The switchoff begins ...

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:57:49 +0100, Ad
wrote:

I do not want to see analogue go, digital is not a patch on analogue and
it never will be.

Personally, my digital reception is much better than anything I've ever
achieved with analogue.

I expect you got bad analogue then, those of us with very good analogue
can tell the difference and digital is very poor.
Even my parents notice and they are in their 70's

I expect you get bad digital then. Those of us with very good digital
can tell the difference and digital is far superior. Even my wife
notices the difference and she's a woman.

I have yet to have anyone comment positively on my digital reception
and the picture quality when they see it on my 42" plasma. Digital is
superior in concept, if for no other reason than it supports true
anamorphic widescreen. If your reception of the service does not match
mine then that's more a reflection on your equipment/location than it
is on the system itself.

I have said it before and I will say it again. Just because it got
digital in its name, it do not mean it is any good.
People have this idea, that anything digital is better.


In a newsgroup like this its easy to forget that 99% of people don't
even know what digital means. But then, they don't know how the old
analogue systems work either.


But they know the quality. I give you an example, My sister was given a
DAB radio for Christmas, she notice the difference in the quality of the
stations and if she can notice, then I should think anyone can.

My brother has had a DAB radio for a few years and swears by it. He
won't hear a bad word about it, despite what I try and tell him about
bandwidth.

Lee.
--
Founder, DVD Debate
http://www.dvddebate.com
lee at dvddebate dot com

If you told a joke and someone died laughing, could you be found guilty of a mans laughter?

"Ad" wrote in message
...
harrogate2 wrote:


Channel re-usage - no channels available on which to put new muxes, so
the only possibility is to switch off one or more of the existing
analogue transmitters (three of four in this case) and use those
frequencies for DTTV.

Interesting to note that nothing is said in the article about
provision of STBs. What about those people who did not want to change
to DTTV or could not afford to?

Not everybody can afford to drive or eat in the best restaurants, so we do
without.

Have Auntie - at our expense -
provided them with a box + fitting + a new aerial and feeder if
required?

In an experimental area I should imagine that the residents would have been
advised and/or subsidised.

What about any communal systems, like nursing homes or
warden controlled housing? Who has paid for their upgrades?

The flats where I lived a few years back, have a communal system, I know
someone who still lives there and they want Freeview, but the housing
association who owns the flats will not pay for the upgrade.

Whilst analogue is still generally available, then the housing association
is under little pressure to upgrade a system that works.

so what is the government going to do about that, they can not force any
housing association to pay for a new system./

When analogue is switched off, complaints from residents will do the trick.


--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella

"Ad" wrote in message
...
Ben wrote:



The government can't force housing associations to pay for an analogue
system now, but most of them seem to pay for it anyway. When analogue is
switched off they'll pay for a digital system.


But most systems was put in when the flats was built, unless it was an
old building converted. These flats I lived in was only 3 years old,
they are now about 8 years old.
The people in the flats have been told, that the housing ascotiation
will not pay for the system to be converted.

The cost of conversion would be over the budget.

I took my box up there and it would not work, it only just about picked
up a couple of radio stations.


So what are these people meant to do? and I doubt they are the only ones
with the same problem.


There is little motivation at the moment for the HA to do anything...yet.
They will have to when the existing system becomes totally obsolete.


--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella

"Ad" wrote in message
...
Ben wrote:


Its going to work the other way round. The improvements can only be made
once analogue is switched off. Having analogue and digital sharing the
same spectrum is less than ideal. By 2008 (the proposed start of

Most of us knows that, but i doubt things will get any better even when
analogue is switched off. Bandwidth will stay the same, the only thing
that will happen is higher power.

Huh? More bandwidth will be available due to a greater number of
multiplexes (assuming that some are reserved for DTT).




analogue switchoff) digital terrestrial will have been with us for 10
years. Countries that rolled out DTT much later than us have a timetable

Twice it have

has

been put back, we was suppose

were supposed

to be fully converted by
2008, then it was 2010, now 2012. I thin it will be pushed back again.

I am not sure about your earlier dates, but I can see slippage.



I do not want to see analogue go, digital is not a patch on analogue and
it never will be.

The reverse could be considered true. Analogue could not cope with forty or
more stations.


I have said it before and I will say it again. Just because it got
digital in its name, it do not mean it is any good.

True.


Why? Do not give me the same old rubbish that it cost

costs

broadcasters more
to transmit in digital and analogue. that is not our problem.

No? Ultimately it does cost you more either in licence fees or in the cost
of goods and services elsewhere in the economy.

digital need to be improved before analogue is switched off, even Dsat
is not very good considering that i got a much larger bandwidth than
terrestrial.

Digital can only realistically be improved seriously once analogue is
switched off.


I find a lot of people I talk to is not happy with digital T.V some even
switch back to analogue to watch the five main channels.
My next door neighbour, only got a Freeview box, so their grandkids can
watch CBeeBees and CBBC when they are there. I been in the house a few
times having a cup of coffee and the box have been switched off.

Perhaps they have good manners! Maybe when you leave, the set is switched
back on.



Looking at the aerials up this street alone, most of them could not even
cope with digital T.V, there are some with Sky I must admit, but not
that many. It is going to be a long hard slog to get the refuseniks to
update and change over.

Having no TV reception will motivate many.

We was told that 95% of people would have to
have access to digital T.V, before the analogue was switched off, the
government can not go back on that.

Why not? Digital TV coverage is probably close to 100% in actual fact!


--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella

"Ad" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

With BBC, Sky and ITV text services on DTT what is your beef?



Unfortunately, the "digital text" services offered aren't a patch on the
old
Ceefax/Teletext offered on the analogue platform.

This is the problem, the BBC I service is alwful now, far worse than
before. It is also so slow, and on Sky, I could almost make a cup of
coffee by the time the page changes.

A friend has a Sky Plus box and his Sky text is rapid. I suspect that you
hardware is simply out of date.


--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella

"John Porcella" wrote in message
...

"Ad" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

With BBC, Sky and ITV text services on DTT what is your beef?



Unfortunately, the "digital text" services offered aren't a patch on
the
old
Ceefax/Teletext offered on the analogue platform.

This is the problem, the BBC I service is alwful now, far worse than
before. It is also so slow, and on Sky, I could almost make a cup of
coffee by the time the page changes.

A friend has a Sky Plus box and his Sky text is rapid. I suspect that you
hardware is simply out of date.



It's truly abysmal on my Sky+ box. Not mentioning it's only a quarter of
the screen with a red background, it's also half the speed of Ceefax (on
BBC1 anyway).

"Dave Fawthrop" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 11:22:38 +0100, "JB"
wrote:

|
| "Ad" wrote in message
| ...
|

|
| Looking at the aerials up this street alone, most of them could not
even
| cope with digital T.V, there are some with Sky I must admit, but not
that
| many. It is going to be a long hard slog to get the refuseniks to
update
| and change over. We was told that 95% of people would have to have
access
| to digital T.V, before the analogue was switched off, the government
can
| not go back on that.
|
|
| I disagree. When the options are digital or nothing most will switch
pretty
| damn quickly.

Also the cost of DTT is already falling are a huge rate. Remember the Beeb
were initially saying that a DTT STB cost GBP100, now it is down to
GBP40.
In 2010 it will be down GBP10 or lower.



Yep, I totally agree and this is without the government subsidising STBs,
etc.

wrote in message
ups.com...



All residents were given a STB for each TV, and a free Pace Twin to
replace each VCR.


For each VCR? Fantastic. I wonder how many people nipped out to Argos for
3 extra VCRs just before the PVRs came around.

Lee wrote:
Even my wife notices the difference and she's a woman.

Is this the politically correct way to say that you're not gay ?

"Colonel Montague Kitchen-Sink [Retired]" wrote in
message ...
Lee wrote:
Even my wife notices the difference and she's a woman.

Is this the politically correct way to say that you're not gay ?





1) It's not very politically correct at all.

2) Why do you have gay on the mind in uk.tech.digital-tv?