Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

BBC to launch five new HD channels on Freeview


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16-07-2013, 17:35
AngusMast
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,297
The way TV is nowadays, HD is like polishing a turd. IMHO
AngusMast is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 16-07-2013, 17:48
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 57,914
The way TV is nowadays, HD is like polishing a turd.
The Fall?

Run?

Broadchurch?

Line of Duty?

To name but a few.
mossy2103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:03
Mickey_T
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,785
With the new HD muxes being at low power, I'd definitely have preferred BBC4-HD to be on the current HD mux to ensure max coverage and good reception.
Mickey_T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:25
Greebo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 968
With the new HD muxes being at low power, I'd definitely have preferred BBC4-HD to be on the current HD mux to ensure max coverage and good reception.
That would be your preference and fair enough.

However, I suspect that a significantly higher percentage of BBC3 output is relatively new material and has HD available, compared to sizable amounts of BBC4 being based on historic SD footage. This will probably have swung the decision in BBC3's favour.

Note I'm not commenting on the quality of the program, just the available image quality.

It may be that the decision also took into account which childrens channel is paired with BBC3/4 - though I suppose they could swap the pairing if so desired. CBBC going HD on BBCB gives full access to their drama output and also Blue Peter will return to HD again.
Greebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:25
kasg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Sussex (Crystal Palace)
Posts: 2,667
LOL, yeah that is really going to work with broadband in the 3Mb/s or less range, come to think of it it is not going to work in families if you got 10Mb/s

I think you should have thought about that a little bit more.
But it won't be like that forever - I went from about 3Mbps to 70Mbps when a fibre cabinet was put in my village, IPTV has to be the future.
kasg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:26
kasg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Sussex (Crystal Palace)
Posts: 2,667
This will probably have swung the decision in BBC3's favour.
And the relative audience figures.
kasg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:28
kasg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Sussex (Crystal Palace)
Posts: 2,667
Hd is pretty naff on Freeview
Utter rubbish. The quality is superb.
kasg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:31
technologist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 6,073
But it won't be like that forever - I went from about 3Mbps to 70Mbps when a fibre cabinet was put in my village, IPTV has to be the future.
If the viewers can afford it ..... through the air is very cheap for mass distribution ..... and ISPs are in it for the money ..
and the Second largest UK ISP has considerable through the air commitment. ....... and Number 1 and 3 supply DTT boxes ..
technologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:34
kasg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Sussex (Crystal Palace)
Posts: 2,667
If the viewers can afford it
People seem willing to pay far more for a Sky subscription that I pay for my unlimited fibre broadband.
kasg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:37
Clusterbombed
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 154
LOL, yeah that is really going to work with broadband in the 3Mb/s or less range, come to think of it it is not going to work in families if you got 10Mb/s

I think you should have thought about that a little bit more.
You've obviously missed my tongue being (partly) in my cheek.

Nonetheless, as the technology becomes more advanced and more people are connected to fibre, we'll see more broadcasters believing that it is cheaper for them to deliver their channels over the internet than it is to pay the fees charged for DTT (or indeed satellite and cable). Current boxes already make it partly indistinguishable whether your channel is coming through the aerial or through the internet by assigning them channel numbers.

In the end though, people will only care about getting the content they want, cheaply and with little fuss, whatever the delivery method.
Clusterbombed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:44
crofter
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 2,053
[quote=Kevin_Tipler;67129011]
Presumably by then everyone will have realised that broadcasting over the airwaves is sooo 20th Century and the great IPTV Switchover will be underway![/QUO

That can only happen after everyone has fibre optic and unlimited broadband.
That would go against the idea of Freeview as well as you have to pay approx 30 per month minimum in line rental and the actual ISP.
crofter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:56
packages
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 143
Right, so people will have to buy a new Tv set or box again. for crying out loud do they think people are made of money?
The boxes are dirt cheap now. You don't have to upgrade it you don't want HD.
packages is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 18:58
neo_wales
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: South Wales/Gran Canaria
Posts: 7,393
LOL, yeah that is really going to work with broadband in the 3Mb/s or less range, come to think of it it is not going to work in families if you got 10Mb/s

I think you should have thought about that a little bit more.
10mb/s is fine, just tell the family to not use computers if that is all they get. More and more of the UK is fibre or at least FTTC and growing plus 4G coverage will improve dramatically within a few short years.

Right, so people will have to buy a new Tv set or box again. for crying out loud do they think people are made of money?
20% of people already have the equipment and HD tuners are more and more commonplace in new TV's, it will be the norm before long

Why do people want the news in HD? TBH, Hd is pretty naff on Freeview and not much better on Dsat, Most channels are broadcast at the lowest quality they can get away with, and that includes SD,.
HD is good quality on freeview, why do you keep saying picture quality (including SD) is so bad? Its fine.

Its all down to choice, if people want HD then they upgrade, nobody is saying they have to do so. If they can't afford to....tough, thats life.
neo_wales is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 19:23
DragonQ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 4,191
With the new HD muxes being at low power, I'd definitely have preferred BBC4-HD to be on the current HD mux to ensure max coverage and good reception.
I don't agree, even though I enjoy lots of BBC Four stuff. BBC Three has more viewers and a generally wider audience, plus it's used as an overspill for sport.

In any case, it'll all be on Freesat anyway.
DragonQ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 19:47
Bizman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Taunton, Somerset
Posts: 282
But it won't be like that forever - I went from about 3Mbps to 70Mbps when a fibre cabinet was put in my village, IPTV has to be the future.
I don't live in a village. Cable stops about a mile up the road and is unlikely to ever get down the country lane to my place.
Utter rubbish. The quality is superb.
But not everyone has HD eyesight! HD & SD look the same to me.
Bizman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 20:27
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 57,914
People seem willing to pay far more for a Sky subscription that I pay for my unlimited fibre broadband.
And those people without a Sky sub (who will quite naturally want some form of TV reception)?
mossy2103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 20:49
Mickey_T
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,785
That would be your preference and fair enough.

However, I suspect that a significantly higher percentage of BBC3 output is relatively new material and has HD available, compared to sizable amounts of BBC4 being based on historic SD footage. This will probably have swung the decision in BBC3's favour.

Note I'm not commenting on the quality of the program, just the available image quality.

It may be that the decision also took into account which childrens channel is paired with BBC3/4 - though I suppose they could swap the pairing if so desired. CBBC going HD on BBCB gives full access to their drama output and also Blue Peter will return to HD again.
Yes good points.

I don't agree, even though I enjoy lots of BBC Four stuff. BBC Three has more viewers and a generally wider audience, plus it's used as an overspill for sport.

In any case, it'll all be on Freesat anyway.
Yes, I forgot about BBC3 being used for extra sports stuff, so better for freeview 'lite' viewers.
Mickey_T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 21:14
MARKIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 212
I don't live in a village. Cable stops about a mile up the road and is unlikely to ever get down the country lane to my place.
But not everyone has HD eyesight! HD & SD look the same to me.
It's always been said you'll only notice HD on screen sizes of 37" and above. To make get the best of it you really need to go 46" and above..
MARKIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 21:17
MARKIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 212
Can I just add it's very sad that it appears VM and Sky are paying Channel 5 over the odds for them not to go HD on Freeview.
MARKIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 21:31
jj20x
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,102
Can I just add it's very sad that it appears VM and Sky are paying Channel 5 over the odds for them not to go HD on Freeview.
Sky possibly, VM are unlikely to pay over the odds for any content. It's quite possible that the deal with Sky did involve an FTA lock out and would explain why they didn't taken the vacant HD slot when they had the opportunity.
jj20x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 22:10
kasg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Sussex (Crystal Palace)
Posts: 2,667
It's always been said you'll only notice HD on screen sizes of 37" and above. To make get the best of it you really need to go 46" and above..
Well that depends how far away you are from it. HD looks much better than SD on the 19" set in my kitchen, but that tends to be watched at relatively close quarters. If I sit on the other side of the room then obviously I can't tell the difference.
kasg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 22:33
tghe-retford
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Retford
Posts: 17,406
It's always been said you'll only notice HD on screen sizes of 37" and above. To make get the best of it you really need to go 46" and above..
I have a 22" TV in the bedroom and I can most definitely tell the difference between SD and HD.
tghe-retford is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 22:49
noise747
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 17,232
But it won't be like that forever - I went from about 3Mbps to 70Mbps when a fibre cabinet was put in my village, IPTV has to be the future.
And how many people are in your village? We still got streets in this city that don't have Fibre and some of them are in the centre of the city.

How long do you think it will take for the whole country to have some sort of superfast broadband?

I could have fibre, but I choose not to, happy with the 10 Mb/s i get and by the way 99.5% my video entertainment is done via IPTV as i use netflix, but then it is only me in the house.
noise747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 22:50
noise747
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 17,232
Utter rubbish. The quality is superb.
If that is what you call superb then fine. but i would not to be honest.
noise747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-07-2013, 22:58
noise747
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 17,232
You've obviously missed my tongue being (partly) in my cheek.

Nonetheless, as the technology becomes more advanced and more people are connected to fibre, we'll see more broadcasters believing that it is cheaper for them to deliver their channels over the internet than it is to pay the fees charged for DTT (or indeed satellite and cable). Current boxes already make it partly indistinguishable whether your channel is coming through the aerial or through the internet by assigning them channel numbers.

In the end though, people will only care about getting the content they want, cheaply and with little fuss, whatever the delivery method.
I agree that people don't care how they are getting the content, but the speed and quality of broadband is required to to get the quality picture and what happens when 2 or more people are watching Hd on different devices?

there are still places in this country that don't have broadband, so little chance of then getting fibre. As been said on another post the cost of broadband is another problem, not everyone got the internet and not everyone wants it and I don't think they would be happy about paying out just to watch TV.

Broadband in this country even by fibre can still be iffy in some places.
noise747 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:52.