Talk:PlayTV

Requested move
I have requested that this be moved back to PlayTV. This shouldn't have been moved in-favour of a disambiguation page linking to a non-existent article. An OtherUses template should have been implemented instead, partly because speculative disambiguation shouldn't be performed per wikipedia's policy, but partly as this product is much more well known that the retro-game product intended as the subject of the non-existent page. ChappyTC 10:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support I support this article being moved back to its original location of PlayTV. There is no need for a disambiguation title as there is no conflict with any other WP article with the same name. The move to PlayTV (Sony) serves no reason, it wasn't moved to make way for a new article on a different subject - it was moved to create a disambiguation list for a redlink article and a TV channel that has a slightly similar name that is already disambiguated at the top of this article. It wasn't even announced on the discussion page, let alone discussed. All we received by way of reason was a two word edit summary. - X201 (talk) 13:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Actually, from what I can tell, the name for the Brazilian television network is exactly the same as the Sony product. The Radica line is named Play TV. Those are the most official and common stylings, though there seems to be some looseness in following them, similar to Namco with its various trademarks. The Brazilian network seems aware of the new Sony product, and referred to itself as "PlayTV Brazil" in a recent press release. Dancter (talk) 19:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support move back to PlayTV. If it wasn't for the previous move, I'd have thought this would be uncontroversial. Andrewa (talk) 22:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Play TV in North America a littel misleading.
The sentence "Because North American markets, including the United States, Canada, and Mexico will be using the ATSC digital standard (and the latter two are currently early in their digital transition), it is unlikely they will see the PlayTV device because of compatibility issues." seems a little misleading to me. Yes it is unlikely that we will see the current version of Play Tv, however we may see a North American version sometime down the road. Fisha695 (talk) 20:10, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. Sounds more like an opinion and not a statement (it's not even backed up with a cite).  There's no reason why they wouldn't do a PlayTV for North America in the future, but using the ATSC standard.  Obviously the electronics would be fairly different, but in any case it's all pure speculation so the sentence should really be removed. Smoothy (talk) 11:08, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * How about this as a citation http://kotaku.com/gaming/gc07/harrison-sheds-light-on-us-plans-ps3-dvr-and-psp-tv-292330.php ? Although posted in 2007, it still holds some ground.. --Vylen (talk) 13:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

DVB T2
Does anyone know if it will be possible for this device to use the forthcoming Freeview HD service in the UK? It will be in MPEG 4, which is already supported, but I'm not sure if the new transmission standard DVB-T2 can be supported with just a software/firmware patch or would require hardware changes. If anyone has any concrete info, would be good to add in to the main article. --81.157.218.28 (talk) 10:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Read the reply to question 28 . Reading between the lines, that sounds to me like "We're going to need new hardware but we're not saying anything yet". - X201 (talk) 13:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Order of channels
what's wrong with this link (http://www.elotrolado.net/hilo_para-cuando-un-programa-o-app-para-usar-play-tv-dignamente_1546617_s20#p1723268814)? It seems ok to me and not dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.34.68.51 (talk) 12:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't know - I was getting a 404 error before. Seems to be working now, so I don't know what was wrong (maybe something at their end that is now fixed).  Alphathon ™ ( talk ) 12:25, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ok, thanks for the revision (my initial edition was not clear). keep the good work!!! 81.34.68.51 (talk) 12:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Promotional wording
The list describing the premium features in Software update 2.01 seems very promotional. I feel like that would be better off entirely removed or heavily reworded, but wanted to get other opinions before I did it. Oxi (talk|he/him) 11:29, 6 November 2022 (UTC)