"PeterC" <
giraffe...@homecall.co.uk> wrote in message
news:jasmyj07v3gy$.1kckiej5l6cf2.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 19:00:37 +0100, tim... wrote:
>
>> "Brian Gaff" <
bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:olvhg9$aoe$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>> Everything is set to go up in price a lot in the next year or so, so now
>>> is the time to jump.
>>
>> OTOH the price of Freesat boxes hasn't moved in the past 3 years, despite
>> 1
>> and a half iterations of Moore's law
>>
> In Humax's case, that means dropping functionality in favour of glitzcrap
> and upping the running power by 20W.
um, no it doesn't
it means that you ought to be able to drop your price because your build
costs are lower (as the components now cost less)
This *is* what happened with the Freeview SD boxes.
It's really what ought to be happening with HD boxes
If what you mean by glitzcrap is "smart" functionality, then I agree
I think manufacture of "FreeSat/View Plus" logo-ed boxes should be required
to offer non-smart options of their box (at appropriately reduced prices)
(obviously only the owner of the TM can do that, we can't legislate for it).
Not because I'm a luddite who doesn't want that functionality.
but because I already have 2 devices in my living room that provide me with
that functionality, and I don't want to be forced into paying over the odds
for a third when all I want to do is upgrade my video recorder to a fucking
bigger disk.
> In a well-known, specialised AV shop the assistant told me that he
> wouldn't
> buy a Humax.
but what would he buy?
I once went into a specialist HIFi shop looking to buy a high quality
"Integrated" unit
despite having several such products on offer that I asked him to compare
the pros and cons of for me, all he did was spend 5 minutes trying to
persuade me that I should "upgrade" to separates.
I walked out.
It's all very well saying that "I wouldn't buy a Humax", but not if his
alternative is "not a set top box" at all.
tim