More4 on Freeview
 

I saw an ad for CH4+1 on CH4 last night. It said CH4+1 would be on Freeview
channel 13 which currently broadcasts More4. Does this mean we're going to
lose More4 from Freeview?

Peter

More4 on Freeview
 

"Peter Barns" wrote in message
...
I saw an ad for CH4+1 on CH4 last night. It said CH4+1 would be on
Freeview
channel 13 which currently broadcasts More4. Does this mean we're going to
lose More4 from Freeview?

Peter



Just checked the Radio Times and it looks like some of the Freeview channels
are moving about. More4 will be on Freeview channel 14 with E4 moving to
Freeview channel 29 - currently occupied by UKTV Food. ITV4 will be on
channel 28 - currently occupied by Discovery Real Time. Film4 will be on
Freeview channel 32 currently occupied by E4+1. E4+1 will move to Freeview
channel 30 currently occupied by ITV4. ITV2+1 will be on Freeview channel 31
which seems to be a new channel - ITV2+1 is currently on channel 815
according to my set top box.

Peter

More4 on Freeview
 

"Peter Barns" wrote in message
...

"Peter Barns" wrote in message
...
I saw an ad for CH4+1 on CH4 last night. It said CH4+1 would be on
Freeview
channel 13 which currently broadcasts More4. Does this mean we're going
to
lose More4 from Freeview?

Just checked the Radio Times and it looks like some of the Freeview
channels
are moving about. More4 will be on Freeview channel 14 with E4 moving to
Freeview channel 29 - currently occupied by UKTV Food. ITV4 will be on
channel 28 - currently occupied by Discovery Real Time. Film4 will be on
Freeview channel 32 currently occupied by E4+1. E4+1 will move to Freeview
channel 30 currently occupied by ITV4. ITV2+1 will be on Freeview channel
31
which seems to be a new channel - ITV2+1 is currently on channel 815
according to my set top box.

I think your channels are all cocked up - the channel 815 is the giveaway -
boxes only allocate those channels if the proper ones are used. I think you
need to delete all your channels and re-scan your box - I expect it'll be
necessary to delete all the channels that are changing and re-scan at least.

--
Max Demian

More4 on Freeview
 

Peter Barns wrote:


"Peter Barns" wrote in message
...
I saw an ad for CH4+1 on CH4 last night. It said CH4+1 would be on
Freeview
channel 13 which currently broadcasts More4. Does this mean we're
going to lose More4 from Freeview?

Peter



Just checked the Radio Times and it looks like some of the Freeview
channels are moving about. More4 will be on Freeview channel 14 with
E4 moving to Freeview channel 29 - currently occupied by UKTV Food.
ITV4 will be on channel 28 - currently occupied by Discovery Real
Time. Film4 will be on Freeview channel 32 currently occupied by
E4+1. E4+1 will move to Freeview channel 30 currently occupied by
ITV4. ITV2+1 will be on Freeview channel 31 which seems to be a new
channel - ITV2+1 is currently on channel 815 according to my set top
box.

Peter


This is what gets on peoples nerves with Freeview, every few months we
have to rescan, because something have changed, if it was for more
decent channels, it would not be as bad, but for another +1 channel, it
is a waste of time. Also what about older people who don't understand
the technology, how are they suppose to do it and how on earth do they
know anyway??

The system should have been like sky and sort itself out when things
change.

Freeview was a rush to get going and to be honest it shows.

--

More4 on Freeview
 

Ad c wrote:
Peter Barns wrote:

"Peter Barns" wrote in message
...
I saw an ad for CH4+1 on CH4 last night. It said CH4+1 would be on
Freeview
channel 13 which currently broadcasts More4. Does this mean we're
going to lose More4 from Freeview?

Peter


Just checked the Radio Times and it looks like some of the Freeview
channels are moving about. More4 will be on Freeview channel 14 with
E4 moving to Freeview channel 29 - currently occupied by UKTV Food.
ITV4 will be on channel 28 - currently occupied by Discovery Real
Time. Film4 will be on Freeview channel 32 currently occupied by
E4+1. E4+1 will move to Freeview channel 30 currently occupied by
ITV4. ITV2+1 will be on Freeview channel 31 which seems to be a new
channel - ITV2+1 is currently on channel 815 according to my set top
box.

Peter


This is what gets on peoples nerves with Freeview, every few months we
have to rescan, because something have changed, if it was for more
decent channels, it would not be as bad, but for another +1 channel, it
is a waste of time. Also what about older people who don't understand
the technology, how are they suppose to do it and how on earth do they
know anyway??

The system should have been like sky and sort itself out when things
change.

Freeview was a rush to get going and to be honest it shows.

According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4)
More4: 14 (was E4)
E4: 29 (was Film4)
E4+1: 30 (no change)
Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

I don't think a channel re-scan will be necessary on all boxen out
there, only those that store the channel idents permanently rather than
dynamically.

I'm actually a little disappointed here. If we have to have +1 channels
I'd rather have More+1 than E4+1. However, these +1 channels are only of
use if you need to timeshift stuff when recording, as I see it. I'd
rather see a new channel here, but that's obviously not going to happen.
Sigh.

The OP clearly needs to re-scan his boxen to get the channel layout correct.


Clem

More4 on Freeview
 

"Clem Dye" wrote in message
...
Ad c wrote:
Peter Barns wrote:


boxen

?????

tim

More4 on Freeview
 

On 19/08/2007 12:09, tim..... wrote:

"Clem Dye" wrote:

boxen

?????

http://catb.org/jargon/html/V/VAXen.html

More4 on Freeview
 

In article , Clem Dye
wrote:


According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4) More4: 14 (was E4) E4: 29 (was Film4) E4+1:
30 (no change) Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

I don't think a channel re-scan will be necessary on all boxen out
there, only those that store the channel idents permanently rather than
dynamically.

A rescan is a pest from my POV as I live in an area where I can RX from two
different TXs. One in the lower frequency part of the band, the other in
the higher frequency part.

The LF versions are lower power and give less reliable reception. So to
rescan and get the versions I require takes some furtling about on my part.

For my Nokia 221T I have to run a rescan with the antenna lead removed
until it has passed the LF channels, then shove the lead in so it can find
the HF ones.

For the Panasonic recorder I may have to do an autoscan with no RF to blank
all the channels, then connect the RF and rescan the actual channels I
want, individually. However I've only owned this for a short time. Maybe it
will automate the process overnight... i.e. do it anyway even if I don't
want it to! ?

PITA.

So - as in the past - I'll only rescan if I find I need to. If the old
numbers still work, I'll use them as they are until that becomes a pest for
some reason.

Is there any technical reason for changes in the assigned station numbers
for stations that are continuing to be broadcast? I can see that 'new'
stations will require a number, and that when one dissapears its number
could become available. But is the shuffling for continuing stations
actually necessary? It would save bother if the broadcasters were told they
could not keep changing these.

I'm actually a little disappointed here. If we have to have +1 channels
I'd rather have More+1 than E4+1. However, these +1 channels are only of
use if you need to timeshift stuff when recording, as I see it. I'd
rather see a new channel here, but that's obviously not going to happen.
Sigh.

I'd prefer all '+1' stations to be removed and the data used for other
purposes like better quality. However broadcasters are interested in what
they want, not what we'd prefer. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html

More4 on Freeview
 

"tim....." wrote in message
...

"Clem Dye" wrote in message
...
Ad c wrote:
Peter Barns wrote:


boxen

?????

It's a fanciful plural of box, in the sense of a computer, as in "Unix box".

Not really applicable to a "set top box", and certainly not as a singular.

--
Max Demian

More4 on Freeview
 

In article , Clem Dye wrote:
According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as*
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4)
More4: 14 (was E4)
E4: 29 (was Film4)
E4+1: 30 (no change)
Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

Not again! Every time I have to go through this nonsense on one of my
boxes I have to re-enter all my programmed recordings. Somehow it seems
appropriate that one of them is called "The Enemies of Reason".

Rod.

More4 on Freeview
 

"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
"tim....." wrote in message
...

"Clem Dye" wrote in message
...
Ad c wrote:
Peter Barns wrote:


boxen

?????

It's a fanciful plural of box,

you mean it's a made up plural.

tim

More4 on Freeview
 

"tim....." wrote in message
...

"Max Demian" wrote in message
...
"tim....." wrote in message
...

"Clem Dye" wrote in message
...
Ad c wrote:
Peter Barns wrote:


boxen

It's a fanciful plural of box,

you mean it's a made up plural.

Ox, oxen; box, boxen.

Are not fancies made up?

--
Max Demian

More4 on Freeview
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Clem Dye
wrote:


According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4) More4: 14 (was E4) E4: 29 (was Film4) E4+1:
30 (no change) Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

I don't think a channel re-scan will be necessary on all boxen out
there, only those that store the channel idents permanently rather than
dynamically.

A rescan is a pest from my POV as I live in an area where I can RX from
two
different TXs. One in the lower frequency part of the band, the other in
the higher frequency part.

The LF versions are lower power and give less reliable reception. So to
rescan and get the versions I require takes some furtling about on my
part.

For my Nokia 221T I have to run a rescan with the antenna lead removed
until it has passed the LF channels, then shove the lead in so it can find
the HF ones.

For the Panasonic recorder I may have to do an autoscan with no RF to
blank
all the channels, then connect the RF and rescan the actual channels I
want, individually. However I've only owned this for a short time. Maybe
it
will automate the process overnight... i.e. do it anyway even if I don't
want it to! ?

PITA.

Obviously boxes vary, but I would have thought that all have a way of
deleting all the channels, even if it involves returning to the
manufacturer's default settings. Then you just have to do six separate
scans, one for each multiplex. You should know the correct UHF channels for
each by now. I doubt that any boxes scan and store now channels
automatically overnight - though they might tell you that new ones are
available.

Is there any technical reason for changes in the assigned station numbers
for stations that are continuing to be broadcast? I can see that 'new'
stations will require a number, and that when one dissapears its number
could become available. But is the shuffling for continuing stations
actually necessary? It would save bother if the broadcasters were told
they
could not keep changing these.

I'm actually a little disappointed here. If we have to have +1 channels
I'd rather have More+1 than E4+1. However, these +1 channels are only of
use if you need to timeshift stuff when recording, as I see it. I'd
rather see a new channel here, but that's obviously not going to happen.
Sigh.

I'd prefer all '+1' stations to be removed and the data used for other
purposes like better quality. However broadcasters are interested in what
they want, not what we'd prefer. :-)

There isn't enough rubbish to fill the space. For example Film4 is 24 hour
but only carries films for half that time.

Also many people still watch live TV, and benefit from the +1 channels if
they are late.

--
Max Demian

More4 on Freeview
 

"Clem Dye" wrote...

According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4)
More4: 14 (was E4)
E4: 29 (was Film4)
E4+1: 30 (no change)
Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

Hmm. I wonder whether these channel numbers will retain their original
resolutions? If so, Film4 will have the reduced quality of Film4+1
which will be a nuisance.

Matti

More4 on Freeview
 

"Clem Dye" wrote in message
...
Ad c wrote:
Peter Barns wrote:

"Peter Barns" wrote in message
...
I saw an ad for CH4+1 on CH4 last night. It said CH4+1 would be on
Freeview
channel 13 which currently broadcasts More4. Does this mean we're
going to lose More4 from Freeview?

Peter


Just checked the Radio Times and it looks like some of the Freeview
channels are moving about. More4 will be on Freeview channel 14 with
E4 moving to Freeview channel 29 - currently occupied by UKTV Food.
ITV4 will be on channel 28 - currently occupied by Discovery Real
Time. Film4 will be on Freeview channel 32 currently occupied by
E4+1. E4+1 will move to Freeview channel 30 currently occupied by
ITV4. ITV2+1 will be on Freeview channel 31 which seems to be a new
channel - ITV2+1 is currently on channel 815 according to my set top
box.

Peter


This is what gets on peoples nerves with Freeview, every few months we
have to rescan, because something have changed, if it was for more
decent channels, it would not be as bad, but for another +1 channel, it
is a waste of time. Also what about older people who don't understand
the technology, how are they suppose to do it and how on earth do they
know anyway??

The system should have been like sky and sort itself out when things
change.

Freeview was a rush to get going and to be honest it shows.

According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4)
More4: 14 (was E4)
E4: 29 (was Film4)
E4+1: 30 (no change)
Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

I don't think a channel re-scan will be necessary on all boxen out there,
only those that store the channel idents permanently rather than
dynamically.

I'm actually a little disappointed here. If we have to have +1 channels
I'd rather have More+1 than E4+1. However, these +1 channels are only of
use if you need to timeshift stuff when recording, as I see it. I'd rather
see a new channel here, but that's obviously not going to happen. Sigh.

The OP clearly needs to re-scan his boxen to get the channel layout
correct.


Clem
Can I put in a "request" that the +1 is a day not an hour. It would help
with those
"did you last night..."
"no dam!"
type of conversations
ted

More4 on Freeview
 

"Ad c" wrote:
[...] Also what about older people who don't understand
the technology, how are they suppose to do it and how on earth do they
know anyway??

The system should have been like sky and sort itself out when things
change.

What about older people who don't understand the technology and how on
earth do they know where their favourite channel(s) just went?

There's no technical reason the numbers couldn't stay constant, but all
ways of handling line-up changes have drawbacks. Freeview just picked
a different one to Sky - but at least the owner can choose when to reset
with Freeview, which is very slightly less bad IMO.
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Free Sat FAQ: http://mjr.towers.org.uk/blog/2006/astefaq
Webmaster/web developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop maker,
Workers co-op @ Weston-super-Mare, Somerset http://www.ttllp.co.uk/

More4 on Freeview
 

On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 17:28:00 +0100, "Matti Lamprhey"
wrote:

"Clem Dye" wrote...

According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4)
More4: 14 (was E4)
E4: 29 (was Film4)
E4+1: 30 (no change)
Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

Hmm. I wonder whether these channel numbers will retain their original
resolutions? If so, Film4 will have the reduced quality of Film4+1
which will be a nuisance.

Circa 1330 today from Emley Moor, rates from Nebula DigiTV Tech Info
dialog.

C4 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 704 x 576
C4+1 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 544 x 576
More4 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 544 x 576
E4 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 544 x 576
E4+1 15Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 720 x 576
Film 4 15Mbps Video 160kbps Audio 720 x 576


--

More4 on Freeview
 

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:43:01 +0000 (UTC), MJ Ray
wrote:

What about older people who don't understand the technology and how on
earth do they know where their favourite channel(s) just went?

minor rant

Why is it always 'older people' who don't understand the technology? A
lot of these 'older people' invented the technology. I'm just turned
seventy and I don't have a problem.

How about 'some' older people instead.

/minor rant

--
Alan White
Mozilla Firefox and Forte Agent.
Twenty-eight miles NW of Glasgow, overlooking Lochs Long and Goil in Argyll, Scotland.
Webcam and weather:- http://windycroft.gt-britain.co.uk/weather

More4 on Freeview
 

On 20/08/2007 13:45, Mike wrote:

C4 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 704 x 576
C4+1 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 544 x 576
More4 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 544 x 576
E4 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 544 x 576
E4+1 15Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 720 x 576
Film 4 15Mbps Video 160kbps Audio 720 x 576

I presume the bitrates you quoted are meaningless?

I'd have expected C4/M4/F4 to have the 720 pixel widths
and all the +1s to have 544 pixels

More4 on Freeview
 

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:05:00 +0100, Andy Burns
wrote:

On 20/08/2007 13:45, Mike wrote:

C4 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 704 x 576
C4+1 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 544 x 576
More4 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 544 x 576
E4 10 Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 544 x 576
E4+1 15Mbps Video 192kbps Audio 720 x 576
Film 4 15Mbps Video 160kbps Audio 720 x 576

I presume the bitrates you quoted are meaningless?

Yes

I'd have expected C4/M4/F4 to have the 720 pixel widths
and all the +1s to have 544 pixels

So would I, but they don't

--

More4 on Freeview
 

Alan White wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:43:01 +0000 (UTC), MJ Ray
wrote:

What about older people who don't understand the technology and how
on earth do they know where their favourite channel(s) just went?

minor rant

Why is it always 'older people' who don't understand the technology? A
lot of these 'older people' invented the technology. I'm just turned
seventy and I don't have a problem.

How about 'some' older people instead.

/minor rant

I've met pleanty of people in their twenties and thirties that don't
understand the technology.

More4 on Freeview
 

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 15:52:21 +0100, "Adrian A" wrote:

I've met pleanty of people in their twenties and thirties that don't
understand the technology.

It's not just us then. That's a relief.

--
Alan White
Mozilla Firefox and Forte Agent.
Twenty-eight miles NW of Glasgow, overlooking Lochs Long and Goil in Argyll, Scotland.
Webcam and weather:- http://windycroft.gt-britain.co.uk/weather

More4 on Freeview
 

"Matti Lamprhey" wrote in message
...
"Clem Dye" wrote...

According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4)
More4: 14 (was E4)
E4: 29 (was Film4)
E4+1: 30 (no change)
Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

Hmm. I wonder whether these channel numbers will retain their original
resolutions? If so, Film4 will have the reduced quality of Film4+1 which
will be a nuisance.

Well Film 2 is still on multiplex D - it hasn't changed to 2 which Film4+1
used. In fact it seems that the new C4+1 is using the old Film4+1 slot and
the others have stayed where they are and it's just the logical channel
numbers that have been shuffled.

--
Max Demian

More4 on Freeview
 

Clem Dye wrote:


According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4)
More4: 14 (was E4)
E4: 29 (was Film4)
E4+1: 30 (no change)
Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

The only change I can see is that Channel4+1 is on 32, all the rest seem
as was.

Basically, they've ditched Film4+1, an eminently sensible compromise
IMO, instead of shuffling all their channels around.

It's 544x576 instead of Channel 4's 704x576.

Doubtless some receivers will need a rescan...

Peter

More4 on Freeview
 

"Peter Hayes" wrote in message
m...
Clem Dye wrote:

According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4)
More4: 14 (was E4)
E4: 29 (was Film4)
E4+1: 30 (no change)
Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

The only change I can see is that Channel4+1 is on 32, all the rest seem
as was.

Basically, they've ditched Film4+1, an eminently sensible compromise
IMO, instead of shuffling all their channels around.

It's 544x576 instead of Channel 4's 704x576.

Doubtless some receivers will need a rescan...

Yours will need one if you want the channel numbers to correspond to the
ones in the Radio Times, etc.

--
Max Demian

More4 on Freeview
 

Max Demian wrote:

"Peter Hayes" wrote in message
m...

Doubtless some receivers will need a rescan...

Yours will need one if you want the channel numbers to correspond to the
ones in the Radio Times, etc.

Those aren't the only changes. ITV2 has changed PID from 8322 to 8325 and
ITV3 from 8291 to 8294. That will mess up any recordings set up on PVRs
for those channels.
--
Dave

More4 on Freeview
 

Max Demian wrote:

"Peter Hayes" wrote in message
m...
Clem Dye wrote:

According to the Radio Times from 20 August the channel changes are as
follows:

Channel4+1: 13 (was More4)
More4: 14 (was E4)
E4: 29 (was Film4)
E4+1: 30 (no change)
Film4: 32 (was Film4+1)

The only change I can see is that Channel4+1 is on 32, all the rest seem
as was.

Basically, they've ditched Film4+1, an eminently sensible compromise
IMO, instead of shuffling all their channels around.

It's 544x576 instead of Channel 4's 704x576.

Doubtless some receivers will need a rescan...

Yours will need one if you want the channel numbers to correspond to the
ones in the Radio Times, etc.

EyeTV picked up the change without prompting, but my el cheapo Asda
Freeview box needs a rescan. The channel numbers are still the same as
in Saturday's Daily Mail TV supplement except Channel4 + 1 / Film4 + 1,
obviously...

--

Immunity is better than innoculation.

Peter

More4 on Freeview
 

In article , Max Demian
wrote:
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

A rescan is a pest from my POV as I live in an area where I can RX
from two different TXs. One in the lower frequency part of the band,
the other in the higher frequency part.

The LF versions are lower power and give less reliable reception. So
to rescan and get the versions I require takes some furtling about on
my part.

For my Nokia 221T I have to run a rescan with the antenna lead removed
until it has passed the LF channels, then shove the lead in so it can
find the HF ones.

For the Panasonic recorder I may have to do an autoscan with no RF to
blank all the channels, then connect the RF and rescan the actual
channels I want, individually. However I've only owned this for a
short time. Maybe it will automate the process overnight... i.e. do
it anyway even if I don't want it to! ?

PITA.

Obviously boxes vary, but I would have thought that all have a way of
deleting all the channels, even if it involves returning to the
manufacturer's default settings. Then you just have to do six separate
scans, one for each multiplex.

Indeed. As I pointed out. Takes some time, and some furtling about removing
the RF input and restoring it.

You should know the correct UHF channels for each by now.

Ideed. I've already had to do this more than once. Hence my annoyance that
the broadcasters keep changing established station numberings.

I doubt that any boxes scan and store now channels automatically
overnight - though they might tell you that new ones are available.

Turned out that my new Panasonic DVD recorder is like my old Nokia RX.
Neither noticed the changes in station arrangements. They just go on using
the 'old' station numbers until I choose to do a rescan. No indication from
either than anything has changed.

Since I haven't found any announcement in Radio Times about the changes, I
only know about them as a result of it being mentioned in this thread.



Also many people still watch live TV, and benefit from the +1 channels
if they are late.

Any figures for that?

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html

More4 on Freeview
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

Since I haven't found any announcement in Radio Times about the changes, I
only know about them as a result of it being mentioned in this thread.

Actually it's at the bottom of a little box at the bottom of page 70 of the
18 - 24 August edition.

--
Max Demian

More4 on Freeview
 

Alan White
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:43:01 +0000 (UTC), MJ Ray
wrote:
What about older people who don't understand the technology and how on
earth do they know where their favourite channel(s) just went?

minor rant

Why is it always 'older people' who don't understand the technology?

I don't know. Please remember that I was rewriting the question of 'Ad c'
and not choosing all the words myself. Send your flame elsewhere.
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Free Sat FAQ: http://mjr.towers.org.uk/blog/2006/astefaq
Webmaster/web developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop maker,
Workers co-op @ Weston-super-Mare, Somerset http://www.ttllp.co.uk/

More4 on Freeview
 

In article ,
MJ Ray wrote:
Alan White
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:43:01 +0000 (UTC), MJ Ray
wrote:
What about older people who don't understand the technology and how on
earth do they know where their favourite channel(s) just went?

minor rant

Why is it always 'older people' who don't understand the technology?

I don't know. Please remember that I was rewriting the question of 'Ad c'
and not choosing all the words myself. Send your flame elsewhere.

Not sure how this started - (I've lost the OP's article),
but it may be quite simple - so the following is not a
rant - just an observation that I think most of us would
agree with..

Older people /do/ understand the technology - and then some.
(I mean, look at Bill Wright)! ;'))

Having grown up with the earliest personal and business
computers; they understand often at a very fine level just
what 'programming' is all about; they have an acute awareness
of just when 'things are wrong' - and often an almost intuitive
capacity to fix; in short, they have that diamond encrusted
'something' named "Experience"...

It's the Child of Today, (of all ages) who, used to having
everything dished up on a plate by their long-suffering
Paroids and others, that can be the really clueless ones!

My 85yr old mother, (now deceased but at the time a great
grandmother and formerly a Senior Nursing Officer), was
perfectly capable of wiring plugs correctly, fiddling about
with scart combinations, sorting out digital tv and so on.

As a young girl during WWII she was the electrical stores
controller in a factory 'somewhere' in England. Eyes and
ears not quite what they once were - but the brain was
perfectly capable.

She made mincemeat of any Dixon-Drone (as were) or Comet-Corpse
who dared to attempt selling special 'oxygen-free', wire-coated
special coloured plastic leads at 69.95gbp, without which all
digital transmissions would clearly fail... ;'))

Why, she even fixed our Triang Train set for us after we
knackered it ..and always was a dab hand at Scalextric..

;))

Bill ZFC

--
Adoption InterLink UK with -=- http://www.billsimpson.com/
Domain Host Orpheus Internet -=- http://www.orpheusinternet.co.uk/

More4 on Freeview
 

"Bill (Adopt)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Older people /do/ understand the technology - and then some.
(I mean, look at Bill Wright)! ;'))

Oi!


Having grown up with the earliest personal and business
computers; they understand often at a very fine level just
what 'programming' is all about; they have an acute awareness
of just when 'things are wrong' - and often an almost intuitive
capacity to fix; in short, they have that diamond encrusted
'something' named "Experience"...

At this moment my 88 year old dad is building a large shed. Because of the
unusual design the local shed building outfit declared that 'it couldn't be
done, and if it was done it would be illegal'. (I kid you not). So my dad
got several large sheets of paper, sharpened his pencil, and designed the
roof structure which he is now constructing.

Bill

More4 on Freeview
 

In article , Bill (Adopt) wrote:
Older people /do/ understand the technology - and then some.
(I mean, look at Bill Wright)! ;'))

Having grown up with the earliest personal and business*
computers; they understand often at a very fine level just*
what 'programming' is all about; they have an acute awareness*
of just when 'things are wrong' - and often an almost intuitive*
capacity to fix; in short, they have that diamond encrusted*
'something' named "Experience"...

Also usually an understanding of the fundamental principles on which
things work, rather than simply knowing how to take a piece of ready-
made modern technological magic out of its box and switch it on.

It's the Child of Today, (of all ages) who, used to having*
everything dished up on a plate by their long-suffering*
Paroids and others, that can be the really clueless ones!

My 85yr old mother, (now deceased but at the time a great*
grandmother and formerly a Senior Nursing Officer), was
perfectly capable of wiring plugs correctly, fiddling about*
with scart combinations, sorting out digital tv and so on. *

Likewise my mother, (though she only got to be 80). Born the same year
that the wireless station 2LO started broadcasting, she grew up without
television, computers, mobile phones, the internet, and a great many
other things we take for granted today, but towards the end of her life
she was happily writing a daily diary on a computer, including pictures
either scanned from photographs or taken with a digital camera, and if
she had a problem with it she would email me for help. I've met many
people half her age who not only haven't a clue how to do any of this,
but despite bemoaning their ignorance appear to have made no effort to
find out. All it takes is diligence and the willingness to learn. As
long as you still have the use of your mind, it doesn't matter if
you're old.

Rod.

More4 on Freeview
 

In article , Max Demian
wrote:
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

Since I haven't found any announcement in Radio Times about the
changes, I only know about them as a result of it being mentioned in
this thread.

Actually it's at the bottom of a little box at the bottom of page 70 of
the 18 - 24 August edition.

Ah, yes. Sort of tucked away in a comment at the bottom of the box, with no
real details. Hardly surprising I missed it! Not much help for those who
are now wondering, "Where has ITV3 gone?..." is it.

I wonder how many people around the UK now assume they can't get ITV any
more due to the change in PIDs and station numbers, and haven't even seen
the obscure RT 'announcement' or realise what it means.

Well done, RT. Fountain of useful info. Not. :-)

Does the RT editor work for thew Vogon Constructor Fleet?

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html

More4 on Freeview
 

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
.. .
As
long as you still have the use of your mind, it doesn't matter if
you're old.

That's what's bothering me.

Bill

More4 on Freeview
 

In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Max Demian
wrote:
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

Since I haven't found any announcement in Radio Times about the
changes, I only know about them as a result of it being mentioned in
this thread.

Actually it's at the bottom of a little box at the bottom of page 70 of
the 18 - 24 August edition.

Ah, yes. Sort of tucked away in a comment at the bottom of the box, with
no real details. Hardly surprising I missed it! Not much help for those
who are now wondering, "Where has ITV3 gone?..." is it.

I wonder how many people around the UK now assume they can't get ITV any
more due to the change in PIDs and station numbers, and haven't even seen
the obscure RT 'announcement' or realise what it means.

Well done, RT. Fountain of useful info. Not. :-)


well, it is a BBC publication. TV Times would be the one to look at for
details about changes to ITV

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

More4 on Freeview
 

charles wrote:

well, it is a BBC publication. TV Times would be the one to look at for
details about changes to ITV

ITV sold TV Times years ago, even before the 1991 listings deregulation ISTR.

Even when it was ITV owned, it was bloody useless.

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

More4 on Freeview
 

"charles" wrote in message
...
well, it is a BBC publication. TV Times would be the one to look at for
details about changes to ITV

I though RT was a listings mag, with editorial content tailored for the
readers' convenience.

Bill

More4 on Freeview
 

On Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:31:25 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:


"Bill (Adopt)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Older people /do/ understand the technology - and then some.
(I mean, look at Bill Wright)! ;'))

Oi!


Having grown up with the earliest personal and business
computers; they understand often at a very fine level just
what 'programming' is all about; they have an acute awareness
of just when 'things are wrong' - and often an almost intuitive
capacity to fix; in short, they have that diamond encrusted
'something' named "Experience"...

At this moment my 88 year old dad is building a large shed. Because of the
unusual design the local shed building outfit declared that 'it couldn't be
done, and if it was done it would be illegal'. (I kid you not). So my dad
got several large sheets of paper, sharpened his pencil, and designed the
roof structure which he is now constructing.

Bill

Your dad is a bloody genius! My dad's only 75, has vascular dementia,
is almost blind and can no longer look after himself. He was always
very active and extremely clever. It's a bugger, really.

Marky P.

More4 on Freeview
 

"Owain" wrote in message
...
Bill Wright wrote:
"Roderick Stewart" wrote
As long as you still have the use of your mind, it doesn't matter if
you're old.
That's what's bothering me.

Why, do you think you might have worn yours out with over-exertion in your
younger days? ;-)

No, if anything I under-exerted my mind in my younger days! If I'd worked
harder all through school, really applied myself and got a decent degree,
studied assiduously all though my early 20s, I could have spent the last 40
years working for some vast organisation, suffering all the internal
politics, the inhumanity of higher management, the senseless bureaucracy,
the long hours, the poor rewards. As it is I was an idle little ****er at
school, interested only in booze and birds, and as a result I've been
condemmed to 40 years of fairly carefree self employment, dealing only with
people I like, quickly ditching those I don't, choosing my own hours, making
my own decisions, and generally having a nice time.

Isn't life funny? When I failed the 11+ (mostly due to fighting; we were
assessed, not examined) I was told that my adult life was ruined before it
had started. I was condemned to a life of hewing wood and drawing water, in
the words of one teacher. Or was it hewing water and drawing wood, I can't
remember. Anyway, it was going to be really horrid. But of course it wasn't.
Teachers always overemphasise the importance of academic success.

Anyway, I digress.

Bill