For those who don't know it yet, the FCC approved modifications to Part 15
regarding BPL.

This is an extraordinary example of the FCC being both responsive to the
--need-for new technologies and innovative spectrum use, while invoking new
guidelines and requirements to assure dual use between licensed and unlicensed
users.

I agree with Mr. Powell's assessment that it was a "banner day". The FCC did a
spectacular job!

But, if you've followed my comments, you knew that this was my prediction for
some time...

73,
Chip N1IR

But for someone who comes on an amateur radio forum to gloat over
the probable destruction of the HF radio spectrum, I'll make an exception.

Will someone please tell me how to "killfile" this F***ING STUPID
TROLL? I haven't quite figured out how to do it in OE6. (That will
also save me from feeding this Troll, which I'm afraid I just did.)

Thanks...

"Fractenna" wrote in message
...
For those who don't know it yet, the FCC approved modifications to Part 15
regarding BPL.

This is an extraordinary example of the FCC being both responsive to the
--need-for new technologies and innovative spectrum use, while invoking
new
guidelines and requirements to assure dual use between licensed and
unlicensed
users.

I agree with Mr. Powell's assessment that it was a "banner day". The FCC
did a
spectacular job!

But, if you've followed my comments, you knew that this was my prediction
for
some time...

73,
Chip N1IR

Dear OM,

I am sorry that you take personal offense; I will be happy to state why this
was posted:

1) it has been an ongoing topic on this NG for a long time, and now we have
final resolution;
2) I did not expect nor require anyone to respond, ergo the 'troll factor' is
not an issue;
3) The FCC has taken careful and measured steps to assure that US amateurs
remain with the enjoyment of the HF bands, given the sharing of spectrum with
BPL.
4)It is the very best scenario for all involved. That is definitely worth
gloating over.

Wishing you the best,

Chip N1IR

(nt)

"Fractenna" wrote in message
...
Dear OM,

I am sorry that you take personal offense; I will be happy to state why
this
was posted:

1) it has been an ongoing topic on this NG for a long time, and now we
have
final resolution;
2) I did not expect nor require anyone to respond, ergo the 'troll factor'
is
not an issue;
3) The FCC has taken careful and measured steps to assure that US amateurs
remain with the enjoyment of the HF bands, given the sharing of spectrum
with
BPL.
4)It is the very best scenario for all involved. That is definitely worth
gloating over.

Wishing you the best,

Chip N1IR


The "very best solution" would be to allow the utilities to use their
extensive system of power poles to string a fiberoptic cable to residences
(either direct, or maybe the last half-mile as an RF node). If the power
companies had spent their lobbying and legal money on installing this base,
a lot of people would now have high-speed net connections.

BPL is simply a poor technical solution, and is an interim communications
step that should be bypassed. You may gloat over your prediction accuracy,
but certainly not over the existence of any form of BPL.

Ed
wb6wsn

BPL is simply a poor technical solution, and is an interim communications
step that should be bypassed.

Why wait? People have things to say and see right now.

Ultimately, all telecom systems transition. BPL has the good fortune of having
an infrastructure and a need right now; tomorrow; and for some time to come.

Seize the day! Solve a pressing problem. BPL looks very promising.

73,
Chip N1IR

At the expense of interference on the HF bands? No thanks.

-SSB

Fractenna wrote:

BPL is simply a poor technical solution, and is an interim communications
step that should be bypassed.


Why wait? People have things to say and see right now.

Ultimately, all telecom systems transition. BPL has the good fortune of having
an infrastructure and a need right now; tomorrow; and for some time to come.

Seize the day! Solve a pressing problem. BPL looks very promising.

73,
Chip N1IR

(Fractenna) wrote in message ...
BPL is simply a poor technical solution, and is an interim communications
step that should be bypassed.

True. Very true.

Why wait? People have things to say and see right now.

People need to cross the highway right now, but running in front of a
truck is not recommended.

Ultimately, all telecom systems transition. BPL has the good fortune of having
an infrastructure and a need right now; tomorrow; and for some time to come.

On a personal level, I need BPL like I need an enema.

Seize the day!

Ok... the day is under arrest...Should I hold it for 72 hours?

Solve a pressing problem.

BPL is a dumbass answer to a nonexistant problem.

BPL looks very promising.

It would, to you....
Simply put....BPL, in it proposed configuration, sucks. Only
tweezerbrained people with a commercial or political agenda would
disagree. The idea of the HF spectrum becoming a digital noise
wasteland does not appeal to me. I bet the people over at Houston
Universal Radio will just love it. I can hear it now...Continental
1256 heavy, you are 1 by 1....You are buried in our BPL garbage bin.
Call San Juan Radio... Maybe they can hear you....Forget New York
Radio, they are in worse shape than we are. If no joy, just deviate to
Boston, descend to 2000 and stick your head out the window and yell
real, real, real, loud....Maybe that goofy ass Chip will hear you and
will relay your intentions back to us via his coveted BPL internet
connection....Then, again, maybe he won't...MK

Sorry but I don't think so !

No, I don't have an impressive resume or advance degree in RF or anything.

BPL can't turn a profit without a large customer base. So, this bs about
the rural folk getting their internet cheap don't fly because of all the
hardware they need to string out in the country and that cost money.

Do you think the telco and cable co will loose customers to bpl, I don't.

DSL has dropped in price several times since the BPL dog and pony show
has started. Cable roadrunner has reduced the price and increased speed.

Now cell phone companies have the capacity to offer it via the new phones
and with a network card in your laptop or desktop.

If people need internet in rural area, let them dial in like I do.
Sure the kids need internet to stay on top of stuff but don't need
to download Gb size files with music and movie crap.

scotty


Fractenna wrote:

BPL is simply a poor technical solution, and is an interim communications
step that should be bypassed.

Why wait? People have things to say and see right now.

Ultimately, all telecom systems transition. BPL has the good fortune of having
an infrastructure and a need right now; tomorrow; and for some time to come.

Seize the day! Solve a pressing problem. BPL looks very promising.

73,
Chip N1IR

On 15 Oct 2004 22:57:29 GMT, (Fractenna) wrote:

BPL is simply a poor technical solution, and is an interim communications
step that should be bypassed.

Why wait? People have things to say and see right now.

Ultimately, all telecom systems transition. BPL has the good fortune of having
an infrastructure and a need right now; tomorrow; and for some time to come.

Seize the day! Solve a pressing problem. BPL looks very promising.

That is not exactly what the Technology News has to say
http://www.technewsworld.com/story/37378.html
They basically say it doesn't look promising as a business model and
the infrastructure isn't in place to use it yet, except for a few test
sites. It's inefficient, expensive to install, and is least likely to
serve the sparsely settled rural areas for which it's being touted.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

73,
Chip N1IR