| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume the end of TV reception did not come to pass? |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 27/10/2015 19:16, Tweed wrote:
When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume the end of TV reception did not come to pass? No, we are still running round fitting filters and taking other measures. It doesn't make the headlines because each time it happens it's just seen as a little regional problem. I would think the cost borne to date by councils, housing associations, hospitals, etc, must be in the millions. Bill |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 20:26:45 +0000
Bill Wright wrote: On 27/10/2015 19:16, Tweed wrote: When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume the end of TV reception did not come to pass? No, we are still running round fitting filters and taking other measures. It doesn't make the headlines because each time it happens it's just seen as a little regional problem. I would think the cost borne to date by councils, housing associations, hospitals, etc, must be in the millions. Bill So is it a real problem, or are you pre-empting problems that might not really be there? -- Davey. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 27/10/2015 23:03, Davey wrote:
No, we are still running round fitting filters and taking other measures. It doesn't make the headlines because each time it happens it's just seen as a little regional problem. I would think the cost borne to date by councils, housing associations, hospitals, etc, must be in the millions. Bill So is it a real problem, or are you pre-empting problems that might not really be there? We are responding to problems. Councils and landlords do not pre-empt because that implies pre-spend. However when we are on site for other reasons we will add the basic filters just in case a 4G mast is built nearby. Sometimes we have to switch a system from Belmont to an alternative transmitter because reception of channel 60 is impossible near a 4G mast. Sometimes we find that the 4G people have distributed leaflets, so any reception problem of any kind whatsoever in the following months is reported to us as 4G. Bill |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 00:43, Bill Wright wrote:
Sometimes we have to switch a system from Belmont to an alternative transmitter because reception of channel 60 is impossible near a 4G mast. It's worth noting that Crystal Palace's highest allocated DTT Mux is Ch 35. You know where I'm coming from here....... ;-) -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
Well, maybe everyone got a dish instead or is busy watching sstuff on the
internet. I was just channel hoping last night, not much worth watching at all, or lots of repeats. Brian -- From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active Remember, if you don't like where I post or what I say, you don't have to read my posts! :-) "Tweed" wrote in message ... When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume the end of TV reception did not come to pass? |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
"Brian-Gaff" wrote in message
... Well, maybe everyone got a dish instead or is busy watching sstuff on the internet. I was just channel hoping last night, not much worth watching at all, or lots of repeats. I like the idea of channel hoping. It sums the activity up pretty well. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
In article , Tweed
wrote: When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume the end of TV reception did not come to pass? Afraid I can't recall anyone saying that it would be a blanket "end of TV reception". However I certainly had to fit a very good filter to rid our reception of problems when the local 4G base station started up. I doubt I was the only person affected. What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from noticing. 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 |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
In article , Mark Carver
wrote: On 28/10/2015 00:43, Bill Wright wrote: Sometimes we have to switch a system from Belmont to an alternative transmitter because reception of channel 60 is impossible near a 4G mast. It's worth noting that Crystal Palace's highest allocated DTT Mux is Ch 35. You know where I'm coming from here....... ;-) Whereas ours is 60- ... 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 |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:17:05 -0000
"Norman Wells" wrote: "Brian-Gaff" wrote in message ... Well, maybe everyone got a dish instead or is busy watching sstuff on the internet. I was just channel hoping last night, not much worth watching at all, or lots of repeats. I like the idea of channel hoping. It sums the activity up pretty well. That is a good example of Serendipity. Well done Brian! All that needs to happen now is that the phrase makes it into the OED. -- Davey. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:36:20 +0000 (GMT)
Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Tweed wrote: When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume the end of TV reception did not come to pass? Afraid I can't recall anyone saying that it would be a blanket "end of TV reception". However I certainly had to fit a very good filter to rid our reception of problems when the local 4G base station started up. I doubt I was the only person affected. What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from noticing. Jim Maybe Bill could enlighten them. -- Davey. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 00:43:50 +0000
Bill Wright wrote: On 27/10/2015 23:03, Davey wrote: No, we are still running round fitting filters and taking other measures. It doesn't make the headlines because each time it happens it's just seen as a little regional problem. I would think the cost borne to date by councils, housing associations, hospitals, etc, must be in the millions. Bill So is it a real problem, or are you pre-empting problems that might not really be there? We are responding to problems. Councils and landlords do not pre-empt because that implies pre-spend. However when we are on site for other reasons we will add the basic filters just in case a 4G mast is built nearby. Sometimes we have to switch a system from Belmont to an alternative transmitter because reception of channel 60 is impossible near a 4G mast. Sometimes we find that the 4G people have distributed leaflets, so any reception problem of any kind whatsoever in the following months is reported to us as 4G. Bill Ah, so it is happening, then. As an aside, I knew a Bill Wright once when I worked in Canada, he was a Millwright. So are you an Aerialwright? Just wondering. -- Davey. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
The residents of Yorkshire and surrounding counties must fervently
hope that at least he's not an aerialwrong! On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:15:53 +0000, Davey wrote: As an aside, I knew a Bill Wright once when I worked in Canada, he was a Millwright. So are you an Aerialwright? -- ================================================== ====== Please always reply to ng as the email in this post's header does not exist. Or use a contact address at: http://www.macfh.co.uk/JavaJive/JavaJive.html http://www.macfh.co.uk/Macfarlane/Macfarlane.html |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote:
What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from noticing. Yes, my parents recently had a note through their door advising that they might be affected and may have to get a filter. I told them not to worry, if they start to get problems I'll turn up with an analyser to see whether it really is 4G gunk, in any case the nearest mobile phone site in their area is on top of a water tower, 180 degs off beam and a mile away, and their highest DTT mux is UHF 47. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 08:33, Mark Carver wrote:
On 28/10/2015 00:43, Bill Wright wrote: Sometimes we have to switch a system from Belmont to an alternative transmitter because reception of channel 60 is impossible near a 4G mast. It's worth noting that Crystal Palace's highest allocated DTT Mux is Ch 35. You know where I'm coming from here....... ;-) Them in charge was scared of riots in Landan. Bill |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote:
What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from noticing. That's exactly right. And even when problems are pointed out to journos they aren't interested. Bill |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 12:01, Davey wrote:
What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from noticing. Jim Maybe Bill could enlighten them. Ha! Bill |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:01:06 +0000, Davey wrote:
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:36:20 +0000 (GMT) Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Tweed wrote: When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume the end of TV reception did not come to pass? Afraid I can't recall anyone saying that it would be a blanket "end of TV reception". However I certainly had to fit a very good filter to rid our reception of problems when the local 4G base station started up. I doubt I was the only person affected. What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from noticing. Jim Maybe Bill could enlighten them. Bill may have many abilities, but could even he enlighten ignorant journalists? He could tell them, but would they understand? -- Peter Duncanson (in uk.tech.digital-tv) |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
In article , Mark Carver
wrote: On 28/10/2015 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote: What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from noticing. Yes, my parents recently had a note through their door advising that they might be affected and may have to get a filter. I told them not to worry, if they start to get problems I'll turn up with an analyser to see whether it really is 4G gunk, in any case the nearest mobile phone site in their area is on top of a water tower, 180 degs off beam and a mile away, and their highest DTT mux is UHF 47. In our case its within 20 deg of the same direction and only 400 metres away. 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 |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
In article , Bill Wright
wrote: On 28/10/2015 09:36, Jim Lesurf wrote: What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from noticing. That's exactly right. And even when problems are pointed out to journos they aren't interested. In a similar way, I sighed when reporters kept saying that the recent report put ham and red meat into the same 'category' as smoking. The reality was that the original scientific report put it into the category "established to increase the risk of cancer". Which is totally different to assuming "same chance of getting cancer". So may well seriously mislead many people into thinking that eating ham or red meat is "just as dangerous as smoking". Never really sure in case like this if the journalists are simply lazy and ignorant, or want to make what they say 'more dramatic' regardless of the way it then misleads. Coming back to: The whole problem with 4G is that no-one really knew how many serious problems it would cause. So the telcos simply worked on that basis that they could leave journalists in the dark and roll it out area by area to minimise any fuss. As a result, almost impossible even now to tell how many people are affected. Chances are many will simply assume some other reason. 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 |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Mark Carver wrote: On 28/10/2015 00:43, Bill Wright wrote: Sometimes we have to switch a system from Belmont to an alternative transmitter because reception of channel 60 is impossible near a 4G mast. It's worth noting that Crystal Palace's highest allocated DTT Mux is Ch 35. You know where I'm coming from here....... ;-) Whereas ours is 60- ... IIRC clearing the 800MHz band was decided in 2003 when that nice Mr Brown oversaw just about all domestic policies across the UK! And while I know BBC Engineering was good, if they allocated UHF channels to Crystal Palace with a view to London not being bothered by 4G I'd like to know who now has their ouija board/crystal ball/magic mushrooms/... -- Robin reply to address is (meant to be) valid |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 17:25, Robin wrote:
IIRC clearing the 800MHz band was decided in 2003 when that nice Mr Brown oversaw just about all domestic policies across the UK! And while I know BBC Engineering was good, if they allocated UHF channels to Crystal Palace with a view to London not being bothered by 4G I'd like to know who now has their ouija board/crystal ball/magic mushrooms/... Fair point. Though of course who decided it was the top end of the UHF band that had to be sold off, and not the bottom end ;-) -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:51:54 +0000
Peter Duncanson wrote: On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:01:06 +0000, Davey wrote: On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:36:20 +0000 (GMT) Jim Lesurf wrote: In article , Tweed wrote: When the 4G 800 MHz allocations were made a while back, there was much prediction of doom for TV reception in certain areas. I recall there being much debate about how inadequate the filters might be and how it would all never work. Given the silence since, I presume the end of TV reception did not come to pass? Afraid I can't recall anyone saying that it would be a blanket "end of TV reception". However I certainly had to fit a very good filter to rid our reception of problems when the local 4G base station started up. I doubt I was the only person affected. What the telco's have done efficiently is "news managed" any problems by rolling out 4G gradually with minimal publicity telling people when their area might be affected. Thus keeping lazy and ignorant journalists from noticing. Jim Maybe Bill could enlighten them. Bill may have many abilities, but could even he enlighten ignorant journalists? He could tell them, but would they understand? You are correct. But one can hope! -- Davey. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 17:22, Jim Lesurf wrote:
Coming back to: The whole problem with 4G is that no-one really knew how many serious problems it would cause. So the telcos simply worked on that basis that they could leave journalists in the dark and roll it out area by area to minimise any fuss. As a result, almost impossible even now to tell how many people are affected. Chances are many will simply assume some other reason. I heard a local installer boasting that when he went to a 4G problem he used it to sell either a vast new aerial or a Freesat to all rooms job. "Never less that four 'undred quid mate." It was just the same with DSO. Bill |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 17:36, Mark Carver wrote:
On 28/10/2015 17:25, Robin wrote: IIRC clearing the 800MHz band was decided in 2003 when that nice Mr Brown oversaw just about all domestic policies across the UK! And while I know BBC Engineering was good, if they allocated UHF channels to Crystal Palace with a view to London not being bothered by 4G I'd like to know who now has their ouija board/crystal ball/magic mushrooms/... Fair point. Though of course who decided it was the top end of the UHF band that had to be sold off, and not the bottom end ;-) They could have used three or four Gp A channels at Crystal Palace and put the rest further up the band as happened at virtually every other analogue Gp site. That would have allowed other txs to use lower channels. CP has hogged the Group A channels at the expense of other txs. Still, London isn't a part of the UK any more. It's a hellhole full of foreigners. The rest of us are ruled by a foreign power. No wonder we are called The Provinces. But the solution isn't the balkanisation of the UK because that would assist the BBC's master plan for a borderless Europe (as per Marx and other commies). Bill |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 17:36, Mark Carver wrote:
On 28/10/2015 17:25, Robin wrote: IIRC clearing the 800MHz band was decided in 2003 when that nice Mr Brown oversaw just about all domestic policies across the UK! And while I know BBC Engineering was good, if they allocated UHF channels to Crystal Palace with a view to London not being bothered by 4G I'd like to know who now has their ouija board/crystal ball/magic mushrooms/... Fair point. Though of course who decided it was the top end of the UHF band that had to be sold off, and not the bottom end ;-) Perhaps they thought hard-working aerial-rigging families in the Northern Powerhouse would welcome the 4G filter fitting work? |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 18:37, Chris wrote:
On 28/10/2015 17:36, Mark Carver wrote: On 28/10/2015 17:25, Robin wrote: IIRC clearing the 800MHz band was decided in 2003 when that nice Mr Brown oversaw just about all domestic policies across the UK! And while I know BBC Engineering was good, if they allocated UHF channels to Crystal Palace with a view to London not being bothered by 4G I'd like to know who now has their ouija board/crystal ball/magic mushrooms/... Fair point. Though of course who decided it was the top end of the UHF band that had to be sold off, and not the bottom end ;-) Perhaps they thought hard-working aerial-rigging families in the Northern Powerhouse would welcome the 4G filter fitting work? It is not just the north. I am receiving from Mendip, and they broadcast channels in the high 50s. I have had a thing through my door informing me that 4G *might* interfere, but they carefully avoided telling me if or when they might install 4G close enough to risk causing me a problem. I haven't had any problems so far, but I haven't got a 4G capable mobile, so I have no idea whether or not there is a 4G capability nearby. Jim |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
Mark Carver wrote:
Though of course who decided it was the top end of the UHF band that had to be sold off, and not the bottom end ;-) I thought that was something to do with the physics of 800MHz compared with the lower channels but as my physics was developed at the same time as the Lancia Beta and has lasted just as well ... :( -- Robin reply to address is (meant to be) valid |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
Chris wrote:
Perhaps they thought hard-working aerial-rigging families in the Northern Powerhouse would welcome the 4G filter fitting work? Don't forget there's another £600 million set aside for the effects of freeing up further channels by 2020 (little of which will go to London). -- Robin reply to address is (meant to be) valid |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 22:54:17 +0000
Indy Jess John wrote: I haven't had any problems so far, but I haven't got a 4G capable mobile, so I have no idea whether or not there is a 4G capability nearby. Jim As somebody said before, around here we're still waiting for reliable 1G, let alone 4G. -- Davey. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 18:37, Chris wrote:
Perhaps they thought hard-working aerial-rigging families in the Northern Powerhouse would welcome the 4G filter fitting work? In the whole of my 45 years in the trade never once did a government or a large organisation do anything whatsoever to ease the lot of the self-employed sole trader. Quite the opposite in fact. They decide what they're going to do and do it, and ******** to the ordinary trader and his customers. Bill |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On 28/10/2015 23:00, Robin wrote:
Mark Carver wrote: Though of course who decided it was the top end of the UHF band that had to be sold off, and not the bottom end ;-) I thought that was something to do with the physics of 800MHz compared with the lower channels but as my physics was developed at the same time as the Lancia Beta and has lasted just as well ... :( To be honest, it's good riddance to the top end of UHF. We had C4 on Ch 66 here (with BBC1/2/ITV down at 39/42/45) and it was sometimes a PITA to get C4 noise free, without overloading on the other three. Swings and roundabouts though, the bottom end is far more susceptible to impulse noise, and is affected by weather related reception 'lifts' more than the other end. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:41:09 +0000, Davey wrote:
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:17:05 -0000 "Norman Wells" wrote: "Brian-Gaff" wrote in message ... Well, maybe everyone got a dish instead or is busy watching sstuff on the internet. I was just channel hoping last night, not much worth watching at all, or lots of repeats. I like the idea of channel hoping. It sums the activity up pretty well. That is a good example of Serendipity. Well done Brian! All that needs to happen now is that the phrase makes it into the OED. Back in the days of analogue TV, channel *hopping* was an effective (and mercifully brief and productive) way to determine if there was anything worth watching at any particular moment in time before resorting to a published TV listing (TV magazine or evening paper). These days, such an exercise is a rather dreary trudge through 30 or more channels of crap which could easily consume another 10 or 15 minutes of your life that you're never going to get back. Most of us, having tried to recreate that analogue channel hopping experience, soon abandon any repeat attempts and resort to checking out the epg. Scanning the guide being only marginally swifter on most TV sets IME thus far and yet just as tediously depressing. Digital TV broadcasting demands a more planned approach to scheduling your evening's TV viewing (or, in my case, the week's recording schedule). The modern digital broadcasting system effectively precludes the spontaneously casual quick flick through the channels approach to finding a programme that looks interesting enough to hold your attention. I may not be the typical TV viewer but I suspect most, especially those that have invested in a PVR, who, like me, value their time, rarely watch live TV, choosing instead to schedule what their PVR will capture for later viewing at a more convenient time of their own choosing with the added bonus in the case of commercial broadcasts of being able to skip past the adverts and unnecessary continuity crap. The nation's viewing habits have been distorted out of all recognition with how analogue TV used to be viewed with the art of channel hopping being the most notable casualty in this age of digital TV broadcasting. -- Johnny B Good |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
"Johnny B Good" wrote in message ... On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:41:09 +0000, Davey wrote: On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:17:05 -0000 "Norman Wells" wrote: "Brian-Gaff" wrote in message ... Well, maybe everyone got a dish instead or is busy watching sstuff on the internet. I was just channel hoping last night, not much worth watching at all, or lots of repeats. I like the idea of channel hoping. It sums the activity up pretty well. That is a good example of Serendipity. Well done Brian! All that needs to happen now is that the phrase makes it into the OED. Back in the days of analogue TV, channel *hopping* was an effective (and mercifully brief and productive) way to determine if there was anything worth watching at any particular moment in time before resorting to a published TV listing (TV magazine or evening paper). These days, such an exercise is a rather dreary trudge through 30 or more channels of crap which could easily consume another 10 or 15 minutes of your life that you're never going to get back. Most of us, having tried to recreate that analogue channel hopping experience, soon abandon any repeat attempts and resort to checking out the epg. Scanning the guide being only marginally swifter on most TV sets IME thus far and yet just as tediously depressing. Digital TV broadcasting demands a more planned approach to scheduling your evening's TV viewing (or, in my case, the week's recording schedule). The modern digital broadcasting system effectively precludes the spontaneously casual quick flick through the channels approach to finding a programme that looks interesting enough to hold your attention. I may not be the typical TV viewer but I suspect most, especially those that have invested in a PVR, who, like me, value their time, rarely watch live TV, choosing instead to schedule what their PVR will capture for later viewing at a more convenient time of their own choosing with the added bonus in the case of commercial broadcasts of being able to skip past the adverts and unnecessary continuity crap. The nation's viewing habits have been distorted out of all recognition with how analogue TV used to be viewed with the art of channel hopping being the most notable casualty in this age of digital TV broadcasting. ....and how many of us have nearly full PVR drives of progs we have never got around to watching? -- Woody harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
"Johnny B Good" wrote in message
... I may not be the typical TV viewer but I suspect most, especially those that have invested in a PVR, who, like me, value their time, rarely watch live TV, choosing instead to schedule what their PVR will capture for later viewing at a more convenient time of their own choosing with the added bonus in the case of commercial broadcasts of being able to skip past the adverts and unnecessary continuity crap. It's an interesting psychological thing. I use my PVR to record programmes I would have watched had I been able. But they more often than not then sit on the hard disk for a long time, and frequently get deleted without being watched at all. I know this is going to happen, but still dutifully set the PVR. Why? It's even worse if I archive something out to DVD to tidy up the hard disk. That's usually a film I always meant to see but couldn't set aside the couple of hours it needs, which is more often than not. Once archived, though, it never brings itself to my attention because it's no longer on a visible menu. Consequently, it never gets watched at all unless, that is, it comes round again live when, remarkably, I find I do have a couple of hours to watch it in, so I do. Am I alone in all this? Or should we set up a self-help group? |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:52:17 GMT, Johnny B Good
wrote: I may not be the typical TV viewer but I suspect most, especially those that have invested in a PVR, who, like me, value their time, rarely watch live TV, choosing instead to schedule what their PVR will capture for later viewing at a more convenient time of their own choosing with the added bonus in the case of commercial broadcasts of being able to skip past the adverts and unnecessary continuity crap. Same here, and if a programme becomes really boring, it's possible to spin through it at one of several fast-forward speeds to see if anything interesting happens. I've kept my older PVR for the sake of programme clashes, and because it can also record on DVDs, but I rarely use it because it doesn't have HD, and I have several boxes of DVDs I've never watched. Rod. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:47:34 +0000, Roderick Stewart
wrote: On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:52:17 GMT, Johnny B Good wrote: I may not be the typical TV viewer but I suspect most, especially those that have invested in a PVR, who, like me, value their time, rarely watch live TV, choosing instead to schedule what their PVR will capture for later viewing at a more convenient time of their own choosing with the added bonus in the case of commercial broadcasts of being able to skip past the adverts and unnecessary continuity crap. Same here, and if a programme becomes really boring, it's possible to spin through it at one of several fast-forward speeds to see if anything interesting happens. I've kept my older PVR for the sake of programme clashes, and because it can also record on DVDs, but I rarely use it because it doesn't have HD, and I have several boxes of DVDs I've never watched. Think of the time you save... -- Max Demian |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 08:54:05 -0000
"Norman Wells" wrote: "Johnny B Good" wrote in message ... I may not be the typical TV viewer but I suspect most, especially those that have invested in a PVR, who, like me, value their time, rarely watch live TV, choosing instead to schedule what their PVR will capture for later viewing at a more convenient time of their own choosing with the added bonus in the case of commercial broadcasts of being able to skip past the adverts and unnecessary continuity crap. It's an interesting psychological thing. I use my PVR to record programmes I would have watched had I been able. But they more often than not then sit on the hard disk for a long time, and frequently get deleted without being watched at all. I know this is going to happen, but still dutifully set the PVR. Why? It's even worse if I archive something out to DVD to tidy up the hard disk. That's usually a film I always meant to see but couldn't set aside the couple of hours it needs, which is more often than not. Once archived, though, it never brings itself to my attention because it's no longer on a visible menu. Consequently, it never gets watched at all unless, that is, it comes round again live when, remarkably, I find I do have a couple of hours to watch it in, so I do. Am I alone in all this? Or should we set up a self-help group? That's what external HDDs are for, and a simple spreadsheet to keep track of what's still unwatched. You could even print it out! But I usually only archive something I want to keep, rather than something recorded but not watched. Non-technical SWMBO is very good at asking me to record something, which then sits there forever, unwatched and unloved. -- Davey. |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
"Davey" wrote in message
... On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 08:54:05 -0000 "Norman Wells" wrote: "Johnny B Good" wrote in message ... I may not be the typical TV viewer but I suspect most, especially those that have invested in a PVR, who, like me, value their time, rarely watch live TV, choosing instead to schedule what their PVR will capture for later viewing at a more convenient time of their own choosing with the added bonus in the case of commercial broadcasts of being able to skip past the adverts and unnecessary continuity crap. It's an interesting psychological thing. I use my PVR to record programmes I would have watched had I been able. But they more often than not then sit on the hard disk for a long time, and frequently get deleted without being watched at all. I know this is going to happen, but still dutifully set the PVR. Why? It's even worse if I archive something out to DVD to tidy up the hard disk. That's usually a film I always meant to see but couldn't set aside the couple of hours it needs, which is more often than not. Once archived, though, it never brings itself to my attention because it's no longer on a visible menu. Consequently, it never gets watched at all unless, that is, it comes round again live when, remarkably, I find I do have a couple of hours to watch it in, so I do. Am I alone in all this? Or should we set up a self-help group? That's what external HDDs are for, and a simple spreadsheet to keep track of what's still unwatched. You could even print it out! But I usually only archive something I want to keep, rather than something recorded but not watched. Non-technical SWMBO is very good at asking me to record something, which then sits there forever, unwatched and unloved. Which I guess you daren't delete for fear of the wrath of god, right? You see, I'm married too. The only solution then is to archive out all of your stuff that you're never going to watch, isn't it? |
Whatever happened to 4G interference?
On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 12:17:13 -0000
"Norman Wells" wrote: That's what external HDDs are for, and a simple spreadsheet to keep track of what's still unwatched. You could even print it out! But I usually only archive something I want to keep, rather than something recorded but not watched. Non-technical SWMBO is very good at asking me to record something, which then sits there forever, unwatched and unloved. Which I guess you daren't delete for fear of the wrath of god, right? You see, I'm married too. The eternal dilemma. Sod's Law states that, if I delete one of her programmes that was recorded two years ago, the first time she will want to watch it will be the day after it's deleted. * The only solution then is to archive out all of your stuff that you're never going to watch, isn't it? Multi-TB HDDs are cheap nowadays....... * A family friend once (1970s) invested in an electrical shop in the Essex Road in East London. It came with the manager who had been there for years. They decided to clear out old stuff that had layers of dust, which even the manager couldn't remember selling any of. Then, a craze began for building old-style crystal wireless sets, and lots of people came in asking if the shop had any cat's whiskers for sale. "If you had asked a month ago.....". -- Davey. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:14 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com