Broadcasters blamed for potential digital 'crisis'
Grover
A row between broadcasters and high street retailers over how to
promote digital television to British viewers is threatening to derail
government plans to switch off the analogue signal by 2012.
Senior executives from Dixons and Sony today warned broadcasters that
plans to switch off the analogue signal were a "potential crisis in
the making" and that the UK had squandered its international lead in
the area.
The government has charged SwitchCo, a coalition of broadcasters,
retailers and manufacturers, with the job of driving digital take-up
from next year.
But a row over the selection of the chairman of the SwitchCo board and
widespread dissatisfaction among television manufacturers and high
street retailers with the way the BBC is marketing digital TV threaten
to derail the process before it has even begun.
Retailers such as Dixons and television manufacturers including Sony
and Panasonic want an independent chairman. But the broadcasters, who
will dominate the SwitchCo board, have nominated Barry Cox, the deputy
chairman of Channel 4 and current chair of the digital television
stakeholders group, which SwitchCo will replace.
Danny Churchill, the chairman of the group of television retailers
involved in SwitchCo, said today the broadcasters had been "naive" in
the way they had dealt with the supply chain by failing to ally
digital television with the boom in plasma and flat screen sets.
"There had never been a better opportunity for digital technology to
attach itself to new products, and we've failed. Consumers still see
it as a set top box phenomenon," he said at a meeting of the
Westminster Media Forum.
Mr Churchill, a former deputy chairman of Dixons and still a
consultant to the high street chain, blamed the BBC for concentrating
on pushing cheap set top boxes as the only way to upgrade to Freeview.
"We potentially have a crisis in the making. We have to equip the
consumer with 75m digital reception devices to achieve switchover," he
said.
"Only 12.5m have been converted to digital. That leaves around 8m a
year. This year, we'll be very lucky to achieve 3.5m sales, which puts
us 50% behind in the first year," he said.
Steve Dowdle, the managing director of Sony UK, warned that people
were buying new analogue TVs at three times the rate of digital set
top boxes, wiping out any gains that were being made.
In the 12 months to the end of August, 5.4m analogue TVs were sold, as
well as 2.2m video recorders - all of which will have to be converted
following switchover. During the same period, just 270,000 integrated
digital TV sets and 2.5m set top boxes were sold.
"This means we have added an additional 4.8m analogue units into the
market - making matters worse, not better. Consumers are demanding
analogue products at nearly three times the sales rate of the digital
products we are using to convert them," Mr Dowdle said.
He also blamed broadcasters for concentrating their marketing on
persuading viewers to upgrade with a set top box rather than targeting
those buying new televisions.
"This situation is totally unacceptable ... If the government expects
all stakeholders to cooperate and sign memorandums of understanding in
order to achieve switchover, then we need to have an adequate voice
within switchover to represent us," he said.
Andy Townend, BBC controller of distribution and a key member of the
team that launched Freeview following the collapse of ITV Digital in
October 2002, pointed out that there were two representatives of the
supply chain on the SwitchCo board.
(MediaGuardian)
Ben
mislead people into thinking that they need to buy a new TV for digital
switchover?
Stevie Boy
"Ben" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:41a522ae$0$535$ed26...@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net...
> So basically Dixons are wingeing that the BBC aren't helping them mislead
> people into thinking that they need to buy a new TV for digital
> switchover?
Says nothing of Sky subscribers of which all new subscriptions are digital.
Stev
Alan
<gro...@fortbaxter.com> wrote
>Broadcasters blamed for potential digital 'crisis'
>
Translation 1:
Dixons cannot make £M profit by selling unnecessary extended warrantees
on set top boxes that only cost £50.
Translation 2:
The British public are not as thick as the average Dixons' customer.
Most people realise that you don't have to pay hundreds of GBP to
replace a working television to get digital broadcasts. Perhaps this
little outburst has something to do with the recent prediction that
sales of consumer luxury goods is likely to fall next year?
If Dixons and Sony, who both sell overpriced goods, don't want to
participate then perhaps they should leave the marketing of Terrestrial
Digital Television to the market leaders - the supermarkets.
--
Alan
mailto:news2me...@amacleod.clara.co.uk
Aztech
<
> But a row over the selection of the chairman of the SwitchCo board and
> widespread dissatisfaction among television manufacturers and high
> street retailers with the way the BBC is marketing digital TV
Hrm, I wonder why major TV manufacturers would be displeased with the BBC
promoting cheap add-on boxes instead of shiny new sets? ;)
<
> Danny Churchill, the chairman of the group of television retailers
> involved in SwitchCo, said today the broadcasters had been "naive" in
> the way they had dealt with the supply chain by failing to ally
> digital television with the boom in plasma and flat screen sets.
Because the results can be bloody awful in some cases.
Az.
Aztech
<
> Translation 2:
>
> The British public are not as thick as the average Dixons' customer. Most
> people realise that you don't have to pay hundreds of GBP to replace a working
> television to get digital broadcasts. Perhaps this little outburst has
> something to do with the recent prediction that sales of consumer luxury goods
> is likely to fall next year?
>
> If Dixons and Sony, who both sell overpriced goods, don't want to participate
> then perhaps they should leave the marketing of Terrestrial Digital Television
> to the market leaders - the supermarkets.
The point about low margin STB's is undoubtedly true.
However, if you take commercial squabbles out of the equation and look at the
overall picture there is a sort of "void" in the statistics, of which they're
using as a basis for a potential analogue switch-over, some numbers are
ridiculous, you see figures like over 50% of households are now digital... and
we're nearly there, just give it a couple more years. Unfortunately they've gone
all 50's retro by only considering a single TV per house, they ignore
inconvenient facts like the other 3 analogue TV's and a VCR etc.
You can work out the actual number of digital capable sets out there :-
8m Sky boxes
5.5m DTT boxes
2m cable boxes
So that's just under 16m boxes over 6 years, given a modest figure of 80m
analogue TV's about in the UK (excluding VCR's) that means that penetration is
less than 20%. Of those 16m boxes shipped, over twice as much analogue kit has
been shifted over that length of time, and this disparity still remains with the
'sucesss' of Freeview, at the moment they're not shifting enough DVB to catch
the tail of analogue sales. Over the last year, 5.4m PAL's + 2.2m VCR's v. 2.5m
STB's and IDTV's.
Of course there may come a tipping point where that crosses over, but that's
still a huge mountain they have to climb where in sheer numbers there are a
greater number of devices dependant of analogue signals than when digital
launched. Gross digital sales may only overtake analogue sales by 2007-10, but
that still leaves the legacy of an installed base of 80m TV's, so to talk of a
switch over in 2012 seems hopeful.
On the way you also encounter obstacles like the slowing down in the growth rate
of new Sky installations. And the further you go along the harder it will be to
convert the remaining households to Freeview once all the people who are
interested have bought a box and you're left with a bunch of refuseniks who
aren't bothered, they can only hope the falling cost will solve this, but some
people won't be interested even at below-cost prices. They also have to consider
the 25-30% of the country who can't receive DTT and who aren't interested in
paying for Sky.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/c1b58600-3e70-11d9-a9d7-00000e2511c8.html
If your average home resembled the sort of kit most people in this NG have
installed we'd be sorted, unfortunately you're not average ;)
Az.
Peter Duck
Alan <junk_...@amacleod.clara.co.uk> wrote:
> ... Translation 2:
> The British public are not as thick as the average Dixons' customer.
> Most people realise that you don't have to pay hundreds of GBP to
> replace a working television to get digital broadcasts. ...
Many may even have noticed that in the short time that DTT 'boxes' have
existed there have already been two 'evolutions' that virtually
obsoleted all or most of the earlier ones : 7-day EPG and 'Top-Up'
needing cards.
Not too amusing even for owners of £50-ish boxes: totally
infuriating/disillusioning for those of £1000+ Plasma or TFT sets.
And the digital version of Teletext is 'too clever by half', to a point
as yet nearing unusabilty ...
MJ Ray
> You can work out the actual number of digital capable sets out there :-
> 8m Sky boxes
> 5.5m DTT boxes
> 2m cable boxes
It's not that easy. Ofcom have given up trying to track "expired" Sky
boxes, mail orders, Lidl sets, cross-channel shopping trip imports and
simply deleted everyone who hasn't got a current FTV card from the
statistics.
OK, your guess is as good as any, but I think the "hidden" digital sets
are getting more common.
Generally, you're right that analogue receivers are here for a long
time to come, though. Coax is a far easier for mortals to set up than
SCART, so it's just as well.
> If your average home resembled the sort of kit most people in this NG have
> installed we'd be sorted, unfortunately you're not average ;)
Sport fans, movie hunters, foreign channels, ...
MJ Ray
> And the digital version of Teletext is 'too clever by half', to a point
> as yet nearing unusabilty ...
Yes, most digital users I know still prefer the old Ceefax-style service.
Why are BBC being allowed to discontinue it? Try finding out if your MP
has ever used teletext and will ask the Culture secretary about it...
surely many MPs will know Ceefax? BBC Parliament is one of the few
channels with a service that doesn't just say "press the red button".
Stuart Bell
> "This means we have added an additional 4.8m analogue units into the
> market - making matters worse, not better. Consumers are demanding
> analogue products at nearly three times the sales rate of the digital
> products we are using to convert them," Mr Dowdle said.
And whose fault is that?
>
> He also blamed broadcasters for concentrating their marketing on
> persuading viewers to upgrade with a set top box rather than targeting
> those buying new televisions.
If they can produce set top boxes at 50 quid, including costs of PSU,
case, remote, transportation, packaging, etc etc, then they could add
digital capability to analogue TVs for half that. If they then gave high
profile to such dual stanaard TVs, the punters would buy them. But at
the moment, IDTVs seem limited to the top end of the market, and they
wonder why people don't buy them!
Stuart
--
Try stuartsmacs at dsl dot pipex dot com to email me.
John Russell
Is this for real?
How many households will ever pay £1000+ for a TV? The takeup of digital TV
has to target the majority who even now think £50 for a STB is too much. And
how many cheap TV's do dixon's offer which are DTT ready?
Mat Overton
>> all stakeholders to cooperate and sign memorandums of understanding in
>> order to achieve switchover, then we need to have an adequate voice
>> within switchover to represent us," he said.
>>
>> Andy Townend, BBC controller of distribution and a key member of the
>> team that launched Freeview following the collapse of ITV Digital in
>> October 2002, pointed out that there were two representatives of the
>> supply chain on the SwitchCo board.
>>
> How many households will ever pay £1000+ for a TV? The takeup of digital
> TV has to target the majority who even now think £50 for a STB is too
> much. And how many cheap TV's do dixon's offer which are DTT ready?
The real problem is the lack of digital sets, Panasonic get the gong for
their full range of Quintrix sets which come in 50Hz, 100Hz, 50Hz Freeview
and 100Hz freeview, plus of course their Viera. Sharp's new LCD Titanium
range also, but apart from the odd Sony set there's buggar all choice out
there. So many people are now buying Plasma and LCD, but 98% of those
available will need a set top box.
It does't help that only UK and Germany have the DTT standard. The
introduction of France may help boost the market, but the manufacturers
aren't going to bother for a small portion of Europe when they have the
whole world to consider.
Most customers with $ky don't bother with digital sets as they don't think
they need it, no matter how many times I point out that if they get rid of
$ky they'll need DTT.
As Panasonic told me the other day, they're not holding their breath for the
analogue switch off. It's the same with their plasmas. They're not true HDTV
sets because there's no market for them. They have HD Viera sets in America,
and will bring them over when needed, but not before.
Speaking of which I should be getting a nice HDTV sat box today at work,
will have it hooked up on Tuesday!
gbh
gro...@fortbaxter.com says...
set (which is working perfectly) perhaps I should say why I didn't buy a
digital version this time.
1. I don't have £1000, but do have £500.
2. I do have a freeview box.
3. I sometimes watch widescreen DVDs - the main reason for purchase.
4. I expect hi-definition TV to be introduce soon - its the only way
that retailers and manufacturers can get the majority of consumers
to upgrade - and don't want to left with expensive obsolete kit.
--
gbh
gbh04 is a spamtrap
all post is deleted
David
"Stuart Bell" <spamfri...@spamfritterspam.com> wrote in message
news:1gnsro5.1kad5ci1cnouz4N%spamfri...@spamfritterspam.com...
If they then gave high
> profile to such dual stanaard TVs, the punters would buy them. But at
> the moment, IDTVs seem limited to the top end of the market, and they
> wonder why people don't buy them!
>
I would never buy another IDTV, had one glad to get my money back on it.
--
Regards,
David
<><
Please reply to News Group.
David
"gbh" <gb...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c0fcaca7...@news.tiscali.co.uk...
why I didn't buy a
digital version this time.
1. I don't have £1000, but do have £500.
2. I do have a freeview box.
3. I sometimes watch widescreen DVDs - the main reason for purchase.
4. I expect hi-definition TV to be introduce soon - its the only way
that retailers and manufacturers can get the majority of consumers
to upgrade - and don't want to left with expensive obsolete kit.
--
You did right, but I think you are wrong about hi-definition, the
broadcasters do not give the best out of the present digital system so I do
not think HD will be a success.
David
"Mat Overton" <mat.o...@REMOVElealholm.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9Sipd.4608
>
> As Panasonic told me the other day, they're not holding their breath for
the
> analogue switch off.
What is needed is the Government to switch off anologue SOONER not later.
But they are too soft.
Max Demian
news:3130303032343...@zetnet.co.uk...
> In message <jNBsJbB+...@amacleod.clara.co.uk>
> And the digital version of Teletext is 'too clever by half', to a point
> as yet nearing unusabilty ...
What's the matter with digital Teletext (Freeview channel 9)?
--
Max Demian
AD C
>
>
> I would never buy another IDTV, had one glad to get my money back on it.
>
I would not buy one either, better to buy analouge and stick a box on
it. Cheaper, more choice and at least you can change the digital box if
it goes wrong or gets out dated.
AD C
>
>
> What is needed is the Government to switch off anologue SOONER not later.
> But they are too soft.
They got sense this time, after all, they would not want to upset too
many people before an election. Mind you what they will do after the
election is another thing.
MJ Ray
> "Peter Duck" <pd...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:3130303032343...@zetnet.co.uk...
> > as yet nearing unusabilty ...
> What's the matter with digital Teletext (Freeview channel 9)?
From my experience with freeview boxes in the family: much slower for most
access than a caching analogue or DVB-TXT decoder, text is too small (with
no zoom as common on real teletext sets), there isn't the same amount
of information and the interface is too varied. Freeview's channel 4
teletext approximates the old interface, but looks like the bad one on
channel 9, so doesn't get used much.
Teletext and Ceefax worked. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The new
services can do menus of video streams, but they should run in parallel
with the real teletext news and information services.
At least CNN still have some teletext news pages, but it's not a patch on
what the British channels used to offer.
John Russell
"David" <d.remo...@tesco.net> wrote in message
news:z5jpd.199$Su...@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
>
> "Mat Overton" <mat.o...@REMOVElealholm.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:9Sipd.4608
>>
>> As Panasonic told me the other day, they're not holding their breath for
> the
>> analogue switch off.
>
> What is needed is the Government to switch off anologue SOONER not later.
> But they are too soft.
I bet they think it's oldies who are reluctant to change. So let's wait
until a few million of them have died and then "offer" free STB's to those
left.
John Russell
Please be realistic. It's ordinary technophobes who are reluctant to change.
They know nothing about HDTV! Just look at the acceptance of anamorphic PAL
as our widescreen standard!
use...@isbd.co.uk
really so awful compared with the alternatives (mostly PC based) that
I can't understand why anyone would use any of them.
--
Chris Green
Dave Farrance
> Mr Churchill, a former deputy chairman of Dixons and still a
>consultant to the high street chain, blamed the BBC for concentrating
>on pushing cheap set top boxes as the only way to upgrade to Freeview.
He does have a point.
The technically competent, like uk.tech.digital-tv people, will be happy
enough with STBs because we've saved money, and we've a fighting chance
of solving the problems that can arise when we end up with a cats-cradle
of SCART cables. (Positive feedback loops & similar horrors.)
The less technically competent might well prefer the extra expense of
buying integrated digital equipment, if only they knew that the tuners
of their analogue equipment were due to become redundant. After all,
"analogue switch-off" is only meaningful if you know what analogue means
in this context. And so far, the BBC have not been mentioning the
switch-off at all in their adverts; they just present Freeview as a way
to get more channels.
--
Dave Farrance
AD C
>
> I really see no attraction for *any* sort of teletext service, they're
> really so awful compared with the alternatives (mostly PC based) that
> I can't understand why anyone would use any of them.
>
Teletext servcice, gives you information for free, and it is there 24
hours a day.
Not everyone got or want a computer and even if they have, not everyone
wants to be on the internet.
Aztech
news:10qbhh7...@corp.supernews.com...
Err... nothing stops you adding a STB to a IDTV. The idea may seem superfluous,
but an IDTV has SCART's like any other TV.
Az.
David
"Aztech" <a...@tech.com> wrote in message
news:Scopd.5696745$6p.9...@news.easynews.com...
>
> Err... nothing stops you adding a STB to a IDTV. The idea may seem
superfluous,
> but an IDTV has SCART's like any other TV.
>
>
Yes that's the solution I was offered for my Philips IDTv, I rejected that.
Eventually got my money back. And bought a 'normal' Tv and a digibox. Had
some change left as well as a better picture, and the services the IDTV
would not do.
Kennedy McEwen
<max_d...@bigfoot.com> writes
viewing to read it. I expect that Freeview 9's text service is used by
less than 10% of the percentage of users of analogue Teletext on ITV.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
Ed
wrote:
>Broadcasters blamed for potential digital 'crisis'
snip
>
>In the 12 months to the end of August, 5.4m analogue TVs were sold, as
>well as 2.2m video recorders - all of which will have to be converted
>following switchover. During the same period, just 270,000 integrated
>digital TV sets and 2.5m set top boxes were sold.
>
Analogue TVs not really an issue, however analogue VCRs look far more
obsolete, however Freeview VCRs are few and far between. What is more
worrying is analogue DVD Recorders.
People are spending large sums on something that unless it works well
with their digital box they are going to have to set two boxes to
record a programme, that really is going to create resistance to the
death of analogue. Really the government\BBC ought to be pushing DTT
recorders with an EPG. Though of course part of the problem is that
digital is DVB-T, DVB-S and digital cable, and the boxes are not
really ready yet.
Hopefully the next few years will see the maturing of the PVR market
with machines with HDD and DVD recorders and an EPG that always works,
twin tuners (one Freesat and one Freeview if that is what you want) as
standard.
If people worried more about creating technology that people really
want, and less about trying to legislate the end of analogue it would
be far better.
Max Demian
news:nXszKmDG...@kennedym.demon.co.uk...
> In article <co4g9h$i0c$2...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>, Max Demian
> <max_d...@bigfoot.com> writes
>>"Peter Duck" <pd...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:3130303032343...@zetnet.co.uk...
>>> In message <jNBsJbB+...@amacleod.clara.co.uk>
>>
>>> And the digital version of Teletext is 'too clever by half', to a point
>>> as yet nearing unusabilty ...
>>
>>What's the matter with digital Teletext (Freeview channel 9)?
>>
> It isn't "integrated" with a main video channel, so you have to suspend
> viewing to read it. I expect that Freeview 9's text service is used by
> less than 10% of the percentage of users of analogue Teletext on ITV.
For most purposes it's easier to read a text service without the distraction
of sound and vision. It would be nice to have the option, though, full
screen text or text with a quarter screen of video, or text with sound (TV
or radio), and to be able to call the same service up from any channel.
--
Max Demian
Martin
Quite a few do
I did<g>
And it was worth it!
Martin
>>until a few million of them have died and then "offer" free STB's to those
>>left.
Oldies seem very happy to get Freeview - all that extra ITV!
Martin
that.
>>Eventually got my money back. And bought a 'normal' Tv and a digibox.
Had
>>some change left as well as a better picture, and the services the IDTV
>>would not do.
Glad I bought my now 5 year old Sony!
Stuart Bell
>
> I would never buy another IDTV, had one glad to get my money back on it.
But long term, IDTV has to the solution for Joe Public. Boxes with
everything, the potential for mis-cabling, the two mains sockets, the
untidiness, just makes no sense.
Kennedy McEwen
<max_d...@bigfoot.com> writes
>
>For most purposes it's easier to read a text service without the distraction
>of sound and vision
Usually its just women that say blokes can only do one thing at a time!
MJ Ray
Even people with permanent connections and working for online services
like to switch the computers off sometimes. The permanent machines are
elsewhere, not in the living room. Maybe when the PC is the TV or the
TV is the PC, for more than just techies, teletext will no longer be
wanted, but that day's not today.
Teletext is also pretty tricky to monitor, unlike net access, if you're
worried by such things. Hi Echelon!
AD C
>
> Err... nothing stops you adding a STB to a IDTV. The idea may seem superfluous,
> but an IDTV has SCART's like any other TV.
>
I know that, but they are also more expensive, cheaper to buy analouge
and get a decent set box.
Peter Duck
spamfri...@spamfritterspam.com (Stuart Bell) wrote:
> ... But long term, IDTV has to the solution for Joe Public. Boxes with
> everything, the potential for mis-cabling, the two mains sockets, the
> untidiness, just makes no sense.
Long term, I'll be dead: meanwhile, the elements of an installation will
no doubt contine, as hitherto, to evolve separately.
Digital 'box', recording/playback device, and (analogue) TV aren't much
hassle to interconnect (though 2 or 3 remotes are a touch inconvenient).
When (not 'if') one drops dead or is superseded by something 'better'
(or just 'different'), I'd rather not repeatedly have to replace the
whole lot because they're 'all-in-one'.
--
Peter Duck <pd...@zetnet.co.uk>
Peter Duck
use...@isbd.co.uk wrote:
> > > And the digital version of Teletext is 'too clever by half', to a
> > > point as yet nearing unusabilty ...
> > Yes, most digital users I know still prefer the old Ceefax-style > >
> > service. ...
> I really see no attraction for *any* sort of teletext service, they're
> really so awful compared with the alternatives (mostly PC based) that
> I can't understand why anyone would use any of them.
Unbeatable, IMO, for quick, concise information on all sorts of things.
- Is the flight I've got up early to meet going to be on time, is the
usual route to the airport blocked somewhere ... ?
- News headlines (expandable to a few pithy lines of text if of interest),
weather forecast
- The TV-programme I thought I'd watch isn't happening: has the schedule
been changed?
- etc, etc.
--
Peter Duck <pd...@zetnet.co.uk>
Richard Watkinson
spamfri...@spamfritterspam.com (Stuart Bell) wrote:
> David <d.remo...@tesco.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > I would never buy another IDTV, had one glad to get my money back on it.
>
> But long term, IDTV has to the solution for Joe Public. Boxes with
> everything, the potential for mis-cabling, the two mains sockets, the
> untidiness, just makes no sense.
>
> Stuart
>
I disagree
Long term there should be no future for the domestic TV as we know it.
Consider the current state of play:
Joe & Josie use their TV as a monitor to watch videos and increasingly
DVDs. They might even route the sound to their Hi-Fi system.
Now they have just bought a DTT box and again the TV is just working as
a monitor.
All you are going to need is a video monitor, a sound system and your
choice of 'boxes' to link up with it all:
DTT
Sky
DVD
CD
Cassette
VHS
They call it 'component video' over the pond
No Problem!
Well yes there is. It all those **** who believe that everyone in the house should have their own TV in their room.
I agree that it is a problem but one that they can live through...
--
Richard Watkinson
Treasurer Sheffield Folk Festival
http://www.sheffieldfolkfestival.org/
Join the RSPB today
Stuart Bell
> Long term, I'll be dead: meanwhile, the elements of an installation will
> no doubt contine, as hitherto, to evolve separately.
Just look at the popularity of 14" TV+VCR, TV+DVD and now TV+VCR+DVD all
-in-ones. Mrs Public doesn't like wires, and Mr Public is scared he'll
get the wiring wrong and look a pratt. When you get Sky, the engineer
connects the box up; apart from that, people avoid 'em.
Roderick Stewart
> If people worried more about creating technology that people really
> want, and less about trying to legislate the end of analogue it would
> be far better.
Bureaucrats always seem to use the same destructive methods to persuade
the public to change their ways. e.g public transport - just make what
everybody is currently using very expensive instead of encouraging the
development of a useful alternative.
Rod.
gbh
d.remo...@tesco.net says...
> digital version this time.
> 1. I don't have £1000, but do have £500.
> 2. I do have a freeview box.
> 3. I sometimes watch widescreen DVDs - the main reason for purchase.
> 4. I expect hi-definition TV to be introduce soon - its the only way
> that retailers and manufacturers can get the majority of consumers
> to upgrade - and don't want to left with expensive obsolete kit.
>
> You did right, but I think you are wrong about hi-definition, the
> broadcasters do not give the best out of the present digital system so I do
> not think HD will be a success.
>
Dixons, at their main Oxford Street store, were displaying a high
definition plasma set (42" I think,showing HDTV from satellite)a couple
on months back. Perhaps they know something we don't?
--
gbh
gbh04 is a spamtrap
all post is deleted
David
In article <A5jpd.200$Su5...@newsfe3-win.ntli.net>,
Dixons, at their main Oxford Street store, were displaying a high
definition plasma set (42" I think,showing HDTV from satellite)a couple
on months back. Perhaps they know something we don't?
--
But many, many people do not want satellite.
Say sayellite and Joe Public thinks only of Sky and Subscriptions.
use...@isbd.co.uk
> use...@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>
> >
> > I really see no attraction for *any* sort of teletext service, they're
> > really so awful compared with the alternatives (mostly PC based) that
> > I can't understand why anyone would use any of them.
> >
>
> Teletext servcice, gives you information for free, and it is there 24
> hours a day.
Very little information, rarely enough to be useful in my experience.
The weather forecasts on teletext for example are so abbreviated and
general that they're of little use (maybe that's true of others as
well nowadays). Similarly the travel information, it's either old,
trivial or advertising. There's also no easy way to compare different
places on teletext systems so that you can at least attempt to get a
balanced view on something.
> Not everyone got or want a computer and even if they have, not everyone
> wants to be on the internet.
I said 'mostly PC based', there are other sources as well - libraries,
newspapers, the neighbours, radio, etc.
--
Chris Green
Alan (in Brussels)
"Mat Overton" <mat.o...@REMOVElealholm.co.uk> wrote:
> >> "This situation is totally unacceptable ... If the government expects
> >> all stakeholders to cooperate and sign memorandums of understanding in
> >> order to achieve switchover, then we need to have an adequate voice
> >> within switchover to represent us," he said.
> >>
> >> Andy Townend, BBC controller of distribution and a key member of the
> >> team that launched Freeview following the collapse of ITV Digital in
> >> October 2002, pointed out that there were two representatives of the
> >> supply chain on the SwitchCo board.
> >>
> > Is this for real?
> > How many households will ever pay £1000+ for a TV? The takeup of digital
> > TV has to target the majority who even now think £50 for a STB is too
> > much. And how many cheap TV's do dixon's offer which are DTT ready?
>
> The real problem is the lack of digital sets, Panasonic get the gong for
> their full range of Quintrix sets which come in 50Hz, 100Hz, 50Hz Freeview
> and 100Hz freeview, plus of course their Viera. Sharp's new LCD Titanium
> range also, but apart from the odd Sony set there's buggar all choice out
> there. So many people are now buying Plasma and LCD, but 98% of those
> available will need a set top box.
> It does't help that only UK and Germany have the DTT standard. The
> introduction of France may help boost the market, but the manufacturers
> aren't going to bother for a small portion of Europe when they have the
> whole world to consider.
<SNIP>
It's only a matter of time before all EU member-States with analogue
terrestrial TV switch over to DTT - though obviously it's not going to
happen tomorrow. Such services are widely available already, but until there
is a clear commitment from all concerned - including the regulatory
authorities - to ensure a successful switch-over by setting the timetable
and guaranteeing that full interoperability will be maintained during the
transition period, the present buck-passing situation will deter the great
majority of viewers from taking the risk of investing in new technology.
The good news from France is that the present dominant analogue TV operator
TF1 has just made a U-turn and agreed to support the MPEG-2 system for its
DTT service(s) (though it reserves the right to choose another system for
possible future HDTV by ADSL and/or satellite). So the market for DTT
hardware in the EU is likely to start expanding significantly in a few
months' time.
Regards,
- Alan (in Brussels)
Alan
Stuart Bell <spamfri...@spamfritterspam.com> wrote
>Peter Duck <pd...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Long term, I'll be dead: meanwhile, the elements of an installation will
>> no doubt contine, as hitherto, to evolve separately.
>
>Just look at the popularity of 14" TV+VCR, TV+DVD and now TV+VCR+DVD all
>-in-ones. Mrs Public doesn't like wires, and Mr Public is scared he'll
>get the wiring wrong and look a pratt. When you get Sky, the engineer
>connects the box up; apart from that, people avoid 'em.
>
Most of these combinations are at the bottom end of the market and they
sell on price.
--
Alan
mailto:news2me...@amacleod.clara.co.uk
Stuart Bell
> >> Long term, I'll be dead: meanwhile, the elements of an installation will
> >> no doubt contine, as hitherto, to evolve separately.
> >
> >Just look at the popularity of 14" TV+VCR, TV+DVD and now TV+VCR+DVD all
> >-in-ones. Mrs Public doesn't like wires, and Mr Public is scared he'll
> >get the wiring wrong and look a pratt. When you get Sky, the engineer
> >connects the box up; apart from that, people avoid 'em.
> >
>
> Most of these combinations are at the bottom end of the market and they
> sell on price.
And all those big screen sets in Tesco, Sainsbury's and Argos don't?
Mark Carver
>
> I've never seen a "big screen" TV+VCR, TV+DVD or TV+VCR+DVD. I can
> understand *portables* being combos because they are designed primarily
> to save space. But to me the concept of a main family living-room TV
> being a combo TV+VCR, TV+DVD or TV+VCR+DVD is an abomination.
Humax are bringing out a 32 inch LCD with built in HDD and I think
twin tuners, next year.
I saw the prototype at IBC Amsterdam a couple of months ago.
Stuart Bell
> >> >> Long term, I'll be dead: meanwhile, the elements of an installation will
> >> >> no doubt contine, as hitherto, to evolve separately.
> >> >
> >> >Just look at the popularity of 14" TV+VCR, TV+DVD and now TV+VCR+DVD all
> >> >-in-ones. Mrs Public doesn't like wires, and Mr Public is scared he'll
> >> >get the wiring wrong and look a pratt. When you get Sky, the engineer
> >> >connects the box up; apart from that, people avoid 'em.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Most of these combinations are at the bottom end of the market and they
> >> sell on price.
> >
> >And all those big screen sets in Tesco, Sainsbury's and Argos don't?
>
> I've never seen a "big screen" TV+VCR, TV+DVD or TV+VCR+DVD. I can
> understand *portables* being combos because they are designed primarily
> to save space. But to me the concept of a main family living-room TV
> being a combo TV+VCR, TV+DVD or TV+VCR+DVD is an abomination.
My point was not about combos specifically, but that Mr & Mrs Public
have a strong preference for minimising the number of boxes and cables.
Just as combos sell in big quantities, so if someone pulled their finger
out and sold 28" widescreen TVs in Supermarkets with analogue and
digital tuners for little more than analogue-only ones, it would sell
into homes which don't want yet another little box in the corner of the
room.
David Robinson
> Peter Duck <pd...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Long term, I'll be dead: meanwhile, the elements of an installation will
> > no doubt contine, as hitherto, to evolve separately.
>
> Just look at the popularity of 14" TV+VCR, TV+DVD and now TV+VCR+DVD all
> -in-ones. Mrs Public doesn't like wires, and Mr Public is scared he'll
> get the wiring wrong and look a pratt. When you get Sky, the engineer
> connects the box up; apart from that, people avoid 'em.
I don't have any figures at all (maybe someone could provide them?)
but those combi things aren't nearly as successful as people expected
them to be. I remember adverts in the 1980s telling us how logical it
was to buy a TV and VCR in one, but people didn't.
However, IDTVs are different - VCRs and DVDs have moving parts which
will obviously break down. STBs don't, and to most people, a TV
includes a tuner. A basic TV without a digital tuner in 20 years time
will be as pointless as a basic TV without an analogue tuner 20 years
ago, or even now.
Cheers,
David.
Alan
Robinson <davidr...@postmaster.co.uk> wrote
>A basic TV without a digital tuner in 20 years time
>will be as pointless as a basic TV without an analogue tuner 20 years
>ago, or even now.
No. The market is likely to be for displays without any 'TV' decoding
capability so people can bolt on whatever they want, including all the
future developments that will occur in the next 20 years.
--
Alan
mailto:news2me...@amacleod.clara.co.uk
AD C
>
>
> Very little information, rarely enough to be useful in my experience.
I liked reading the letters and also looking at the cooking pages.
when I did the lottery, they was useful to have a look at the numbers.
> The weather forecasts on teletext for example are so abbreviated and
> general that they're of little use (maybe that's true of others as
> well nowadays). Similarly the travel information, it's either old,
> trivial or advertising. There's also no easy way to compare different
> places on teletext systems so that you can at least attempt to get a
> balanced view on something.
>
It does the job, but analogue Text is better than the digital one
>
>>Not everyone got or want a computer and even if they have, not everyone
>>wants to be on the internet.
>
>
> I said 'mostly PC based', there are other sources as well - libraries,
> newspapers, the neighbours, radio, etc.
>
Libraries you got to find time to go down there. Newspapers cost money
and most of the time contain stories about what pop star is shagging
what actor/actress. which any one with any sense do not care about.
Neighbours can be wrong and give you a load of crap information.
Radio is ok, but the infomation is not at your fingertips.
Kennedy McEwen
<junk_...@amacleod.clara.co.uk> writes
having those future features bolted on in exactly the same way as they
would be to a display without any TV decoder - and it is no more
"duplication" than the current popular arrangement of having an analogue
TV with a digital box.
Personally, I will be looking very carefully at the Humax 32" with
integrated PVR and dual digital tuner when it arrives.
Ed
Don't get me onto public transport, I tried to complain to Centro, the
local passenger transport authority about how ticketting problems
discouraged people from using local public transport - they wrote back
and said that people should set off five minutes earlier to make sure
they could be sure to buy a ticket.
They appear to have a new policy here on tickets, one person selling
tickets at Coventry Station with a mile long queue, five penalty fares
inspectors sitting waiting to catch them on the train. I suppose its
a new funding policy, what really riles is that I have to pay for them
to patronise and insult me with their stupidity.
Alan
<r...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
>Personally, I will be looking very carefully at the Humax 32" with
>integrated PVR and dual digital tuner when it arrives.
Your neighbours will not thank you for turning up the volume on your TV
to drown out the noise of the £0.10 (China price) fan that Humax will
have installed to cool down the box.
--
Alan
mailto:news2me...@amacleod.clara.co.uk
Roderick Stewart
> They appear to have a new policy here on tickets, one person selling
> tickets at Coventry Station with a mile long queue, five penalty fares
> inspectors sitting waiting to catch them on the train. I suppose its
> a new funding policy,
It's unlikely to be anything as clever as that. Just good old fashioned
incompetence. Lots of departments not talking to each other and nobody
taking an intelligent look at the whole situation and applying a bit of
common sense. To take another example, why do the washbasins in public
toilets almost invariably outnumber the drying machines by at least two
to one? This isn't rocket science either. Don't the schools teach people
to think any more?
Rod.
Ed
Teach people to think, teach people to think, that's a dangerous
suggestion.
I mean if people really thought about things then what would happen to
New Labour, well what would happen to any of them?
Roderick Stewart
> Teach people to think, teach people to think, that's a dangerous
> suggestion.
>
> I mean if people really thought about things then what would happen to
> New Labour, well what would happen to any of them?
True. Just think what could have happened in America (which will
inevitably have an effect on the rest of the world) if more people had
been capable of meaningfuil thought. It's difficult to believe they would
have wanted a corrupt inarticulate warmonger in office for a second term.
Rod.
the_bla...@crapbin.org.uk
<rj...@escapetime.nospam.plus.com> wrote:
>True. Just think what could have happened in America (which will
>inevitably have an effect on the rest of the world) if more people had
>been capable of meaningfuil thought. It's difficult to believe they would
>have wanted a corrupt inarticulate warmonger in office for a second term.
Or even a bigger majority?
--
ff
Kennedy McEwen
Stewart <rj...@escapetime.nospam.plus.com> writes
>
>True. Just think what could have happened in America (which will
>inevitably have an effect on the rest of the world) if more people had
>been capable of meaningfuil thought. It's difficult to believe they would
>have wanted a corrupt inarticulate warmonger in office for a second term.
>
like them?
Kennedy McEwen
the_bla...@crapbin.org.uk writes
Bush serving a third term as he wasn't elected to serve his first!
Dave MacRae
> In article <js9jq0lsn5j6r6mpr...@4ax.com>,
> the_bla...@crapbin.org.uk writes
>>On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 09:36:57 -0000, Roderick Stewart
>><rj...@escapetime.nospam.plus.com> wrote:
>>>True. Just think what could have happened in America (which will
>>>inevitably have an effect on the rest of the world) if more people had
>>>been capable of meaningfuil thought. It's difficult to believe they would
>>>have wanted a corrupt inarticulate warmonger in office for a second term.
>>
>>Or even a bigger majority?
>>
> Just a majority, this time, not a bigger one - there is nothing to stop
> Bush serving a third term as he wasn't elected to serve his first!
Shhhh. Don't give them ideas!!
--
Dave
Steven Sumpter
paragraphs, nearly all newsreaders see it as a marker for the signature.
Steve.