But if it's 50% digital listening and let's say 90% of that isn't DAB, then
why bother "making a clear statement of Government and policy commitment to
enabling DAB to be a primary distribution network for radio;"?




On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 18:05, John Ousby <john.ou...@bbc.co.uk> wrote:

>  The recommendation isn't 50% dab, it's 50% digital listening - so
> combination of DAB, IP, DTV etc. i.e. choose the one that matches your
> expectations of quality.
> on the DAB+ point, the boring sounding profiles bit means that there is a
> set of profiles that mean that a digital broadcast radio can work anywhere
> in europe (DAB, DAB+, DMB-A) hence introducing economies of scale and
> getting round the fact that a lot of  manufacturers don't just provide
> devices for a particular territory.
> hope this helps
> best
> J
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:
> owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] *On Behalf Of *Scot McSweeney-Roberts
> *Sent:* 29 January 2009 16:41
> *To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> *Subject:* Re: [backstage] Digital Britain Interim Report is published
>
>  Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see any mention of FM vs DAB quality.
> Even if the coverage is (eventually) there, if the quality isn't as good
> then I don't see 50% of the population switching to DAB any time soon.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 16:31, Brian Butterworth <briant...@freeview.tv>wrote:
>
>> In the box on page 34, the second table has no headings.  Nowhere does it
>> mention the 'planned coverage' is for 2030.   And best of all...
>> "N.B. Comparing analogue FM to DAB coverage is not straightforward due to
>> the individual characteristics of each platform and it is necessary to
>> measure the performance in different ways ... current coverage of DAB on
>> local commercial multiplexes varies considerably."
>>
>> 2009/1/29 Brian Butterworth <briant...@freeview.tv>
>>
>> I'm quite impressed by the way that the whole DAB+ issue has become a box
>>> about the boring sounding European 'Digital Radio Receivers Profiles' on
>>> page 33.  Strange way to write a long-term plan if you ask me.
>>>
>>> 2009/1/29 Jim Tonge <jim_d_to...@yahoo.co.uk>
>>>
>>>  And plenty not to:
>>>> (page 22)
>>>>  "On the same basis, the Government has yet to see a case for
>>>> legislation in favour of
>>>> net neutrality. In consequence, unless Ofcom find network operators or
>>>> ISPs to have
>>>> Significant Market Power and justify intervention on competition
>>>> grounds, traffic
>>>> management will not be prevented."
>>>>
>>>> At least I'll be able to get to the quality at AOL news faster...
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>>  On 29 Jan 2009, at 15:27, Brian Butterworth wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  A lot to enjoy here...
>>>>
>>>> "Our plans for the level of service which we believe should be
>>>> universal. We anticipate this consideration will include options up to
>>>> 2Mb/s."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.dcms.gov.uk/images/publications/digital_britain_interimreportjan09.pdf
>>>>
>>>> Brian Butterworth
>>>>
>>>> follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
>>>> web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and
>>>> switchover advice, since 2002
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Brian Butterworth
>>>
>>> follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
>>> web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and
>>> switchover advice, since 2002
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Brian Butterworth
>>
>> follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist
>> web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover
>> advice, since 2002
>>
>
>

Reply via email to