All posts by MikeB
Below are all of MikeB's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
MJ Ray: I am sure you have had a poor time of it from TVL, or rather Capita. As you've just said, this is a reason to stop employing Capita, rather than getting rid of the licence fee.
Frankly, I wise government would stop employing Capita, Srco et al all together, and stories like this - Birmingham council must make Capita contract open or risk concealing cuts | Local Leaders Network | Guardian Professional support that view.
| link to this comment |
Mark H: perhaps we should see the Ofcom report for what it is - a 'what if' exercise, based on the reasonable idea of expanding internet use to watch TV in the future. Thats perfectly valid, even if, as Briantist points out, that actual push comes from the mobile phone companies, seeking to stake a claim on as much spectrum as possible.
However, as I pointed out above, there is no way that the infrastructure exists at present to allow such a move, and even if/when it does, who will pay for it? Probably not the mobile companies...
And even if there is such infrastructure broadly in place, it seem that Japan and Korea (the the two countries which lead in broadband speed) have no plans at present to give up on terrestial broadcasting. The Koreans have even been experimenting with broadcasting 4K.
As Charles Stuart points out, the DVB-T2 standard wasn't even agreed until 2009 (the first TV's with them came into stores in the spring of 2011), when the full rollout of digital switchover had started in Nov 2008. He is also right (as you have) to emphasis the large number of people who had bought an 'HD Ready TV', with a integral DVB-T tuner. To have announced that their equipment was obsolete and that they would have to buy another 'ugly box' would have been a disaster. As is often the case, perfection is the enemy of the good.
However, Ofcom does expect the T2 tuner to be standard in about 4 years (I've argued on another thread that the market might reach the 80% figure expected possibly earlier than that), which will improve the use of bandwidth. Most people are actually upgrading their main TV, or buying T2 equiped recorders, so Freeview HD is hardly an expensive or difficult retrofit.
I have long argued that buying a TV without a T2 tuner is foolish, but DVB-T TV's are cheaper. I certainly hope that the £1 figure is no more than a wild guess. A bog standard DVB-T set-top box is about £20, whilst the cheapest DVB-T2 equivalant is about £55 (which are difficult to find, most people seemingly going for the PVR option). The £35 difference can hardly be down to just packaging and an HDMI output.
However, major manufacturers usually ship theirs with T2 tuners as standard, and even sat. tuners are creeping back in, after being eclipsed when Freeview HD came along. It would be impractical to stop Freeview only TV's being sold, and Sky HD customers do not need them, so perhaps let the market decide.
Charles Stuart: Although the idea of have space for extra hardware sounds attractive, its difficult to find space within the modern TV for something which might come along some time. Samsung do have an evolution kit for the 8000/7000 series TV's, but thats for processing. Generally we upgrade by adding new boxes, and I suspect that will continue (which is why you should buy a TV with as many HDMI's as possible - you will probably need them). The new OLED TV's are literally a pane of glass, and the imputs are in a seperate box (which is actually a rather old idea), as are some of the 4K's. You could argue that TV's are monitors, and we plug in new kit as the need arises.
Overall, the rollout has been relatively pain free for most. Your simple digibox will last for at least another couple of years, and any new equipment will have a DVB-T2 tuner built in.
Its easy to point out problems, and ways it could have been done better, but hindsight is 20/20, or as they say in America, its easy to be a Monday morning quarter-back.
| link to this comment |
Mike P: Its worth pointing out that retailers also have very tight margins as well.
The market is fiercely competative, and a number of companies have or are leaving the market. Its certainly one of the factors behind the demise of Comet, the losses (or little profit) that Currys have had since 2008 (despite a huge turnover), and the decision by Tesco to downsize their interest in the TV market Tesco chief executive defends downturn amid 'dramatically reduced ambitions' | Business | theguardian.com
In real terms, TV's have never been cheaper - indeed in sterling terms they have never been cheaper. In 2008-9, an average 50hz 32in HD Ready LCD Freeview TV from Samsung (4 series) was about £400. A 100hz Samsung (mid/high range) was around £600 Samsung LE32B650 review from the experts at whathifi.com
Now, that basic Samsung is an LED and Full HD, and if you are happy with 2 HDMI's rather than 3, you can have much the same (but with Freeview HD and 100hz) for just £269 at the moment. With Smart, 3 HDMI's and Wifi? - £349. The 32B650 Samsung's equivalent became the D6530 in 2011 Samsung UE32D6530 review from the experts at whathifi.com - but with a 400hz LED panel, Freeview HD, smart, wifi and 3D - for about £600. This year you can buy the similar 6500 for £529 at present (but smarter, Freesat and with an extra bluetooth remote). You can see the problem - same object, but cheaper, so less margin.
Of course its been awful for many manufacturers - Sony, Panasonic, Sharp, etc have had their panel operations nationalised to keep them alive, and Philips has bascially sold off its TV arm. Ultimately, things cost money to make and distribute, and the kit that gets put into a TV is carefully thought (and costed) out. However, there is generally far more in one than most customers will ever use, so manufacturers are certainly not skimping - quite the opposite.
The winner - the consumer..
| link to this comment |
Ian: Perhaps, judging by the diagram, thats what Sky want everyone to think as well!
Frankly, this all seems to be manoeuvring by various lobbies over very valuable spectrum real-estate. The mobile companies want more, and have put down a flag, and have pushed Ofcom to open the whole subject up.
The terrestial companies have pushed back with their own report, telling the government just how valuable they are, and saying to their rivals that they should get their tanks off the terrestial broadcasters lawn.
The broadband industry is actually saying fairly little, since they must know such a scheme is years off, owing to lack of capacity, etc. And Sky looks on quite happily, since if there was a move to dish/net/cable, they would be in a perfect place to capture a large slice of the market.
The thing which does not make sense is why Digital UK assumes that Sky would automatically capture such a large part of the market. Freesat basically replicates what most of us already have, is free and the actually dishes are interchangable - wouldn't Freesat be the growth area?
| link to this comment |
KMJ,Derby: Thats very true - that 'free' Sky dish and box look very attractive. However, that does have to be paid for, and a profit made. If users are simply not profitable enough (basic package at best, then switch to something else as soon as possible), then that investment gets them nowhere. You also have to think of just how many people (including politicians) really want Sky with 40% of the market.
Freesat boxes are now pretty cheap (less than £50, and a generic sat. receiver less than £20), and many TV's have them built in (LG's have generic tuners they dont even talk about). Since most TV's are already smart, and we are talking 10 years down the line, boxes that receive, record and stream could be perhaps £30 or less (your screen will probably be a pane of glass). You could have a builtin app for subscription as well, and stuff for Skype, email, mirroring, etc. Frankly, thats all doable now, although the costs would be higher (SSD memory would have to fall a bit in price as well).
The report assumes Freesats relatively low takeup on the grounds of Sky's much larger marketing budget. Thats true at present. However, if all terrestial channels had to migrate to Freesat, then would not those channels seek to maximise their audience on that platform?
They would have a goodly amount of time to market Freesat as the new main platform, and since no one wants to beholden to Sky, would not just sit back and see what happened. Just as Sky supplies you with a box and dish, why not ITV, C4, etc? And of course if you have a spare dish (or having taken advantage of their free dish, are just sick of Sky), the switch might not be that hard. Having a common transmission method is a double edged sword for Sky.
The future is not yet written. Never underestimate the power of inertia when it comes to consumer technology, spending large amounts of somebodies money and politically touchy decision-making. Hopefully, the whole idea will just gather dust while something that works for most of us gets sorted out.
Michael: to be fair to the Lords, if they hadn't written the report, someone else would have - and they would have been even more likely to have favoured Sky. But yes, I know what you and Mike P mean!
| link to this comment |
Dennis: Just to follow up on what Dave Lindsay said, modern TV's are not really designed with that feature in mind. Although many TV's do allow you to record to a USB using the main tuner (and some now have extra tuners to allow you to watch and record at the same time), using the TV's tuner to feed to another box makes no sense. Much better to use a PVR, such as one from Panasonic or Humax. Yours has a USB, so you can play back from a stick, but not (as far as I'm aware) record.
| link to this comment |
Henry ford: If you click on the R + T Investigation link , you can see that neither Bath or Mendip are seemingly having a problem. You can ask a neighbour to see if they are having problems, but it sounds like soemthing within your own system (check which trasnmitter your tuned to).
| link to this comment |
Briantist: Quite right! TV's are basically screens, designed to feed things to them, and even the sound outputs have changed a bit.
In fact, until I found this page I have a tv with built in freeview.
how do I connect them up to tape
from the freeview channel watching the 1-5 channels. | ukfree.tv - 11 years of independent, free digital TV advice a while back, I'd no idea you could use the TV's tuner to output at all. Why you'd want to in this modern world is another question.
| link to this comment |
Monday 20 January 2014 4:23PM
Graeme: If you click on the links next to your post, you'll find that your transmitters seem to be fine, and your not close to a 4G station (why does everyone blame 4G ?) - so its probably your aerial. Ask your neighbours - if they are ok, then it must be your aerial.