Freeview is mutton dressed as lamb

Both in picture quality and programming.

Less is more I feel. Less channels so the bitrate for the signal can increase and less channels to try to have to find content for.

I have a PVR at home but stuff (films/shows etc.) are repeated on Freeview so often, sometimes 5 times in a week I dont really need to use it. I think the movie 'Core' has been on half a dozen times in the past two months as an example.

Its the picture quality that annoys e the most. Got flames burning on screen? Oh dear there goes the picture!

Sometimes having more channels is good... I've always had those days where nothing is worth viewing and I'm really bored. I really think that we should get at least 10 channels with 2 sub-channels broadcasting at the same frequency so my HTPC can record a sub-channel whilst watching another on the same frequency... they have this currently on ABC and SBS I think.

Anyway, what was the purpose of freeview again?

Personally I find they can't produce enough decent content for 5 channels never mind 30+, if it wasn't free I wouldn't bother. They'll cetainly never get me to stump up cash for Sky....

it is free, it is just a technology update from the old analog TV. as long as picture quality is better than before, everyone should be happy.

want good content, you will have to pay

We have the same issue here in New Zealand; I upgraded to freeview to get better picture picture quality (would also get HD if I had a HD TV), but was surprised at how few channels there are. There are about the same number of usable (ignoring the couple of random crap) channels on freeview as there are on terrestrial analogue - terrestrial has a couple of better channels that haven't moved to freeview yet.

Now, at first this doesn't seem too bad, but I moved here 3 years ago from the UK where at that time Freeview had a lot more content (including a decent selection of radio channels, unlike freeview which has two) - I'm guessing in the last few years the content has improved. Over here, they are hoping to add 1 more channel during 2009, but that is looking a bit iffy...

:P

all well and good, but i bet we wont be seeing it any time soon here in rural australia. heck, we can't even get sbs or nbn (not that there's anything to watch on nbn), so 15 free channels would be something, even if it's the same old sh-t....

"seen before.." sounds just like Sky TV in the UK, but Sky TV has the added feature of taking £30 or more from your bank account each month and turns your TV into a megaphone every 7 mins for a 6 minute advert break at 120db SPL, so that you can still hear it even if you pop to the shops during the commercial break...

Yeah, free-to-air digital TV in NZ is in a pretty crap state due to the fumbling of successive governments, and having made a late start they're making up for it by having an analogue switchoff in 2012 or when 75%(!) of homes have digital TV.

At the time of typing Freeview equipment is still pricey - you pay a premium for your digital TV to have a Freeview decoder, and it probably won't have an EPG: and the one Freeview PVR costs the equivalent of three HDD recorders. There's also no voucher scheme to buy this stuff.

Nevertheless that 75% target is unambitious because it includes the 45% of homes with Sky or TC cable (probably more like 50% by 2012), and most replacement TVs sold in the next 3-4 years will have decoders.

As you can probably guess I haven't ponied up for a decoder, but mainly because the additional channels are dross. I'd happily trade any number of rebroadcast radio stations and the likes of ParliamentTV for a classic TV and movie channel.

Rant over.