[opendtv] Re: Some Aussie posts

  • From: Jeroen Stessen <jeroen.stessen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:02:04 +0100


Bert wrote: 
> Oh pooh.
> The Netherlands destroyed already the hype about guaranteed indoor 
> reception, which I saw was their intent again somewhere on the web. 

That is unfair, because not all of the transmitters have been 
installed yet. During 2007 a lot of local transmitters will be brought 
on line, and some central transmitters (like Lopik) will be switched 
off. Also the polatisation will change from H to V. Eindhoven will 
have 2 transmitters, east and west of the center. I don't know why. 

This document describes the situation immediately after the transition: 
I had found a map of locations to be added, but I can't find it again! 
Ask about indoor coverage again in a year or so, it will be good. 
Every concentration of population will be covered then. THEN. 

> Which is why, when Jeroen explained the price structure of TV, my 
> reaction was that they were deliberately setting up DTT to fail. 

It is still cheaper than analog cable, let alone digital cable. 
Add the fact that a lot of people really hate their cable company, 
because of inadequate customer service (not even because of the 
picture quality). Until now they had no alternative, now they do. 

Also, let's not forget that cable TV is not really old in this 
country. Before that we had shared antenna installations, which 
would just collect and distribute all the OTA channels. They would 
serve a block, maybe a few blocks of houses, each. They could use 
larger antennas, allowing reception of more remote transmitters. 

When they were upscaled to an entire city, and channels were 
converted to different frequencies, then we would start calling it 
"cable TV". This happened during the 1980's. Satellite channels 
were added only later, and BBC later yet. Then cable would offer a 
package that was not available in any other way, until digital 
satellite receivers became affordable, late in the 1990's. 
So, our cable TV has a history of only ~25 years, in most towns. 

Now, digital terrestrial TV could in principle offer a package 
that can compete with (analog) cable, i.e. some 30 programs. 
They will even throw in one porn channel for free, and some sports 
channels for extra money. For some mysterious reason they will not 
include BBC 1&2. But for many people this is now the first 
serious alternative to cable. Did I mention that it is cheaper ? 

Satellite reception is an even more attractive alternative, if you 
can get over the initial cost of a dish, LNBs, and receiver(s). 
But many appartment owners try to forbid it for their renters, 
saying that it will spoil the look of the building and there is 
nothing in the air that can not be received on cable. Yeah right. 
You depend on a view of the south, and on building regulations, 
and on reasonable weather (rain, snow !), but otherwise it is a 
very good deal. You still have to run cables through your house, 
though, so it will never be as easy as digital OTA reception. 

-- Jeroen

| From:     Jeroen H. Stessen   | E-mail:  Jeroen.Stessen@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Building: SFJ-5.22 Eindhoven  | Deptmt.: Philips Applied Technologies |
| Phone:    ++31.40.2732739     | Visiting & mail address: Glaslaan 2 |
| Mobile:   ++31.6.44680021     | NL 5616 LW Eindhoven, the Netherlands |
| Skype:  callto:jeroen.stessen | Website: http://www.apptech.philips.com/ 

Other related posts: