"BBC Two frst to go fully digital"

[snip]

I've just spent the best part of 500 quid on a new DVD recorder with a
whopping great hard drive in it, I don't have any money for any more kit
just yet..! It didn't have a freeview decoder, the only ones I could see
at the time that did didn't have a HDD or else only had an 80GB drive
rather than a 160GB one.

Ivor

 

[snip]

I understand that it will need upgrading all right, I just resent the
fact..!

Ivor

 

[snip]

Very little, actually. The "extra" TV is in the kitchen, sometimes I like
to watch something while I'm cooking. I like cooking, ok..?!

Indeed.

Ivor

 

message
[snip]

So I have to pay Sky 20 quid to watch channels I can get for free on
analogue or Freeview. Meanwhile the BBC is still getting my licence money.

Somebody tell me again that Sky isn't a ripoff..?

Ivor

 

You have time to make pithy points with me.

Look at the site and you might catch some of the drift of mine, which
would give you a better idea with which to reply.

Ivor

 

I don't blame Sky - the BBC and ITV have come up with a free system.
Blame CH4 & 5 for not changing. Ofcom seemed to accept Sky's
arrangement as fair.

 

this is the main reason I haven't yet bought a DVD recorder.

I am waiting until there are ones with both HDD and digital tuner for
a reasonable price.

 

OK.

Sky isn't a rip off. (although it costs a lot more than *I* am willing
to pay for most of their services)

BTW, you *don't* have to pay Sky 20 quid. You can get viewing cards
from other places, I believe.

 

I did look into that but was told that the recycled Sky boxes don't have RGB
or S-video out which I regard as essential. And for the first year at least
it's no cheaper than subscribing to Sky's basic package which has certain
other benefits.

(kim)

 

My general point in this thread is that people want everything handed on a
plate to them, they are unwilling to take action of their own to ensure
they receive TV following switchover, they just want to post and whine.

The fact that the poster cannot even see any correlation between HMG's
income and expenditure demonstrates a lack of ability to understand the
reasons for society and individual responsibility. The government gets
money from xxx therefore I should be paid or given yyy on a plate.

Interestedly you never gave an opinion, likewise the post I was replying
to never gave an opinion on the proceeds of privatisation.

 

Hi Kim, still evading the question as to how you would do it better? Why
is that?

 

Well the BBC and ITV have come up with a free system, but like pretty much
any other broadcaster in the world they do not provide you with the kit to
receive it.

Did BBC/ITV give away free analogue TVs and install an aerial for you?

The only company giving kit and installation away at below cost price are
sky (for their own motives), Ivor defines this as a rip off - this
probably explains Ivor's inappropriate use of the term rip off in many
other parts of this thread.

 

steve wrote:
....

Which has nothing at all to do with what I posted.

/My/ point was that the prime motivation (or at any rate a major one) is
the vast number of shekels the government can have from selling off the
to-be-unused spectrum. In order to get that money, they are making /me/
pay extra. As they'll be making such a huge amount, it wouldn't be at
all unreasonable for HMG to pay for the necessary expenses from that profit.

As an aside, I don't like the quality of digital pictures anyway - there
seem to be a noticeable number of artifacts from the encoding, and minor
signal degradation causes drastic loss of picture. And I'm very happy
with the present number of channels, and the quality (picture, not
programming ), thank you.

 

Yes. To begin with I would stop haranguing individual viewers who have no
say over the type and qulaity of signal they receive. I would also drop all
the "interactive TV" nonsense. It didn't work for Philips in 1993 and it
hasn't worked for anyone who's tried it since. I most definitely wouldn't
switch off a major channel a month before many people are able to receive it
by other means if for no other reason than once they've got used to being
without it they may never tune in again. Imaging the furore if 405-line
transmisions had been switched-off before 625-lines were available or if
black & white transmissions were ended before everyone had colour?

Instead I would lobby the housing associations and council housing
departments who so far have ignored every new technical development in the
field of TV and radio reception. (That particular state of affairs might
change dramatically after the introduction of so-called "target rents" and
the compulsory listing of service charges - which often include TV
reception - separately from next April). With the money saved from making
pointless trailers for DTV and "interactive" TV I would follow Channel 5's
example of offering grants to assist in the conversion of communal systems
from analogue to digital distribution. The switch-off dates of 2011 and 2012
in some areas are ludicrous. Many TV sets bought today will have ended their
useful life before digital reception is available in all areas. I would
lobby the home office to bring the dates forward thus putting more pressure
on landlords to update their distribution systems in line with the estra
rents many of them will be receiving by then.

In the meantime I'll continue to download high quality programme material
over the internet while a friend in Ware keeps sending me DVD compilations
of digital broadcasts he has received himself.

(kim)

 

You have obviously been misinformed.

For an off topic thread, this one has gone on for an awful long time.

 

That is pure speculation. Even if they do replace the existing analogue
channel with a high power mux I very much doubt it will be on _exactly_ the
same frequency so many of us with communal aerial systems will still be left
without a signal of any kind.

(kim)

 

Yes, expired Sky viewing cards are for sale on ebay, but they might be, or
could be later, completely disabled due to no payment of the original owner's
sub etc.

The only genuine source is from Sky themselves. When the BBC were encrypted
they did supply FTV cards free of charge on request. That scheme died at the
same time the Beeb went FTA (July 2003). C4 and C5 were partners in that
enterprise but they refused to continue with it (the Beeb had financed 80%).
ITV never bothered to contribute anything, and there were many protests to
Ofcom and the DCMS.

Ofcom's/DCMS conduct was utterly spineless in my view, eventually they leaned
on Sky to resurrect an FTV card issue, this Sky reluctantly did, but they
charge way over the odds. The Beeb apparently paid something like 2 to 3 quid
for each card they issued, 20 quid is taking the piss (IMHO).

 

A reasonable point.

I think, given that the government are forcing this change, the OP
did have a point there.

And he was correlating the fact that the government are doing this in
order to make money with the suggestion that they therefore should use
some of the expected income to fund the changeover.

I'm not sure what privatisation has to do with this discussion?

 

Because the question wasn't asked?

It isn't "evading" a question to respond without mentioning it in a
thread or subthread where the question has not been asked.

 

You are only talking 7 years, for the *last* area to go digital.

I have never come across a TV set with a useful life of less than 7
years, unless the set was faulty.

Of the three sets in our household, the youngest is four years old,
the portable (for use in the caravan when I work away from home) is 8
years old, and the main set is a fair bit older than that. I'm not
quite sure, but I think it would be around 15 years old.

All are still working.

We are not seriously considering replacing any of those sets before
analogue is turned off here (2008), but are expecting to use set top
boxes.