile round trips?
Actually, it's around 26,000 miles, which makes the delay 186 / 52 or
about .297ms. This is far too high for VoIP or "video phones".
Here there are two competing "cable tv" services. They both get their
source material from satellites, however one delivers it via a terrestrial
cable and the other by retransmitting it to a satellite.
If you have both, you can flip back and forth on the same channel and
see the extra delay in the satellite network.
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel g...@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/
John Smith
OK. I'll spell it out, usually I charge for teaching ...
You don't request one character, acknowledge receipt of it, then request
the next--GEESH!!!
Say you wish a 10 meg file. You send 1000 requests for CONSECUTIVE
10,000 byte packets, the satellite queues up what packet requests it
cannot send in parallel/immediately (depends on bandwidth, traffic,
processing power, etc.)
In the best case, the satellite would begin sending all compressed
packets at once (ALL 1000)--using
multi-threading/multi-processors/multi-channels, etc.
All happens quicker than poop through a goose! :-)
Of course, most elementary school students are already acquainted with
such methods of data transmission--well, at least 7th and 8th graders.
Next time, use google ...
Regards,
JS
Bert Hyman
<assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> OK. I'll spell it out, usually I charge for teaching ...
Too bad for your kids.
>
> You don't request one character, acknowledge receipt of it, then
> request the next--GEESH!!!
You're apparently unfamiliar with interactive applications which use
short (often single character) transactions.
Good luck watching your movies.
John Smith
>> ...
> Of course, most elementary school students are already acquainted with
> such methods of data transmission--well, at least 7th and 8th graders.
>
> Next time, use google ...
>
> Regards,
> JS
Forgot one thing, which will be your next question.
After a 10,000 byte packet is xmitted, a error correct sum is computed
upon the data in the packet and sent at the tail of the packet, this
error correction sum is re-computed at the receivers end, if the two do
NOT match, a resend of the packet in question in requested--this
eliminates ALL possible errors ...
And, of course, great interference or poor/no signal can GREATLY slow
data xmission ... which is a good reason to only implement redundant,
robust models using the high state of technology at the time of
implementation.
It would be nice if the war ended and the USA took one years war
expenditures and implemented such a system for all American citizens.
Regards,
JS
John Smith
>> ...
> Actually, it's around 26,000 miles, which makes the delay 186 / 52 or
> about .297ms. This is far too high for VoIP or "video phones".
> ...
> Geoff.
Absolutely NOT, you see the news nightly, most often there is at least
one news correspondent, somewhere, using satellite links to send in
their report--they do it quite nicely--but yes, there is a bit of delay
noticed--they/we live with it quite nicely--just like we do now with the
transatlantic telephone cable(s)/satellite links.
Regards,
JS
Bert Hyman
<assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Forgot one thing,
You underestimate yourself.
> which will be your next question.
I have no questions for you.
Good luck.
John Smith
> In news:fh58lm$r7l$5...@news.albasani.net John Smith
> <assembl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Forgot one thing,
>
> You underestimate yourself.
>
>> which will be your next question.
>
> I have no questions for you.
>
> Good luck.
>
Next time, use Google, you will save yourself embarrassment ...
Regards,
JS