Plans for Sky's unused spectrum at 28.2 East?

On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 09:21:30 +0000, Jerry wrote:

No you were lying yet again, you are a psychopathical liar from I can see,
you will lie in the same sentence as telling fact, you probably don't even
realise that you do so now...

Well, that might be putting it too strongly, but I too was beginning to
suspect that JF has some mental "issues". Though it might simply be
age-related cognitive problems - he did say that he's pushing 70.

Mike Smith wrote:
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 09:21:30 +0000, Jerry wrote:

No you were lying yet again, you are a psychopathical liar from I can see,
you will lie in the same sentence as telling fact, you probably don't even
realise that you do so now...

Well, that might be putting it too strongly, but I too was beginning to
suspect that JF has some mental "issues". Though it might simply be
age-related cognitive problems - he did say that he's pushing 70.

He's simply a Usenet 'stirrer'. An articulate troll if you like.
No better (for uk.tech.digital readers) than [half_pint] and all his/her
aliases.

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

In article ews.net, MJ Ray wrote:
Zak wrote:
Jerry wrote:
No they can't (easily), not unless the EPG and delivery etc. is
removed from BSkyB's control, even the BBC has to pay to have their
FTA channels listed on the EPG.

I think they can. They have to pay for their inclusion of the EPG but
could as well add another EPG to the bit stream.

Huh? I thought Sky's EPG encoding used the DVB-SI stream in a manner
incompatible with Event Information Tables (the standard EPG) - that is,
Sky-coding prevents adding another EPG to the bitstream. BBC told me that
they can't add the standard EPG to satellite. Is that incorrect?

EIT data is already carried (it currently provides the current/following
data which identifies actual programme info during overruns), this is
table 0x4E on PID 0x0012.
You can see this data in action if you switch say from ITV to BBC just
after the hour when the prev programme is overrunning - the Now & Next
banner will first show the cached EPG data (the later programme) and then
update to show the EIT data (which can only be found on the transponder
carrying the programme.)
It also provides the synopsis when you press Info whilst viewing a
programme.

So there surely cannot be any problem with data format to add tables
0x4F (current/following for other transponders) 0x50-0x5F (later
events, this transponder) and 0x60-0x6F (later events, other
transponders) which are identical in format.

Two areas where there might be an issue:

a) Bandwidth. Carrying the full EPG is quite a lot of data. The complete
SkyEPG (all days forward including synopsis) is currently only carried
on the "default" transponder. Only the current and next 6-hour
chunks are carried on other transponders (and without synopsis data).
Since many (all?) Sky boxes don't cache the full EPG, it needs to
be broadcast at high rate to provide data interactively.

It is not necessary however to transmit this data at a high rate
if boxes cache it fully. Allowing it to accumulate over an hour or
more would probably be fine. Probably only boxes with a disk would
be able to cache the full EIT data.

b) The logistics of assembling the data for all broadcasters. At present
someone (Sky?) assemble the full SkyEPG from the many broadcasters'
input and feed it (two 6 hour chunks) to all transponders. I guess
the BBC receive this feed and just include it on their transponders,
rather than build it themselves. So they probably do not have easy
access to the raw data for non-BBC channels. Of course this
wouldn't stop them including EIT data for just their own programming.

Mike.

Fudge-packing prick

On 2006-11-30, Sandman wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:07:08 +0000, Bill Wright wrote:


"JohnT" wrote in message
...

"JF" wrote in message
...

Sorry -- can't stop. The muddled thinking that pervades this newsgroup
like November mist on a Sussex down dictates that commercial reality is
too hideous a spectre to accept, and that that messengers shall be shot
at.

May we please have those pearls of wisdom translated into English?

He means you're all talking ****e.

Bill, you might like him for his reactionary politics, but you're doing
yourself no favours by siding with somebody so lacking in integrity.

So anyone who is lacking in integrity must be disagreed with, regardless
of whether they're actually right or wrong?

--
David Taylor

On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 10:37:17 +0000, TroJon wrote:

Fudge-packing prick

I fear you are a trifle homophobic.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Please don't perpetrate the notion that Sky 'own' 28.2E or any satellites,
they don't.
No wonder Joe Public imagine that in the UK [Satellite TV]=[Sky].

But conversely the BBC take the "don't_mention_SKY" thing too far
the other way.
I mean when they say their services are available on "Digital Satellite"
they somehow expect us to know that they don't mean Hotbird or
Astra 19.2e etc.

--
Graham.
%Profound_observation%

"Graham" wrote in message
...

snip

But conversely the BBC take the "don't_mention_SKY" thing too far
the other way.
I mean when they say their services are available on "Digital
Satellite"
they somehow expect us to know that they don't mean Hotbird or
Astra 19.2e etc.


Anyone who doesn't know that would be in need of someone who does, or
are you seriously suggesting that someone would buy a dish and
receiver without knowing (or finding out) what they need?

"Jerry" wrote:
"Graham" wrote:
But conversely the BBC take the "don't_mention_SKY" thing too far
the other way.
I mean when they say their services are available on "Digital
Satellite"
they somehow expect us to know that they don't mean Hotbird or
Astra 19.2e etc.

Anyone who doesn't know that would be in need of someone who does, or
are you seriously suggesting that someone would buy a dish and
receiver without knowing (or finding out) what they need?

Now that high-street electronics shops are selling dish-receiver sets
for 80 quid (much less than the 150 quid the BBC falsely claim), it
seems fairly likely that someone might do that.
http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?...8737&doy=19m12
http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?...9085&doy=19m12

--
MJR/slef
Free Sat FAQ: http://mjr.towers.org.uk/blog/2006/astefaq

On 19 Dec 2006 21:03:30 GMT, MJ Ray wrote:

"Jerry" wrote:
"Graham" wrote:
But conversely the BBC take the "don't_mention_SKY" thing too far
the other way.
I mean when they say their services are available on "Digital
Satellite"
they somehow expect us to know that they don't mean Hotbird or
Astra 19.2e etc.

Anyone who doesn't know that would be in need of someone who does, or
are you seriously suggesting that someone would buy a dish and
receiver without knowing (or finding out) what they need?

Now that high-street electronics shops are selling dish-receiver sets
for 80 quid (much less than the 150 quid the BBC falsely claim), it
seems fairly likely that someone might do that.
http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?...8737&doy=19m12
http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?...9085&doy=19m12

If they mentioned those they would probably be accused of
anti-competitive practices by Uncle Rupert.