BBC One is going High Definition

Great News Danielle. Well done BBC.

I think it's a bit ignorant to presume that anyone who wants it can receive HD right now, Danielle.

This won't overcome the BBC2/3/4 clashes though.

Would Nurse Jackie and Mad Men still have to be dropped if they clash with another non-BBC1 HD programme?

If this happened, would you make an exception and use BBC1 HD, if they were only showing upscaled material like the Ten O'Clock News?

Without wanting to come across all negative, would it be safe to assume that BBC One HD will be the London feed or will the nations & regions get opt-outs?

From being an avid BBC watcher my hours watching BBC have gradually dwindled to just a few hours a week. I'd prefer money was spent on improving programme quality at the existing picture resolution rather than having the existing generally poor programmes at HD resolution.

F1 in HD, then this is complete. ;)

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!! You will not regret this.

Great News Danielle.

Will the info bar tells us what is HD and what is upsacled?

Will BBC HD now only show BBC 1 programmes when they are repeated.

This is excellent news.

Great news, but can you please ensure that the bit rates are of a high enough standard in order for it to be called "HD"?

At the moment we still have a sub-standard BBC HD. The picture quality on the golf last weekend on BBC HD wasn't as good as on Sky Sports HD.

Danielle, Good news that BBC1 is moving to HD. I didn't understand your post 10, though.
If BBC1HD isn't going to be the London feed and it isn't going to be a regional feed, what is it exactly? eg When it comes to local news time?
David

Danielle, you say in the press release that BBC HD "is the most popular HD channel in the UK". Do you get to see Sky HD's viewing figures, as they're never published for the public?

Since going Freesat at the start of this year I have been very pleased with the BBC HD range of programmes. Now BBC 1 HD will make it even better.

Great job.

Will more programmes be broadcast in Dolby Digital 5.1? If not, why not? We were promised superior sound and picture for HD, the picture is ok, except for some (eg Ashes to Ashes which was terrible quality) but it is not pleasing to the ear to listen to a programme in Dolby 2.0.

I hope the BBC will listen to the many complaints about the HD service and improve it, otherwise, there is no point in bringing out another HD channel when the one you have is not good enough.

Danielle, you haven't mentioned in this blog that the Trust have also upped BBC HD's hours to 12 I understand.

Now that it has extented hours, BBC HD should be a great place to broadcast longer, uninterupted sports coverage of things like golf, snooker, and some sports events that the BBC have broadcast but not in HD - even though it was available in HD via other broadcasters.

Will films on BBC 1 HD now be sourced in HD?

I do not think it is fair that the BBC is putting this much money in to hd programming when I like so may other people I know do not have a hd TV set.

I was surprised you didn't manage to do Chelsea this year in HD, I thought all the big events would have switched by now.

Ahh... But what bit rate are you transmitting this "so called" HD in??

Danielle

Can you confirm that there will be no on screen logos ("DOG") at any time on any version of BBC1, including the HD version?

If there is a DOG on BBC1 HD, this will be a surreptitious way of gradually getting a DOG on BBC1, as more people move over to HD. That's not something licence payers will tolerate.

At last, more than one BBC HD channel. I was getting fed up with the schedule changes for series where it would be on HD one week, but not the next, or move to a different time each week (Rab C Nesbit...) I am slightly confused about the wording of the press release that says about "HD moves for Casualty". Does this mean that it will be moved to BBC HD channel before BBC1 HD starts, or produced in HD? The picture quality on SD of Casualty is so high I have always assumed that it was filmed in HD in the recent past (it has better picture quality than Ashes to Ashes on HD).
It is just a shame that the digital switch over has such a glacial rollout schedule, as here in Hampshire we won't be getting HD Freeview until 2012, so I have to whatch it on Sky STB until then! I can't really see why the rollout is so slow as most people already have Digtal TVs or STB, as they have for the last 5 years. The only people I know who use anlogue are those who can't get digital.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This sounds great, In response to those complanning about the quaility, have you listened to yourselfs. we got HD two weeks ago, and we notitced a massive difference in picture quailty than before, it's brillant. tv has come along long way over the last few years. and it doesn't matter if the picture is standard of high def, viewers can still enjoy the content, i think those saying that they can't enjoy the programes because the quality is so low, sorry but stanadrd def is still good so i don't understand what people at getting at. i think people will just moan at anything. and don't start with the license fee stuff, the service the bbc are giving atm is worth way more than licence fee, and if you can't see that then i suggest you just get rid of your tv and read the daily mail for 'entertainment'

@ 28, Steven R.

It sounds to me that you are saying we do not need BBC HD and it doesnt matter how bad the picture is as long as the programme is good. Thats rubbish, sorry.
HD is all about picture and sound quality. 2 Things BBC HD no longer take seriously at all.

And with the viewing figures BBC HD gets, this for me prooves that viewers want a top quality channel. Hardly anyone is watching BBC HD and its clear why. People just do not see the point when the quality of picture is so poor.

BBC One HD would be great, but its not going to be great if like the current channel its starved of bandwith. I would rather see the SD channels improved.

The current BBC HD channel could use the extra bandwith thats available for BBC One HD and extend its hours so it runs all day.

Why is the BBC pushing ahead with HD when many parts of the Peak District (and probably lots of other rural places)can't even get digital TV. Surely the first priority should be ensuring all license fee payers get digital TV.

Some good news from the BBC at last. Many of us could never see the logic in not having an HD version of BBC 1 rather than the hotpotch service we got from BBC HD. I fear though this has not been some thing that the BBC wanted to do but have infact been left with little choice. When Five decided to pull out of Freeview HD the BBC were left holding the baby. The channel and all its associated costs reverted to the BBC as multiplex owners. This meant that it had to fill this with something and of course a simulcast of BBC 1 would be a simple solution. Of course this will probably mean even more repeats on the BBC HD channel but it will make shedualing easyer.

In one report Danielle is quoted as saying

'BBC HD – the most popular HD channel in the UK – will continue to show programmes from across all BBC channels.'

We don't know how she measures "popular" but judging by the thousands of complaints the BBC gets about BBC HD I would have thought it was one of the most unpopular channels. Technically its in one of the lowest quality HD channels.

It is quite clear now that the new Government is going to do something to sort out the BBC. With any luck we will see some big changes and hopefully a change in management. The BBC Trust has still not responded to Paul's appeal.

@30 That's what Freesat was launched for. Even at DSO there will always be some who can't receive Freeview.

I would prefer one BBC HD Channel used to exploit the capability of the technology, hopefully matching what was achieved during the days just post the HD Trial, before the loss of quality that the reduction in transmission bit-rate and the new encoders inflicted on us.

I miss the stunning picture quality and miss the high quality 5.1 sound that used to be available.

Moderators: I have posted here in a vain attempt of alerting those new to BBC HD, following the press release, to the FACT that the BBC are no longer the Gold Standard of HD broadcasting in the UK.

Any on screen graphics would be a backward step. BBC tried when they launched digital TV on satellite, but were soon forced to drop them. I hope they don't spoil what could be the best HD channel on the TV with one, as I'll just stick to watching the clean standard definition version. There is no need and no reasonable excuse for them. Any metadata can easily be added into the EPG, or like the red button dissapears within 20 seconds.

Danielle,

As an owner of a HD TV & Service(V+) I record alot of BBC Programs because I work shifts. When I record HD I use 5Hrs for a 1Hr Program, due to the higher quality.

Can I still be able to record SD to maximise the amount of recordings I reoord on my box??

Regards,

Mark.

Danielle, firstly can I say that I'm really impressed that you personally are responding to people's questions on here. I'm really excited about the prospect of a dedicated HD simulcast of BBC One. I guess this will commence around mid-September when Strictly starts? Will there be new idents? Also, regarding the DOG, my suggestions would be that you don't use the word "HD" when it's just upscaled SD, and that you use it sparingly like on BBCHD (ie take it off for dramas and sport). I'm sure you've heard the argument many times that most of the british public are not stupid, they know what channel they're on simply by pressing the ok/select button! Looking forward to BBC One HD!

Well done BBC!

BBC HD has been very good. Gardeners World has been a pleasure to discover and enjoy in HD. I was disappointed not to see The Chelsea Flower Show (second year running) in HD and last years Autumnwatch also not in HD, so fingers crossed that the next editions will be in HD thanks to this decision.

BBC HD's dog has been unobtrusive (thank you for that) so I hope if BBC One HD must have one, that it's equally so.

#34 We will though of course be trying to make sure (as #9 SkyCaddie suggests in his question) that viewers can easily establish whether a programme is "true HD" or upscaled.

Simply put (HD) after the title on the EPG. If you use a DOG, then just as when the current HD channel does, I won't watch it.

#34 Thanks for the quick and full reply.

I have made my point that I would prefer the BBC HD to be a Gold Standard service with Quality given priority over quantity.

When done well 5.1 sound can add another dimension to the TV experience. Like all things getting the most out of the available technology is expensive. It is disappointing that the BBC HD team that was instrumental in the development and adoption of HD TV in Europe cannot afford to make the best use of this magnificent technology.

I missed the Chelsea Flower Show not being in HD. I can understand that it is not economic to provide the blanket coverage the BBC decided to offer. What I would have liked is say a one hour HD programme that used HD cameras to show in glorious HD the highlights of this occasion.

DOGs: I do not accept the need for them. I can see what is planned to be broadcast in HD in the Electronic Programme Guide. In the good old days of BBC HD there was no doubt that it was HD sourced and delivered in Stunning HD.

Thanks to all at BBC HD. I wish you would provide the highest quality HD experience, not cramming in as much as the budget and technology can be forced to provide. HD can be a quality experience and should remain be so.

Most of BBC TVs budget must still be on Standard Definition for the majority who are not willing/ able to spend the money to be able to receive HD TV. I only wish more effort is made on increasing the SD picture and sound quality of this service. Things have improved recently with some poor picture quality that may be technical problems that can be overcome.

Very good news about BBC1 going HD from autumn. A step in the right direction. Was this a planned development or just an opportunity
which came about because Five did not take up their HD slot?

Why ask? well perhaps if you are using Five's space then a full 1080x1920 at high bitrate will give a cracking picture- but if you were already planning to run BBC1HD alongside BBCHD would you have lowered the bit rate once again to cram both channels into the same space...? The answer to this question will dictate the satisfaction of your viewers and the volume of blog posts for months to come.

On the Issue of D.O.G's any screen graffic is irritating and counter productive as the large colourful ones on some channels put me off watching them. The banner advert for Graham Norton in the Dr Who shows that inappropriate interruption can destroy the viewers enjoyment.
Thankfully The BBC HD logo is fairly transparent and is held back from some shows but I would prefer no dog at all. Every channel change gives me the Identity of the channel but if the purpose is to Highlight your Brand when selling your shows abroad why not add it then, not for domestic consumers.

As the World Cup is nearly upon us please do your best to provide the best possible picture quality as fast moving sports,moving crowds and grass combine to test your current setup to it's limits and a temporary increase in bandwidth with it's associated increase in costs is justified by this once in four year event.

#41 Well said

What will happen when/if FIVE decide to launch their HD channel on Freeview? The space you intend to use for BBC One HD will no longer be available.

You should make this clear to people who might invest in Freeview HD on the assumption that this extra channel is a permanent fixture.

Presumably, at that time, you won't be able to continue BBC One HD on Satellite & Cable either, as your channels have to be available on ALL platforms, don't they?

Does this mean that F1 will in HD as well?

Would it not have made more sense to have had BBC HD 1 and BBC HD 2 instead of constantly have a HD simulcast with BBC One, even though most of BBC One's programmes won't be in HD? This would then resolve the problem of having the news pointlessly in high definition.

Surely committing yourselves to a BBC One HD channel is wasting the resources available to you.

Also, will Freeview HD be available by the 11th of June in all areas that are planned to have Freeview HD?
I'm really looking forward to seeing the World Cup in High Definition.
And, yes, I do have all the set-up ready ;)
Just need a source now :)

I see that BBC 1 is also starting a BBC 1 HD simulcast channel on all digital television platforms.

No problem with it on Freeview as each transmitter is for the local array
but...
on Freesat and Sky, what's the plan for the local programs.
Is there room to have 18 regions of BBC1 HD?
If not will there be;
A; Half an hour of the test card after the national news.
B; A different program to BBC1 SD after the national news.
C; A different regional program each time.
Eg. The whole of the UK will get BBC1 local news from the Isle of Wight, them the next time from South West Northumberland, BBC East Riding, BBC Isles of Scilly....

or

D; BBC1 London only. (To keep ever body in Scotland, Wales, Ireland etc. happy)

I very much welcome this BELATED development after repeatedly writing in over the last 2 years.

Thus I would like to take this opportunity to ask why has it taken till now given that BBC-HD has been running following the succesful trials and when BSkyB has even launched 3D tv?

The explanation for NOT DOING the Chelsea Flower show this year in HD is rather odd: "the way in which the coverage is produced for SD has changed, and ....that it would simply be too expensive to move it to HD at the moment." - I am most intrigued in knowing more of this change?

Given some 90% of households have HD-ready tvs NOW according to Ofcom. Indeed affordable tvs are now being produced with BOTH Freesat and Freeview-HD tuners (the latter as a result of the decision by the powers be on the standard), Why is it going to take til 2012 for BBC to go full HD?

Can you please tell me what is the TOTAL cost to the BBC-tv of maintaining programming in analogue transmissions?

Given, that once again ONLY after the commercial sector has failed that the BBC has come in to deliver the service: i.e. Channel-5 couldn't satisfy OFCOM's requirements ( https://www.dtg.org.uk/news/news.php?id=3692 )and hence Ofcom handing over the bandwidth to the BBC, when was the BBC going to deliver BBC-1 HD otherwise?

Evidently there is plentiful bandwidth given that so much of bandwidth on Freeview-SD is wasted on duplicate channels+1 and channels that show repeat rubbish could be rationalised. The fact that the BBC has Freesat it clearly proves the bandwidth is not an issue but POLITICS or just plainly the BBC is letting down its License fee payers?

Good news that you are going to add another layer to the BBC HD availability.

However, I would also echo other posts earlier on; I was amazed by the quality of the early HD broadcasts, both in picture quality and sound, and that was my driving force to go HD once the Freesat service was announced. Unfortunately I have been less than impressed by the current BBC output - not a patch on those early broadcasts - and subjectively not as good picture quality as ITV's.

This is really good news, but please, please sort out the picture quality which has so obviouslyThis is really good news, but please, please sort out the picture quality which has so obviously deteriorated since the introduction of the new encoders and associated drop in broadcast bit-rate since August last year. The BBC HD service used to be the showcase standard with which I would show-off the picture quality of my HDTV system; this is no longer the case. Programmes which looked fantastic with pin-sharp pictures are now mediocre to say the least. A prime example of this was with Ashes to Ashes in ‘HD’ where the picture quality barely qualified to be called HD. So many people have noticed the reduction in picture quality, how can they all be wrong? I’m all for BBC One going HD, but please bring it to us with the picture quality that BBC HD had before the new encoders were brought on-line. deteri

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

@49, 50, et all, firstly are we talking about the picture quality being bad on Freeview-HD and/or on Freesat?

What is the BBC-HD picture quality like on Virginmedia and/or BSkyB?

Also, Danielle, can you please clarify if the BBC is paying BSkyB and VirginMedia to provide BBC content via their platforms?

If so why, when now BBC has Freesat, Freeview, Freeview-HD? Wouldn't this money be better spent providing us BBC-HD PROPER and responding to the complaints as per posts herein and elsewhere? Not all these complainants be wrong?

Perhaps the BBC-HD Management could go round to the viewer's place and see the degraded BBC-HD service for themselves. In the meantime the viewers could e-mail a video or still pictures of the HD reception to the BBC-HD management c/o one of the BBC e-mails!

So this is the last Mary Poppins on BBC HD today as it would be on BBC1 HD in the next Bank Holiday. Maybe you could show the good stuff from BBC2/BBC4 on the second HD channel at the same time as BBC1 HD shows Mary Poppins

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This is potentially very good news, not only more HD but also fewer scheduling problems. But please don't spoil it with a DOG - on other HD channels you just have to check the EPG to see whether a programme is HD or upscaled - a permanent on-screen indication is not needed and can often spoil a stunning picture. Not all commercial channels use DOGs you know - Sky Arts 1 and 2 don't and are all the better for it.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

_I don't understand how you can say that future development depends on 'how far you feel that HD is the way you want to watch television.'

Who wouldn't want their watching to be in HD? We've gone out and bought the sets and the set-top boxes - what more do we have to do?

Danielle.
I'm very pleased that you have confirmed BBC1HD will be using
The HD slot not taken up by Five. However you stopped short of confirming
that BBC1HD will make full use of the opportunity this presents you with
to use the 1080 x 1920 @ 16Mb/s which will be availiable to you.
If no decision has yet been made on the resolution/bandwidth it should be clear that considering the blog posts, number 10 petition, and viewer group visit to BBC that opinion of viewers who contact you is that 1440 and 9.7Mb/s does not provide a service which leaves us totally satisfied.

If you have already decided to continue with the current format please
let us know at this early stage so that expectations are not raised only to end in another round of complaints.

General feedback- from my perspective Picture Quality is the number 1 Priority followed by more 5.1 surround, then production styles and lastly scheduling.

I thank the BBC HD staff for their hard work in bringing us HD at no extra charge -it is appreciated.
If you would prefer to reserve the TV blog for non tech discussions
(i'm non tech ) i'd be happy for you to pass this on to Andy Quested to reply via the internet blog.
Thanks

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Thank you FionaWickham I will add the same post on Andy's blog-
I had posted here because since mid April Andy has not been active on his blog and now here we are in June... and Danielle is answering questions.

Untill the feedback from the viewers visit to the BBC is made availiable
and the BBC's position is known to viewers then with the new BBC1HD channel coming up this Blog is the one in which we can let our thoughts be known to Danielle.
Program Quality wise the BBC has no issues that need adressing in my view

Danielle: first let me sincerely thank you for your detailed participation in the blog comments.

As for regional opt-outs, in place of regional news you could take the BBC News channel feed (mirroring what happens when the News channel takes the BBC One feed for the 6 and 10).

And, while I'm here, an extra vote for 1920x1080i on both channels...

WOOHOO! EE in HD! Can't wait!!!! :-)

Who wouldn't want their watching to be in HD?

I don't want to watch in HD - yes I have the equipment capable of watching in HD and in a few months will even be able to receive Freeview HD - but don't see the point.

I watch almost EVERYTHING on demand - rarely ever watch TV as it goes out live - HD takes up a LOT more space than SD and it's the space on my recorder that matters more to me than a bump in quality.

I'd happily watch a video off youtube to be honest - it's the content not the quality that matters for me.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Danielle - Great news about BBC1 HD. It's unfortunate it won't be here in time for Wimbledon - since there will be clashes with the World Cup. Can you clarify the priority that will take place - I can understand England football matches would beat anything, but do ALL football matches take priority over tennis even if, say, Andy Murray is playing? Regardless, could you perhaps ensure that live match coverage always takes priority, so for example you don't cut away from Wimbledon just for 30 mins football warm-up - surely joining 5 mins before the match and leaving right after would be more appropriate?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Wonderful news

What about Casualty on Saturday Nights on BBC One?
Can that go HD as well

It's very good news about the stat mux'ing Danielle, and I'm glad you are finally in a position to do it. Thanks for keeping us informed. It'll be interesting to see by how much the resulting, occasional, bandwidth boost improves the picture quality of some of the more challenging scenes for the HD channels. I'm sure that the sports fans amongst your HD viewers will be delighted. Let's hope you have some good news for the BBC's F1 fans to break very soon too.

been away for a while but very pleasing developments

Will there be a BBC One HD on the iPlayer as well?

Excellent news that the channels will be stat mux'd. Thanks for that. It is a shame that the channels will only be running at a poor resolution, but the fact the channels will be stat mux'd is a major boost and its a start. Who knows, maybe in years to come, BBC HD will catch up with the rest of the world and go to 1920/1080 which most large TVs are crying out for.

Anyway, thanks for the Stat Mux'd news.

I have a Full HD TV at 1920x1080 and I have to say that the quality of Springwatch in HD is excellent. I don't know if it is full HD or not on the BBC, but it certainly looks very crisp and sharp with great colours.

Only 5.1 sound could improve it in my humble opinion. The quality of the BBCHD idents is always excellent too, but I have noticed that the some shows are better than others. Dragons Den always has a great sharp image.

Well done and thank you. Can't wait for Autumnwatch in HD now!

Hmmm...Oaks and Derby NOT in HD even though the higher definition would have made it an obvious application when covering an event involving closely packed, fast moving, multi coloured objects (i.e., horses and jockeys) at distance. After all, horse racing is the only sport where even the commentator requires binoculars, so any visual enhancement would have been welcome. And it probably would have demonstrated the potential of HD far better than the incessant preview loop...

The decision to go in SD is even more surprising when you bear in mind that the cornerstone of the technical operation over these two days is SIS-Live's state-of-the-art OB3 mobile control room, 'one of the most sophisticated HD trucks in Europe' (according to the SIS website). As a licence payer, I trust that the BBC are paying SD rates for the kit...?

For those who may be interested in the findings of a viewers group invited to BBC Television Centre by Andy Quested to better understand issues surrounding transmitted HD picture quality, our report, findings and recommendations are published here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2010/06/picture_quality_on_bbc_hd_a_vi.html

Are there any plans to broadcast BBC news in HD as Sky has?

Someone asked whether BBCHD is better on Virgin or Freesat/Sky. From my experience (I have both) Freesat/Sky is much better than Virgin. Not only for HD but all channels have better picture quality on Freesat.

Why not just scrap BBC HD and just show BBC1 HD and BBC2 HD? Surely that's easier than a completely seperate channel.

@82 Peter Flower asks:

Why not just scrap BBC HD and just show BBC1 HD and BBC2 HD? Surely that's easier than a completely seperate channel.

Because there is also BBC3 and BBC4.

And shows from these channels may be shown on BBC HD.

If the HD channels were just simulcasts of BBC1 and BBC2, then there would be no place to show BBC3/4 output in HD.

@Arch_Angel

Note: Freesat nor BSkyB own any satellites, these are owned by SES Astra and Eutelsat. Broadcasters lease capacity on one of the several co-located satellites.

Freesat and the Sky box platform are EPG systems and they both pull the same channels down from the same satellites. So for example you want to watch BBC1 West Midlands it will be the same channel (10.788Ghz Vertical) from the same satellite (Astra 2D) whether you use the Freesat box or Sky box, or any other DVB satellite box.

See no reason why [HD] can't be put in the EPG info pane, or [Native HD].

I refer to the comment I made earlier about scrapping BBCHD and showning BBC1 and 2 as HD channels.

I love BBC HD. I really enjoy watching programmes like Spring Watch and Antiques Roadshow in high definition when I couldn't bear watching them in Standard Definition. However, surely BBC HD is just a showcase channel, it doesn't have any content of it's own. It can't really have a character. It's really a "best of" channel.
So it must be doomed in the long run.
If it's not doomed, give it a number and a budget and let it commission it's own stuff.
I would like to see BBC3 and 4 in HD as well, but I guess someone would need to make space for that many channels.
Anyway anything on BBC3 and 4 that is any good ends up repeated on BBC2 at sometime.

What a joy. I've just seen a BBC commercial informing me that I can watch the World Cup in "Haitch Dee".

May I suggest that the "voice-over" in question -and those responsible for the commercial - spend some on Learning English? Then they might learn that there is is only one AITCH in H.

@87

I don't want to wait for however long it may be to see HD programmes from BBC3 and BBC4.

How will I know if and when the shows will ever air on BBC1/2?

And what about CBBC and CBeeBies' HD content?

Juat think about it, Peter, it's a silly idea.

I really can't wait to see Eastenders in more detail.

hello

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Its good that there some programs are broadcast in HD, however it baffles me when some programs such as natural history programs, and travel programs are only broadcast in standard def, when at the same time the HD channel has something on which doesn't need to be in HD. Also, why are the same programs broadcast at different days and times on SD and HD, such as Top Gear, and Heroes? This is confusing.
Why not scrap the HD channel all together, and simply broadcast BBC1 and BBC2 in HD all of the time?

I have just ploughed through all the above comments and it seems as if all is going well for the launch of BBC One HD in "the Autumn". May I be the first one to ask what (even roughly) could be the launch month (I wont dare ask for a precise date yet lol). I am hoping this will tie in with the new season programmes usually in September? Fingers crossed...

Well done to the Beeb for catching up with ITV1, who have been broadcasting most of their programming in HD for a while now. However, why oh why does Auntie think that she knows best when it comes to how HD is being broadcast. I refer of course to the reduced bandwidth being used by BBC HD to display the HD material. If you were to compare this with the quality being broadcast on European satellite and even cash-strapped ITV, the resulting output is a poor relation. So much so, that my wife, who has better vision than me, cannot tell the difference between HD and normal BBC output. However, it is significantly better than the Freeview picture, which until HD comes here (April 2011 in the East) will undoubtedly remain the case. As it happens, we live very close to the Sandy Heath transmitter and our main TV gets its signal from a modern external aerial, so generally, we can get all channels currently available. Interesting point however, Comet, Currys and one or two other major retailers are already pushing Freeview HD kit but it isn't going to be available here until next year, so who's in charge of this messy switchover/ upgrade process?

As an Addendum to my last comment - just what is the BBC HD station ident trailer all about? Cats turning into lions, tiddlers turning into sharks - who's kidding who? I expect it is meant to convey that with HD ' you can see much more'. Frankly, it is only marginly better than the advert for Virgin HD, which, if you take what you see literally, would imply that by signing up to Virgin HD your living room would be filled with 3D images, totally surrounding the viewing family. Hopefully the ASA will take them to task over this misleading ad.

If you want to watch top quality HD, the Astra satellite at 19.2E, showing the German channels, have superior output, even those broadcasting in 720p.

Re 21. Whilst Fiona was entirely correct in pointing all those complaining about the reduced quality of HD output on the Beeb, due to lowering the bit rate, it seems to me that if customers in general (for that is what we are)have a perception that we are receiving an inferior product, then we cannot all be wrong (can we?) Ongoing justifications by the techies just won't cut it. If the licence fee must go up to ensure the absolute best in quality, then so be it - the alternatives are miles more expensive anyway (Sky), so come on Beeb, grasp the nettle and give us what we want.

How does the dead come alive like this, how would this twist work after everyone see what happeneed in the car at the canal unless that converted girl in the flat was in the car as well.

It is great news that BBC1 is going HD. I am a little surprised that it has actually taken this long, and also surprised that F1 especially is not on the BBC HD channel.
BBC should be showing the way in HD programming but ITV appear to have stolen a march on them. However, I am glad that the BBC have finally got there and look forward in seeing ALL channels on there as soon as possible. Just don't do an ITV and use poor compression rates for some programmes. It lets HD down. Anyhow. Looks like the Beeb have finally got there. Great stuff!

I find it astonishing that anyone thinks that the BBC needs to catch-up with ITV on HD. ITV might have ITV1 HD but the number of programmes actually in HD is tiny.

At least when BBC1 goes HD, it appears that a high percentage of their peak time programmes will be in HD, unlike ITV. I don't think the BBC is 'catching-up' with ITV. ITV will take a few years to catch up with the BBC - if they ever do.

As regards the hope that all BBC channels can be in HD in the future. A hope perhaps but unlikely for many years because of the lack of transmission space on BBC controlled satellites or terrestrial. It might help if ALL the +1 channels were scrapped - does anyone really want or need them. ITV would not need HD on their other channels as they have no (or very few) programmes made in HD on ITV2,3, or 4.

As regards F1 in HD, then this is not a BBC decision, it is the controllers of the F1 sport. Hopefully it might change next season.

No, keep going BBC, and let the others catch up with you.