HD Freesat Next Year

Discussion in 'TiVo Series 1 - UK' started by Automan, Apr 27, 2007.

  1. May 7, 2008 #221 of 383
    OzSat

    OzSat Very Nice Moderator

    5,053
    1
    Feb 15, 2001
    Oxfordshire, UK
    I do :p
     
  2. May 7, 2008 #222 of 383
    Pete77

    Pete77 New Member

    7,968
    0
    Aug 1, 2006
    Not Far...
    Did you ever participate in the Yahoo discussion group about that service?

    I have had my Hitachi since 2002 but Worldspace looks on its last legs now, unless Noah Samara can get hold of more money from various unconventional sources who do not follow normal business rules for making loans.
     
  3. May 7, 2008 #223 of 383
    Pete77

    Pete77 New Member

    7,968
    0
    Aug 1, 2006
    Not Far...
    Did you or Gary have to do any lobbying work at all to persuade Tivo and/or Tribune to add the Freesat platform to the list of supported options for the UK Thomson Tivo service or was it just an automatic decision because they are supporting the platform with various other clients (eg Microsoft) that they also supply UK EPG data on behalf of?

    Presumably all the hard work has in effect been done by Tribune and the Tivo S1 UK software can already handle the insertion of another digital satellite channel lineup with less channels and different channel numbers?
     
  4. May 7, 2008 #224 of 383
  5. May 7, 2008 #225 of 383
    Pete77

    Pete77 New Member

    7,968
    0
    Aug 1, 2006
    Not Far...
    I thought it was a rubbish article since it gives the impression everyone can easily get Freeview on all the Muxes and does not make any mention at all of the likelihood of requiring up to £200+ aerial upgrades that are as costly as a Freesat HD box plus install to get a decent Freeview signal. No mention of this not being put right till digital switchover in your area etc.

    Whereas for 20% of the population in a non cable area and with no Freeview reception FreesatFromSky and FreesatFromTheTerrestrialBroadcasters or a pay Sky box are your only options for multi channel television.

    However your articles about various the new individual Freesat boxes were excellent. But then perhaps you wrote those?;)
     
  6. May 7, 2008 #226 of 383
    Automan

    Automan Ex TiVo User

    4,184
    0
    Oct 29, 2000
    South...
    Yes and when my local UHF transmitter Newhaven goes live in 2012 with Freeview because it is a relay it will have less channels than they get in Brighton.

    I think they are calling it Half-Freeview mentioned at http://www.hdtv.odyssey.ltd.uk/index.htm

    Automan.
     
  7. May 7, 2008 #227 of 383
    OzSat

    OzSat Very Nice Moderator

    5,053
    1
    Feb 15, 2001
    Oxfordshire, UK
    No - needs some decent services to make it worthwhile.
     
  8. May 7, 2008 #228 of 383
    OzSat

    OzSat Very Nice Moderator

    5,053
    1
    Feb 15, 2001
    Oxfordshire, UK
    TiVo were happy to add Freesat - didn't need much discussion.

    The UK TiVo stuff is standalone I beleive - technically - but maybe not contractually.
     
  9. May 7, 2008 #229 of 383
    Pete77

    Pete77 New Member

    7,968
    0
    Aug 1, 2006
    Not Far...
    Its certainly good news though and suggests someone at Tivo Inc still cares about supporting the existing UK customer base.:):up:
     
  10. May 7, 2008 #230 of 383
    TCM2007

    TCM2007 New Member

    3,947
    0
    Dec 25, 2006
    While there is a possibility you might have to upgrade your aerial, for most people they just plug the box in and it works. That's always been my experience.
     
  11. May 7, 2008 #231 of 383
    Sneals2000

    Sneals2000 New Member

    1,541
    0
    Aug 25, 2002
    Maidenhead, UK
    You have been lucky then.

    There are large chunks of the UK (both geographically and to a lesser amount in population terms) that get acceptable/tolerable/just about watchable analogue reception but don't have a cat in hells chance of getting Freeview currently - and even after analogue switch-off they will only get the two PSB SD and (I think) PSB HD muxes, as the commercial muxes are not paying to be relayed (and are only radiating from their current sites).
     
  12. May 7, 2008 #232 of 383
    Pete77

    Pete77 New Member

    7,968
    0
    Aug 1, 2006
    Not Far...
    Indeed.

    Only 75% of the UK population can get a full Freeview signal with no breakup on at least some of the Muxes and a lot more of the UK landmass is not covered than the 25% of the population with no adequate signal.

    There is no adequate Freeview signal at my house even with the best possible aerial and my mother could only have got an adequate Freeview signal by spending around £200 for the best analogue aerial on a long pole.

    I would be alarmed to hear the techradar bases its editorial content purely on the anecdotal personal experiences of the website's editor.:eek:

    Surely its editor is aware of digital switchover and why many UK homes outside city centres will not have and adequate DTT signal before that takes place.:mad:
     
  13. May 7, 2008 #233 of 383
    TheBear

    TheBear Member

    363
    0
    Feb 21, 2001
    Cornwall
    A flawed and biassed piece, imho..

    So Freeview is easier to set up than an engineer-installed Sky system?? I don't think so..

    Freesat currently offers a better selection of channels than Freesat from Sky?? I don't think so..

    Set up cost of freeview less than satellite?? I don't think so, not if the cost of the antenna is taken into account..
     
  14. May 7, 2008 #234 of 383
    TCM2007

    TCM2007 New Member

    3,947
    0
    Dec 25, 2006
    I'm not sure 75% is "only" - I'd say it was the vast majority!

    Oh, and I'm not the editor...
     
  15. May 7, 2008 #235 of 383
    TCM2007

    TCM2007 New Member

    3,947
    0
    Dec 25, 2006
    Buy box, plug in, wait while autosetup runs... Pretty easy.

    While someone sets up satellite for you, you have to arrange for them to come at some point in the future and probably take a day of work as well. Not so easy, even if you never actually touch the box!

    Often hear that argument, but as 99% of houses already have an aerial system, it's not an additional cost when people are considering going digital.
     
  16. May 7, 2008 #236 of 383
    Pete77

    Pete77 New Member

    7,968
    0
    Aug 1, 2006
    Not Far...
    And about one in 3 households find their Freeview aerial is not up to the job and have to pay out for a new one, even if they are in the 75% of the population where the signal is adequate if you have an adequate aerial.

    It is a large additional cost for many people who want to watch Freeview, even if not the majority (presumably you would cheerfully see those of us not in the majority thrown a few crumbs of cake to shut us up judging from your attitude). Ask any store selling the boxes. Many customers who cannot get an adequate signal return them for a refund. Whereas Sky now works nearly everywhere apart from your house given that they also now do free communal dish installs for small private blocks of flats.
     
  17. May 7, 2008 #237 of 383
    Pete77

    Pete77 New Member

    7,968
    0
    Aug 1, 2006
    Not Far...
    It would only be a vast majority for an election result.

    One in four of the population not being able to get a Freeview signal is rather a lot of people. It seems you take the view that one in four people don't count?

    Or I suspect its a case of "I'm alright Jack" as you appear to have always lived at houses with an adequate Freeview signal.

    If you aren't the editor (but merely the owner and/or main financial backer) of techradar I should have him fired then for allowing such a thoroughly inadequate article on to your shiny new website.:p
     
  18. May 7, 2008 #238 of 383
    Pete77

    Pete77 New Member

    7,968
    0
    Aug 1, 2006
    Not Far...
    Alternatively don't get all Muxes or picture regulalry breaks up.

    Helplessly roam the yellow pages for an aerial fitter who is not a dodgy geezer.

    Ring around and end up amazed that the price of an aerial that gets you only 30 channels or less is around £200.

    Give up on Freeview and then return to analogue only or consider Freesat From Sky or Freesat From The Beeb as a better alternative at less cost with three times more channels.

    It seems you only want to hear one side of the argument. Not to mention that many cheaper Freeview boxes are rubbish and so you may have to needlessly replace your aerial at £200 because you saved yourself £20 by buying the cheapest and nastiest Freeview box you could find.
     
  19. May 7, 2008 #239 of 383
    TCM2007

    TCM2007 New Member

    3,947
    0
    Dec 25, 2006
    Source for that statistic? But even if true that still means that 50% of people can just plug in and go.
     
  20. May 7, 2008 #240 of 383
    TCM2007

    TCM2007 New Member

    3,947
    0
    Dec 25, 2006
    I don't have any axe to grind for or against either Freeview or Freesat; I leave pointless opinion holding to you....

    But 75% is the vast majority, whatever spin you try to put on it. Three quarters of people can get a good Freeview signal.

    That doesn't mean the other 25% don't count, it's just the maths!

    If you and your mother both fell in that group - well that's just very bad luck, but I don't follow that it's therefore bad advice to tell the majority of people who can get Freeview that they can, and for them it will be easier than getting someone to come to your house and install a disk!
     

Share This Page