Technical advice -antennas and satellite dishes

[Ozcoins]

One fairly easy option I can think of.
If you press 'prt scr' button on the keyboard. A copy of what is on the screen is stored, so you can 'paste' it into programs (eg using 'edit' then 'paste' in the program where you want the picture of the screen)

[JeffH]

"F11" is the button to capture a snap with many of these. But it could be another of the F buttons depending on the software. Have a search through the menu buttons of the top of the screen to suss out options available.
With my computer I need to hit "F Lock" button first for "PrtScn" to work. These buttons each have two functions and, which one happens depends on whether F lock is on or off.

Have you tried to use the new device with the software for the old device? That may work too.

Jeff

[Fulvio]

please tell me how to set it up to take pictures please

These things are a hardware/software combination. As we discovered with the KB's, not every combination works. Far from it.

I would search for alternative software for it. There are likely different versions apart from what came on the disc. Google it, chances are there is a solution in some forum.

And if all else fails, screenshots, though crude, will give you something at least.

[keldaw]

thanks guys , I will just keep on trying .
 if it don't work , I will wait for A J  to come up ..

     , kel ,,

[ausjack]

:-/ no promises Kel, but I'll see how i go :good:

[JeffH]

TV transmission frequencies are being changed. Now that analogue TV has been turned off, there are many spare frequencies.
Digital, unlike analogue doesn't require separation between frequencies. So, digital transmissions are being "stacked" (changed to blocks of adjacent channels) in many areas. Unless your TV set has auto detection for new transmissions you will need to retune when the change happens.

To check requirements for your location go here Australia is retuning and enter your postcode in the search box.
In some areas an antenna upgrade may be required but, in most cases, existing system should suffice. My advice is to wait and see.

The large block of frequencies thus freed up can be used for other purposes -most likely auctioned off to mobile phone providers for a lot of money.

Geeks can get further information here...Restack of digital TV services

[Fulvio]

most likely auctioned off to mobile phone providers for a lot of money.

Which of course was the entire point almost from day one. Does anyone even remember the original guff about super-high quality we were supposed to get from digital? Seemed no sooner had they baited that hook, everyone started talking about twenty bazillion channels (with proportionately more advertising revenue of course) serving up the exact same crap instead.

Yet another con courtesy of our glorious leaders. Bah.

[Nevol]

One thing I just don't get is all these Free to Air HD Channels that only show 50-60 year old carp.  Why bother to have a HD Channel if it's never going to be used to broadcast HD programs. Kind of defeats the purpose. :dash1:

[Fulvio]

One thing I just don't get is all these Free to Air HD Channels that only show 50-60 year old carp.  Why bother to have a HD Channel if it's never going to be used to broadcast HD programs. Kind of defeats the purpose. :dash1:

Ah, I'm glad you asked, because there are very good reasons for just about everything to do with film and TV.

Firstly, Hollywood turns out about 450 feature films a year, total. Including all the D-grade crap. That's about 600 hours. The rest of the world combined probably comes up with the same again.

Now that channels are up 24/7, each one has 8,760 hours of airtime to fill. If we take movie channels for the moment, since that's where the HD is, you can see that each film would have to be shown ten times, even if every new movie was screened, which they aren't. That wouldn't work. Look at Foxtel's programming, and you can see they get to about 8 repeats over a month, using their 2-hour offsets.

Advertising of course fills some time, but with movies you can't really interrupt the show. Cue the back catalogue. People have short memories, and will watch stuff from ten years ago even if they've already seen it a dozen times. Especially kids, who have been known to literally wear out video tapes.

Things get better for the programmers with TV shows. Firstly production is cheaper. MUCH cheaper. And you can skip the expensive HD airspace. For starters you can get away with 24 minutes of ads per hour. Then you can pad with say 2-3 min each of "Previously on...", "Next Episode..." and of course the fancy CGI title sequence which airs every episode. So now our hour costs 30 minutes of production. Cue the promo spots. By the time that 30-minute hour of production dollars airs, its had maybe 120 minutes of teasers, which don't count as ads. And then sometimes you can get away with a "Making of..." or similar show about the show. My Bull***t Drools (Sorry, MKR) excels at this, for example.

Repeats give them extra bites at the cherry, almost for free. Even if the programming source is external, and therefore must be paid, prices are a tiny fraction of first-run programmes. If its an in-house production, then it really is money for nothing.

At the end of the day, its all about maximising eyeballs (and therefore revenue) for minimum cost. There are lots and lots of dirty tricks they can use, and they're not at all shy about using them all constantly.

And the dirtiest trick of all is the Pay-TV con. The promise was more and better programming, ad-free, because subscriptions paid for the content. That lasted about five minutes into the rollout. What we have now is exactly the same content, with even more ads and promos, and a hefty monthly bill for the priviledge.

Is it any wonder so many people are investing in media servers loaded up with ad-free content of their choosing, and never turn the telly on except for news?

[JeffH]

You didn't really expect multiple channels full of new, exciting programmes did you Nancy!

There is a certain lack of logic in the use of the channels. Take the ABC for example;
•ABC 1 (channel 2, standard definition). ABC's premier channel. A lot of the newest content is made in high definition but only broadcast in standard definition.
•ABC 1 (channel 21, standard definition). Exactly the same as above!
•ABC 2 (channel 22, standard definition).
•ABC 3 (channel 23, standard definition).
•ABC 4 (channel 24, high definition). High definition -great advantage for the studio shots of talking heads, NOT! And the newsclips are invariably standard definition and often rather poor video quality.
For a while there ABC 1 on channel 21 was high definition. Then, about the time HD set top boxes became readily available and HD TV sets were getting good penetration into the market they changed that to an exact duplicate of channel 2 and introduced "ABC news 24" on the HD channel.
They must have a reason for doing what they did but I cannot fathom it.
Just saw Fulvio's rant. Explains the reason why a lot of people (at least around here) are cancelling their Pay TV subscriptions. Rationale is "why pay extra to watch old crap and repeats when I could watch it for free on the new digital channels?".

[Nevol]

Rationale is "why pay extra to watch old crap and repeats when I could watch it for free on the new digital channels?".

I have a scaled down version of Pay TV for minimal $$$'s, and get  more channels (Sport) added for Tennis that starts in late May (French Open) and goes till late Aug / Early Sept (US Open). At least I get to see some HD Tennis.

After that, I knock it back to where it's at now. My son pays for it, so I'm not real sure of the $$$'s involved.

[trout]

I recon you guys watch far too much TV :angel:

[Fulvio]

I recon you guys watch far too much TV :angel:

Not me. I don't watch any. Well, apart from the odd bit of the news when something is on the go, like the Malaysia flight.

But I have a massive media collection, which I'll maybe get around to one day, if I live that long.

Oh, and I used to be in the industry... watched a LOT of content every day back then... I kinda wish I'd spent the time noodling instead.

[Unicorn]

All I can say is ......... N E _ .... _ _ _ _ .... _ _ _ _ _

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/wheel-of-fortune-player-emil-solved-an-almost-impossible-puzzle/story-e6frfmyi-1226860826581

[Fulvio]

All I can say is ......... N E _ .... _ _ _ _ .... _ _ _ _ _

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/wheel-of-fortune-player-emil-solved-an-almost-impossible-puzzle/story-e6frfmyi-1226860826581

Well, I'm amazed! And he looks vaguely familiar... now who does he look like?