Loading ...Richard Lindsey-Davis, Commercial Development Director at Freesat, spoke of Freesat problems during the annual BADA Conference (British Audio/Visual Dealers Association).
It was admitted that “We have not been able to get enough set top boxes and Freesat TVs to meet demand”, although we of course already knew this from the number of problems consumers had in the first few weeks of launch.
Richard also said that Alba Group high definition boxes were delayed due to picture quality issues, “the standard definition picture was so awful”, “The standard definition output on the Alba boxes wasn’t as good as it should be or as good as that on the Humax box”, “Alba is trying to improve it. It wasn’t something they’d thought about; they assumed people wouldn’t use it.” (no mention of Humax’s poor picture quality?!?!)
Its been confirm that a further three Freesat IDTV’s are due from Panasonic later this year, although we are unsure at this stage what size ranges these will cover. It was also mentioned that Richard is in discussion with other manufacturers including Samsung, Toshiba and Sony about manufacturing Freesat models to improve the supply situation now and in the future.
July 8th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Not surprised at the comment re picture quality. I have tried both, side by side, and would agree the Alba product (Grundig) picture was awful.
At least one magazine review (as reported in one of the threads on DS) would also support this view, as well as reports from members who tried both, side by side.
July 8th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
I was not aware that the freesat boxes produced poor SD pictures. My Sky HD box gives very good SD quality with HDMI. The freesat boxes are very cheap so I guess you get what you pay for.
July 8th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Sky seem to be rather busy on these forums these days. Murdoch and his dirty tricks…
July 8th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
I’m not sure why Trevor Harris is posting on a freesat page if he is so happy with paying Sky each month. I don’t think he will be so happy when his Thompson HD box breaks down due to the infamous cheap capacitor problem.
The SD picture quality on my Bush HD box is superior to my old Pace Sky box so I’m a happy customer. I would be happy to buy a Bush PVR if launched.
July 8th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
I can’t say this is anything particularly ground breaking…he’s hardly about to start pretending that everything’s ok. We all know there have been problems so it would be hard to hide from them.
I bought the Humax box just after launch, so can’t really comment on the Alba, but I’ve been mostly happy so far.
Any problems I have had I’ve just grudgingly accepted since it’s the risk of being an early adopter. If you buy something that’s super-new, untested (by consumers on a large scale) and trying to do something different, there’s bound to be teething problems.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love for it to have launched all singing all dancing and working perfectly, but unfortunately that’s not how the modern world of consumer tech works (Windows anyone???).
I wouldn’t say I’m Freesat’s biggest fan, but it’s been 8 weeks or so since launch, that’s no time at all. If it’s still in a mess in a few months time, then we should worry…..
July 8th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Nice statement. Some honesty and an intention to improve things goes a long way with me.
Everyone makes mistakes and to me its really not a problem so long as they realise it and they get them fixed.
They just need to address the marketing, lack of competitiveness and intent to compete (with Sky), mirroring (major Freeview Channels), and HD transition issues (to an across the board full time HD service) now and we can all be happy and concentrate on watching an excellent competitive service rather than moaning about what they’re failing to give us.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
I think we may need to face facts that Freesat may have no intention of competing with Sky, and see it asjust getting digital bums on seats, regardless of platform, especially considering Freesat is a not-for-profit organisation. We’d certainly all like to think of Freesat as a competitor, taking customers away from Sky, but in reality, its probably not in the make up of the Freesat business plan.
The problem is that competition breeds more development of product and service. What we ideally need is Freesat and Sky to have a major fallout (maybe take the “Freesat” name back!) and let battle commence
July 8th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Just self installed a goodmans HD box today….I am a humax fan but my humax 9200ts gives me lip sync on freeview so was scared off following all the talk about their Foxsat.
The Goodmans SD picture quality via HDMI to Samsung LE40A656 is no match for the humax on freeview via scart…well, at least off the Redruth transmitter….way, way, way short….out of focus/blurred in comparison…but the HD is very good…..I’ve achieved a 80-85% signal strength/quality….so I think the box is as good as it will be. I STAND TO BE CORRECTED….would 100% help a tadd?
I have been so emotional about the issues around Freesat that today I thought…buy a cheap box…..enjoy….let the platform develop then review….if not I would have even more grey hair….life is too short…..sorry humax but yes, I bought a Goodmans….
July 8th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
You’re right admin as I believe they already announed on here that they aren’t intending to compete with Sky, well that isn’t good enough for me or many other prospective customers.
We want nothing less than a service of equal quality and none of us intend to let up on Freesat over this until either they comply or die (in the corporate sense).
There’s no room in the market place for another mediocre public service that offers more of the same of what we have already.
July 9th, 2008 at 12:04 am
Al - 100% agree with you, we need to keep on Freesat’s back to ensure this service continues to develop and give us what we want, subscription free.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:07 am
Lee B, My interest in Freesat is that I wanted to upgrade my non subscription boxes for Freesat HD boxes. I think that is is in all our interests that Freestat should be a success as it does give people more choice.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:15 am
Hi Trevor,
Well I think you would be very happy if you upgraded your non subscription boxes to freesat HD boxes, you will access all the non encrypted SD channels and all the FTA HD Channels, plus you wont have to scroll through 100’s of encrypted channels anymore.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:27 am
How can freesat say they are not in competition with the sky Freesat service when they offer a fully installed service box dish and installation(HD option) in the region of £200 sky offer there own freesat service, box dish and installation for £150 as far as i am aware sky is also a subscription free service just the one of payment as like freesat.Sky say there is 200 channels in place and freesat say they will be 200 channels in place by the end of the year. How is that not competition? I realy want freesat to succeed and give the consumer a alternative option to the rip of merchants known as sky can you imagine having the sky freesat service probably receiving a letter/phone call just about every other day hounding you to take there other services out (sky mix this sky mix that) i for one am sick of skys pestering, agents knocking on my door endless leaflets threw the letterbox. come on freesat get some money spent on advertising and show that there IS an alternative to sky.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:33 am
I find this whole statement incredibly depressing.
If freesat had pitched iteslf from the beginning as an HD source for the nine million households ( thats right NINE MILLION and counting) who have gone out and bought an HD ready TV then I might understand that the quality of the SD broadcasts were given a low priority, but they didn’t instead they pitched themselves as a SD broadcaster (with a lot of HD hype/potential - but an undisclosed timescale on actually delivering this in any meaningful way) who could reach those viewers unable to receive freeview broadcasts in time for the digital switchover . How can anyone say SD “wasn’t something they’d thought about; they assumed people wouldn’t use it” when apart from 1 chanel with a frankly pathetic schedule (IMHO) , it is all they are broadcasting ?
My other frustration is with the public service broadcasters ( rather than freesat ) and that is why they are not providing an HD simulcast for all their channels ? Even if it means doing some upscaling at source for non HD material - but there is plenty of HD material out their ( all studio based broadcasts i.e all news , current affairs, quiz/panel/reality shows ; all movies ; most drama’s particularly US imports ; most sport braodcasts etc ) are all / or could be available in HD.
Until they actually start providing a worthwhile HD schedule than , quite honestly for the 98% of UK households (or thereabouts ) who can receive freeview there is absolutly no case for freesat , no wonder Sky isn’t worried.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
I have just had a Humax Foxsat-HD installed and agree that the sd picture could be better.I would be interested to know Humax could improve this through a download.With this set top box I have found it possible to download the Sky free channels also, but these pictures are not very good either.
July 9th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
For information - I’ve obtained a much better picture from my Foxsat-HD box (1.100.10) on my Samsung LE40A656 panel by changing the V-FORMAT output to 720p whilst watching BBC-HD; then switching to any other SD channel. This is all done in Freesat mode. On my Samsung, the V-FORMAT resolution output is locked to 1080i normally, unless you perform the above mentioned steps. If the Foxsat-HD is switched off/on, then is reverts to 1080i locked.
July 10th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
9pm Criminal Justice on BBChd
No HD picture!!! No Dolby Digital Sound!!!
Yet another Failing!!
What is the point of having a HD channel if the sound and picture is SD!!!!!!
July 10th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
deja vu
July 11th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Hi Alan, do you mean the SD picture quality is greatly improved when you do this? I want to get the Humax box but I’m being put off by reports of poor SD quality. I live in an area where Freeview is patchy.
July 11th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
What is the best box to purchase for Freesat?
I can’t wait to buy but am worried about which one to pick as there are so many.
We reside in Newtownards, Co. Down and our channel 5 signal is fine. Is is better to do with Sky for Freesat or down the Curry’s route?
Replies greatly appreciated!
July 11th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Depends, are you after standard-definition only, or high-definition too? If just SD then go for the cheapest one, they are all alba group boxes and won’t make a difference. If you want HD too, then either go for the Bush (cheapest) or Humax (most expensive). You just need to appreciate that some (especially the Humax) still have problems, but they will eventually be resolved.
July 11th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Hi Matt,
Yes, the SD picture quality is greatly improved when you I select 720p whilst watching BBC-HD; then switching over to any other channel that’s at SD resolution. Once at 720p, I’ve tweaked the LE40A656 picture settings to give a very reasonable picture. Certainly much better than what I’ve ever achived whilst having the picture resolution locked at 1080i — too much upscaling/picture manipulation is being asked of the TV. Oh yes correction… the 720p mode may be preserved during a power down. Not quite 100% on this atm, but it kept 720p mode during a power off. Alan.
July 13th, 2008 at 11:16 am
Thanks for that Alan, that’s great news. I’ll now buy the Humax.
July 15th, 2008 at 7:39 am
Matt this is a bit late but the locked resolution is a bug that only effects some tv’s. On mine I can choose any RES on any channel so it might not be an issue for you.