Coming Soon to Virgin TV (2011) Vol. III.

[zekeisaszekedoes]

Originally Posted by Digital Fanatic

I think you are reading too much in to <small tidbit of TV-related news>

FTFY. It can now be retroactively applied to all his posts.

Originally Posted by Felim_Doyle

Again with the BBC and the licence fee!

Yeah it's odd eh? Generally no-one uses vinyl any more, but you wouldn't know it from the couple of broken record types on CF.

Originally Posted by Felim_Doyle

Alternatively, the tail could wag the dog and we might be stuck with SD until the majority of people have upgraded and that could take years.

And that is exactly what is going to happen. I'm not kidding, most of the non-geek types I've spoken to can't really see the difference between HD and SD. In many cases because they haven't bothered to calibrate their brand spanking new HD TV sets, it has to be said.

All those hours you spend staring at the bloody thing, would make sense to get it looking as good as possible, including using HD channels when available. You would think. But most people don't work like that. It's why my sub £300 LCD TV looks better than some poorly calibrated £500+ LCD TVs - the devil's in the details or something.

[devilincarnate]

Originally Posted by Digital Fanatic

Bless him

Is that what you really think

---------- Post added at 20:28 ---------- Previous post was at 20:27 ----------

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes

the devil's in the details or something.

No I'am not

[HD Boy]

Originally Posted by Lew

Of course, the 2 channels could quite easily be 554 and 555, couldn't they?

Well spiderplant did say
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35...-post6437.html

It is only a matter of when that happens. So Live Events will be on channel 0 on Tivo like the Virgin Media legacy boxes.

[devilincarnate]

Originally Posted by HD Boy

Well spiderplant did say
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35...-post6437.html

It is only a matter of when that happens. So Live Events will be on channel 0 on Tivo like the Virgin Media legacy boxes.

I read what SP said and no-where did he say that they would be on Channel 0 They will be on what ever they will be when all the changes are implemented

[Media Boy UK]

Originally Posted by HD Boy

Well spiderplant did say
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35...-post6437.html

It is only a matter of when that happens. So Live Events will be on channel 0 on Tivo like the Virgin Media legacy boxes.

My Insider has confirm that.

It will happen eventually - but not right now.

[HD Boy]

Originally Posted by Media Boy

My Insider has confirm that.

It will happen eventually - but not right now.

Thanks for the info Media Boy.

[zekeisaszekedoes]

Originally Posted by HDFootyMan

A typical HD channel takes up around x4 the bandwidth of a SD channnel. Even if you closed all the SD channels, its doubtful there would be enough bandwidth for a HD version of every SD channel - unless you start reducing the bitrate of those HD channels (in which case they become HD-lite).

Or convert the entire broadcast network of that provider to MPEG-4, rather than MPEG-2 which is pretty deprecated at this point. Of course it's not likely due to having to support old legacy STBs that aren't MPEG-4 capable... just like SD channels taking a while to fall into obsolescence, this could be a long time coming.

As usual, everyone in front has to wait for the lowest common denominator to catch up. Let's face it, we all know there are people out there still using their old wood-panel Baird TVs from the 70s with the curvy screens, massive overscan and stupid amounts of blooming, an LCD might scare the crap out of them, what with all those buttons and animated menus.

Originally Posted by Felim_Doyle

I can't see a merger of Three and Four as they are polar opposites. More likely marriages would be One with Three and Two with Four. I also find it hard to believe that there is any BBC Three content that is suitable for broadcast in the afternoon slots of BBC One and BBC Two to fill the void left by the reduction in original and imported daytime programming on those channels as has been suggested.

I was happier when there were fewer BBC channels, because the bar was higher. It wasn't a case of cramming spare slots with whatever cheap-to-produce reality trash people would sit and get dumber to, it was more like "if the quality isn't reasonably high, it isn't getting aired". The way the BBC is now in terms of TV, I'd be happy with BBC1, BBC2, BBC 1 HD and BBC 2 HD as long as they cut the right corners (i.e. weaker programs) in order to thin the herd and keep the best programming.

Originally Posted by Media Boy

I think we will ever know how Virgin works out their EPG Channels.

Yeah it is a bit doolally... they could at least start the channels at 001, rather than 101. Make it more like Freeview, that'd help new customers.

Originally Posted by HDFootyMan

Besides, do we really NEED everything featuring Katie Price in HD? Please, think of the children. And the wasted bandwidth.

Hey, I like those kinds of shows. It gives me an excuse to repeatedly drum on the button in rage.

Originally Posted by devilincarnate

No I'am not

Damn, accidental pun...

[devilincarnate]

Originally Posted by zekeisaszekedoes

Damn, accidental pun...

Need to do better

[HD Boy]

As we are Taking about the Virgin EPG.

A advertisement on CBS Action said the horror channel was on Virgin channel 170.

Are they moving horror channel to channel 170 so CBS Action can move to channel 149 ?

If this turns out to be true this means Alibi + 1 could get moved to channel 192 when Alibi HD launches on channel 131 by September 2012.

[Lew]

Originally Posted by HD Boy

Well spiderplant did say
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35...-post6437.html

I know. I was just pointing out that just because someone has said 2 channels will be closed doesn't mean its the end of the world.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Felim_Doyle

Again with the BBC and the licence fee!

I knew what you meant, Alan: better content on the channels that we already have and more channels on VM that are already available from other providers.

I agree that it's odd that the government are proposing these local channels at a time when the mainstream UK channels are struggling and local newspapers and radio stations are going under. We have Mix 96 as our local radio station in Aylesbury but the counterpart in High Wycombe, owned by the same group and formerly broadcasting on two frequencies, went under a few years back having made a loss year after year due to lack of advertising revenue.

Maybe it was because High Wycombe is in the catchment area of other stations that don't reach Aylesbury but it seemed odd that a major town like that couldn't support a local radio station but a town like Luton is expected to support a TV channel. If we are to have local channels they should be capable of operating self-sufficiently or perhaps with a small public service grant but not as satellites (non-orbiting ) of the BBC with their civil service mentality and employment terms. The BBC already has regional TV and radio to look after they don't need more responsibility or more funding.

They have a strong presence in terms if regional radio, but weak in terms of regional tv (really all they have is a few regional programmes)

[ncfc1902]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

According to DS, three channels started today, but didn't state what channels are closing on January 1st and there is two of them.

Nothing to do with DS. It's just a comment someone has done via Facebook on the DS report of three channels launching on VM.

[zantarous]

Have to say I like the line up on CBS Action reminds me of what Bravo used to be like when it was a good channel. although how bad does TNG look now. Sony also seems like a interesting addition.

On a separate note i see Comedy Central has gone widescreen but the +1 and Extra channel seems to be in 4:3 but the actual picture appears to be a squashed widescreen image where everything looks tall and thin. It looks very odd, I did notice that CC was like this for a few weeks before the switch to 16x9 was made.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Felim_Doyle

The BBC iPlayer is currently available on a variety of platforms including TVs, computers, smartphones, tablets and games consoles. A TV licence is not required to use the iPlayer to watch programmes which have already been broadcast but the 'Watch Live' simulcast service does require one. However, development of the iPlayer was funded by the licence fee and was criticised for taking years of development before producing a viable product.

Nobody said that BBC local radio stations were in jeopardy but they might be if funding was diverted to local BBC TV stations instead. It might be nice to have local TV services covering local news and events in better times but it is just the wrong time to be doing it. If the idea fails then nobody will try it again for decades because it will be marred by having failed without taking into consideration the economic environment of the time. I don't believe that we should be trying to do this for a few years and I can only cynically suggest that it is proposed as a money earner for the government through licensing and for the BBC and Arqiva through leasing of studio and broadcast facilities and the all important EPG slots and Freeview multiplexes.

The current licence fee subsidised the digital switch-over so it should be sufficient to fund public service broadcasting at its current level and even cover future innovation especially if cost savings are realised within the BBC.

Whilst it would be a shame to see services like BBC World Service (radio)* and BBC World News (TV)* go or reduce their broadcasting hours, this is what the majority of former colonial powers and propaganda merchants have been doing in favour of website content and internet streaming of radio and TV programmes. The Irish national broadcaster RTÉ was due to launch an international service this/next year which VM were expected to carry but have shelved it in favour of expanding their website and on-line player functionality. Radio Netherlands and countless others are restricting their overseas services, especially on short-wave radio, as there is no longer a need to provide these services for ex-patriots with the advent of other delivery mechanisms. The 'colonies' are not as cut off from the world as they used to be!

*BBC World Service (radio) is currently funded by the British Government through a grant from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office but, from 2014, it will be funded by the BBC licence fee. This may be an indication that the FCO no longer feel the need for such a service for the reasons stated above and I feel it is unfair that the domestic licence fee-payers should be funding a service for non-fee-payers abroad.

*BBC World News (TV) is a commercially operated service funded by advertising and competing against other news channels, principally CNN. It has the largest audience of any BBC channel.

I do understand what you are saying, but the BBC world service and world news services are still important and now you can get them online, I feel that we need to expand the lisesnce fee to make it fit for purpose for this day and age.

---------- Post added at 21:24 ---------- Previous post was at 21:19 ----------

Originally Posted by Felim_Doyle

So we should fund the BBC both through the licence fee and through other forms of direct or indirect taxation?

There are far more appropriate ways that the BBC can manage to operate within their current budget without affecting quality. It is also very important that the BBC's funding should be easily identifiable rather than being hidden in back door government funding from the tax-payer. If anything, the BBC needs to become more autonomous and more business-like and less like a state owned broadcaster.

Which Is why I feel that the BBC should control the licence fee, not the government.

---------- Post added at 21:27 ---------- Previous post was at 21:24 ----------

Originally Posted by Horizon

I beg to differ!

Apart from the 3 new channels today, there has only been 2 other genuine new channels this year, PBS and True Entertainment which have launched on cable.

The rest are +1s or HD versions of existing channels. And some channels like Yesterday+1 and Eden+1 are only relaunches as their predecessor channels used to be on cable before they were removed (UK History+1 and UK Docs+1 removed in 2008.)

Plus Vm has removed several channels over the last few years, many because of the VMtv sale to Sky. If VM bring back channels such as MTV Classic, More 4 +1, History +1, Animal Planet +1 that were removed plus add channels that should've been on the platform ages ago ie, History HD. Then add more recent channels such as the rest of the CBS ones, Universal HD, ITV's HDs etc, then it is adding choice.

But at the moment, I don't see how removing some channels with one hand and adding others with another is adding to choice. It's just keeping things level.

I would agree that 100%, I also think that removing Current TV would be a bad idea

[HD Boy]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

I also think that removing Current TV would be a bad idea

How much would you be willing to pay to keep it ?