examples of digital rip-off

In article , Gary says...

My neighbour conned himself.

He had a good signal on his "analogue" aerial

Irrelevent if it's a narrow band that doesn't cover the frequencies of
the analogue MUX's. I had a cracking analogue reception but the MUX's
were above the frequency range of the antenna.



--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

In article , Tim Downie says...

Except that if it's pointed in the same direction doesn't "poorer analogue
reception = poorer digital reception"?

No.




--
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams

Bruce wrote:
"Gary" wrote:

My neighbour conned himself.

He had a good signal on his "analogue" aerial

He bought a new digital TV.

In his mind he needed a digital aerial.

Bought himself a new aerial. Paid 35 pounds from focus for a gold
coloured aerial. He Took down the perfectly good aerial he already
had.

Then could not get new aerial up because he was short and his son
was scared of heights.

Called in a aerial rigger to put up new aerial who did it for 40
pounds.

Now he has a usable digital signal but analogue is poor ( Crystal
Palace)

He is happy.



Why shouldn't he be happy? For a mere £70 he has an aerial that will
meet his digital TV needs for the foreseeable future.

If he has good digital reception, why on earth does he need analogue?

You missed off the smiley, or are you really that stupid?
--
There's probably no god, so stop worrying and enjoy your life.

Bob Mannix wrote:
"Tim Downie" wrote in message
...
Bruce wrote:
"Gary" wrote:

My neighbour conned himself.

He had a good signal on his "analogue" aerial

He bought a new digital TV.

In his mind he needed a digital aerial.

Bought himself a new aerial. Paid 35 pounds from focus for a gold
coloured aerial. He Took down the perfectly good aerial he already
had.

Then could not get new aerial up because he was short and his son
was scared of heights.

Called in a aerial rigger to put up new aerial who did it for 40
pounds.

Now he has a usable digital signal but analogue is poor ( Crystal
Palace)

He is happy.



Why shouldn't he be happy? For a mere £70 he has an aerial that
will meet his digital TV needs for the foreseeable future.

If he has good digital reception, why on earth does he need
analogue?

Except that if it's pointed in the same direction doesn't "poorer
analogue reception = poorer digital reception"?

Not if the analogue and digital channels are in different groups (as
where I live) where a wideband aerial is indicated (if you want both
from the same aerial, that is). Interestingly he didn't say "good"
digital, he said usable. One might think that, for digital (but not
analogue) good=usable but only he can say.


Tim

He said he was getting his signal from Crystal Palace, analogue and digital
are group A.
--
There's probably no god, so stop worrying and enjoy your life.

On Feb 19, 12:53*pm, Bruce wrote:
"Tim Downie" wrote:
Bruce wrote:

Why shouldn't he be happy? *For a mere £70 he has an aerial that will
meet his digital TV needs for the foreseeable future.

If he has good digital reception, why on earth does he need analogue?

Except that if it's pointed in the same direction doesn't "poorer analogue
reception = poorer digital reception"?

My old aerial gave atrocious reception on analogue but usable reception
on most, but not all Freeview channels. *My new aerial gives good
digital reception but analogue is still atrocious - not really any
better than before. *

It points in exactly the same direction, towards the transmitter. *Why
wouldn't it? *

Also, with the far better picture quality from Freeview compared to even
the best analogue signal,

That's total ********, and it will only get worse once they have us
all over the digital barrel and start pumping even more channels down
the same mulitiplexes.

MBQ

"Terry Casey" wrote in message
...
Bruce wrote:
"Gary" wrote:
Doesn't the fact that his GOOD analogue reception has now been replaced by
POOR reception suggest to you in any way that the new installation might
not have been carried out very well?

These DIY shed aerials are all wideband, and many are crap.

Bill

In message , Conor
writes
In article , Gary says...

My neighbour conned himself.

He had a good signal on his "analogue" aerial

Irrelevent if it's a narrow band that doesn't cover the frequencies of
the analogue MUX's. I had a cracking analogue reception but the MUX's
were above the frequency range of the antenna.

Maybe it's the cross-posting, but some contributors simply don't seem to
be seeing that, for Crystal Palace, ALL the digital MUXes ARE within the
Group A bandwidth. They are between Chs 22 and 34 inclusive.
--
Ian

In article , Bruce
scribeth thus
"Tim Downie" wrote:
Bruce wrote:

Why shouldn't he be happy? For a mere £70 he has an aerial that will
meet his digital TV needs for the foreseeable future.

If he has good digital reception, why on earth does he need analogue?

Except that if it's pointed in the same direction doesn't "poorer analogue
reception = poorer digital reception"?


My old aerial gave atrocious reception on analogue but usable reception
on most, but not all Freeview channels. My new aerial gives good
digital reception but analogue is still atrocious - not really any
better than before.

It points in exactly the same direction, towards the transmitter. Why
wouldn't it?

Also, with the far better picture quality from Freeview compared to even
the best analogue signal, why on earth would anyone want to watch
analogue? Once you have good Freeview reception, why go back?


As it isn't as good as good analogue;!...

Now digital satellite does look good...
--
Tony Sayer

..

In message , tony sayer
writes
In article , Bruce
scribeth thus
"Tim Downie" wrote:
Bruce wrote:

Why shouldn't he be happy? For a mere £70 he has an aerial that will
meet his digital TV needs for the foreseeable future.

If he has good digital reception, why on earth does he need analogue?

Except that if it's pointed in the same direction doesn't "poorer analogue
reception = poorer digital reception"?


My old aerial gave atrocious reception on analogue but usable reception
on most, but not all Freeview channels. My new aerial gives good
digital reception but analogue is still atrocious - not really any
better than before.

It points in exactly the same direction, towards the transmitter. Why
wouldn't it?

Also, with the far better picture quality from Freeview compared to even
the best analogue signal, why on earth would anyone want to watch
analogue? Once you have good Freeview reception, why go back?


As it isn't as good as good analogue;!...

Now digital satellite does look good...

But is there any good analogue any more? Surely what we get these days
is digital converted to analogue?

And, even if you do get a 'good' analogue signal, there's a good chance
that it will be co-channel with a not-too-distant digital MUX. Even
under 'flat' propagation conditions, the SNR can be visibly impaired,
and if there's a 'lift' on, the analogue signal can be virtually
unwatchable.
--
Ian

On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:18:30 +0000, tony sayer wrote:

In article , Bruce
scribeth thus
"Tim Downie" wrote:
Bruce wrote:

Why shouldn't he be happy? For a mere £70 he has an aerial that will
meet his digital TV needs for the foreseeable future.

If he has good digital reception, why on earth does he need analogue?

Except that if it's pointed in the same direction doesn't "poorer analogue
reception = poorer digital reception"?


My old aerial gave atrocious reception on analogue but usable reception
on most, but not all Freeview channels. My new aerial gives good
digital reception but analogue is still atrocious - not really any
better than before.

It points in exactly the same direction, towards the transmitter. Why
wouldn't it?

Also, with the far better picture quality from Freeview compared to even
the best analogue signal, why on earth would anyone want to watch
analogue? Once you have good Freeview reception, why go back?


As it isn't as good as good analogue;!...

Now digital satellite does look good...

Until there's heavy snow or rain.
--
Peter.
You don't understand Newton's Third Law of Motion?
It's not rocket science, you know.