|
|
Posted by guv on 11/03/05 22:20
On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 21:40:25 +0000, Erics <eric@NOSPAMTHANKS> wrote:
>>>If you use the freeview set-top box for the TV and the freeview tuner
>>>in the DVR recorder for recording from, there is no need to have a dvd
>>>recorder with twin freeviews. After all how many VCRs were sold with
>>>twin tuners?
>>
>>Why would you need a twin tuner on a VCR, when all it was designed for
>>was terrestrial channels? The TV was in effect the second tuner and
>>enabled you to watch one channel while recording another. Of course
>>you could use 2 freeview boxes - but then I thought you wanted to
>>unclutter everything?
>
>I think you are wrong about the need for twin tuners in a DVD recorder
>as the DVD recorder is effectively a replacement for a VCR as
>fundamentally they do they same thing - record a signal, hence the
>comparison with a VCR.
Yes, thats fine as long as you want to watch the same channel if using
freeview.
>As TVs with integrated freeview tuners becomes
>the norm a twin tuner will be unnecessary just as it is in the VCRs of
>yesterday.
Hmm. My TV doesnt have one freeview tuner - let alone 2!
> I also think it better to maintain some independence
>between the TV and the recorder.
Agreed - though they would be seperate eitherway. Its only the signal
that joins them. Of course, if your TV has freeview, then the DVDR
becomes dependant on that!
>Anyway thanks for your opinion, alternative views are welcome.
No worries. Just passing personal views. One of the reasons for this
viewpoint. I have a TiVo. I am fed up of recordings being set, for
someone to come along and change either the freeview or sky channel I
am recording. Hence why sky have sky plus! I now wished I had gone
that route - though maybe not. I hate paying sky more than I need to!
>If I wanted to unclutter everything I'd get shot of the wife not the
>TV!
Amen! ;-) Never a truer word spoken in jest!
--
www.senaction.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|