Digital switchover is 'a mystery'

On 28/06/2008 21:15, Marky P wrote:

Doing it with the other hand feels like someone else is doing it for
you.

See also "The Stranger"

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...m=the+stranger

In message , Ian Jackson
writes
In message , Adrian C
writes
Ian Jackson wrote:
I may be wrong, but I think that they recoup some of the cost of the
modulator by not providing any form of AV output. Am I wrong?

Nope. AV output (Stereo sound & CVBS) is available on a 2.5mm 4-pole socket.

Manual here http://www.tvonics.com/images/mfr200im.pdf

Ah, I thought there was something 'different' about this unit.

Unfortunately, the lead is non-standard (well, the 2.5mm connector is).
It's an optional extra, and has to be ordered separately. [There is
also an optional RC (which enables Audio Description) and IR receiver
extender.] While you could make up your own AV lead, this type of
connector is not something which you are likely to have in your junk
box. Otherwise, it looks a nice little unit, and eminently suitable for
little old ladies with ancient TV sets which may - or may not - have an
AV input!

Having checked the TVonics website. These seem to be Sony products.

I see that the AV lead is £7.99. As it has phono connectors at the TV
end, you might need a phono-to-scart adaptor. [Maplin do Sony and
Panasonic camcorder versions for the same price.] As the TV could easily
have no phono inputs (scart only), you're going to need a phono-to scart
adaptor (Maplin price £7.99). So, there's a good chance that you £40 STB
is going to cost you £55, unless you stay with the RF connection to the
TV set.

The MFR-200 is £39.99, and there's also an MFR-300 for a massive £69.99.
From the information given, at first sight I can't see what the
difference is, [Any ideas what the differences might be?] And (I think)
the MFR-300 still doesn't include an AV lead.
--
Ian

Ian Jackson wrote:

unless you stay with the RF connection to the
TV set.

The suggestion is that this is only really marketed for the little old
lady's set with _only_ an RF connection, not SCART where a cheaper box
would suffice.

AV connections, although provided on that (expensive) connector, are
really there for high tech stuff that Gladys simply gave up trying to
understand years ago. So the lead is optional.

The MFR-200 (with a standard remote) is £29 at my local ALDI. The
MFR-300 has an enhanced remote control and that package offers audio
description. You can buy the enhanced remote for £25 (gulp) from TVonics
and that will effectively convert the MFR-200 to the MFR-300.

Prices are coming down all the time. I suspect for the next couple of
years we are not too far from the set-top box for a fiver, from the like
of ASDA and co.

--
Adrian C

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:23:11 +0100, Adrian C
wrote:

The suggestion is that this is only really marketed for the little old
lady's set with _only_ an RF connection, not SCART where a cheaper box
would suffice.

Perhaps someone should bring out a box with the only output the 5
terestrial stations on a RF connection (on their current UHF
channels). Just plug it in between the TV and ariel, no extra remote
control, totaly "little old lady" proof.

In message , Adrian C
writes
Ian Jackson wrote:

unless you stay with the RF connection to the
TV set.

The suggestion is that this is only really marketed for the little old
lady's set with _only_ an RF connection, not SCART where a cheaper box
would suffice.

AV connections, although provided on that (expensive) connector, are
really there for high tech stuff that Gladys simply gave up trying to
understand years ago. So the lead is optional.

The MFR-200 (with a standard remote) is £29 at my local ALDI. The
MFR-300 has an enhanced remote control and that package offers audio
description. You can buy the enhanced remote for £25 (gulp) from
TVonics and that will effectively convert the MFR-200 to the MFR-300.

Prices are coming down all the time. I suspect for the next couple of
years we are not too far from the set-top box for a fiver, from the
like of ASDA and co.

I see. So the MFR-300 is simply the MFR-200 with the enhanced RC
included in the price.

However, the TVonics prices don't quite tie up. The MFR-200 is ~£40 from
TVonics (although only ~£30 at your Aldi) and the Audio Description
Remote Control is ~£25 (total TVonics price £65). The MFR-300 is ~£70.
Perhaps they also include the AV lead (~£8), and maybe also the Remote
Control Extender (£9). Presumably they will save a bit of money by not
providing the standard RC.
--
Ian

wrote:

Perhaps someone should bring out a box with the only output the 5
terestrial stations on a RF connection (on their current UHF
channels). Just plug it in between the TV and ariel, no extra remote
control, totaly "little old lady" proof.

Yes, I've thought exactly that as well. But it would be expensive as is
most low volume special needs stuff.

For example the following site offers mobile phones designed for the
elderly (and why not everyone that is not a schoolkid). They are a bit
on the costly side for limited functionality, when Pay-as-you-go phones
are a tenner a throw in the high street.

http://www.easytousephones.com/

--
Adrian C

In article , Adrian C wrote:
For example the following site offers mobile phones designed for the*
elderly (and why not everyone that is not a schoolkid). They are a bit*
on the costly side for limited functionality, when Pay-as-you-go phones*
are a tenner a throw in the high street.

http://www.easytousephones.com/

What an excellent idea, though I agree it's wrong to brand the elderly as
if they were the only people who might just want a simple phone, or who
are by implication too stupid to handle all the unneccessary gizmos that
most ordinary phones are full of. It seems far from stupid to want a piece
of equipment that is simply well designed for one purpose. The phones
themselves don't seem to be named in ways that suggest anything to do with
old or disabled people, so it should only be necessary to whittle it out
of the sales pitch. And adjust the price of course.

Rod.

Java Jive wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm

"Many people are still buying analogue TV sets unaware that they will
soon need extra equipment to make them work, according to a report
from MPs.

Most people simply don't *need* to know every detail of technology, and
in the case of TVs, they'd probably only need to know some details once
every five years when they buy stuff. And it *isn't* simple. There's a
confusing mix of names for the various services, often with subtle
distinctions. Even with just DTT, you've got all kinds of labels on TVs:
Freeview, DVB, Digital-tickmark, "receives 30 digital channels", which
all mean the same thing in that context.

Have you seen some of the stickers on TVs in showrooms? Some run all the
way down the side of the screen, listing a couple of dozen acronyms. How
are consumers supposed to know which out of that lot are critical?

And a much bigger problem is analogue DVD recorders -- most of those will
probably end up dumped. Some combinations of STB and DVDR allow you to
control the DVDR from the STB's EPG, but even then there's gotchas with
the scart cable arrangement.

Seems that the Public Accounts Committee have a vaguely worded intent to
increase the implementation of the Digital-tickmark logo to 90% by the
end of 2008, probably by just hoping that it will happen. Here's the
original report:

http://www.publications.parliament.u...cc/416/416.pdf

My petition for mandated labels has 111 signatures, but there's no chance
of getting to the 200 signature level that would warrant a response in
its final week. Pity.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/analogue-warn/

The Americans knew that a mandated notice would be necessary if people
were to understand the issues. They might go over the top with some of
their consumer protection ideas, but I think that they were right in this
case. The notice is at the bottom of this leaflet:

http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/dtvlabels.html

--
Dave Farrance

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:04:10 +0100, Roderick Stewart
wrote:

In article , Adrian C wrote:
For example the following site offers mobile phones designed for the*
elderly (and why not everyone that is not a schoolkid). They are a bit*
on the costly side for limited functionality, when Pay-as-you-go phones*
are a tenner a throw in the high street.

http://www.easytousephones.com/

What an excellent idea, though I agree it's wrong to brand the elderly as
if they were the only people who might just want a simple phone, or who
are by implication too stupid to handle all the unneccessary gizmos that
most ordinary phones are full of. It seems far from stupid to want a piece
of equipment that is simply well designed for one purpose. The phones
themselves don't seem to be named in ways that suggest anything to do with
old or disabled people, so it should only be necessary to whittle it out
of the sales pitch. And adjust the price of course.

Rod.

ISTR Vodafone marketed two "plain and simple" phones a few years ago -
large, easy to hold and simple to operate - cannot remeber the model
numbers now tho
--
Cheers

Peter

"Peter Thomas" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:04:10 +0100, Roderick Stewart
wrote:

In article , Adrian C wrote:
For example the following site offers mobile phones designed for the
elderly (and why not everyone that is not a schoolkid). They are a
bit
on the costly side for limited functionality, when Pay-as-you-go
phones
are a tenner a throw in the high street.

http://www.easytousephones.com/

What an excellent idea, though I agree it's wrong to brand the elderly
as
if they were the only people who might just want a simple phone, or
who
are by implication too stupid to handle all the unneccessary gizmos
that
most ordinary phones are full of. It seems far from stupid to want a
piece
of equipment that is simply well designed for one purpose. The phones
themselves don't seem to be named in ways that suggest anything to do
with
old or disabled people, so it should only be necessary to whittle it
out
of the sales pitch. And adjust the price of course.

Rod.

ISTR Vodafone marketed two "plain and simple" phones a few years ago -
large, easy to hold and simple to operate - cannot remeber the model
numbers now tho
--
Cheers

Peter


IMSMC S1 and S3, designed for the older user who needs phone and text
and nowt else. Made by Sagem as I remember.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com