Most of my 2.4 GHz links have been removed from service since the band is so crowded, that even with -50dBm signals the throughput was crap, but one is almost by themselves on 5.8 GHz (almost no 802.11a, a few TDMA stations, mostly AirMAX, around), and can get great throughput and reliability with weaker signals...If I were starting a WISP now, I would do only 5.8 GHz and 24 GHz links.

Teeth and nails go in the grinder.. :-)

Should point there were THOUSANDS of audio feeds available on each satellite, both as sub-carriers of video channels (could be tuned by most consumer receivers), and SCPC (required a little more than the standard TVRO receiver)...Now that everything is a digital stream, unsure how many of those still exist

The best part of TVRO/FTA systems was finding wild feeds: syndicated programming being delivered to locals (many times a whole season at a time for re-run tv shows), news & sports remotes (loved hearing reporters and PBP announcers when they weren't "on-air"), corporate video distribution, teleconferences, etc... Sadly it has been 20 years since I've been able to play with such...MMDS systems were also fun to hack (the service no longer exists, I believe -or at least all the operators went out of business), my local one was too cheap to scramble everything (didn't want to have to provide a descrambler for each customer if they didn't subscribe to premium programming), so if you had a 2.8 GHz to something your TV could tune (it was transmitted in VSB) downconverter you could get quite a bit, there was also channels in that band used for tele-education, so one could watch some university classes, etc.. Cheap, abundant IP bandwidth has moved many of those off satellite and microwave, so there isn't as much as there used to be...If we could implement IP multicasting effectively internet wide, we would see even less satellite distribution.

Not everything is outsourced at Target, they always have listings of Dice for Technology positions http://www.dice.com/jobsearch/company/DiceId_10111064/Target+Corporation

I usually don't post comments asking people with moderator points to mod a comment up, but mod up this parent....

There are likely IT people within the company that see the problems and know how to fix them but they will be ignored. CxO types hate those annoying IT people that are always complaining about security. They will bring in a solution sold by a slick sales person at a major company.

Is likely the most accurate statement I've seen in a while. In my 20+ years in the tech/IT/OT field, what a salesman is selling to (non-tech) management seems to trump the feedback that is received from tech departments. Case in point, just this week there is a copier/printer vendor that insists on installing a software agent that is suppose to report back meter readings and troubleshooting info to them (and "managing our printing costs"), but looking into it, it has capability of scanning entire network and reporting on every device it sees. As lead network and systems administrator, I say no way will I allowed an externally controlled and reporting network scanner on any of our secure networks - and I'm being framed as being uncooperative, not considering my report that the vendor solution will break many layers of security,...I may have to make sure the agent is disallowed in group policy, in case it can be installed in user space without elevated rights on the machines (wouldn't surprise me that they'll just try installing it on a user's workstation)...

Your school should qualify for e-rate service...I know the e-rate bid winner for schools around here (which wasn't the monopoly phone company or cable company, but a CLEC) built out their own fiber to each school, so I'm guessing they can get any speed they want...

+1 that comment....let's prevent people from wanting to shoot up a school instead of being proud of knowing how to deal with the situation after the fact.

Mod parent up.... New deployment is cheaper with fiber vs. copper.....And you have more revenue opportunity for each fiber drop - "unlimited" number of phone lines, many data possibilities, cable TV and video services, not to mention the ability to sell ancillary services to other utilities such as remote meter reading and load control/demand response. And with much of the thin gauge copper pairs currently in place exceeding 75 years old in much of USA, the wire is reaching EOL...

"Fiber is enormously expensive to deploy, Enormously expensive to maintain but can serve very long distances from the CO" Fiber costs about the same to deploy new as copper, has proven cheaper to maintain, can go long distances (even 100 KM optics are becoming quite affordable) and can provide MANY revenue generating services for the operator of the line...I know a telephone coop that is replacing much of their failing 50-75 year old twisted pair outside plant with fiber because it ended up being cheaper than the 600 or 1200+ pair cables they would be running otherwise....The problem is with the private and investor owned telcos, capital expenditures cut into the executive boards' bonuses so they are usually cut.

Since it only work for 100 meters, you're just as well off putting in a Cat-6 or multimode fiber pair and run 1000B-T or 1000B-SX between the points and skip the extra CPE and other equipment...

You are correct...I should have said g.711 (which is roughly the same quality) and g.722

From the first link in the summary: "The Federal Communications Commission is working toward drafting rules in January to formalize the IP transition â" switching communications systems to Internet protocol."

They are not proposing replacement with cell service, but with wired IP. IP based telephony is LESS centralized than analog pots, and is easier to setup redundancy, and has better audio quality (when g.722 or g.729 codecs are used).... The main drawbacks are there is no longer a central battery for all stations, and phone sets need more complex electronics....

Now to find copies of all the old Beagle Brothers Software titles