Probably more likely Sky Underground.

I mean Freeview has not been called terrestrial has it.
Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"wrightsaerials@aol.com" <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote in message
news:99dc40c7-3945-41c6-b40f-c49dae2eb40en@googlegroups.com...
> On Friday, 23 September 2022 at 18:51:46 UTC+1, NY wrote:
>> "Mark Carver" <mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:jp5v8t...@mid.individual.net...
>> > https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html
>>
>> Will Sky change their name if people are no longer receiving their
>> broadcasts from a satellite up in the sky>? ;-)
>
> Yes, Sky are going to be known as 'Land' from next year.
>
> Bill

It would instead great if freesat was the norm, not freeview, and that the
internet was there as well. At the moment the telecoms companies want the
reast of freeview frequencies and would pay the gov a lot to lease them,
meaning that the sat version might grow. I would imagine though that the
difficult part would be when you need to replace the sat. Who would pay for
it? Who pays for the hardware Freeview?
Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"the dog from that film you saw" <dsb@REMOVETHISbtinternet.com> wrote in
message news:%xFXK.177734$IRd5.164772@fx10.iad...
> On 23/09/2022 18:51, NY wrote:
>> "Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:jp5v8tFep16U3@mid.individual.net...
>>> https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html
>>
>> Will Sky change their name if people are no longer receiving their
>> broadcasts from a satellite up in the sky>? ;-)
>>
>> I presume this is a Sky-only thing and will only affect Sky-specific
>> channels, and the Freesat will continue as a broadcast medium for many
>> years yet?
>
>
>
> it would be very convenient if for terrestrial channels you could avoid
> connecting your tv to the aerial socket and instead receive them via
> broadband - as simple as 1 gets you bbc 1, 2 bbc 2 etc etc.
>
>

Mark Carver wrote:

> https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html

Sky are denying it

<https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html>

On 25/09/2022 10:54, Brian Gaff wrote:

> Probably more likely Sky Underground.

What does the T in DTT stand for?

--
Max Demian

On Sunday, 25 September 2022 at 13:06:02 UTC+1, Max Demian wrote:
> On 25/09/2022 10:54, Brian Gaff wrote:
>
> > Probably more likely Sky Underground.
> What does the T in DTT stand for?
>
> --
> Max Demian
? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB-T

On Sun, 25 Sep 2022 10:52:39 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
<brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:

>I did also wonder if Freesat and indeed Freeview might go completely online,
>which as I and others have said is a huge mistake as it gives a single point
>of failure for all communications.
> Brian

If you watch TV online it makes much more sense to watch things when
you want to watch them than in accordance with somebody else's
timetable, but I understand that 'live' TV streams of broadcasts
(meaning concurrent with the equivalent broadcasts) are available
online if you can be bothered to look for them.

Most of my TV viewing has been online for several years now, and 100%
of it has been online since the beginning of this year, and it hasn't
failed yet. Your mileage may vary, as they say, but if something works
for you, it seems silly not to use it.

Rod.

On 25/09/2022 14:07, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> If you watch TV online it makes much more sense to watch things when
> you want to watch them than in accordance with somebody else's
> timetable, but I understand that 'live' TV streams of broadcasts
> (meaning concurrent with the equivalent broadcasts) are available
> online if you can be bothered to look for them.
>
> Most of my TV viewing has been online for several years now, and 100%
> of it has been online since the beginning of this year, and it hasn't
> failed yet. Your mileage may vary, as they say, but if something works
> for you, it seems silly not to use it.

I very rarely watch online, a couple of times a week I watch BBC Wales
because BBC Scotland has some sort of soap opera on BBC1. About the only
time is when the BBC WalesHinterland style series are running.

I cannot remember the last time Freeview failed but even though my BT
broadband is usually reliable, I do have the odd problem. I can get a
4G router from them if there is a fault but presumably that will take a
day or so.

Never had any interest in satellite.

On 25/09/2022 13:01, Andy Burns wrote:
> Mark Carver wrote:
>
>> https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html
>>
>
> Sky are denying it
>
> <https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html>
>

 A sure sign it's happening then !  :-)

On Sunday, 25 September 2022 at 10:52:41 UTC+1, Brian Gaff wrote:
> I did also wonder if Freesat and indeed Freeview might go completely online,
> which as I and others have said is a huge mistake as it gives a single point
> of failure for all communications.
> Brian

Bit of a misunderstanding of the internet here. Originally Arpanet developed by the US DoD it is designed to be able to withstand and continue operating after a nuclear exchange.

Links, nodes etc. can be taken out and it carries on working. The worst I recall was the 1998 ice storm in Canada. Suspended wires broke, power was off over a huge area. Took two weeks to recover, but eventually emails got through.

I suppose the wire / fibre from you to the exchange is potentially a single point of failure, but even in 2010 we had: -

Primary network - Cable [coax wiring] with NTHell / Virgin.
Secondary Network - BT ADSL / VDSL [over PSTN].
[stand by] Backup network - 3G from any carrier.

Our [out of warranty] Draytek router that we used to do this was also to an extent a single point of failure, and is was damaged by a nearby lightning strike, although retaining some functionality.

BT's network does now provide 99.9% up time, although it took them a few years to fulfil their promise.

PS how do you think most content gets to Freeview transmitters? It ain't relay any more.

SNIP

On 25/09/2022 13:01, Andy Burns wrote:
> Mark Carver wrote:
>
>> https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html
>>
>
> Sky are denying it
>
> <https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html>
>

And a day later announce this

https://www.skygroup.sky/article/sky-stream-the-new-easy-way-to-get-sky

Mark Carver <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 25/09/2022 13:01, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Mark Carver wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Sky are denying it
>>
>> <https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2022/09/sky-uk-reportedly-plan-to-end-satellite-tv-dish-installs-in-2023.html>
>>
>>
>
> And a day later announce this
>
> https://www.skygroup.sky/article/sky-stream-the-new-easy-way-to-get-sky
>

I think that’s more their attempt to head off the likes of the Firestick.
Was round at my son’s house. He has no dish or TV aerial and depends
entirely on the Firestick. With access to iPlayer, Amazon Prime and Netflix
there’s very little extra that Sky offer unless you want their sports
channels.

On 26/09/2022 21:25, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> Bit of a misunderstanding of the internet here. Originally Arpanet developed by the US DoD it is designed to be able to withstand and continue operating after a nuclear exchange.

You are comparing MilNet with the commercial internet. As politicians
are always telling us, the reason you give things to commercial
contractors is to increase efficiency, and you do that by reducing
redundancy.

MilNet is survivable because it is very much a network of peers, not a
hierarchy of consumers, retail, ISPs, wholesale ISPs, national hubs, etc.

On Sun, 25 Sep 2022 11:00:35 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
<brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>It would instead great if freesat was the norm, not freeview, and that the
>internet was there as well. At the moment the telecoms companies want the
>reast of freeview frequencies and would pay the gov a lot to lease them,
>meaning that the sat version might grow. I would imagine though that the
>difficult part would be when you need to replace the sat. Who would pay for
>it? Who pays for the hardware Freeview?
> Brian
It would not be great at all - not everyone can use a satellite dish;
not everyone has free broadband.
--
Dave W

On Friday, 14 October 2022 at 15:30:22 UTC+1, Dave W wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2022 11:00:35 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
> <brian...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >It would instead great if freesat was the norm, not freeview, and that the
> >internet was there as well. At the moment the telecoms companies want the
> >reast of freeview frequencies and would pay the gov a lot to lease them,
> >meaning that the sat version might grow. I would imagine though that the
> >difficult part would be when you need to replace the sat. Who would pay for
> >it? Who pays for the hardware Freeview?
> > Brian
> It would not be great at all - not everyone can use a satellite dish;
> not everyone has free broadband.
> --
> Dave W

Indeed - people in flats and tenements. Freesat is very good for broadcast, but the return path is poor for several reasons.

On Fri 14/10/2022 15:29, Dave W wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2022 11:00:35 +0100, "Brian Gaff"
> <brian1gaff@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It would instead great if freesat was the norm, not freeview, and that the
>> internet was there as well. At the moment the telecoms companies want the
>> reast of freeview frequencies and would pay the gov a lot to lease them,
>> meaning that the sat version might grow. I would imagine though that the
>> difficult part would be when you need to replace the sat. Who would pay for
>> it? Who pays for the hardware Freeview?
>> Brian
>
> It would not be great at all - not everyone can use a satellite dish;
> not everyone has free broadband.

Ah but HMG has mandated (ha!) that all copper telephone lines will be
replaced by fibre (in theory) by 2025 although it will be quite a lot
longer than that I suspect.
However once there is fibre to very household you need neither broadcast
TV nor satellite as it an all come down the fibre.
Providing a means of supplying radio to moving vehicles will probably
mean that its fate will be dragged on rather longer methinks.