I agree that BB speeds would have to be a lot faster for IPTV but Telecoms companies are offering faster speeds all the time.
I agree, but the recent trend has been towards faster and faster speeds and wider provision. If you think back to 2004 when 54k dial up was still common, it would be a stretch for anyone to believe that in 8 years time they could potentially browse on their phone at 50+ Mbps. 2 years ago even I wouldn't have guessed that I would now be able to get 100Mbps at home.
My prediction is that so many devices with be internet enabled by 2020 that having high speed broadband will be seen just as essential as having gas or electric. And that even budget packages will offer you 500 Mbps as standard. In this situation providing HD tv over IPTV isn't remotely an issue.
I suspect because it's cheaper. They are charged less.
Really? Surely it's coming to cross over stage where HD recording is now so common that the costs have fallen to the same level as SD? I can record HD with my phone!!!
Does that mean the BBC chose to only take an SD source - whereas an HD source was available if they wanted it?
Or that whomever was responsible for the coverage of the event only provided an SD source?
No. The show(s) I refer to were produced in native SD only. No HD. Bit silly considering most of the kit was HD capable. Perhaps the GFX was SD, but we could always upconvert that.
I don't understand the economics, or why it's 'cheaper' to downgrade a HD truck to work in SD, but there you go.
Why would I argue? You are correct.
But you need connections a lot faster than 20Mb to reliably be able to use IPTV, I used Sky Go for the F1 races on Sky Sports last year, and if someone else was on their computer in the house the quality would drop or it would stop to buffer.
Especially when in a typical household there could be several television sets in different rooms. Not uncommon for each child to have their own TV with others in kitchen and parents' bedroom.
No. The show(s) I refer to were produced in native SD only. No HD. Bit silly considering most of the kit was HD capable. Perhaps the GFX was SD, but we could always upconvert that.
I don't understand the economics, or why it's 'cheaper' to downgrade a HD truck to work in SD, but there you go.
Getting more rare to do that though.
So it was the BBC's decision to only produce it in SD?
Especially when in a typical household there could be several television sets in different rooms. Not uncommon for each child to have their own TV with others in kitchen and parents' bedroom.
If speeds increase at the same rate they have done since 2000 then having even 10 tvs in the house wouldn't be an issue by 2020.
I agree, but the recent trend has been towards faster and faster speeds and wider provision. If you think back to 2004 when 54k dial up was still common, it would be a stretch for anyone to believe that in 8 years time they could potentially browse on their phone at 50+ Mbps. 2 years ago even I wouldn't have guessed that I would now be able to get 100Mbps at home.
My prediction is that so many devices with be internet enabled by 2020 that having high speed broadband will be seen just as essential as having gas or electric. And that even budget packages will offer you 500 Mbps as standard. In this situation providing HD tv over IPTV isn't remotely an issue.
I agree for the vast majority of people BB speeds are only going to get faster I just hope that people in rural areas aren't left behind.
When will Sky stop charging 10 pounds a month extra to ALL Customers to watch HD
When they do not offer a SD box anymore ???
Sorry, they do NOT charge all customers a tenner for watching HD, only the subscription channels, those that are FTA HD are just that.
As for switching off SD transmissions, many moons away yet, it us not just getting people to buy a HD set, but also ALL the makers/providers of TV shows etc would have to convert to HD too.
Why does being a PBS prevent them swapping the EPG places of their SD and HD channels?
101 would still be BBC 1 - just HD for an HD user instead of SD. (the swapping only works on Sky HD boxes, so by definition the only viewer who would see this change is one who has HD).
The issue would be regional variations, as 101 would no longer show any regional stuff. But that would still be available on 143 if the viewer wished to watch it. Or is assumed that viewer isn't capable of making such as decision?
I think it is only sensible that channels 1-5 should have become HD in the HD sd swap over and apart from what I said about them being PSB channels I don't why this didn't happen. The only factor I can see which may have stopped it is because in Northern Ireland and Scotland the Franchise isn't held by ITV.
That's what I am saying nowhere should be left out in the opportunity to gain from ever faster BB speeds.
I don't know how feasible this is, but maybe they will invent a way to provide nationwide wifi or even satellite access for local broadband networks. All just pie in the sky but I can't believe that the internet will be confined to cables in the ground going forward.
I don't know how feasible this is, but maybe they will invent a way to provide nationwide wifi or even satellite access for local broadband networks. All just pie in the sky but I can't believe that the internet will be confined to cables in the ground going forward.
One thing is for sure the next ten years is going to be a very exciting time as far as technology goes.
I think it is only sensible that channels 1-5 should have become HD in the HD sd swap over and apart from what I said about them being PSB channels I don't why this didn't happen. The only factor I can see which may have stopped it is because in Northern Ireland and Scotland the Franchise isn't held by ITV.
Regional advertising is a factor in why the HD PSB channels don't switch with the SD ones.
I think it is only sensible that channels 1-5 should have become HD in the HD sd swap over and apart from what I said about them being PSB channels I don't why this didn't happen. The only factor I can see which may have stopped it is because in Northern Ireland and Scotland the Franchise isn't held by ITV.
The answer is quite simple - the Comms act 2003 give the designated PSB channels
- i.e. ALL BBC plus the legacy Analogue channels due prominence in the EPG...
(hence BBC rumblings on the kids channel's on sky) ....
Other other than UK DTT (where the EPG provider (digital UK was DMOL) has no relationship with the STB ...
the EPG MUST have the legacy analogue plus BBC channels "up front"....
and the SD version of BBC are seen being more PSB (more viewers ) than HD...
hence resolution is simple - Lobby your MP...!!!
(and also include PSB prominence by discovery as well as by number)..
you may also note that the BBC has 10/13 of PSB channels a bit different from the the 2/5 in analogue...
The "switch back to 101 for your regional programme" factor is also part of why they cant put BBC One HD on 101. Whether this will happen in the nations once they have all launched is going to be interesting to see.
For my money a trick has been missed: Freesat should have launched as HD only (as in the only equipment available with the Freesat logo was HD compatible).
This, combined with more aggressive marketing of Sky's offer to provide existing customers with an HD box free of charge if they take the HD pack for a year, could have paved the way for a phased switch-off of SD services on satellite, reducing distribution costs and freeing up bandwidth for additional services to migrate to HD.
For my money a trick has been missed: Freesat should have launched as HD only.
As one of the Freesat Shareholders is meeting its objectives by putting its HD services behind a paywall ...seems unlikely ....
and the other is set on platform neutrality stirred by government (of any colour who seems to promote DTT.... I wonder why?? )
Comments
I agree, but the recent trend has been towards faster and faster speeds and wider provision. If you think back to 2004 when 54k dial up was still common, it would be a stretch for anyone to believe that in 8 years time they could potentially browse on their phone at 50+ Mbps. 2 years ago even I wouldn't have guessed that I would now be able to get 100Mbps at home.
My prediction is that so many devices with be internet enabled by 2020 that having high speed broadband will be seen just as essential as having gas or electric. And that even budget packages will offer you 500 Mbps as standard. In this situation providing HD tv over IPTV isn't remotely an issue.
I noticed that. Why was that only in SD?
I suspect because it's cheaper. They are charged less.
Really? Surely it's coming to cross over stage where HD recording is now so common that the costs have fallen to the same level as SD? I can record HD with my phone!!!
Does that mean the BBC chose to only take an SD source - whereas an HD source was available if they wanted it?
Or that whomever was responsible for the coverage of the event only provided an SD source?
No. The show(s) I refer to were produced in native SD only. No HD. Bit silly considering most of the kit was HD capable. Perhaps the GFX was SD, but we could always upconvert that.
I don't understand the economics, or why it's 'cheaper' to downgrade a HD truck to work in SD, but there you go.
Getting more rare to do that though.
Especially when in a typical household there could be several television sets in different rooms. Not uncommon for each child to have their own TV with others in kitchen and parents' bedroom.
So it was the BBC's decision to only produce it in SD?
Hard to understand why if so.
If speeds increase at the same rate they have done since 2000 then having even 10 tvs in the house wouldn't be an issue by 2020.
Well you would have to say from what OB Racks said it looks a fairly strange decision.
Use HD equipment, but then produce it to SD, even though it was broadcast on an HD channel (BBC One).
Seems like the BBC needs bashing in this case.
I agree for the vast majority of people BB speeds are only going to get faster I just hope that people in rural areas aren't left behind.
Sorry, they do NOT charge all customers a tenner for watching HD, only the subscription channels, those that are FTA HD are just that.
As for switching off SD transmissions, many moons away yet, it us not just getting people to buy a HD set, but also ALL the makers/providers of TV shows etc would have to convert to HD too.
Live just outside Colchester, downloaded THE DUCHESS off iplayer the other day, as we had missed it..... 2 hours just over to download 1 programme !
I think it is only sensible that channels 1-5 should have become HD in the HD sd swap over and apart from what I said about them being PSB channels I don't why this didn't happen. The only factor I can see which may have stopped it is because in Northern Ireland and Scotland the Franchise isn't held by ITV.
That's what I am saying nowhere should be left out in the opportunity to gain from ever faster BB speeds.
What makes you think this was a BBC Production? It wasn't. It was independent and mainly for Eurosport. BBC took a small part of it.
I don't know how feasible this is, but maybe they will invent a way to provide nationwide wifi or even satellite access for local broadband networks. All just pie in the sky but I can't believe that the internet will be confined to cables in the ground going forward.
Well that was the question I was asking you.
Perhaps if you had made that clearer earlier, we wouldn't have gone down this track...
One thing is for sure the next ten years is going to be a very exciting time as far as technology goes.
The answer is quite simple - the Comms act 2003 give the designated PSB channels
- i.e. ALL BBC plus the legacy Analogue channels due prominence in the EPG...
(hence BBC rumblings on the kids channel's on sky) ....
Other other than UK DTT (where the EPG provider (digital UK was DMOL) has no relationship with the STB ...
the EPG MUST have the legacy analogue plus BBC channels "up front"....
and the SD version of BBC are seen being more PSB (more viewers ) than HD...
hence resolution is simple - Lobby your MP...!!!
(and also include PSB prominence by discovery as well as by number)..
you may also note that the BBC has 10/13 of PSB channels a bit different from the the 2/5 in analogue...
For my money a trick has been missed: Freesat should have launched as HD only (as in the only equipment available with the Freesat logo was HD compatible).
This, combined with more aggressive marketing of Sky's offer to provide existing customers with an HD box free of charge if they take the HD pack for a year, could have paved the way for a phased switch-off of SD services on satellite, reducing distribution costs and freeing up bandwidth for additional services to migrate to HD.
and the other is set on platform neutrality stirred by government (of any colour who seems to promote DTT.... I wonder why?? )