| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 27 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 38:02:29 |
| Calls: | 631 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 1,187 |
| D/L today: |
22 files (29,767K bytes) |
| Messages: | 173,681 |
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-terrestrial-television/>
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
JNugent wrote:Wait until SpaceX/Amazon want more spectrum for their internet
Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a terrestrial one.
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a >terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but
that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to >freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time
is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as
long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network >downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing -
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which
had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:32:17 +0100, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a
terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but
that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to
freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time
is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as
long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network
downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing -
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which
had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I've been using nothing but online TV viewing for a couple of years
and have no issues with it. I can subscribe to view whatever channels
I want witout adverts, which wouldn't be possible with conventional broadcasts, I can watch whatever I want whenever I want without having
to record it first, as I would have to do with conventional
broadcasts, and streaming devices actually do have pause and rewind
controls, so much the same flexibility as conventional broadcasts. And
there are thousands, literally thousands more things to choose from.
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make no difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt
if I'll ever switch them on again.
Rod.
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:32:17 +0100, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a >>terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but >>that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to >>freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time
is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as >>long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband >>connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network >>downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter >>emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing -
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which >>had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I've been using nothing but online TV viewing for a couple of years
and have no issues with it. I can subscribe to view whatever channels
I want witout adverts, which wouldn't be possible with conventional >broadcasts, I can watch whatever I want whenever I want without having
to record it first, as I would have to do with conventional
broadcasts, and streaming devices actually do have pause and rewind
controls, so much the same flexibility as conventional broadcasts. And
there are thousands, literally thousands more things to choose from.
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make no >difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt
if I'll ever switch them on again.
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but
that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time
is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as
long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing -
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which
had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a
terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but
that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to
freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time
is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as
long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network
downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing -
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which
had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I think you will find satellite being turned off before terrestrial.
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:44:50 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business- >>>>> committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a
terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but >>> that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to >>> freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time
is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as
long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network
downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing -
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which >>> had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I think you will find satellite being turned off before terrestrial.
Why so? Satellite must use a fraction of the power and is probably
more reliable in the middle of nowhere than terrestrial.
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:32:17 +0100, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a
terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but
that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to
freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time
is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as
long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network
downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing -
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which
had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I've been using nothing but online TV viewing for a couple of years
and have no issues with it. I can subscribe to view whatever channels
I want witout adverts, which wouldn't be possible with conventional broadcasts, I can watch whatever I want whenever I want without having
to record it first, as I would have to do with conventional
broadcasts, and streaming devices actually do have pause and rewind
controls, so much the same flexibility as conventional broadcasts. And
there are thousands, literally thousands more things to choose from.
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:44:50 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business- >>>>>> committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted >>>> and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a
terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but >>>> that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to >>>> freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time >>>> is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as >>>> long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network >>>> downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing - >>>> if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which >>>> had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I think you will find satellite being turned off before terrestrial.
Why so? Satellite must use a fraction of the power and is probably
more reliable in the middle of nowhere than terrestrial.
They cost a lot. Sky already has a strategy of getting out. If you take out
a subscription now they try to put you on an Internet connected box.
On 04/09/2025 13:01, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:32:17 +0100, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a
terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but
that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to
freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time
is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as
long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network
downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing -
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which
had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I've been using nothing but online TV viewing for a couple of years
and have no issues with it. I can subscribe to view whatever channels
I want witout adverts, which wouldn't be possible with conventional
broadcasts, I can watch whatever I want whenever I want without having
to record it first, as I would have to do with conventional
broadcasts, and streaming devices actually do have pause and rewind
controls, so much the same flexibility as conventional broadcasts. And
there are thousands, literally thousands more things to choose from.
Nonsense. Rewind and fast forward are rudimentary compared to what a PVR
can do. With streaming there is no slow-motion, something a PVR can do
with ease. A PVR can also step through frame-by-frame in forward or
reverse. Just as annoying is that if using iPlayer with a live programme
(ie green button) fast forward and fast rewind are available but there
are no thumbnails visible, so you've little idea where you are during
the programme.
Also, I've no idea if iPlayer is typical, but it takes ages to find a programme you want to watch (where it's no more than a few seconds with
a PVR). And don't get me started on those ^*!*>%~ trailers they insist
on showing before any programme you want to watch, and you have to stop
them before watching what you want. Why can't I opt out of them? They
are *never* of any interest.
And as for reliability, if broadband goes down you've lost all entertainment. For the second time this year my broadband has gone intermittent, and Openreach are having trouble trying to tie down the
exact problem. It hardly matters when I'm using Usenet, but it would be extremely annoying if I was watching a "last chance to view" programme.
Of course, the main reason the broadcasters want you to stream is so
they have a record of what you watch. Someone will pay to use that information, even if /you/ think it's of no use to anyone else. And what happens if the broadcasters decide to only provide streams with adverts?
Will be discussed today: <https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-terrestrial-television/>
On 04/09/2025 09:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today: <https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-terrestrial-television/>
FWIW I tried watching this debate on www.parliamentlive.tv. It
started about 1510, and had finished when I started to watch. From
what I could see, it was in favour of keeping terrestrial tv (the broadcasting licence expires in 2034), and was critical of just using broadband to watch TV.
Hilariously, the bloody streaming signal repeatedly failed and I kept getting the "buffering" rotating circle! I'll try downloading the
Hansard report which should be available later today. So much for
streaming reliability... :-)))
Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 13:01, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:32:17 +0100, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business- >>>>>> committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted >>>> and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a
terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but >>>> that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to >>>> freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time >>>> is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as >>>> long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network >>>> downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing - >>>> if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which >>>> had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I've been using nothing but online TV viewing for a couple of years
and have no issues with it. I can subscribe to view whatever channels
I want witout adverts, which wouldn't be possible with conventional
broadcasts, I can watch whatever I want whenever I want without having
to record it first, as I would have to do with conventional
broadcasts, and streaming devices actually do have pause and rewind
controls, so much the same flexibility as conventional broadcasts. And
there are thousands, literally thousands more things to choose from.
Nonsense. Rewind and fast forward are rudimentary compared to what a PVR
can do. With streaming there is no slow-motion, something a PVR can do
with ease. A PVR can also step through frame-by-frame in forward or
reverse. Just as annoying is that if using iPlayer with a live programme
(ie green button) fast forward and fast rewind are available but there
are no thumbnails visible, so you've little idea where you are during
the programme.
Also, I've no idea if iPlayer is typical, but it takes ages to find a
programme you want to watch (where it's no more than a few seconds with
a PVR). And don't get me started on those ^*!*>%~ trailers they insist
on showing before any programme you want to watch, and you have to stop
them before watching what you want. Why can't I opt out of them? They
are *never* of any interest.
And as for reliability, if broadband goes down you've lost all
entertainment. For the second time this year my broadband has gone
intermittent, and Openreach are having trouble trying to tie down the
exact problem. It hardly matters when I'm using Usenet, but it would be
extremely annoying if I was watching a "last chance to view" programme.
Of course, the main reason the broadcasters want you to stream is so
they have a record of what you watch. Someone will pay to use that
information, even if /you/ think it's of no use to anyone else. And what
happens if the broadcasters decide to only provide streams with adverts?
Your last point about adverts is the most telling. For streaming services that offer both advert and advert free subscriptions the going rate to be
rid of adverts seems to be around -u5/month per service. It would soon add up.
On 04/09/2025 09:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
FWIW I tried watching this debate on www.parliamentlive.tv. It started
about 1510, and had finished when I started to watch. From what I could
see, it was in favour of keeping terrestrial tv (the broadcasting
licence expires in 2034), and was critical of just using broadband to
watch TV.
Hilariously, the bloody streaming signal repeatedly failed and I kept getting the "buffering" rotating circle! I'll try downloading the
Hansard report which should be available later today. So much for
streaming reliability... :-)))
On 04/09/2025 03:06 PM, Tweed wrote:
Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 13:01, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:32:17 +0100, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business- >>>>>>> committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted >>>>> and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a >>>>> terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but >>>>> that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to >>>>> freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time >>>>> is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as >>>>> long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit >>>>> out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network >>>>> downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing - >>>>> if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which >>>>> had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I've been using nothing but online TV viewing for a couple of years
and have no issues with it. I can subscribe to view whatever channels
I want witout adverts, which wouldn't be possible with conventional
broadcasts, I can watch whatever I want whenever I want without having >>>> to record it first, as I would have to do with conventional
broadcasts, and streaming devices actually do have pause and rewind
controls, so much the same flexibility as conventional broadcasts. And >>>> there are thousands, literally thousands more things to choose from.
Nonsense. Rewind and fast forward are rudimentary compared to what a PVR >>> can do. With streaming there is no slow-motion, something a PVR can do
with ease. A PVR can also step through frame-by-frame in forward or
reverse. Just as annoying is that if using iPlayer with a live programme >>> (ie green button) fast forward and fast rewind are available but there
are no thumbnails visible, so you've little idea where you are during
the programme.
Also, I've no idea if iPlayer is typical, but it takes ages to find a
programme you want to watch (where it's no more than a few seconds with
a PVR). And don't get me started on those ^*!*>%~ trailers they insist
on showing before any programme you want to watch, and you have to stop
them before watching what you want. Why can't I opt out of them? They
are *never* of any interest.
And as for reliability, if broadband goes down you've lost all
entertainment. For the second time this year my broadband has gone
intermittent, and Openreach are having trouble trying to tie down the
exact problem. It hardly matters when I'm using Usenet, but it would be
extremely annoying if I was watching a "last chance to view" programme.
Of course, the main reason the broadcasters want you to stream is so
they have a record of what you watch. Someone will pay to use that
information, even if /you/ think it's of no use to anyone else. And what >>> happens if the broadcasters decide to only provide streams with adverts? >>>
Your last point about adverts is the most telling. For streaming services
that offer both advert and advert free subscriptions the going rate to be
rid of adverts seems to be around -u5/month per service. It would soon add >> up.
Just three of them (say, ITV, C4 and 5) would add up to more than the
annual price of the BBC Tax.
On Thu 04/09/2025 17:05, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
FWIW I tried watching this debate on www.parliamentlive.tv. It started
about 1510, and had finished when I started to watch. From what I could
see, it was in favour of keeping terrestrial tv (the broadcasting
licence expires in 2034), and was critical of just using broadband to
watch TV.
Hilariously, the bloody streaming signal repeatedly failed and I kept
getting the "buffering" rotating circle! I'll try downloading the
Hansard report which should be available later today. So much for
streaming reliability... :-)))
You're not the only one sunshine.
Until last week we used to suffer buffering quite a lot on one TV but
never on the second. The second TV (LG) sits on top of a cabinet in our lounge with my router on the floor under the cabinet. The incoming (VM)
feed is adjacent into a Hub4 working in modem mode. The first TV
(Samsung) suffered a lot with either buffering or loss of (wifi) signal
even though it is in the bedroom above the lounge. We have a third (non-smart) Philips TV in the kitchen which does have the capability of program streaming for stations that show up in the Freeview guide (such
as, for instance, France24 on 255) via ethernet so the only way I could
get to that was with powerline. I had some units to hand so pushed them
into service for both the Philips and Samsung TVs and they worked well -
for a couple of months - whence the Samsung started playing up again
losing the stream.
The powerline units (TP-L TP4020 600Mb units) can be made to securely interconnect (a la WPS) and it transpired this was the cause. I did a
full restart on each of them which deletes any previous settings but
allows the units to work in the wild, unprotected, and it has cured the problem.
If anyone fancies trying powerline units, have a look at uk.webuy.com
(the web site of Cex) where I found a two or three pack for -u5 per unit with a 5 year warranty.
All we have now is the Philips TV persistently freezing for a few
seconds but as there is no loss of program (the prog resumes after a few seconds from where it stopped) I have put it down to sync issues at the studio end and we put up with it.
For the record I am also a radio amateur and so far have found no RFI
from the powerline units. (RFI = radio frequency interference.)
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:44:50 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
I think you will find satellite being turned off before terrestrial.
Why so? Satellite must use a fraction of the power and is probably
more reliable in the middle of nowhere than terrestrial.
On 04/09/2025 09:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-terrestrial-television/>
FWIW I tried watching this debate on www.parliamentlive.tv. It started
about 1510, and had finished when I started to watch. From what I could
see, it was in favour of keeping terrestrial tv (the broadcasting
licence expires in 2034), and was critical of just using broadband to
watch TV.
Hilariously, the bloody streaming signal repeatedly failed and I kept
getting the "buffering" rotating circle! I'll try downloading the
Hansard report which should be available later today. So much for
streaming reliability... :-)))
On 04/09/2025 13:48, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:44:50 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
I think you will find satellite being turned off before terrestrial.
Why so? Satellite must use a fraction of the power and is probably
more reliable in the middle of nowhere than terrestrial.
The satellites in the constellation at 28.2E reach end-of-life around 2029-31, and Sky would doubtless prefer not to have to pay for
replacements.
Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On Thu 04/09/2025 17:05, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
FWIW I tried watching this debate on www.parliamentlive.tv. It started
about 1510, and had finished when I started to watch. From what I could
see, it was in favour of keeping terrestrial tv (the broadcasting
licence expires in 2034), and was critical of just using broadband to
watch TV.
Hilariously, the bloody streaming signal repeatedly failed and I kept
getting the "buffering" rotating circle! I'll try downloading the
Hansard report which should be available later today. So much for
streaming reliability... :-)))
You're not the only one sunshine.
Until last week we used to suffer buffering quite a lot on one TV but
never on the second. The second TV (LG) sits on top of a cabinet in our
lounge with my router on the floor under the cabinet. The incoming (VM)
feed is adjacent into a Hub4 working in modem mode. The first TV
(Samsung) suffered a lot with either buffering or loss of (wifi) signal
even though it is in the bedroom above the lounge. We have a third
(non-smart) Philips TV in the kitchen which does have the capability of
program streaming for stations that show up in the Freeview guide (such
as, for instance, France24 on 255) via ethernet so the only way I could
get to that was with powerline. I had some units to hand so pushed them
into service for both the Philips and Samsung TVs and they worked well -
for a couple of months - whence the Samsung started playing up again
losing the stream.
The powerline units (TP-L TP4020 600Mb units) can be made to securely
interconnect (a la WPS) and it transpired this was the cause. I did a
full restart on each of them which deletes any previous settings but
allows the units to work in the wild, unprotected, and it has cured the
problem.
If anyone fancies trying powerline units, have a look at uk.webuy.com
(the web site of Cex) where I found a two or three pack for -u5 per unit
with a 5 year warranty.
All we have now is the Philips TV persistently freezing for a few
seconds but as there is no loss of program (the prog resumes after a few
seconds from where it stopped) I have put it down to sync issues at the
studio end and we put up with it.
For the record I am also a radio amateur and so far have found no RFI
from the powerline units. (RFI = radio frequency interference.)
Buy a decent WiFi mesh network.
On 04/09/2025 13:48, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:44:50 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
I think you will find satellite being turned off before terrestrial.
Why so? Satellite must use a fraction of the power and is probably
more reliable in the middle of nowhere than terrestrial.
The satellites in the constellation at 28.2E reach end-of-life around 2029-31, and Sky would doubtless prefer not to have to pay for
replacements.
On 04/09/2025 19:50, Dave wrote:
On 04/09/2025 13:48, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:44:50 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
I think you will find satellite being turned off before terrestrial.
Why so? Satellite must use a fraction of the power and is probably
more reliable in the middle of nowhere than terrestrial.
The satellites in the constellation at 28.2E reach end-of-life around
2029-31, and Sky would doubtless prefer not to have to pay for
replacements.
Whilst many would like broadcast TV to continue but I can't see that happening. By 2030 we are supposed to have over 99% availability of super-fast broadband. The linear TV audience will have shrunk by virtue
of the rubbish NHS , in fact I am not sure if I will survive that long.
So given the cost why would any TV company invest in transmitters?
On Thu 04/09/2025 18:04, Tweed wrote:
Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On Thu 04/09/2025 17:05, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
FWIW I tried watching this debate on www.parliamentlive.tv. It started >>>> about 1510, and had finished when I started to watch. From what I could >>>> see, it was in favour of keeping terrestrial tv (the broadcasting
licence expires in 2034), and was critical of just using broadband to
watch TV.
Hilariously, the bloody streaming signal repeatedly failed and I kept
getting the "buffering" rotating circle! I'll try downloading the
Hansard report which should be available later today. So much for
streaming reliability... :-)))
You're not the only one sunshine.
Until last week we used to suffer buffering quite a lot on one TV but
never on the second. The second TV (LG) sits on top of a cabinet in our
lounge with my router on the floor under the cabinet. The incoming (VM)
feed is adjacent into a Hub4 working in modem mode. The first TV
(Samsung) suffered a lot with either buffering or loss of (wifi) signal
even though it is in the bedroom above the lounge. We have a third
(non-smart) Philips TV in the kitchen which does have the capability of
program streaming for stations that show up in the Freeview guide (such
as, for instance, France24 on 255) via ethernet so the only way I could
get to that was with powerline. I had some units to hand so pushed them
into service for both the Philips and Samsung TVs and they worked well - >>> for a couple of months - whence the Samsung started playing up again
losing the stream.
The powerline units (TP-L TP4020 600Mb units) can be made to securely
interconnect (a la WPS) and it transpired this was the cause. I did a
full restart on each of them which deletes any previous settings but
allows the units to work in the wild, unprotected, and it has cured the
problem.
If anyone fancies trying powerline units, have a look at uk.webuy.com
(the web site of Cex) where I found a two or three pack for -u5 per unit >>> with a 5 year warranty.
All we have now is the Philips TV persistently freezing for a few
seconds but as there is no loss of program (the prog resumes after a few >>> seconds from where it stopped) I have put it down to sync issues at the
studio end and we put up with it.
For the record I am also a radio amateur and so far have found no RFI
from the powerline units. (RFI = radio frequency interference.)
Buy a decent WiFi mesh network.
Why have any mesh network when you can use ethernet wired? Much faster,
more reliable, and secure. I've had that now for well over a decade and
it is 100% rock solid - until some idiot drove into a VM street cab!
On 04/09/2025 19:50, Dave wrote:
On 04/09/2025 13:48, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:44:50 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
I think you will find satellite being turned off before terrestrial.
Why so? Satellite must use a fraction of the power and is probably
more reliable in the middle of nowhere than terrestrial.
The satellites in the constellation at 28.2E reach end-of-life around
2029-31, and Sky would doubtless prefer not to have to pay for
replacements.
Yes, SKy would prefer not to pay for replacements but they are not responsible for Freesat.
Both Freesat and Freeview are owned by Everyone TV.
Everyone TV is in turn a joint venture owned by the BBC, ITV, Ch4, CH5
and Sky.
So what will happen to Freesat in 2029-31?
It appears that Freeview are still committed to circa 2034 by way of
their PSB licences (unless they hand them back early?)
Freesat's main selling point is being able to reach parts of the UK taht Freeview transmitters cannot reach.
Satellite economics depends on having enough customers. I wonder if the
PSBs alone have enough cash to maintain a satellite presence, and enough customers on satellite to justify this outlay? Freesat is very much a minority sport.
A lot of talk, just about all in favour of keeping terrestrial TV. I
have no idea what comes next.
On 04/09/2025 13:01, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:32:17 +0100, NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted
and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a
terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but
that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to
freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time
is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as
long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit
out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network
downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing -
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which
had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I've been using nothing but online TV viewing for a couple of years
and have no issues with it. I can subscribe to view whatever channels
I want witout adverts, which wouldn't be possible with conventional
broadcasts, I can watch whatever I want whenever I want without having
to record it first, as I would have to do with conventional
broadcasts, and streaming devices actually do have pause and rewind
controls, so much the same flexibility as conventional broadcasts. And
there are thousands, literally thousands more things to choose from.
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make no
difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt
if I'll ever switch them on again.
Rod.
How much are you spending per year on subscriptions?
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make no >>difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubtAs I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I cannot get
if I'll ever switch them on again.
STV live.
Your last point about adverts is the most telling. For streaming services >that offer both advert and advert free subscriptions the going rate to be
rid of adverts seems to be around u5/month per service. It would soon add
up.
Whilst many would like broadcast TV to continue but I can't see thatBecause it's a condition of licence and franchise?
happening. By 2030 we are supposed to have over 99% availability of
super-fast broadband. The linear TV audience will have shrunk by virtue
of the rubbish NHS , in fact I am not sure if I will survive that long.
So given the cost why would any TV company invest in transmitters?
if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which
had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
On Thu 04/09/2025 18:04, Tweed wrote:You can't always easily use wired Ethernet.
Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On Thu 04/09/2025 17:05, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business-
committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
FWIW I tried watching this debate on www.parliamentlive.tv. It started >>>> about 1510, and had finished when I started to watch. From what I could >>>> see, it was in favour of keeping terrestrial tv (the broadcasting
licence expires in 2034), and was critical of just using broadband to
watch TV.
Hilariously, the bloody streaming signal repeatedly failed and I kept
getting the "buffering" rotating circle! I'll try downloading the
Hansard report which should be available later today. So much for
streaming reliability... :-)))
You're not the only one sunshine.
Until last week we used to suffer buffering quite a lot on one TV but
never on the second. The second TV (LG) sits on top of a cabinet in our
lounge with my router on the floor under the cabinet. The incoming (VM)
feed is adjacent into a Hub4 working in modem mode. The first TV
(Samsung) suffered a lot with either buffering or loss of (wifi) signal
even though it is in the bedroom above the lounge. We have a third
(non-smart) Philips TV in the kitchen which does have the capability of
program streaming for stations that show up in the Freeview guide (such
as, for instance, France24 on 255) via ethernet so the only way I could
get to that was with powerline. I had some units to hand so pushed them
into service for both the Philips and Samsung TVs and they worked well - >>> for a couple of months - whence the Samsung started playing up again
losing the stream.
The powerline units (TP-L TP4020 600Mb units) can be made to securely
interconnect (a la WPS) and it transpired this was the cause. I did a
full restart on each of them which deletes any previous settings but
allows the units to work in the wild, unprotected, and it has cured the
problem.
If anyone fancies trying powerline units, have a look at uk.webuy.com
(the web site of Cex) where I found a two or three pack for -u5 per unit >>> with a 5 year warranty.
All we have now is the Philips TV persistently freezing for a few
seconds but as there is no loss of program (the prog resumes after a few >>> seconds from where it stopped) I have put it down to sync issues at the
studio end and we put up with it.
For the record I am also a radio amateur and so far have found no RFI
from the powerline units.-a (RFI = radio frequency interference.)
Buy a decent WiFi mesh network.
Why have any mesh network when you can use ethernet wired?
more reliable, and secure. I've had that now for well over a decade and
it is 100% rock solid - until some idiot drove into a VM street cab!
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make noAs I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I cannot get
difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt
if I'll ever switch them on again.
STV live.
If you haven't got an aerial or a Firestick, how are you able to watch television at all?
Why would you want to watch TV programmes 'live' i.e. according to
someobody else's timetable instead of whenever you choose? This is the
21st century now and we're no longer tied to the limitations of
oldfashioned broadcast technology.
If you can't get the STV catchup app on your streaming device, you're--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
using the wrong streaming device. There are several to choose from
that can do it. From personal experience the Amazon Fire TV devices
and the Thomson 270 can receive STV, and there are probably others.
This is true, but I'm free to choose which ones, if any, I want to
subscribe to. It's perfectly legal to watch the terrestrial catchup
services (except the BBC) without subscribing to any of them.
On 05/09/2025 10:30 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make noAs I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I cannot get
difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt
if I'll ever switch them on again.
STV live.
If you haven't got an aerial or a Firestick, how are you able to watch
television at all?
Why would you want to watch TV programmes 'live' i.e. according to
someobody else's timetable instead of whenever you choose? This is the
21st century now and we're no longer tied to the limitations of
oldfashioned broadcast technology.
Good point.
Even if I want to watch something (on a commecial channel) when it is broadcast, I almost always set the Sky box to record it, then start to
watch it on "chase" at ten to fifteen minutes past the start time. Then
I cab speed through the adverts. The later past the start time I leave
it, the better chance of being able to get through the ads at high speed.
Even if I want to watch something (on a commecial channel) when it is broadcast, I almost always set the Sky box to record it, then start
to watch it on "chase" at ten to fifteen minutes past the start time.
Then I cab speed through the adverts. The later past the start time I
leave it, the better chance of being able to get through the ads at
high speed.
The problem with the viewers not watching ads is that, eventually,
companies will consider there is little point spending money on making
them and renting screen time. I wonder, with the "ad-free" streaming
option, where the extra few pounds a month goes. And, if everybody went >ad-free, would that generate enough cash for the streaming companies to >enable them to make the sort of programmes they now do with the aid of >advertising money? The alternative is unavoidable ads.
On 05/09/2025 11:57, JNugent wrote:
On 05/09/2025 10:30 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make no >>>>> difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt >>>>> if I'll ever switch them on again.As I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I cannot get
STV live.
If you haven't got an aerial or a Firestick, how are you able to watch
television at all?
Why would you want to watch TV programmes 'live' i.e. according to
someobody else's timetable instead of whenever you choose? This is the
21st century now and we're no longer tied to the limitations of
oldfashioned broadcast technology.
Good point.
Even if I want to watch something (on a commecial channel) when it is
broadcast, I almost always set the Sky box to record it, then start to
watch it on "chase" at ten to fifteen minutes past the start time. Then
I cab speed through the adverts. The later past the start time I leave
it, the better chance of being able to get through the ads at high speed.
The problem with the viewers not watching ads is that, eventually,
companies will consider there is little point spending money on making
them and renting screen time. I wonder, with the "ad-free" streaming
option, where the extra few pounds a month goes. And, if everybody went ad-free, would that generate enough cash for the streaming companies to enable them to make the sort of programmes they now do with the aid of advertising money? The alternative is unavoidable ads.
*Subject:* Re: Future of terrestrial TV
*From:* JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com>
*Date:* Fri, 05 Sep 2025 17:00:48 +0100
On 05/09/2025 01:01 PM, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 05/09/2025 11:57, JNugent wrote:would make no
On 05/09/2025 10:30 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it
but I doubtdifference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes
cannot getif I'll ever switch them on again.As I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I
It's only the linear commercial channels (ITV, 4 , 5 and some Sky
Channels) that are losing out on the effectiveness of their
advert breaks. But that's been the case ever since the first VHS
machine with the facility for fast-forward viewing.
*Subject:* Re: Future of terrestrial TV
*From:* JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com>
*Date:* Fri, 05 Sep 2025 17:00:48 +0100
On 05/09/2025 01:01 PM, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 05/09/2025 11:57, JNugent wrote:would make no
On 05/09/2025 10:30 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it
but I doubtdifference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes
cannot getif I'll ever switch them on again.As I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I
It's only the linear commercial channels (ITV, 4 , 5 and some Sky
Channels) that are losing out on the effectiveness of their
advert breaks. But that's been the case ever since the first VHS
machine with the facility for fast-forward viewing.
I managed to skip ads for 20 years with two or three VHS machines, then the last 25 years with various Sky+/HD/Q/Humax boxes.
I get Paramount via Sky and initially it was ad free, but then they started non-skipable ads, and worse, trailers for programmes you've already seen that can not be skipped either.
I read the trailer for 'Tony and Ziva' (NCIS) that started yesterday has been seen 80 million times, not surprising when it's shown during existing programmes several times an hour and you can not skip it.
Streaming technology if far from perfect, programmes do have a habit of dying part way through, sometimes never starting. And they can just disappear from the web site without notice when you are part way through watching a series, Paramount again.
Once I've recorded a program on my Sky Q box, it's there to be watched for many
months and I know it will not disappear and will be complete to watch.
Also, streaming 'rewind a few seconds' to rewatch something you've just missed
is primitive, varying between the different services, sometimes a quick backwards goes a few seconds, sometimes minutes, sometimes locks up. Sky Q back/forward/skip is very powerful.
The only positive to streaming is Prime adding cast members on screen, and information that actually benefits the programme.
So I'll keep using Sky Q until the day the last satellites die and ignore any attempts from Sky to get me streaming linear channels.
I prefer Sky+HD, with its useful analogue-out connectivity.
I did have Q, but rejected it within a month and had +HD back.
There are a few disadvantages, but they're outweighed by the
SCART socket.
*Subject:* Re: Future of terrestrial TV
*From:* JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com>
*Date:* Fri, 05 Sep 2025 17:00:48 +0100
On 05/09/2025 01:01 PM, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 05/09/2025 11:57, JNugent wrote:would make no
On 05/09/2025 10:30 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it
but I doubtdifference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes
cannot getif I'll ever switch them on again.As I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I
It's only the linear commercial channels (ITV, 4 , 5 and some Sky
Channels) that are losing out on the effectiveness of their
advert breaks. But that's been the case ever since the first VHS
machine with the facility for fast-forward viewing.
I managed to skip ads for 20 years with two or three VHS machines, then the last 25 years with various Sky+/HD/Q/Humax boxes.
I get Paramount via Sky and initially it was ad free, but then they started non-skipable ads, and worse, trailers for programmes you've already seen that can not be skipped either.
I read the trailer for 'Tony and Ziva' (NCIS) that started yesterday has been seen 80 million times, not surprising when it's shown during existing programmes several times an hour and you can not skip it.
Streaming technology if far from perfect, programmes do have a habit of dying part way through, sometimes never starting. And they can just disappear from the web site without notice when you are part way through watching a series, Paramount again.
Once I've recorded a program on my Sky Q box, it's there to be watched for many
months and I know it will not disappear and will be complete to watch.
Also, streaming 'rewind a few seconds' to rewatch something you've just missed
is primitive, varying between the different services, sometimes a quick backwards goes a few seconds, sometimes minutes, sometimes locks up. Sky Q back/forward/skip is very powerful.
The only positive to streaming is Prime adding cast members on screen, and information that actually benefits the programme.
So I'll keep using Sky Q until the day the last satellites die and ignore any attempts from Sky to get me streaming linear channels.
Angus
Also, streaming 'rewind a few seconds' to rewatch something you've just missed
is primitive, varying between the different services, sometimes a quick backwards goes a few seconds, sometimes minutes, sometimes locks up. Sky Q back/forward/skip is very powerful.
Currently we have the means to record *any* programme from either
Freeview or Freesat via either a PC based tuner or a set top PVR device
to either a hard drive, DVD disc, USB stick or a SSD. Hello, we could
even record onto VHS or Betamax (Theres a lively trade on eBay for
Betamax!) we can then keep the recording for as long as one wishes.
Now can one do that with Freely, Now TV, Sky Glass? AIUI, the
broadcaster holds the recordings for you for XX days/months so how does
one create a persoanl digital copy?
I have seen HDMI to USB converters as used by computer gamers who want
to make videos of their gaming exploits.....
Could these be used with firesticks/Rokus/Nvidia Shield etc or would
HDCP kibosh that?
Stephen
On Fri, 5 Sep 2025 19:34:13 +0100, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
Why record anything at all? I used to record lots of programmes, and >consequently have several boxes of home recorded DVDs that I've never >watched. Literally never. Hundreds of them. A streaming service is >effectively a huge box of recordings that have been already done for
you so why go to the bother of recording them yourself? There comes a
time when maybe you need to ask yourself, as I did, why you are making
all those home recordings if nobody is going to watch them.
You might think you'll want to keep everything forever and watch your >favourite movies many times, but I've found that in reality, with the >exception of a very few movies, this just hasn't happened. After I've
watched something it's usually several years before I have any
interest in seeing it again, and the movies that are worth watching
are always available somewhere. Most of the published DVDs that I've >collected are gathering dust on the shelves, and in the few cases
where I've wanted to see one again, I've often found that in the time
since I bought it, the movie has become available in high definition
on a streaming service so I watch that instead. I have, at most, about
half a dozen Blu-ray disks that I've watched more than once.
On Fri, 5 Sep 2025 19:34:13 +0100, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
Currently we have the means to record *any* programme from either
Freeview or Freesat via either a PC based tuner or a set top PVR device
to either a hard drive, DVD disc, USB stick or a SSD. Hello, we could
even record onto VHS or Betamax (Theres a lively trade on eBay for
Betamax!) we can then keep the recording for as long as one wishes.
Now can one do that with Freely, Now TV, Sky Glass? AIUI, the
broadcaster holds the recordings for you for XX days/months so how does
one create a persoanl digital copy?
I have seen HDMI to USB converters as used by computer gamers who want
to make videos of their gaming exploits.....
Could these be used with firesticks/Rokus/Nvidia Shield etc or would
HDCP kibosh that?
Stephen
Why record anything at all? I used to record lots of programmes, and consequently have several boxes of home recorded DVDs that I've never watched. Literally never. Hundreds of them. A streaming service is effectively a huge box of recordings that have been already done for
you so why go to the bother of recording them yourself? There comes a
time when maybe you need to ask yourself, as I did, why you are making
all those home recordings if nobody is going to watch them.
You might think you'll want to keep everything forever and watch your favourite movies many times, but I've found that in reality, with the exception of a very few movies, this just hasn't happened. After I've
watched something it's usually several years before I have any
interest in seeing it again, and the movies that are worth watching
are always available somewhere. Most of the published DVDs that I've collected are gathering dust on the shelves, and in the few cases
where I've wanted to see one again, I've often found that in the time
since I bought it, the movie has become available in high definition
on a streaming service so I watch that instead. I have, at most, about
half a dozen Blu-ray disks that I've watched more than once.
I'm sure there are adaptors that would enable me to make local copies,
but I've not yet encountered anything that seems worth the trouble.
Rod.
On Fri, 5 Sep 2025 19:34:13 +0100, SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
Currently we have the means to record *any* programme from either
Freeview or Freesat via either a PC based tuner or a set top PVR device
to either a hard drive, DVD disc, USB stick or a SSD. Hello, we could
even record onto VHS or Betamax (Theres a lively trade on eBay for
Betamax!) we can then keep the recording for as long as one wishes.
Now can one do that with Freely, Now TV, Sky Glass? AIUI, the
broadcaster holds the recordings for you for XX days/months so how does
one create a persoanl digital copy?
I have seen HDMI to USB converters as used by computer gamers who want
to make videos of their gaming exploits.....
Could these be used with firesticks/Rokus/Nvidia Shield etc or would
HDCP kibosh that?
Stephen
Why record anything at all? I used to record lots of programmes, and consequently have several boxes of home recorded DVDs that I've never watched. Literally never. Hundreds of them. A streaming service is effectively a huge box of recordings that have been already done for
you so why go to the bother of recording them yourself? There comes a
time when maybe you need to ask yourself, as I did, why you are making
all those home recordings if nobody is going to watch them.
You might think you'll want to keep everything forever and watch your favourite movies many times, but I've found that in reality, with the exception of a very few movies, this just hasn't happened. After I've
watched something it's usually several years before I have any
interest in seeing it again, and the movies that are worth watching
are always available somewhere. Most of the published DVDs that I've collected are gathering dust on the shelves, and in the few cases
where I've wanted to see one again, I've often found that in the time
since I bought it, the movie has become available in high definition
on a streaming service so I watch that instead. I have, at most, about
half a dozen Blu-ray disks that I've watched more than once.
I'm sure there are adaptors that would enable me to make local copies,
but I've not yet encountered anything that seems worth the trouble.
Rod.
AIUI on catch up services, the recordings are removed after 30 >days....subscriber services like Netflix et. al. seem to have a longer
but not indefinate retention time.....
plus having recordings of TV/radio etc means that you still have
something to watch/listen to in case of an internet outage.....
same argument for spotify/deezer etc.
Hell, even a laptop could play a DVD or CD during a power cut if you
have a power bank to hand as a power cut will usually knock out internet
too (no power to your router but I suppose you could use a USB mobile >broadband dongle)
Satellite economics depends on having enough customers. I wonder if the
PSBs alone have enough cash to maintain a satellite presence, and enough customers on satellite to justify this outlay? Freesat is very much a minority sport.
If its a decade old is it still 100baseT? If so mesh WiFi will be
quicker. Any way I fell internal fibre is the gold standard...
On 05/09/2025 06:44, Tweed wrote:
Satellite economics depends on having enough customers. I wonder if the
PSBs alone have enough cash to maintain a satellite presence, and enough
customers on satellite to justify this outlay? Freesat is very much a
minority sport.
I can possibly see the PSBs clubbing together and sharing a couple of transponders to carry their core services.
Even then ITV/4/5 will only do that if mandated by Ofcom.
Everything else on Freesat (which isn't much) will cease when Sky withdraw
The direction of travel is 'on line' delivery
On 05/09/2025 11:52, David Wade wrote:
If its a decade old is it still 100baseT? If so mesh WiFi will be
quicker. Any way I fell internal fibre is the gold standard...
100 Megs copper Ethernet is more than enough.
SD streaming is about 2-3 Mb/s
HD about 8-12 ish
UHD, sometimes up to 40, but typically 10-15
On 07/09/2025 11:37, Mark Carver wrote:
On 05/09/2025 06:44, Tweed wrote:
Satellite economics depends on having enough customers. I wonder if the
PSBs alone have enough cash to maintain a satellite presence, and enough >>> customers on satellite to justify this outlay? Freesat is very much a
minority sport.
I can possibly see the PSBs clubbing together and sharing a couple of
transponders to carry their core services.
Even then ITV/4/5 will only do that if mandated by Ofcom.
Everything else on Freesat (which isn't much) will cease when Sky
withdraw
The direction of travel is 'on line' delivery
Are the satellites owned or operated by Sky ?
On 07/09/2025 11:45, Abandoned Trolley wrote:
On 07/09/2025 11:37, Mark Carver wrote:
On 05/09/2025 06:44, Tweed wrote:
Satellite economics depends on having enough customers. I wonder if the >>>> PSBs alone have enough cash to maintain a satellite presence, and
enough
customers on satellite to justify this outlay? Freesat is very much a
minority sport.
I can possibly see the PSBs clubbing together and sharing a couple of
transponders to carry their core services.
Even then ITV/4/5 will only do that if mandated by Ofcom.
Everything else on Freesat (which isn't much) will cease when Sky
withdraw
The direction of travel is 'on line' delivery
Are the satellites owned or operated by Sky ?
no, they are owned & operated by SES Astra
no, they are owned & operated by SES Astra
Yes, and with a couple of exceptions all BBC, ITV, and C4 channels and regions are uplinked by those broadcasters, and not by Sky
no, they are owned & operated by SES Astra
Yes, and with a couple of exceptions all BBC, ITV, and C4 channels and
regions are uplinked by those broadcasters, and not by Sky
Uplinking can be done from the roof of your Land Rover, almost anywhere
- so who does the uplinking and where its done from might not be relevant
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make no >>>difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubtAs I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I cannot get
if I'll ever switch them on again.
STV live.
If you haven't got an aerial or a Firestick, how are you able to watch >television at all?
Why would you want to watch TV programmes 'live' i.e. according to
someobody else's timetable instead of whenever you choose? This is the
21st century now and we're no longer tied to the limitations of
oldfashioned broadcast technology.
If you can't get the STV catchup app on your streaming device, you're
using the wrong streaming device. There are several to choose from
that can do it. From personal experience the Amazon Fire TV devices
and the Thomson 270 can receive STV, and there are probably others.
On 05/09/2025 11:57, JNugent wrote:
On 05/09/2025 10:30 AM, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make no >>>>> difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt >>>>> if I'll ever switch them on again.As I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I cannot get
STV live.
If you haven't got an aerial or a Firestick, how are you able to watch
television at all?
Why would you want to watch TV programmes 'live' i.e. according to
someobody else's timetable instead of whenever you choose? This is the
21st century now and we're no longer tied to the limitations of
oldfashioned broadcast technology.
Good point.
Even if I want to watch something (on a commecial channel) when it is
broadcast, I almost always set the Sky box to record it, then start to
watch it on "chase" at ten to fifteen minutes past the start time. Then
I cab speed through the adverts. The later past the start time I leave
it, the better chance of being able to get through the ads at high speed.
The problem with the viewers not watching ads is that, eventually,
companies will consider there is little point spending money on making
them and renting screen time. I wonder, with the "ad-free" streaming
option, where the extra few pounds a month goes. And, if everybody went >ad-free, would that generate enough cash for the streaming companies to >enable them to make the sort of programmes they now do with the aid of >advertising money? The alternative is unavoidable ads.
no, they are owned & operated by SES Astra
Yes, and with a couple of exceptions all BBC, ITV, and C4 channels and
regions are uplinked by those broadcasters, and not by Sky
Uplinking can be done from the roof of your Land Rover, almost anywhere
- so who does the uplinking and where its done from might not be relevant
But getting a usable sateliite in to orbit is a slightly different
thing, and not connected with the core business of the BBC or any other broadcaster.
I would suggest that if Freesat and Sky both went out of business
tomorrow then SES Astra would carry on very nicely.
Astra plan to launch 1Q at location 19.2 some time in 2026
On Fri, 05 Sep 2025 10:30:55 +0100, Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, ScottThanks, but I do not have a 'streaming device'. I have a smart TV
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make noAs I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I cannot get
difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt
if I'll ever switch them on again.
STV live.
If you haven't got an aerial or a Firestick, how are you able to watch
television at all?
Why would you want to watch TV programmes 'live' i.e. according to
someobody else's timetable instead of whenever you choose? This is the
21st century now and we're no longer tied to the limitations of
oldfashioned broadcast technology.
If you can't get the STV catchup app on your streaming device, you're
using the wrong streaming device. There are several to choose from
that can do it. From personal experience the Amazon Fire TV devices
and the Thomson 270 can receive STV, and there are probably others.
which I assumed would cope with all routine and common tasks (such as watching the four main television channels). I can get ITVX if I
change my postcode to one in England. I tend to prefer to watch news
and current affairs live - otherwise somehow becomes less relevant :-)
Also football is more exciting if you don't know the result.
Why ITVX should be compatible with LG but STV Player is incompatible
remains a mystery.
Sky and Freesat is actually broadcast from 28.2 East which is where the Astra 2 fleet is.
Astra 1 is at 19.2 East
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Fri, 05 Sep 2025 10:30:55 +0100, Roderick StewartCan you cast from STV player on your iPad to the TV?
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 13:39:06 +0100, ScottThanks, but I do not have a 'streaming device'. I have a smart TV
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make no >>>>> difference to me. I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt >>>>> if I'll ever switch them on again.As I mentioned, unless I get an aerial or a Firestick, I cannot get
STV live.
If you haven't got an aerial or a Firestick, how are you able to watch
television at all?
Why would you want to watch TV programmes 'live' i.e. according to
someobody else's timetable instead of whenever you choose? This is the
21st century now and we're no longer tied to the limitations of
oldfashioned broadcast technology.
If you can't get the STV catchup app on your streaming device, you're
using the wrong streaming device. There are several to choose from
that can do it. From personal experience the Amazon Fire TV devices
and the Thomson 270 can receive STV, and there are probably others.
which I assumed would cope with all routine and common tasks (such as
watching the four main television channels). I can get ITVX if I
change my postcode to one in England. I tend to prefer to watch news
and current affairs live - otherwise somehow becomes less relevant :-)
Also football is more exciting if you don't know the result.
Why ITVX should be compatible with LG but STV Player is incompatible
remains a mystery.
Sky and Freesat is actually broadcast from 28.2 East which is where
the Astra 2 fleet is.
Astra 1 is at 19.2 East
I know-a - I was making the general point that SES Astra is is not
"falling out of the Sky"
They have at least 2 other orbital locations
Sky and Freesat is actually broadcast from 28.2 East which is where
the Astra 2 fleet is.
Astra 1 is at 19.2 East
I know-a - I was making the general point that SES Astra is is not
"falling out of the Sky"
They have at least 2 other orbital locations
If you can't get the STV catchup app on your streaming device, you'reThanks, but I do not have a 'streaming device'. I have a smart TV
using the wrong streaming device. There are several to choose from
that can do it. From personal experience the Amazon Fire TV devices
and the Thomson 270 can receive STV, and there are probably others.
which I assumed would cope with all routine and common tasks (such as >watching the four main television channels). I can get ITVX if I
change my postcode to one in England. I tend to prefer to watch news
and current affairs live - otherwise somehow becomes less relevant :-)
Also football is more exciting if you don't know the result.
Why ITVX should be compatible with LG but STV Player is incompatible
remains a mystery.
On Sun, 07 Sep 2025 16:33:05 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
If you can't get the STV catchup app on your streaming device, you're >>>using the wrong streaming device. There are several to choose fromThanks, but I do not have a 'streaming device'. I have a smart TV
that can do it. From personal experience the Amazon Fire TV devices
and the Thomson 270 can receive STV, and there are probably others.
which I assumed would cope with all routine and common tasks (such as >>watching the four main television channels). I can get ITVX if I
change my postcode to one in England. I tend to prefer to watch news
and current affairs live - otherwise somehow becomes less relevant :-)
Also football is more exciting if you don't know the result.
Why ITVX should be compatible with LG but STV Player is incompatible >>remains a mystery.
As I said, if you can't receive all the available catchup services,
you're using the wrong streaming device.
Even if the streaming device
is actually part of a 'smart' TV set, it's effectively the same thing
because it performs the same function - or not, as the case may be. If
you decide to use the streaming functions of a TV set and they're not
to your liking, all you can do is replace the entire TV set.
You're much better off with an external one. They're cheaper and
easier to change if you want to experiment to find the best one for
you, and it means you have a wider range of choice when you want to
replace your TV because anything with an HDMI port will do.
Sky and Freesat is actually broadcast from 28.2 East which is where
the Astra 2 fleet is.
Astra 1 is at 19.2 East
I know-a - I was making the general point that SES Astra is is not
"falling out of the Sky"
They have at least 2 other orbital locations
Why record anything at all? I used to record lots of programmes, and consequently have several boxes of home recorded DVDs that I've never watched. Literally never. Hundreds of them. A streaming service is effectively a huge box of recordings that have been already done for
you so why go to the bother of recording them yourself? There comes a
time when maybe you need to ask yourself, as I did, why you are making
all those home recordings if nobody is going to watch them.
I've never had a power cut in 30 years, and the longest (out of no
more than 2 or 3) internet outage was about an hour. In any case,
there are other things to do with one's time than to watch television,
so I'm sure I would survive if I was temporarily unable to.
On 07/09/2025 16:45, Abandoned Trolley wrote:
Sky and Freesat is actually broadcast from 28.2 East which is where
the Astra 2 fleet is.
Astra 1 is at 19.2 East
I know-a - I was making the general point that SES Astra is is not
"falling out of the Sky"
They have at least 2 other orbital locations
They do, but the days of DTH satellite everywhere, not just here, are numbered
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:44:50 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
On 04/09/2025 12:13, JNugent wrote:
On 04/09/2025 09:26 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
Will be discussed today:
<https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/202/backbench-business- >>>>>> committee/news/209066/mps-to-hold-a-debate-on-the-future-of-
terrestrial-television/>
It doesn't bode well...
There will be a sudden rush of people who want satellite dishes fitted >>>> and who then need a new PVR which has a satellite tuner rather than a >>>> terrestrial one.
I suppose "they" want us to change to online delivery of programmes but >>>> that is a huge step backwards because you are forced to use a
proprietary player which is specific to the channel (and its ability to >>>> freeze frame, go backwards a bit, play at faster/slower than real time >>>> is primitive compared with VLC); you can only watch a programme for as >>>> long as the broadcaster retains it on their site; you can't skip/edit >>>> out adverts. You are dependent on having a fast enough broadband
connection for playing not to buffer when someone else on your network >>>> downloads a file.
All things which the broadcaster probably wants, but the punter
emphatically doesn't. All changes which a watchdog should be vetoing - >>>> if only we had watchdogs which were on the side of the punter and which >>>> had any "teeth" to say to broadcasters "Oi! No! Just no!".
I think you will find satellite being turned off before terrestrial.
Why so? Satellite must use a fraction of the power and is probably
more reliable in the middle of nowhere than terrestrial.
They cost a lot. Sky already has a strategy of getting out. If you take out
a subscription now they try to put you on an Internet connected box.
I've been using nothing but online TV viewing for a couple of years
and have no issues with it.
They could switch the transmitters off tomorrow and it would make no difference to me.
I still have a couple of Freeview boxes but I doubt
if I'll ever switch them on again.
I've never had a power cut in 30 years,
and the longest (out of no more than 2 or 3) internet outage was about
an hour.
I've never had a power cut in 30 years,
Really? I find that very hard to believe.
We had two power cuts this year, both deliberate and notified, to fix a local problem in a street cabinet, did not effect the main road or broadband.
I've never had a power cut in 30 years,
Really? I find that very hard to believe.
The power is mostly very reliable in cities with buried cables, barring
the odd transformer fire and aging distribution equipment.
We had two power cuts this year, both deliberate and notified, to fix a
local problem in a street cabinet, did not effect the main road or
broadband.
Before that, I recall only a couple of cuts since the 1987 storm.
Angus
I've never had a power cut in 30 years,
Really? I find that very hard to believe.
The power is mostly very reliable in cities with buried cables, barring the odd
transformer fire and aging distribution equipment.
As a kid in Liverpool, I don't remember any power cuts that were notI've never had a power cut in 30 years,
Really? I find that very hard to believe.
The power is mostly very reliable in cities with buried cables, barring the odd
transformer fire and aging distribution equipment.
We had two power cuts this year, both deliberate and notified, to fix a local problem in a street cabinet, did not effect the main road or broadband.
Before that, I recall only a couple of cuts since the 1987 storm.