Nintendo Switch review: Hands-on with the intuitive modular console and its disappointing games…
Just looking at the content, ie the channels available, there doesn't seem to be much difference between them.
Since I get a strong enough freeview signal in the attic, I can just stick a freeview aeriel in the attic and DIY it.
Are there any reasons or indications that one will be noticably superior to the other in the future, in terms of the content ?
If you already getting a strong signal, you should not need a "freeview" aerial, there is no such thing,there are a lot of con artists running around selling people so called special aerials for freeview,all they are ,are high gain its a load of bunkum, I will say again,as long as you can get the signal you DO NOT need to change your aerial. HD is a different matter. I get freeview from a little 8 element in the loft.
I would go for Freesat.
I'm on Freeview at the moment and there doesn't look to be enough bandwidth to get many HD channels on there, whereas Freesat are touting lots of HD channels for the future.
The alternative for HD is Sky, but you'll probably need a subscription for the HD channels - not sure if there are any free ones on Sky but there may be if competition dictates.
Freeview aeriels are just "better" aeriels. We had to change ours to pick up the full complement of Freeview.
If you have an integrated television i.e. one with a built-in Freeview tuner (and there won't be many out there without one), you can enjoy Freesat as well.
In fact the five new Panasonic models (from 32in to 50in) come with analogue, Freeview and Freesat tuners.
Freesat HD channels are free (along with the actual service) and ITV has stated categorically that its own HD channels will only ever be available on Freesat.
To emphasise lofty29's point about "digital"/Freeview aerials, the correct term is a wideband aerial (suitable for reception from your particular transmitter).
Once the analogue transmitters have been closed down and full strength digital television signals are the norm, some Freeview HD channels will become available.
In fact some limited tests of HD on Freeview was undertaken by the BBC about two years ago (IIRC in the London area).
Just found this link re Freeview high definition programmes:
As with Freesat a new set top box will, I'm certain, be required to be able to view Freeview HD transmissions.
Another link (plus the good news that my area (NW England) will be able to receive Freeview HD towards the end of next year (2009)..:-))
It's a shame that set top boxes are here for a while.
The terrestrial HD services will require a new STB, even for those who own a integrated TV and have for now got rid of the clutter, assuming they wish to view HD.
Doesn't help our green credentials.
Regarding freeview aerials, the major difference concerns the electrical matching of the antenna to the feeder cable. The antenna uses a dipole for reception which is a balanced device. Coaxial cable is unbalanced. This mismatch didn't matter much with analogue signals, but does with digital.
A balun (balanced to unbalanced) transformer is now employed in the antenna construction to improve the matching of the dipole to the feeder. It results in increased immunity to impulse interference which creates errors in the decoding process.
Oresome. Some time ago I installed two coax cables, one for FM radio and one for TV. The TV one is now in use successfully with a good aerial on Freeview. The FM aerial is redundant but conveniently follows the same route (under floorboards etc.) If I go for "Stuartli's" new Humax PVR for HD Freesat, could a dish and the Freesat PVR use the existing FM coax cable? It would be difficult to create a new route without considerable disruption.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.