Hi,
I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm

Regards,

Rob.

Robert Wilson wrote:
> Hi,
> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm

Until fairly recently, you'd be hard pushed to buy a TV that wasn't 
analogue. I doubt many people are buying these TVs just because they are 
able to receive analogue. I still use a Panasonic analogue widescreen 
CRT TV simply because the picture is better than the equivalent sized 
flat panel. It has never been used for analogue, even though it's 
capable. I don't see any evidence that these TVs as described in the 
article are being bought solely for analogue.

This is simply a non story as most people use some kind of STB to view 
DTV and the boxes are hardly expensive.

Robert Wilson wrote:
> Hi,
> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?

No; people have always been prejudiced and ignorant.

   BugBear

No they are in fact more canny than the press give them credit for I think. 
The bbc have made a big thing of this but in fact with all the recent talk 
of freesat, freeview and hd and possibly changing the transmission system 
AGAIN, I feel most of the sales  will be because joe public trusts the 
authorities only to screw it up again and make them all buy a new box, so 
why not have an older type tv, which will last some years a and if you need 
a new box its cheaper than a new tv.

Brian

-- 
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
 graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________


"Robert Wilson"  wrote in message 
news:OradnQX4G4kXz_nVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
> Hi,
> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>
> Regards,
>
> Rob.

Brian Gaff wrote:
> No they are in fact more canny than the press give them credit for I think. 
> The bbc have made a big thing of this but in fact with all the recent talk 
> of freesat, freeview and hd and possibly changing the transmission system 
> AGAIN, I feel most of the sales  will be because joe public trusts the 
> authorities only to screw it up again and make them all buy a new box, so 
> why not have an older type tv, which will last some years a and if you need 
> a new box its cheaper than a new tv.
> 
> Brian
> 
Actually that rings true....are'nt they changing the format of DTT in 
2012 which will make a percentage of recivers useless in the UK?

Rob.

Silk wrote:
> Robert Wilson wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK 
>> population dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
> 
> Until fairly recently, you'd be hard pushed to buy a TV that wasn't 
> analogue. I doubt many people are buying these TVs just because they are 
> able to receive analogue. I still use a Panasonic analogue widescreen 
> CRT TV simply because the picture is better than the equivalent sized 
> flat panel. It has never been used for analogue, even though it's 
> capable. I don't see any evidence that these TVs as described in the 
> article are being bought solely for analogue.
> 
> This is simply a non story as most people use some kind of STB to view 
> DTV and the boxes are hardly expensive.



Is it even possible to get a good-quality digital CRT TV? Like you, I 
still prefer the picture quality of CRT over LCD/plasma, so when my 
current TV gives up the ghost, I'm also going to be replacing it with an 
analogue set. This is not because I'm 'unaware' of the digital switch 
over (I'm on freeview through a DVD/HD from Panasonic), I will be 
actively *chosing* an analogue set over a digital one.

Robert Wilson wrote:

>>
> Actually that rings true....are'nt they changing the format of DTT in 
> 2012 which will make a percentage of recivers useless in the UK?

No, what's happening, probably starting in the Granada region at the end 
of 2009, is that Mux B will convert to DVB-T2/MPEG 4 standard in order 
to accommodate 3 or 4 HD services.

That means that the SD services that are currently spread over six 
muxes, will be squeezed into five.

That sixth mux, Mux B today, PSB3 after DSO, in each region will only 
carry HD broadcasts, and won't be receivable by any presently available, 
or in use equipment.

I was at an industry seminar yesterday, the man from Ofcom said that the 
  SD DVB-T(1) broadcasts will continue for the foreseeable future, 
although whether or not DVB-T2/MPEG4 will gradually take over the other 
muxes he didn't say. I suspect it will.

The only receivers that will die come DSO are the very early OnDigital 
boxes, because they can only cope with 2k COFDM, and the UK will be 
switching to 8k come DSO.

Silk wrote:
|| Robert Wilson wrote:
||| Hi,
||| I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK
||| population dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
|||
||| http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
||
|| Until fairly recently, you'd be hard pushed to buy a TV that wasn't
|| analogue. I doubt many people are buying these TVs just because they
|| are able to receive analogue. I still use a Panasonic analogue
|| widescreen CRT TV simply because the picture is better than the
|| equivalent sized flat panel. It has never been used for analogue,
|| even though it's capable. I don't see any evidence that these TVs as
|| described in the article are being bought solely for analogue.
||
|| This is simply a non story as most people use some kind of STB to
|| view DTV and the boxes are hardly expensive.

Look at the VCR DVD recorder combis in the summer edition of the Argos 
catalogue, only two out of seven have Freeview tuners, I know that because 
my sister-in-law was 'thick' enough to buy one recently.

In article <OradnQX4G4kXz_nVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet>, Robert 
Wilson wrote:
> Hi,
> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm

Perhaps it's unfair to assume that it has anything to do with "IQ", 
whatever that is. Most members of the public have other things to think 
about than television. Anyway, it's technical, which is by definition 
boring and incomprehensible so there wouldn't be any point even trying to 
understand it. Generally speaking Nanny-state Britain requires that things 
sold in shops are suitable for their purpose and safe to use, so consumers 
will mostly assume this holds true and not give the matter any thought.

Rod.

Robert Wilson wrote:
> Hi,
> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rob.


I think you've got that totally the wrong way round.

It strikes me that the people reporting on this are the ones who are, as you 
put it, as think as shit.  Nobody needs a digital TV they simple need a 
digital tuner. There should be more emphasis on the simple upgrade option of 
buying a cheap digibox rather than spouting this crap about the take up of 
digtial TV's.  These reports sound more like propaganda for eth TV 
manufacturers.

I'm more than happy to go with a TV with analogue internal tuner and use a 
seperate box for receiving digital. Far more flexible and simple to upgrade 
at a later date if I wish.  If I was buying a new set I may well be tempted 
to go for a TV with analogue tuner and seperate box as it may well be more 
cost effective.


cheers

David

DM wrote:
> Robert Wilson wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK 
>> population dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Rob.
> 
> 
> I think you've got that totally the wrong way round.
> 
> It strikes me that the people reporting on this are the ones who are, as 
> you put it, as think as shit.  Nobody needs a digital TV they simple 
> need a digital tuner. There should be more emphasis on the simple 
> upgrade option of buying a cheap digibox rather than spouting this crap 
> about the take up of digtial TV's.  These reports sound more like 
> propaganda for eth TV manufacturers.
> 
> I'm more than happy to go with a TV with analogue internal tuner and use 
> a seperate box for receiving digital. Far more flexible and simple to 
> upgrade at a later date if I wish.  If I was buying a new set I may well 
> be tempted to go for a TV with analogue tuner and seperate box as it may 
> well be more cost effective.
> 
> 
> cheers
> 
> David
I suppose if you buy an analogue television set, that gives you the 
choice of the STB you use, whether you buy a crappy £20 job, or 
something with a bit more 'pedigree'.

Also I detect a whiff of me causing offence with my tone, which was not 
the intent I promise, but I do find poeple exasperating.  I don't mind 
being someone people ask and hire int to sort out technical things as 
long as they pay me to do it properly.  See Bill's earlier post.  As 
Bill says, everyone wants you to do it for nowt.

Then you start to wonder why kids are'nt leaning toward Science and 
Engineering.  My son really fancies Civil/Railway engineering, and he's 
only 7.

Cheers,

Rob.

Robert Wilson wrote:
> Hi,
> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rob.


I think you've got that totally the wrong way round.

It strikes me that the people reporting on this are the ones who are, as you 
put it, as think as shit.  Nobody needs a digital TV they simple need a 
digital tuner. There should be more emphasis on the simple upgrade option of 
buying a cheap digibox rather than spouting this crap about the take up of 
digtial TV's.  These reports sound more like propaganda for eth TV 
manufacturers.

I'm more than happy to go with a TV with analogue internal tuner and use a 
seperate box for receiving digital. Far more flexible and simple to upgrade 
at a later date if I wish.  If I was buying a new set I may well be tempted 
to go for a TV with analogue tuner and seperate box as it may well be more 
cost effective.


cheers

David

In message <OradnQX4G4kXz_nVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet>, Robert 
Wilson  wrote
>Hi,
>I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
>dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>

And the expert technical journalist on one of the Radio 4 news programs 
today claimed that "digital TV pictures were sharper" and the "sound 
quality was much better"

-- 
Alan
news2006 {at} amac {dot} f2s {dot} com

"Robert Wilson"  wrote in message 
news:OradnQX4G4kXz_nVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
> Hi,
> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
> Regards,
> Rob.
>
People used to read and so learn lot more,
now we have the TV generation instead

Steve Terry

"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:6ch93lF3fp804U1@mid.individual.net...
> Robert Wilson wrote:
>
>>>
>> Actually that rings true....are'nt they changing the format of DTT in 
>> 2012 which will make a percentage of recivers useless in the UK?
>
> No, what's happening, probably starting in the Granada region at the end 
> of 2009, is that Mux B will convert to DVB-T2/MPEG 4 standard in order to 
> accommodate 3 or 4 HD services.
>

Anyone know what happens about those regions that will have already switched 
before then (Border, Westcountry etc)?  Will they get HD or not?

"Robert Wilson"  wrote in message 
news:OradnQX4G4kXz_nVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
> Hi,
> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>
> Regards,
>
> Rob.

In fact, roughly 85% of UK homes have digital TV of some sort, on one or 
more TV sets. This surprised me, but I found it in a report on the OFCOM 
site (can't remember just where it was). So presumably at least 85% of the 
population are aware of digital TV.

Sometimes people will buy a cheap analogue set, cheerfully aware that if it 
still existing at ASO they will either replace it or get a cheap DTT box.

Many people believe that by the time of ASO in their area set top boxes will 
cost about fourpence.

Bill

"Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
news:3p6dnbePpoeHcP7VnZ2dnUVZ8tSdnZ2d@pipex.net...
>
> "Robert Wilson"  wrote in message 
> news:OradnQX4G4kXz_nVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>> Hi,
>> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
>> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Rob.
>
> In fact, roughly 85% of UK homes have digital TV of some sort, on one or 
> more TV sets. This surprised me, but I found it in a report on the OFCOM 
> site (can't remember just where it was). So presumably at least 85% of the 
> population are aware of digital TV.
>
> Sometimes people will buy a cheap analogue set, cheerfully aware that if 
> it still existing at ASO they will either replace it or get a cheap DTT 
> box.
>
> Many people believe that by the time of ASO in their area set top boxes 
> will cost about fourpence.
>
> Bill
>


I know several people who have bought cheap analog LCDs simply for use with 
game consoles.   In otherwords, as plain monitors, with no intention of 
using the tuner at all.

Those people were not 'thick', they were making an informed choice.

-- 
Ron

Bill Wright wrote:
> "Robert Wilson"  wrote in message 
> news:OradnQX4G4kXz_nVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>> Hi,
>> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
>> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Rob.
> 
> In fact, roughly 85% of UK homes have digital TV of some sort, on one or 
> more TV sets. This surprised me, but I found it in a report on the OFCOM 
> site (can't remember just where it was). So presumably at least 85% of the 
> population are aware of digital TV.
> 
> Sometimes people will buy a cheap analogue set, cheerfully aware that if it 
> still existing at ASO they will either replace it or get a cheap DTT box.
> 
> Many people believe that by the time of ASO in their area set top boxes will 
> cost about fourpence.
> 
> Bill 
> 
> 
Richer Sounds are doing them for about 20 quid i think.  If 85% of 
peoplealready have a DTV solution, then I wonder how much less STBs will 
cost.

I decided to 'roll my own' anyway, as I use MythTV.

Rob.

"Bill Wright"  wrote in message 
news:3p6dnbePpoeHcP7VnZ2dnUVZ8tSdnZ2d@pipex.net...
>
> "Robert Wilson"  wrote in message 
> news:OradnQX4G4kXz_nVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>> Hi,
>> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK 
>> population dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Rob.
>
> In fact, roughly 85% of UK homes have digital TV of some sort, on one 
> or more TV sets. This surprised me, but I found it in a report on the 
> OFCOM site (can't remember just where it was). So presumably at least 
> 85% of the population are aware of digital TV.
>
> Sometimes people will buy a cheap analogue set, cheerfully aware that 
> if it still existing at ASO they will either replace it or get a cheap 
> DTT box.
>
> Many people believe that by the time of ASO in their area set top 
> boxes will cost about fourpence.
>
> Bill
>


Actually Bill, how many people think they have 'digital' and how many 
think they have Sky but n'er the twain shall meet?



-- 
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

Robert Wilson said the following on 26/06/2008 08:49:
> Hi,
> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rob.

As soon as digital screens durability get to a quarter of a century 
for the prices, then I'll get rid of my analogue!

Earlier this year, lifespan numbers were coming in at five years. 
F*ck that!

Bagpuss wrote:
> "Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:6ch93lF3fp804U1@mid.individual.net...
>> Robert Wilson wrote:
>>
>>> Actually that rings true....are'nt they changing the format of DTT in 
>>> 2012 which will make a percentage of recivers useless in the UK?
>> No, what's happening, probably starting in the Granada region at the end 
>> of 2009, is that Mux B will convert to DVB-T2/MPEG 4 standard in order to 
>> accommodate 3 or 4 HD services.
>>
> 
> Anyone know what happens about those regions that will have already switched 
> before then (Border, Westcountry etc)?  Will they get HD or not? 

My understanding is they will have six SD muxes initially, switching to the 
new proposed format at the end of 2009 [1]. More rescanning and viewer confusion !

[1] Providing the new DTT transmitters being installed in those regions 
currently, can actually handle DVB-T2 !

-- 
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:24:59 +0100, "Bill Wright"
 wrote:

>
>"Robert Wilson"  wrote in message 
>news:OradnQX4G4kXz_nVnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@posted.plusnet...
>> Hi,
>> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
>> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Rob.
>
>In fact, roughly 85% of UK homes have digital TV of some sort, on one or 
>more TV sets. This surprised me, but I found it in a report on the OFCOM 
>site (can't remember just where it was). So presumably at least 85% of the 
>population are aware of digital TV.
>
>Sometimes people will buy a cheap analogue set, cheerfully aware that if it 
>still existing at ASO they will either replace it or get a cheap DTT box.
>
>Many people believe that by the time of ASO in their area set top boxes will 
>cost about fourpence.

I wouldn't buy a DTT only TV yet.  We won't get freeview until
switchover (and maybe not even then).

-- 
(\__/)  M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:13:47 +0100, DM  wrote:

>Robert Wilson wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK population 
>> dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>> 
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Rob.
>
>
>I think you've got that totally the wrong way round.
>
>It strikes me that the people reporting on this are the ones who are, as you 
>put it, as think as shit.  Nobody needs a digital TV they simple need a 
>digital tuner. There should be more emphasis on the simple upgrade option of 
>buying a cheap digibox rather than spouting this crap about the take up of 
>digtial TV's.  These reports sound more like propaganda for eth TV 
>manufacturers.
>
>I'm more than happy to go with a TV with analogue internal tuner and use a 
>seperate box for receiving digital. Far more flexible and simple to upgrade 
>at a later date if I wish.  If I was buying a new set I may well be tempted 
>to go for a TV with analogue tuner and seperate box as it may well be more 
>cost effective.

Wouldn't it be even better if TVs came with _no_ tuner at all?  A
system of standard plug in tuners could be devised to make the TV pick
up analogue, freeview, satelite etc as required.

This would save having several boxes but allowing
upgrades/replacements etc.

It'll never happen though.
-- 
(\__/)  M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

On 27/06/2008 in message  Mark 
wrote:

>Wouldn't it be even better if TVs came with no tuner at all?

Aren't they called monitors?

-- 
Jeff Gaines Damerham Hampshire UK
There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.
(Ken Olson, president Digital Equipment, 1977)

In , Mark
 wrote:

>I wouldn't buy a DTT only TV yet.  We won't get freeview until
>switchover (and maybe not even then).

I don't think anyone is suggesting DTT-only TVs. Just IDTVs (ie analogue
and digital). I certainly made sure that the TV I bought two years after
Digital Switch On - ie, in 2000 - was an IDTV. Then, it was hard to find
an IDTV amongst the deluge of analogue-only sets. Here we are almost a
decade after Digital Switch On and it's a disgrace that the retailers are
still obfuscating product descriptions, adverts and point of sale
information.

Mark wrote:
> 
> Wouldn't it be even better if TVs came with _no_ tuner at all?  A
> system of standard plug in tuners could be devised to make the TV pick
> up analogue, freeview, satelite etc as required.
> 
> This would save having several boxes but allowing
> upgrades/replacements etc.
> 
> It'll never happen though.

This is the same idea as hi-fi separates.

The people on this group might buy them, but JP wants a single box 
solution.  It's easier.

Andy

Steve Terry wrote:

> People used to read and so learn lot more,
> now we have the TV generation instead

Maybe that applies to the small but ever growing underclass but, believe 
it or not, more books are sold and read now than at any time during our 
history.

"Silk"  wrote in message 
news:g4b8pq$ue6$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> Steve Terry wrote:
>
>> People used to read and so learn lot more,
>> now we have the TV generation instead
>
> Maybe that applies to the small but ever growing underclass but, believe 
> it or not, more books are sold and read now than at any time during our 
> history.

And have you seen how thick the Sunday Times is?

Richard Brooks wrote:
> Robert Wilson said the following on 26/06/2008 08:49:
>> Hi,
>> I came across this article.  Has the collective IQ of the UK 
>> population dropped like a rock over the last 20 years or so?
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7473807.stm
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Rob.
> 
> As soon as digital screens durability get to a quarter of a century for 
> the prices, then I'll get rid of my analogue!
> 
> Earlier this year, lifespan numbers were coming in at five years. F*ck 
> that!
You know it's funny that because I remember from my childhood that the 
early colour sets were very poor for reliability.  Infant technology 
methinks?

Actually I think that LCD looks great when it's displaying material that 
it was designed to show, ie HD.  I have a 40" Samsung driven from a 
Linux box showing BBC HD and i'm very happy.

Has anyone got an HD compatible CRT?  If so is it better than LCD?  I 
know the CRT zealots are bound to say yes, but was hoping for a balanced 
opinion.

Cheers,

Rob

In article <P-mdne5ORezZSvTVnZ2dnUVZ8sbinZ2d@posted.plusnet>, Robert Wilson 
wrote:
> Has anyone got an HD compatible CRT?  If so is it better than LCD?  I 
> know the CRT zealots are bound to say yes, but was hoping for a balanced 
> opinion.

HD has been around since many years before flat screens were invented, and 
was displayed in a variety of ways using direct-view CRT, back projection 
and front-projection using Trinitrons or separate CRTs with coloured 
filters, and even a colour Eidophor. I recall being very impressed by all 
of these at trade exhibitions and wondering how long it would be before we 
could see HD anywhere else. Now, a whole generation later, I am less than 
impressed by what I see in the shops. Either I've become cynical in my old 
age or the best available broadcast TV quality has become steadily worse. 
I'm not a zealot, just somebody who was responsible for picture quality for 
many years and is disappointed by the way it is going.

Rod.

In article ,
Roderick Stewart  wrote:

> In article <P-mdne5ORezZSvTVnZ2dnUVZ8sbinZ2d@posted.plusnet>, Robert Wilson 
> wrote:
> > Has anyone got an HD compatible CRT?  If so is it better than LCD?  I 
> > know the CRT zealots are bound to say yes, but was hoping for a balanced 
> > opinion.
> 
> HD has been around since many years before flat screens were invented, and 
> was displayed in a variety of ways using direct-view CRT, back projection 
> and front-projection using Trinitrons or separate CRTs with coloured 
> filters, and even a colour Eidophor. I recall being very impressed by all 
> of these at trade exhibitions and wondering how long it would be before we 
> could see HD anywhere else. Now, a whole generation later, I am less than 
> impressed by what I see in the shops. Either I've become cynical in my old 
> age or the best available broadcast TV quality has become steadily worse. 
> I'm not a zealot, just somebody who was responsible for picture quality for 
> many years and is disappointed by the way it is going.
> 
> Rod.
> 
Many shops don't have a HD source and simply show a current SD
transmission - stretched to fill the screen if it's 4x3: and the sets
are set up very bright and contrasty because of the lighting. Also some
Freeview transmissions are at a rather low bitrate and look mucky as a
result.

It can be done: I've just bought a Sony 40W4000, which gives excellent
results from good SD material (and disguises the line structure
remarkably well); HD material from Blu-Ray looks terrific.

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:26:30 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>The only receivers that will die come DSO are the very early OnDigital 
>boxes, because they can only cope with 2k COFDM, and the UK will be 
>switching to 8k come DSO.

Also, my (long sold) On Digital integrated TV had a SCART on the back
so I'd think that just plugging in a set top box would restore all
necessary functionality.

I don't see what anybody's getting upset about..unless it's the
constant technology refreshes that are now part of the norm in the
digital society or the plethora of mismatching boxes they have to
attach to their TVs.

While I'm moaning, just as I'd migrated to a pleasant full silver
living-room set up the buggers have reintroduced that ugly black
again!!!!

-- 
Z

On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:25:00 +0100, Zathras
 wrote:

>On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:26:30 +0100, Mark Carver
><mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>The only receivers that will die come DSO are the very early OnDigital 
>>boxes, because they can only cope with 2k COFDM, and the UK will be 
>>switching to 8k come DSO.
>
>Also, my (long sold) On Digital integrated TV had a SCART on the back
>so I'd think that just plugging in a set top box would restore all
>necessary functionality.
>
>I don't see what anybody's getting upset about..unless it's the
>constant technology refreshes that are now part of the norm in the
>digital society or the plethora of mismatching boxes they have to
>attach to their TVs.
>
>While I'm moaning, just as I'd migrated to a pleasant full silver
>living-room set up the buggers have reintroduced that ugly black
>again!!!!

TELL ME ABOUT IT!!!!  I started replacing my ageing Hi-Fi set up a
couple of years ago with silver components.  Now I've added a DVD/HDD
recorder and Blu-Ray player and I had no choice but black!

Marky P.

"Marky P"  wrote in message 
news:211o64t59mpue30524vdm783bhgp9li94n@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:25:00 +0100, Zathras
>  wrote:

>>While I'm moaning, just as I'd migrated to a pleasant full silver
>>living-room set up the buggers have reintroduced that ugly black
>>again!!!!
>
> TELL ME ABOUT IT!!!!  I started replacing my ageing Hi-Fi set up a
> couple of years ago with silver components.  Now I've added a DVD/HDD
> recorder and Blu-Ray player and I had no choice but black!

Just wait a few years. I've got a silver Sony turntable bought in 1982.

I'm still waiting for teak to come back in to match my 1976 (real) Goodmans 
speakers.

-- 
Max Demian

In article , Max Demian wrote:
> >>While I'm moaning, just as I'd migrated to a pleasant full silver
> >>living-room set up the buggers have reintroduced that ugly black
> >>again!!!!
> >
> > TELL ME ABOUT IT!!!!  I started replacing my ageing Hi-Fi set up a
> > couple of years ago with silver components.  Now I've added a DVD/HDD
> > recorder and Blu-Ray player and I had no choice but black!
> 
> Just wait a few years. I've got a silver Sony turntable bought in 1982.
> 
> I'm still waiting for teak to come back in to match my 1976 (real) Goodmans 
> speakers.

Maybe it will, or maybe we'll see a return of maroon and cream with gold trim 
on the control knobs, or maybe Quad will start making left-handed tuners and 
amplifiers again, but I doubt if any of it will match my grubby white 1972 
Bowers and Wilkins loudspeakers. Luckily I don't care much what it all looks 
like because I listen with my ears.

Rod.

In article ,
Roderick Stewart  scribeth
thus
>In article , Max Demian wrote:
>> >>While I'm moaning, just as I'd migrated to a pleasant full silver
>> >>living-room set up the buggers have reintroduced that ugly black
>> >>again!!!!
>> >
>> > TELL ME ABOUT IT!!!!  I started replacing my ageing Hi-Fi set up a
>> > couple of years ago with silver components.  Now I've added a DVD/HDD
>> > recorder and Blu-Ray player and I had no choice but black!
>> 
>> Just wait a few years. I've got a silver Sony turntable bought in 1982.
>> 
>> I'm still waiting for teak to come back in to match my 1976 (real) Goodmans 
>> speakers.
>
>Maybe it will, or maybe we'll see a return of maroon and cream with gold trim 
>on the control knobs, or maybe Quad will start making left-handed tuners and 
>amplifiers again, but I doubt if any of it will match my grubby white 1972 
>Bowers and Wilkins loudspeakers. 

They DM2's ?....

>Luckily I don't care much what it all looks 
>like because I listen with my ears.
>
>Rod.
>

-- 
Tony Sayer

In article , Tony sayer wrote:
> >Maybe it will, or maybe we'll see a return of maroon and cream with gold trim 
> >on the control knobs, or maybe Quad will start making left-handed tuners and 
> >amplifiers again, but I doubt if any of it will match my grubby white 1972 
> >Bowers and Wilkins loudspeakers. 
> 
> They DM2's ?....

They are, and they still sound as good as ever. Nothing sounds "forced" like many 
of today's systems with separate woofer boxes, and a sure sign of a smooth 
frequency response is that everything sounds very clear even at low volume 
levels, so I can watch TV after midnight without annoying the neighbours and 
without straining to follow the dialogue.

Rod.

In article ,
Roderick Stewart  scribeth
thus
>In article , Tony sayer wrote:
>> >Maybe it will, or maybe we'll see a return of maroon and cream with gold 
>trim 
>> >on the control knobs, or maybe Quad will start making left-handed tuners and 
>> >amplifiers again, but I doubt if any of it will match my grubby white 1972 
>> >Bowers and Wilkins loudspeakers. 
>> 
>> They DM2's ?....
>
>They are, and they still sound as good as ever. Nothing sounds "forced" like 
>many 
>of today's systems with separate woofer boxes, and a sure sign of a smooth 
>frequency response is that everything sounds very clear even at low volume 
>levels, so I can watch TV after midnight without annoying the neighbours and 
>without straining to follow the dialogue.
>
>Rod.
>
Remember "desiring" a pair of they around that time, getting very good
reviews then:)...
-- 
Tony Sayer