When are we getting something new from Humax « My Humax Forum

My Humax Forum » Other Humax Products

When are we getting something new from Humax

(13 posts)
  1. User has not uploaded an avatar

    deej78

    member
    Joined: Apr '13
    Posts: 40

    offline

    When will we get a product that runs quicker than a snail? It's 2018. Come on Humax.

    Fri 14 Dec 2018 8:32:40 #1 |
  2. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Pollensa1946

    special member
    Joined: Sep '12
    Posts: 1,093

    offline

    deej78 - 29 minutes ago  » 
    When will we get a product that runs quicker than a snail? It's 2018. Come on Humax.

    Regarding Freesat satellite products you are not as they have lost the contract for the G3 boxes. Freeview? Who knows.

    Fri 14 Dec 2018 9:04:50 #2 |
  3. gomezz

    gomezz

    special member
    Joined: Mar '11
    Posts: 823

    offline

    With all the talk about Freeview being phased out completely either more quickly or more slowly than various interested parties might like then could well be the Freeview box market remains moribund and what we have got now is all we will ever have.

    Fri 14 Dec 2018 11:10:37 #3 |
  4. Trev

    Trev

    senior member
    Joined: Apr '18
    Posts: 115

    offline

    gomezz - 1 minute ago  » 
    With all the talk about Freeview being phased out completely

    What's that all about? To make room for more bloody mobile phones, I'll be bound.

    Fri 14 Dec 2018 11:12:28 #4 |
  5. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Christina2018

    member
    Joined: Jul '18
    Posts: 92

    offline

    gomezz - 2 hours ago  » 
    With all the talk about Freeview being phased out completely either more quickly or more slowly than various interested parties might like then could well be the Freeview box market remains moribund and what we have got now is all we will ever have.

    Does anyone know why Freeview would be phased out? I find that baffling as I've heard so many complaints about Youview, mainly the fact it seems to cut the ends off recordings a lot and is slow to operate. Hopefully Freeview will stay around for a long time to come.

    Fri 14 Dec 2018 14:07:36 #5 |
  6. User has not uploaded an avatar

    fedman1

    special member
    Joined: Dec '13
    Posts: 113

    offline

    I agree 'Freeview' generally works very well, the problem is that it is very expensive to maintain all those transmitters. To the "bean counters" internet TV is very attractive.

    Fri 14 Dec 2018 17:01:42 #6 |
  7. REPASSAC

    REPASSAC

    special member
    Joined: Mar '11
    Posts: 3,694

    online

    fedman1 - 2 hours ago  » 
    I agree 'Freeview' generally works very well, the problem is that it is very expensive to maintain all those transmitters. To the "bean counters" internet TV is very attractive.

    Satellite is much, much, cheaper. Internet may be better in coming years but not now.

    Fri 14 Dec 2018 19:27:38 #7 |
  8. User has not uploaded an avatar

    fedman1

    special member
    Joined: Dec '13
    Posts: 113

    offline

    I certainly agree that satellite long term running costs will be much cheaper than for terrestrial. However the initial cost of getting the satellite into orbit must be far higher than replacing a transmitter / antenna arangement.

    I use a combination of both the above, plus internet for 'catch up'. Being a bit long in the tooth, and given the choice I still prefer RF to landline, but accept that internet / cable will become the norm.

    Sat 15 Dec 2018 10:07:18 #8 |
  9. grahamlthompson

    grahamlthompson

    special member
    Joined: Feb '11
    Posts: 9,943

    offline

    fedman1 - 1 minute ago  » 
    I certainly agree that satellite long term running costs will be much cheaper than for terrestrial. However the initial cost of getting the satellite into orbit must be far higher than replacing a transmitter / antenna arangement.
    I use a combination of both the above, plus internet for 'catch up'. Being a bit long in the tooth, and given the choice I still prefer RF to landline, but accept that internet / cable will become the norm.

    One satellite will basically provide cover for the whole UK with just one site to upload the programmes. Add more at the same location allows hundreds of channels to be transmitted.

    Compare this to the hundreds of terrestrial sites and the infrastructure to deliver content to your local transmitter and the energy costs involved. The power required to power a communication satellite is essentially free from solar cells. SES Astra own and maintain the fleet at 28.2E. Broadcasters rent transponder space from SES Astra. Even quite small broadcasters can afford to rent transponders. Freesat rent a single transponder to support the two Freesat epg's.

    A failure of a ground based transmitter like the Emley moor transmitter means the loss of it for months. Satellite operators can move satellites to provide back up for a failure at a specific orbital point using the small boosters required to maintain the orbital location and to stop satellites at the same nominal location like 28.2E from hitting each other.

    Sat 15 Dec 2018 10:16:02 #9 |
  10. User has not uploaded an avatar

    fedman1

    special member
    Joined: Dec '13
    Posts: 113

    offline

    Thanks Graham, your case is well made for satellite transmission compared to terrestrial.

    Sat 15 Dec 2018 12:18:29 #10 |

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.