Technology that refuses to die

Page 10 of 13 [ 201 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Wandering_Stranger
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,261

30 Apr 2013, 4:38 pm

CornerPuzzlePieces wrote:

BeautifulTechno wrote:

For me, touchscreen cell phones. Albeit more practical for cellaholics(not me, not even interested in buying a cellphone any time soon) battery lives are just dreadful and terrible. Can't they optimize it? Probably they can - they want cheap technology, that's what I think. Until it isn't optimized, let's hope that something innovating and refreshing comes out from technological companies.

That would be the backlight on the lcd screen.. something new that looks promising is O-LED's.

It's not the touchscreen that drains it, just turn the brightness down if you want amazing battery life!

It's not just the brightness. I've had my touchscreen for about 10 months now, already had to replace the battery and send it off for repair because of battery issues.

On the other hand, I have a cheap Nokia (one of those where you can only call and text on) which I got at the start of last year and have had no problem with the battery.

greengeek
Velociraptor

Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 434
Location: New York USA

24 May 2013, 10:55 am

crookedfingers wrote:

Florescent lighting, LED's are so much better for a lot of reasons.

LED's contain no Mercury, more energy efficient, and work properly in a wider range of temperatures.

_________________
Nothing is fool proof only fool resistant

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

24 May 2013, 3:50 pm

greengeek wrote:

crookedfingers wrote:

Florescent lighting, LED's are so much better for a lot of reasons.

LED's contain no Mercury, more energy efficient, and work properly in a wider range of temperatures.

I am waiting for the price to come down a bit. Right now LEDs are rather expensive for any kind of serious lighting.

ruveyn

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

26 May 2013, 3:59 pm

A year ago there was a call to end free over the air broadcast television and now the broadcasters want to save their bandwidth by offering this insane 8K ultra-high definition television which promises IMAX quality.

Max000
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,547

29 May 2013, 8:49 pm

Ichinin wrote:

TV, non-mobile phones (land lines), printed magazines... come on, its 2013 already!

Definitely agree with TV and printed everything, but I'm not sure I agree with non-mobile phones. Land lines are still more reliable then wireless. Plus I think its kind of a waste of bandwidth to use wireless, when you have a perfectly good land line available.

That said, I can live without a land line.

Max000
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,547

29 May 2013, 8:54 pm

Tollorin wrote:

Ichinin wrote:

), printed magazines...

Not everyone got a tablet..

I don't have a table, but I haven't bought a printed magazine in 15 years.

Max000
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,547

29 May 2013, 9:24 pm

eric76 wrote:

Ichinin wrote:

Arran wrote:

Terrestrial television is a debatable one. Some critics say that digital terrestrial television was developed primarily to appease older people who preferred the look of a yagi to a satellite dish.

Television has no right to exist! The internet can deliver pretty much any show you wanna watch, without some moron TV planner deciding for you what to watch. The concept of force fed entertainment has to DIE.

So your answer is to deny TV to people who live in remote areas? Make everyone move to a big city with cheap Internet?

There are many places without much in the way of Internet at all or with limitations on bandwidth.

Around here, most people have two choices for Internet -- satellite Internet that with severe limitations on your bandwidth and poor service or fixed wireless Internet with much better performance and fewer limitations. However, with the high cost of the multiple T-1 lines (ours has three T-1 lines) to service the customers it would be impossible for many to watch TV at the same time. Even with just three T-1 lines, the company just barely breaks even in spite of paying considerably less than competitive wages.

So if you want tv, you either get it over the air or you pay for it from Dish Network or Direct TV.

We should do whatever is necessary to bring high speed internet to everybody. No matter where they live. Then we should get rid of TV.

Max000
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,547

29 May 2013, 9:46 pm

CornerPuzzlePieces wrote:

I love satellite radio but it's WAY too expensive to justify it.

It's on my list of things to buy if I win the lottery though...

Yeah, thanks to it being a monopoly. :evil:

Anyway who needs it? I've got 30,000 songs downloaded on my computer. Some of them I have never even listened to before. Thats enough for me, for the rest of my life.

greengeek
Velociraptor

Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 434
Location: New York USA

06 Jun 2013, 9:36 pm

I still use a Dot-Matrix printer as they are cheap to use, the ribbons don't dry out from not being used, and my Apple Imagewriter II and my C.Itoh 8510 works on most of my computers.

_________________
Nothing is fool proof only fool resistant

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

07 Jun 2013, 1:07 pm

Why is free television obsolete?

zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,613

07 Jun 2013, 2:33 pm

androbot2084 wrote:

Why is free television obsolete?

My theories....

1. DTV reduces the transmission range of broadcast TV to a vast degree. You can get an analog signal to be watchable at just 40% signal strength, but DTV really needs 70% or better or it's impossible to tolerate...if you get anything. Since DTV went in, a lot of people lost stations they used to get well enough to watch.

2. The only fix for #1 is more DTV transmitters. They are expensive in their own rights...never mind the process to get permission to put more up. Most places just don't bother.

3. In urban areas, there's lots of incentive to make everyplace broadband ready, and there are government programs to provide it for next to nothing for those who can't afford it. In rural areas....good luck with that.

4. Wherever you live, satellite and cable offer more options than broadcast TV, and most people probably go in on that.

The simple fact is that broadcast TV is a dying market. They are usually on every other medium for TV, and the number of people who can only get them over an antenna is shrinking every year. At some point, they just won't bother anymore unless they cost is subsidized.

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,740
Location: the island of defective toy santas

07 Jun 2013, 5:00 pm

zer0netgain wrote:

The simple fact is that broadcast TV is a dying market. They are usually on every other medium for TV, and the number of people who can only get them over an antenna is shrinking every year. At some point, they just won't bother anymore unless they cost is subsidized.

then I guess pofolks like me who live out in the sticks will be up the creek as well.

Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

07 Jun 2013, 6:43 pm

The FM radio refuses to die, but I can see why. Shutting down the FM network would render many car radios worthless.

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,740
Location: the island of defective toy santas

07 Jun 2013, 6:45 pm

FM [and AM as well] radio's lifespan has been extended a bit with the advent of HD radio. :idea:

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

07 Jun 2013, 7:38 pm

Radio is alive and well.

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

07 Jun 2013, 8:38 pm

Free over the air broadcasting will soon support ultra high definition which is 16 times more detail than regular 1080p high definition. And the naysayers still think this format is obsolete?

Page 10 of 13 [ 201 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 Next

Jump to:

Technology that refuses to die Post Reply New Topic

Technology that refuses to die