Home cinema - Digital TV for Residential Care Homes

Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:36:18 +0100, Tony wrote:

I'm not sure what figures you're working in but -32dBm will easily drive
loads of TVs. A DTV reciever needs about 28dBuV (-80dBm ish) of mux
to get a good picture, more for a stable picture/weather etc

It is pointless quoting signals levels without considering what the noise
level is as well.

Strictly speaking yes, but the debate was over using amplifiers against
a bigger aerial. Amplifiers will be noisier than a bigger aerial.

Why not? It does, I have designed several setups for test in labs and
factories for companies I have worked for. All passive distrbution its
all about the level you start with.

And what happens when you can't get a high enough level to start with
compared to what you require at the end?

It doesn't work obviously, try reading the full thread. We had both
mentioned input level that we would need.

But then I also don't
understand why ethernet networks are built like stars aswell, when local
hubs would significantly reduce the amount of cabling required and do
not reduce bandwidth.

You are clearly a fool if you think local hubs don't reduce bandwidth
available (per branch) on the root.

I'm a little surprised at the insults when I had already said that I
didn't understand. However it would seem that you are an idiot, hubs do
not ration out the bandwidth on Ethernet, is it the sum of traffic that
dictates what bandwidth a user might see. The point of debate was
whether you split near the server and had a lead going to each computer
or split near groups of compters and save cable. Either way they all
have to share a 100MB/s to the server or whatever. Having 'local' hubs
is no different in bandwidth to a central one.

--
Tony