"Michael Chare" wrote in message
...
"Ad" wrote in message
...
Michael Chare wrote:


but changing from 405 to 625, was an improvement,


Yes but people bought new equipment in order to recieve an extra station,
BBC2. Not the quaulity.
--
Regards,
David

Please reply to News Group.

Michael Chare wrote:

With DTT reception can be flakey and coverage is more like 73% at the
moment.


DTT reception will always be flakey for people at the edge of coverage
areas, and there will always be edges of coverage areas if there's only
73% population-coverage.

You have to remember that the digital TV signal power is far lower than
analogue TV's to avoid interfering with analogue TV. When analogue TV is
switched off then they can crank up the power.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm

MJ Ray wrote:
"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote:
MJ Ray wrote:
I prefer the analogue system. Basically, every "digital text"
box I've used so far has a mindblowingly bad user interface which
has different navigation on each service and very slow feedback
when the user operates some controls.
My Pioneer DBRTF100 Freeview box is quick for displaying digital text
pages,

My award for "worst. receiver. ever." would go to a Pioneer
Freeview, but I'm not sure of the model number. About 14
months old, with one indicator light on the box. It is fast
at *displaying* BBCi pages, but very slow bringing up the
first screens of teletext and skytext. Slow control response
and a very narrow remote control range (not more than about 20
degree vertical is very annoying when most people I know put
the Freeview box on the VCR/DVD under the TV) cripple it.


It's probably the same box as I've got, and I think it's an excellent
receiver:

* fast channel change
* good reception
* IMO, quick bringing up of text pages
* digital audio output

There's far more to a receiver than just the fact that it's moderately
slow at initialising the text.


especially when you compare it to Ceefax where you have to wait
for the sodding page number to scroll round.

That's between you and your decoder's page cache. It's solvable.
My receiver caches 5 pages either side and the fastext linked
pages, which is enough that it's only a noticeable delay when
you key a page number, rather than browsing. It reacts to the
control instantly and the remote control works over a wide arc
(unless the low winter sun is shining directly on the sensor).


I've never owned such a TV, so I wouldn't know.


I think it has a lot to do
with the CPU speed inside the STB. My main problem with digital text
is that it doesn't update, e.g. football scores, share prices etc.

That's bad too. Are all Freeview services as slow to update as BBCi?


I don't use the other text services.




--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm

"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...
Michael Chare wrote:

With DTT reception can be flakey and coverage is more like 73% at the
moment.


DTT reception will always be flakey for people at the edge of coverage
areas, and there will always be edges of coverage areas if there's only
73% population-coverage.

You have to remember that the digital TV signal power is far lower than
analogue TV's to avoid interfering with analogue TV. When analogue TV is
switched off then they can crank up the power.

Yes the aerial upgrade problem. Should I put up a better aerial now and then
maybe get good reception on all the muxes of wait till 2011 (or later) when
maybe they will improve the signal strength from Crystal Palace.

AFAIK there is no published plan showing what each transmitter will broadcast.

--

Michael Chare

Michael Chare wrote:
"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in message
...
Michael Chare wrote:

With DTT reception can be flakey and coverage is more like 73% at
the moment.


DTT reception will always be flakey for people at the edge of
coverage areas, and there will always be edges of coverage areas if
there's only 73% population-coverage.

You have to remember that the digital TV signal power is far lower
than analogue TV's to avoid interfering with analogue TV. When
analogue TV is switched off then they can crank up the power.

Yes the aerial upgrade problem.


I think BOTH about 75% of those that can get DTT need an aerial upgrade
AND there is only about 75% population coverage, but I might be wrong.


Should I put up a better aerial now
and then maybe get good reception on all the muxes of wait till 2011
(or later) when maybe they will improve the signal strength from
Crystal Palace.


If I had to get a new aerial I'd get FTA satellite instead.

But my experience, and the experience of presumably millions of other
people, is that I bought a Freeview receiver, plugged it in, it worked
fine, and that's it. Cheap, simple way to get digital TV and radio,
which is what it says on the tin.

Personally, I hope the BBC launch a Freesat platform.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm

David wrote:


Yes but people bought new equipment in order to recieve an extra station,
BBC2. Not the quaulity.


The differnce then was that people only had one station, now they got 5
anyway. the other differeince is that most people only had one T.v,
there was no video recorders either.

"Ad" wrote in message
...
David wrote:


Yes but people bought new equipment in order to recieve an extra
station,
BBC2. Not the quaulity.


The differnce then was that people only had one station, now they got 5
anyway. the other differeince is that most people only had one T.v,
there was no video recorders either.

No we had 2 stations, BBC and an Independant station, thus BBC made a 50%
increase.
Later the 625line UHF transmissions were the ones color were on.
--
Regards,
David

Please reply to News Group.

DAB sounds worse than FM said the following on 2005-04-01 11:29:
Dave Farrance wrote:
receive HDTV. Another issue is the proposed change to 8K, which
Intellect (the consumer electronics industry's "spokesman") favour, and
yet someone who favoured buying IDTVs over buying set-top boxes could be
unlucky and buy THREE IDTVs when they could have kept their old TV and
bought 2 new STBs.

Assumming that iDTVs were at respectable prices (i.e. no more that £30
extra from the manufactures equivelent analogue set) then those
replacing a faulty set, or otherwise upgrading (old 21" 4:3 to 32"
Widescreen say) then the iDTV route is a wise one to take. If the
standards change you can still add an STB if required, and in the
interim have the convience of the one box solution.

However if you have a perfectly good NICAM/Stereo set made since ~1990
(i.e. you have a TV with an RGB SCART socket) and are replacing it "like
for like" (i.e. a 21" Sony 4:3 for a 21" Sony 4:3 iDTV) then you are
chucking your money away.

To say that iDTVs are a waste of money is wrong (provided the extra
expense is resonable), it just depends on your individual circumstances
as to which is the best choice.

I don't consider myself a technophobe, but having to use two remote
controls to watch TV is a right PITA (it wouldn't be too bad if I could
dump analogue) - The seperate remotes for DAB and my HiFi are just as
big a PITA.


The Sky remote at my parents has instructions written on the back of it
along the lines of (i can't remember the exact numbers as i havn't used
Sky for over a year, and the sticker is from 1999, although corrected a
few times)

Press TV then 6 then SKY then :
"101" for BBC ONE
"102" for BBC TWO
"104" for Channel 4
"105" for Channel 5
"109" for UK Gold
"115" for Granada Plus
"450" for VH-1
Press TV then 3 for Granada

Dispite having the STB for the best part of 6/7 years my mum still
referes to the sticker for the channel numbers, and she has managed to
suss out how to play Bumble Bees (or whatever it's called).

MJ Ray said the following on 2005-04-01 11:58:
My award for "worst. receiver. ever." would go to a Pioneer
Freeview, but I'm not sure of the model number. About 14
months old, with one indicator light on the box. It is fast
at *displaying* BBCi pages, but very slow bringing up the
first screens of teletext and skytext.

My Pace Twin and Daewoo Setpal struggle on Teletext and Sky, they take
an absolute age - BBCi is so much faster.


That's between you and your decoder's page cache. It's solvable.
My receiver caches 5 pages either side and the fastext linked
pages, which is enough that it's only a noticeable delay when
you key a page number, rather than browsing.

I think it has a lot to do
with the CPU speed inside the STB. My main problem with digital text is
that it doesn't update, e.g. football scores, share prices etc.

Hmm, so some analogue sets are fast with teletext, and some digital sets
are fast with digital text - sounds like it's totally down to the set
then (My 14" TV and 21" TV are so bloody slow on analogue teletext i
don't use it anymore, BBCi is much quicker). Heck even my ITV Digital
Pioneer was snappy with BBCi (i've not dug it out of the cupboard under
the stairs since the latest change) - Mind you it was the fastest thing
ever to change channels, beats all three analogue sets, Setpal and Pace
Twin by miles (and my DAB reciver by trips to mars and back).

That's bad too. Are all Freeview services as slow to update as BBCi?

I think Eurosport have recently changed to using one system to
update content across all platforms. Why doesn't everyone?

I thought the BBC already did that, cetrainly BBCi, BBC.co.uk, BBC WAP
and Ceefax have identical stories on them (although occassionally
BBC.co.uk and BBC WAP have more tacked on the end)

David wrote:
"Ad" wrote in message

The differnce then was that people only had one station, now they got 5
anyway. the other differeince is that most people only had one T.v,
there was no video recorders either.


No we had 2 stations, BBC and an Independant station, thus BBC made a 50%
increase.
Later the 625line UHF transmissions were the ones color were on.


I can only just remember those days, I do remember my parents getting a
T.V that could cope with VHF and UHF.