Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul
LOL, you dont get any brownie points for that - it was not exactly hard to predict, and as noted, a national plan.
|
You’re right, but I had a fair number of detractors back then.
I’m not asking for any brownie points, anyhow. I’m just saying what I think. Either I’m right or wrong - no big deal.
---------- Post added at 19:43 ---------- Previous post was at 19:38 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
They could do this dropping an episode a week of one programme at 8pm on a Monday, another at 9pm, another at 10pm... And so on in sequence.
Realising they have some spare airtime they could run trailers, or sell adverts. They could even break up the programme itself - giving the advantage of the captive viewer to sell to advertisers.
Once they've done this for say, um, 168 hours a week they could publish the sequence in which programming can be viewed first run or, if required, repeat showings to pad it out a bit. They could even explore innovative ways to supply content advertising funded, perhaps to non-subscribers, if only such a transmission system existed that people could receive such programming by default. Broadcast, if you like, into their living rooms in an accessible form. Like you just switched on your TV and it's there.
|
Haha, you never give up, do you? This is a real Monty Python experience.
Maybe the streamers will also issue subscribers with a free fake portable aerial to put on their TV sets, just to make people of a nervous disposition feel safe….
Maybe they could also reduce picture quality during very hot weather and when it rains heavily so you can kid yourself nothing’s changed.
---------- Post added at 19:45 ---------- Previous post was at 19:43 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
If we are going as low as superfast (using the greater than 30 megabits definition) in 2014 the UK had 85-90% coverage. More than enough to stream high definition television at that time and develop a market of over 20 million households.
|
H’mmm. Maybe you should revisit what was being said at the time.
---------- Post added at 19:47 ---------- Previous post was at 19:45 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
The notion that there is some kind of “game changer” in terms of progress in content delivery that’s more likely to fall in the next decade than the last one is flawed.
|
It’s not flawed when you consider that there were still a lot of households who received either no or inadequate broadband speeds. This was the big reason quoted on here as why the channels would never be closed down. Lack of electricity to support streaming was also quoted!
