So, it’s official. We pay for the likes of Jonathan Ross and Russell Brandt to take the piss out of people…we pay for a service (iPlayer) to only be available to us while we’re at home (i.e. coming from a UK IP address) and now it’s been noted that we pay for HD service that is sub-par. Thanks Auntie.
In the recent news release of the BBC, they’ve told us that normal HD service runs – with their *new* encoders – at 9.7 Mbps, whereas the older ones used to run at 16 Mbps…Go figure, let’s downgrade right, as we’ve probably had to pay for fines for phone-in competitions ran wrongly, stupid things our employees do and who knows what else that, us as the British public have the fun of paying £140 per year for!
I guess if it’s anything, at least they’ve reported on their own faults (the downgrade), yet their unwilling to admit it has affected the service:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8415636.stm
Oh and yeah, let us not forget in order to get this channel if we have Sky (even though we pay our TV License) we still have to pay yet an addition £10 per month…
</soap box>
Possibly related:
[
#1 by technogran on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 - 17:18
Quote
I agree. If they would just admit that the picture is not as good, and stop trying to make out that its the same quality as before August we would all accept it (as long as they gave an explanation as to WHY they have done it.
Some of us on DigitalSpy have begun a petition and think that its to make sure that the picture quality on Freeview HD which will also only be able to be broadcast at 9 Mbps or so, will be on a par with Freesat.
Now it takes you all your time to distinquish it from a good SD picture. All that money that we invested in a Freesat box and in many cases a dish install wasted.
Before August it was fantastic.
TG