Four years of fun and games with the Digital TV Switchover is coming to an end at last… we don’t want to worry you… but there might be another one on the way…
Digital Switchover Mk II
OK – Nothing to worry about just yet, but according to a report in the Guardian, the House of Lords has been discussing moving TV from being broadcast over-the-air, to being broadcast over the Internet.
Of course, a switchover to Internet TV for every home in the UK is major upheaval, and it’s likely to be some way off, but it does make sense. With over 11 million homes now getting a decent fibre Internet connection, and more and more of us watching our TV and movies online, int twenty years time, we’ll all be laughing looking back at the days when we struggled to get a clear picture from the airwaves with a bit of metal on the roof.
The Lords committee has recommended that the UK Government, media regulators and the TV industry start planning now for a potential switchover to Internet TV at some point in the future.
For the idea of a switch to Internet TV to be viable, the UK broadband network will need to complete the overhaul, and it’s likely that every home not using a satellite TV service would need at least 2 to 3 MBp/s of broadband speed – more if two people want to watch different channels at the same time.
A switch to Internet TV would be a potential revenue-earner though… with TV off-the-air, that very valuable part of the radio spectrum could be hived off to the mobile phone networks, allowing new entrants into the market to offer more mobile services for us. Additionally, there’d be no need to maintain the expensive network of TV transmitters and fill-in relay sites needed to get TV signals to remote parts of the country.
There’s no doubt that they way we watch TV has changed significantly in the last 10 years – Catch-Up TV, the numerous on-demand services, +1 channels and timeshifting. Perhaps a shift to an Internet-based service is the next logical step, and provided it’ll be possible to get granny a decent broadband connection and a simple-to-use Internet TV monitor, it’s likely that Digital Switchover v2.0 may not be that far away after all…
Comments on the idea of switching over to Internet TV? Add ’em below!
I am sorry but your view of 2-3Mbps for each home is woefully low. High quality TV services (as viewers are expecting now) are using between 6 and 12Mbps per service, which for the average family home runs to somewhere up to 40Mbps of bandwidth at peak. Then you need to throw in the fact that we still want high speed broadband to run smoothly on top of that. The current UK infrastructure even in Cable areas cannot yet provide that, so the uninformed House of Lords needs to go back to sleep for at least five years and a huge CAPEX spend that no one has the money for right now, to transition everything to IP.
This is just ANOTHER WAY to RIP US OFF in RIP OFF BRITAIN.
This way EVERYONE will have to subscribe to internet services even if you dont want the internet or cant afford it.
It is yet ANOTHER HUGE profit earner for the FOREIGN companies that now control ALL money making services in this cesspit country.
And of course we will STILL have to PAY for our beloved TV LICENCE ON TOP of the internet service that we NEVER had to pay for unless you wanted the internet./
Just how many politicians and lords are shareholders and directors of all these FOREIGN COMPANIES????
Probably the MAJORITY.
This country stinks of EGOTISTICAL SELF CENTERED FOREIGNER LOVING GOVERNMENTS that are ONLY interested in BENEFITTING FOREIGNERS and FOREIGN COMPANIES and have NO interest in the benfitting and welfare of BRITISH people or companies.
For a long time, it has been clear that internet TV was the eventual way forward. However, it will be many years before many of us in rural areas get broadband that is good enough to support television services.
Instead of spending yet more money on providing more and different ways of providing the TV service, perhaps more thought should be given to the quality of the programme material being broadcast.
With all the repeats, audience participation and other cheaply made offerings, in my opinion there is virtually nothing worth watching at present; it is “never mind the quality, feel the width”.
This is just ANOTHER WAY to RIP US OFF in RIP OFF BRITAIN.
This way EVERYONE will have to subscribe to internet services even if you dont want the internet or cant afford it.
It is yet ANOTHER HUGE profit earner for the FOREIGN companies that now control ALL money making services in this cesspit country.
And of course we will STILL have to PAY for our beloved TV LICENCE ON TOP of the internet service that we NEVER had to pay for unless you wanted the internet./
Just how many politicians and lords are shareholders and directors of all these FOREIGN COMPANIES????
Probably the MAJORITY.
This country stinks of EGOTISTICAL SELF CENTERED FOREIGNER LOVING GOVERNMENTS that are ONLY interested in BENEFITTING FOREIGNERS and FOREIGN COMPANIES and have NO interest in the benfitting and welfare of BRITISH people or companies.
THIS !!! ^^^
Another thing, can you inagine old Bert and Doris trying to get to grips with internet TV ? Or indeed having the disposable income to pay for broadband, which by this time will probably be circa £50 per month ?
So many people have spent fortunes and bought Freeview TV’s, most had to buy set-top boxes and many installed new Ariel’s all to be scrapped. Ah well all that ends well! there will be tons of scrap aluminium on chimney stacks! and copper in the wires running down from them. Anyone got a spare ladder?
How can the government (House of Lords) possibly do that, until such time that there is parity in the broadband speeds across the UK?
The broadband speed (1.8mb max) that myself and the others in our area get is pretty abysmal, and fairly typical in outlying areas. such as ours. We are three and a half miles from the BT exchange, and the BT wiring to our houses is 40+ years old. (Bearing in mind that all broadband signals, no matter who the provider is, have to come along those same, clapped out, high resistance copper phonelines). I have made many enquiries with BT and Virgin (our broadband supplier, to whom I pay £20 per MTh for the privilege for just broadband) and they say that there are no plans to bring cable or Fibre Optics to our area in the foreseeable future. We struggle even to get a smooth download from BBC iPlayer, for instance, with constant and very irritating buffering. This happens with almost everything (moving) that comes over the Web. How could you possibly watch TV under these circumstances?
I must point out that I am just a novice on these things, and maybe the internet programmes can all be watched via satellite? (We have Freesat). But if so, would that mean that everybody in the same circumstances as us would have to get a satellite installation?
Colin: As outlined in the article, this won’t be happening imminently, and yes, the broadband network will need to be overhauled and upgraded before this can happen.
The article in the Guardian talks about the need for Government, broadcasts and regulators to start thinking and planning for this, as it’s seen by some as the next logical step.
As for satellite, note that the proposed changes only affect Freeview. Cable, Internet and satellite services won’t be affected, and if it goes ahead, satellite will be an alternative for those unable to get Internet access.
There are two interesting articles in the Observer, dated 05/08/2012 re. Broadband speeds etc.
1. “COMMENT” Page 31. ‘TAKING THE RIGHT ROAD TO A HIGHSPEED BRITAIN’
2. “BUSINESS SECTION” Page 39. ‘BT STRENGTHENS ITS GRIP ON THE SUPERHIGHWAY AS ISOLATED HOMES GO IT ALONE FOR BETTER BROADBAND’
Availale at: http://www.observer.co.uk
Colin Weyman
Unless they bring fibre to my door we are unlikely to get the bandwidth required for streaming TV. We are lucky if we get over 2Mb/sec at the moment as we are at least 4 kms from the local exchange. The main reason I can see for this topic being discussed in the House of Lords is to free up the wavebands for 4G mobile so HMG can make more money from the mobile companies! On second thoughts, maybe they will use those licence fees to subsidise the infrastructure work required? – some hope!
As has been said, internet speeds are woefully slow outside the major towns. Even with the promised upgrade to FTTC, I am only expecting 9Mbps at best and I am one of the better ones round here, only 35 miles from London.
We are looking forward to G4 mobile broadcasts some time next year using the redundant TV spectrum left over from the digital switch. That at least promises some decent internet speeds countrywide. I thought it would be using the TV transmitters???? If it uses the mobile phone masts, forget it. There are lots of dead spots around here, anywhere it is hilly.
The idea that the internet can ever be as universal for TV/radio as a broadcast electromagnetic signal (satellite or terrestrial) is ridiculous. The internet is inevitably bandwidth limited and everyone who receives streamed video/audio needs to be fed – more receivers, more bandwidth required, regardless of the number of proxies/repeaters. This will result in more cost as well as continually challenging the super-highway to keep up with the bandwidth needs of more and more services. Let’s keep general broadcasting away from the internet to keep it free forll the other services we need. Also (call me old fashioned) I still get some comfort from being able to listen to the radio or watch TV without relying on anything other than a power supply.
So, let me see if I have this right.
All TV reception will have to be via cabled internet access. But
* Rural areas can’t get internet access through cable because it’s not cost effective.
* Mobile homes & caravans can’t get internet access via cable because, yes, they’re mobile!
Therefore, solution to the second two points: transmit over a mobile phone network, say.
But, wait a minute, isn’t that back to transmitting over the air! Except, of course, that it’s now an extra profit area for the mobile networks.
And, isn’t there still a problem with mobile networks that can’t cover remote areas due to a) not cost effective to instal transmitters for almost zero population ; b) can’t cover every grid reference due to geographical terrain. – Just like current TV transmitters.
So, what’s the benefit to going to internet only TV and doing away with current over-the-air transmission? To say going internet only TV is ‘clear and inevitable’ seems to ignore some basic issues. What is wrong with the current state of affairs with multiple methods of delivery. That way, most reception scenarios can be covered and ‘not all your eggs are in the same basket’.
I also have to agree with Dave with his points about infrasture requirements for point-to-point connections rather than blanket over-the-air (or via-satelite) coverage.
Quote:So many people have spent fortunes and bought Freeview TV’s, most had to buy set-top boxes and many installed new Ariel’s all to be scrapped. Quote
It always appears strange to me that people think washing powder can receive TV. They must know it’s washing powder as they use an upper case letter for it.
well how can they possiably do this, i feel sorry for the old ladies that where more than happy with their tv sets with just 5 channels and a vcr if you where lucky, then in a way they where forcefully told to get eather a new tv, a set top box and in some cases even a new ariel as the one the avrage old lady has proberly dates from the 1970’s, which can cost up to at least well a lot of money as well as paying for the license until your 75, so if it all goes online, what chance has poor old betty got next door got? As with most old people they struggle to even keep warm in the winter i really hope this dosent happen, as that would mean every one would need a broadband connection and thats even more money BT could rake in as they own the phone lines, in line rental is sounds nothing but a scam, if this does happen i am going back to the age or radio!