View Single Post
Old 19-11-2020, 14:23   #5
cheekyangus
cf.mega poster
 
cheekyangus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,661
cheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond reputecheekyangus has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Major changes proposed in new Freeview consultation

​<cont>

Again this is my initial thoughts and interpretation. They kept saying in the document that, at least to start with, any broadcaster who wanted a "IP fallback" would also need to have an app on Freeview Play as it would use processes already used for streaming channels provided in the existing Freeview Play-compliant apps. They also said organisational procedures (i.e. paperwork to comply and be added, not interface placement related) already used for current services/apps would will be used as they are already in place.

I may copy'n'paste pieces later as to what I'm trying to convey above, as my wording doesn't seem quite correct, I'm composing it from memory and their wording seemed clearer.

I think this all might mean that some of the streaming proposals could be implemented on older equipment, at least existing Freeview Play-branded equipment, just not all of the proposals.

So HD swapping and at least some of the streaming proposals will only work on models from 2020 onwards that have Channel List Management functionality. I don't get the impression there will be a branding launched to help the public identify compatible models, they certainly don't seem to mention it.

They don't mention how CLM works.
cheekyangus is offline   Reply With Quote