Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

Well, the title says it all really, what's the point? Surely at some time in the future, SD will disappear altogether leaving us just with the HD channels. As far as I am concerned it might as well happen sooner rather than later! It would presumably free up a load of bandwidth and reduce costs, also it would end the rediculous channel numbering system we have at present where the HD variant of a channel may be hundreds of channels away from its SD version.
I appreciate that some people would have to upgrade their TVs, but have you seen the prices of basic HD TVs these days, they're dirt cheap!
I honestly can't see a downside to this suggestion, but appreciate that others may have a different point of view and if so would be interested to hear it.

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

Topgun, you just have to understand that not everyone is in your privileged position. There are still a lot of SD TVs out there and unlike you, there are also a lot of hard pressed families trying to make ends meet. A new TV will not be on their list of priorities.

As for channel numbering, why is this such an issue. Just select 'HD' on your channel guide and all the HD channels come up, excluding the SD channels. I really don't see the problem!

In any case, what do you expect VM to do with all that vacant bandwidth? To be realistic, we have most of the channels we need now anyway. There's sufficient space for those we don't have that are worth having.

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

Agreed I think all new channels should be in HD.Ok there are certain channels that would not benefit from HD (gold).But there should be an HD version of all channels available to customers

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

I agree with your last sentence.

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

Fair point. But the point I was trying to make is, that like black and white TVs and the analogue signal, technology moves on and makes previous hardware redundant. I think what I suggested will happen at some point, I was just saying I would like to see it happen sooner rather than later.

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

I expect you are right that it will happen, but customers will be alienated if VM or Sky try to push this too far too soon.

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

Easy solution get shot of the + 1 channels replace with HD

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

Ok, here goes... :)

1) A HD channel takes typically 4 to 6 times the bandwidth of a SD channel. So changing all channels to HD would require far more bandwidth, even if the SD versions were dropped. That either means losing a load of channels, or introducing new expensive technologies (e.g. switched video; motorised dishes and more satellites)

2) The fact that many TVs are SD-only isn't a problem if they have an HD STB that can downscale. However, LOTS of people still have SD-only STBs. Are you willing to pay for new STBs for them?

3) HD production and broacasting is more expensive, and requires new equipment. Are you willing to pay for all the minor broadcasters to upgrade?

4) Interest in HD simply isn't that great. Although 73% of the UK population have a HD-ready TV, only 49% actually have a HD source (source).
And many of those who could watch HD, don't. As an example only 5.7% of ITV viewing last week was HD.

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

I think all channels should be in SD and HD I watch a lot in HD Virgin should split there packages into SD and HD so you have a choice

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

It will happen at some point. However, it was 17 years after the introduction of 625-line PAL colour TV on UHF that 405-line mono on VHF was switched off in the UK - officialdom likes to avoid making changes that force large numbers of people to upgrade their equipment, because officialdom dislikes having to compensate people for it.

As it runs a closed, subscriber-based system, VM could of course do whatever it wanted, whenever it wanted, but remember it didn't complete its own analogue switch-off until relatively recently, and right through the process we had people on this forum complaining that analogue suited their needs, why should they be forced to change, etc etc etc.

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

I'm not going to get rid of a perfectly fine television just because it's not HD.
I'll 'upgrade' when it breaks and becomes too expensive to repair compared to the cost of a new one

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

I honestly don't think i know a single person who doesn't at least have a 720p capable TV in the living room, most have 1080p. TV's elsewhere in their houses is another matter though.

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

And (I assume, based on its location) the fact that it's too small for it to be noticeable.

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

In addition, I remember reading an article a few months back stating tv licensing announced there were still around 20k black and white tv licenses being purchased!

Even those tv sets haven't died yet!

Re: Why are we still bothering with SD?
 

I presume you mix amongst upwardly mobile people rather than pensioners and low paid workers, then...