Digital text. Why is it so slow?

[Deleted User] · 30/12/05 - 15:23

it's a waste of time, isn't it? This topic was prompted by myself trying to view the local 24 weather forecast just now. It was taking about seventy seconds per load, and the weather map had taken about five minutes when I gave up on it!

Is it supposed to be this slow? Anything I can do to speed it up, or should I just forget about it and use analogue text?

freetoview33 · 30/12/05 - 15:25

Rebelstar wrote:

it's a waste of time, isn't it? This topic was prompted by myself trying to view the local 24 weather forecast just now. It was taking about seventy seconds per load, and the weather map had taken about five minutes when I gave up on it!

Is it supposed to be this slow? Anything I can do to speed it up, or should I just forget about it and use analogue text?

it depends what box you have. anyway it is quicker than cable, sky

[Deleted User] · 30/12/05 - 15:30

Rebelstar wrote:

it's a waste of time, isn't it? This topic was prompted by myself trying to view the local 24 weather forecast just now. It was taking about seventy seconds per load, and the weather map had taken about five minutes when I gave up on it!

Is it supposed to be this slow? Anything I can do to speed it up, or should I just forget about it and use analogue text?

it really is that slow, old basic teletext is so much better the point of teletext is to get the info you want fast, digital text just doesnt do it,
take text messages companies make millions from texts so they think they will improve it by adding pics and sound (mms) and no one uses it cause it is so complicated

[Deleted User] · 30/12/05 - 16:20

yeah, the box you're using makes a huge difference. my old Philips is pretty much instantanious, the Echostar is horrendously slow, and my Sagem somewhere between the two.

mossy2103 · 30/12/05 - 16:27

Analogue teletext - fast, content-rich, with the ability to jump to pages via coloured Fastext buttons, newsflash facility. Compare that with Digital Teletext - slow (dependant upon box), lacks content, can't easily jump to other pages, no flash facility.

It's what's known as progress .....

[Deleted User] · 30/12/05 - 16:28

I see. Well, this a five year old Sony 28 inch IDTV I'm using.

snukr · 30/12/05 - 17:22

mossy2103 wrote:

Analogue teletext - fast, content-rich, with the ability to jump to pages via coloured Fastext buttons, newsflash facility. Compare that with Digital Teletext - slow (dependant upon box), lacks content, can't easily jump to other pages, no flash facility.

It's what's known as progress .....

This isn't true on all boxes, there is fastext, and there are some which load very quickly, and it is better than analogue as you can go to the sub page you want with a few clicks, without having to wait for the page to come round, and there are no adverts

.

freetoview33 · 30/12/05 - 17:26

the mheg5 v1.0.6 updates might help speed it up (but only i tiny bit)

Ornsack · 30/12/05 - 17:26

I always wondered this.

And then I tried my girlfriends cousins, and it was pretty much instant on whatever I clicked on.

Digi Man · 30/12/05 - 17:28

mossy2103 wrote:

Analogue teletext - fast, content-rich, with the ability to jump to pages via coloured Fastext buttons, newsflash facility. Compare that with Digital Teletext - slow (dependant upon box), lacks content, can't easily jump to other pages, no flash facility.

It's what's known as progress .....

Yes, this is very worring indeed, especially when you think of analogue switch-off coming in the future.

My personal opinion is (I think lots of other people agree aswell) that digital text is nowhere near as good as Ceefax and Teletext. I can see alot of unhappy people if this is still the case come switch over.

mossy2103 · 30/12/05 - 17:28

snukr wrote:

This isn't true on all boxes, there is fastext, and there are some which load very quickly, and it is better than analogue as you can go to the sub page you want with a few clicks, without having to wait for the page to come round, and there are no adverts .

OK, from what I have, there is limited Fastext, but very basic - Menu/Back/Sport/ .... it certainly isn't as comprehensive as the analogue counterpart, and doesn't seem to be as well-implemented (or advanced) as it does on Analogue.

There ARE adverts plastered all over the ITV and Sky pages, ok there aren't individual ad pages, but they are there

And boxes, sorry, but I can't see Digital Text endearing itself to people if they have got to look for "fast" boxes or IDTVs - they will see it as slow, and blame the system rather than their box.

pad · 30/12/05 - 17:34

I have a pace twin recorder and a cheap pacific box from Asda .. the cheap box is miles faster than the pace .. why I don't know, but it's really annoying considering how much I paid for the pace.

[Deleted User] · 30/12/05 - 18:53

Teletext actually list boxes they've tested for speed and general usability with their service (channel 100, text page 104, subpage 6).

I wish I'd seen it before I bought the Echostar as it is so slow that on some occasions it's almost like using Telewest's STB. My Digilogic (Goodmans GDB3 clone) and my mother's Humax are much better, so it seems the box itself is key.

[Deleted User] · 30/12/05 - 19:02

The amount of bandwidth allocated for the text service also makes a difference. Another thing that affects the loading speed is the page seet up (i.e. the amount of data for the STB to load).

mossy2103 · 30/12/05 - 19:08

pcfreeviewer wrote:

The amount of bandwidth allocated for the text service also makes a difference. Another thing that affects the loading speed is the page seet up (i.e. the amount of data for the STB to load).

Presumably this is why there are only a couple of lines per item on the BBC news pages, causing you to have to page down to the next page in order to see the rest of the story.

Another backward step compared to analogue.

freetoview33 · 30/12/05 - 19:12

mossy2103 wrote:

Presumably this is why there are only a couple of lines per item on the BBC news pages, causing you to have to page down to the next page in order to see the rest of the story.

Another backward step compared to analogue.

at switchover there should be a big improvement in interactive services on dtt.

mossy2103 · 30/12/05 - 19:22

freetoview33 wrote:

at switchover there should be a big improvement in interactive services on dtt.

How? What will they be doing to improve it?

freetoview33 · 30/12/05 - 19:29

well the bbc muxes will go 64 qam giving more room for improvement in bbci also in 2010 ITV will get control on MUXA hopefully giving more room for teletext if it still stays on mux2 it should get more room if the ITV channels move to muxA. also the goverment could give more muxes and room for interactive services

mossy2103 · 30/12/05 - 19:50

But that won't improve the speed or content of Digital Text will it? Interactivity is fine, as long as people actually want it and can access it when they want (which is one of the issues with the text services currently - too slow, and lack of content compared to Ceefax)

Alex Oughton · 30/12/05 - 20:26

Yes, it will improve speed.

If you give more bandwidth to an interactive service, but keep the same amount of cointent, loading times decrease.

The main cause for slow boxes is the amount of RAM they have available for caching pages. Less RAM equals fewer data stored in the box temporarily for future access. That leads to increased loading times.

[Deleted User] · 30/12/05 - 20:59

The time that Set top boxes will take to process the data will also become smaller over time, as they make use of new technology as well.

blueblade · 30/12/05 - 22:55

I hardly ever view digi text. I use analogue skytext, and switch to the analogue transmission for BBC Ceefax. Much quicker, better, and easier to see.

[Deleted User] · 30/12/05 - 23:37

I have a tv with built in freeview and the text is almost instantaneous but my digital decoder takes a while so it does depend entirely on your equipment

freetoview33 · 30/12/05 - 23:43

i never realy use text services anyway

[Deleted User] · 30/12/05 - 23:52

dear god?? digital text slow???!

Its a million times faster than analogue text and shows pictures etc...

i think you need a faster receiver

[Deleted User] · 31/12/05 - 11:23

a04188 wrote:

dear god?? digital text slow???!

Its a million times faster than analogue text and shows pictures etc...

i think you need a faster receiver

Hello! Topic creator here!

Hmmm, that's interesting. Won't be buying one, though! As I've already posted, it's a Sony IDTV, bought five years ago. the way things are going, if it conks out, I may well not replace it. Not much on that interests me these days, anyway! No tv licence = one less bill to pay, and my only other tv is an ancient portable that hasn't been used for about seven years.

I spend more time online than viewing tv programmes.......

Hey there!

Quick Links

Digital text. Why is it so slow?

Comments