The future of television

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

I’m unsure there are any facts to be had here but I’m certain it’s not the thread for it.

I’m unconvinced that the BBC deliberately misrepresented what they - and everyone else - were hearing on the ground, nor am I convinced by Israel and its allies saying they have proof and to trust them .

I don’t think they deliberately misrepresented the facts. They just assumed it must have been Israel as the Corporation appears to be biased towards the Palestinians. So when the Palestinians claimed the hospital was blown up by Israel, the Beeb gave that claim credence without exercising any caution about the veracity of the claim.

Most people contributing to this thread thought likewise.

---------- Post added at 10:25 ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 ----------

https://advanced-television.com/2023...io-protection/

[EXTRACT]

A report published by over-60s advocacy group Silver Voices has revealed the extent of the British public’s support for the protection of broadcast TV and radio for the long-term.

According to the Safeguarding Universality: The Future of Broadcast TV and Radio report’s findings, over 80 per cent of respondents believe broadcast TV and radio should be protected well beyond 2040 – to at least 2051, with some going further and calling for them to be protected until 2079. This is far in advance of the UK Government’s current commitment to protect these services until 2034.



I can’t see this getting international acceptance due to the pressure to better utilising the bandwidth currently used to carry TV signals. I think the government needs to concentrate more on enabling all households to receive the basic internet speeds required for streaming and make it easier for them to access programmes. It can’t be beyond the wit of man.

[jfman]

I'm not sure "most" people in the thread agree with your contention that the BBC were biased, however to move onto the second part of your post what pressure to re-use the bandwidth?

5G frequencies the demand is 3.5-7Ghz, 6G is looking at 100-300Ghz. There's almost zero demand for sub 700 MHz at any scale in this country or any other.

Let’s all stay on the topic, please - we have a separate thread for the current conflict in Israel & the West Bank

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

5G frequencies the demand is 3.5-7Ghz, 6G is looking at 100-300Ghz. There's almost zero demand for sub 700 MHz at any scale in this country or any other.

Some countries want to switch off terrestrial broadcasting, and if a majority at the 2023 conference agree, we will have to comply with that.

I believe the issue relating to 5G is concerned with interference from terrestrial TV signals.

However, the public reaction to any such proposal to switch off terrestrial TV may dissuade the Conference members from going down that route.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2023/over-20000...save-freeview/

[EXTRACT]

Delegates at the World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-23) will make binding decisions on whether frequencies currently used for terrestrial TV in the UK and Europe must be surrendered for use by mobile network operators. In the UK, this affects Freeview, in the Republic of Ireland, Saorview.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Some countries want to switch off terrestrial broadcasting, and if a majority at the 2023 conference agree, we will have to comply with that.

I believe the issue relating to 5G is concerned with interference from terrestrial TV signals.

However, the public reaction to any such proposal to switch off terrestrial TV may dissuade the Conference members from going down that route.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2023/over-20000...save-freeview/

[EXTRACT]

Delegates at the World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-23) will make binding decisions on whether frequencies currently used for terrestrial TV in the UK and Europe must be surrendered for use by mobile network operators. In the UK, this affects Freeview, in the Republic of Ireland, Saorview.

Helpfully, the European Broadcast Union and African Telecommunications Union have both agreed on a no-change position for WRC-23. The chances of any meaningful change happening in Europe are virtually zero.

https://tech.ebu.ch/news/2023/08/afr...band-at-wrc-23.

There's no evidence that 5G coverage would be improved by farming off even more of the bandwidth below 700 MHz. The limitation is the lack of masts using the existing frequency allocation.

As Governments pivot towards satellite broadband as the answer for rural connectivity issues the demand to reallocate these frequencies will be further reduced as we hit the 2030s.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Helpfully, the European Broadcast Union and African Telecommunications Union have both agreed on a no-change position for WRC-23. The chances of any meaningful change happening in Europe are virtually zero.

https://tech.ebu.ch/news/2023/08/afr...band-at-wrc-23.

There's no evidence that 5G coverage would be improved by farming off even more of the bandwidth below 700 MHz. The limitation is the lack of masts using the existing frequency allocation.

As Governments pivot towards satellite broadband as the answer for rural connectivity issues the demand to reallocate these frequencies will be further reduced as we hit the 2030s.

This article shows you that terrestrial broadcasting after 2035 is unlikely.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2023/decision-t...e-has-arrived/

[EXTRACT]

At the moment, Freeview frequencies are only secure until 2030. But administrations across Europe, including Ofcom in the UK, have been pushing for no change – keeping the status quo.

However, that may only guarantee ongoing use of frequencies for another four years, as the decision would be revisited at the next World Radiocommunications Conference in 2027.

Decision-makers in the UK hope that an extra four years will be enough time to get viewers switched from terrestrial to streaming services. Key to that assumption is Freely – the recently announced streaming replacement from the operator of the Freeview and Freesat platforms.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

This article shows you that terrestrial broadcasting after 2035 is unlikely.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2023/decision-t...e-has-arrived/

[EXTRACT]

At the moment, Freeview frequencies are only secure until 2030. But administrations across Europe, including Ofcom in the UK, have been pushing for no change – keeping the status quo.

However, that may only guarantee ongoing use of frequencies for another four years, as the decision would be revisited at the next World Radiocommunications Conference in 2027.

Decision-makers in the UK hope that an extra four years will be enough time to get viewers switched from terrestrial to streaming services. Key to that assumption is Freely – the recently announced streaming replacement from the operator of the Freeview and Freesat platforms.

There’s nothing in that article but confirming they are kicking the can down the road.

“Hope”

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

There’s nothing in that article but confirming they are kicking the can down the road.

“Hope”

UK decision makers just need the extra four years. I think they will get that, but no more.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

UK decision makers just need the extra four years. I think they will get that, but no more.

Europe appears to be united on keeping the status quo – no change – for the next four years. And there is support from Africa.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

This article shows you that terrestrial broadcasting after 2035 is unlikely.

No, it shows that a decision on reserving spectrum has been deferred.

As it happens I agree, the UK authorities most likely do want to call an end to terrestrial broadcast at some point. To be honest the ideal time to have done it was when we went digital. A free broadcast service standardised on Freesat would have avoided all these years of fiddling around trying to fit a quart in a pint pot. DTT has never, and will never, have the bandwidth satellite does and can never provide a full range of HD channels across the board. Freeview is a messy compromise and we only have it thanks to a combination of inertia and poor planning.

Having said all that, note also the move by the UK’s PSBs to launch ‘Freely’ next year …

https://inews.co.uk/news/freely-new-...o=most_popular

… as they finally acknowledge that to truly embed IP delivery of their content they are going to have to show people that their broadcast schedules are still available, even if they access content via their internet connection rather than an aerial or a dish.

If we end up with a fully IP delivered TV service in the next 10 years (and that’s still unlikely, given the pace of the super-fast broadband rollout in those famously ‘hard to reach’ areas) they’re only going to achieve it by making it look like Freeview. Plus ca change, as some foreigner or other once said.

[OLD BOY]

Yes, that seems to be the way things are going. The government is going to be very careful about how this change will be managed and a completely different look and feel will not be welcomed by some sections of society, particularly the elderly.

Instead of the Big Bang that I still believe most of the broadcasters would prefer, change is going to have to happen in smaller doses so that all members of society can get used to the new way of doing things. The government will make sure of that, I have no doubt.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Yes, that seems to be the way things are going. The government is going to be very careful about how this change will be managed and a completely different look and feel will not be welcomed by some sections of society, particularly the elderly.

Instead of the Big Bang that I still believe most of the broadcasters would prefer, change is going to have to happen in smaller doses so that all members of society can get used to the new way of doing things. The government will make sure of that, I have no doubt.

The Government that will be out on it’s ear next year?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

The Government that will be out on it’s ear next year?

I wouldn’t have thought Labour would come to a different view if in power, do you?

[jfman]

https://x.com/Douglas4Moray/status/1...626047946?s=20

Originally Posted by jfman

https://x.com/Douglas4Moray/status/1...626047946?s=20

Are you minded to agree with the Scots Tory?

He does have a point, and I think it is a far deeper problem that is not confined to the rural ‘not spots’. We often have 3 or 4 TV shows streaming at once in our house. No problem at all on our 900Mb fibre - which is why we eventually decided not to even bother having a dish installed on our new house and have stuck with accessing everything over IP - but an 80Mb FTTC line would struggle with that, if there was any local contention at all. Radio waves do not suffer contention no matter how many people in the street are receiving them. There is a reason why old fashioned, one-to-many broadcast systems are going nowhere fast. They are super resilient and they are going to be the only reliable way of receiving TV in multi-screen households for many years to come.