Log in
Register
Menu
Log in
Register
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Terrestrial Broadcasting
Terrestrial Television, Digital and Analogue
FreeView, will it catch on?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="jimbo" data-source="post: 13401" data-attributes="member: 175309"><p>I'm still intrigued as to the real benefit of being able to re-sequence Sky channels. I mean in terms of application rather than principle. With the European stuff it is useful to get them into an order which you find easiest to access, e.g. FTAs together or grouped in genres. With Sky I find the EPG very manageable and I can pick out a channel I want in a few seconds. </p><p></p><p>In my opinion Sky is a system for watching programmes rather than scanning through for long periods because you know exactly what's going to be on there. Scanning stuff other than Sky is more interesting as there are (some) surprises of new channnels or others temporarily broadcasting as FTA and there are occasional feeds etc which come and go.</p><p></p><p>Of course subscribers can use the 'favourites' procedure for ........ errrr... personal favourites. Then switch on, press the blue button and select the one they want. Doesn't seem too onerous.</p><p></p><p>Looking at the higher numbers question, the top 5 slots (101-105) are occupied by the UK national services with Sky not getting in until 106 with Sky One. I suppose any company who put up the money and took the risks will want its products to the fore.</p><p></p><p>I believe most consumers who take up Sky do so because they want to watch a film or football or whatever. The point is they know EXACTLY what's on offer before they purchase. If they get out of it what they want does that mean they are hapless? I bet if you could survey them and ask if they want to re-sequence channels and/or rename them you would get a big fat 'No'.</p><p></p><p>Consumers without reasonable technical knowledge are dealt much harsher blows in areas such as purchasing PCs with large organisations selling them systems and software......half of which they will never need. I think you could say some were hapless in this case.</p><p></p><p>Jimbo</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jimbo, post: 13401, member: 175309"] I'm still intrigued as to the real benefit of being able to re-sequence Sky channels. I mean in terms of application rather than principle. With the European stuff it is useful to get them into an order which you find easiest to access, e.g. FTAs together or grouped in genres. With Sky I find the EPG very manageable and I can pick out a channel I want in a few seconds. In my opinion Sky is a system for watching programmes rather than scanning through for long periods because you know exactly what's going to be on there. Scanning stuff other than Sky is more interesting as there are (some) surprises of new channnels or others temporarily broadcasting as FTA and there are occasional feeds etc which come and go. Of course subscribers can use the 'favourites' procedure for ........ errrr... personal favourites. Then switch on, press the blue button and select the one they want. Doesn't seem too onerous. Looking at the higher numbers question, the top 5 slots (101-105) are occupied by the UK national services with Sky not getting in until 106 with Sky One. I suppose any company who put up the money and took the risks will want its products to the fore. I believe most consumers who take up Sky do so because they want to watch a film or football or whatever. The point is they know EXACTLY what's on offer before they purchase. If they get out of it what they want does that mean they are hapless? I bet if you could survey them and ask if they want to re-sequence channels and/or rename them you would get a big fat 'No'. Consumers without reasonable technical knowledge are dealt much harsher blows in areas such as purchasing PCs with large organisations selling them systems and software......half of which they will never need. I think you could say some were hapless in this case. Jimbo [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Terrestrial Broadcasting
Terrestrial Television, Digital and Analogue
FreeView, will it catch on?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top