FCC Accepts Dish Filing for DBS Satellite at 86.5 W

[rocatman]

The FCC has accepted for filing an application by Echostar (Dish) to build a DBS satellite at 86.5 W. It is interesting that this was originally filed on June 9, 2003. This might be an indication that the FCC is about to allow the 4.5 degree separation for DBS slots since there is a Canadian slot at 82 W. In addition, if you look below the Echostar application, there are two applications from Spectrum Five LLC for building two DBS satellites at 114.5 W which is also a 4.5 degree slot between 110 and 119 W. I would have to believe that if the FCC allows the 4.5 degree DBS slots that any competition arguments against the Dish acquisition of Rainbow-1 would be severely weaken if not eliminated since there would be more DBS slots available. Here is the link:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-258174A1.pdf

[Big Bob]

this sounds encouraging. It will be interesting to see what kind of challenges there are to having satellites 4.5 degrees apart.

And I believe that technically it isn't the FCC that allows 4.5 degree separation, that is set by international treaty.

[James Long]

And I believe that technically it isn't the FCC that allows 4.5 degree separation, that is set by international treaty.I believe the separation is more where the slots ended up than a specific thought or rule to give 9 degree separation. In any case, the ITU will need to approve the change to the Region 2 plan. Just like the adjustments that US satellite carriers have made.

JL

[Jacob S]

That 4.5 degree spacing would help satellite ever so much on getting more bandwidth for HD and locals. They could even eliminate the big FSS dishes.

[bavaria72]

Would/Could they move the Voom bird to that location?

[rocatman]

Would/Could they move the Voom bird to that location?

I don't think Dish would move the Voom satellite, Rainbow-1 (R-1) to that location because the real value of R-1 is its spotbeam capability at 61.5 W. The spotbeams would get messed up if the satellite was moved elsewhere. Now after the Echostar-10 (E-10) satellite is launched and operational hopefully later this year at 110 W, the E-6 satellite currently at 110 W could be moved there. I can't see Dish having E-6, E-8 and E-10 all at 110 W. E-6 could also be moved to 119 W as a backup to E-7 there since E-5 appears to be going to 129 W.

[rocatman]

Here is another link to a letter sent from Dish (Echostar) to the FCC on 3/25/05 regarding the 4.5 degree DBS slot separation. It appears that Dish has found that there are technical difficulties in having a "multiple feed earth station dish" (something like a D500 dish) receiving signals from DBS satellites only 4.5 degrees apart. If I am interpreting this correctly, it would difficult to use a single dish to receive signals from two DBS satellites only 4.5 degrees apart. So for example Dish could not use a single dish for DBS slots at 105.5 W and 110 W or as another example 114.5 W and 110 and/or 119 W. This would not affect Dish at 86.5 W since the slots at 82 and 91 W are being used by the Canadians. Here is the link:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-257928A1.pdf

[James Long]

A dish designed for even one 4.5º spaced satellite would require a tighter focus than a 9º design. But even if every dish already on the market and installed were 4º compliant (+/- 2º of center) a multi-sat dish would have some difficulties.

The logic:
Look at the degree difference between aiming a Dish300 at 110 and 119 from a southern location such as San Diego, California (92101).
110: Azimuth 154 Elevation 51
119: Azimuth 170 Elevation 52
Dish500 points down the middle at Azimuth 162 Elevation 51
Then go northeast to Bangor, Maine (04401).
110: Azimuth 250 Elevation 24
119: Azimuth 259 Elevation 19
Dish500 points down the middle at Azimuth 254 Elevation 21

Now design a dish that can see both satellites from San Diego where they are 16º apart as well as Bangor where they are 9º apart - You have a Dish500. Whether that dish is in San Diego or Bangor the dish is the same just in Bangor the focal points hit close to the center edge of the feedhorns and in San Diego the focal points hit closer to the outside edge. Add in a theoretical new satellite at 114.5 and hope that its focal point is small enough to fit between the two feedhorns and not interfere with every multisat dish on the market.

With an active 114.5 DBS sat a slightly misaimed Bangor dish would land two focal points on one feedhorn (interference) and the same dish in San Diego could pick between 119 and 114.5 or 114.5 and 110.

The DirecTV tripple dish has a similar challenge, except the three satellites are even further apart. A tweener dish for 119-114.5-110 would be of similar design. The tweener dish would have to see three satellites at a perspective of 4.5 degrees apart from Bangor and 8 degrees apart from San Diego. The issue would come when the second tweener is introduced:
Center: 114.5
+ 4.5º: Bangor 110/119
+ 8º: San Diego 110/119
+ 9º: Bangor 105.5/123.5
+13.5º: Bangor 101/(128)
+16º: San Diego 105.5/123.5
Where do you position the left LNB so it picks up 110 in San Diego at 8º and not 105.5 in Bangor at 9º but is still wide enough to see 110 in Bangor at 4.5º. That is the challenge. (The DirecTV tripple has an extra degree or two to work with.)

Echostar has been leading the charge for tweeners - to hear from them that they can't do it on one dish is significant. They would be the ones trying the hardest to make that work. Personally I'd work on an adjustable dish where the feedhorns could be pulled in closer in northern areas and left wide in southern areas. I do not believe it would be too difficult - but would require a new step (set LNB spacing) and of course separate LNBs like the SuperDish.

(BTW: 4.5 degree separation is a non-starter unless either all current DBS dishes are compliant or all non-compliant dishes are replaced. Much like the shift from 4 degree to 2 degree C band dishes.)

JL

[rocatman]

Theoretically Dish could build a spotbeam only satellite for 86.5 W that would have spotbeams for all of the U.S. except that which borders Canada to avoid interference with the adjacent Canadian slots at 82 and 91 W.

In regards to my initial posting in this thread, I can not believe it is just a coincidence that those three applications for "tweener" DBS slots appeared in a single public notice. The FCC is moving on the tweener DBS slot issue and it should be interesting how the issue unfolds.

[James Long]

Theoretically Dish could build a spotbeam only satellite for 86.5 W that would have spotbeams for all of the U.S. except that which borders Canada to avoid interference with the adjacent Canadian slots at 82 and 91 W.And accept any inbound interference from Canadian signals that come too far south. :)In regards to my initial posting in this thread, I can not believe it is just a coincidence that those three applications for "tweener" DBS slots appeared in a single public notice. The FCC is moving on the tweener DBS slot issue and it should be interesting how the issue unfolds.Yes, it will be interesting. I'm glad they are finnaly ready to deal with the issue.

JL

[alebowgm]

I think they would have to go with a spotbeam only satellite that focus's mostly on the south. Not only does Canada DBS use both 82 and 91, but they are both Nimiq birds and since Expressvu is using Echostar equipment, all of the sudden Canadian subs would go and look at their signal and instead of seing Nimiq2 would see something like Wrong Sat, VOOM1 or something along those lines...

[alebowgm]

Unless they firmware upgrade of course to avoid this somehow...

[Jacob S]

So they could put a spotbeam satellite at 114.5 as well to avoid the interference with 110 and 119? If they used HD locals on those spotbeams that would mean another dish swapout for those customers (or at least an upgrade of another lnbf onto the current Dish500/SuperDish and a different switch to accomodate the additional slot such as the DPP-44 switch).

[larrystotler]

The ideal situation would be for one company to have the 96.5/105.5/114.5 and another company to have the 101/110/119 locations. This would give both compaies access to 96 transponders each, and having dishes focused at the 3 locations would help to eliminate interference between slots. This would be much more practical that trying to have a dish with the 105.5/110/119 or the 110/114.5/119. However, if they used the torrioidal dish design, this may help solve the problems, but may end up making my job much more of a bitch.......

[bavaria72]

Dang it Larry I hate when you use big words like "toroidal dish". I had to stop down and do a search on the net. Wow what a huge pain in the butt those puppy dogs will be. But man, the ability to receive signals from birds that are 60 degree apart. Would certainly be nice and it would solve the one dish issue!

[SimpleSimon]

Larry:

I don't get why having the slots as DEDEDE would be better than DDDEEE?

At first glance, it seems easier to have a 9 degree spread on a dish than a 13.5 one.

And considering the focal point differences for different locations, I also think that adds weight to my position.

Look at a D500. The focal points move from cross-eyed to wall-eyed as location varies. Of course, that's also true for the wider spread, but won't the amount of focal shift of the side eyes increase?

Either way, the center stays in the center, and shouldn't be a problem.

Of course, ANY of these solutions involves swapping out dishes.

[geobernd]

On a different note - but not completely OT:
Why do we need so many slots anyway? Why not expand the spectrum like in Europe.... Look at Astra on 19.2E as an example: Frequencies spectrum goes from 10.714 GHz to 12.748 GHz that's more than three US DBS slots together... And you can use one dish, one LNB and be done with it......

[James Long]

Frequencies spectrum goes from 10.714 GHz to 12.748 GHz that's more than three US DBS slots together... And you can use one dish, one LNB and be done with it......Closer to four slots ... US DBS is using 500MHz per satellite. US is using that "extra" space in different ways.

"Ku" Downlink Frequencies:
DBS: 12200-12700 MHz - High Power, currently 9º spaced
FSS: 11700-12200 MHz - Medium Power, 2º spaced
KuX: 11450-11700 MHz - New "Extended Ku Band"
KuX: 10950-11200 MHz - New "Extended Ku Band"

Most of the bandwidth is there just used differently. DBS uses higher power transponders futher apart in the sky (9º) which leads to smaller dishes on the earth. FSS uses less power in the sky allowing for closer placement (2º) but requires larger dishes. KuX will require FSS sized dishes.

By limiting the power and spacing them closer together the FSS band has more room than the DBS band in the US. In the 18º where two DBS slots are currently allowed one can put up 9 FSS Ku slots full of transmissions. 1000 MHz of DBS vs 4500 MHz of FSS total.

I believe our ITU region is doing ok with their assignments ... lots of room for those wanting Ku FSS assignments that cover the entire ITU region while providing high power and easy to find on a small dish DBS assignments for direct to home. Same bandwidth as you find in Europe, managed differently.

JL

[SimpleSimon]

Actually, that looks like a combination of FSS (V/H) & DBS (L/R) frequencies.

According to this: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf and other sources, FSS is 11.724-12.147GHz, DBS is 12.224-12.675GHz. The 12.75-13.25GHz band is reserved for uplinks. No idea what's happening at 10.7-11.7GHz.

Hmmm. On the cable to the receiver, a full set of transponders takes up 1GHz. 32 DBS transponders is 450MHz. Looks like left/right ad H/V polarization is very efficent (allows overlap).

Anyway, we're using a 2GHz spread now - it's just that issues like transmit power, slot separation, etc. are getting in the way. Think about the StupiDish.

[larrystotler]

Hmmm. On the cable to the receiver, a full set of transponders takes up 1GHz. 32 DBS transponders is 450MHz. Looks like left/right ad H/V polarization is very efficent (allows overlap).

Yes, the manage to squeeze 768Mhz into the DBS band and 864Mhz into the FSS band. That is why I said that they could have created a D500 setup that you could actually split, since * has 50 of the 64 trans available.
The 110 has 90.625% which is 696Mhz and the 119 has 65.625% which is 504Mhz. Total bandwidtch needed is 1200Mhz, which is exactly what you have between 950 and 2150Mhz. However, as JL has pointed out before, that does take away upgradability due to E*'s reliance on many locations. Would be nice tho.

[larrystotler]

Larry:I don't get why having the slots as DEDEDE would be better than DDDEEE? At first glance, it seems easier to have a 9 degree spread on a dish than a 13.5 one.
Of course, ANY of these solutions involves swapping out dishes.

You are looking at it wrong. With D*'s current triple sat dishes, they are 101/110/119 at 9 degrees, and what I was suggesting was that E* take the 96.5/105.5/114.5 slots, which are also 9 degrees each. This way, the dishes are focusing at only those 3 locations, so interference could be kept to a minimum. This way, E* could just repoint the existing D500 dishes to, say, the 105.5/114.5 and be up and running. D* would have to replace their Phase 3 with a true tripleLNB dish and upgrade the Phase 1 & 2's with a standard LNB for the 110, and use a new 6x4 switch to do the job. That would be the 9 degrees, not 13.5. Also, with having them have adjacent sats, you would have to make entirely new LNBs to account for the 4.5 degree spread. Look at the SD's 105/110 as an example. Also remember this is DBS only. No FSS(for those that aren't paying attention.... :)

[SimpleSimon]

Actually, my 13.5 number was wrong - it's actually an 18 degree spread your way.

I see what you're saying, though. I don't agree that it's the easiest way to go however.

Another plan would be to leave E* on 110/114.5/119, upgrading dishes as people needed the new channels on 114.5. Meanwhile, old D* dishes stay the same (101), Phase II & III get swapped out for something that can handle 96.5/101/105.5. Unfortunately, the kludgy way D* did the Sat C (110) add-on prevents them from just repointing during a transition. Time for D* to pay the piper - same as E* is now for one-dish-locals. ;)

The upgraded dishes for both D* and E* would both have to have special 4.5 degree LNBFs - but something is needed to handle that EITHER way.

[Jacob S]

Having a dish for 96.5/105.5/114.5 and another for 101/110/119 would not change the fact that they would still be receiving signals from the other satellites since 101 and 110 are in between them and 105.5 and 114.5 would be in between for the other dish.

[larrystotler]

Yes, but how much interference will their be? I seriously doubt that either D* or E* would be willing to have to automatically replace all of their dishes to use the tweener slots. With the focus on the 101/110/119 slots and the focus on the 96.5/105.5/114.5 slots might be enough to make it work. As for the seperation, I see your point about the 18/13.5 degree seperations. However, D* has successfully deployed their triple sat dishes for years with little problem, so the seperation isn't as big of a deal as it may seem. As for doing the sats the other way, they wouldn't end up as just for E* or D*. With the possibility of have a full 6 slots open, the FCC would be more interested in splitting the slots up to foster competition. I'm sure E* would be much more willing to show how the existing dishes could be made to work first.

[James Long]

The 110 has 90.625% which is 696Mhz and the 119 has 65.625% which is 504Mhz. Total bandwidtch needed is 1200Mhz, which is exactly what you have between 950 and 2150Mhz.Be careful - don't confuse math with reality. Although the transponders are only 24MHz each, they are centered 29-30MHz apart.

E*'s reception of 119 requires the reception of 21 transponders, 10 are right polarized between 12212 MHz and 12528 MHz and 9 are left polarized between 12227 MHz and 12513 MHz. That is 602 MHz (not 504) assuming one could even design a LNB that would block D*'s channels that start at 12518 left and 12533 right and stack the 119 transponders as close as possible. The LNB would be useful for only that one satellite if it could be designed and would be more expensive.

E*'s reception of 110 is even more of a problem with your math. E* has all the odd trasponders stretching from 12212 MHz to 12673 MHz and most of the even transponders stretching from 12227 MHz to 12600 MHz. That is 834 MHz (not 696) and would be another one of a kind LNB.

602 + 834 = 1236 even IF you could get the four polarities to stack on one cable - which would drop in to the high UHF TV ranges on the coax rendering standard diplexers useless for adding a Dish broadcast TV antenna to the system. It is a lot of work and expense to make the system even more limited.

The DishPro LNBs that E* uses for BOTH satellites stacks the Right/Odd transponders at 950-1450 MHz and the Left/Even transponders at [CORRECTED] 1650-2150MHz (rolling off any reception below 12200 MHz or above 12700 MHz on each polarity). The actual gap between polarities is between TP 31 (12649-12673 MHz) at 1399-1423 MHz and TP 32 (12664-12688 MHz) at 1686-1662 MHz (stacked backwards). They are allowing 239 MHz to prevent interference between the polarities when stacked. (Standard stacking allows 154 MHz between TP31 and TP2.)

It is really nice to be able to pull a DP LNB and point it at ANY E* sat and not have to worry that it is some oddball "110" or "119" designed LNB. And the DP switches have done a good job of switching the receiver between satellites. A DP receiver sees only one satellite at a time (per sat input) but all sees transponders on that satellite.

The DP+44 taking that one step further by stacking the two satellite polarities requested by the receiver. Instead of stacking R/L of the same satellite the DP+44 stacks whatever satellite and polarity reciever one needs at 950 and whatever satellite and polarity reciever two needs at 1650. You cannot do that with non-standard stacking like the "110" and "119" combined one feed you suggest as the reciever may need a feed from a third or fourth location. The DP and DP+ system works well for the needs E* has.

JL

[larrystotler]

JL, I fully realize that there would be some slop, and that current E* LNBs merely send all 32 transponders to the receiver and the receiver only makes use of the ones that E* actually has rights to. Also, E*'s stacking puts the evens at the 1650-2150Mhz band and reverses them. I am lost as to why you specified the transponder 31/2 difference. Standard legacy LNBs merely send the evens or the odds down the 950-1450Mhz band, depending upon the voltage sent to the LNB. So, as long as they have the gap between the 1450 and 1650Mhz area, they have enough space to limit any potential problems. IIRC, the actual DisCqec(sp?) spec calls for using the 1550-2050Mhz band, which had some people complaining about E* not following the standard. However, E* doesn't really have any reason to allow anyone's else's equipment to work with their own. Anyway, with E*'s upper limit at 2150Mhz, they still wouldn't fall into the <850Mhz band that UHF is.

[James Long]

D* has successfully deployed their triple sat dishes for years with little problem, so the seperation isn't as big of a deal as it may seem. D* doesn't have to deal with satellites at 105.5 and 114.5.

The center LNB of the dish is aimed at 110. The left (standing behind the dish) LNB picks up the 119 sat which may be anywhere from 4.5º to 8º right of center depending on if the dish is in Bangor or San Diego. The right LNB picks up the main programming from the 101 sat which may be anywhere from 4.5º to 8º left of center in the sky.

Unless D* designed or retrofits a "width" adjustment to move the LNBs in or out from center, a dish designed to "see" 101 and 119 at 4.5º off center WILL MOST LIKELY get interference from 105.5 and 114.5 degree satellites when placed in San Diego where the focal point for 105.5 and 114.5 are 4º off center.

JL

[James Long]

JL, I fully realize that there would be some slop, and that current E* LNBs merely send all 32 transponders to the receiver and the receiver only makes use of the ones that E* actually has rights to.Which is the smartest way to make an LNB ... so they are interchangeable and future developments (such as E* potentially gaining ownership of 11 more transponders on 61.5) don't waste a "one sat" designed LNB.Also, E*'s stacking puts the evens at the 1650-2150Mhz band and reverses them.Either way. The total bandwidth used by each bird is the higher numbers I gave (602 and 834 without any gaps) and the design for a 119 LNB would have to not only account for rolling off D*'s transponders at the LNB but to bring down the stacks.

So lets assume E* does it your way and redesigns a LNB to pick up 110 and 119. We start with the 110 LNB and leave the odd TPs alone - E* has all 16 odd TPs. We can rolloff the even TPs above 26. If E* currently leaves 200 MHz between polarities how much should that be cut? Let's drop it to about 27MHz just for fun.
110 Even: 12200->2150 down to 12600->1750 (edge of TP26)
110 Odd: 12200->1250 up to 12700->1750
(27Mhz TP31 to 12700 / 12MHz 12200 to TP1)
119 Even: 12200->1250 down to 12513->0937 (edge of TP20)
(27MHz 12200 to TP2)
0910-0937 27MHz buffer
119 Odd: 12200->0582 up to 12528->0910 (edge of TP21)

JL

[alebowgm]

DThe left (standing behind the dish) LNB picks up the 119 sat which may be anywhere from 4.5º to 8º right of center depending on if the dish is in Bangor or San Diego.
JL

Not sure about you, but when I stand behind my dish, the left is the 110 and the right is the 119. When I look at it from the ground, the right is the 110 and left is 119...

[James Long]

Not sure about you, but when I stand behind my dish, the left is the 110 and the right is the 119. When I look at it from the ground, the right is the 110 and left is 119...Keep the crossover effect in mind. Standing behind the dish 110 is to the left of 119 in the sky, but after being reflected in the dish they hit the LNBs opposite.

The left side of the Y adapter and Twin LNB both say 119.

JL

[JohnH]

Well, don't forget the reason E* says there is a problem with the 4.5 degree spacing on a single dish. That would seem to be 2 Circular polarized LNBFs cannot be placed that close together on a small dish.

[larrystotler]

Well, don't forget the reason E* says there is a problem with the 4.5 degree spacing on a single dish. That would seem to be 2 Circular polarized LNBFs cannot be placed that close together on a small dish.

My point exactly. A dish that aims at 3 9degree spaced sats would work better than a dish aimed at 3 4.5 sats.

JL - I never said it wasn't smarter to make it that way. I said would have made my job EASIER :D As for your math, you are outta my league. I was only making suggestions based on what I DO know, and obviously my grasp of that is lacking........ :shrug:

[James Long]

JL - I never said it wasn't smarter to make it that way. I said would have made my job EASIER :D As for your math, you are outta my league.The DP LNBs hopefully made your life easier ... until SuperDish came along and complicated it again. :D

Do note the degrees of separation noted in prior posts as well. As long as the DBS providers are selling one dish to work in both Bangor and San Diego, tweeners will be an issue to deal with.

JL

[larrystotler]

The DP LNBs hopefully made your life easier ... until SuperDish came along and complicated it again. :D

Do note the degrees of separation noted in prior posts as well. As long as the DBS providers are selling one dish to work in both Bangor and San Diego, tweeners will be an issue to deal with.

In some ways it did, but in others it didn't. Like prewired RG59 or older RG6. Most C-Band wiring was very good and I have had very little issues using DP on it. P* wiring is hit and miss unfortunately. Like I tell everyone. ALWAYS pull the wall plate. Most Electricians do a horrible job on their connections.

As for the dishes, I'm not a designer. I have noticed that out here in the east that the 119 is usually the stronger sat that the 110. Of course, I don't spend 15 minutes trying to balance the things either. 100+ on both and I'm locking it down.

[James Long]

As for the dishes, I'm not a designer. I have noticed that out here in the east that the 119 is usually the stronger sat that the 110. Of course, I don't spend 15 minutes trying to balance the things either. 100+ on both and I'm locking it down.I'm on SD105 which means get the best I can on 105 and hope the others are still usable. When I tried to get the best out of 119 or 110 I lose 105. So to get high 50's/60's on 105 I live with 70's/80's on 110. 119 gives me 90's/100's with 120's on the spotbeams.

(Mostly annoying because on my Dish500 I got 120's on both 110 and 119. I've been waiting for the satellite in my avatar to be put in to use before trying to raise the 110/119 numbers. I should have left my Dish500 up and just added the FSS from the SuperDish ... but that is a lot of dishes for the side of a house. BTW: I have a Dish500 pointed at 61.5 that gets 110's/120's.)

I don't see a multisat dish, even a tweener, being impossible once tweener slots are used but I am concerned with all the existing dishes that would recieve interference. Most of the country will be ok, but the extremes matter.

JL

[larrystotler]

You've seen my recommendations for the 105. Biggest P* dish you can get. Period. Nothing else is better. However, that creates a problem for DP, unless you only need the odds, since a dual LNB P* dish CAN work with a DP switch............Don't know what trans your locals is on..............

As for the tweeners, I see it being a while before that even becomes a problem. D* seems more interested in making some kind of use out of the Ka sats that were supposed to be for Spaceway.

[Jacob S]

The question should be answered as to whether or not it would be cheaper to swap everyone's dishes or their receivers. If the receivers are upgraded that means that there is less money if any that has to be paid for installation and allows the company to implement newer technologies and even more smart card encryption.

[musicmaker2020]

Another reason I love this forum. Tell me any place else on the net you can get this deep technical discussion on Sats. You all are over my head but I think I get the jist of it all. I will love to see what E* is up to on this.

Im thinking (and crossing my fingers) all this is for upcoming HD capabilities. :goodjob:

[SimpleSimon]

Tell me any place else on the net you can get this deep technical discussion on Sats.satelliteguys.us

[Darkman]

hehe :)

[larrystotler]

satelliteguys.us

Yeah, but you have to deal with those ADS over there.... :D

[Darkman]

Not AIDs at least :)

[P Smith]

Not true, last week I don't see ads there.

[Darkman]

Ya.. ads been gone there now..
..happened recently...

forgot how it said..something like: "thanks to donations, etc - we are now an Ad-Free Community" (or something like that)

I see Scott is giving out Gmail invites there now... lol
I got like 50 of them .. in each of my email addresses over there at Gmail .. they kept on increasing and increasing those from like 3 or 4 to 50...
Gmail is now, BTW, 2 Gig.. instead of 1 Gig as previously (the size of mailbox)

[larrystotler]

They are still there. They are just the regular ones and not the ones they stuck in the middle of everything when they were begging for help to pay their bills. He still has the sponsors links at the top of the page and the ad at the upper righthand corner. Anyway, I'm not trying to put Scott's sight down, I'm just saying that I prefer this site better. These guys will refer people to companies like Dish Depot, but that is because they feel it is a good company, and not because of any affiliation(or am I incorrect here?).

[Big Bob]

They still have the worst ads, the "Sponsored Links" that are underlined and give little pop-ups when you mouse over them. IMHO, those are the worst ads of all.

But on a side note, when I first read "ADS", I thought there was an insinuation that they have "Attention Deficit Syndrome". Might apply to a few members over there...

[larrystotler]

But on a side note, when I first read "ADS", I thought there was an insinuation that they have "Attention Deficit Syndrome". Might apply to a few members over there...

Hey, that's ADD, not ADS. It's a DISORDER, not a Syndrome. I should know, I have it.

[Big Bob]

Hey, that's ADD, not ADS. It's a DISORDER, not a Syndrome. I should know, I have it.

It has been known by both names.

From one of my files:
ADD is sometimes called attention-deficit syndrome (ADS) to avoid the connotations of "disorder".

The currently favored name seems to be ADHD.

My intent was not to offend. I am sorry if my post was disagreeable.

[SimpleSimon]

They are still there. They are just the regular ones and not the ones they stuck in the middle of everything when they were begging for help to pay their bills. He still has the sponsors links at the top of the page and the ad at the upper righthand corner. Anyway, I'm not trying to put Scott's sight down, I'm just saying that I prefer this site better. These guys will refer people to companies like Dish Depot, but that is because they feel it is a good company, and not because of any affiliation(or am I incorrect here?).
I think the affiliation is about the same there as here.

Except of course that Claude also owns the dishretailer web site, and I think that Scott does the server management for him.

[larrystotler]

The currently favored name seems to be ADHD.

My intent was not to offend. I am sorry if my post was disagreeable.

None taken. However, some might have. And the H part is for Hyperactivity, which neither I nor my son have. However, we both have the rest, and it makes thing "interesting" to say the least. I personally refuse to take medications, and we are discussing whether my son needs it right now(he's 8). I feel that proper training can be more beneficial to him than drugs, since the drugs won't work if he doesn't take them, and if he is like me, he will end up having a high tolerance, and they will become ineffective pretty quickly. Personally, I think that being fairly smart is actually what causes ADD. My IQ is over 150(depends on which test you take), and I've always felt that being normal was highly overrated. I also have never used any type of drugs. I'm an ENTP(Myers/Briggs), and this type, being one of the smallest, has one of the highest problems of addictions.
What's really interesting is that I have never been suicidal, which seems to happen to ADD affected people. His mother has been, however.....oh well. back to topic......

[larrystotler]

I think the affiliation is about the same there as here.

Except of course that Claude also owns the dishretailer web site, and I think that Scott does the server management for him.

At least here, it is not as pushy. Personally, I hope to be able to contribute here sometime in the future. I would now, but my finances are pretty nasty, and can't make it.... :(
After almost a year on this site, I am very pleased with how it is run, and must give thumbs up to all the mods! :allthumbs

[James Long]

At least here, it is not as pushy. Personally, I hope to be able to contribute here sometime in the future. I would now, but my finances are pretty nasty, and can't make it.... :(Please put a penny in the old man's hat
If you haven't got a penny, a ha' penny will do,
If you haven't got a ha' penny, then God bless you

Every little bit helps, but I'm sure Chris would rather have good contributing members than the donations. dbstalk seems to have the good members.

JL

[larrystotler]

Every little bit helps, but I'm sure Chris would rather have good contributing members than the donations. dbstalk seems to have the good members.
JL

I try................