Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
His comment on power consumption refers back to a point I made in some version or other of this discussion some years ago now. Like FAST TV, it baked OB’s noodle because he hadn’t considered it and didn’t have any way to counter it, so he adopted his usual tactic of sneering at it and hoping it would just go away. Which obviously it won’t.
|
More assumptions that are not true. You’re starting to sound desperate now, Chris.
Incidentally, although I have a personal disdain for the FAST channels, that’s simply due to the fact that they make for even more dumbed-down viewing. If people want to watch them, fine - it’s no skin off my nose.
As for the electricity supply, that’s your argument, not mine, and it’s based on that inexplicable attitude that the pair of you seem to have that nothing much will change from where we stand now.
If you haven’t noticed channels starting to disappear, like the Disney Channel, FX and so on, and the redirection of original material to the streamers, then you haven’t been paying attention. We’re not even half way into my prediction period yet and everything is pointing to what I said more or less coming true.
Oh, and don’t forget that even the BBC is planning for an all-streaming future within the next 10 years. That’s something that I note
you are trying hard to ignore.
---------- Post added at 13:17 ---------- Previous post was at 13:14 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
What's the difference between a "traditional" channel and a FAST channel?
Would ITV1 over IP be FAST? If not, why not?
|
Now you are being ridiculous. You know very well what a FAST channel is, and that my belief is that ITV1, 2, 3 and 4 will just morph into ITVX. If the government allows them to do so, of course.