All posts by MikeB
Below are all of MikeB's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
Gerry Walsh: YouView is a hybrid - its both web based and served by an aerial. If the wifi/internet is working OK, then check the aerial strength.
| link to this comment |
Graham Gittins: Your catchup service have nothing to do with your aerial, unless its a Youview TV, in which case its a hybrid.
Try updating the app - ITV has always been a bit of a pain, and if needed, perhaps a factory reset and install. If its an Android TV, then you should have Youview, and thats easier to acces.
| link to this comment |
Brian Butterworth: I agree, they should be making more. But they are going to have to show them over BBC1. 2 and 4 (CBBC has actually done some really good stuff, but its not primetime), and that creates a problem.
The problem is that there is only so much time, and even more importantly, money. I am not convinced that 'Inside the Factory', for instance is actually science. Brian Cox? Yes. Jim Al-Khalili? Yes. Volcanos? Yes? Creatures from the deep ocean? Yep. Climate Science? Totally. Sky at Night - absolutely (I love Sky at Night).
There are loads of possible science subjects, but the problem is that the places where they can be seen cant really do them justice, in many cases. Think of having to put someone from Top Gear on some sort of populist pap, because thats how you get science on BBC1. He puts bums on seats, and justifies the budget/slot.
And where they can do a reasonable job, they tend to be on channels like BBC4, whose budget has been slashed (hence the reason we dont get BBC4 drama like we used to).
I think you are right to push them, because the BBC's TV science output is far worse than Radio 4's, for instance. But then again, the BBC is failing in some areas, whilst do well in others.
More money, and better programmes on higher profile slots. And not just nature programmes - actual hard science would be great.
| link to this comment |
Robert: You were the one that made the accusation about the BBC. Steve merely pointed out that the BBC does not make a profit, and the monies made from Killing Eve, etc are ultimately recycled back to the BBC.
And then you said that 'ALL those media types (BBC and others) are living like kings (100 grand a year upwards+).' That seems unlikely, but thats your claim, so its on you to back it up.
Dont get angry at anyone else. Just use evidence. As the saying goes, in God we trust - all others bring data. And yeah, links to websites would help - because why should we spend time doing research for you?
| link to this comment |
Anthony J B Graham: And Killing Eve will be shown later in the UK than it will in the States, because its a co production between BBC America (part of BBC's commercial arm) and AMC.
Broadcasters pay a lot of money for content rights, and guard it carefully.
| link to this comment |
Terry Reddington: Check your signal strength - it might be too high, especially if your using a YouView box, which is a humax under the bonnet. They are known for their sensitive tuners, and that, plus a new aerial, plus an upgrade to the transmitter, might be combining to just tip your signal strength over the threshold.
If its happening to more than one house in your road, then its not just you. So either the transmitter is at fault, or that your reception has changed in some way.
the good news that its easy to fix - just search for the page on this site called 'too much of a good thing', and that will guide you.
| link to this comment |
G Vaughan:
A) This website has nothing to do with Pick or any other broadcaster, so complaining here makes no difference.
b) Pick doesnt have to supply subtitles - it costs money, and they are not obliged to supply them.
Best suggestion? If your TV allows it, a pair of headphones might help.
| link to this comment |
John Martin: An LG 4K 43in TV is 309 (2018 model), if you can still get one. Ten years ago, a 32in HD TV, which wasnt smart and didnt have an HD tuner, was at best 450.
According to the 1979 Autumn Argos catalogue, a 14in Pye colour portable TV was 254. Thats equivalent to about a grand. Even a 12in B & W portable was 70 then.
And yes, there is now 8k. But nobody is forcing you to buy it. In fact, nobody is forcing you to buy a 4K set. But if you want a new TV, its almost certainly going to be 4K.
And HD is better than SD.
| link to this comment |
john: Yes - old sky boxes did have a scart to allow that, and old PVRs had one as well.
Now, its no longer the case for either. But since the EX 97 has a freeview HD tuner, you can at least record programmes to dvd from that.
| link to this comment |
Saturday 16 March 2019 11:05PM
Mike: It is probably broadcast in SD, but uses an HD tuner to receive it. Most TV's for at least the past 5 years have one as standard, as do PVR's etc. You can buy a receiver for less than fifty pounds, although dont bother with the Manhattan, they are a bit rubbish ( I have one).
The broadcasters have to fit in as many channels as possible, and to the widest audience. And most people have an HD tuner in or attached to their TV.