Subject: Re: TP on PBS (was Re: TP: 4/11 episode: Maybe it is time....) From: long-morrow@CS.Yale.EDU (H. Morrow Long) Date: 1991-04-25, 11:54 Newsgroups: alt.tv.twin-peaks In article , jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) writes: |> In article <1991Apr19.032041.8250@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> keb3@po.CWRU.Edu (Keith E. Bitely) writes: |> > |> >I would hope that if another network picks it up, that at least it is a |> >network like FOX or PBS, for I don't have cable, and it would kill me |> >to know that Twin Peaks was being shown and I couldn't see it! |> |> You think you've got problems? I *have* cable, and don't get a single FOX |> channel! I asked the local cable company about it a long time ago, and |> they said that they tried but couldn't get a clear signal. Hell, I'd take |> any signal at all, especially if it was Peaks!Maybe if I got all 30000 of |> our hypothetical readers to write to them... Can you say Direct Broadcast Satellite? For only a few thousand (and a good siting for a dish) I'll bet you could get Fox and quite a few other channels as well (I'm don't know whether or not there is a Fox net feed or super-station available and whether you would have to pay a monthly charge to descramble the signal - post a message in rec.video.satellite if you are interested). There are some technical details to be concerned with (such as which satellites are available to you in your part of the country, and on which bands - C, Ku, etc. But if Cicely, Alaska (Northern Exposure) could receive network satellite feeds then most anyplace in the continental US shouldn't have to worry, right :-) In the near future many alternatives to traditional broadcasting and cable will ooze into the marketplace (including much less expensive direct broadcast satellite methods) to pose challenges to both cable companies and traditional broadcasters. Maybe a healthy dose of competition is what your cable co. needs. - Morrow -- _ _ __ _ __ (/_ / (/ \/ \ _ __ __ ____ _ __ (/ _ __ _) / / . / )_(_)_/ (_/ (_(_) (_(_( /___(_)_/ )_(_) ( ( ( _)