The shopping channels other then QVC may not survive as lot of people just buy through the shopping apps and websites these days.
They are all doomed !
What in my opinion is inevitable is the technoligy will quickly morph into micro cells .
These cells will be much bigger than standard G4 cellphone cells.
As far as coverage us concerned ,obstructions permitting ,these can be spaced 15 miles apart ,and closer for higher population density .
These cells would carry TV as we know it today ,plus high speed Internet , thus removing the need for BT,s copper for the last connection to the home .
The capacity in megabits with the correct design is almost infinite.
What in my opinion is inevitable is the technoligy will quickly morph into micro cells .
These cells will be much bigger than standard G4 cellphone cells.
As far as coverage us concerned ,obstructions permitting ,these can be spaced 15 miles apart ,and closer for higher population density .
These cells would carry TV as we know it today ,plus high speed Internet , thus removing the need for BT,s copper for the last connection to the home .
The capacity in megabits with the correct design is almost infinite.
Sorry but that idea was made a it failed big time, it wasn't for tv but for phone network with dish in high street but it was one minute you had signal and other none because it's was not powerful enough or blocked by building and other objects. ...transmitted tv is best by a transmission using a traditional transmitters as it's unlikely to be blocked and able to get to a wide range of population unlike your cell system. Also a cost to manage to get so many large cell system up to cover the uk wouldn't cost worth. ... how many people would allow a cell mask be put up next to them ?
Sorry but that idea was made a it failed big time, it wasn't for tv but for phone network with dish in high street but it was one minute you had signal and other none because it's was not powerful enough or blocked by building and other objects. ...transmitted tv is best by a transmission using a traditional transmitters as it's unlikely to be blocked and able to get to a wide range of population unlike your cell system. Also a cost to manage to get so many large cell system up to cover the uk wouldn't cost worth. ... how many people would allow a cell mask be put up next to them ?
Sorry to disagree with you ,but with respect you don't understand the technoligy .
On the other hand and ,being a modest type ,I do understand cos I am technically brilliant.😇
It's a thought but I haven't heard of any plans to do that. Of course if an election was due, who knows what straws politicians might try to grasp.
A legacy DVB T mux is One way to kill the platform ......
The current government Intents are for the PSB's emission to be DVB T2 and HD only at DSO 2 .... It saves a lot if money for the BBC ....
A legacy DVB T mux is One way to kill the platform ......
The current government Intents are for the PSB's emission to be DVB T2 and HD only at DSO 2 .... It saves a lot if money for the BBC ....
I agree with you, nothing else makes any sense. It's just that this unseemly grasping at straws daily during the current election campaign does make me wonder sometimes. The next election seems likely to be around the time of the next DSO.
I agree with you, nothing else makes any sense. It's just that this unseemly grasping at straws daily during the current election campaign does make me wonder sometimes. The next election seems likely to be around the time of the next DSO.
Well lets hope that DSO 2 has already started at the time of the next election so its essentially a fatacomple when the next election starts!
If dso 2 happens at the end of a term like the last one its not going to be tainted by silly election promises that are half baked!
DSO 2 will be when the government give cash to the Mux & TV companies to allow full HD services over DTT.
This money will be needed as at this time not all TV companies put out all HD channels like CITV, 5USA, 5*, BBC ALBA, BBC Parliament, QUEST, CBS Action, CBS Horror and those + channels will need to go HD or money to Mux owners to pay for less channels.
The Channel owners of paid HD channels services on other platforms will not wish that they may be force to put them onto Freeview HD, like ITV2 HD, ITV3 HD, ITV4 HD, CH5 HD and Film 4 HD.
The reason for the above is that COM7 & COM8 were made to push HD services and this as not gone as fast like OFCOM wished and because TV companies have not all gone HD because of the price difference in putting out HD then SD.
Why should they be a push to go all HD on Freeview ( DTT ) when other platforms are not looking to do the same ?
Space on DTT has always kept the growth of channels & types too down and biding for space has cost TV companies in the past too.
Also cost has given to hours of some channels being cut or changed for space and cost.
Yes tech dose change things in the end, but I feel until the public pressure for more services and choices changes, I feel the push for less TV channels by DTT or push to put channels onto a Internet system instead would go less fast then tech would like.
DSO 2 is more about fitting SD channels into less bandwidth than bringing more HD channels
DSO 2 is primary about the spectrum issues which orivide another 100 MHz or so fir mobile etc useage .... What ed Vaizey said 11 months ago was that if the PSB went Hd only and T2 etc at the same time this was a single step change which would mean no significant changes for another (say10) years ....
And gave great benefits to the PSBs ......
If at the same time the T2 switch gave more SD or s few more non PSB Hd .. That was fir the market to sort out but would reinvigorate theplatform used by say 80% of all the tvs in the UK . ( half the first tv are not on DTT ) ...
DSO 2 will be when the government give cash to the Mux & TV companies to allow full HD services over DTT.
This money will be needed as at this time not all TV companies put out all HD channels like CITV, 5USA, 5*, BBC ALBA, BBC Parliament, QUEST, CBS Action, CBS Horror and those + channels will need to go HD or money to Mux owners to pay for less channels.
The Channel owners of paid HD channels services on other platforms will not wish that they may be force to put them onto Freeview HD, like ITV2 HD, ITV3 HD, ITV4 HD, CH5 HD and Film 4 HD.
The reason for the above is that COM7 & COM8 were made to push HD services and this as not gone as fast like OFCOM wished and because TV companies have not all gone HD because of the price difference in putting out HD then SD.
Why should they be a push to go all HD on Freeview ( DTT ) when other platforms are not looking to do the same ?
Space on DTT has always kept the growth of channels & types too down and biding for space has cost TV companies in the past too.
Also cost has given to hours of some channels being cut or changed for space and cost.
Yes tech dose change things in the end, but I feel until the public pressure for more services and choices changes, I feel the push for less TV channels by DTT or push to put channels onto a Internet system instead would go less fast then tech would like.
The improving technoligy of digital TV broadcast technoligy means you get a lot more for much less cost .
The real cost of broadcasting a single SD TV program ,compared to a analogue TV program ,taking into consideration all infastructure ,transmision ,engineering ,site sharing costs is less than 1% of what analogue used to cost .
I am sure the BBC ,ITV and other TV broadcasters have not seen the benefits of these huge savings .
But hey ho we have a monopoly in our TV broadcast infastructure so all this lovely extra dosh in my opinion is going straight into the pockets of investment bankers down under .
This can be seen in thier financial reports , plus it has been reported in the press they avoid taxes .
Why have we got a monopoly ? , donations to the Tory party , in particularly to David Cameron and other key politicians seems to be the reason .
David Cameron promised to reform Ofcom ,I wonder why he didn't ?
This is the only reason why Ofcom abandoned the stated commitment of promoting competition .
This corruption if making donations to politicians to gain financial advantage is deemed to be corrupt makes yer wanna puke .
It's been going on for decades
The situation is different in Fance and the UK.
Currently in France we have 4 channels (TF1, A2, M6, Arte) which are simulcast in SD (MPEG-2) and HD (MPEG-4/H264) but they all use DVB-T, not DVB-T2.
This simulcast will cease next year when all channels (SD and HD) will have to use MPEG-4 but the modulation will remain DVB-T due to the very important number of HDTV sets with a DVB-T tuner here (there are practically no DVB-T2 TVs or external decoders).
It is not planned to ever use DVB-T2 with MPEG-4 codec.
It's planned to switch both the modulation (from DVB-T to DVB-T2) and the codec (from H264 to H265) around 2020.
It's a thought but I haven't heard of any plans to do that. Of course if an election was due, who knows what straws politicians might try to grasp.
If they did that it means that we will have gone from dual llumination analogue + digital to dual illumination old digital technology and new digital technology!
They could have done that at any time before now but chose not to for commercial reasons.
If they don't want Ch5 in HD they certainly don't want Spike in HD either.
True, but maybe there is a chance now that Channel 5 has new owners and the new HD MUX should be much cheaper as hardly anybody seems to want it to a great extent as yet.
Maybe the decision of the former owner to get into bed with Sky could throw up contractual issues though.
DSO 2 will be when the government give cash to the Mux & TV companies to allow full HD services over DTT.
This money will be needed as at this time not all TV companies put out all HD channels like CITV, 5USA, 5*, BBC ALBA, BBC Parliament, QUEST, CBS Action, CBS Horror and those + channels will need to go HD or money to Mux owners to pay for less channels.
The Channel owners of paid HD channels services on other platforms will not wish that they may be force to put them onto Freeview HD, like ITV2 HD, ITV3 HD, ITV4 HD, CH5 HD and Film 4 HD.
.................
Why should they be a push to go all HD on Freeview ( DTT ) when other platforms are not looking to do the same ?
The government was not saying that the UK DTT platform was to be HD only ..
Just that the PSB should not need to double illuminate ..... And thus they should be mandated to go HD only ....as this saves the BBC a lot if money .....
This is a very strong public policy statement
and also aligned with the bbcs sixth public purpose,
So the BBC will need to change some BBC Alba origination and upscale PARBUL output if it is not up graded by DSO 2...
If other channels want to go HD ..... they can do
.. The publically owned broadcaster seems to go for HD just look at mux 7
and thus may stop the emitting SD version of its commercial channels ...
What other do will be a commercial decision.......
But with the doubling of basic bite rate for a 8 MHz channel and the halving of the bit rate a SD channel occupies ...
There is ample space for both a few more HD channels
and many more SD channels ... And hopefully at a better picture quality.
And the governments money needs to go mainly to Arqiva as they will need to change modulators and some rf kit at every site ...... And perhaps a little to others to lubricate the change.....
but all PSBs Except ch 5 are currently transmitting in HD so why do they need any money...
And even ch 5 just needs to change its contract fir a modern Coder which will not cost much so why pay them..... .?
And who got government money when we went digital .. .?
The government took all the excess from the digital help scheme paid for by the BBC/LF payers ... About 400 million GBP.
Comments
They are all doomed !
What in my opinion is inevitable is the technoligy will quickly morph into micro cells .
These cells will be much bigger than standard G4 cellphone cells.
As far as coverage us concerned ,obstructions permitting ,these can be spaced 15 miles apart ,and closer for higher population density .
These cells would carry TV as we know it today ,plus high speed Internet , thus removing the need for BT,s copper for the last connection to the home .
The capacity in megabits with the correct design is almost infinite.
I suspect at least one mux will be reserved for legacy broadcasts in DVB-T of just the five main channels.
They could have done that at any time before now but chose not to for commercial reasons.
If they don't want Ch5 in HD they certainly don't want Spike in HD either.
Sorry but that idea was made a it failed big time, it wasn't for tv but for phone network with dish in high street but it was one minute you had signal and other none because it's was not powerful enough or blocked by building and other objects. ...transmitted tv is best by a transmission using a traditional transmitters as it's unlikely to be blocked and able to get to a wide range of population unlike your cell system. Also a cost to manage to get so many large cell system up to cover the uk wouldn't cost worth. ... how many people would allow a cell mask be put up next to them ?
Sorry to disagree with you ,but with respect you don't understand the technoligy .
On the other hand and ,being a modest type ,I do understand cos I am technically brilliant.😇
It's a thought but I haven't heard of any plans to do that. Of course if an election was due, who knows what straws politicians might try to grasp.
A legacy DVB T mux is One way to kill the platform ......
The current government Intents are for the PSB's emission to be DVB T2 and HD only at DSO 2 .... It saves a lot if money for the BBC ....
I agree with you, nothing else makes any sense. It's just that this unseemly grasping at straws daily during the current election campaign does make me wonder sometimes. The next election seems likely to be around the time of the next DSO.
Well lets hope that DSO 2 has already started at the time of the next election so its essentially a fatacomple when the next election starts!
If dso 2 happens at the end of a term like the last one its not going to be tainted by silly election promises that are half baked!
This money will be needed as at this time not all TV companies put out all HD channels like CITV, 5USA, 5*, BBC ALBA, BBC Parliament, QUEST, CBS Action, CBS Horror and those + channels will need to go HD or money to Mux owners to pay for less channels.
The Channel owners of paid HD channels services on other platforms will not wish that they may be force to put them onto Freeview HD, like ITV2 HD, ITV3 HD, ITV4 HD, CH5 HD and Film 4 HD.
The reason for the above is that COM7 & COM8 were made to push HD services and this as not gone as fast like OFCOM wished and because TV companies have not all gone HD because of the price difference in putting out HD then SD.
Why should they be a push to go all HD on Freeview ( DTT ) when other platforms are not looking to do the same ?
Space on DTT has always kept the growth of channels & types too down and biding for space has cost TV companies in the past too.
Also cost has given to hours of some channels being cut or changed for space and cost.
Yes tech dose change things in the end, but I feel until the public pressure for more services and choices changes, I feel the push for less TV channels by DTT or push to put channels onto a Internet system instead would go less fast then tech would like.
DSO 2 is primary about the spectrum issues which orivide another 100 MHz or so fir mobile etc useage .... What ed Vaizey said 11 months ago was that if the PSB went Hd only and T2 etc at the same time this was a single step change which would mean no significant changes for another (say10) years ....
And gave great benefits to the PSBs ......
If at the same time the T2 switch gave more SD or s few more non PSB Hd .. That was fir the market to sort out but would reinvigorate theplatform used by say 80% of all the tvs in the UK . ( half the first tv are not on DTT ) ...
The improving technoligy of digital TV broadcast technoligy means you get a lot more for much less cost .
The real cost of broadcasting a single SD TV program ,compared to a analogue TV program ,taking into consideration all infastructure ,transmision ,engineering ,site sharing costs is less than 1% of what analogue used to cost .
I am sure the BBC ,ITV and other TV broadcasters have not seen the benefits of these huge savings .
But hey ho we have a monopoly in our TV broadcast infastructure so all this lovely extra dosh in my opinion is going straight into the pockets of investment bankers down under .
This can be seen in thier financial reports , plus it has been reported in the press they avoid taxes .
Why have we got a monopoly ? , donations to the Tory party , in particularly to David Cameron and other key politicians seems to be the reason .
David Cameron promised to reform Ofcom ,I wonder why he didn't ?
This is the only reason why Ofcom abandoned the stated commitment of promoting competition .
This corruption if making donations to politicians to gain financial advantage is deemed to be corrupt makes yer wanna puke .
It's been going on for decades
http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2013/05/company-wins-150m-govt-contract-despite-tax-avoidance/
http://www.wirelesswaffle.com/index.php?m=01&y=13&entry=entry130128-052204
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2013/05/13/the-treasury-is-not-walking-its-talk-as-its-business-as-usual-for-tax-avoiders/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2007124/Snouts-trough-Independent-media-regulator-costs-taxpayer-millions-holds-Middle-England-contempt.html
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-259564347.html
Currently in France we have 4 channels (TF1, A2, M6, Arte) which are simulcast in SD (MPEG-2) and HD (MPEG-4/H264) but they all use DVB-T, not DVB-T2.
This simulcast will cease next year when all channels (SD and HD) will have to use MPEG-4 but the modulation will remain DVB-T due to the very important number of HDTV sets with a DVB-T tuner here (there are practically no DVB-T2 TVs or external decoders).
It is not planned to ever use DVB-T2 with MPEG-4 codec.
It's planned to switch both the modulation (from DVB-T to DVB-T2) and the codec (from H264 to H265) around 2020.
If they did that it means that we will have gone from dual llumination analogue + digital to dual illumination old digital technology and new digital technology!
True, but maybe there is a chance now that Channel 5 has new owners and the new HD MUX should be much cheaper as hardly anybody seems to want it to a great extent as yet.
Maybe the decision of the former owner to get into bed with Sky could throw up contractual issues though.
Just that the PSB should not need to double illuminate ..... And thus they should be mandated to go HD only ....as this saves the BBC a lot if money .....
This is a very strong public policy statement
and also aligned with the bbcs sixth public purpose,
So the BBC will need to change some BBC Alba origination and upscale PARBUL output if it is not up graded by DSO 2...
If other channels want to go HD ..... they can do
.. The publically owned broadcaster seems to go for HD just look at mux 7
and thus may stop the emitting SD version of its commercial channels ...
What other do will be a commercial decision.......
But with the doubling of basic bite rate for a 8 MHz channel and the halving of the bit rate a SD channel occupies ...
There is ample space for both a few more HD channels
and many more SD channels ... And hopefully at a better picture quality.
And the governments money needs to go mainly to Arqiva as they will need to change modulators and some rf kit at every site ...... And perhaps a little to others to lubricate the change.....
but all PSBs Except ch 5 are currently transmitting in HD so why do they need any money...
And even ch 5 just needs to change its contract fir a modern Coder which will not cost much so why pay them..... .?
And who got government money when we went digital .. .?
The government took all the excess from the digital help scheme paid for by the BBC/LF payers ... About 400 million GBP.