|
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 09:47:14 -0800, "Wayne"
wrote: "The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:52:11 -0600, tom wrote: On 2/10/2012 8:32 PM, Wayne wrote: He really needs to create a new file from which to cut and paste. Like most comedians', his jokes get stale after awhile. -- VWW, K6EVE - But you must admit that this normally quiet newsgroup finally has some activity. Who knows, this could take on the characteristics of the GFW. --Wayne W5GIE "GFW=Great Fractal Wars" Unfortunately the traffic has nothing to do with antennas. Things dried up here around 6 months ago. I suspect the people with brains and stories, and some of us remember who they are, are no longer with us or finally bailed due to the noise. I was playing with Moonrakers way back in the early seventies. - Moonrakers? LOL. Ok now we have you calibrated. No, you do not. I was 12 years old, and the gear was my dad's. You have nothing, and you know nothing. All you do is presume, and you presume wrong, boy. The antennas I work with now are everything from 18 foot diameter gateway heads to yagis for the military that we get in 20 foot long crates that put anything you ever worked with to shame. You should go see someone for that multiple personality disorder you are sporting there, "we" boy. More like "wee boy". I suppose Giant Rat of Sumatra was your "call sign". If you had any clue at all, you would be familiar with where the name comes from. So you fail there too, asshole. No surprise that you are a cultureless twit as well. That pretty much means that *I* have YOU calibrated. You are a total loser, or you would remember the art. The fact that you do not means that you were a drab loser ****tard back then as well. My fingernail clippings have more on the ball than you do, idiot. Bwuahahahaha! |
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
On 2/11/2012 2:08 AM, Sal wrote:
wrote in message . net... On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:52:31 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote: nuclear snippage tom K0TAR I plonked the guy days ago. It would be so-o-o-o great if people quoted him back little or none. I have no objection to appropriate profanity (and have been known to howl the unprintable on occasion, myself.) But when overused to no good end, ****/****ing,****er/****ed-up/****wad get tedious. "Sal" I was just making sure he was really the badass he's convinced that he is. He's not. He's actually kind of pitiful. Sooo, Plonk anyway! tom K0TAR |
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
Joerg wrote: Michael A. Terrell wrote: Joerg wrote: Michael A. Terrell wrote: Joerg wrote: Michael A. Terrell wrote: Joerg wrote: amdx wrote: Hi All, I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post. Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture. I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap. That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the signal to work 100% of the time. Looks like the cable guys screwed up. In your opinion. If their company cable box doesn't deliver a useful and reliable signal I call that screwed up. One pays for a service and expects to either get it delivered as promised or money back. ... If they are delivering the level called for in their franchise, they didn't screw up. It has always been up to the customer to pay for or provide extra equipment for non standard installs. Mike's install does not sound non-standard. 170ft cable drop towards premises which is fairly normal, plus the cable company's set-top box. Grow up. That is an excessive length drop. A standard drop is under 100 feet. You think you know everything, and that the world has to live by your rules. You don't, and it doesn't. ... http://www.starvision.tv/lineup_res.htm Quote "Maximum Drop Length 300 Feet" Now that's what I call good service. ... I'll bet you've never even seen a CATV franchise, or the dozen of pages of specifications agreed to by both the CATV company and the local government. The CATV company isn't a Santa Clause machine, and local governments know why there are limits to the service provided. If there were't, no one could afford to build or operate a CATV system. You've never designed a headend, or a physical plant If they build to supply higher port levels, it has to start at the headend, and requires closer spaced trunk amplifers. The system noise goes up from all of the cascaded amplifers, and the equipment runs hotter, withj a very reduced service life. When you can design an RF distribution system of more than 500 MHz bandwidth and has over 10,000 output ports, with the gain stabilized to a couple dBmv 20 miles from the headend and over a range from sub zero F to + 100 F then you can tell me I'm wrong. One headend I designed and built was only off by .1 dBmv at the test port on the first trunk amp which was a half mile from the head end. If you can do better than that, I'll listen to you and your opinions See above. Obviously others can. And yes, I have designed RF broadband power amps. Lots of them. Not just lashing up boxes but the actual transistor level circuitry including layout guidance for the nasty stuff. Fact is, if a cable company isn't competent to do a 170ft drop they should decline the job. Otherwise it is a screw-up, plain and simple. In our area they'd lose their shirts to the satellite guys because there are many houses like ours where there is no reasonable way to get from the street to the house with a 100ft limit. We have around 200ft that's still there from the early 90's and the previous owner said cable TV worked just fine for them. We are not subscribed because TV ain't that important to us. Yawn. You constantly harp about having to meet specs in medical, but whine like a drunken jackass when other businesses have to meet their specs. yes, they could design the sytems to 300 feet or more, but the cost to every customer on the system would go up. In medical I tend to push the envelope and so do the standards committees. Sometimes based on what we do. I designed all my cardiac stuff defibrillator-proof, always, although it was not the law yet. Then they made it law, because it makes sense. You do it because they wouldn't hire you if you couldn't meet specs, just like every other consultant, engineer or tech. They might even jail you for your incompetence for not meeting the specs. Believe it or not but I like to have to meet specs in medical because they protect people. Including you. Believe it or not, most technical people have that same standard. You're nothing special. ... Would you like to pay an extra 20% to 30% just so a very few locations can get better service? Out here we do not pay extra. Our cable companies out tend do use modern technology, not cheap stuff from the 70's. A cable company that isn't competent enough to do more than a measly 100ft would lose their franchise rather quickly. Once again the all knowing Jeorge shows his ignorance. 1: You don't know what you're talking about, about the cost of service. Any extra operating costs become part of the basic service that everyone pays. You won't work for nothing, and the utilities don't give them free electricity. The service companies don't repair the equipment for free. Do you have any idea how many amplifiers, taps and set top boxes are needed for 10,000 active ports? To provide hotter ports require more amplifiers, and raises the system noise floor. You 'designed an amplifier'. Big deal. A lot of engineers 'designed and amplifier' and those companies are long out of business. Current CATV amplifiers use hybrids designed specifically for the application and they use them for many reasons. That just leave the design of the 60V modified sine wave to DC power supplies, equalizers, gain control, equalization and remote switching. Some locations also have remote monitoring so the headend can check system status on a continuous basis. It can also report outages when some of the equipment doesn't respond. They can even detect power failures and monitor the battery status in the standby power supplies to give them time to get a portable generator to the area if it is an extended outage. The local Brighthouse system remained in operation here for over four weeks after a hurricane even though the only way to watch TV or access broadband was with battery power or a generator. 2: '70s CATV tech was 12 channel with no return path. It was crude, discrete point to point designs that looked like a ham put together from junk TVs while drinking cheap beer. They were touchy as hell, their tempco sucked, and they were impossible to service without a fully equipped test bed. the power supplies were simple, poorly regulated linear supplies with 85 C electrolytics that died quickly in the southern sun. The large diecast aluminum housing ran hot to the touch without the sun hitting them. That stuff was pretty well all scrapped out by the mid to late '80s by 36 or more channels with return capability. There was so much construction of upgraded systems that there was a severe shortage of new hardware through most of the mid '80s. That '80s tech was gone in all but the smallest systems by 2000. Today most systems are 450 MHz or higher, and are 'Fiber Enhanced' to provide telephone, broadband, movies on demand and pay per view services by breaking the system into cells that cover a few hundred homes, or less. 3: You know nothing about CATV franchises. 'A measly 100 feet' is more than adequate for a hell of a lot of drops & house wiring. If that is what the franchise calls for, THAT IS THE SPECIFICATION, no matter how much you whine like Sloman. A city or county won't pull a franchise over one or two people complaining about weak signals. They receive a fixed percentage of the system revenue every month, and the percentage was set when the economy was up. If they pull the franchise, another provider will offer a much lower percentage. It also involves legal fees, and causes the rates to go up for the users. Why put up with all that for a fraction of a percent of problems. Like people who built a private road a mile long and want to pay the standard install fee when it will cost about $15,000 to run a feeder for that one house. Or like that marina. It isn't a street. It's private property. If they want better service, let them pay for upgrades with .500 cable to each boat, with a .500 to 'F" connector for each boat. That would only cost a few hundred dollars a boat for materials. More if the cable is jacketed. If it isn't it won't last long in salt air. Double that for the hardware and labor to get a good idea of the costs. Oh, that's right. You're too cheap to even have cable TV. Read more carefully. I said TV doesn't matter to us, it is not about cost. Then why are you being such an ignorant prick about the issue when you have no horse in the race? You sound more like Dimbulb every day. I used to think highly of you, but no longer -- You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense. |
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
JIMMIE wrote: On Feb 10, 11:38 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:17:03 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE wrote: Jeff, I installed TVRO systems for several years and used a lot of F connectors. Suprisingly the ones I found that worked best were the ultra cheap ones that only took a pair of pliers to fasten These were the ones with the separate crimp rings. Used with some good quality heat shrink tubing this eliminated most of the problems you mention. I dont know why these connectors went away, my only guess is that someone wasn't making enough money on them. Jimmie Yech... Please try this test. Insert such a crimp type F connector and cable into some useless piece of equipment with a type F jack. Pull on the cable hard. In my experience, it doesn't take much to make the cable and connector part ways. Repeat with a screw on connector. Now, repeat the experiment using a properly assembled compression type F connector and cable. It takes considerably more brute force to break the connection. I think the official minimum pull test is 55 lbs, but I'm too lazy to Google for it now. Hiding the workmanship under shrink tube is not very functional. It will have little effect on the pull test. Most of the cable leakage problems I've seen (and found) were due to crimp type F connectors coming apart or badly crimped. That includes both the hex shaped crimp, and ones held together with a crimped ring. Bad: http://www.fconnector.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/F-Connector2.jpg Worse: http://www.showmecables.com/images/catalog/product/F-connector-RG59.j... Good: http://images.lowes.com/product/converted/783250/783250926510lg.jpg -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-255 Sorry Jeff but I never used my connectors to support my cables. You may be right but completely irrelevant to me. To me F connector and good connection shouldn't even be used in the same sentence. They are what that are, cheap connectors at best that uses the center conductor of the cable for a contact. Then you would hate most microwave connectors lit SMA. Now that is Yech. Heat shrink has nothing to do with the pull test or hiding poor workmanship but it does help keep corrosion down which is the biggest problem with F connectors. You didn't need heat shrink on good 'F' connectors. Ive never seen one pull apart except in the shoddiest of installations. One of the best things I have found to insure you maintain a good connection is to apply something like DeOxit to the connectors when you assemble them. Best done while all the parts are new. Not needed, if you use flooded outdoor cable. -- You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense. |
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
JIMMIE wrote: On Feb 10, 11:38 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:17:03 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE wrote: Jeff, I installed TVRO systems for several years and used a lot of F connectors. Suprisingly the ones I found that worked best were the ultra cheap ones that only took a pair of pliers to fasten These were the ones with the separate crimp rings. Used with some good quality heat shrink tubing this eliminated most of the problems you mention. I dont know why these connectors went away, my only guess is that someone wasn't making enough money on them. Jimmie Yech... Please try this test. Insert such a crimp type F connector and cable into some useless piece of equipment with a type F jack. Pull on the cable hard. In my experience, it doesn't take much to make the cable and connector part ways. Repeat with a screw on connector. Now, repeat the experiment using a properly assembled compression type F connector and cable. It takes considerably more brute force to break the connection. I think the official minimum pull test is 55 lbs, but I'm too lazy to Google for it now. Hiding the workmanship under shrink tube is not very functional. It will have little effect on the pull test. Most of the cable leakage problems I've seen (and found) were due to crimp type F connectors coming apart or badly crimped. That includes both the hex shaped crimp, and ones held together with a crimped ring. Bad: http://www.fconnector.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/F-Connector2.jpg Worse: http://www.showmecables.com/images/catalog/product/F-connector-RG59.j... Good: http://images.lowes.com/product/converted/783250/783250926510lg.jpg -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 You are correct that the problem is in the hex crimp and part of this is because they started making the crimp made on to the connector. The other part is that you have to have a special tool to crimp them. All the pictures that you showed are require a special crimp tool. If these tools are worn or dont fit the particular plug/ cable combination you will get a bad crimp. The old style that is probably 40 years old now that you could crimp the little ring with a pair of pliers worked the best. Unfortunately you can no longer get them, well I do have a few. A 'special tool' that only cost about $20 and would do thousands of crimps before it was worn out. I've bought them new, on sale for $8 US. You admitted to using pliers on the cheap crap, and you certainly can't do that with a hex crimp. -- You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense. |
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote:
If you had any clue at all, you would be familiar with where the name comes from. So you fail there too, asshole. No surprise that you are a cultureless twit as well. That pretty much means that *I* have YOU calibrated. You are a total loser, or you would remember the art. The fact that you do not means that you were a drab loser ****tard back then as well. My fingernail clippings have more on the ball than you do, idiot. Bwuahahahaha! Which one are you? http://www.forward.com/articles/127941/ "A schmuck is, in short, someone who lacks not intelligence, but all insight into what is humanly appropriate and what is not. This makes his condition remediable. A schlemiel, a schlimazel and a schmendrik are irredeemably what they are. A schmuck can be enlightened. He can acquire, through a painful process of self-examination, the moral and social understanding that he has been missing. He can become, to revert to Wex’s dichotomy, a mentsh." -- VWW, P.E., K6EVE Using PCLOS |
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
"tom" wrote in message . net... On 2/11/2012 2:08 AM, Sal wrote: wrote in message . net... On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:52:31 -0800, The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra wrote: nuclear snippage tom K0TAR I plonked the guy days ago. It would be so-o-o-o great if people quoted him back little or none. I have no objection to appropriate profanity (and have been known to howl the unprintable on occasion, myself.) But when overused to no good end, ****/****ing,****er/****ed-up/****wad get tedious. "Sal" I was just making sure he was really the badass he's convinced that he is. He's not. He's actually kind of pitiful. Sooo, Plonk anyway! tom K0TAR :-)) "Sal" |
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
"The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra" wrote in message ... On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 09:47:14 -0800, "Wayne" wrote: "The_Giant_Rat_of_Sumatra" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:52:11 -0600, tom wrote: On 2/10/2012 8:32 PM, Wayne wrote: He really needs to create a new file from which to cut and paste. Like most comedians', his jokes get stale after awhile. -- VWW, K6EVE - But you must admit that this normally quiet newsgroup finally has some activity. Who knows, this could take on the characteristics of the GFW. --Wayne W5GIE "GFW=Great Fractal Wars" Unfortunately the traffic has nothing to do with antennas. Things dried up here around 6 months ago. I suspect the people with brains and stories, and some of us remember who they are, are no longer with us or finally bailed due to the noise. I was playing with Moonrakers way back in the early seventies. - Moonrakers? LOL. Ok now we have you calibrated. No, you do not. I was 12 years old, and the gear was my dad's. You have nothing, and you know nothing. All you do is presume, and you presume wrong, boy. The antennas I work with now are everything from 18 foot diameter gateway heads to yagis for the military that we get in 20 foot long crates that put anything you ever worked with to shame. - So what? Before you were born, I was working on 2-30 MHz log periodic arrays that were collapsed into a nuc hard silo along with a telescoping tower. |
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 08:02:37 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE
wrote: Sorry Jeff but I never used my connectors to support my cables. You may be right but completely irrelevant to me. Umm... you've never tripped over a cable, had the equipment fall off the table with the cables attached, run RG6a/u up a pole to where it has to support its own weight, moved furniture with cables still attached, flexed the connector when used as a test lead, pulled cable through the wall or conduit with connectors attached, etc? These are all very common situations which will stress the connector to cable connection. While it might not be a problem for a fixed (stapled in place) installation, it certainly will be a problem for the average home user. http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/drivel/slides/mess01.html I find it odd that outdoor CATV uses quad shielded cable to prevent RF leakage and ingress, and having the cable swept to perfection, while you recommend using inferior F connectors. To me F connector and good connection shouldn't even be used in the same sentence. They are what that are, cheap connectors at best that uses the center conductor of the cable for a contact. Now that is Yech. I do have some issues with RG6a/u that uses copper plated steel core center wire. Mostly, it's a corrosion problem for outdoor connections where the home owner does their own wiring, and uses F connectors without the necessary rubber o-ring needed for waterproofing. I've swept F connectors on the bench and find them quite good and often superior to the rare 75 ohm TNC and BNC connectors near the top end (2GHz for satellite). Incidentally, most of the antennas (that survived a recent storm) on my roof use RG6a/u coax. The mismatch loss between 50 and 75 ohms is minimal. Some use F connectors, but most use BNC's made for RG6a/u. Heat shrink has nothing to do with the pull test or hiding poor workmanship but it does help keep corrosion down which is the biggest problem with F connectors. Ahem. I worked for a marine radio company during the 1970's. I learned a few things about waterproofing and corrosion. Heat shrink doesn't work. Capillary action along the heat shrink to connector boundary will suck the water into the connector. What I use (when needed) is a layer of 1" PTFE tape (or 1/2" if that's all I can find) over the connector. Once in place, a layer of Scotch 66 or other electrical tape to hold it in place. The PTFE will cold flow into the irregularities on the connector surface, and there will be zero capillary action. If I want UV resistance, I spray the tape with clear Krlyon (acrylic) spray. While we're on the topic, I've experimented with various allegedly waterproof enclosures and packages. The only ones I consider genuinely waterproof are sealed and pressurized with dry air. Anything less will eventually leak. Ive never seen one pull apart except in the shoddiest of installations. I have and all too often. I was at the neighbors trying to troubleshoot their Comcast cable tv and modem mess. They had some friend of theirs do the wiring. All the F connectors were crimp ring type and were falling apart. The coax was mostly RG-59 with maybe 80% coverage. I replaced the most disgusting and will finish the job when I have time. One of the best things I have found to insure you maintain a good connection is to apply something like DeOxit to the connectors when you assemble them. Best done while all the parts are new. DeOxit and Cramolin contain oleic acid, which will slightly corrode copper. It's good for CLEANING connectors by removing the oxides, but should not be left on the connector. If you want to make sure that you can take the connector apart after the threads rot in place due to galvanic action between the aluminum receptacle, and the nickel plated crimp type F connector, some silicon or lithium grease would probably be better. Some notes on the contents: http://www.antiqueradios.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=82058&start=40&sid=71ca160c8f60768 6916a0f355e9ecc34 Jimmie As for special tools, I love them. My various cable preparation tools for various coax cable have saved me countless hours of fumbling with a pocket knife and diagonal cutters. Using the various compression tools on F connectors almost guarantee a good connection, unless I did something dumb. Same with crimp lugs, various LMR-xxx coax cables, and Anderson Power Pole connectors. The days of using a hammer or vice grips to crimp a connector are over. The cost can be substantial, but is well worth it if you work with connectors regularly. http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/antennas/Misc/slides/crimpers.html About $35/ea. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Increasing Cable TV signal strength
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Joerg wrote: Michael A. Terrell wrote: Joerg wrote: Michael A. Terrell wrote: Joerg wrote: Michael A. Terrell wrote: Joerg wrote: amdx wrote: Hi All, I'm on a boat, about 170ft from the utility post. Recently our cable company switched to the wonderful world of Digital TV. I got the new digital converter and had no picture. I took the box back and got a second box, still no picture. So now I suspect a weak signal and confirm that it is the cable length. The cable company came out and gave me a better cable than I had installed. At this point I have a picture but it is intermittent. The signal at the utility post has 3 outputs and had a four way splitter, I suggested the cable guy put in two 2 way splitters and give me the stronger (first) tap. That got my signal to work almost all the time. I'd like to get the signal to work 100% of the time. Looks like the cable guys screwed up. In your opinion. If their company cable box doesn't deliver a useful and reliable signal I call that screwed up. One pays for a service and expects to either get it delivered as promised or money back. ... If they are delivering the level called for in their franchise, they didn't screw up. It has always been up to the customer to pay for or provide extra equipment for non standard installs. Mike's install does not sound non-standard. 170ft cable drop towards premises which is fairly normal, plus the cable company's set-top box. Grow up. That is an excessive length drop. A standard drop is under 100 feet. You think you know everything, and that the world has to live by your rules. You don't, and it doesn't. ... http://www.starvision.tv/lineup_res.htm Quote "Maximum Drop Length 300 Feet" Now that's what I call good service. ... I'll bet you've never even seen a CATV franchise, or the dozen of pages of specifications agreed to by both the CATV company and the local government. The CATV company isn't a Santa Clause machine, and local governments know why there are limits to the service provided. If there were't, no one could afford to build or operate a CATV system. You've never designed a headend, or a physical plant If they build to supply higher port levels, it has to start at the headend, and requires closer spaced trunk amplifers. The system noise goes up from all of the cascaded amplifers, and the equipment runs hotter, withj a very reduced service life. When you can design an RF distribution system of more than 500 MHz bandwidth and has over 10,000 output ports, with the gain stabilized to a couple dBmv 20 miles from the headend and over a range from sub zero F to + 100 F then you can tell me I'm wrong. One headend I designed and built was only off by .1 dBmv at the test port on the first trunk amp which was a half mile from the head end. If you can do better than that, I'll listen to you and your opinions See above. Obviously others can. And yes, I have designed RF broadband power amps. Lots of them. Not just lashing up boxes but the actual transistor level circuitry including layout guidance for the nasty stuff. Fact is, if a cable company isn't competent to do a 170ft drop they should decline the job. Otherwise it is a screw-up, plain and simple. In our area they'd lose their shirts to the satellite guys because there are many houses like ours where there is no reasonable way to get from the street to the house with a 100ft limit. We have around 200ft that's still there from the early 90's and the previous owner said cable TV worked just fine for them. We are not subscribed because TV ain't that important to us. Yawn. You constantly harp about having to meet specs in medical, but whine like a drunken jackass when other businesses have to meet their specs. yes, they could design the sytems to 300 feet or more, but the cost to every customer on the system would go up. In medical I tend to push the envelope and so do the standards committees. Sometimes based on what we do. I designed all my cardiac stuff defibrillator-proof, always, although it was not the law yet. Then they made it law, because it makes sense. You do it because they wouldn't hire you if you couldn't meet specs, just like every other consultant, engineer or tech. They might even jail you for your incompetence for not meeting the specs. Correct. And the spec for a competent cable company is typically 300ft, as I have shown in the link. Plus the one below. Believe it or not but I like to have to meet specs in medical because they protect people. Including you. Believe it or not, most technical people have that same standard. You're nothing special. Never said I was. Except that I do exceed standards at times where I believe it is necessary. In the case of med electronics that has likely saved lives. I do not subscribe to the idea that a standard is always good enough. Because sometimes they are not. ... Would you like to pay an extra 20% to 30% just so a very few locations can get better service? Out here we do not pay extra. Our cable companies out tend do use modern technology, not cheap stuff from the 70's. A cable company that isn't competent enough to do more than a measly 100ft would lose their franchise rather quickly. Once again the all knowing Jeorge shows his ignorance. No. I suppose you know what MoCA is. Do you consider them ignorant? Because they say the very same thing that I said. What matters is today's state-of-the-art. Nobody cares about what it was in the 80's. Today this is state-of-the-art: http://www.cablefax.com/ct/sections/...ier_44237.html Quote "The Multimedia Over Coax Alliance (MoCA) provides a standard ..." then Quote "The maximum cable distance supported between the root and the last outlet is 300 feet, with a maximum attenuation of 25 dB". And this is for MoCA, not just cable TV. 1: You don't know what you're talking about, about the cost of service. Any extra operating costs become part of the basic service that everyone pays. You won't work for nothing, and the utilities don't give them free electricity. The service companies don't repair the equipment for free. Do you have any idea how many amplifiers, taps and set top boxes are needed for 10,000 active ports? To provide hotter ports require more amplifiers, and raises the system noise floor. You 'designed an amplifier'. Big deal. A lot of engineers 'designed and amplifier' and those companies are long out of business. ... So how many linear RF amplifiers above 1W have you personally designed and guided through layout? Hint: All my clients are still in business and I am sure will be for a long time to come. ... Current CATV amplifiers use hybrids designed specifically for the application and they use them for many reasons. That just leave the design of the 60V modified sine wave to DC power supplies, equalizers, gain control, equalization and remote switching. Some locations also have remote monitoring so the headend can check system status on a continuous basis. It can also report outages when some of the equipment doesn't respond. They can even detect power failures and monitor the battery status in the standby power supplies to give them time to get a portable generator to the area if it is an extended outage. The local Brighthouse system remained in operation here for over four weeks after a hurricane even though the only way to watch TV or access broadband was with battery power or a generator. If that company can't do more than 100ft they'd fail miserably in our market. It's not just our house, it's also the neighbor to the west, and the one after that, and ... 2: '70s CATV tech was 12 channel with no return path. It was crude, discrete point to point designs that looked like a ham put together from junk TVs while drinking cheap beer. They were touchy as hell, their tempco sucked, and they were impossible to service without a fully equipped test bed. the power supplies were simple, poorly regulated linear supplies with 85 C electrolytics that died quickly in the southern sun. The large diecast aluminum housing ran hot to the touch without the sun hitting them. That stuff was pretty well all scrapped out by the mid to late '80s by 36 or more channels with return capability. There was so much construction of upgraded systems that there was a severe shortage of new hardware through most of the mid '80s. That '80s tech was gone in all but the smallest systems by 2000. Today most systems are 450 MHz or higher, and are 'Fiber Enhanced' to provide telephone, broadband, movies on demand and pay per view services by breaking the system into cells that cover a few hundred homes, or less. 3: You know nothing about CATV franchises. 'A measly 100 feet' is more than adequate for a hell of a lot of drops & house wiring. ... No, it is not. If you don't believe me check out Cameron Park, CA, especially the area of the Estates. Then tell me how you want to do that with 100ft drops. ... If that is what the franchise calls for, THAT IS THE SPECIFICATION, ... And the franchise would get kicked out of the market around here. You can't serve this market with a sub-par spec. The big automotive companies had once exhibited a "Well, this is the spec and that's that" attitude like you do in this thread. Then they learned, the hard way. In part by essentially going on welfare which was embarrassing. ... no matter how much you whine like Sloman. A city or county won't pull a franchise over one or two people complaining about weak signals. ... They will if there's a whole big crowd showing up at the next meeting. Now I won't because I only watch the evening news via antenna. But I know a whole lot of folks who would be miffed to be declined service because they are literally addicted to the sports channels. Many would just get satellite though, they market that quite aggressively these days. ... They receive a fixed percentage of the system revenue every month, and the percentage was set when the economy was up. If they pull the franchise, another provider will offer a much lower percentage. It also involves legal fees, and causes the rates to go up for the users. The county folks have one much more important thing on their mind: How to get re-elected. That's what'll matter most to them. They know that seeing complaints about what many people perceive as a utility service they have "rights to" in the paper is not the way to get re-elected. ... Why put up with all that for a fraction of a percent of problems. Like people who built a private road a mile long and want to pay the standard install fee when it will cost about $15,000 to run a feeder for that one house. Or like that marina. It isn't a street. It's private property. If they want better service, let them pay for upgrades with .500 cable to each boat, with a .500 to 'F" connector for each boat. That would only cost a few hundred dollars a boat for materials. More if the cable is jacketed. If it isn't it won't last long in salt air. Double that for the hardware and labor to get a good idea of the costs. Then answer a question I asked you before but you did not comment on it: Why did Mike's cable provider not decline service? Obviously it worked reliably in the analog days and now with DTV it doesn't. If they can't handle the 170ft drop after the digital switch, why did they not inform Mike, cancel the service on their part and send someone out to pick up the set-top box? [...] -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:48 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com