Freeview losing two BBC streams

On 24 Oct, 10:30, Mark Carver wrote:
Kennedy McEwen wrote:
In article
,
" writes

And it's a fair point - in most other countries with digital TV
services, pressing Text on the TV remote still brings up teletext. The
UK is in the minority in that it's dumped "analogue" (VBI) teletext on
the digital service.

That's rather clever of Johnny Foreigner!

How exactly does he manage to keep a VBI text service on a TV switched
the composite, component, RGB or modulated output of a digital STB? *Do
foreign STBs include VBI text encoders.

Not just foreign ones, our very own Sky Digiboxes all have VBI 'analogue'
teletext insertion. The teletext data can be sent in a data channel within the
DVB transport stream, and the set top box regenerates this into the VBI of the
output video signal. Still used by some D-Sat channels, and the BBC 1 London
and BBC 2 England streams still carry a limited Ceefax service for the benefit
of the Benelux cable cos that source the BBC channels from 28E.

Also if I put my Freesat PVR into 'Non Freesat' mode, then the 'Text' button
launches a good old '1974' spec teletext decoder within the box, and Ceefax on
the two streams mentioned above can be viewed, as well as '888' subtitles on
those and many other channels.

I guess that since most foreign text services amounted to little more
than Line21 closed captioning at the best of times it wouldn't be too
difficult to do, but a full VBI teletext service on each channel of the
MUX would require a bit more effort.

In Europe and beyond teletext services are as comprehensive and stuffed full
of pages as there are (still) here.

The only real difference is the UK spec of DVB-T does not carry 1974 spec
teletext, there's no technical reason why not, only political.

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

www.paras.org.uk

I agree that teletext services, particularly those still available as
analogue text load far faster on European channels than they do on UK
TV.
As much as I used to enjoy using Ceefax and found it extremely good,
the speed that pages load is dire compared to German TV, for example.
Freeview digital weather forecasts are useful, particularly the five
day listings. It's a case of horses for courses, Ceefax teletext is
more informed and easier to access some items, such as detailed
financial news, but digital has its own improvements too.

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:06:08 +0100, "Jerry"
wrote:

Err, yes, the only reason this F1 programme gets 'hidden' is
because the couch potatoes want their EastEnders omnibus, which
could if be put on the "Red Button" instead or viewers directed
to the iPlayer - which is what the iPlayer was designed for after
all, to allow poeple to 'catch-up'...

I completely agree. Original content should always take precedence
over repeats.

Is this F1 programme actually any good, or is it really one of those
"point a television camera at a radio programme" kind of deals? Does
it need the visual element? Would it work just as well on Radio 5 or
similar? (Asking as I haven't seen it and don't know.)

--

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 23:10:41 +0100, Kennedy McEwen
wrote:

How exactly does he manage to keep a VBI text service on a TV switched
the composite, component, RGB or modulated output of a digital STB? Do
foreign STBs include VBI text encoders.

Yes.

I guess that since most foreign text services amounted to little more
than Line21 closed captioning at the best of times it wouldn't be too
difficult to do, but a full VBI teletext service on each channel of the
MUX would require a bit more effort.

Very wrong. Most 'foreign text services' are wide-ranging and
comprehensive, with thousands of pages of content.
--

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
snip
:
: Is this F1 programme actually any good, or is it really one of
those
: "point a television camera at a radio programme" kind of deals?
Does
: it need the visual element? Would it work just as well on Radio
5 or
: similar? (Asking as I haven't seen it and don't know.)
:

As an F1 enthusiast I would say it does (the talking heads/guests
could be done on R5 but try talking through any sporting action
whilst also attempting to explain/put into context what happened,
just as with news, sometimes a picture is worth a million words
IYSWIM. Not only that but often original content, that would
have other been in the main programme had it had a longer running
time, is also shown for the first time.

On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 18:18:32 GMT, Zero Tolerance
wrote:

Is this F1 programme actually any good, or is it really one of those
"point a television camera at a radio programme" kind of deals? Does
it need the visual element? Would it work just as well on Radio 5 or
similar? (Asking as I haven't seen it and don't know.)

It does need the visual element, but it doesn't need to be live.
It certainly doesn't need 3 hours of live to put in less than half an
hour of 'interesting' content on a prime time mainstream channel.
It should be edited into a max. 45 minutes programme and shoved out on
BBC2 an hour or so later.

"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in
message ...
: On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 18:18:32 GMT, Zero Tolerance

: wrote:
:
: Is this F1 programme actually any good, or is it really one
of those
: "point a television camera at a radio programme" kind of
deals? Does
: it need the visual element? Would it work just as well on
Radio 5 or
: similar? (Asking as I haven't seen it and don't know.)
:
: It does need the visual element, but it doesn't need to be
live.
: It certainly doesn't need 3 hours of live to put in less than
half an
: hour of 'interesting' content on a prime time mainstream
channel.
: It should be edited into a max. 45 minutes programme and shoved
out on
: BBC2 an hour or so later.

Err, the race is *up to* 2 hours in length, I hope that your not
suggesting that only 'highlights' should be shown...

In message
,
galaxyguy writes:
[]
which was glorious. If you are still lucky enough to live in an area
still using analogue and you get fed up with on screen junk on BBC 1
or 2 then just move to analogue (often found about page 901) and your

I don't understand "If ... you get fed up with on screen junk ... then
just move to analogue (often found about page 901)".
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)[email protected]+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe. -Galileo
Galilei, physicist and astronomer (1564-1642)

In message , charles
writes:
In article
,
galaxyguy wrote:

Well, it's nothing to be proud of, is it? If anyone in Britain used
this expression with that known meaning in the 1970s or 1980s they
would have been treated with great distain. The original word dates
back many centuries. In being late it can be as a result of being
slow, so the unpleasant American slang is almost certainly derived
from the polite French word.

a further look, this time in the Oxford English Dictionary, reveals that
the word was first used for 'someone slow of learning' by Francis Bacon in
the 16th century.

That's the first _citation_ they could find; it could be older.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)[email protected]+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe. -Galileo
Galilei, physicist and astronomer (1564-1642)

Zero Tolerance wrote:
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:06:08 +0100, "Jerry"
wrote:

Err, yes, the only reason this F1 programme gets 'hidden' is
because the couch potatoes want their EastEnders omnibus, which
could if be put on the "Red Button" instead or viewers directed
to the iPlayer - which is what the iPlayer was designed for after
all, to allow poeple to 'catch-up'...

I completely agree. Original content should always take precedence
over repeats.

Is this F1 programme actually any good, or is it really one of those
"point a television camera at a radio programme" kind of deals? Does
it need the visual element? Would it work just as well on Radio 5 or
similar? (Asking as I haven't seen it and don't know.)

Not as good as it used to be. At one time when on the BBC and the F1 GP
was at Brands Hatch the cameraman zoomed in on someones tyres as they
went up Hawthorn Hill to point out something Murray Walker had said. Did
a fine job of it too, since I sort of remember it from years ago.
Looking it up Brands Hatch has not run a GP since 1986.

--

People like you are the reason people like me have to take medication.

?John Wright

"Ivan" wrote:

Zero Tolerance wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:46:39 -0700 (PDT), galaxyguy
wrote:

BBC News Multi-screen is a very useful service and should not be
taken off Freeview. Are they serious? It is a service that anyone
from 11-90 could find useful.

The BBC already has a 24-hour rolling news channel. Is there anything
that cannot be delivered via the full spectrum television channel and
has to instead be hidden behind the incessant calls to "press your red
buttons now" ?


Well a very large number of people apparently watch the F1 forum after the race. Another
reason I can think of is that a rather irate friend of mine rang up the other day complaining
bitterly that he was unable to watch the big snooker match on BBC 2 as advertised.. he can
only receive Welsh TV because of his location in Somerset.. as for some reason they had
decided to substitute it with an edition of Mastermind instead, fortunately I was able to
tell him to press the red button, which thankfully solved his problem.

The F1 Forum is not available on Freeview now that the 302 stream has been
removed - at least not for this weekend's Abu Dhabi GP. The New York Marathon
seems to take precedence.

It should still be available on other platforms.

--

Brian