[The News Bot]

Some breaking news from the Intellect Consumer Electronics Conference in London today has Panasonic announcing they will release Freeview HD capable TV’s next year. Exact details are still thin on the ground but Robert Scholes, Panasonic sales director is reported to have made the announcement with the likelihood that the new TVs would have built-in freeview [...]

More...

[sean5302]

One wonders what the point is?

I bought a top-end DAB receiver to discover that bandwidth is a shambles and quality atrocious, despite a massive aerial.

Freesat is similarly shambolic. All that technology and nothing to watch.

Rupert Murdoch must be laughing his proverbials off. No competition to Sky yet.

[Phil Hinton]

Originally Posted by sean5302

Rupert Murdoch must be laughing his proverbials off. No competition to Sky yet.

Doubt there will ever be much in the way of that, just look at the mess Setanta made. It will however be interesting to see what Freeview HD will offer.

[sean5302]

That's what I'm trying to say. It's all very well Matsushita announcing platforms but there's no content or infrastructure to support them in this country.

I receive DAB from Emley Moor transmitter, arguably the most advanced in this country. The signal is total rubbish at (from memory) 128kbps. My Yamaha DAB tuner won't give decent reception, yet in Germany it works perfectly.

When I asked Ofcom they tell me there is no money to finance a proper DAB or enhanced Freeview output and won't be until 2015 at the earliest.

[Rasczak]

Originally Posted by sean5302

That's what I'm trying to say. It's all very well Matsushita announcing platforms but there's no content or infrastructure to support them in this country.

BBC HD immediately springs to mind - high quality programming, exceptional quality and a good range of content. I would rather have one high pedigree channel than a dozen lacklustre ones.

[fastgaz]

Originally Posted by sean5302

One wonders what the point is?

I bought a top-end DAB receiver to discover that bandwidth is a shambles and quality atrocious, despite a massive aerial.

Freesat is similarly shambolic. All that technology and nothing to watch.

Rupert Murdoch must be laughing his proverbials off. No competition to Sky yet.

i dissagree freeview is a decent picture and at the end of the day its free

[vipergrm]

Originally Posted by fastgaz

i dissagree freeview is a decent picture and at the end of the day its free

No it isn't. Do you not pay your TV license fees? This is what they go towards. While I do think the content access is very good with iPLayer, mobile iPlayer etc etc, Freeview quality is utterly shambolic. I couldn't agree more with sean5302.

[sean5302]

Originally Posted by Rasczak

BBC HD immediately springs to mind - high quality programming, exceptional quality and a good range of content. I would rather have one high pedigree channel than a dozen lacklustre ones.

We have to pay BBC £4 billion (yes, billion) a year, which is about the same as Sky.

BBC HD has a fraction of BBC1's output and when I see that we've had endless Glastonbury on both BBC1 and BBC2 at the same time, followed by endless Wimbledon simultaneously on BBC1 and 2 I'm glad of the choice offered by SKY.

Apart from BBC HD what does Freesat offer?

That begs the question why anyone would buy new hardware to watch a single channel when SKY offers so much.

The BBC has become bloated. They sent over 400 people to Glastonbury including over 100 managers on jollies. They spent £18 million on Woss and £4 million on Davina etc.

Why aren't they spending on infrastructure? Their HD platform and the "interactive" service on Freeview are provided for them by SKY.

[Rasczak]

Originally Posted by sean5302

We have to pay BBC £4 billion (yes, billion) a year, which is about the same as Sky.

Now when did I mention budgets? I don't doubt the funding the BBC gets is good - something which has my full support.

Apart from BBC HD what does Freesat offer?

Several things. Most importantly the ability for people with a very poor DVB-T reception to benefit from Digital TV. Secondly the ability to get HD content now (and I think even most SKyHD subscribers agree that if they only had one channel, BBC HD would be it). Thirdly it offers more bandwidth for interactive elements like BBC iPlayer (due to launch on Freesat soon).

That begs the question why anyone would buy new hardware to watch a single channel when SKY offers so much.

Sky isn't for everyone. Personally I cancelled my subscription awhile back because there simply wasn't content I was interested in. Movies and TV series I can get in much better quality on Blu-ray, I'm not a massive sports fan and I can't stand the ruining of the programming by the endless adverts. And besides, you have to remember that (for what they are worth) ITV HD and C4 HD will probably land on Freesat sooner rather than later.

You also have to remember that SkyHD isn't exactly a wonderful solution. Admittedly you can pair the SkyHD box with a scaler to resolve it's problems, but if you are just after the flagship HD channel (BBC HD) then it makes sense to buy the wider range of better kit that is available to receive that. I, for example, would much rather just have access to BBC HD but be able to record it's content onto Blu-ray via a Panasonic HDD/BD recorder than have access to lacklustre, advert ridden content on SkyHD.

[fastgaz]

Originally Posted by vipergrm

No it isn't. Do you not pay your TV license fees? This is what they go towards. While I do think the content access is very good with iPLayer, mobile iPlayer etc etc, Freeview quality is utterly shambolic. I couldn't agree more with sean5302.

other people have to have whats there and the pic on my tv is near dvd quailty , i cant afford sky hd as many others cant either so i think it is better then just the normal 5 channels , as for the tv licience i dont think we should have to pay for it anyway.

[sean5302]

So it seems that most people value BBC HD. If so, the options for the UK would only be to receive this via SKY or Freesat.

Both routes can be available without any subscription via a Sky dish and either a new Freesat tv or a Sky HD box. The latter is readily available for around £100 on our Forum classifieds or the well known auction site.

To return to the OP, the availability of Freeview HD tv's from Matsushita is irrelevant, because there is no such infrastructure to provide the broadcasts, and there won't be until 2015 at the earliest, according to Ofcom.

A bit like me selling you a hydrogen fuelled car. Great, but how will you power it? No garages, no filling stations, no use. That's my point.

[sean5302]

Originally Posted by Rasczak

BBC HD immediately springs to mind - high quality programming, exceptional quality and a good range of content. I would rather have one high pedigree channel than a dozen lacklustre ones.

But that's my point.

You cannot get BBC HD on a Freeview HD tv and won't be able to in the significant future. You either need a Sky HD box or Freesat, neither of which were referred to by the OP.

[Rasczak]

Originally Posted by sean5302

But that's my point.

You cannot get BBC HD on a Freeview HD tv and won't be able to in the significant future. You either need a Sky HD box or Freesat, neither of which were referred to by the OP.

You are aware Freeview HD, with BBC HD, is going live on 2 Dec 09? The full UK rollout will be constrained by the analogue switch-off - but even then the BBC is looking into options to get an early switch on for BBC HD for areas late in the analogue shutdown programme. See this thread for details. So, when the set mentioned in the OP launches, Freeview HD will have been available in some areas for a good few months. And even where not, it will only be a year or two off.

[vipergrm]

Originally Posted by sean5302

So it seems that most people value BBC HD. If so, the options for the UK would only be to receive this via SKY or Freesat.

Both routes can be available without any subscription via a Sky dish and either a new Freesat tv or a Sky HD box. The latter is readily available for around £100 on our Forum classifieds or the well known auction site.

To return to the OP, the availability of Freeview HD tv's from Matsushita is irrelevant, because there is no such infrastructure to provide the broadcasts, and there won't be until 2015 at the earliest, according to Ofcom.

A bit like me selling you a hydrogen fuelled car. Great, but how will you power it? No garages, no filling stations, no use. That's my point.

This is a similar scenario to the whole 'HD Ready' revolution. Suddenly we had all these people buying HD Ready TVs assuming that they would be getting HD pictures when in actual fact there was absolutely zero HD content available on any format. Of course, early adapaters were also shafted by the fact that their sets didn't come with an HDMI connection either. All they got was a flatter TV, vastly inferior picture (compared to CRT) and a hell of a bill to pay off.

[Cliff]

Lets turn this around the other way.
If you were buying new TV next year would you be happy with just an SD freeview receiver when the plan is for the major channels to broadcast HD in the near future. I don't think so!

[Chanser]

Doesn't matter if you bought a Panasonic or LG Freesat TV.

[sean5302]

Why do you think "the plan is for the major channels to broadcast HD in the near future"? Presumably you mean via HD freeview.

Ofcom certainly don't think so. Are you going to believe them, or some bloke at the BBC? It's not as if the BBC are saying that, is it?

[Cliff]

The BBC are committed to HD Freeview and are now talking about broadcasting to London as early as December. Ofcom have a cunning plan to rejig the multiplexes so that the other main terrestrial channels can broadcast in HD.
They are broke at the moment so their plans might be on hold but that is another story!

From the hardware point of view we now have an agreed codec that Freeview broadcasters and manufactures can adhere to. And for the consumer that means when you buy a new telly it will be HD capable for the future.

[vipergrm]

Originally Posted by Cliff

The BBC are committed to HD Freeview and are now talking about broadcasting to London as early as December. Ofcom have a cunning plan to rejig the multiplexes so that the other main terrestrial channels can broadcast in HD.
They are broke at the moment so their plans might be on hold but that is another story!

From the hardware point of view we now have an agreed codec that Freeview broadcasters and manufactures can adhere to. And for the consumer that means when you buy a new telly it will be HD capable for the future.

I don't think anyone is arguing against introducing HD Freeview capable sets. The point is, we're all going to see TV adverts and billboards poisoned with 'HD Freeview inside' etc which will fool a lot of people as it won't be available for some, if not most of them for years.

[Miyazaki]

Is freeview HD a viable alternative to freesat HD?

Are there going to be these two new technologies next to each other for some time to come?