Messages

571

General Discussion / Re: Weird TV channel I've discovered...

« on: April 08, 2012, 09:49:45 PM »

Wow - that mention of Prevue takes me back!  I remember when it was nothing more than a full-screen scrolling list of programming in half-hour blocks at a time.  Then they got fancy and added ads, trailers, and promos on the top half of the screen.  Then they got really fancy and showed 90 minutes of listings at a time.

In my house we upgraded to cable boxes with on-screen programming guides in the mid-1990s, so I stopped watching Prevue out of lack of necessity.  It was an interesting story about how we got those cable boxes so early - I happened to be flipping the channels, and the cable company's own promo channel happened to be showing an "infomercial" for them.  I watched, it looked very interesting, I told my mother to turn on that channel, and within half an hour we were already driving to the cable company's office to upgrade. 

572

Programming and Graphics / Re: Where can i get Intellistar graphics???

« on: April 08, 2012, 09:46:56 PM »

The 4000 graphics have been available for some time now, not to mention the emulator.  I take it TWC's policy is to just conveniently look the other way regarding such an old system?

573

Programming and Graphics / Re: New Video Wall

« on: April 05, 2012, 11:22:52 PM »

I love your graphic about last year's Springfield tornadoes.  I lived in eastern Massachusetts at the time, and, though our weather wasn't nearly as severe as in Springfield and surrounding communities, we still had some nasty weather.  In the middle of the morning we had a torrential downpour with a severe thunderstorm, but that soon passed and the skies were nice and sunny.  After another few hours, all H broke out.

What I find even more amazing is that this was predicted so accurately in advance, so people could prepare for it.  If I recall correctly, Massachusetts was even given a TOR:CON index of 10.

574

General Discussion / Re: The Front Porch

« on: April 05, 2012, 11:20:27 PM »

Nope.  Tomorrow is only day 4 in a 7-day stretch.  But my one day off will be coming soon...  I just have to wait until Tuesday. 

575

General Discussion / Re: Audio Waveforms

« on: April 05, 2012, 11:19:00 PM »

When I was younger, back in the Windows 3.1 days, I used to use the Sound Recorder program to amplify and diminish a sound file's audio (we're talking about .wav - long before MP3s came about!) until it sounded like someone was speaking underneath mud 50 miles away through a tunnel. 

It entertained pre-teen Eric. 

576

General Discussion / Re: The Front Porch

« on: April 04, 2012, 12:35:35 AM »

Yeah, I don't think detailed forecasts for the Australian Outback would be all that important.  There's basically one constant forecast, and interruptions of that would perhaps warrant some additional attention, but that's all.  And, considering the population density is... very low, who'd be paying attention to the forecasts, anyway? 

577

Local Forecast / Re: Has the L-bar been discontinued?

« on: April 04, 2012, 12:34:11 AM »

The Weather Channel has changed so much since I started watching it that I honestly don't think I'll be pleased with any changes they make unless they return to the mission that they started with.  Since I doubt that's going to happen, I doubt I'm going to see the network the same way as I did in the past.

Remember when The Learning Channel actually focused on education?  Remember when Bravo actually focused on high culture?  Remember when The Weather Channel actually focused on weather?

Television is careening towards a homogeneous stew simply because advertisers want to stick with what people already know.  Reporting on the movement of a cold front across the North American continent isn't going to attract as many advertisers as showing people being pulled out of the ocean or helicoptered to a hospital from the tundra.

Yes, I think it's 100% sad that advertising basically dictates what appears on the television screen.  Even sadder is that there's precious little alternative.  Americans would start a new revolution if they had to pay a license fee like Britons do to support the BBC.  (Even thought the caliber of BBC programming is so much higher than almost all American programming.)

578

Everything Else TWC / Re: General TWC Discussion

« on: April 03, 2012, 03:29:08 PM »

The way things are going, TWC won't need to spend extra money to hire meteorologists as on-air talent anymore.

579

General Discussion / Re: The Front Porch

« on: March 31, 2012, 07:13:06 AM »

I guess everyone has to get on with their impoverished lives again...

580

IntelliStar 2 Discussion / Re: when will comcast get intellistar 2?

« on: March 30, 2012, 01:47:12 PM »

Comcast is one of, if not the, largest cable company in the U.S.  I'm certain money isn't a problem if they wanted to buy IS2 units.

581

Local Forecast / Re: Lack of flavor variety

« on: March 30, 2012, 10:40:52 AM »

Rather than watch nearly 10 minutes of video, I'll settle for flavor lists instead. 

But it's nice seeing Massachusetts on a Star again. 

582

Programming and Graphics / Re: New Video Wall

« on: March 30, 2012, 10:31:28 AM »

Does anyone think they should have made the video wall bigger?  I'm sure it properly suits the functions they need it for, but when compared to the rest of the wall, it seems so small.

Don't worry... in another couple of decades, I'm sure whole walls in TV studio will be video walls.  Just think of how the TV news has progressed over time.  A static background with no graphics gave way to rear projector screens to superimposed boxes to chroma key to TV panels.  Not all necessarily in that order after the first two, but... you get the point. 

583

General Discussion / Re: Weather Graphics Products

« on: March 30, 2012, 10:29:13 AM »

It's very important to balance visual attractiveness with the usefulness of the information provided.

A given map may look very pretty, but it's essentially eye candy: it conveys little to no practical or useful information, but impresses the viewers at home so much anyway because it's in pretend 3-D, or spins around a lot, or has lots of animation, or shows something in a very different way.

Displaying weather information doesn't have to be done in a boring way, but neither does the information have to be obscured to show off the computing power of the latest equipment the TV station bought.

584

Local Forecast / Re: General LF Discussion

« on: March 30, 2012, 10:25:18 AM »

Talk about contradicting oneself rather efficiently!

On the one hand, they want continuity across all platforms, but, on the other hand, they simultaneously admit that it's not possible because of technical reasons.

I actually have to agree with the latter point.  I remember the days when the current IS2 icon set was used on the IS.  That set simply did not look good on a standard definition display.  I honestly couldn't tell the difference between rain and snow on that set - it looked like random "stuff" falling from a grey cloud against a grey background.  All I could see was "precipitation," not rain or snow.  The current icon set, I think, is much more suited to SD.  It may not be as realistic, but it gets the message across instantly - and THAT is, in my opinion, the most important thing.  On the other hand, the higher resolution of HD means that the IS2 icon set looks fantastic AND is also able to convey its message easily.

(I find it ironic that vocal supporters of the 4000 are often those who criticize the current IS/SD feed icon set.  Really, Lego-block rain is better looking?!)

</rant #2 for the day>
This is what happens when I wake myself up hours earlier than I would have liked because I thrash around when I sleep... and a broken radio that fell off a bedside table is the result.  Two stereo systems have broken within the past couple of months, one just yesterday, because of advanced age, and now this.  I'm running out of equipment!!

585

IntelliStar 2 Discussion / Re: when will comcast get intellistar 2?

« on: March 30, 2012, 10:19:54 AM »

I don't think I've ever found out what those "compatibility issues" are.

I know Comcast is among the worst offenders among cable companies with channel compression.  Perhaps that interferes with how the IntelliStar 2 would receive/transmit information?  Or... perhaps Comcast just uses a lot of non-standard/proprietary equipment?

I really do feel sorry for those with Comcast - one of the earliest cable companies to show the HD feed, but dead last when it comes to adopting the IS2.  After having the IS2 available to me for the past couple of months, I certainly don't want to go back to not having it.