Home cinema - Digital TV - information and interest

Whatever you say, you can get most info in other languages easier than in
anything like audio as most blind cannot read Braille you know. We are the
forgotten client group, subculture or whatever. Lots of ad boxticking, very
little real solid info.

Not to mention no access to epg or teletext.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________

"FCS" wrote in message
...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/...nd/7711531.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/...nd/7698370.stm

Wow. I'm glad I'm internet-enabled. I'd be quite confused otherwise
where the public information side of digital is concerned.

SKY seem to have an inside track where their own stable of newspapers,
The News Corporation, is concerned and, as such, anyone reliant on
this traditional medium for their information would not really be too
aware of cable options.

And with both a suitably enabled digital box as well as a digital TV
and suitable analogue recording equipment it should be possible to
watch one show whilst recording one to disk and another to generic VCR
tape cassette. If it has a SCART, which seems to have escaped mention.

Similarly, how on earth will any generic analogue recording equipment
work with a digital-native TV set? And if it does work by way of a
SCART lead. I'm sure the BBC had up, and have since pulled, a slightly
misleading story at 09:30 this morning. But I now can't find it--
though the information I did find seems adequate for the jigsaw fan,
so who says traditional co-ordinative skills are on their way out!

Still, I did like the bit about how people in Whitehaven didn't
realise they were doing something wrong until all the cameras and
reporters showed up.

But the BBC is perhaps culpable for having a piecemeal approach with
no cohesive thread, kind of a "well it's covered somewhere, I remember
approving it a couple of months back" attitude. It's a big enough
change and a competitive enough sector that simply providing complete
and comprehensive information merely is informing the public.

But again, I have the internet so I know what's up there; those who
don't will not and are similarly likely to be unable to access BBCi
information despite severe mental dysfunction is about the only way
even a casual viewer could be unaware of this new teletext system.

Given how much junk pap goes out through the Royal Mail and by way of
the traditional print media is a well-prepared 2-colour gatefold
"state-of-the-stations" missive every six months out with every paper
- local, regional, national, paid-for or free - really not a suitable
solution? Is it not somehow broadcasting?

And more to the point isn't it how the old radio switchover in the
late 1970s worked without a hitch? The fact that FM was the same, warm
rosy mixdown at the engineers' decks as the previous VHF by a
different name and clarification on how both the standard for
measuring the scale on the dial and its carrier amplitudes were
changing in the new wave of life for this pop-picker medium--some of
the stations really were moving to a new home!

Let's face it though, it's perhaps not any kind of an area of public
information where we want the newspapers doing the overseers' - and
BBC's - job in their own names.

After all they along with the sensationalist rolling news channels
reported only one side of the workplace qualifications route to
academic brilliance in the new year and only now are getting round to
covering the worthwhile aspects of on-the-job education--not something
one would hope a promising 16 year old new starting staff member would
need, and not something really an underperforming teenager could be
expected to want or make the most of.

But it remains, if I was just watching BBC BREAKFAST on analogue this
morning, well, I would be confused.

G DAEB
COPYRIGHT (C) 2008 SIPSTON
--