31 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
The Telecom Digest for August 4, 2013
====== 31 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Bill Horne and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using any name or email address
included herein for any reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to that person, or email address
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of that address. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. - Geoffrey Welsh
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 06:49:36 -0700 (PDT) From: HAncock4 <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Uptime and lifetime of #5ESS Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Friday, October 1, 2010 3:23:23 PM UTC-4, Thad Floryan wrote: > A good while ago the Bell System Technical Journal had an issue devoted to the #5 ESS (#5 Electronic Switching System) that you might find interesting. I could only find one article on No. 5 ESS, published in November, 1982. While it focused on the system's database, it did provide a general picture of the system. It mentions things like "tuple-retrieval primitives". http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol61-1982/articles/bstj61-9-2423.pdf The Nov 1982 issue has several articles on database processing. (The Sept 1964 issue is about No. 1 ESS). http://www3.alcatel-lucent.com/bstj/vol61-1982/articles/bstj61-9-2423.pdf
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 06:17:18 -0400 From: Michael Muderick <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Re: Only Seven Percent of TV Households Rely on Over-the-Air Message-ID: <CAGhQzTpCJSK18xnoK5p3n1=XUWoQnMYk_+y9TSL3a+g55i_Xxw@mail.gmail.com> IT DEPENDS ON WHOSE STATISTICS YOU READ: Antennas aren't just for grandma's boob tube anymore: 19.3 percent of all US TV households get their TV fix from free over-the-air broadcasts, according to a new GfK study released this week http://www.fierceonlinevideo.com/press-releases/over-air-tv-renaissance-continues-pay-tv-cord-cutting-rises . This means that 22.4 million households representing 59.7 million Americans get their TV for free, the market research firm estimates. http://gigaom.com/2013/06/21/ota-60-million-antenna-users-cord-cutting/
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 22:15:52 -0400 From: Telco Guy <Telco@Guy.com> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Only Seven Percent of TV Households Rely on Over-the-Air Signals according to CEA Study Message-ID: <51FB1658.5AE137AA@Guy.com> (7% of households feed OTA and only OTA to their TV's) > > "Consumers have moved away in droves from traditional broadcast > > television thanks to a surge in programming alternatives > > available through wired and wireless broadband connections. I question that conclusion, unless some numbers are provided showing what percentage of the other 93% feed the following into their TV's: a) A combination of OTA and pure internet (netflix/hulu/etc) b) or a combination of cable/IPTV/satellite and internet c) or pure internet (netflix/hulu/youtube/etc) d) or ONLY cable/IPTV/satellite e) or ONLY local-source material (DVD/Bluray/NAS) With the economy in the toilet, I thought that "cord-cutting" was trending up. It was my impression that sports was the primary driver for keeping cable/satellite subscribers, and households that have no sports fans and live in urban areas served with many terrestrial TV stations have a greatly reduced reason to subscribe to cable or satellite TV.
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 10:34:17 -0400 From: "news" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Only Seven Percent of TV Households Rely on Over-the-Air Signals according to CEA Study Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:44:06 -0700 (PDT), Neal McLain <email@example.com> wrote: >FierceCable July 30, 2013 > >> ARLINGTON, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--New research released today from the >> Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) found that just seven percent >> of American TV households rely solely on an antenna for their television >> programming. The findings of the new study, U.S. Household Television >> Usage Update, are consistent with CEA's 2010 research which found eight >> percent of TV households reported using an antenna only for television >> programming. According to historical CEA research, there has been a >> gradual decline in the percentage of TV households using antennas since >> 2005. The phone survey of 1,009 U.S. adults is comparable to a 2012 >> Nielsen study indicating nine percent of all U.S. TV households are >> broadcast TV/over-the-air only, a decrease from 16 percent in 2003. >> >> "The vast majority of Americans no longer rely on over-the-air TV >> signals," said Gary Shapiro, president and CEO, CEA. "Consumers have >> moved away in droves from traditional broadcast television thanks to a >> surge in programming alternatives available through wired and wireless >> broadband connections. This is why Congress had it right when they >> authorized the FCC to hold voluntary broadcast spectrum incentive >> auctions to reallocate broadcast television spectrum to greater uses, >> like wireless broadband. This study provides yet another reason why it >> is time for broadcast spectrum to be reallocated, and quickly." > >Continued: >http://tinyurl.com/lq6bkkx > > >And so it is that the "vast majority of Americans" subsidizes the Seven Percent. All in the name of Consumer Protection. > >Neal McLain No, the conclusion should be that the vast majority of Americans like getting ripped off by the cable companies..... ET
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2013 17:43:12 -0500 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Gordon Burditt) To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Only Seven Percent of TV Households Rely on Over-the-Air Signals according to CEA Study Message-ID: <OqCdnRtIPqkdGmDMnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d@posted.internetamerica> >> ARLINGTON, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--New research released today from the >> Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) found that just seven percent >> of American TV households rely solely on an antenna for their television >> programming. This statistic seems particularly useless for determining who benefits from over-the-air signals, which is relevant if you're going to talk about "subsidy". If you apply the same criteria to communication, you'd probably find that almost nobody depends solely on one of: the postal service, voice telephone calls, texting, or the Internet (email/web). For transportion, almost nobody depends solely on one of: walking, bicycling, ground motor vehicles, or air transportion. So let's get rid of all of them (sidewalks, roads, airports and any spectrum associated with toll tags, highway cameras, air navigation, radar, etc. Especially passenger air transportation (and most of the TSA along with it). Lots of other people with both a cable/satellite/internet source of TV programming and and antenna (not necessarily on the same TV) benefit from broadcast programming: - Those who primarily watch broadcast television and fall back to cable/satellite for (a) premium programming or (b) weather problems with over-the-air reception, because they think the picture on ATSC is generally better (yes, these people really do exist). - Those who primarily watch cable/satellite and fall back to over-the-air programming for (a) cable outages, (b) cable system/broadcaster hissy fits such as the one currently happening between Time Warner Cable and CBS over retransmission fees (KTVT-11 has gone dark on TWC's system in Dallas), (c) money shortages to pay the cable bill, (d) weather problems with satellite or cable (cable isn't supposed to have weather problems except for severe storms but if you don't maintain it, you will) or (e) programming where high compression really hurts, such as live sports, because they think the picture on cable/satellite is generally equal or better. - Those who watch with a mix of sources on different sets (e.g. cable in the living room, small portables in other rooms and in the RV). - Those who don't know that they depend on over-the-air broadcasts because that's how their cable company gets the signal to pass it on. A lot of these were found and probably fixed during the digital transition, but I'm not betting on all of them being fixed.
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom- munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
bill at horne dot net
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Copyright (C) 2013 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization.