Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android
Subject: Re: Codes sent by text message
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2024 21:36:27 -0700
Organization: None, as usual
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <ut5s0c$3bjd7$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ush35k$2791b$1@dont-email.me> <lgm8ckxlpl.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <ust0kr$14c9n$1@dont-email.me> <lb2cckx9mp.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <ut0qlb$25761$1@dont-email.me> <saodckxjd1.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <ut1g5i$29b4r$1@dont-email.me> <cjtdckxcca.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <ut1j4l$2a1sa$1@dont-email.me> <3h7eckxatm.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <ut273k.9rs.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> <ut28pf$2ejt9$1@dont-email.me>
 <ut2ddd.21k.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> <ut4ie3$3028p$1@dont-email.me>
 <ut4rdn.gtc.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2024 04:36:28 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9e7ad84118a2adae8d78bceb2565b9ac";
	logging-data="3526055"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+AmWoiqie1fZS6dcu/y+FbRtwhSfqw1gc="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/68.0 Thunderbird/68.12.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:F+BD1K/4byXbIekYw4piIoBWils=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <ut4rdn.gtc.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
Bytes: 4370

On 3/16/24 11:20 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 3/15/24 1:09 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> > The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On 3/15/24 11:21 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> >> >    Exactly! His term "classical TV" didn't mean a thing to me, wa=
y too
>> >> > ambiguous. OTOH, I knew what "linear TV" means.
>> >>=20
>> >> Is it the opposite of logarithmic TV?  I've been watching it since =
1948=20
>> >> or so and I've never heard that term.  OTA?
>> >=20
>> >    It's somewhat reasonably explained in J=F6rg's reference, so I su=
ggest
>> > to read that.
>> >=20
>> >    It's 'normal'/'scheduled'/real-time/<whatever> TV as we've always=

>> > known it. The transmission technology is not really relevant, so it
>> > covers both OTA and any other method, cable, satellite, etc..
>> >=20
>> >    I have cable TV, but most of what I watch has been recorded (by m=
e),
>> > so it's no longer "linear TV". If that hasn't confused you, I have t=
o
>> > try harder,
>>=20
>> No need, you did a fine job!  I was more interested in where the word =

>> itself came from as a descriptor of 'original' TV.
>>=20
>> "Where in hell did THAT usage come from?" frequently stops me in my tr=
acks.
>=20
>    Elementary, dear Watson! It's of course a retronym.
>=20
>    Just kidding. I threw "linear TV" at Wikipedia and came up with this=
:
>=20
> "Broadcast programming
>   ...
>   With the growth of digital platforms and services allowing non-linear=
,
>   on-demand access to television content, this approach to broadcasting=

>   has since been referred to using the retronym linear (such as linear
>   television and linear channels)."
>=20
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_programming>
>=20
>    See also the explanation/link of "non-linear" in that paragraph.
>=20
>    "Wikipedia, don't leave home without it!" [1]
>=20
> [1] When I need/want to look something up, Wikipedia and Google's
> "define:" search clause [2] are my first ports of call.

Excellent idea, one I wish I followed more frequently.

> [2] I.e. in this case <https://www.google.com/search?q=3Ddefine%3A+line=
ar+TV>
> which gives as the first hit
> "Linear TV is a traditional system in which a viewer watches a schedule=
d
>   TV program when it's broadcasted and on its original channel."
> (from <https://www.oracle.com/advertising/measurement/ctv-vs-ott>)

Perhaps it's an industry-only usage.

--=20
Cheers, Bev
   I'd rather not have neighbors. If I can see them, they're too close.
   In fact, if I can see them through a rifle scope, they're too close.
                                                 -- Anonymous Coward