Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

RG wrote:
.

When you say "additional receiver", I assume you mean receiver and
antenna both?



Yes. Since the boat is some 50 miles away from home, a second dish is
pretty much a requirement. The cost of the hardware (specially the dish
antennas) is chump change. The cost of the service is directly proportional
to the number of premium channels you subscribe to, just like with cable.
If you are considering the move to a satellite service, by all means get a
receiver with a built-in digital video recorder (same concept as TIVO). I
can tell you that it will absolutely change the way you think about, plan
for, and ultimately watch TV, and all for the better. The nice part of
having the DVR incorporated with the sat receiver is it cuts down on space
requirements and cabling, and you use the native guide for selecting
recording events. Way cool.



On a moving object like a boat, would you continually have to re-aim the
dish to get the best signal?

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

JimH wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...

JimH wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
...


Eisboch wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...



JimH wrote:



I guess so. We do not have digital cable or HD tv sets so the S-video
works just fine for us.


Comcast hasn't gone to "digital" cable in your part of the country?


Many subscribers, me included up until a few days ago, just have a
basic cable service meaning there is no cable box. The cable is simply
hooked up to the VHF antenna input on the TV and you use the TV tuner to
choose the channels. In this case, all channels are analog.

Eisboch

We updated a year ago to digital.
Getting ready for the big shift to HDTV in the near future.
(read:...saving for the TV)


When all channels in the US go digital (I believe in 2008 or 2009) there
will be no need to upgrade your TV's to HD if you have cable.

Huh?
HD and digital are two different things.


I never said otherwise Don.


here's what Consumer Reports says about HD vs standard def vs ED

Image quality: HD vs. standard definition

High definition is the way to go if you want the best TV viewing
possible. The picture quality can be stunning, especially on a large,
wide-screen set. HD is a digital-TV format that can offer
almost-lifelike clarity. That’s because HD images contain more and finer
detail than other formats. In technical terms, they have higher
resolution, or more picture elements making up each image. HD images are
digital, usually with definition of either 1080i (1,080 lines drawn
on-screen in an odd/even, or interlaced, pattern) or 720p (720 lines
scanned in one sweep, or progressively). You can get HD capability in
all types of TVs: picture-tube sets, LCD, plasma, rear-projection, and
front-projection. However, simply buying an HDTV doesn't get you HD. You
need programming that’s created in HD and transmitted the same way, plus
a digital tuner (usually supplied by special cable and satellite boxes)
that can receive these signals. See our HDTV report for more details.

Standard definition, the type of TV we've watched for years, has much
less detail. These are analog signals with resolution of 480i (480 lines
drawn onscreen in an interlaced pattern), the format in which TV content
is delivered over regular analog broadcasts and basic (non-digital)
cable. On the best TVs, the picture quality can be very good or even
excellent--but it doesn't compare to the best that HD can offer. Most
standard-definition TVs now on the market are picture-tube sets; some
LCDs of this type are also available.

Enhanced definition falls in between standard and high definition. ED
signals are digital, with resolution of 480p (480 lines scanned
progressively). This is equivalent to DVD quality, which is a little
better than standard definition but not as good as high definition. Some
ED sets can decode HD signals when they're connected to a digital tuner.
However, they have to convert them to a lower resolution that they can
display, so the picture quality won't match that of true HD. Still, it
can be quite impressive. Most ED sets now on the market are either LCD
or plasma TVs.

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 21:53:58 GMT, Don White wrote:

JimH wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message
...

JimH wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
...


Eisboch wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...



JimH wrote:



I guess so. We do not have digital cable or HD tv sets so the S-video
works just fine for us.


Comcast hasn't gone to "digital" cable in your part of the country?


Many subscribers, me included up until a few days ago, just have a
basic cable service meaning there is no cable box. The cable is simply
hooked up to the VHF antenna input on the TV and you use the TV tuner to
choose the channels. In this case, all channels are analog.

Eisboch

We updated a year ago to digital.
Getting ready for the big shift to HDTV in the near future.
(read:...saving for the TV)


When all channels in the US go digital (I believe in 2008 or 2009) there
will be no need to upgrade your TV's to HD if you have cable.

Huh?
HD and digital are two different things.


I never said otherwise Don.


here's what Consumer Reports says about HD vs standard def vs ED

Image quality: HD vs. standard definition

High definition is the way to go if you want the best TV viewing
possible. The picture quality can be stunning, especially on a large,
wide-screen set. HD is a digital-TV format that can offer
almost-lifelike clarity. That’s because HD images contain more and finer
detail than other formats. In technical terms, they have higher
resolution, or more picture elements making up each image. HD images are
digital, usually with definition of either 1080i (1,080 lines drawn
on-screen in an odd/even, or interlaced, pattern) or 720p (720 lines
scanned in one sweep, or progressively). You can get HD capability in
all types of TVs: picture-tube sets, LCD, plasma, rear-projection, and
front-projection. However, simply buying an HDTV doesn't get you HD. You
need programming that’s created in HD and transmitted the same way, plus
a digital tuner (usually supplied by special cable and satellite boxes)
that can receive these signals. See our HDTV report for more details.

Standard definition, the type of TV we've watched for years, has much
less detail. These are analog signals with resolution of 480i (480 lines
drawn onscreen in an interlaced pattern), the format in which TV content
is delivered over regular analog broadcasts and basic (non-digital)
cable. On the best TVs, the picture quality can be very good or even
excellent--but it doesn't compare to the best that HD can offer. Most
standard-definition TVs now on the market are picture-tube sets; some
LCDs of this type are also available.

Enhanced definition falls in between standard and high definition. ED
signals are digital, with resolution of 480p (480 lines scanned
progressively). This is equivalent to DVD quality, which is a little
better than standard definition but not as good as high definition. Some
ED sets can decode HD signals when they're connected to a digital tuner.
However, they have to convert them to a lower resolution that they can
display, so the picture quality won't match that of true HD. Still, it
can be quite impressive. Most ED sets now on the market are either LCD
or plasma TVs.

HD is the way to go, Don. But, Eisboch is right. You'll start seeing a lot more
facial hair and zits.

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...



On a moving object like a boat, would you continually have to re-aim the
dish to get the best signal?

Yes, if you had a desire to have a TV signal while underway or on the hook
at a remote location. There are relatively small sat domes that can be
installed that will automatically track the satellite(s) under such
conditions. Last time I checked, they were around $3,000. But it's been a
while since I looked at them, so they might have come down some since then.
I have no such need for a signal while underway. My dish is attached to a
pole that resides in a receptacle designed for just such a purpose. The
receptacle for the pole is right next to the boat on the dock in my marina.
My boat is factory pre-wired for TV, and there is a cable receptacle in the
storage locker in the transom, right next to the shore power receptacle,
telephone receptacle, and pressurized city water receptacle. So, I am
limited to a live TV broadcast while in the slip, which also means that the
cost of my antenna was just next to nothing. If I wish to watch TV while
out and about, I carry a number of VHS tapes or DVDs of shows that I have
previously recorded from my DVR satellite receiver at home. I'll also use
these if I can't find anything interesting live on the 100+ sat channels I
carry.

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 15:09:41 -0700, "RG" wrote:

There are relatively small sat domes that can be
installed that will automatically track the satellite(s) under such
conditions. Last time I checked, they were around $3,000.

================================

There's a relatively new system called "Follow Me TV" available for
about $900 which does azimuth only. Supposedly it works well at
anchor. Haven't tried it but have gotten good reports.

http://www.followmetv.com/

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

"
There's a relatively new system called "Follow Me TV" available for
about $900 which does azimuth only. Supposedly it works well at
anchor. Haven't tried it but have gotten good reports.

http://www.followmetv.com/


I suppose that would be one way to go, but I see two fundamental problems
with it. Since it only compensates for azimuth, it would be less effective
on smaller boats, which are more prone to pitch and roll, even at anchor.
It's ironic that the larger the boat, the more effective this system might
be, but also, the larger the boat the more likely the owner could afford one
of the more expensive systems that will fully track a satellite under all
conditions and vectors.

The other problem I see is that this system is essentially a device to
rotate a standard mini-dish. This means that the ugly mini dish is
displayed on your boat in front of God and everybody to see. Personally I
think the dishes are ugly and not very nautical looking (and prone to rust
in a salt water environment I would suspect), and I'm more than happy to
leave mine behind, permanently mounted to the dock when I'm out boating.
Just an aesthetics thing. I thought the photo in your link showing the dish
mounted to railing was just hideous looking. At least with the big dollar
systems, the dish is fully enclosed in a plastic dome, which I think looks
much more appropriate on a boat. You could even pass it off to the
unknowing as some sort of sophisticated satellite communications system.

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 17:30:06 -0700, "RG" wrote:

At least with the big dollar
systems, the dish is fully enclosed in a plastic dome, which I think looks
much more appropriate on a boat. You could even pass it off to the
unknowing as some sort of sophisticated satellite communications system.

I have some of the same concerns which is one reason that we haven't
bought anything yet. There is no question that the domes offer better
appearance and weather protection. I haven't seen anything less than
about $5K however which will still buy a lot of DVDs. I can get news
and weather from the internet just about everywhere.

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

I haven't seen anything less than about $5K however which will still buy a
lot of DVDs.

Exactly. I record quite a bit of programming to my DVR, then transfer it to
tape to watch on the boat whenever and wherever it's convenient. The DVR
makes time-shifting incredibly easy. Transferring the content to tape
significantly degrades the quality, but it's just generic TV, so I can live
with it. One of these days I'll get around to replacing my DVD player in
the AV rack at home with a DVD recorder, and then the stuff I take out to
the boat would have excellent quality.

Another solution would be to replace the sat receiver in the boat with a
receiver that has a built in DVR, like the one I have at home. Just program
a week or two worth of recordings before leaving the boat, and then you can
play them back with no quality degradation, even when the receiver is away
from the dock-mounted dish. I've thought about it, but my boat is only 29'
long, and it will get knocked around at times. Not too sure if the hard
drives in these DVR's would appreciate that or not.

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

Harry Krause wrote:

Don White wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

Don White wrote:

Eisboch wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

JimH wrote:

I guess so. We do not have digital cable or HD tv sets so the
S-video works just fine for us.


Comcast hasn't gone to "digital" cable in your part of the country?


Many subscribers, me included up until a few days ago, just have a
basic cable service meaning there is no cable box. The cable is
simply hooked up to the VHF antenna input on the TV and you use the
TV tuner to choose the channels. In this case, all channels are
analog.

Eisboch

We updated a year ago to digital.
Getting ready for the big shift to HDTV in the near future.
(read:...saving for the TV)



When you are ready to buy, take a long look at the glass tube flat
screen HD TVs before you pay extra for one of the thin screens. It is
still true that the glass tube TVs produce better pictures, and
without your being able to see pixels. And, of course, the viewing
angle with a glass tube TV is still wider than that of an LCD or
plasma (overpriced) screen.


I've been keeping close watch on Consumer Reports magazine (just paid
the $12.00 US so I could search online) for any ecommendations in HD
TVs. Quite a choice between the CRT type, LCDs, Plasma & DLP.
I'll increase my research when I get close to buying one.
My smaller living room (in a WW2 era house) calls for a 32" max.
Anything bigger is getting hard to lug around.



At the moment, SONY makes a gem of a 32" flat screen LCD. I'll try to
find the model number. Of all the 32's I've seen it was by far the
brightest and sharpest. Unfortunately, it was about $1700.


Where do they make that sweet TV?

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

Around 1/6/2006 10:11 AM, Eisboch wrote:

You can subscribe to it and it only costs
about 12.95 a month.

??

Man, Comcast needs some serious competition in our area! Basic analog
cable is $44.50(!) a month, and basic digital is about $60, plus the
cost of renting the set-top box.


--
~/Garth - 1966 Glastron V-142 Skiflite: "Blue-Boat"
"There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing about in boats." -- Kenneth Grahame
~~ Ventis secundis, tene cursum ~~

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 10:13:24 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

Garth Almgren wrote:
Around 1/6/2006 10:11 AM, Eisboch wrote:

You can subscribe to it and it only costs
about 12.95 a month.

??

Man, Comcast needs some serious competition in our area! Basic analog
cable is $44.50(!) a month, and basic digital is about $60, plus the
cost of renting the set-top box.


When you have a non-competitive, unregulated industry, the consumer gets
reamed. The "cable" industry is one of the worst. Cable where we live is
outrageously expensive.

In our area, Comcast is pushing really hard to convert traditional
"Bell" phone customers to its phone service. But there's a real downside
to depending upon the cable company for phone service, and that is the
"reliability" factor. That traditional telco dialtone when you pick up
the phone is something upon which you can depend 99.9999% of the time.
Everywhere I have lived, the cable companies have "lost signal" during
thunderstorms, snowstorms, bright sunny days, et cetera, and when the
cable signal is lost, well, so is your cable-company supplied telephone
service.

Have you checked into the internet phone services at all? My neighbor has this one
and thinks it's fantastic. With a cell phone for emergencies, this looks like a cheap
way to go.

http://www.sunrocket.com/

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 10:30:52 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jan 2006 10:13:24 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

Garth Almgren wrote:
Around 1/6/2006 10:11 AM, Eisboch wrote:

You can subscribe to it and it only costs
about 12.95 a month.
??

Man, Comcast needs some serious competition in our area! Basic analog
cable is $44.50(!) a month, and basic digital is about $60, plus the
cost of renting the set-top box.

When you have a non-competitive, unregulated industry, the consumer gets
reamed. The "cable" industry is one of the worst. Cable where we live is
outrageously expensive.

In our area, Comcast is pushing really hard to convert traditional
"Bell" phone customers to its phone service. But there's a real downside
to depending upon the cable company for phone service, and that is the
"reliability" factor. That traditional telco dialtone when you pick up
the phone is something upon which you can depend 99.9999% of the time.
Everywhere I have lived, the cable companies have "lost signal" during
thunderstorms, snowstorms, bright sunny days, et cetera, and when the
cable signal is lost, well, so is your cable-company supplied telephone
service.

Have you checked into the internet phone services at all? My neighbor has this one
and thinks it's fantastic. With a cell phone for emergencies, this looks like a cheap
way to go.

http://www.sunrocket.com/


All the consumer internet phone services that come across cable to enter
your house have the same problem. Sunrocket uses broadband cable or
alternately DSL (that's on a phone line) to provide service.

When it comes to telephone service, I'm not looking for the "cheap" way
to go. I'm looking for the "when I pick up the phone there had damned
well be a dialtone" service. I get that with the telco.

Im my immediate neighorhood, cell service is sketchy.

With touchy cell phone service, the internet service may not be a good choice. I've
got to admit, Cox Cable hasn't been down at all for at least a couple years now. The
neighbor likes his Sunrocket plan a bunch. He's trying to talk me into it, and he
knows I'd give him a ration of **** if it were a problem.

I'm still thinking though.

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

There's a relatively new system called "Follow Me TV" available for
about $900 which does azimuth only. Supposedly it works well at
anchor. Haven't tried it but have gotten good reports.

http://www.followmetv.com/



RG wrote:
I suppose that would be one way to go, but I see two fundamental problems
with it. Since it only compensates for azimuth, it would be less effective
on smaller boats, which are more prone to pitch and roll, even at anchor.

It works OK. We have several friends with them. It does work
better at the dock, but it will work at anchor too.




The other problem I see is that this system is essentially a device to
rotate a standard mini-dish. This means that the ugly mini dish is
displayed on your boat in front of God and everybody to see.

Agreed. That's one reason why we don't have one.

The other reason why we don't have one is that we just plain
don't watch much TV, and a $19.95 extrnal antennae gets us
local channels well enough to catch the news & weather.

This may be heresy, but I'd rather read, play, or do boat
work than sit & watch TV.

.....At least with the big dollar
systems, the dish is fully enclosed in a plastic dome, which I think looks
much more appropriate on a boat. You could even pass it off to the
unknowing as some sort of sophisticated satellite communications system.


And you could put a missile launcher on the aft deck to
complete the effect.

Fair Skies
Doug King

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

Around 1/6/2006 9:33 AM, wrote:

You probably should go back to rabbit ears and a black and white tv
using your reasoning.

I'd go back to rabbit ears too, but only with an HDTV. :)

http://antennaweb.org

--
~/Garth - 1966 Glastron V-142 Skiflite: "Blue-Boat"
"There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing about in boats." -- Kenneth Grahame
~~ Ventis secundis, tene cursum ~~

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Don White wrote:

JimH wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
...

JimH wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
...


Eisboch wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...



JimH wrote:



I guess so. We do not have digital cable or HD tv sets so the
S-video works just fine for us.


Comcast hasn't gone to "digital" cable in your part of the country?


Many subscribers, me included up until a few days ago, just have
a basic cable service meaning there is no cable box. The cable
is simply hooked up to the VHF antenna input on the TV and you
use the TV tuner to choose the channels. In this case, all
channels are analog.

Eisboch

We updated a year ago to digital.
Getting ready for the big shift to HDTV in the near future.
(read:...saving for the TV)


When all channels in the US go digital (I believe in 2008 or 2009)
there will be no need to upgrade your TV's to HD if you have cable.

Huh?
HD and digital are two different things.


I never said otherwise Don.

here's what Consumer Reports says about HD vs standard def vs ED

Image quality: HD vs. standard definition

High definition is the way to go if you want the best TV viewing
possible. The picture quality can be stunning, especially on a large,
wide-screen set. HD is a digital-TV format that can offer
almost-lifelike clarity. That’s because HD images contain more and
finer detail than other formats. In technical terms, they have higher
resolution, or more picture elements making up each image. HD images
are digital, usually with definition of either 1080i (1,080 lines
drawn on-screen in an odd/even, or interlaced, pattern) or 720p (720
lines scanned in one sweep, or progressively). You can get HD
capability in all types of TVs: picture-tube sets, LCD, plasma,
rear-projection, and front-projection. However, simply buying an HDTV
doesn't get you HD. You need programming that’s created in HD and
transmitted the same way, plus a digital tuner (usually supplied by
special cable and satellite boxes) that can receive these signals. See
our HDTV report for more details.

Standard definition, the type of TV we've watched for years, has much
less detail. These are analog signals with resolution of 480i (480
lines drawn onscreen in an interlaced pattern), the format in which TV
content is delivered over regular analog broadcasts and basic
(non-digital) cable. On the best TVs, the picture quality can be very
good or even excellent--but it doesn't compare to the best that HD can
offer. Most standard-definition TVs now on the market are picture-tube
sets; some LCDs of this type are also available.

Enhanced definition falls in between standard and high definition. ED
signals are digital, with resolution of 480p (480 lines scanned
progressively). This is equivalent to DVD quality, which is a little
better than standard definition but not as good as high definition.
Some ED sets can decode HD signals when they're connected to a digital
tuner. However, they have to convert them to a lower resolution that
they can display, so the picture quality won't match that of true HD.
Still, it can be quite impressive. Most ED sets now on the market are
either LCD or plasma TVs.



Don, everything looks better on a good HDTV, but...

wait until you look at a science or nature program filmed in and
broadcast in HD. There are a few "inHD" channels, and when I watch TV,
those are the ones I watch. They're just spectacular, no other way to
describe it.

I second that one. Like I said before, I can't take take my eyes off
Discovery HD. I watched a show about plate tectonics - I have an MSc.
in geology and this was pure freshman stuff, but it was SO BEAUTIFUL.

Stella

Yikes! Consumer Electronic Rip...
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Black Dog wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

Don White wrote:

JimH wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
...

JimH wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
...


Eisboch wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...



JimH wrote:



I guess so. We do not have digital cable or HD tv sets so
the S-video works just fine for us.


Comcast hasn't gone to "digital" cable in your part of the
country?


Many subscribers, me included up until a few days ago, just
have a basic cable service meaning there is no cable box. The
cable is simply hooked up to the VHF antenna input on the TV
and you use the TV tuner to choose the channels. In this case,
all channels are analog.

Eisboch

We updated a year ago to digital.
Getting ready for the big shift to HDTV in the near future.
(read:...saving for the TV)


When all channels in the US go digital (I believe in 2008 or
2009) there will be no need to upgrade your TV's to HD if you
have cable.

Huh?
HD and digital are two different things.


I never said otherwise Don.

here's what Consumer Reports says about HD vs standard def vs ED

Image quality: HD vs. standard definition

High definition is the way to go if you want the best TV viewing
possible. The picture quality can be stunning, especially on a
large, wide-screen set. HD is a digital-TV format that can offer
almost-lifelike clarity. That’s because HD images contain more and
finer detail than other formats. In technical terms, they have
higher resolution, or more picture elements making up each image. HD
images are digital, usually with definition of either 1080i (1,080
lines drawn on-screen in an odd/even, or interlaced, pattern) or
720p (720 lines scanned in one sweep, or progressively). You can get
HD capability in all types of TVs: picture-tube sets, LCD, plasma,
rear-projection, and front-projection. However, simply buying an
HDTV doesn't get you HD. You need programming that’s created in HD
and transmitted the same way, plus a digital tuner (usually supplied
by special cable and satellite boxes) that can receive these
signals. See our HDTV report for more details.

Standard definition, the type of TV we've watched for years, has
much less detail. These are analog signals with resolution of 480i
(480 lines drawn onscreen in an interlaced pattern), the format in
which TV content is delivered over regular analog broadcasts and
basic (non-digital) cable. On the best TVs, the picture quality can
be very good or even excellent--but it doesn't compare to the best
that HD can offer. Most standard-definition TVs now on the market
are picture-tube sets; some LCDs of this type are also available.

Enhanced definition falls in between standard and high definition.
ED signals are digital, with resolution of 480p (480 lines scanned
progressively). This is equivalent to DVD quality, which is a little
better than standard definition but not as good as high definition.
Some ED sets can decode HD signals when they're connected to a
digital tuner. However, they have to convert them to a lower
resolution that they can display, so the picture quality won't match
that of true HD. Still, it can be quite impressive. Most ED sets now
on the market are either LCD or plasma TVs.



Don, everything looks better on a good HDTV, but...

wait until you look at a science or nature program filmed in and
broadcast in HD. There are a few "inHD" channels, and when I watch
TV, those are the ones I watch. They're just spectacular, no other
way to describe it.


I second that one. Like I said before, I can't take take my eyes off
Discovery HD. I watched a show about plate tectonics - I have an MSc.
in geology and this was pure freshman stuff, but it was SO BEAUTIFUL.

Stella



I wonder if it was the same one I saw recently. Did it have a segment
about "the next big one" knocking part of the Pacific NW into the ocean?
No wonder boats are selling in Seattle!

Discovery HD is *the best* choice on TV.

Probably the same show. I didn't see the whole thing as the hubby had
the remote and the HD sports channels were beckoning. I do remember a
volcanologist running around grabbing fresh lava in somewhere in Hawaii.

I have a bunch of friends in Comox BC (on Vancouver Island) who keep
ribbing me about my, shall we say, *limited* sailing season. Heehee,
yeah the boat's in the driveway half the year, but I don't need
hurricane, earthquake, tsunami or health insurance. And I kind of like
it like that.

Stella