Just bought a Topfield PVR. And guess what? It's got a RISC processor.

--
*Virtual reality is its own reward *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Just bought a Topfield PVR. And guess what? It's got a RISC processor.

Which particular one is it?

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

In article ,
John Cartmell wrote:
Just bought a Topfield PVR. And guess what? It's got a RISC processor.

Which particular one is it?

TF5800 with 250Gb HD. It certainly does what it says on the box. Two
niggles - the prog listing is only for the channel you are on. My Sony box
allowed you to look through them all without changing channel.

Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer recording
etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in standby.

Picture and sound quality appears to be exactly as broadcast.

--
*Don't byte off more than you can view *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
John Cartmell wrote:
Just bought a Topfield PVR. And guess what? It's got a RISC processor.

Which particular one is it?

TF5800 with 250Gb HD. It certainly does what it says on the box. Two
niggles - the prog listing is only for the channel you are on. My Sony box
allowed you to look through them all without changing channel.

Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer recording
etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in standby.

Picture and sound quality appears to be exactly as broadcast.


Does the Topfield allow you to extract the recordings to a PC?

Cheers

Tim

Tim S wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
John Cartmell wrote:
Just bought a Topfield PVR. And guess what? It's got a RISC
processor.

Which particular one is it?

TF5800 with 250Gb HD. It certainly does what it says on the box. Two
niggles - the prog listing is only for the channel you are on. My Sony
box allowed you to look through them all without changing channel.

Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer
recording etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in standby.

Picture and sound quality appears to be exactly as broadcast.


Does the Topfield allow you to extract the recordings to a PC?

Cheers

Tim

Sorry - just found the specs - it claims so...

Cheers

Tim

In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
John Cartmell wrote:
Just bought a Topfield PVR. And guess what? It's got a RISC processor.

Which particular one is it?

TF5800 with 250Gb HD. It certainly does what it says on the box. Two
niggles - the prog listing is only for the channel you are on. My Sony box
allowed you to look through them all without changing channel.

Have you checked to see if TAPs allow access to these? The Toppy allows you to
produce (TAPs) proglets that modify its behaviour and I believe there are
hundreds available free.

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

In article ,
Tim S wrote:

Does the Topfield allow you to extract the recordings to a PC?

Yup.

--
*I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
John Cartmell wrote:
TF5800 with 250Gb HD. It certainly does what it says on the box. Two
niggles - the prog listing is only for the channel you are on. My Sony
box allowed you to look through them all without changing channel.

Have you checked to see if TAPs allow access to these? The Toppy allows
you to produce (TAPs) proglets that modify its behaviour and I believe
there are hundreds available free.

That's a thought. I've joined the Toppy forum, but haven't got round to
checking out everything on there.

The instruction book supplied with the machine reads like it was computer
translated. ;-)

--
*You sound reasonable......time to up my medication

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer recording
etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in standby.

FWIW, you could probably knobble that by disconnecting the switching pin
in your SCART cable.


Kim.

In article j3g33e.85e.ln@willow,
kimble wrote:
Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer
recording etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in
standby.

FWIW, you could probably knobble that by disconnecting the switching pin
in your SCART cable.

You can but it also disables the auto 4:3/16:9 switching.

--
*There are two sides to every divorce: Yours and **** head's*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 10:27:15 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer recording
etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in standby.

Don't leave your TV on standby, it's causing global warming all by itself.

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer
recording etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in
standby.

Don't leave your TV on standby, it's causing global warming all by
itself.

From one who insists on driving a vast 4x4? Puleese...

--
*Honk if you love peace and quiet.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Mon, 01 May 2006 10:08:29 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer
recording etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in
standby.

Don't leave your TV on standby, it's causing global warming all by
itself.

From one who insists on driving a vast 4x4? Puleese...

Good to see that you're as hypocritical as a Duhg in this respect.

In article ,
Huge wrote:
Don't leave your TV on standby, it's causing global warming all by
itself.

From one who insists on driving a vast 4x4? Puleese...

Everyone owns a telly. Hardly anyone owns a 4x4 (despite the volume
of bigotry from the antis.)

So what? The extra CO2 a large 4X4 produces over a similar passenger
capacity car with the same performance probably accounts for a village
worth of TVs on standby. Plus the fact that any heat produced by my TV
being left on standby isn't wasted at this time of the year - it simply
reduces the heating supplied by the central heating.

And yet again I'll state I'm not anti 4X4 where they're needed for the
purpose they were originally designed for. Simply anti Chelsea Tractors.

But all 4x4 owners seem to want to defend them regardless of the havoc
badly driven ones cause in large towns when driven by people who just by
them as a fashion statement and can't drive them properly.

--
*I'm pretty sure that sex is better than logic, but I can't prove it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , Steve Firth
writes
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 10:27:15 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer recording
etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in standby.

Don't leave your TV on standby, it's causing global warming all by itself.

Hmm, here, at least, it's not really significant, 2W in standby compared
to 60-80W in use.

A back of a fag packet calc suggests leaving the tele in standby
accounts for around .05% of my annual electricity consumption.


--
bof at bof dot me dot uk

In article ,
bof wrote:
Other one is more annoying. If you set the machine to do a timer
recording etc while you're out, it switches on my TV if left in
standby.

Don't leave your TV on standby, it's causing global warming all by
itself.

Hmm, here, at least, it's not really significant, 2W in standby compared
to 60-80W in use.

A back of a fag packet calc suggests leaving the tele in standby
accounts for around .05% of my annual electricity consumption.

Mr Firth won't let facts stand in the way of him having a go. Even when he
plainly doesn't understand the heating of a house.

--
*Gargling is a good way to see if your throat leaks.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Owain wrote:
... Plus the fact that any heat produced by my TV
being left on standby isn't wasted at this time of the year - it simply
reduces the heating supplied by the central heating.

Central heating??? I got my big cooling fan out of the cupboard
yesterday.

Not warm enough yet in London, although the weather forecast says it will
be later this week.

--
*It's this dirty because I washed it with your wife's knickers*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Huge wrote:
The extra CO2 a large 4X4 produces over a similar passenger
capacity car with the same performance probably

So you're guessing. (You're wrong, too.)

No I'm not. Compare the figures for the much slower BMW X5 to a BMW 5
series touring fitted with the same engine.

Or any other you want to make.

4x4s are heavy and have much more friction in their drive train. Which
makes a big difference to their town fuel consumption. And the poor
aerodynamics make them use more fuel at speed.

--
*Why is the third hand on the watch called a second hand?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Huge wrote:
[here the attributions were ballsed by someone]
The extra CO2 a large 4X4 produces over a similar passenger
capacity car with the same performance probably

So you're guessing. (You're wrong, too.)

No I'm not. Compare the figures for the much slower BMW X5 to a BMW 5
series touring fitted with the same engine.

Or any other you want to make.

4x4s are heavy and have much more friction in their drive train. Which
makes a big difference to their town fuel consumption. And the poor
aerodynamics make them use more fuel at speed.

Sorry Dave, but if you're going to get all accurate and
use facts, then you probably won't get an answer.

On 2 May 2006 11:47:17 +0200, Chris Bacon wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Huge wrote:
[here the attributions were ballsed by someone]
The extra CO2 a large 4X4 produces over a similar passenger
capacity car with the same performance probably


ESPACE 3.0 dCi

CO2 EMISSIONS: 252g/km
FUEL CONSUMPTION: (urban) 21.2mpg/ (extra urban) 38.3mpg/ (combined)
29.8mpg


Land Rover Discovery3 2.7 V6 TD range
CO2 EMISSIONS: 249 g/km
FUEL CONSUMPTION: (urban) 24.5mpg / (extra urban) 34.5mpg / (combined)
30.0mpg


So you're guessing. (You're wrong, too.)

No I'm not. Compare the figures for the much slower BMW X5 to a BMW 5
series touring fitted with the same engine.

Again with the BMW fixation.

Or any other you want to make.

4x4s are heavy and have much more friction in their drive train. Which
makes a big difference to their town fuel consumption. And the poor
aerodynamics make them use more fuel at speed.

Sorry Dave, but if you're going to get all accurate and
use facts, then you probably won't get an answer.

He'll have to start providing facts instead of hand waving.


And again, what does my (or anyone else's) choice of vehicle have to do
with *you*? Would you care to describe your car so that I can tell you that
you don't need it and would be best served by Shank's pony?

In article ,
Chris Bacon wrote:
Sorry Dave, but if you're going to get all accurate and
use facts, then you probably won't get an answer.

What I find strange is IIRC both Huge and Steve actually need something
like a 4X4 because of the rural locations of their homes but choose to
defend Chelsea Tractors. Perhaps because they've never experienced the
havoc they cause in urban side roads - mainly through poor driving.

Perhaps they want a source of immaculate secondhand ones which have
never put a boot in mud?

--
*Frankly, scallop, I don't give a clam

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 02 May 2006 13:34:48 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

What I find strange is IIRC both Huge and Steve actually need something
like a 4X4 because of the rural locations of their homes but choose to
defend Chelsea Tractors.

Because no one ever attacks just urban use of 4x4s they always attack *all*
4x4s. Most of the moaners don't even know what they are moaning about. Will
they ban Audi quattros, Subaru WRXs, Fiat Pandas and the like? And where do
they sit on the subject of the Subaru Forester?

Perhaps because they've never experienced the
havoc they cause in urban side roads - mainly through poor driving.

Then campaign against poor driving. If you get these people out of 4x4s do
you imagine they will all choose to drive Smart cars? Or indeed that their
driving will improve?

The problem is that action taken against city dwellers use of 4x4s is broad
brush - to increase fixed taxation in the form of VED, to increase fuel
prices and possibly in the future to impose taxation on those who enter
cities in a 4x4. The intent of the legislation may be to target those who
offend you, but the practice will be to hit those in the country.

BTW, I've said before I'm happy to see legislation banning country folk
from visiting cities, provided that the same legislation band city folk
from leaving cities. I'd love to see the roads here at the weekend free
from the flood of drivers of perfectly ordinary saloon cars who can't drive
for toffee rushing to get to the west country or to their holiday cottages
on the Downs.

Perhaps they want a source of immaculate secondhand ones which have
never put a boot in mud?

Well it's damned useful, my current Ford was bought off a city boy, let him
take the £14k in a year depreciation hit.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote:
Sorry Dave, but if you're going to get all accurate and
use facts, then you probably won't get an answer.

What I find strange is IIRC both Huge and Steve actually need something
like a 4X4 because of the rural locations of their homes but choose to
defend Chelsea Tractors.

Huge doesn't, if he lives where he did last year.


Perhaps because they've never experienced the
havoc they cause in urban side roads - mainly through poor driving.

I'm not sure what their driving abilities have got to do with the facts.


Perhaps they want a source of immaculate secondhand ones which have
never put a boot in mud?

I've no idea. Many second-hand vehicles of this sort have lots of
scratches and dings in them, especially around the bumpers (or "bull
bars"), together with assorted colours of paint rubbed off other cars.

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
The extra CO2 a large 4X4 produces over a similar passenger
capacity car with the same performance probably


ESPACE 3.0 dCi

CO2 EMISSIONS: 252g/km
FUEL CONSUMPTION: (urban) 21.2mpg/ (extra urban) 38.3mpg/ (combined)
29.8mpg

Top speed 130mph. 0-60 10.4sec. 0-100 31.6sec. 50-70 6.0sec. MPG 19
overall 43 test route


Land Rover Discovery3 2.7 V6 TD range
CO2 EMISSIONS: 249 g/km
FUEL CONSUMPTION: (urban) 24.5mpg / (extra urban) 34.5mpg / (combined)
30.0mpg

Top speed 109mph. 0-60 12.2sec. 0-100 42.8sec. 50-70 13sec. MPG 17
overall. 24 test route.

Forgetting acceleration and top speed which are unimportant to many, the
key figure is the 50/70 mph time for overtaking. The Disco takes more than
twice as long as the Espace due to its excessive weight. (and all tests
have said it's excessive)

The official fuel consumption figures are known by all who actually drive
to be a bit of a joke. Autocar - where these figures come from - take all
their test cars over a standard route which is designed to be more
representative of most urban/suburban driving.

Their overall result includes performance testing on a track so is
unlikely to be representative of daily use.

On the touring route, the Espace managed 43 mpg, the Disco 24.

Which proves my argument that if you take a car type vehicle with the same
performance as a 4X4 you'll save both the planet and mucho money on fuel.
Just comparing similar sized engines in the two makes no sense to anyone
with half a brain cell, since the on road performance is chalk and cheese.
But ruins your argument further since the smaller engined car with the
same performance as the 4X4 will be even more economical and produce less
CO2.

So you're guessing. (You're wrong, too.)

No I'm not. Compare the figures for the much slower BMW X5 to a BMW 5
series touring fitted with the same engine.

Again with the BMW fixation.

Really? I was simply doing the comparison since they are available with
identical engines - rather than your obvious ploy of using different
makes, one of which may have a state of the art engine design, and one
possibly due for replacement shortly. And the Ford V-6 in the Disco *is* a
recent design.

Or any other you want to make.

4x4s are heavy and have much more friction in their drive train. Which
makes a big difference to their town fuel consumption. And the poor
aerodynamics make them use more fuel at speed.

Sorry Dave, but if you're going to get all accurate and
use facts, then you probably won't get an answer.

He'll have to start providing facts instead of hand waving.

I'm afraid you're not making much of a fist of it.

And again, what does my (or anyone else's) choice of vehicle have to do
with *you*? Would you care to describe your car so that I can tell you
that you don't need it and would be best served by Shank's pony?

I'm not telling anybody to walk. Might help and if tried to understand
what's written before jumping to conclusions.

Although walking or cycling to school would seem a good idea for many
kids, given the current figures on obesity in youngsters.

--
*Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Chris Bacon wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Chris Bacon wrote:
Sorry Dave, but if you're going to get all accurate and
use facts, then you probably won't get an answer.

What I find strange is IIRC both Huge and Steve actually need something
like a 4X4 because of the rural locations of their homes but choose to
defend Chelsea Tractors.

Huge doesn't, if he lives where he did last year.


Perhaps because they've never experienced the
havoc they cause in urban side roads - mainly through poor driving.

I'm not sure what their driving abilities have got to do with the facts.


Perhaps they want a source of immaculate secondhand ones which have
never put a boot in mud?

I've no idea. Many second-hand vehicles of this sort have lots of
scratches and dings in them, especially around the bumpers (or "bull
bars"), together with assorted colours of paint rubbed off other cars.

You forgot to mention the blood & scraps of flesh ...

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Or any other you want to make.

4x4s are heavy and have much more friction in their drive train. Which
makes a big difference to their town fuel consumption. And the poor
aerodynamics make them use more fuel at speed.
Sorry Dave, but if you're going to get all accurate and
use facts, then you probably won't get an answer.

I can certainly confirm that a defender - same basic chassis and
transmission as a disco, but much less fancy, returns between 20 and
25mpg overall on normal driving (cruise at 45-50 on open roads you get
25mpg, in town or at 85mph, its nearer 20mpg.

The same is totally *not* true of other more 'townified' 4x4's..here the
fuel consumption is very close to that of a standard road car. However
they don't have the ground clearance to wade through floods and deep
snow, and the sheer grunt of the landrover..

I am totally against raising car tax on 4x4's though. By all means raise
the fuel tax, and let people decide what they want to drive...but this
road tax does not encourage low fuel consumption. It encourages non
4x4's. That is not the same thing at all. With a fixed motoring budget
one is tempted to go for a small car and spend less on tax, and MORE on
fuel, and do MORE miles.

We don't quite HAVE to have a defender, but its such a capable tackle
anything sort of car, and it does get to go off road quite a bit, for
all sorts of reasons..that I prefer to keep it and simply use it
infrequently when I need to. Currently tax, insurance and MOT together
exceed the cost of the fuel that it uses...

On Tue, 02 May 2006 15:01:38 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Which proves my argument

No, it simply proves desperation. The figures you quoted were not
significantly different to the official ones, amnd they don't invalidate
the point that as near to like for like as one can get - seven seats some
room for luggage, a 4x4 is a close match for an MPV.

[snip]

I'm not telling anybody to walk.

Was I talking to you?

However what do *you* expect to happen if you ban all of the 4x4s that are
so obviously ruining your existence?

On 30/04/2006 11:43 John Cartmell wrote:

The Toppy allows you to
produce (TAPs) proglets that modify its behaviour and I believe there are
hundreds available free.

MyStuff and eit3mei are the two to start with. These two alone transform
the toppy.

--
Frank
(Beware of spam trap - remove the negative)

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I can certainly confirm that a defender - same basic chassis and
transmission as a disco,

The latest Disco is nothing like the Defender. It has independant
suspension all round. And weighs in at two tons. ;-)

but much less fancy, returns between 20 and
25mpg overall on normal driving (cruise at 45-50 on open roads you get
25mpg, in town or at 85mph, its nearer 20mpg.

The same is totally *not* true of other more 'townified' 4x4's..here the
fuel consumption is very close to that of a standard road car.

No it's not if you compare with a car of the same performance. The only
one which comes close is the Lexus hybrid. But then it's a road only 4X4 -
you can't even tow with it or cross a muddy field.

--
*Why do we say something is out of whack? What is a whack? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
Which proves my argument

No, it simply proves desperation. The figures you quoted were not
significantly different to the official ones,

I'd call double the MPG from the Espace over the Disco in real wold use
quite significant for most. As well as half the time to overtake.

amnd they don't invalidate
the point that as near to like for like as one can get - seven seats some
room for luggage, a 4x4 is a close match for an MPV.

Did you actually read the figures? Or my conclusions?

--
*Acupuncture is a jab well done*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
F wrote:
The Toppy allows you to produce (TAPs) proglets that modify its
behaviour and I believe there are hundreds available free.

MyStuff and eit3mei are the two to start with. These two alone transform
the toppy.

Thanks - I'll have to investigate.

--
*Hard work pays off in the future. Laziness pays off now *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 02 May 2006 18:34:58 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
Which proves my argument

No, it simply proves desperation. The figures you quoted were not
significantly different to the official ones,

I'd call double the MPG from the Espace over the Disco in real wold use
quite significant for most. As well as half the time to overtake.

If it had been double, then perhaps you would be right:

Overall MPG

Espace: 19
Discovery: 17

Not much difference between the two there, is there?

amnd they don't invalidate
the point that as near to like for like as one can get - seven seats some
room for luggage, a 4x4 is a close match for an MPV.

Did you actually read the figures? Or my conclusions?

I did, however I don't think you bothered to read the figures.

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
I'd call double the MPG from the Espace over the Disco in real wold use
quite significant for most. As well as half the time to overtake.

If it had been double, then perhaps you would be right:

Overall MPG

Espace: 19
Discovery: 17

FFS, read the post properly. The Autocar overall figure includes
performance testing on a test track and isn't representative of normal
motoring. Their touring route is - that's why they derived it.

Not much difference between the two there, is there?

Seems you've also ignored the bit about finding an MPV with similar
performance to the Disco and compare that - rather than one which leaves
it for dead. But then the results would be even less in your favour.

amnd they don't invalidate the point that as near to like for like as
one can get - seven seats some room for luggage, a 4x4 is a close
match for an MPV.

Did you actually read the figures? Or my conclusions?

I did, however I don't think you bothered to read the figures.

Oh I did *and* understood them. Do you need them explained yet again?

--
*A hangover is the wrath of grapes.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.