• Million homes 'need TV filters'
    10 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/technology-17125468[/url]
£108m is a lot of money for a filter, they should try looking on amazon to see if someone makes one cheaper
Seems like a lack of foresight about the 4G
If you have neither sattelite or Cable you're pretty liable to not give a fuck about the image quality of your tv. Not worth £108m
In my time you grabbed a coathanger and stuck it to the back of your TV. Image might of looked like ass but dammit, we liked it.
[QUOTE=kaskade700;34820162]If you have neither Antenna or Cable you're pretty liable to not give a fuck about the image quality of your tv. Not worth £108m[/QUOTE] well yeah how the fuck are you gonna get a TV signal at all without an antenna or cable?
Well I know here in Canada, we've had to have an -adapter- attached to all the TV's in the house. It costs more money, but does nothing either than get the intake of 'digital' shit. Meanwhile we already had all the channels coming in perfectly fine, and now we have dinky little remotes. They spent thousands, if not millions to do this. Yet the guy who installed them, installed mine incorrect on my TV. I took it off, and I still get all the channels that I got before, in the same condition. Rogers is a fucking idiot service.
never watching TV master race only buy shows in boxsets
[QUOTE=Catdaemon;34820412]well yeah how the fuck are you gonna get a TV signal at all without an antenna or cable?[/QUOTE] Satellite
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;34823830]only buy shows in boxsets[/QUOTE] Or watch them online if possible.
[QUOTE=Baboo00;34827671]Or watch them online if possible.[/QUOTE] With terrible online player codecs and blurry quality? No thanks.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.