Comments by "Scott Franco" (@scottfranco1962) on "Technology Connections" channel.

  1. 73
  2. 36
  3. 5
  4. 4
  5. 4
  6. 3
  7. 3
  8. 2
  9. 2
  10. 2
  11. 2
  12. 2
  13. 2
  14. 2
  15. 2
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. The "apartment dwellers cannot charge" thing is a canard. Most apartments have assigned spots, and I have never lived in an apartment building that didn't have covered parking and a light above it, meaning that it has electrical runs to the space. In Canada and other cold weather places, you have to have a plug at each space for the simple reason that if you don't plug you car's engine heater in at night, your car will be dead in the morning. Cars can be charged from 110v, but 220v is obviously better. Although apartment owners will moan about the costs, running 220v drops to each space isn't going to break them. I'm amazed sometimes about how really useful a 220v/30 amp L2 charger really is. I have two long range cars, a Bolt at 238 miles and a Tesla M3 at 320 miles, and typically they charge up in 4 hours on a 6.6kW L2 charger, because I don't run them all the way to zero, nor is that a good idea. Both of my cars need charging perhaps once or twice a week even with my 40 mile round trip commute. Its not even necessary to purchase a $400 charger. My Tesla comes with a 220v charger free with the car, and its a reasonable cost with the Bolt. With that and a 220v outlet, you are there for at least a 3.3kW charge. I will say that 130kW supercharging is amazing on the road (Tesla). I typically think about charging when the miles left goes to 2 digits (<100), and I see the 100kW+ charge for only about 20 minutes. But that charger takes the Tesla from less than 100 to over 200 miles in that 20 minutes, which is rocket fast compared to other cars, and makes highway travel amazing.
    1
  50. 1
  51. 1
  52. 1
  53. 1
  54. 1
  55. 1
  56. 1
  57. 1
  58. 1
  59. 1
  60. 1
  61. 1
  62. 1
  63. 1
  64. 1
  65. 1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1
  69. 1
  70. 1
  71. 1
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. The war over color TV standards got repeated with the advent of HDTV. The FCC had already signed off on an analog, backwards compatible system when a small silicon company called general instrument showed that by using a digital carrier based system with mpeg, the amount of bandwidth needed by the (very wasteful) analog TV system could be reduced significantly, while at the same time dramatically increasing the reception reliability. GI had already done this for digital cable systems, so over the air systems had fallen behind. The FCC did another about face, and the broadcasters suddenly did as well. Cynics said that the true underlying cause was the broadcasters realization that the very same digital technology that could give an HDTV signal in the same 6mhz channel as analog TV could very well be used to compress existing TV into 1mhz or less, and result in broadcasters losing up to 5/6ths of their very valuable spectrum real estate if the FCC (and the public) woke up to this fact. Thus HDTV was born, and the broadcasters used the technology to split up into multiple channels anyway... but under their control. The true result of all of the nonsense is that mpeg-2, and later mpeg-4, took over TV broadcasting by storm, rendering the actual method used to broadcast TV increasingly irrelevant. The broadcasters kept their spectrum allocations, but the number of over the air users decreases daily. And the FCC increasingly puts pressure on broadcasters to give up that real estate to other uses.
    1