[jhb_airlines] Re: Digital TV on PC

  • From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:24:53 +0100

I know logic plays no part in matters these days but I would have thought
the BBC digital signal would be sent from existing masts. If they are
satellite transmissions then surely it would give an opening for users to
refuse to pay for a TV license on the grounds that they don't have the dish
to receive BBC signals?

Apart from that how would portable TV's work? Must be masts as happens with
digital radio.


-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill
Sent: 13 October 2005 17:14
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: Digital TV on PC

Our existing, main, TV is analogue, as are most people's. That happilly
works with the satellite system. The satellite box is receiving digital
data, since the satellites transmitting analogue signals were switched
off about two years ago. So, for our main set, when BBC change to
digital transmissions only, we just continue to access the digital
channels, as we are now, via the satellite receiver.
But, when they cease to transmit terrestrial analogue data, then the
other sets will only work if we either buy set top units, or have them
hooked up to the existing Sky system. That can be done by purchasing
additional Sky boxes, which can take an input from our existing box . As
has just been noted on the UK Scenery list, they can only connect them
to the existing satellite dish  by hard wiring. So that's a non starter. I'm
not sure whether BBC digital will arrive here via terrestrial
transmission, or satellite. The former wouldn't require a dish, it says
here. If current analogue reception is iffy, then I can't see that
digital input from the same aerial, into the set top converter, will be
acceptable. If it's beamed here via satellite, then I can see houses
becoming festooned with dishes.
Sky's reported position that additional boxes must be hard wired to the
didh surprises me somewhat. I's possible to run 'phone extensions around
the house without wires, by using a mains plug network.
I don't have a Hauppauge card but guess your assumption is correct.

Gerry Winskill

Bones wrote:

>I hardly ever watch "normal" channels these days because picture
>quality is just so much better via Sky. The only time I use them is
>when two programs conflict, in which case I record the better choice on
>Sky and watch the other on the usual channel.
>I'm not sure I follow your thread properly. If the switch over to
>digital makes two sets obsolete is this because they aren't capable of
>receiving digital data? If so then surely they won't work with a second
>Sky box either..
>I presume the change over makes the Hauppauge TV cards redundant too?
>-----Original Message-----
>From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill
>Sent: 13 October 2005 08:48
>Subject: [jhb_airlines] Digital TV on PC
>The IOM is to be one of the first areas to be switched from Analogue to
>Digital TV. First thing that strikes me is the high degree of spin
>being applied to this changeover. The good news is better picture
>quality; I already have access to digital via my satellite dish.
>An unmentioned sacrifice, unless there is a radical change, is that the
>stereo sound quality will plummet, as the result of the change. Next is the
>fact that although I have satellite TV, it's on one set
>only. That renders the other two sets obsolete, plus a portable, too. I'll
>presumably have to take up the Sky offer of another box, for one of
>the two analogue receivers, since I don't fancy having the house spring
>a second dish.
>The set in my lair, although a present from SWMBO, looks the prime
>candidate for the skip. I've just been doing a search on the subject,
>looking for a way of using the PC as digital TV receiver. Anyone done this,
>already? In particular, I'm just looking at the site for the DVB-T USB
>Stick, at
>This looks promising, apart from not mentioning XP Home, in the
>required OS. Anyone tried this route yet?
>Any other ideas welcomed.
>Gerry Winskill

Other related posts: