SKY+
 

On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 18:15:59 +0100, "loz"
wrote:

Show me another PVR in the UK that charges for recording "services".
Answer, none.

TiVo.

So how does Sky justify it?
Well they don't. Actually, Sky themselves don't try to justify it which is
interesting. If your arguements were so solid - then why don't Sky use them?

Because they don't need to justify anything. It's a service available
at a price you can choose to pay or not. If you don't want to pay it,
you can choose not to record the programmes, or record them some other
way, perhaps with a commonly-available video or DVD recorder. Or even
another PVR like TiVo.

--

SKY+
 

On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 18:09:27 +0100, "loz"
wrote:

But every DTT PVR in the UK is a combination of hardware and software.
Yet no DTT PVR manufacturer charges you extra to use the recording feature.

Only because they cannot find a way to do so. So for that reason, the
full cost of a DTT PVR must be recouped from the purchase price.
Whereas with Sky+, the platform operator can decide to give you the
box at a large discount, or for free.

But AFAIAC saying that isn't providing a valid justification for it. It's
just saying "that's the way it is - take it or leave it".

Which is the way it is with most things in life. Is there any
overarching reason why Sky+ is so critical to life and limb that it
should be deemed an exception?


--

SKY+
 

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
But every DTT PVR in the UK is a combination of hardware and software.
Yet no DTT PVR manufacturer charges you extra to use the recording
feature.

Only because they cannot find a way to do so. So for that reason, the
full cost of a DTT PVR must be recouped from the purchase price.
Whereas with Sky+, the platform operator can decide to give you the
box at a large discount, or for free.

Thats why DTT PVRs are so much more expensive than Sky+ boxes then? Not...

Loz

SKY+
 

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 17:48:34 +0100, "loz"
wrote:

So name one UK PVR besides Sky+ boxes that requires any fee for recording
in
the UK.

TiVo.

err, no long on sale in the UK....

Loz

SKY+
 

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 18:15:59 +0100, "loz"
wrote:

Show me another PVR in the UK that charges for recording "services".
Answer, none.

TiVo.

What's a Tivo?
Oh, I remember, some obscelete technology from the last millenium.. :-)

So how does Sky justify it?
Well they don't. Actually, Sky themselves don't try to justify it which is
interesting. If your arguements were so solid - then why don't Sky use
them?

Because they don't need to justify anything. It's a service available
at a price you can choose to pay or not. If you don't want to pay it,
you can choose not to record the programmes, or record them some other
way, perhaps with a commonly-available video or DVD recorder. Or even
another PVR like TiVo.

You keep saying Tivo. Why? No one can buy one.

Loz

SKY+
 

Joern Bredereck wrote:

One of the best examples would be Windows XP (Home/Professional). You
can turn any "XP Home" to "XP Professional" by changing some registry
keys but that would mean breaking the licencing contract with Microsoft.

Another urban myth. You are wrong.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5
UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

SKY+
 

Joern Bredereck wrote:

The fact that every other PVR also requires such a programme and yet none of
them charge an ongoing subscription charge in order to use the recording
programme.

Many of the other PVRs use Linux based software which is licenced under
the GPL and therefore generate (close to) no costs for the box vendors
at all.

You really don't have a clue, do you? Very few such boxes use Linux.
Most contain firmware that has been developed specifically, just like
the Sky+. But they don't attempt to charge a permanent monthly fee for
use.


Anyway in the case of Sky+ it's not the cost of the software sky charges
for. It's the service itself. How this service is being put into
action on the technical side is irrelevant in this matter.

There is no service involved, and more than there is with any
recording device. Which part of this don't you understand?


In fact there are Linux based PVRs which are perfectly capable of
receiving and recording Sky even without paying 10 Pound to Sky and the
possibility to simply FTP and burn the recorded movies.

Only because the CAM has been emulated. However this is a fair
comparison. Having bought your Dream box or whatever, do you then
expect to pay the manufacturer a monthly fee in order to record with
it? No? Why not? You say that it is justified for Sky to make such a
charge.
And why aren't the manufacturers of these other boxes all bankrupt?
Presumably they managed to develop the device and its operating system
and make a profit from selling them without needing a permanent extra
£10 per month.


The only catch:
it's illegal, bause the software (NDS-capable software-CAM such as
"NewCS") isn't licenced by NDS/Sky.

It is not illegal.


After all it comes down to charging money for a service which Sky is
providing. The fact that software is required to put the service in
action and the fact that there is software which does the same job
for free doesn't change anything about it.

All these devices are paid for by the user, as it the software that
runs them. But all except the Sky+ do so without a monthly fee.


And few of them cost more than a Sky+ box to buy either. So they
are clearly recovering their software development costs in the cost they
sell the unit for.

As mentionned above: that's completely irrelevant. Being able to
digitally record Sky is a feature/service regulated by a contract. How
this service works is irrelevant.

You don't have a clue.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5
UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

SKY+
 

Joern Bredereck wrote:

You are still comparing FTA to PayTV, right?

UK DTT supports Pay TV.
UK DTT PVRs enable recoding of Pay TV.
UK DTT PVRs don't change a monthly fee to record pay TV

So, what's the next twist in your arguement.

Your twist would be that you compare the content and service of Sky+
with the content that DTT vierwes have access to.

As long as this content is not equal any comparison is nonsense as DTT
isn't a valid alternative to Sky+.

This has nothing to do with why Sky might charge £10 for the recording
function.

You pay to receive the pay Sky channels. You (can) pay full list price
to buy the Sky+ box without any requirement to subscribe and use it to
view the FTA and FTV channels. Yet you cannot use the box to record
without paying another £10 fee every month, even if you don't actually
subscribe to Sky and only want to record FTA and FTV channels.

There is no element of service here. It is just a rip-off charge that
is possible because Sky have the monopoly of FTV sat recording
devices, and for that matter of devices that use the Sky EPG.

Some have argued that the payment is for the software development, or
the hard drive, or this or that. This is incorrect as has been proven
many times. The payment is for nothing at all and, as such, is a
rip-off.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5
UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

SKY+
 

Zero Tolerance wrote:

So name one UK PVR besides Sky+ boxes that requires any fee for recording in
the UK.

TiVo.

The Tivo requires no payment at all to record or play back.

Payment (optional) is for the EPG.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5
UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

SKY+
 

Joern Bredereck wrote:

But you still don't explain why there should have been an identical
fee when the Sky+ *couldn't* record two things at once, nor do you
explain why it isn't free to record just one thing.

that's simple: The service has been improved without an additional
charge. Would you be happier if the Sky increased the fee after
improving the service?

My word, now there's a backwards argument! There is no justification
for any fee at all.


The argument "this fee is valid because I think it's worth the money"
is totally fallacious.

No, it's how free market works: supply and demand. As long as there are
people willing to buy at a certain price, this price is "valid".

There can be no free market with a monopoly product. This is why these
are banned in all free market economies.


And, in spite of much prompting, you still haven't come up with a
single good reason as to why there should be such a fee for the Sky+
but not for any other type of recorder or indeed any other type of
device.

I think I see now where your missunderstanding is: You think of "Sky+"
as a piece of electronics. But that's dead wrong. Sky+ is an ongoing
service, provided continuesly. You can't "buy" a service like this by
purchasing a piece of electronics. The Digibox is nothing more than the
neccessary infrastructure you need in order to use the service.

That is the excuse for a payment for programme content. The Sky+ is
not an ongoing service, any more than your toaster or washing machine
is. And they don't require a monthly payment for use either.


Think of
it as your PC: Just because you bought a piece of hardware that is
capable of displaying web sites that doesn't mean that you bought the
internet access itself. You still have to pay a monthly fee for your
internet service.

That equates to programme content. You do NOT have to pay a monthly
fee to use your PC or the software in it.


Great so don't subscribe to Sky+ then if you do not need the additional
service being provided. I don't fly Business Class because I do not need to
sleep in a flat bed across the Atlantic, but I don't bitch about the cost of
a Business Class ticket either!

This is totally irrelevant. There isn't a choice when it comes to
Sky+.

Take it or leave it. That sounds like a choice to me.

Well woo-hoo.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5
UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
BBC/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)