My Twitterbate With @wirelessmics

I was off work today for illness - something struck me suddenly and I can't stray too far from a bathroom, and I'm pretty dehydrated at the moment. So, as I slowly sip liquids to fix the dehydration, I enjoyed a rare "long session" in my home office in front of the big desktop computer. I was catching up on my Twitter tweets, and found myself enjoying a spirited debate with @wirelessmics about an apparent petition to the FCC by the TV Broadcast Band Whitespace industry-to-be.

In fairness to @wirelessmics, I haven't followed the day-to-day goings on with whitespace and wireless mics of late, but I feel that I'm familiar enough with the issues from my following the emergence of the whitespace rules, and how the wireless microphone industry shaped those rules to its requirements.

I have no idea who, or what, is behind @wirelessmics, only that they said in one of their last tweets, that they're not a PR agency as I accused. My bad.

In the exchange below, I've tried to maintain the order of the exchange, as shown on my Twitter feed (@bwianews), and I'll let the respective tweets, and viewpoints, speak for themselves.

The following exchange is ordered most recent / conclusion, at the bottom.

@wirelessmics is in bold

@bwianews (me) is in italics.

I've edited out the headers and timestamps for readability. I tried to get the ordering of the exchanges right, but if not, apologies to readers and @wirelessmics.

"Twitterbate" begins:

wireless devices "accept interference" but work...despite some transmit delay...a wireless mic with transmit delay is broken

changing the fcc's wireless mic rules will make (some) companies money, but damage live performance and art (cont'd one more time)

(some tech lobbyists) now want the fcc to make wireless mics "accept interference" like other wireless devices (cont'd next tweet)

parallel thought...music/movie piracy (@fightpiracy) undermines artists rights so that someone else gets the money...(cont'd)

Wireless mic vendors want to keep making simple, cheap-to-make, stupid FM xmitter / receivers. Don't blame 'em - PROFITABLE!

So... If wireless mics cannot evolve to forward error correction than there's ultrawideband and 60 GHz - lots of room there.

forward error correction requires more bandwidth - not less
   
see today's tweets about delay and retransmission - wifi/phone transmission techniques don't work for mics
   
efficient mic tech (spectral efficiency) will come, but mics can't be wifi-type devices - fcc rules are correct now

if you move mics to 60 GHz - existing mics would become paper weights? that sound fair to churches/schools/musicians?

Many existing wmics ARE now paperweights because wireless mic industry kept selling mics that operated in TV ch 51-69.

That FEC requires more bandwidth, not less, would be news to the entire digital communications industry.

FEC is redundant data in stream i.e. more data no retrans. (less bw for delay tolerant data, more bw for real time data)

Problem is that Ch 51-69 are now allocated for two-way communications, not (mostly vacant) TV transmission.

Shure gives rebates to replace now obsolete microphone systems - http://tiny.cc/4PxW4

FEC is interleaved realtime - entire point is that it doesn't require retransmission or delay.
   
fcc rules now (good) ch 51-69 gone - there is now a lobby for mics to "accept interference" in 2-51 - new (bad) change

Wireless Mic industry arguments remind me of the minicomputer industry on the eve of PCs becoming powerful enuf for most jobs.

Wireless Mics could have had AMPLE protection from interference by using beacons, but rejected that during FCC investigations.

mic data is real time AND hi-res - repeat, it's not wifi data (delay tolerant) or phone data (lo-res)

Your marketing dept. is a bit confused - FEC is not incompatible with realtime and high-resolution.

Apologies... your lobbying department, not marketing department, is a bit confused...

the fcc rules as written work fine - there is lobby to change (brand new) whitespace rules http://tiny.cc/9h98J explians

Expecting the follow block from @wirelessmics any second now.

wont' follow block - a debates a debate - multiple technical ways to make mics work - but they work where they are

FEC is very compatible with realtime and high-resolution - over fiber where its used for video

mics DO have AMPLE protection from interference in the FCC rules - wthout beacons - we're in favor of FCC rules as-is
   
FEC is interleaved (and more data - my words) realtime - it doesn't require retransmission or delay (correct - my word)

Point being that whitespace devices will provide new services to a vastly larger population, not just a tiny # of wmic users.

And... And, wireless mics could have had ample protection from whitespace devices using beacons, but rejected beacon approach.

And it's understandable that wireless mic industry should try to block progress because they haven't updated their tech.

The TVBD rules are less than 9 mos. old (see http://tiny.cc/y0lAn) after 5+ years lobbying. Changes now aren't progress.

wmic industry will evolve their tech - "Darwinian Effect of License-exempt Wireless". If wmics work poorly, people won't buy.
   
Yes, understood that wmics are, technically, a licensed service, but wmic industry enjoyed not having licensing rqmt enforced.

Thanks to @bwianews for today's discussion (we all have to work sometime and i do now).

Welcome to "Internet Time" :-) whitespace industry is seizing "bias towards action and progress" of Obama Admin and new FCC.
   
Put it this way... if Bluetooth can be made to work in 2.4 GHz junk band, with LOTS of users, than wmics can use better tech.

RT Learn about wireless mics and new TV spectrum regulations http://tiny.cc/y0lAn Already these new FCC rules are under attack by lobbyists!

wmic industry just doesn't want to change its tech - it's comfortable and profitable. Change is hard and uncomfortable.

RT parallel thought...music/movie piracy (@fightpiracy) undermines artists rights so that someone else gets the money...(cont'd)

RT (some tech lobbyists) now want the fcc to make wireless mics "accept interference" like other wireless devices (cont'd next tweet)

Some smart engineer will soon see the margins of wmics and invent Bluetooth, 5 GHz, UWB, or 60 GHz wmics (all with FEC) - $$$.

Yes, propaganda must be served to keep collecting PR fees from wireless microphone industry. Everyone's gotta make a living.

I'm not a PR agency - and you believe Google/Microsoft/Dell/Motorola/HP don't engage in "propaganda" about this issue?

Editing by Steve Stroh. No copyright claims.