BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 18:59:04 +0000, Bill Wright wrote:

Paul Ratcliffe wrote:

I've got one fork for digging the garden and another for eating my dinner.
Would you advocate I throw one away and use the other for both tasks?

How big's tha gob?

Not as big as tha's (I hope that's acceptable use of Yorkshire - I only
lived there for 3 years, so I'm obviously not as skilled as you).

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
charles wrote:

there have been other, less publicised, moves with similar results


Please tell.

Many main stations with either new masts or new aerials or new masts caused
serious localised problems.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 18:59:04 +0000, Bill Wright wrote:

Paul Ratcliffe wrote:

I've got one fork for digging the garden and another for eating my dinner.
Would you advocate I throw one away and use the other for both tasks?
How big's tha gob?

Not as big as tha's (I hope that's acceptable use of Yorkshire - I only
lived there for 3 years, so I'm obviously not as skilled as you).

Nay lad, tha shoulda said 'Norras big as thine'. It would be optional to
add, 'Tha fat pillock.'

Bill

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

Bill Wright wrote:
Mark Carver wrote:
On 13/12/2013 15:33, Bill Wright wrote:
Mark Carver wrote:

That's a good idea, and then I suppose you could carry every regional
version of a channel, and choose to watch whatever version you like,
regardless of location.


No, there isn't the bandwidth. Each TV channel needs 8MHz remember.

Oh that's easy, just throw away most of the detail in the signal,
plenty of room.

Would this not be a good time to re-introduce System A?

Some might say (unkindly IMHO) that we've just about restored definition to
that level with HD.



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

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

Mark Carver wrote:

Would this not be a good time to re-introduce System A?

Some might say (unkindly IMHO) that we've just about restored definition
to that level with HD.

I'd rather watch a decent 405 line mono picture than some of the lousy
pictures we get nowadays. I don't remember being actually pained by 405
line pictures.

Bill

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

charles wrote:
In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
charles wrote:

there have been other, less publicised, moves with similar results


Please tell.

Many main stations with either new masts or new aerials or new masts caused
serious localised problems.

Wasn't there a problem at Dover after an aerial refurb or replacement ?



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

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

In message , Bill Wright
writes
Mark Carver wrote:

Would this not be a good time to re-introduce System A?
Some might say (unkindly IMHO) that we've just about restored
definition to that level with HD.

I'd rather watch a decent 405 line mono picture than some of the lousy
pictures we get nowadays. I don't remember being actually pained by 405
line pictures.

Because of the differences in the horizontal scan speed (15625 scans per
second vs 10125), the horizontal definition of 5(.5)MHz bandwidth
625-lines is not much better than that of the 3MHz bandwidth 405-lines.
--
Ian

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

On 13/12/2013 21:45, Bill Wright wrote:
Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 18:59:04 +0000, Bill Wright wrote:

Paul Ratcliffe wrote:

I've got one fork for digging the garden and another for eating my dinner.
Would you advocate I throw one away and use the other for both tasks?
How big's tha gob?

Not as big as tha's (I hope that's acceptable use of Yorkshire - I only
lived there for 3 years, so I'm obviously not as skilled as you).

Nay lad, tha shoulda said 'Norras big as thine'. It would be optional to
add, 'Tha fat pillock.'

Oi, will da pair o' wazzocks gi'oer!
--
Phil Cook

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:59:29 GMT, Paul Ratcliffe
wrote:


except that "broadcasting" is an efficent ay of getting programmes to the
customers. If everybody had their own dedicated "line" to some master
computer that would be very inefficient.

That's the way it's going though. While it might be inefficient to
plan a broadcasting system on the basis of individual connections, if
such a system or its equivalent is already there, even if it was put
in place for other purposes, then if it also happens to be capable of
handling broadcasting services it makes perfect sense to use it. From
the customers' point of view it makes no sense to have two different
sets of equipment, one for communications and one for entertainment,
if one can do the lot.

I've got one fork for digging the garden and another for eating my dinner.
Would you advocate I throw one away and use the other for both tasks?

If it were capable of performing both tasks, why not? I have a tiny
suspicion, however, that you're just being silly.

Broadcast transmission systems and computer networks systems actually
have some common capabilities in real life, rather than simply the
common feature of being named with the same word.

Rod.

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 21:53:47 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

I'd rather watch a decent 405 line mono picture than some of the lousy
pictures we get nowadays. I don't remember being actually pained by 405
line pictures.

I remember being pained by the noise the line scanning components
made, but I expect we could do that a bit better with modern
electronics, and I'm older now, so probably wouldn't hear it anyway.

Rod.