[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Clare Shepherd wrote: > This is all true, but the Government has assured us that it'll be all > so much better when we go totally digital, as the signal will be > boosted. Makes no sense to me.. why cajole and entice people onto a substandard service *knowing* it is? Why not just give the full quality and then let the service market itself? The way they are doing it they gets lots of people saying to their friends 'Don't bother it's rubbish quality' when they *could* be getting 'You should switch over.. it's brilliant!' Of course if they *did* broadcast full strength and it was still rubbish they'd have to admit they cocked up, just in time for the next election, and what politician is going to do that? > If you can believe them. I've been digital for about 2 to 3 > years and my reception is better than Neils, but not much. During the > summer we're plagued by break-up and loss of vision, and it's always > when I want to watch the Proms on BBC 4! If it's a geographical issue the government know they can't do anything so they're keeping their heads down *hoping* increased power will solve the issue, rather than admit 'Sorry some of you will not get a decent signal'. > End of rant by grumpy old woman. > You missed a word out... 'justifiable' :) Kind regards, Julian -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html