Satellite v Freeview
 

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:26:04 +0100, Martin wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:37:50 +0000, Charlie+ wrote:

On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:29:43 +0000, Dave Farrance
wrote as underneath


rbel wrote:

From a consumer's perspective does satellite viewing have any
advantages over Freeview other than a wider selection of stations? Is
it less prone to interference/reception problems?

I recall that about 2 years after Freesat started ( ~2010? ) somebody said
that there were a few popular channels that were on Freeview but not
Freesat. Anybody know if there are still any Freeview-but-not-Freesat
channels?

I havnt noticed that Dave and Dave DejaVu and Quest are available on
FTA Satellite - I will take any correction! These are useful channels!

If you want to watch TG 24/7

Unfortunately TG is not shown 24/7. It is seriously interrupted by other
shows. From my point of view the most unwatchable is Man v. Food. The
host Alan Richman travels to various place and eats stupid quantities of
food.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._Food_episodes

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

Satellite v Freeview
 

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:47:47 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

In article , Mark
wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:21:22 +0000, Bill Wright wrote:

--snip--

There's no doubt a cheap filter will sort it out for Gp A channels. The
problem is hardly new. Only yesterday I dealt with a system where the
TETRA is transmitted from the same roof!

Is 4G likely to disrupt even Grp A channels?

It is certainly possible in some cases. Simply by over-powering any
distribution amp or RF gain stages. However the gap in frequencies between
4G and the low end of the UHF TV band make filtering much more likely to
fix such problems without also upsetting TV reception.

I don't really understand why they will be permitted to transmit
significant levels of interference.

How often problems will arise? Dunno. I doubt OfCom know, either.

Very different, though, to where we're expected to get BBC A on ch60- with
4G blasting away just a MHz or so above in frequency.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?

Satellite v Freeview
 

In article ,
Martin wrote:

I can't say that I miss not having Freeview.

But do you miss having it?

-- Richard

Satellite v Freeview
 

In article , Mark
wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:47:47 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

Is 4G likely to disrupt even Grp A channels?

It is certainly possible in some cases. Simply by over-powering any
distribution amp or RF gain stages. However the gap in frequencies
between 4G and the low end of the UHF TV band make filtering much more
likely to fix such problems without also upsetting TV reception.

I don't really understand why they will be permitted to transmit
significant levels of interference.

Because they waved billions of quid in front of the government / OfCom.

....then paid less than that nice Mr Osbourne thought he'd been promised by
his pals.

Que song:

"Its the saaaaame the whole world over..." :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Satellite v Freeview
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:


And since both my antennas are in the loft I may not qualify anyway.
Can't see why. It's always worked before.
AIUI 'MitCo' will provide filters, etc, *provided* you have an
external antenna.
That's outrageous. Lots of people on high ground near phone masts will
have loft aerials because that's all they'll need. Some estates ban
outdoor aerials. Could you point me to the reference?

Afraid not. I recall reading it in one report or document, but can't recall
where.
I can't find anything on the internet. Anyone else find a reference to
this?

Bill

Satellite v Freeview
 

Mark wrote:

I don't really understand why they will be permitted to transmit
significant levels of interference.

Money.

Bill

Satellite v Freeview
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Mark
wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:47:47 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

Is 4G likely to disrupt even Grp A channels?

It is certainly possible in some cases. Simply by over-powering any
distribution amp or RF gain stages. However the gap in frequencies
between 4G and the low end of the UHF TV band make filtering much more
likely to fix such problems without also upsetting TV reception.

I don't really understand why they will be permitted to transmit
significant levels of interference.

Because they waved billions of quid in front of the government / OfCom.

...then paid less than that nice Mr Osbourne thought he'd been promised by
his pals.


I think that you are confusing Ozzie with George.

--
JohnT

Satellite v Freeview
 

Bill wrote:
In message , lid writes

From a consumer's perspective does satellite viewing have any
advantages over Freeview other than a wider selection of stations? Is
it less prone to interference/reception problems?

You have stated the main advantage.

After this it does depend somewhat on the location of the consumer, there are some areas where Freeview reception is not good and satellite would be better.
Satellite is less likely to suffer from local interference, thermostats, trees, other radio transmitters, radio hams, CBers etc. and by the look of news reports 4G too.

My neighbour asked me to cut a tree down, since in summer (when in leaf) he got poor
reception on Sky.

BugBear

Satellite v Freeview
 

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:22:44 +0000, bugbear
wrote:

Bill wrote:
In message , lid writes

From a consumer's perspective does satellite viewing have any
advantages over Freeview other than a wider selection of stations? Is
it less prone to interference/reception problems?

You have stated the main advantage.

After this it does depend somewhat on the location of the consumer, there are some areas where Freeview reception is not good and satellite would be better.
Satellite is less likely to suffer from local interference, thermostats, trees, other radio transmitters, radio hams, CBers etc. and by the look of news reports 4G too.

My neighbour asked me to cut a tree down, since in summer (when in leaf) he got poor
reception on Sky.

BugBear

I hope you refused. Trees are more important than Sky.

Steve

--
EasyNN-plus. Neural Networks plus. http://www.easynn.com
SwingNN. Forecast with Neural Networks. http://www.swingnn.com
JustNN. Just Neural Networks. http://www.justnn.com

Satellite v Freeview
 

In article , JohnT
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Mark
wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:47:47 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:


...then paid less than that nice Mr Osbourne thought he'd been
promised by his pals.


I think that you are confusing Ozzie with George.

That explains a lot. Cameron appointed the wrong one as Chancellor! :-)

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html