BBC Freesat

"Mel" wrote in message
...

"John Russell" wrote in message
...

"the dog from that film you saw"
wrote in message ...

"John Russell" wrote in message
...
.

Some would argue Freesat already exists. You can buy FTV Sat box's
from the likes of Humax etc. I don't see any intention to make a BBC
Freesat box, only to define what the BBC "Freesat" service will be,
and hence what a Freesat logoed box would have to support, including
support for future HD services.

P.S. There is already concern that the sell off of Terrestrial
frequencies will leave no space for HD. Is this the BBC's answer?
After all Freesat and SKY users would benefit, and it would force those
wanting HD (without cable) to shift to using the Sat services, thus
making the hiring of HD transponders better value. Those with Freeview
box's wanting HD would have to get a new box anyway, so why not a
Freesat box?




at the end of the day, is there really much difference between an
external tv aerial and a satellite dish for practical purposes? - other
than most houses having an aerial on the roof as standard.

There are those who defend DVB-T with an almost Luddite fervour against
Sat. Many of those have joined the "HD on Freeview" campaign.


Snip" I have SKY HD and will support any iniative to make HD more widely
available. "

Is HD really worth the expense at the moment, or is it better to wait a
little longer????????

It depends upon if you have subscription TV, and watch a lot of Prem Soccer,
Films or new US series on SKY One.
If you do, then those who get SKY HD do consider the extra quality worth the
£10.
If you don't then you won't get much benefit as you will spend most of the
time watching SD.

Because of the huge back catalogue of SD 4:3 programs most channels will
never be HD. Most people considering HD want to see BBC,ITV, CH4 and CH 5 go
HD first. Freesat is a BBC initiative and doesn't imply the other main
channels will offer HD services when the BBC do.

"Beck" [email protected] wrote in message
...

"Mark Carver" wrote in message
...
Beck wrote:

. I would end up with 2 dishes on the side of the house (to
retain other sky services), but thats no bother.

Why?
I have 1 dish and 3 boxes on it, and could add a 4th.

Because maybe the BBC freesat will have its own dish.

It will, but the transmissions will almost certainly still be on Astra
28E, so any dish pointed that way, with a dual or quad LNB, could service
both a Sky box, and the BBC Freesat receiver.

I think my quad LNB is full at the moment. :-)
So you don't think your current kit will pick up Freesat? Freesat will just
be like Freeview. The BBC will specify a min spec for a Freesat system. SKY
STB's will still recieve the broadcasts and the BBC will continue to upload
the EPG. I also doubt that the BBC will ignore the current HD standard used
for the Sat trial. That's obvious considering the vast majority of those
watching the BBC via Sat will still be Licence Paying SKY users.

Ohh you mean, they could actually pay Sky to deliver something with a
[b][b][C] logo on it like they did with [b][b][C] /HD/. Quelle suprise.

SKY users are Licence Payers as well. I can't see the BBC making their
Freesat services "Freesat Only", cutting SKY users off. Neither can I see
them having duplicates of every channel. This is will end up a "branding
exercise" for a new generation of independent Sat box's, nothing more. They
may decide to use different software, but that doesn't mean they would stop
updating the SKY EPG for SKY users, who would constitute the vast majority
of those watching the BBC's Sat broadcasts.

"John Russell" wrote in message
...

So you don't think your current kit will pick up Freesat? Freesat will
just be like Freeview. The BBC will specify a min spec for a Freesat
system. SKY STB's will still recieve the broadcasts and the BBC will
continue to upload the EPG. I also doubt that the BBC will ignore the
current HD standard used for the Sat trial. That's obvious considering the
vast majority of those watching the BBC via Sat will still be Licence
Paying SKY users.

I already have freesat from sky, if it works on that then fine. I did not
know before that systems would be interchangeable.

"Beck" [email protected] wrote in message
...

"John Russell" wrote in message
...

So you don't think your current kit will pick up Freesat? Freesat will
just be like Freeview. The BBC will specify a min spec for a Freesat
system. SKY STB's will still recieve the broadcasts and the BBC will
continue to upload the EPG. I also doubt that the BBC will ignore the
current HD standard used for the Sat trial. That's obvious considering
the vast majority of those watching the BBC via Sat will still be Licence
Paying SKY users.

I already have freesat from sky, if it works on that then fine. I did not
know before that systems would be interchangeable.

Neither does anyone, but it's reasonable to assume that the BBC cannot
afford to develop their own box or want to duplicate channels. It's a
"branding exercise" to make FTV Sat easier to understand and more readily
available.

Adrian A wrote:

Beck wrote:
"David" wrote in message
...

"Beck" [email protected] wrote in message
...

. I would end up with 2 dishes on the side of the house (to
retain other sky services), but thats no bother.

Why?
I have 1 dish and 3 boxes on it, and could add a 4th.

Because maybe the BBC freesat will have its own dish.

Don't be stupid.

It's not stupidity, merely ignorance which could have been fixed with a
simple explanation instead of a gratuitous ad-hominem.

BBC Freesat will use existing installed technology, otherwise who'll buy
it?

What I want to see is all the BBC's programmes on UK Gold, Drama, etc
currently on Sky to be transferred to Freesat - after all, the licence
payer has already paid for the programmes.

--

Immunity is better than innoculation.

Peter

On 28 Feb, 10:40, "Beck" [email protected] wrote:
I already have freesat from sky, if it works on that then fine. I did not
know before that systems would be interchangeable.

Yes; they're most unlikely to do anything else. If you take a bog
standard satellite box - ie, not a Sky one - you can still see many of
the channels that appear on 'Freesat from Sky' because they're not
even encrypted. For example, Movies4 Men, Men and Motors, Zone
Thriller, Bloomberg, CNN, Euronews, all the BBC regions, ITV regions.
These channels should be available on your Sky box even without a
viewing card, too.

What they lack on a non-Sky box - and one of the things the BBC will
bring to the party - is an EPG. They just show now/next. Sky charges
channels to be on their EPG - in a recent decision, Rapture TV lost a
complaint about their charge of just over 75,000 per year to appear in
the listing.

It will be very interesting to see if the BBC do charge for EPG
services; and if they don't - or if it's a substantially smaller sum -
at what stage some of the smaller channels feel that they will be
better off opting out of Sky's EPG and hoping just to pick up viewer
from the BBC Freesat system.

All the systems will be using the same core - DVB-S or perhaps DVB-S2;
the BBC already have streams on the satellites used for Sky's
platform, so many people will have dishes pointing there, and there
are lots of other english language channels. So it would be wasteful
to use a different satellite. Keeping as much in common as possible
gives the best chance of persuading channels to appear on the Freesat
platform as well as (or instead of) Sky's.

The key to both Sky and Freesat is the programme guide; the stream for
any channel is just a standard digital TV broadcast. All that's
different is the EPG/channel lineup, which effectively points the box
at the right stream when you select a channel. You can have two (or
more) EPGs pointing at the same stream - some boxes will use one,
others a different one.

Sky's EPG is closed, which is what enables them to charge for it; and
people only do that because it's the best way of getting your channel
in front of viewers. It also allows them to provide consistent channel
numbering, which is an advantage for advertisers and easier for many
consumers.

It will be interesting to see if the BBC want to use LCNs (fixed
channel numbers) on satellite, or allow people to store the channels
on any number.

Nigel

"Nigel Whitfield" wrote in message
s.com...
On 28 Feb, 10:40, "Beck" [email protected] wrote:
I already have freesat from sky, if it works on that then fine. I did
not
know before that systems would be interchangeable.

Yes; they're most unlikely to do anything else. If you take a bog
standard satellite box - ie, not a Sky one - you can still see many of
the channels that appear on 'Freesat from Sky' because they're not
even encrypted. For example, Movies4 Men, Men and Motors, Zone
Thriller, Bloomberg, CNN, Euronews, all the BBC regions, ITV regions.
These channels should be available on your Sky box even without a
viewing card, too.

What they lack on a non-Sky box - and one of the things the BBC will
bring to the party - is an EPG. They just show now/next. Sky charges
channels to be on their EPG - in a recent decision, Rapture TV lost a
complaint about their charge of just over 75,000 per year to appear in
the listing.

It will be very interesting to see if the BBC do charge for EPG
services; and if they don't - or if it's a substantially smaller sum -
at what stage some of the smaller channels feel that they will be
better off opting out of Sky's EPG and hoping just to pick up viewer
from the BBC Freesat system.

All the systems will be using the same core - DVB-S or perhaps DVB-S2;
the BBC already have streams on the satellites used for Sky's
platform, so many people will have dishes pointing there, and there
are lots of other english language channels. So it would be wasteful
to use a different satellite. Keeping as much in common as possible
gives the best chance of persuading channels to appear on the Freesat
platform as well as (or instead of) Sky's.

The key to both Sky and Freesat is the programme guide; the stream for
any channel is just a standard digital TV broadcast. All that's
different is the EPG/channel lineup, which effectively points the box
at the right stream when you select a channel. You can have two (or
more) EPGs pointing at the same stream - some boxes will use one,
others a different one.

Sky's EPG is closed, which is what enables them to charge for it; and
people only do that because it's the best way of getting your channel
in front of viewers. It also allows them to provide consistent channel
numbering, which is an advantage for advertisers and easier for many
consumers.

It will be interesting to see if the BBC want to use LCNs (fixed
channel numbers) on satellite, or allow people to store the channels
on any number.

Interesting post thanks, I learned a few things there.
I wonder what BBC plan to do to entice current satellite users to the
service - including current freesatfromsky customers. For me the clincher
would be an HD box but not everyone has or wants HD.

On Feb 28, 10:38 am, "John Russell"
wrote:

SKY users are Licence Payers as well. I can't see the BBC making their
Freesat services "Freesat Only", cutting SKY users off. Neither can I see
them having duplicates of every channel. This is will end up a "branding
exercise" for a new generation of independent Sat box's, nothing more. They
may decide to use different software, but that doesn't mean they would stop
updating the SKY EPG for SKY users, who would constitute the vast majority
of those watching the BBC's Sat broadcasts.

The challenge AIUI is for two EPG/SI streams to co-exist on a
transponder, where one of those EPG/SI streams is BSkyB's propriety
one. I strongly suspect that the continued delay in a BBC/ITV Freesat
service centres around this issue ?

On 28 Feb, 11:51, "Beck" [email protected] wrote:

Interesting post thanks, I learned a few things there.
I wonder what BBC plan to do to entice current satellite users to the
service - including current freesatfromsky customers. For me the clincher
would be an HD box but not everyone has or wants HD.

Well, there are a number of potential reasons for choosing Freesat:

1) "Free forever," whereas the Sky system is only a committment to
remain free for a few years, for your £20 card. Most people will think
it's ok to pay just a small amount like that; others - especially
after the present spat between Sky and Virgin - may be a little
sceptical about how long their 20 quid card will last, and prefer
something that involves no viewing card.

2) No marketing followup; never having had it, I've not been subjected
to their temptations, but I bet Freesat from Sky is a good way of them
getting sales leads for the subscription service. Again, that's most
unlikely with the BBC.

3) Wider range of equipment; there's a huge amount of kit available,
from very cheap receivers, PCI cards, to PVRs. Much of that will
happily work with multiple dish or LNB setups, whereas Sky boxes are
fiddly if you want, for example, to pick up some foreign services too.
Those people who want free TV from a number of countries might
actually find that, thanks to Freesat, they can make do with one
receiver instead of two.

4) PVRs without a monthly fee; although satellite PVRs are pretty
pricey at the moment, there are lots available, and you don't have to
pay 10 quid a month just to be able to use them.

5) HD without a monthly fee; I'm watching a bit of satellite - mostly
France 24, Al Jazeera and BBC HD - with a standard box. To get BBC HD
via Sky, I'd have to pay 299 for the box, 60 quid installation, and a
minimum of 25 a month for two mixes and HD. Ok, I'd have a recorder
too, but I have a PVR for Freeview, and most stuff on BBC HD is
repeated. By contrast, I can get standard HD satellite box for just
over 200 quid (some cost less), and a dish, and I installed it myself
(workshop in the next issue of Active Home, if you're curious).

That's still a bit pricey, but it will come down; sure, there's only
BBC HD free at the moment, but I think others will follow eventually.
Yes, there's more stuff on Sky, and a PVR is included - but at the
entry level I'd be paying 25 a month for not that much more HD
content, with a first year cost of 659 and 300 a year after that,
compared to a one off cost of under 300 for my free setup.

If Channel 4 or ITV provide freely available HD services, then I think
it will become even more compelling for a lot of people.

Nigel.