[epsilon]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

What confirmation?

Exactly, it didn't give you any.

I was simply making the point that DTT and IPTV are completely different because the latter was on demand rather than channel based. Previous big changes have not enabled such revolutionary change to the method by which broadcasters present their content.

The broadcasters have already shown their hand and their vision of an IPTV future. It is Freely, where broadcast channels continue to use DVB but delivered over IP rather than the transmitter network. The "on demand" exclusive version is entirely your own invention.

This is not about the availability of alternative means of scheduled channel delivery, it is about the changeover to on demand, which broadcasters find cheaper and easier to manage for reasons I have given on multiple occasions. THAT is the point, not ‘Is there an alternative method of delivery over the airwaves?’. As I said earlier, with diminishing audiences watching our traditional channels, the broadcasters are unwilling to continue to plough money into it.

Again, the broadcasters have already demonstrated their potential replacement for Freeview, it is Freely with, oh you know.. regular linear channels.

As for this point you make about compensation, where have I said anywhere that the government or anyone else had to pay compensation? What I am saying is that unless compensation is available, the broadcasters will be unwilling to keep funding the existing system.

Again, not what has happened with other forms of simulcasting.

This withering comment was about the FAST channels. I have already (how many times?) explained that these channels are run on the cheap and they simply don’t incur the same costs as the big five. You’ve only got to compare the content with the traditional channels to see that.

CNN operate their normal service as a FAST channel, as do most other news channels NHK World, France 24, DW etc. Same for your right wing buddies at Talk TV, OAN, Newsmax etc. You can't just pick a subset of cheap reality / old tv shows etc presented without continuity and use that to represent FAST channels as a whole.

The FAST channels were never a part of my prediction, but my view is that they will indeed survive the switchover to IPTV only. But don’t expect the likes of BBC, ITV and the rest to follow - they will stick with on demand because it saves them costs.

Again, as can be seen with Freely, they are continuing to broadcast linear channels and still using DVB but over IP. I don't expect this to get past your filter as it doesn't give you confirmation of your dream scenario.

Well, epsilon, with the bullying and hectoring way you guys react to opinions different from your own, is it any wonder that others don’t stick their heads above the parapet? I know for a fact that some people do agree with me, but they won’t say so on here, which is a shame. These are really interesting times, and people would expect to see intelligent debate on these issues, particularly on a forum like this.

Yeah, cry me a river! Not agreeing with you isn't the same as bullying and hectoring. Don't play the sympathy card just because things aren't going your way.

I don’t think you are grasping what I’m saying here. You can make as good a case as you like on how the existing DTT channels could be replicated in as many ways as you would want, but you have completely ignored or missed my point.

The broadcasters want to put out their content on demand via IPTV only. This is the issue you need to address because it is the one thing that is most likely to dictate which road is taken in the next few years.

If you don’t believe me, ask Tim Davie. As you know, the BBC is always to be relied upon to deliver the news correctly (or so you tell me on here)!

Another reminder needed here that Freely, the DTT "replacement", carries linear channels using DVB over IP. Filter Alert!!!