Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Al Quaglieri wrote:
1. Internet over power lines (BPL) is a stillborn technology, arriving ten years too late to have any impact. The explosion in broadband connectivity is already here, and it's a wireless future. I'd be surprised if the technology lasts more than two years, with only minor rollouts in rural areas. The nail in the coffin will be subscribers losing their connection every time Joe CB'er down the block keys up. I don't see BPL noise as a factor in shortwave's future prospects. I'm with you and Steve on this. BPL has already been tried and failed in a number of other countries; at least one pilot project here in the U.S. has already failed as well. Interference to/from amateurs is occasionally cited as a reason but IMHO if the BPL operators felt they could make money, the regulatory agencies would see to it the amateurs went away, not the BPL. 2. One by one, the industrialized nations will find the internet a neater, cheaper way of reaching their target audience, and their shortwave operations will end, except for I've my doubts the Internet will be a real viable replacement for all shortwave anytime in the near future. For those broadcasts intended to reach a country's citizens abroad, yes, the Internet is probably a more economic solution. Likewise, for those intended to reach an audience of foreigners in a developed country. The Internet is more easily jammed (the Chinese are already doing so on a nationwide basis) and it's far easier to monitor what people are listening to. It will not, with current protocols, replace shortwave for reaching audiences in countries where the government would rather they weren't listening. Computers may be cheap, but they're still a LOT more expensive than a cheap radio. In isolated areas a reliable Internet connection with adequate bandwidth might be an even bigger problem. (heck, at my location - within 30 miles of Nashville - internet audio is problematic due to my connection) I don't think the Internet will in the near future replace shortwave for reaching audiences in sparsely-populated and poor countries. Of course, that does mean that secular broadcasts directed at rich free nations are likely to go away. Listeners will have to develop new skills to pull out the weak stations beaming their signals to far away parts of the world -- and to identify the broadcasts in exotic languages. Won't be much English - or for that matter, Spanish, French, German, or Japanese - left. 10. Eventually, world regulatory agencies and the ITU will examine the state of international broadcasting and see that it has turned exclusively into a fundraising tool for bible thumpers. At this point, they will be hard-pressed to justify maintaining the valuable spectrum allocations for shortwave broadcasting. All of the current shortwave broadcasting bands will shrink to 100-200 kHz apiece, and some will vanish altogether, as the worldwide demands for digital data spectrum increases. Don't really see much demand for spectrum for data on shortwave. (VHF & especially microwave are a different story!) It's not easy to reliably transfer significant amounts of data over shortwave; SW transmission will be very much a last resort. So many of the point-to-point users have shifted to satellites. I think the allotments will largely stay put. I could even see a point where the FCC concludes a segment could be opened for "amateur broadcasting", where "pirates" could operate legally as long as they keep their power down to a reasonable level. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message ... I've my doubts the Internet will be a real viable replacement for all shortwave anytime in the near future. For those broadcasts intended to reach a country's citizens abroad, yes, the Internet is probably a more economic solution. Likewise, for those intended to reach an audience of foreigners in a developed country. SNIP Computers may be cheap, but they're still a LOT more expensive than a cheap radio. In isolated areas a reliable Internet connection with adequate bandwidth might be an even bigger problem. (heck, at my location - within 30 miles of Nashville - internet audio is problematic due to my connection) I don't think the Internet will in the near future replace shortwave for reaching audiences in sparsely-populated and poor countries. But how about WorldSpace satellite radio? They have a couple of dozen channels with coverage of Africa and Asia and much of Europe. They even carry different services on the various spot beams from a single satellite. I gather they rent some space to national broadcasters. Their receivers aren't dirt cheap, but well within the means of many people in the third world. I gather that they are NOT doing well financially, however. They have a web site www.worldspace.com . There was some initial relationship between them and XM, but WorldSpace's partial foreign ownership killed that from what I heard.. bob w3otc |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
R J Carpenter wrote:
But how about WorldSpace satellite radio? They have a couple of dozen channels with coverage of Africa and Asia and much of Europe. They even carry different services on the various spot beams from a single satellite. I gather they rent some space to national broadcasters. Their receivers aren't dirt cheap, but well within the means of many people in the third world. I gather that they are NOT doing well financially, however. They have a web site www.worldspace.com . There was some initial relationship between them and XM, but WorldSpace's partial foreign ownership killed that from what I heard.. I can see LEO satellites as a possible eventual replacement for shortwave. But it's going to be pretty tough to get the costs low enough (both on the transmitting side and the receiving side) to make it fly in poorer countries. (I'm not familiar with WorldSpace's pricing) I've my doubts that any scheme that involves monthly subscription charges will work. -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"R J Carpenter" wrote in news:co477k$som$1
@xuxa.iecc.com: But how about WorldSpace satellite radio? They have a couple of dozen channels with coverage of Africa and Asia and much of Europe. They even carry different services on the various spot beams from a single satellite. I gather they rent some space to national broadcasters. Their receivers aren't dirt cheap, but well within the means of many people in the third world. I gather that they are NOT doing well financially, however. They have a web site www.worldspace.com . There was some initial relationship between them and XM, but WorldSpace's partial foreign ownership killed that from what I heard.. I don't believe you can "see" the Worldspace satellites from North America, and even if you could, it's probably impossible to get one activated unless you have a european address. I realize the reception quality on satellite radio is much better than that on shortwave, but is replacing a free service with a subscription service really a sensible way to go (unless you own stock in the satellite company!)? -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Voice of Switzerland prepares to bow out | Broadcasting | |||
Photos of China shortwave radios (and more!) | Equipment | |||
Photos of China shortwave radios (and more!) | Policy | |||
Antenna future | Antenna | |||
WHERE ARE ALL THE TOUGH GUYS IN THIS SHORTWAVE NEWSGROUP? | General |