Remote TV?

[themiddleagedun]

I have got my broadband & television through Virgin Media. Obviously I can use a laptop without being connected to a router.
Can the television be run the same way, remotely, or does it have to be physically connected to the cable? Thanks.

 

[Lucid]

Yes, but not without some issues potentially.

There are wireless video senders that work from either SCART/AV or from HDMI. The ones using SCART/AV tend to be cheap (£25-£80). They'll let you watch what's on the Virgin box but the picture quality will be limited to standard definition composite video. This isn't that great on a 40"+ set. The picture quality from the ones running off HDMI can be better; - up to 1080i; the same as having a HDMI lead connecting the box and TV as long as the sender doesn't compress the source signal in an attempt to make it easier to transmit. HDMI senders range in price from under £150 to over £300.

So if these are available then what's the catch?

The biggest hurdle is the transmission reliability. For a start the wireless senders are using the same frequency space as all other free-to-use wireless devices e.g. your wireless router/laptop, your smart-phone, tablet, wireless security cams, baby monitors etc etc... the list goes on and on. It's a crowded bit of 'air space' so you might find your TV interrupted when you or your neighbours start to stream or game or hammer the 'net in some way.

The reason why your picture may be interrupted is because these senders can't buffer the signal. It has to be transmitted seamlessly. This is different to how computers, phones and tablets work. When you're watching a Youtube vid or streaming some other video feed the PC or smart device is getting a coded data stream that it partially stores in a temporary reservoir and then unpacks as needed. It's the equivalent of sending a bottle of concentrated cordial rather than a diluted drink. If you like then, the PC or smart device uses local water to dilute the juice. As long as there's always some of the data stream stored in the buffer memory then the video will play back smoothly.

Wireless senders can't use these tricks. They have to send the video in its natural state and there's no help from buffering either. It's like sending diluted glasses of cordial. The whole thing requires a much larger pipeline or the flow stops.

The second issue is range - or lack of it. Wireless penetration can be patchy. That's why you'll read reviews of wireless senders where some say the device works brilliantly and others call the same of gear a hunk of junk. Every household yields different results. It's only when you buy one and try it that you'll find out whether it will work for you or not.

 

[themiddleagedun]

Thanks for that! A bit of food for thought there, but at least its feasible...

 

[ericmark]

Lucid knows better than me, all I can say is I use a Smart TV to watch TV with only a wired mains supply. It connects to the router and gets TV from the broad band connection. As to if there is any buffer in the Smart TV I don't know. But there was a warning when I first came to use it that I needed a TV licence so although not using the TV or satellite aerial or dish it is considered as TV.

Be it Virgin, BT, Sky, Freeview, or satellite free to air, they all have plus and minus features. The problem is there seems to be no comparison website giving all pro and cons. The same with the TV and set top boxes, (Should we still call them set top?). I have a SkyHD+ box, a bluray player, a collection of free to air and freeview boxes, and two "Smart TV's" and each one is different. Some are wireless to router, some are wired, most will take a hard drive or memory stick, half will record and play, other half only play.

Even the formats some need high quality recording, so even looking for MP3 on the box does not mean it will play all MP3's.

My first LAN connected unit was a bluray player, I expected the rest to be the same, but that was not the case.