Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

why and where ?

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

"Borg" wrote in message
o.uk...
why and where ?

So "Yesterday" can run for more hours. You'll find it still on in the
evenings now.

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

Borg wrote:
why and where ?

They've also been assimilated

http://pressoffice.virginmedia.com/p...556&highlight=

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

www.paras.org.uk

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

Borg said the following on 04/06/2010 19:37:
why and where ?

We're now in the world of 'you can find out after the fact and see if
we care'.

As a kid I used to puzzle over those engineering announcements (with
apologies) which used to show up months in advance, even for a half
hour tinker on whichever transmitter. Now, I miss those days.

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

Personally, I cannot stand plus 1 channels. They are an unnecessary luxury
with cheap pvrs about.

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!
"Richard Brooks" wrote in message
...
Borg said the following on 04/06/2010 19:37:
why and where ?

We're now in the world of 'you can find out after the fact and see if we
care'.

As a kid I used to puzzle over those engineering announcements (with
apologies) which used to show up months in advance, even for a half hour
tinker on whichever transmitter. Now, I miss those days.

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
Personally, I cannot stand plus 1 channels. They are an unnecessary luxury
with cheap pvrs about.
snip

This assumes, of course, that you have a detailed plan of your viewing and
the inclination to continually program that in advance.

On the other hand, if you just sit down at the TV and surf the EPG it is
sometimes nice to find that although you have just missed something that
looks interesting, it will appear shortly on the '+1' channel.

I doubt that there is a cheap PVR which can record all the channels with a
'+1' simultaneously so that you have the equivalent functionality.

Cheers

Dave R

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

Brian Gaff said the following on 05/06/2010 08:19:
Personally, I cannot stand plus 1 channels. They are an unnecessary luxury
with cheap pvrs about.

Brian


I had a cheap dual one but they make the user incline to storing more
and more crap that they'll never watch.

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

"Richard Brooks" wrote in message
...
Brian Gaff said the following on 05/06/2010 08:19:
Personally, I cannot stand plus 1 channels. They are an unnecessary
luxury with cheap pvrs about.

Brian


I had a cheap dual one but they make the user incline to storing more and
more crap that they'll never watch.


I know exactly what you mean, someday I'll eventually get round to listening
to those shellac disc recordings I made of Lord Haw Haw's speeches...

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

In article , Richard Brooks
writes

I had a cheap dual one but they make the user incline to storing more
and more crap that they'll never watch.

Yeah, and then they lose the library just when you decide you do want to
watch something you've recorded.

--
(\__/)
(='.'=) Bunny's thinking about giving Windows 7
(")_(") a go despite what he's said about it...

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On 05/06/2010 13:51, Richard Brooks wrote:
Brian Gaff said the following on 05/06/2010 08:19:
Personally, I cannot stand plus 1 channels. They are an unnecessary
luxury with cheap pvrs about.

Brian

I had a cheap dual one but they make the user incline to storing more
and more crap that they'll never watch.

I find their main benefit is that I can set them to record the stuff I
don't want to watch,then play them back when I'm out!

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 08:19:12 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

Personally, I cannot stand plus 1 channels. They are an unnecessary luxury
with cheap pvrs about.

Depends, they can be useful when there are too many programmes on at
once to record all the ones you want. Also sometimes the bit rates are
better than the original channels.

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 14:38:48 +0100, Albert Ross wrote:
Also sometimes the bit rates are better than the original
channels.

But if the +1 stations were not there, then the real channels
would have decent bit rates rather than just below barely
adequate.

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:47:23 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 14:38:48 +0100, Albert Ross wrote:
Also sometimes the bit rates are better than the original
channels.

But if the +1 stations were not there, then the real channels
would have decent bit rates rather than just below barely
adequate.

hysterical laughter

The channels that used to carry +1 streams would surelyt continue in
existence carrying something else.


--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 17:15:44 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:47:23 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 14:38:48 +0100, Albert Ross wrote:
Also sometimes the bit rates are better than the original
channels.

But if the +1 stations were not there, then the real channels
would have decent bit rates rather than just below barely
adequate.

hysterical laughter

The channels that used to carry +1 streams would surelyt continue in
existence carrying something else.

And the something else would be ... ?

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:31:03 +0100, lid wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 17:15:44 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:47:23 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 14:38:48 +0100, Albert Ross wrote:
Also sometimes the bit rates are better than the original
channels.

But if the +1 stations were not there, then the real channels
would have decent bit rates rather than just below barely
adequate.

hysterical laughter

The channels that used to carry +1 streams would surelyt continue in
existence carrying something else.

And the something else would be ... ?

In the current economic situation the channels might remain unused for a
while.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:41:28 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

The channels that used to carry +1 streams would surelyt continue in
existence carrying something else.

And the something else would be ... ?

In the current economic situation the channels might remain unused for a
while.

Then why not leave the +1 streams as they are?

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:16:20 +0100, lid wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:41:28 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

The channels that used to carry +1 streams would surelyt continue in
existence carrying something else.

And the something else would be ... ?

In the current economic situation the channels might remain unused for a
while.

Then why not leave the +1 streams as they are?

I suppose the companies find that the costs of the +1 streams are not
sufficiently offset by advertising income, in other words they lose
money.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:54:29 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:16:20 +0100, lid wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:41:28 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

The channels that used to carry +1 streams would surelyt continue in
existence carrying something else.

And the something else would be ... ?

In the current economic situation the channels might remain unused for a
while.

Then why not leave the +1 streams as they are?

I suppose the companies find that the costs of the +1 streams are not
sufficiently offset by advertising income, in other words they lose
money.

If the companies were losing money on the +1 channels, they would soon
stop transmitting them. No-one forces them to transmit them.

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 18:17:14 +0100, lid wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:54:29 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:16:20 +0100, lid wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:41:28 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

The channels that used to carry +1 streams would surelyt continue in
existence carrying something else.

And the something else would be ... ?

In the current economic situation the channels might remain unused for a
while.

Then why not leave the +1 streams as they are?

I suppose the companies find that the costs of the +1 streams are not
sufficiently offset by advertising income, in other words they lose
money.

If the companies were losing money on the +1 channels, they would soon
stop transmitting them. No-one forces them to transmit them.

Exactly.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 18:17:14 +0100, lid wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:54:29 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:16:20 +0100, lid wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:41:28 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

The channels that used to carry +1 streams would surelyt continue in
existence carrying something else.

And the something else would be ... ?

In the current economic situation the channels might remain unused for
a
while.

Then why not leave the +1 streams as they are?

I suppose the companies find that the costs of the +1 streams are not
sufficiently offset by advertising income, in other words they lose
money.

If the companies were losing money on the +1 channels, they would soon
stop transmitting them. No-one forces them to transmit them.

Exactly.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)


I find the +1 useful as it helps get rid of the 9-11 pm log jam.
Gary

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

"Borg" wrote in message
o.uk...
why and where ?


Hi,


Errr.... Sky bought the Virgin Media series of channels... and now... they
want to encourage subscription to their services... so... cut back
convenience and features on free or "trial" services / channels.... in the
hope that this will increase interest in or take-up of subscription channels
/ packages / channels (?).


Best wishes,




News Reader




--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:47:23 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 14:38:48 +0100, Albert Ross wrote:
Also sometimes the bit rates are better than the original
channels.

But if the +1 stations were not there, then the real channels
would have decent bit rates rather than just below barely
adequate.

Now you're being logical :P

The benefit is that they are on different muxes which may have a
better bitrate, although this may change at any moment

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

"Albert Ross" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 6 Jun 2010 13:47:23 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 14:38:48 +0100, Albert Ross wrote:
Also sometimes the bit rates are better than the original
channels.

But if the +1 stations were not there, then the real channels
would have decent bit rates rather than just below barely
adequate.

Now you're being logical :P

The benefit is that they are on different muxes which may have a
better bitrate, although this may change at any moment

C4, C4+1, ITV2, ITV2+1 are all on the same mux (a rubbish one for reception
where I live).

--
Max Demian

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 22:55:00 +0100, Max Demian wrote:

C4, C4+1, ITV2, ITV2+1 are all on the same mux (a rubbish one for
reception where I live).

Should +1 stations be permitted on the PSB multiplexes?

Virgin 1 +1 gone
 

On 2010-06-08 20:33, News Reader wrote:
wrote in message
o.uk...
why and where ?


Hi,


Errr.... Sky bought the Virgin Media series of channels... and now... they
want to encourage subscription to their services... so... cut back
convenience and features on free or "trial" services / channels.... in the
hope that this will increase interest in or take-up of subscription channels
/ packages / channels (?).

This seems to be the message being given to viewers of Welsh
transmitters, who have lost both the current and timeshifted Virgin 1's
in the evening. Their front page http://www.virgin1.co.uk/ says:

"Unfortunately this does mean that Freeview viewers in Wales will not be
able to receive Virgin 1 at all in peak and may need to subscribe to a
pay service should they wish to continue to enjoy Virgin 1 in peak."