[EAS] Why we need Text-To-Speech

[Ed Czarnecki]

There are some pretty big flaws that these products were issued in "draft".
The DASDEC was not, nor the OneNet.  They adhered to all relevant standards
published at the time, including a number not formally incorporated by FEMA
or FCC.  The rules of the game (at least for manufacturers) were in fact
known and published.  The FCC had deferred to FEMA though most of the
standards development process.  Manufacturers were in most cases part of
that standards development process - either directly or indirectly.  Product
adhered to those published standards.  The only rule of the game that we
understood to be pending was that of the "streamlined" certification process
that the FCC issued as part of the 5th R&O.

As far as a government mandating a one size fit all solution, your
proposition boils down to the idea that the government should issue a post
facto specification for CAP EAS equipment, going well beyond their
traditional (and legal) scope, have an entirely new generation of equipment
designed, and then have broadcasters should go out and buy a whole new
device.  The government typically can only do that if they are contracting
for the equipment to purchased by a government agency, not ad hoc the
private sector.  This plainly is not the case with EAS.  What you suggest
would be extremely expensive, and likely not permissible (including under
the USC or rules of the Federal Acquisition Register).

-----Original Message-----
From: eas-bounces at radiolists.net [mailto:eas-bounces at radiolists.net] On
Behalf Of Alex Hartman

Clay hits one of the major issues, in that a "horse has already left the
barn".  It's out of the barn, through the gate, and several miles down the
road at this point.  And can't be called back without significant risk
(economic, operational, etc).

Product has already been designed (years ago in some cases), and shipped and
deployed (also years ago in cases).  Each manufacturer has made its own
design choices that make it too late to mandate a specific software module
for all makes and models of CAP EAS unit.  Quite simply, (1) one size will
not fit all, (2) much of this gear has already been deployed.

Ed,

With all due respect, the fatal flaw with this line of thinking is that the
proverbial cart is before the horse. Releasing a "draft"
product, with customers in line to buy it is not the fault of anyone but the
manufacturer, really. Knowing that the rules of the game would change before
the final draft and final adoption is pretty obvious and made some
contingencies beforehand for firmware/software updates knowing that
something like this could happen. However, both sides of the fence to blame
here. The FCC changed their minds *after* the timer started to replace all
the gear in the field. So i do see both sides.

I'm guilty of it as well. I have a 1 year old Sage Digital ENDEC. But i
purchased mine to replace a failing unit already in place. Instead of
spending the better part of $1k to fix it, i opted for replacement.

But i'm sure that 1 year old box can be updated to allow user lexicons,
right Harold? ;)

As for the one size does not fit all... a government mandate should be a
one-size-fits-all solution. Simple as that. Adding your own personal touches
to the devices seems like a waste if it's never used, right?
When it comes to "public safety" coming up with your own features that don't
work with other products seems to really show some arrogance and even a lack
of good judgement, yes?

--
Alex Hartman

_______________________________________________
This is the EAS Forum Discussion List

Please invite your friends to join our Forum!
http://lists.radiolists.net/mailman/listinfo/eas

And, remember the main page: http://eas.radiolists.net