Future of Freeview

PPP QQQ

"Mobile broadband shortage could force drastic Freeview re-tune in 2018"

"TV viewers could face another major re-tune and TV aerial changes in 2018 to stop Britain running out of mobile broadband capacity.

"Freeview could even be reduced to a rump of 20 channels if communications regulator Ofcom cannot find enough space for TV and mobile demand."

[...]

"The frequencies used by Freeview are very attractive to mobile users because they can reach a long distance in rural areas and they penetrate buildings for better coverage in towns and cities."

http://recombu.com/digital/news/mobil...

PPP QQQ

"5G UK: Ofcom plans 2018 auction for 700MHz"

"The 4G auction has barely begun but Ofcom is already laying out its plans for 5G.

The next-next-generation of mobile services is expected to arrive in the UK in 2018 and will occupy some of the 700MHz slice of the broadcast spectrum - yet another patch that’s currently occupied by Freeview."

[...]

"In a post-Digital Switchover world it was expected that once the analogue signal had been switched off for good, we’d see far more HD channels broadcast on Freeview.

"This hasn’t really happened and now Freeview stands to be compromised by the rollout of 4G in the UK.

"Though not due to kick off until 2018, you have to wonder how many Freeview customers might actually be left after 5G rollout."

http://recombu.com/digital/news/5g-uk...

This may be excessively pessimistic. As I understand it, the temporary HD licenses now available are part of OFCOM's efforts to encourage Freeview broadcasters to use DVB-T2 which is apparently more efficient and could squeeze more channels into less spectrum.

Unknown

>> This may be excessively pessimistic

No 'may' about it, it is excessively pessimistic.

As you say, there is a plan to lease additional spectrum for temporary HD channels aimed at pushing take-up of HD / DVB-T2 capable equipment. This would create a consumer-led move away from first/early generation Freeview SD equipment, allowing a more efficient use of spectrum.

Effectively it's be a re-run of Digital Switch Over, and some might way what should have been done as part of DSO anyway.

Like the '4G will kill Freeview', this story is scaremongering to the nth degree. Ofcom is committed to securing the future of free to air DTT and it's very unlikely any Government would nod through any move which took TV away from nice old ladies or forced them to take up a subscription to get channels they currently enjoy.

Roy

Martin1 said:

>> This may be excessively pessimistic

No 'may' about it, it is excessively pessimistic.

As you say, there is a plan to lease additional spectrum for temporary HD channels aimed at pushing take-up of HD / DVB-T2 capable equipment. This would create a consumer-led move away from first/early generation Freeview SD equipment, allowing a more efficient use of spectrum.

Effectively it's be a re-run of Digital Switch Over, and some might way what should have been done as part of DSO anyway.

Like the '4G will kill Freeview', this story is scaremongering to the nth degree. Ofcom is committed to securing the future of free to air DTT and it's very unlikely any Government would nod through any move which took TV away from nice old ladies or forced them to take up a subscription to get channels they currently enjoy.

So not at all like the analogue switch-off, then?

Visionman

Roy 6 minutes ago
So not at all like the analogue switch-off, then?

Nothing at all like it Roy. Theres no news here. They may want it, but they're not gonna get it. The article is just excessive scaremongering.

Because Freeviews going nowhere... And neither will IPTV cause its shutdown either. As its Hybrid television that will be the future of 21st century digital Freeview. And the massive expansion of the new Broadband infrastructure that is being rolled out will only enhance, and not replace, Freeview.

PPP QQQ

Martin

As you say, there is a plan to lease additional spectrum for temporary HD channels aimed at pushing take-up of HD / DVB-T2 capable equipment. This would create a consumer-led move away from first/early generation Freeview SD equipment, allowing a more efficient use of spectrum.

Hardly consumer-led. If it was consumer-led it wouldn't have to be created. Consumers aren't leading a move away from SD receivers because a large slice of consumers don't want to buy new equipment if they're satisfied with what they've already got.

Consumers need to be given clearer information about the implications for Freeview of the conflicting demands for spectrum. Then they'll be in a better position to decide how to spend their TV-watching pennies. The supposed desires of little old ladies are always being trotted out as evidence that no goverment would ever change what's currently available, but in fact, rather than kowtowing to little old ladies goverments are much more likely to just give them the necessary new equipment and get on with the changes.

As for OFCOM's pledge, the Lords report has handed them their getout: better to use the spectrum for mobile and shift broadcasting to the internet.

Visionman

PPP QQQ said:

Martin

As you say, there is a plan to lease additional spectrum for temporary HD channels aimed at pushing take-up of HD / DVB-T2 capable equipment. This would create a consumer-led move away from first/early generation Freeview SD equipment, allowing a more efficient use of spectrum.

Hardly consumer-led. If it was consumer-led it wouldn't have to be created. Consumers aren't leading a move away from SD receivers because a large slice of consumers don't want to buy new equipment if they're satisfied with what they've already got.

Consumers need to be given clearer information about the implications for Freeview of the conflicting demands for spectrum. Then they'll be in a better position to decide how to spend their TV-watching pennies. The supposed desires of little old ladies are always being trotted out as evidence that no goverment would ever change what's currently available, but in fact, rather than kowtowing to little old ladies goverments are much more likely to just give them the necessary new equipment and get on with the changes.

As for OFCOM's pledge, the Lords report has handed them their getout: better to use the spectrum for mobile and shift broadcasting to the internet.That Lords report? Correct conclusion. About twenty years too early.

gomez

Their time-scale for the replacement of perfectly servicable domestic electronic equipment is wildely out of whack with what many people consider reasonable.

Unless they reserve one MUX to be kept as DVB-T with the basic main SD channels. And I can see the hoohah over what deserves to be given priority on that.

Visionman

gomez said:

Their time-scale for the replacement of perfectly servicable domestic electronic equipment is wildely out of whack with what many people consider reasonable.

Unless they reserve one MUX to be kept as DVB-T with the basic main SD channels. And I can see the hoohah over what deserves to be given priority on that.

Ha ha. Yeah. Just like the enforced digital radio switchover. Meaning tens of millions of perfectly servicable and working radio's would have had to be binned. At a very expensive cost to replace them too.

A decision which has now been reversed. Meaning DAB radio is now (rightly) only an option, and not an enforcement.

Unknown

That Lords report? Correct conclusion. About twenty years too early.

Very succinct, Visionman.

(Maybe too succinct - you are one of the extremely well informed forum contributors who assume we're all up to speed about these questions.)

It's taken me sometime to get my head around this subject. So correct me if I'm wrong but what you and Aisha and the Lords are saying is that it's logical to make broadband be the main delivery medium for TV in our homes, and use all available wireless technology (i.e. the current Freeview and phone spectrum) for purely mobile use.

And the big question is what is the timescale?

PPP QQQ

Speaking for myself I don't have a view on whether it's logical or not. The Lords Report argues that it's logical. Logic of the global market, perhaps, since the mobile industry is international and the tv sector is not. Standardizing mobile frequencies internationally does seem logical to me - and welcome, if it means not getting hit by roaming charges.

Unknown

Standardising mobile frequencies isn't about not being hit by mobile phone roaming charges, it's about ensuring one nation's use of frequencies doesn't cause interference and problems in another.

Unknown

gwatuk said:

That Lords report? Correct conclusion. About twenty years too early.

Very succinct, Visionman.

(Maybe too succinct - you are one of the extremely well informed forum contributors who assume we're all up to speed about these questions.)

It's taken me sometime to get my head around this subject. So correct me if I'm wrong but what you and Aisha and the Lords are saying is that it's logical to make broadband be the main delivery medium for TV in our homes, and use all available wireless technology (i.e. the current Freeview and phone spectrum) for purely mobile use.

And the big question is what is the timescale?The Lords have suggested that the Government future proof their support and policies for connecting homes to the internet by having the end goal of switching off DTT down the line and move channels to IPTV.

That would allow the sell-off of the remaining DTT spectrum and lower the costs of broadcasting. However it would effectively make pay TV or broadband (with its own monthly sub) essential for all households.

The report is about broadband in its entirety, the switch to IPTV is one point amongst many which cover the need to actively plan the scale and role of our broadband backbone.

The Lords want Govt to aspire to all homes having FTTP in the future, IPTV is just one use and reason for such a goal.

PPP QQQ

Aye, no doubt, but as I am not a mobile operator, I tend to take a pocket-oriented view. :-)

Unknown

gwatuk said:

That Lords report? Correct conclusion. About twenty years too early.

Very succinct, Visionman.

(Maybe too succinct - you are one of the extremely well informed forum contributors who assume we're all up to speed about these questions.)

It's taken me sometime to get my head around this subject. So correct me if I'm wrong but what you and Aisha and the Lords are saying is that it's logical to make broadband be the main delivery medium for TV in our homes, and use all available wireless technology (i.e. the current Freeview and phone spectrum) for purely mobile use.

And the big question is what is the timescale?Thanks, Martin that's very helpful.

Unknown

PPP QQQ said:

Aye, no doubt, but as I am not a mobile operator, I tend to take a pocket-oriented view. :-)

Sure, but unless I've missed something what makes you think the ongoing standardisation of frequencies will stop roaming charges?

Companies such as O2 won't be buying EU or global rights to a slice of the spectrum.

UK operators will still only have their UK spectrum to operate on and will still need to pay their international partners to allow you to piggy back on their networks, and therefore pass on the charge to you.

PPP QQQ

PPP QQQ said:

Aye, no doubt, but as I am not a mobile operator, I tend to take a pocket-oriented view. :-)

But if the partners are all operating on the same frequencies, won't that reduce costs for the user? That's what I was thinking but may be mistaken.

Unknown

PPP QQQ said:

Aye, no doubt, but as I am not a mobile operator, I tend to take a pocket-oriented view. :-)

>> But if the partners are all operating on the same frequencies, won't that reduce costs for the user?

No reason why it should.

All European operators already use a common standard (GSM) which is based around a pretty small number of frequencies but it still needed the EU and Ofcom to take action to cap voice and mobile roaming fees.

Of course the pre-cap roaming charges were always a rip-off. So many operators have the same parent companies that it was always possible to sell a pan-Europe service, they just preferred not to.

PPP QQQ

PPP QQQ said:

Aye, no doubt, but as I am not a mobile operator, I tend to take a pocket-oriented view. :-)

Thanks for the correction.

PPP QQQ

There is an OFCOM strategy statement, "Securing long term benefits from
scarce low frequency spectrum" at http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bina...

• Support the international process and conduct preparatory work to enable the harmonised release of the 700 MHz band; and
• Seek to ensure that the 600 MHz band can be used for DTT and other service sharing spectrum with it on a geographic interleaved basis assuming harmonised release of the 700 MHz band for mobile broadband. This will help ensure that a future replan of the DTT platform associated with change of use at 700 MHz secures the ongoing delivery of benefits associated with near-universal low cost access to PSB services and to the provision of a range of other DTT services that sustains viewers’ choice in digital TV. This approach will also help the ongoing delivery of other services sharing spectrum with national DTT, including Local TV, the NI Mux, PMSE, and new services based on white space technology, by mitigating the reduction of spectrum available to them caused by change of use at 700 MHz.

PPP QQQ

OFCOM strategy statement (http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bina...) says OFCOM will

• Support the international process and conduct preparatory work to enable the harmonised release of the 700 MHz band; and

• Seek to ensure that the 600 MHz band can be used for DTT and other service sharing spectrum with it on a geographic interleaved basis assuming harmonised release of the 700 MHz band for mobile broadband. This will help ensure that a future replan of the DTT platform associated with change of use at 700 MHz secures the ongoing delivery of benefits associated with near-universal low cost access to PSB services and to the provision of a range of other DTT services that sustains viewers’ choice in digital TV. This approach will also help the ongoing delivery of other services sharing spectrum with national DTT, including Local TV, the NI Mux, PMSE, and new services based on white space technology, by mitigating the reduction of spectrum available to them caused by change of use at 700 MHz.

This seems to mean they haven't yet got a definite plan for Freeview location following the release of the 700 MHz spectrum, but will shift it temporarily to 600 MHz and figure out by then where it goes next. Am I wrong?

Technogran

PPP QQQ said:

Martin

As you say, there is a plan to lease additional spectrum for temporary HD channels aimed at pushing take-up of HD / DVB-T2 capable equipment. This would create a consumer-led move away from first/early generation Freeview SD equipment, allowing a more efficient use of spectrum.

Hardly consumer-led. If it was consumer-led it wouldn't have to be created. Consumers aren't leading a move away from SD receivers because a large slice of consumers don't want to buy new equipment if they're satisfied with what they've already got.

Consumers need to be given clearer information about the implications for Freeview of the conflicting demands for spectrum. Then they'll be in a better position to decide how to spend their TV-watching pennies. The supposed desires of little old ladies are always being trotted out as evidence that no goverment would ever change what's currently available, but in fact, rather than kowtowing to little old ladies goverments are much more likely to just give them the necessary new equipment and get on with the changes.

As for OFCOM's pledge, the Lords report has handed them their getout: better to use the spectrum for mobile and shift broadcasting to the internet.And as one of those 'little old ladies' mentioned here by some of you, I only watch HD, can't stand to watch SD since getting my lovely Samsung full HD tv! Okay, I'm not your average little old lady I suppose, seeing as I'm a geek and proud of it! Lol

Technogran

PPP QQQ said:

Speaking for myself I don't have a view on whether it's logical or not. The Lords Report argues that it's logical. Logic of the global market, perhaps, since the mobile industry is international and the tv sector is not. Standardizing mobile frequencies internationally does seem logical to me - and welcome, if it means not getting hit by roaming charges.

Yes, I agree, but ultimately, isn't it about Government making lots of dosh out of selling spectrum to the mobile industry? Is anything like this ever about us poor consumers?

PPP QQQ

PPP QQQ said:

Speaking for myself I don't have a view on whether it's logical or not. The Lords Report argues that it's logical. Logic of the global market, perhaps, since the mobile industry is international and the tv sector is not. Standardizing mobile frequencies internationally does seem logical to me - and welcome, if it means not getting hit by roaming charges.

The money goes into the public finances, no? And many of us poor consumers use both freeview and mobiles.

gomez

PPP QQQ said:

Speaking for myself I don't have a view on whether it's logical or not. The Lords Report argues that it's logical. Logic of the global market, perhaps, since the mobile industry is international and the tv sector is not. Standardizing mobile frequencies internationally does seem logical to me - and welcome, if it means not getting hit by roaming charges.

And many, especially those more vulnerable consumers use only Freeview.

PPP QQQ

PPP QQQ said:

Speaking for myself I don't have a view on whether it's logical or not. The Lords Report argues that it's logical. Logic of the global market, perhaps, since the mobile industry is international and the tv sector is not. Standardizing mobile frequencies internationally does seem logical to me - and welcome, if it means not getting hit by roaming charges.

Personally I don't think it's likely that the transfer of spectrum to mobile comms use is going to mean that vulnerable consumers will be left with no access to free tv. There may be fewer channels, but probably more than the five we had before DSO.

gomez

PPP QQQ said:

Speaking for myself I don't have a view on whether it's logical or not. The Lords Report argues that it's logical. Logic of the global market, perhaps, since the mobile industry is international and the tv sector is not. Standardizing mobile frequencies internationally does seem logical to me - and welcome, if it means not getting hit by roaming charges.

Thus my earlier suggestion that there be one MUX reserved for DVB-T channels within the tunable range of existing equipment..

PPP QQQ

PPP QQQ said:

Speaking for myself I don't have a view on whether it's logical or not. The Lords Report argues that it's logical. Logic of the global market, perhaps, since the mobile industry is international and the tv sector is not. Standardizing mobile frequencies internationally does seem logical to me - and welcome, if it means not getting hit by roaming charges.

Assistance for vulnerable/low-income households to switch to DVB-T2 might be more likely, given the pressure on space.

But there should be more information about these planned changes IMO. Putting it on OFCOM's website is not enough.

Roy

PPP QQQ said:

Martin

As you say, there is a plan to lease additional spectrum for temporary HD channels aimed at pushing take-up of HD / DVB-T2 capable equipment. This would create a consumer-led move away from first/early generation Freeview SD equipment, allowing a more efficient use of spectrum.

Hardly consumer-led. If it was consumer-led it wouldn't have to be created. Consumers aren't leading a move away from SD receivers because a large slice of consumers don't want to buy new equipment if they're satisfied with what they've already got.

Consumers need to be given clearer information about the implications for Freeview of the conflicting demands for spectrum. Then they'll be in a better position to decide how to spend their TV-watching pennies. The supposed desires of little old ladies are always being trotted out as evidence that no goverment would ever change what's currently available, but in fact, rather than kowtowing to little old ladies goverments are much more likely to just give them the necessary new equipment and get on with the changes.

As for OFCOM's pledge, the Lords report has handed them their getout: better to use the spectrum for mobile and shift broadcasting to the internet.Knock knock.... (joke coming)