Friday, August 5, 2011
The evolution of the common TV set
The standard analog TV with a big CRT picture tube, which used to be the only type out there, still has a lot of market share. The flat screen digital TV's are coming on, it's the only type on sale at Walmart, and it offers wide screen and an number of digital goodies such as displaying the name of the program on screen to aid channel surfers. When you surf onto a commercial, (the usual case) you can see what program will come on, after the commercials.
The cable companies haven't figured out what type of TV to broadcast too. Some channels like Fox News broadcast in "Widescreen" mode, essentially the NTSC standard def format but they leave the top and bottom of the screen black. This looks poorly on a standard analog TV, but on a new digital TV you can push a button and stretch the picture both horizontally and vertically to fill the screen. It's a little fuzzy compared to real high def, but not bad. Clearly Fox is favoring viewers with the new widescreen TV's.
Then some channels don't bother to broadcast the program name fields. Since this helps the viewers with digital TV's and doesn't degrade the signal for analog TV's, failure to broadcast it means the suits at HQ are brain dead. The program name display is sure fire bait to attract channel surfers and raise their ratings. You would think even the most brain dead suits would catch on sooner or later.
The cable companies haven't figured out what type of TV to broadcast too. Some channels like Fox News broadcast in "Widescreen" mode, essentially the NTSC standard def format but they leave the top and bottom of the screen black. This looks poorly on a standard analog TV, but on a new digital TV you can push a button and stretch the picture both horizontally and vertically to fill the screen. It's a little fuzzy compared to real high def, but not bad. Clearly Fox is favoring viewers with the new widescreen TV's.
Then some channels don't bother to broadcast the program name fields. Since this helps the viewers with digital TV's and doesn't degrade the signal for analog TV's, failure to broadcast it means the suits at HQ are brain dead. The program name display is sure fire bait to attract channel surfers and raise their ratings. You would think even the most brain dead suits would catch on sooner or later.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Boeing to do something
In this week's Aviation Week it was announced that Boeing would do a re-engined 737. That is the ordinary jetliner that most of us fly in, a single aisle jet in the jargon of the airlines. It is the highest production plane Boeing has, and competes head to head with Airbus A320 and A330.
Airbus announced the A330NEO (New Engine Option) a few months ago. The A330 would be equipped with new highly efficient engines, the Pratt and Whitney Geared Turbofan if memory serves, and gain an 8 to 10 percent improvement in fuel burn. This sounded so good that Airbus garnered 400-500 orders, even thought the NEO won't be available for 3-4 years.
Boeing, loaded down with the 787 (all plastic mini-jumbo jet) which was supposed to deliver 3 years ago and is still awaiting FAA type certification, did not want to jump into yet another new aircraft project until the 787 was out of the woods and into production and bringing in money. But, with customers flocking to the competition, Boeing had to do something. So they announced a re engined 737 is in the works and will give 8 to 10 percent better fuel burn than current production 737's.
Aviation Week ran an editorial bewailing the loss of Boeing's New Small Aircraft concept, a single aisle jet redesigned from a clean sheet of paper. They feel that a total redesign would be far far superior to a plain jane engine swap. Perhaps. I just finished reading a photographic coffee table book on the DC-3, which went into production in the 1930's, flew revenue flights in the US for 50 years, and is still flying out in the boondocks. Could it be that the 737 is just as good a design, and just wants better engines to compete for another 25 years?
Airbus announced the A330NEO (New Engine Option) a few months ago. The A330 would be equipped with new highly efficient engines, the Pratt and Whitney Geared Turbofan if memory serves, and gain an 8 to 10 percent improvement in fuel burn. This sounded so good that Airbus garnered 400-500 orders, even thought the NEO won't be available for 3-4 years.
Boeing, loaded down with the 787 (all plastic mini-jumbo jet) which was supposed to deliver 3 years ago and is still awaiting FAA type certification, did not want to jump into yet another new aircraft project until the 787 was out of the woods and into production and bringing in money. But, with customers flocking to the competition, Boeing had to do something. So they announced a re engined 737 is in the works and will give 8 to 10 percent better fuel burn than current production 737's.
Aviation Week ran an editorial bewailing the loss of Boeing's New Small Aircraft concept, a single aisle jet redesigned from a clean sheet of paper. They feel that a total redesign would be far far superior to a plain jane engine swap. Perhaps. I just finished reading a photographic coffee table book on the DC-3, which went into production in the 1930's, flew revenue flights in the US for 50 years, and is still flying out in the boondocks. Could it be that the 737 is just as good a design, and just wants better engines to compete for another 25 years?
The Dow plunges 400 points
There has got to be a connection with the debt limit hassle earlier this week, but what is it?
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Now that the debt limit is done,what is next?
How do we fix the economy?
First we have to understand the problem. Consumer spending (cars, houses, clothes, appliances, entertainment, sporting goods, and everything else) is down. Seventy percent of the US economy was consumer spending. When consumer spending goes down, farms, factories, and everything else has fewer sales, leading to layoffs. If sales go away, no company can retain all it's workers.
This feeds on itself. When people are laid off they start saving all the money they can. When one person is laid off, twenty people hear about it and begin to fear for their jobs too. People fearing for their jobs react much the same way as people who are actually laid off, they start saving as much as they can.
So how to fix?
One fix is to stimulate demand. That is best done by introducing new "must have" products that every one goes out and buys. Apple is one of the few companies still inventing new stuff. We need more people like Steve Jobs.
Another way of stimulating demand is to make stuff cheaper. We could scrap an ocean of cost enhancing laws. Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) raises the price of new cars. EPA's tighter ozone regulations raise the price of electricity. EPA's encouragement of boutique gasoline blends raises the price of gasoline. Real estate "closing costs" jack up the price of houses. The endangered species act makes projects more expensive. Building codes demanding handicapped access and sprinklers in new houses raise the cost of housing. Liability and lawyers raise the cost of everything.
Then we can lift some costs off companies. Repeal Sarbanes Oxley, repeal Dodd Frank, repeal Obamacare, shut down the SEC because it is ineffective, and simplify the corporate income tax.
First we have to understand the problem. Consumer spending (cars, houses, clothes, appliances, entertainment, sporting goods, and everything else) is down. Seventy percent of the US economy was consumer spending. When consumer spending goes down, farms, factories, and everything else has fewer sales, leading to layoffs. If sales go away, no company can retain all it's workers.
This feeds on itself. When people are laid off they start saving all the money they can. When one person is laid off, twenty people hear about it and begin to fear for their jobs too. People fearing for their jobs react much the same way as people who are actually laid off, they start saving as much as they can.
So how to fix?
One fix is to stimulate demand. That is best done by introducing new "must have" products that every one goes out and buys. Apple is one of the few companies still inventing new stuff. We need more people like Steve Jobs.
Another way of stimulating demand is to make stuff cheaper. We could scrap an ocean of cost enhancing laws. Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) raises the price of new cars. EPA's tighter ozone regulations raise the price of electricity. EPA's encouragement of boutique gasoline blends raises the price of gasoline. Real estate "closing costs" jack up the price of houses. The endangered species act makes projects more expensive. Building codes demanding handicapped access and sprinklers in new houses raise the cost of housing. Liability and lawyers raise the cost of everything.
Then we can lift some costs off companies. Repeal Sarbanes Oxley, repeal Dodd Frank, repeal Obamacare, shut down the SEC because it is ineffective, and simplify the corporate income tax.
Cramming on the phone bill
The Wall St Journal has run two articles on cramming in the last week. Cramming is the practice of the phone company to pin charges from third parties (porn sites, get rich quick schemes, telemarketers, etc) onto phone bills. In many cases the harried home owner, trying to get the bills paid, just writes a check covering the phoney third party charges. The Journal mentioned several regulatory actions in the works to slow it down.
The phone company should NEVER bill customers for anything except phone service. Third parties who want to get paid should submit a bill, on their letter head, with an self addressed return envelope inclosed. The phone company should not assist anyone in getting money out of their customers.
We can do something about this. The New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission regulates our phone company and can tell them to stop cramming.
The phone company should NEVER bill customers for anything except phone service. Third parties who want to get paid should submit a bill, on their letter head, with an self addressed return envelope inclosed. The phone company should not assist anyone in getting money out of their customers.
We can do something about this. The New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission regulates our phone company and can tell them to stop cramming.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
So what does it all mean?
Well, it has some minor , very minor cuts. It avoids a government shutdown. The cuts are not very big, nowhere near big enough to come anywhere close to balancing the US budget. And they are mostly fake cuts. And they don't come into effect until the "out years" (2021). Congress in 2021 isn't going to pay any attention to budget resolutions passed back in 2011. Just like today's Congress pays no attention to resolutions from 2001. Which is why discussing the US budget in terms of ten years is essentially deceptive. All and all I don't understand why the democrats are crying so loudly about the cuts. Cause there aren't any, really.
We don't do a tax hike. That's a goodness. Hiking taxes in the depths of Great Depression 2.0 is a bad idea.
We have made it clear to all the voters that the US is running on empty, money wise. That little fact has been concealed by the msm up to this time. Getting that truth out is worth a lot of hassle.
We have a lot of losers. Obama, Harry Reid, and the democrats look like losers. We don't have very many winners. John Boehner comes out looking pretty good, but that's about it.
We don't do a tax hike. That's a goodness. Hiking taxes in the depths of Great Depression 2.0 is a bad idea.
We have made it clear to all the voters that the US is running on empty, money wise. That little fact has been concealed by the msm up to this time. Getting that truth out is worth a lot of hassle.
We have a lot of losers. Obama, Harry Reid, and the democrats look like losers. We don't have very many winners. John Boehner comes out looking pretty good, but that's about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)