# Virgin Media hints at TiVo via Fibre phone lines



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

A friend of mine has just done a customer survey for Virgin Media, and come across the attached question! Just hope it's progressed!


----------



## pauljs (Feb 11, 2001)

£50 Tivo activation fee! must be the new word for lifetime subscription.


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

"Get superfast Fibre Optic Broadband down your phone line"

Surely I'm not the only one to see glaring error in that statement???

Our phone lines are copper. How are VM going to magically transform them into Fibre?

Surely it should say "get superfast broadband at speeds equivalent to Fibre"?

Martin


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

martink0646 said:


> "Get superfast Fibre Optic Broadband down your phone line"
> 
> Surely I'm not the only one to see glaring error in that statement???
> 
> ...


BT is installing Fibre To the Cabinet in a large number of exchanges in the South East of England where there is no Virgin Media coverage in the next 12 months. This includes my mum's exchange where there is no Virgin Media coverage. So it is actually a fibre optic connection apart from the last piece of copper wire of a few tens or a few hundreds of feet to the home.

On top of this my local village exchange in Surrey where I live where there is no LLU, let alone Virgin cable, was one of the winners of the BT Race To Infinity, which is a BT Retail sponsored initiative to assess demand for fibre in village exchange with 1,000 lines or more. Under that scheme around two thirds of premises in the area will be upgraded to FTTP - Fibre To The Premises. So on my home exchange it will actually truly be possible to get a fibre optic connection to Virgin via your own phone line in many homes.

In any event you will note that it was I who previously forecast several times on this forum that Virgin would expand its coverage by using BT's new fibre optic network on exchanges where it has no cable coverage of its own. This is what is now probably coming to pass. BT plans to upgrade every exchange in the country to Fibre To The Cabinet in the next eight years (Fibre To The Premises will probably come later for those who want it if the customer is willing to pay the extra cost and/or takes a long enough contract on a high end broadband product). At that stage Virgin Media should be able to provide their service to every home in the UK, albeit that their profit margin per connection may be lower.

So clearly I was right in my forecast about Virgin using BT's fibre network to expand its coverage. This makes perfect sense as BT Wholesale/Openreach needs to maximise the return on its investment in fibre and government competition policies means it can't expect to do it all as BT Retail.

Twinned with the announcement yesterday of Formula 1 moving mainly to Sky this is all highly significant stuff since Sky does not have LLU at either my home exchange or my mum's exchange so is a very expensive way to get broadband and subscription tv. However getting Sky Sports through Virgin in conjunction with a Tivo could be a fairly good deal, especially for those of use with access to BT FTTC or FTTP but no Sky llu equipment at the local exchange.

So it looks like Virgin Tivo here I come, potentially as soon as the first half of 2012.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Sky's delivery of programmes over broadband is already pretty well established, and is about to get better with Sky Go Monthly. If you have BT Infinity and want streamed/VOD pay tV, why wouldn't you go direct to source?


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> Sky's delivery of programmes over broadband is already pretty well established, and is about to get better with Sky Go Monthly. If you have BT Infinity and want streamed/VOD pay tV, why wouldn't you go direct to source?


I thought Sky Go was only SD (since it works on even a bog standard copper wire ADSL Max connection)? Virgin Tivo over BT Infinity will be HD. I thought you of all people appreciated the massive benefits of watching a program in HD rather than SD?

Also BT Infinity broadband is much faster than normal 8MB ADSL MAX or up to 24MB ADSL2+ LLU.

Anything that allows me directly paying money to the monopolistic Rupert Murdoch empire in favour of the merely free market loving Richard Branson would give me the greatest possible pleasure.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

It is at the moment, as better bandwidth arrives I'm sure HD will come along. iPlayer already has.

I can't see a future in a box which acts like a PVR with TV packages and the rest but actually is an IPTV unit. Why not go straight to IPTV?

Just buy the channels you want, direct from source, not give an intermediary a cut.

it's not there quite yet, but neither is Virgin over IP.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> Anything that allows me directly paying money to the monopolistic Rupert Murdoch empire in favour of the merely free market loving Richard Branson would give me the greatest possible pleasure.


If you subscribe to Sky Sports to watch the F1, Murdoch gets your money, no matter what intermediary it goes through first.

Bet you a tenner he puts F1 on SS3 or SS4 so Virgin don't get it in HD.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> I can't see a future in a box which acts like a PVR with TV packages and the rest but actually is an IPTV unit. Why not go straight to IPTV?
> 
> Just buy the channels you want, direct from source, not give an intermediary a cut.


Unfortunately quite a few of the channels like National Geographic (the sole home of aviation related programs of almost any kind on Uk television for non torrented and therefore legal programs) are only available in a bulk package from Sky or Virgin. Only some channels like British Eurosport are prepared to sell themselves on a completely freestanding basis.

When you talk about something being an IPTV unit rather than a PVR I'm really not quite sure what you mean? In the long run all television will be delivered by IP even though for the time being DTT and Digital Satellite are more robust until IPTV networks develop more bandwidth with more reliable hardware architecture that avoids interruptions in program delivery.

Most pay channels find it easier to sell themselves in a package via Sky or Virgin than to market themselves due to the large marketing budget and economies of scale in terms of customer service that those organisations enjoy.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> Bet you a tenner he puts F1 on SS3 or SS4 so Virgin don't get it in HD.


I reckon Virgin will fight another legal case against Sky if they try to pull that trick.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> I reckon Virgin will fight another legal case against Sky if they try to pull that trick.


They pull that trick all the time. I can get Ss1 and SS2 on Topup Tv, but they put just enough on ss3 to make that unattractive.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> Unfortunately quite a few of the channels like National Geographic (the sole home of aviation related programs of almost any kind on Uk television for non torrented and therefore legal programs) are only available in a bulk package from Sky or Virgin. Only some channels like British Eurosport are prepared to sell themselves on a completely freestanding basis.


We looking a short distance into the future here; disintermediation will be the order of the day.

Setting up a parallel system to Sky on broadcast is next to impossible. Even those who do it typically use Sky's systems as having your own cards or boxes is impractical.

Iptv changes all that; even the smallest channel can run their own billing easily and efficiently.



> When you talk about something being an IPTV unit rather than a PVR I'm really not quite sure what you mean?


A box like an internet radio which can tune in to any channel. Could also be a PC, a console or built in to the tv.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> A box like an internet radio which can tune in to any channel. Could also be a PC, a console or built in to the tv.


I have three Reciva Logik Internet radios I picked up from Dixons for £35 each.

Guess what but standalone internet radios are now completely dead and all the marketing push is behind crappy old DAB radios.

The reason is that DAB is a constrained platform that can be dominated by the Beeb and a couple of commercial broadcasters and that is how big bully boy marketing men working for large jackbooted corporates like things.

If you think that we are now going to have individual subscriptions with each channel we watch then dream on. Apart from anything else Mr and Mrs Average find 20 monthly subs to pay far too complicated. Channels mainly prosper due to marketing and where they are in the EPG as much as due to decent content. If you say to people you can listen to any one of 10,000 channels (Reciva Internet Radio) they just don't want that because its just too much choice. What they want is about 100 channels which a clever marketing machine tells them are the best thing in creation out there and easily worth paying 50 quid a month for.

What people want is something that all their neighbours have and that marketing men tell them is the best thing sliced bread. If you think that people always choose what is actually technically the best product then you have clearly learned far less about life than I had thought in your last 40+ years on this planet.

Take T3 for instance. Do people really buy it because its actually interesting or worth reading or simply because it has a jazzy cover with a stylish image and a distribution deal with all of the country's main magazine wholesalers?


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> If you think that we are now going to have individual subscriptions with each channel we watch then dream on. Apart from anything else Mr and Mrs Average find 20 monthly subs to pay far too complicated.


How patronising.

People seem to manage just fine picking which media they want in other areas.



> Channels mainly prosper due to marketing and where they are in the EPG as much as due to decent content.


Marketing is important, but you are dead wrong if you think content isn't the primary driver.



> What people want is something that all their neighbours have and that marketing men tell them is the best thing sliced bread.


Again with the patronising.



> Take T3 for instance. Do people really buy it because its actually interesting or worth reading or simply because it has a jazzy cover with a stylish image and a distribution deal with all of the country's main magazine wholesalers?


You need both. If it's not worth reading noone would buy it. People are not the idiots you seem to think they are.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Getting back on topic Virgin Media have already previously talked about laying fibre over BT telegraph poles.

So if you are on an exchange where there is BT Fibre To the Cabinet but no Virgin Media cable network probably Virgin Media will offer to pay the cost of running fibre from the BT cabinet to your home/premises if you agree to sign a 12 or 18 month contract with them. Subject to your home being not more than so many hundred feet away from the cabinet and/or no digging up of roads or pavements involved.

This then gives you broadband of up to 80Mbps (latest BT planned speeds for domestic Fibre To The Premises connections) and destroys any hope for Sky Digital of ever providing their service in that area. My betting would be that if Virgin signs a deal with BT where it can lay fibre to the home from BT's cabinets it will specifically demand an exclusive and that Sky cannot also start supplying its service over BT Fibre to the home/premises in the same areas.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

I don't think Sky sees itself as a fibre to the home provider. They are top smart to go down that high cost low margin route. Instead they are positioning themselves as delivery system neutral. Sky Sports is on satellite. DTT, cable, mobile, games console and internet.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> I don't think Sky sees itself as a fibre to the home provider. They are top smart to go down that high cost low margin route. Instead they are positioning themselves as delivery system neutral. Sky Sports is on satellite. DTT, cable, mobile, games console and internet.


They aren't at all neutral about their premium and excessing pricing on the 4,500 UK phone exchanges where they don't have their own LLU phone equipment.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Eh? I don't understand what point you're making?


----------



## gazter (Aug 1, 2001)

britcub said:


> A friend of mine has just done a customer survey for Virgin Media, and come across the attached question! Just hope it's progressed!


Yeah, i already posted something about this a while ago, had a conversation with someone at Virgin Media. They are already trialling it somewhere in Wales.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> Eh? I don't understand what point you're making?


Sky charges a lot more for its ADSL broadband on the 4,500 UK phone exchanges where it doesn't have its own LLU equipment even though it only provides up to 8Mbps ADSL Max via BT Openreach in those areas instead of up to 24Mbps ADSL2+.

Basically Sky isn't interested in providing a competitive broadband offering in the countryside or even in small towns. Yet quite a few of those exchanges are now already getting fast Fibre To The Cabinet connections under the BT Infinity program and all of them will be upgraded to BT Infinity during the next 8 years. This means that the Virgin Tivo and up to 48Mbps broadband may become available in those areas even though Sky broadband will remain at 8Mbps.

See www.samknows.com if you are for some reason unaware of BT's dismally restricted LLU broadband coverage. TalkTalk have their own equipment in nearly twice as many phone exchanges as Sky.


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

Pete77 said:


> Basically Sky isn't interested in providing a competitive broadband offering in the countryside or even in small towns. Yet quite a few of those exchanges are now already getting fast Fibre To The Cabinet connections under the BT Infinity program and all of them will be upgraded to BT Infinity during the next 8 years. This means that the Virgin Tivo and up to 48Mbps broadband may become available in those areas even though Sky broadband will remain at 8Mbps.


I don't get why it should be restricted to Virgin. Many ISPs are promoting fibre optic connection on the back of the BT Openworld trials, including Sky. The idea of an exclusive deal between BT and Virgin wouldn't go down well with Ofcom, nor other ISPs.


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

martink0646 said:


> "Get superfast Fibre Optic Broadband down your phone line"
> 
> Surely I'm not the only one to see glaring error in that statement???
> 
> ...


I know it's dodgy ground to quote yourself but think of this as more of a bump......does anyone else but me think that VM shouldn't be allowed to say what they have said. Oh & Pete77, please don't bother to answer if all you're going to do is give me a patronising lecture about telecoms infrastructure that you've learned from speaking to to a few call centre operators, the odd engineer & a bit of googling!

Martin


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

martink0646 said:


> I know it's dodgy ground to quote yourself but think of this as more of a bump......does anyone else but me think that VM shouldn't be allowed to say what they have said. Oh & Pete77, please don't bother to answer if all you're going to do is give me a patronising lecture about telecoms infrastructure that you've learned from speaking to to a few call centre operators, the odd engineer & a bit of googling!


Actually I have been in dialogue by email on a number of occasions with BT's Head of Superfast Broadband, Mr Johnny McQuoid, regarding their plans for BT Infinity. Would you still rate him as being a call centre operator?

Why should VM not be allowed to say what they are saying? At the moment they operate Fibre To The Cabinet with coax to your living room from the cabinet in their own Virgin Media cable area which they describe as a fibre optic connection. Under BT Infinity they will be operating Fibre To The Cabinet with copper to your living room from the cabinet. What exactly is the big difference in that apart from who owns the fibre cable to the cabinet?

And on the 10 new Race To Infinity exchanges that won the competition run by BT Retail over 50% of homes will have FTTP - Fibre To The Premises. So Virgin Media will be supplying fibre to the front door in those cases.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> Sky charges a lot more for its ADSL broadband on the 4,500 UK phone exchanges where it doesn't have its own LLU equipment even though it only provides up to 8Mbps ADSL Max via BT Openreach in those areas instead of up to 24Mbps ADSL2+.
> 
> Basically Sky isn't interested in providing a competitive broadband offering in the countryside or even in small towns. Yet quite a few of those exchanges are now already getting fast Fibre To The Cabinet connections under the BT Infinity program and all of them will be upgraded to BT Infinity during the next 8 years. This means that the Virgin Tivo and up to 48Mbps broadband may become available in those areas even though Sky broadband will remain at 8Mbps.
> 
> See www.samknows.com if you are for some reason unaware of BT's dismally restricted LLU broadband coverage. TalkTalk have their own equipment in nearly twice as many phone exchanges as Sky.


That seems to support my point, that Sky aren't really interested in being an ISP and see themselves as being available on all platforms.

They got forced to take that view, but ironically it was the better plan.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Adding some facts to the discussion. Virgin's proposed partnerhip is with Fujitsu, not BT:

http://www.iptv-news.com/iptv_news/...lines_delivery_of_cable_tv_over_fujitsu_fibre


----------



## SolidTechie (Dec 11, 2002)

TCM2007 said:


> Adding some facts to the discussion.


Spoilsport.


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

Pete77 said:


> Actually I have been in dialogue by email on a number of occasions with BT's Head of Superfast Broadband, Mr Johnny McQuoid, regarding their plans for BT Infinity.


Lucky him! I'm sure he remebers your exchanges with great fondness. I love your name dropping.



Pete77 said:


> Would you still rate him as being a call centre operator?


No, but I would class him as an engineer. The point I was making that you failed to get, as usual, is that you spout off on every topic known to man as though you are an expert in all of them. In doing this you end up patronising people who actually do know what they are talking about. This is info you have gleaned, not earned so stop pretending



Pete77 said:


> Why should VM not be allowed to say what they are saying?


It's self explanatory, as you have so eloquently described yourself below.



Pete77 said:


> At the moment they operate Fibre To The Cabinet with coax to your living room from the cabinet in their own Virgin Media cable area which they describe as a fibre optic connection.


'Fibre Optic Broadband' is not & cannot be delivered over copper cabling of any sort. Fibre Optic Broadband needs to be fibre from headend to home (FTTH). What they are describing is fibre to the curb (FTTC) also called fibre to the cabinet. Just because they describe it as 'Fibre Optic Broadband' doesn't mean it is. It's a breach of a number of consumer & advertising regs & a clear case of misrepresentation.

You might say it doesn't matter but the reason they are doing it is because fibre is much misunderstood & has a certain cachet. A true FTTH service will offer up to 1GPS (1,000mbps) which is so far removed from the 50mbps that VM offer as to be plainly misleading.

I would have no problem with them calling it 'Superfast Broadband' which it is considering the current state of broadband provision in the UK but they don't because 'Fibre Optic Broadband' sounds more glamourous & I'm sure they are using it because they believe it will help them to sell more subs.

Martin


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

martink0646 said:


> You might say it doesn't matter but the reason they are doing it is because fibre is much misunderstood & has a certain cachet. A true FTTH service will offer up to 1GPS (1,000mbps) which is so far removed from the 50mbps that VM offer as to be plainly misleading.


Sorry but you are just making things up again based on the kind of fibre optic network they have in places like Korea.

My local exchange, which was one of the winners of BT's Race To Infinity, will have around 60% of addresses enable with FTTP (Fibre To The Premises) where there is only a fairly short run from the cabinet to the home. But the expected broadband speed resulting from this is 80Mbps compared to ADSL2+ with a maximum speed of 24Mbps. 1000Mbps is only possible with a massively high capacity fibre optic backbone network which BT simply just doesn't have in place yet.

Whilst you choose to make a big deal of whether people get FTTC rather than FTTP at present the speed difference is 80Mbps versus up to 48Mbps. So that is why at this stage FTTC is considered more or less the same thing. As and when FTTP can deliver speeds of up to several hundred megabytes then your current deliberate nitpicking may have a sounder basis.

Regarding the Virgin and Fujitsu deal I read the press release and have concluded its just PR puff and won't happen because anyone with half a brain will be able to see it is not economically sound to try and compete with BT's forthcoming fibre optic network in thousands of low density rural exchanges.

Anyhow clearly the Virgin Tivo won't after all be arriving at my or my relative's address any time soon so Sky can take their expensive Sky Sports HD F1 coverage and stick it where the sun don't shine while I carry on with my AltEPG Tivo for the races the BBC do decide to show. Unless BT can offer some massively attractive deal to watch it in HD on BT Vision.....



martink0646 said:


> No, but I would class him as an engineer.


You would be wrong. He is quite clearly a senior BT marketing person.


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

Pete77 said:


> Sorry but you are just making things up again


I really don't know why I bother replying but someone has to call you. Please read my post carefully, quote the offending section in your reply & tell me exactly what I am making up.

Then please tell me why you feel so qualified to spout off on all subjects. Please start with telecoms backbone infrastructure.

Hopefully you cannot fudge these very simple requests & deflect them by attacking or changing the subject.

Martin


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

Pete77 said:


> Unless BT can offer some massively attractive deal to watch it in HD on BT Vision.....


As they can't currently offer ANY deal to watch live broadcasts in HD that sounds unlikely!


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

martink0646 said:


> Then please tell me why you feel so qualified to spout off on all subjects. Please start with telecoms backbone infrastructure.
> 
> Hopefully you cannot fudge these very simple requests & deflect them by attacking or changing the subject.


Then why you don't post your own CV first since you quite clearly see yourself as eminently qualified to post on most technical matters and also seem to feel that very few other people are as well qualified as you to do so.

I would also remind you of forum rules about bullying and insulting other members since at the moment you seem to be intent on overstepping the mark.


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

Pete77 said:


> I would also remind you of forum rules about bullying and insulting other members since at the moment you seem to be intent on overstepping the mark.


Oh well, there's another thread closed. Well done Pete.


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

Pete77 said:


> Then why you don't post your own CV first since you quite clearly see yourself as eminently qualified to post on most technical matters and also seem to feel that very few other people are as well qualified as you to do so.


You accused me of making things up, so in my post I asked you to point out what exactly I had made up. It is so typical of you not to answer when there is ANY possibility of you being wrong. I ask you again. What did I make up?



Pete77 said:


> I would also remind you of forum rules about bullying and insulting other members since at the moment you seem to be intent on overstepping the mark.


You accused me of lying & have then been unable to back it up. Where in any of my posts about have I said anything that I can't or won't back up? Or is that another question you will conveniently ignore?

I will listen & abide by the moderators, not you, the person who has placed more personal attacks on this forum over the years than all the other posters put together. Go on, challenge me to produce 10 personal attacks you have made. It will be easy *** ******** ********* (self censored).

As for my cv, I trained & studied as an electrical/electronic engineer & then moved into sales firstly in motorsport (telemetry equipment) & then starting a telecoms business with three colleagues that was based around fibre management, longhaul backbone equipment & network design at headend level where I was responsible for sales. As a matter of interest, we consulted & supplied equipment for the trials of BT's 21CN (21st Century Network), their first real foray into an integrated modern network that didn't rely on legacy copper.

After we sold out to a major American/Belgian/Bahamian comglomerate I took a couple of years off to look after my young son & support my wife in her first love, wedding dress design, allowing her to leave the pharmaceutical industry.

I have subsequently worked in sponsorship acquisition in the telecoms & financial industries (conferences). After the credit crunch I have stepped back to work with my wife on our wedding business which takes up all our time but gives us the opportunity to work together & to maximise our free time. My major hobby is home cinema, centred now on HTPC's & maintaining & upgrading my multiroom entertainment system & stretching it's capabilities in ways that it wasn't exactly designed for. I have spun this into a small business where I set-up peoples tv's as I have all the equipment but I certainly don't make a living from it.

I feel qualified to post on motorsport, telecoms (re fibre), qualified to contradict people who make stupid & untrue comments on HD in general although I bow to Sneals2000, I have an opinion on HTPC's although I will also bow to Stuart & others regarding their full capabilities. I will comment on matters regarding the financial industry having worked in it & recently I have posted regarding solar water heating as we have that. Oh, & I have also had a number of quite decent perfromance cars down the years such as Porsches, a TVR Tuscan, Lancia's & Audi's & although I am now stuck with a Clio & a Kangoo van I reserve the right to have an opinion about cars that have more power than an anaemic, effette, italian, hairdressers rustbucket manufactured for women that never had the power to get out of it's own way.

I also respect the vast majority of people on here & respect anybody who's opinion isn't dressed up as fact & rammed down my throat.

Now Pete77. Your turn!!!!!!!!!!!! Answer or go away & never darken my door again!

Martin


----------



## SolidTechie (Dec 11, 2002)

martink0646 said:


> ... now stuck with a Clio & a Kangoo van I reserve the right to have an opinion about cars that have more power than an anaemic, effette, italian, hairdressers rustbucket manufactured for women that never had the power to get out of it's own way.


I'm sensing a great empathy with these fabulous cars..


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

martink0646 said:


> than an anaemic, effette, italian, hairdressers rustbucket manufactured for women that never had the power to get out of it's own way.




Bet you that's the bit he answers.


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

TCM2007 said:


> Bet you that's the bit he answers.


He won't answer any of it. He's a classic wum/troll - delete as applicable without the courage of his own convictions.

I wish he would reply & answer the questions put to him, but I'm not holding my breath. If he does reply he'll fudge & obfuscate the point or launch another attack from a different angle. Anything but having to say "You know what, you were right. Sorry"

Martin


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> So clearly I was right in my forecast about Virgin using BT's fibre network to expand its coverage.


Talk about bigging yourself up.

1. I think VM have previously mentioned that they might be looking into doing this themselves; though maybe not *exactly* like this.



Pete77 said:


> ... Virgin Media have already previously talked about laying fibre over BT telegraph poles.


There you go!

2. It's hardly rocket science to think that they *may* do this at some pont anyway.

3. If it never happend, you would probably get away with not mentioning that you said they'd do it in the first place


----------



## Heuer (Mar 15, 2004)

Point of order! It is indeed not "rocket science" - you don't science rockets you engineer them. So, altogether - "It's not rocket engineering".

OK, rant over - I will go and lie down.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Heuer said:


> Point of order! It is indeed not "rocket science" - you don't science rockets you engineer them. So, altogether - "It's not rocket engineering".


But is engineering a science or an art?

Answer it is a science.

Since this analogy has been in use for many years now you seem to be trying to push water up hill to have it suddenly changed to "rocket engineering".


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

Heuer said:


> Point of order! It is indeed not "rocket science" - you don't science rockets you engineer them. So, altogether - "It's not rocket engineering".
> 
> OK, rant over - I will go and lie down.


Point of order. No-one likes a smart-arse 



Pete77 said:


> Since this analogy has been in use for many years now you seem to be trying to push water up hill to have it suddenly changed to "rocket engineering".


Either that or he was being entirely sarcastic and not-at-all serious. I know which my money's on


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> But is engineering a science or an art?
> 
> Answer it is a science.


I'd go for "neither, that's a false dichotomy"


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

knightswo said:


> I thought Sky Go was only SD (since it works on even a bog standard copper wire ADSL Max connection)? Virgin Tivo over BT Infinity will be HD. I thought you of all people appreciated the massive benefits of watching a program in HD rather than SD?


It's SD right now; we are talking about the future.

And you can do HD on a bog standard copper ADSL connection - I've used Zune on a 360 to stream HD over my ~6mbps connection.


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

Pete77 said:


> But is engineering a science or an art?
> 
> Answer it is a science.
> 
> Since this analogy has been in use for many years now you seem to be trying to push water up hill to have it suddenly changed to "rocket engineering".


Pete77, not only have you not answered my question or post but you've got the nerve to continue posting on this selfsame thread. Answer the question please! If you've forgotten it, reread the posts.

Martin


----------



## Nimbus (May 29, 2004)

martink0646 said:


> Pete77, not only have you not answered my question or post but you've got the nerve to continue posting on this selfsame thread. Answer the question please! If you've forgotten it, reread the posts.
> 
> Martin


I cant believe that after 7 years here, you'd expect anything else..


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

Nimbus said:


> I cant believe that after 7 years here, you'd expect anything else..


Of course, youre totally right. But I've just had enough of him. If I appeal to his sense of reason, fairness & democracy he may engage in an adult conversation & take responsibility for his posts. Then again he will probably revert to character.

I just have this nagging feeling that deep down inside he may well have something useful to add to the discussion instead of hit & run posting. We'll see.

Martin


----------



## youddiph (Oct 12, 2003)

Just to throw in my two pence worth. Tiscali/Talk Talk (TV) have been delivering multichannel TV through the existing phone line for sometime now, with a recorder. So even with normal ADSL it is possible to use the phone line to transmit a multichanneltv.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

youddiph said:


> Tiscali/Talk Talk (TV) have been delivering multichannel TV through the existing phone line for sometime now, with a recorder. So even with normal ADSL it is possible to use the phone line to transmit a multichanneltv.


All TalkTalk LLU'ed exchanges (which I assume are the only ones offering the tv product) have up to 24Mbps LLU equipment installed rather than just standard ADSL+ up to 8Mbps that several thousand other BT smaller exchanges have. Of course this still won't be any help to those living along way from the exchange on these TalkTalk LLU'ed areas and I assume that they get told they can't have the service via a postcode search just as those in non TalkTalk LLU'ed exchange areas do.

However the point of fibre optic to the cabinet upgrading by BT is to bring things like HD web tv to almost everyone on the upgraded exchange in due course regardless of how far away from the exchange they are. Also while BT are starting at 48Mbps with their BT Infinity service in due course after a few more years much higher speeds like 500Mbps etc will almost certainly be offered, especially once the inevitable Fibre To The Home upgrade is then offered by BT for those willing to sign long broadband contracts or pay the direct cost of laying the new cable from the cabinet to the home. Of course all that requires BT to also substantially upgrade their backbone broadband fibre optic network cabling too in due course..................


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Nimbus said:


> I cant believe that after 7 years here, you'd expect anything else..


However you clearly forget that Martin 0646 (as distinct from the totally unconnected Hanworth based Martin variant) has already proudly publicly admitted in this forum to having a far bigger you know what than most of the rest of us here.

Once you allow for that fact the rest of his behaviour and frequently confrontational attitude towards certain other forum members is quite easily explained.

In other words the poor chap simply can't help it.


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

Pete77 said:


> However you clearly forget that Martin 0646 (as distinct from the totally unconnected Hanworth based Martin variant) has already proudly publicly admitted in this forum to having a far bigger you know what than most of the rest of us here.


 (and baffled?) The only one here who has admitted to having anything bigger than the rest of us is you. How do you manage to squeeze into your hairdressers car?



Pete77 said:


> Once you allow for that fact the rest of his behaviour and frequently confrontational attitude towards certain other forum members is quite easily explained.
> 
> In other words the poor chap simply can't help it.


Just you ....& carl when he's on his VM hobbyhorse

Martin


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

martink0646 said:


> (and baffled?) The only one here who has admitted to having anything bigger than the rest of us is you.


Then how do you account for this recent post:-



martink0646 said:


> *I hereby accept my "Excellence In Dickery" Award.*
> 
> *I have a long list of people to thank today my Mum, My Dad, my Wife, my Son, my goldfish Fred.............*


See www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=473544&page=3


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

martink0646 said:


> ...& carl when he's on his VM hobbyhorse


Please leave me out of your petty squabbles. Some of you are as bad as each other. 



Pete77 said:


> Then how do you account for this recent post:-[/url]


It's called sarcasm. At least, I assume it was; even with the lack of smileys.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> Of course all that requires BT to also substantially upgrade their backbone broadband fibre optic network cabling too in due course..................


And the TV companies to massive upgrade at their end.


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

Pete77 said:


> Then how do you account for this recent post:-
> 
> See www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=473544&page=3


Oh for goodness sake! If you're going to quote from a thread then at least read the posts.

An explanation for the the simple & feeble minded; B166er, no doubt pissed off by the bickering, posted a humourous flow chart pointing what an idiot one is when one gets sucked into arguing online with wums & trolls. At the bottom it congratulates the reader for being a huge dick with a mock "For Excellence in Dickery" award. THAT is what I was accepting because he was absolutely right. You surely didn't think I was talking about my own anatomical parts did you?

The thread this is from is here. Please see Post #101. You know this thread, it's the one where you still haven't answered my questions!!!

Martin


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

martink0646 said:


> At the bottom it congratulates the reader for being a huge dick with a mock "For Excellence in Dickery" award. THAT is what I was accepting because he was absolutely right. You surely didn't think I was talking about my own anatomical parts did you?


But the question is how did you so readily arrive at the bottom of the chart instead of taking one of the sideways routes off it that I and most less huge dickish inclined people would have followed.



> The thread this is from is here. Please see Post #101. You know this thread, it's the one where you still haven't answered my questions!!!


I do know perfectly well which thread this was all discussed in thank you. Can I therefore perhaps take it that at your school they never taught you about the pun in your English classes.

Also with regard to the term huge dick at the base of the b166er flow chart what language root exactly do you suppose that this term derives itself from. With regard to the size of anatomical appendages I believe it was someone else who started the discussion by suggesting that my posting style was as a result of having an undersized appendage. It might have been you or it might have been someone else but I really don't have the time to go back and check up on it all now.


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

My irony dectector just exploded 

*ETA:*

Or, to put it another way...

I think we have a new winner


----------



## martink0646 (Feb 8, 2005)

Pete77 said:


> But the question is how did you so readily arrive at the bottom of the chart instead of taking one of the sideways routes off it that I and most less huge dickish inclined people would have followed.


Because I can take a look at myself & recognise when I'm wrong & be big enough to admit.

Martin


----------

