BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

In article , Roderick
Stewart scribeth thus
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 08:17:14 +0000 (GMT), charles
wrote:


When the uhf services were planned, England was treated as a whole. No
precious frequencies were allocated for regional services, which in the BBC
case amounted to 5 news bulletins and one regional programme about half an
hour long - less than 3 hours a week!

unfortunately, hills which upset tv reception don't nrecessarily repect
man-made regional boundaries, which is why some people in Harrogate have to
watch Bilsdale.

And then we invented the internet, which makes it possible for anybody
to watch or listen to any radio or TV channel from anywhere. Maybe in
about 25 years time people will wonder how we managed for so long with
such an inefficient way of distributing information as to build tall
masts on the tops of hills and blast it into the air.

Rod.

Maybe in 25 years time we will be able to received a decent fast Mobile
Internet service but until then theres fM:)....
--
Tony Sayer

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

On Sat, 14 Dec 2013 10:13:37 +0000, Roderick Stewart
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.

Not at all. Just trying to convince you that, whilst capable of both tasks,
each of the above type of fork is not the most efficient way of achieving
said task. You still seem reluctant to accept this fact.

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.

That is not in question. See above.

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 21:07:49 GMT, 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?

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

Not at all. Just trying to convince you that, whilst capable of both tasks,
each of the above type of fork is not the most efficient way of achieving
said task. You still seem reluctant to accept this fact.

I'm reluctant to accept that they are capable of performing both
tasks, even badly. I think your quip about the forks was in response
to my suggestion that the internet could be used for broadcasting as
well as communications and discussion groups, indeed already is used
for all these things and so is manifestly capable of them, but have
you ever tried to eat your dinner with a garden fork?

Rod.

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
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.

The horizontal definition is actually lower than the 3MHz bandwidth of 405
lines on many digital channels. For example ITV 4 broadcasts at 544 x 576
definition. In widescreen that's equivalent to a 625 lines bandwidth of 3.9
MHz, or a 405 lines bandwidth of 2.5 MHz.

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 08:17:14 +0000 (GMT), charles
wrote:


When the uhf services were planned, England was treated as a whole. No
precious frequencies were allocated for regional services, which in the
BBC
case amounted to 5 news bulletins and one regional programme about half an
hour long - less than 3 hours a week!

unfortunately, hills which upset tv reception don't nrecessarily repect
man-made regional boundaries, which is why some people in Harrogate have
to
watch Bilsdale.

And then we invented the internet, which makes it possible for anybody
to watch or listen to any radio or TV channel from anywhere.

Except it doesn't because they block everything. Try watching WCBS - TV New
York on the internet and see how far you get !

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 08:46:26 -0000, "Stephen"
wrote:


And then we invented the internet, which makes it possible for anybody
to watch or listen to any radio or TV channel from anywhere.

Except it doesn't because they block everything. Try watching WCBS - TV New
York on the internet and see how far you get !

I only said it was possible, which it is, wherever there is the will
to do it. Even conventional radio broadcasts can be jammed.

Rod.

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

On 09/12/2013 10:18, Mark Carver wrote:

Posted this morning

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/CBBC-HD-CBeebies-HD-BBC-Three-HD-BBC-Four-HD-and-BBC-News-HD-to-launch-on-Tuesday-10-December-2013


After retuning our Technika and Humax STB's I found that living in East
Sussex, The Heathfield mast is not one of the extended Freeview HD (COM7
and COM8) transmitters, it does not provide the high definition )
channels: Al Jazeera HD, BBC Four HD, BBC News HD, CBeebies HD.

http://www.ukfree.tv/txdetail.php?a=TQ566220
Derek.

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

On 09/12/2013 10:18, Mark Carver wrote:

Posted this morning

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/posts/CBBC-HD-CBeebies-HD-BBC-Three-HD-BBC-Four-HD-and-BBC-News-HD-to-launch-on-Tuesday-10-December-2013


After retuning our Technika and Humax STB's I found that living in East
Sussex, The Heathfield mast is not one of the extended Freeview HD (COM7
and COM8) transmitters, it does not provide these high definition (HD)
channels: Al Jazeera HD, BBC Four HD, BBC News HD, CBeebies HD.
The teccnika box found the avail able
http://www.ukfree.tv/txdetail.php?a=TQ566220

Derek.

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

"Martin" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 08:46:26 -0000, "Stephen"
wrote:

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 08:17:14 +0000 (GMT), charles
wrote:


When the uhf services were planned, England was treated as a whole. No
precious frequencies were allocated for regional services, which in the
BBC
case amounted to 5 news bulletins and one regional programme about half
an
hour long - less than 3 hours a week!

unfortunately, hills which upset tv reception don't nrecessarily repect
man-made regional boundaries, which is why some people in Harrogate have
to
watch Bilsdale.

And then we invented the internet, which makes it possible for anybody
to watch or listen to any radio or TV channel from anywhere.

Except it doesn't because they block everything. Try watching WCBS - TV
New
York on the internet and see how far you get !

Even when you use a proxy server?

Try using http://schoener-fernsehen.com/live/stream/de/SIXX/
--

Martin in Zuid Holland


That took me somewhere else altogether - that I did not want to see.

BBC Confirmation of new HD services
 

"Martin" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 17:24:46 -0000, "Geoff Pearson"

wrote:


"Martin" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 08:46:26 -0000, "Stephen"
wrote:

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
m...
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 08:17:14 +0000 (GMT), charles
wrote:


When the uhf services were planned, England was treated as a whole. No
precious frequencies were allocated for regional services, which in
the
BBC
case amounted to 5 news bulletins and one regional programme about
half
an
hour long - less than 3 hours a week!

unfortunately, hills which upset tv reception don't nrecessarily
repect
man-made regional boundaries, which is why some people in Harrogate
have
to
watch Bilsdale.

And then we invented the internet, which makes it possible for anybody
to watch or listen to any radio or TV channel from anywhere.

Except it doesn't because they block everything. Try watching WCBS - TV
New
York on the internet and see how far you get !

Even when you use a proxy server?

Try using http://schoener-fernsehen.com/live/stream/de/SIXX/

That took me somewhere else altogether - that I did not want to see.

It takes me to a website showing WCBS amongst other TV channels.
It shows most of the main TV channels in Europe and the USA and is
absolutely
innocuous unless Deal or No Deal is showing.
--

Martin in Zuid Holland


I was taken to a nasty games torrent style page, after some delay.