|
|
TV license
Understand the manufacturers have to pay TV license to Thomson. Is it still
valid of the patent as TV has invented for long time? In the UK, the users must pay TV license of 131.5 pounds per year. Is it still valid in the UK or any change in the fee? Thanks, Scott |
TV license
In message , Scott
wrote In the UK, the users must pay TV license of 131.5 pounds per year. Is it still valid in the UK or any change in the fee? Still valid and 142.50 pounds for colour TV -- Alan news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk |
TV license
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 13:52:26 +0800, "Scott"
wrote: Understand the manufacturers have to pay TV license to Thomson. Is it still valid of the patent as TV has invented for long time? In the UK, the users must pay TV license of 131.5 pounds per year. Is it still valid in the UK or any change in the fee? 'Licence' in the UK :-) |
TV license
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:48:02 +0100, Alan
wrote: In message , Scott wrote In the UK, the users must pay TV license of 131.5 pounds per year. Is it still valid in the UK or any change in the fee? Still valid and 142.50 pounds for colour TV Worth every penny to avoid the commercial channels. Steve -- Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com |
TV license
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 11:23:42 +0100, Stephen Wolstenholme
wrote: On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:48:02 +0100, Alan wrote: In message , Scott wrote In the UK, the users must pay TV license of 131.5 pounds per year. Is it still valid in the UK or any change in the fee? Still valid and 142.50 pounds for colour TV Worth every penny to avoid the commercial channels. Definitely. A couple of years ago our local evening paper was complaining about the local BBC putting video clips of local news events on the BBC website. The local paper thought this was unfair - it wanted to put its own clips on its own website but couldn't stand the competition. I get the local evening paper six days a week. It costs just over 200 pounds each year for much less content that the BBC outputs in a year. -- Peter Duncanson (in uk.tech.digital-tv) |
TV license
In article , Stephen
Wolstenholme writes Worth every penny to avoid the commercial channels. Agreed. The advertising on ITV is getting ever more desperate. It won't be long before they adopt American-style advertising, where as a film progresses, the adverts come in every 15 min, then 10, then 5. Weren't the commercial channels supposed to have been forced to transmit a signal when the adverts started to allow people to record a programme without the ads? What happened to that? Another bugbear is the way the volume leaps when the adverts start. It's inconsiderate. If I want to listen to the ****ing adverts, I will, don't force them on me. Is there a petition or something against this? -- (\__/) (='.'=) Bunny says Windows 7 is Vi$ta reloaded. (")_(") http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/windows_7.png |
TV license
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
Weren't the commercial channels supposed to have been forced to transmit a signal when the adverts started to allow people to record a programme without the ads? What happened to that? I don't recall that ever being the case. PDC codes on ITV/4/5 have always been arranged to capture the ads that surround and interrupt programmes, and the same applies to the recording flags on D-Sat and DTT platforms. Some VCR manufacturers have attempted to make their products detect when a break might be occurring, but that's about as far as it gets. Why would the regulator force the commercial channels to create a system that would allow viewers to avoid their funding system !? Advertising funded programming is looking more and more un-viable, and there are really too many advertising funded channels on Freeview so the situation is becoming unsustainable. ITV are rumoured to be considering making ITV2,3,4 subs only on Sky. Of course the real cheeky buggers are Sky, who charge you a subscription, to watch channels that also contain advertising breaks ! -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. www.paras.org.uk |
TV license
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 13:36:30 +0100, Mike Tomlinson
wrote: In article , Stephen Wolstenholme writes Worth every penny to avoid the commercial channels. Agreed. The advertising on ITV is getting ever more desperate. It won't be long before they adopt American-style advertising, where as a film progresses, the adverts come in every 15 min, then 10, then 5. ITV adverts are already every 15 minutes most of evening. Weren't the commercial channels supposed to have been forced to transmit a signal when the adverts started to allow people to record a programme without the ads? What happened to that? There was a box in the top right hand corner that always use to appear a few seconds before the adverts? I haven't noticed it recently but that may be because I rarely watch any commercial channels these days. Another bugbear is the way the volume leaps when the adverts start. It's inconsiderate. If I want to listen to the ****ing adverts, I will, don't force them on me. Is there a petition or something against this? I often go to sleep when my wife insists on watching crap like the X Factor. The increase in volume is to make sure I wake up to watch the adverts :) Steve -- Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com |
TV license
In article , Mark Carver
writes Why would the regulator force the commercial channels to create a system that would allow viewers to avoid their funding system !? You want to watch in real time, you get the ads whether you like it or not (e.g. live football). Record and have the option to skip the ads. I can do it with my PVR anyway, I just FF past the ads, but I thought there had been agreement (this would have been several years ago) to transmit a signal to indicate the start and stop of the ads, but can imagine that this would have been heavily opposed by the advertisers. IMO Freeview has been a disaster. Yes, we have digital telly, but with too many channels of complete crap a la the American model. This thing of repeats+1 of repeats (C4+1, More 4, Dave, Dave ja vu) is a joke. Why not use that bandwidth to transmit the five current terrestrial channels in HD instead? -- (\__/) (='.'=) Bunny says Windows 7 is Vi$ta reloaded. (")_(") http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/windows_7.png |
TV license
Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
There was a box in the top right hand corner that always use to appear a few seconds before the adverts? Cue Dot. Used internally within the ITV network to signal to the regions when a break was coming up during a networked programme. The regional control rooms then knew to be ready to fire off their adverts. You still see it from time to time, usually during live programmes, where the exact timings for a break cannot be determined and therefore the automation system is free running. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. www.paras.org.uk |
TV license
Just had a great idea for future of bib. No need for detector vans or post
code chasing. Simply really. You make all bbc transmissions with nice internet like adverts superimposed on them or scrolling across on all channels, but all receivers with that new socket can have a card reader plugged in and when you pay your licence, and insert the card, all the adverts go away! ducks hbehind nearest potted plant. Brian -- Brian Gaff - Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. Blind user, so no pictures please! "Stephen Wolstenholme" wrote in message ... On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 08:48:02 +0100, Alan wrote: In message , Scott wrote In the UK, the users must pay TV license of 131.5 pounds per year. Is it still valid in the UK or any change in the fee? Still valid and 142.50 pounds for colour TV Worth every penny to avoid the commercial channels. Steve -- Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com |
TV license
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
In article , Mark Carver writes Why would the regulator force the commercial channels to create a system that would allow viewers to avoid their funding system !? You want to watch in real time, you get the ads whether you like it or not (e.g. live football). Record and have the option to skip the ads. I can do it with my PVR anyway, I just FF past the ads, but I thought there had been agreement (this would have been several years ago) to transmit a signal to indicate the start and stop of the ads, but can imagine that this would have been heavily opposed by the advertisers. I've never heard of such a thing. In fact I had a major row on the phone with a chap from the ITC about 12 years ago, when I'd complained to them that C4 were not sending a PDC 'stop' flag until after the ad break, after the programme in question. If I'd set up a recording on say BBC 2 straight after, my VCR would still be locked to C4 until that stop signal, and I'd often have the start of the following BBC prog chopped off. I could understand them wanting you to record the ads during a programme, but why after. Anyway the ITC bloke just would not accept my argument, even when I asked him whether he'd sit through such ads himself ? Like you, I have PVRs, and very rarely see ads these days. IMO Freeview has been a disaster. Yes, we have digital telly, but with too many channels of complete crap a la the American model. This thing of repeats+1 of repeats (C4+1, More 4, Dave, Dave ja vu) is a joke. Why not use that bandwidth to transmit the five current terrestrial channels in HD instead? I agree, there's all this excitement about DVB-T2 and its extra payload, which of course will simply be hijacked to provide more so called 'choice' and financed how exactly ? We could ditch half the crap on Freeview and have enough bandwidth to broadcast HD services using DVB-T1, although of course new receivers would still be required, but the technical quality of existing 'worthwhile' SD services would not be compromised. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. www.paras.org.uk |
TV license
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 13:20:55 GMT, "Brian Gaff"
wrote: Just had a great idea for future of bib. No need for detector vans or post code chasing. Simply really. You make all bbc transmissions with nice internet like adverts superimposed on them or scrolling across on all channels, but all receivers with that new socket can have a card reader plugged in and when you pay your licence, and insert the card, all the adverts go away! ducks hbehind nearest potted plant. Brian No doubt the method has already been considered. It would need some special TV technology. We can't assume everyone has an Internet TV connection. AAMOI, my old auntie in LA told me she once had some local TV channel that she could pay for with no adverts or get it for free with adverts. She says the choice was available years ago but she does not know if it is still available. She no longer watches TV at all. Such a dual choice channel must be the best solution. Steve -- Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com |
TV license
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:10:11 +0100, Mike Tomlinson
wrote: IMO Freeview has been a disaster. Yes, we have digital telly, but with too many channels of complete crap a la the American model. This thing of repeats+1 of repeats (C4+1, More 4, Dave, Dave ja vu) is a joke. It brings in more advertising revenue for a limited cost. Why not use that bandwidth to transmit the five current terrestrial channels in HD instead? Who will fund that. The commercial channels are having enough trouble keeping their existing services going with the reduced advertising income they are getting. Paying extra to transmit HD would put them closer to a visit to the bankruptcy court. -- Peter Duncanson (in uk.tech.digital-tv) |
TV license
Peter Duncanson wrote:
Why not use that bandwidth to transmit the five current terrestrial channels in HD instead? Who will fund that. The commercial channels are having enough trouble keeping their existing services going with the reduced advertising income they are getting. Paying extra to transmit HD would put them closer to a visit to the bankruptcy court. Could be true, so I wonder come Dec 4th in Granadaland, the only HD service available on the new DVB-T2 mux will be BBC HD ? -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. www.paras.org.uk |
TV license
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
In article , Stephen Wolstenholme writes Worth every penny to avoid the commercial channels. Agreed. The advertising on ITV is getting ever more desperate. It won't be long before they adopt American-style advertising, where as a film progresses, the adverts come in every 15 min, then 10, then 5. Weren't the commercial channels supposed to have been forced to transmit a signal when the adverts started to allow people to record a programme without the ads? What happened to that? Another bugbear is the way the volume leaps when the adverts start. It's inconsiderate. If I want to listen to the ****ing adverts, I will, don't force them on me. Is there a petition or something against this? Even more annoying, ITV have started advertising future programmes _during_ current ones. I only discover this after removing the commercial breaks prior to watching. In future no doubt I'll be watching more rented DVDs. -- ^..^ This is Kitty. Copy and paste Kitty into your signature to help her wipe out Bunny's world domination. |
TV license
Mark Carver wrote:
Peter Duncanson wrote: Why not use that bandwidth to transmit the five current terrestrial channels in HD instead? Who will fund that. The commercial channels are having enough trouble keeping their existing services going with the reduced advertising income they are getting. Paying extra to transmit HD would put them closer to a visit to the bankruptcy court. Could be true, so I wonder come Dec 4th in Granadaland, the only HD service available on the new DVB-T2 mux will be BBC HD ? No, ITV have already said they intend to start their HD service on the same day. -- ^..^ This is Kitty. Copy and paste Kitty into your signature to help her wipe out Bunny's world domination. |
TV license
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:21:51 +0100, "Adrian" wrote:
Even more annoying, ITV have started advertising future programmes _during_ current ones. I only discover this after removing the commercial breaks prior to watching. In future no doubt I'll be watching more rented DVDs. Some rented DVD's also carry adverts. There's no escape! Steve -- Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com |
TV license
Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:21:51 +0100, "Adrian" wrote: Even more annoying, ITV have started advertising future programmes _during_ current ones. I only discover this after removing the commercial breaks prior to watching. In future no doubt I'll be watching more rented DVDs. Some rented DVD's also carry adverts. There's no escape! Steve But at least they don't overlay the actual programme which some channels have started doing recently. DOGs were just the thin end of the wedge. -- ^..^ This is Kitty. Copy and paste Kitty into your signature to help her wipe out Bunny's world domination. |
TV license
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 17:04:07 +0100, "Adrian" wrote:
Stephen Wolstenholme wrote: On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:21:51 +0100, "Adrian" wrote: Even more annoying, ITV have started advertising future programmes _during_ current ones. I only discover this after removing the commercial breaks prior to watching. In future no doubt I'll be watching more rented DVDs. Some rented DVD's also carry adverts. There's no escape! Steve But at least they don't overlay the actual programme which some channels have started doing recently. DOGs were just the thin end of the wedge. Ah yes, DOGs. Even some of the BBC channels have started using DOGs. The BBC3 DOG is nearly as intrusive as the commercial channels. DOGs are an insult to viewers intelligence. I tried to watch a recording of a FIVE USA program the other day but gave up after a few minutes. Steve -- Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com |
TV license
Scott wrote:
Understand the manufacturers have to pay TV license to Thomson. Is it still valid of the patent as TV has invented for long time? No. If you are refering to the Telefunken PAL system, _that_ expired in the mid seventies. http://preview.tinyurl.com/bruchs-pal-color-television (radiomuseum.org) In the UK, the users must pay TV license ... (another type of licenxe) -- Adrian C |
TV license
In message , Stephen
Wolstenholme writes On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 17:04:07 +0100, "Adrian" wrote: Stephen Wolstenholme wrote: On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:21:51 +0100, "Adrian" wrote: Even more annoying, ITV have started advertising future programmes _during_ current ones. I only discover this after removing the commercial breaks prior to watching. In future no doubt I'll be watching more rented DVDs. Some rented DVD's also carry adverts. There's no escape! Steve But at least they don't overlay the actual programme which some channels have started doing recently. DOGs were just the thin end of the wedge. Ah yes, DOGs. Even some of the BBC channels have started using DOGs. The BBC3 DOG is nearly as intrusive as the commercial channels. DOGs are an insult to viewers intelligence. I tried to watch a recording of a FIVE USA program the other day but gave up after a few minutes. Steve I've long suspected that after DSO, all of them will have DOG. -- Ian |
TV license
"Adrian C" wrote in message
... Scott wrote: Understand the manufacturers have to pay TV license to Thomson. Is it still valid of the patent as TV has invented for long time? No. If you are refering to the Telefunken PAL system, _that_ expired in the mid seventies. http://preview.tinyurl.com/bruchs-pal-color-television (radiomuseum.org) In the UK, the users must pay TV license ... (another type of licenxe) -- Adrian C For heaven's sake - licenCe!!! -- Woody harrogate three at ntlworld dot com |
TV license
No No, not internet. I'm talking about the card reader socket being
carefully shoved onto the back of recent products without anyone really knowing why. The ads would be on the transmission, but removable by the system in a way a bit like subtitles are. This could be locked on unless the card reader and card for that year were used. Briann -- Brian Gaff - Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. Blind user, so no pictures please! "Stephen Wolstenholme" wrote in message ... On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 13:20:55 GMT, "Brian Gaff" wrote: Just had a great idea for future of bib. No need for detector vans or post code chasing. Simply really. You make all bbc transmissions with nice internet like adverts superimposed on them or scrolling across on all channels, but all receivers with that new socket can have a card reader plugged in and when you pay your licence, and insert the card, all the adverts go away! ducks hbehind nearest potted plant. Brian No doubt the method has already been considered. It would need some special TV technology. We can't assume everyone has an Internet TV connection. AAMOI, my old auntie in LA told me she once had some local TV channel that she could pay for with no adverts or get it for free with adverts. She says the choice was available years ago but she does not know if it is still available. She no longer watches TV at all. Such a dual choice channel must be the best solution. Steve -- Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com |
TV license
"Woody" wrote in message ... "Adrian C" wrote in message ... Scott wrote: In the UK, the users must pay TV license ... (another type of licenxe) -- Adrian C For heaven's sake - licenCe!!! Now don't go getting incenced about it ;-) Roger R |
TV license
"Mike Tomlinson" wrote in message ... IMO Freeview has been a disaster. Yes, we have digital telly, but with too many channels of complete crap a la the American model. This thing of repeats+1 of repeats (C4+1, More 4, Dave, Dave ja vu) is a joke. [snip] I thought everything American just has to be better and aped here. For many viewers the more channels the better, regardless of content. How many satellite receivers are promoted making a feature of 'receive over X000 channels' as a selling point. It is easy to use the skip/delete channels facility so that only a small selection are ever seen, but I bet the majority of viewers don't do that, instead including all available channels in the list. Roger R |
TV license
On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 01:20:23 +0100, Ian
wrote: I've long suspected that after DSO, all of them will have DOG. The excuse is that there will be so many channels we will need DOGs to know what which channel we are watching! That's why I think DOGs are an insult to our intelligence. Steve -- Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com |
TV license
On Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:30:44 +0100, Mark Carver
wrote: I've never heard of such a thing. In fact I had a major row on the phone with a chap from the ITC about 12 years ago, when I'd complained to them that C4 were not sending a PDC 'stop' flag until after the ad break, after the programme in question. If I'd set up a recording on say BBC 2 straight after, my VCR would still be locked to C4 until that stop signal, and I'd often have the start of the following BBC prog chopped off. I could understand them wanting you to record the ads during a programme, but why after. Anyway the ITC bloke just would not accept my argument, even when I asked him whether he'd sit through such ads himself ? You couldn't understand that, as a commercial broadcaster, he HAD to prioritise the adverts over the service to you? Any hint of a system that could be used to skip adverts, ANY adverts, would be commercial suicide. Do the BBC send the flag before or after the inter-programme "announcements"? |
TV license
In article ,
Mike Tomlinson wrote: Another bugbear is the way the volume leaps when the adverts start. I keep on reading this - but don't notice it most of the time. Of course it could depend on the channel you're watching. I watched the repeat of Lewis followed by Gunrush on ITV last night - so four hours in all. And it wasn't apparent then. -- *What are the pink bits in my tyres? Cyclists & Joggers* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
TV license
In article ,
Mike Tomlinson wrote: IMO Freeview has been a disaster. Yes, we have digital telly, but with too many channels of complete crap a la the American model. This thing of repeats+1 of repeats (C4+1, More 4, Dave, Dave ja vu) is a joke. Why not use that bandwidth to transmit the five current terrestrial channels in HD instead? How do you suggest funding all this? -- *Why do psychics have to ask you for your name? * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
TV license
Laurence Payne wrote:
You couldn't understand that, as a commercial broadcaster, he HAD to prioritise the adverts over the service to you? Any hint of a system that could be used to skip adverts, ANY adverts, would be commercial suicide. Yes, I understand that, but why include the ads *after* the programme ? Do cinemas show adverts after the main feature ? BTW the argument was with the regulator at the time, the ITC, not C4 themselves. Do the BBC send the flag before or after the inter-programme "announcements"? The BBC send the flag during the continuity announcements, so they're doing exactly the same trick, incorporating their promos that are shown after a programme. My argument is that when anybody plays back a recording, unless they're mad they hit their stop button at the end of the programme, only the terminally sad would sit and watch ads as well, though they *might* watch the ads during the programme, rather than FF. |
TV license
On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:01:20 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote: In article , Mike Tomlinson wrote: Another bugbear is the way the volume leaps when the adverts start. I keep on reading this - but don't notice it most of the time. Of course it could depend on the channel you're watching. I've seen this explained as the programme and adverts having the same maximum volume (of course) but the programmes having a wider dynamic range than the ads. The average volume of the ads is higher, closer to the maximum, than that of programmes. Of course, if a programme is relatively quiet just before the ads the contrast will be noticeable. -- Peter Duncanson (in uk.tech.digital-tv) |
TV license
In article ,
Peter Duncanson wrote: I keep on reading this - but don't notice it most of the time. Of course it could depend on the channel you're watching. I've seen this explained as the programme and adverts having the same maximum volume (of course) but the programmes having a wider dynamic range than the ads. On ITV 1 the ads actually peak *lower* than the progs are allowed to. The average volume of the ads is higher, closer to the maximum, than that of programmes. Most ads use voices chosen for their clarity and use the finest techniques to record them. TV drama can have whispering actors on personal mics - buried under clothing. Of course, if a programme is relatively quiet just before the ads the contrast will be noticeable. Indeed. All adverts will be made to sound as loud as they can - and who would do any different if they were in charge of making them? A feature film might have a very wide dynamic range - so the explosions etc thrill in the cinema. And an ad break could well be in the quietest part of the movie. -- *Fax is stronger than fiction * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
TV license
On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:33:22 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote: In article , Peter Duncanson wrote: Of course, if a programme is relatively quiet just before the ads the contrast will be noticeable. Indeed. All adverts will be made to sound as loud as they can - and who would do any different if they were in charge of making them? Well, it may be a good idea to make ads quieter so those who watch the commercials have to pay more attention. Steve -- Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com |
TV license
On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:31:30 +0100, Stephen Wolstenholme
wrote: On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:33:22 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote: In article , Peter Duncanson wrote: Of course, if a programme is relatively quiet just before the ads the contrast will be noticeable. Indeed. All adverts will be made to sound as loud as they can - and who would do any different if they were in charge of making them? Well, it may be a good idea to make ads quieter so those who watch the commercials have to pay more attention. A commercial with no sound at all might attract attention. Suddenly the TV goes unexpectedly quiet so people look at it and see the ad. (This would not work for the deaf or the blind.) -- Peter Duncanson (in uk.tech.digital-tv) |
TV license
"Adrian C" 在郵件
ä¸*撰寫... Scott wrote: Understand the manufacturers have to pay TV license to Thomson. Is it still valid of the patent as TV has invented for long time? No. If you are refering to the Telefunken PAL system, _that_ expired in the mid seventies. http://preview.tinyurl.com/bruchs-pal-color-television (radiomuseum.org) In the UK, the users must pay TV license ... (another type of licenxe) -- Adrian C Thanks for your information. It is interesting in the detail PAL TV history. I learnt the TV was invented by RCA. Thomson acquired RCA so they now bundle TV license with DVD 1C as a Portfolio License. Thanks, Scott |
TV license
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:58:55 +0800, "Scott"
wrote: "Adrian C" ??? ???... Scott wrote: Understand the manufacturers have to pay TV license to Thomson. Is it still valid of the patent as TV has invented for long time? No. If you are refering to the Telefunken PAL system, _that_ expired in the mid seventies. http://preview.tinyurl.com/bruchs-pal-color-television (radiomuseum.org) In the UK, the users must pay TV license ... (another type of licenxe) -- Adrian C Thanks for your information. It is interesting in the detail PAL TV history. I learnt the TV was invented by RCA. Many different people were involved in the invention of television, not just RCA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_television Thomson acquired RCA so they now bundle TV license with DVD 1C as a Portfolio License. Thanks, Scott -- Peter Duncanson (in uk.tech.digital-tv) |
TV license
In article , Peter Duncanson
writes Who will fund that. The BBC, using the licence payer's money... The commercial channels are having enough trouble keeping their existing services going with the reduced advertising income they are getting. Paying extra to transmit HD would put them closer to a visit to the bankruptcy court This is a bad idea? They have nothing worth watching. -- (\__/) (='.'=) Bunny says Windows 7 is Vi$ta reloaded. (")_(") http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/windows_7.png |
TV license
In article , Roger R
writes For many viewers the more channels the better, regardless of content. How many satellite receivers are promoted making a feature of 'receive over X000 channels' as a selling point. It's like broadband advertising: "up to" xxMBps, a big con, knowing that the punter will be attracted by the headline speed and pay no attention to whether the ISP's backhaul is up to the job. -- (\__/) (='.'=) Bunny says Windows 7 is Vi$ta reloaded. (")_(") http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/windows_7.png |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:02 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com