|
|
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package
from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On 26 May 2007 00:22:39 -0700, Ed wrote:
And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! That may be Sky's marketing spin but it still looks like spending an extra 5 pounds per month for channels you didn't want in the first place. -- Cheers Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:19:40 +0100, "Light of Aria" wrote:
"Ed" wrote in message oups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. Sadly not an option for 30% of the population. -- Cheers Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Light of Aria" wrote in message ... "Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. and doesnt receive satellite tv either - i didnt realise a cock waving contest had started. -- Gareth. That fly... is your magic wand. http://www.last.fm/user/dsbmusic/ |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:59:15 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw"
wrote: "Light of Aria" wrote in message ... "Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. and doesnt receive satellite tv either - i didnt realise a cock waving contest had started. To be fair there are equivalent FTA digital satellite dual tuner PVRs that can be bought for around the same price e.g. http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?...=14&doy=search -- Cheers Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:59:15 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw" wrote: "Light of Aria" wrote in message ... "Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. and doesnt receive satellite tv either - i didnt realise a cock waving contest had started. To be fair there are equivalent FTA digital satellite dual tuner PVRs that can be bought for around the same price e.g. http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?...=14&doy=search -- Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
Nigel Barker wrote:
On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:59:15 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw" wrote: "Light of Aria" wrote in message ... "Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. and doesnt receive satellite tv either - i didnt realise a cock waving contest had started. To be fair there are equivalent FTA digital satellite dual tuner PVRs that can be bought for around the same price e.g. http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?...=14&doy=search What kind of epg would such a device have? If it's just 'now/next' it wouldn't be much use to most people. Perhaps there's a way of using it with a third party epg? |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"John Russell" wrote in message
... Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. You'll find that a lot here (umtm) - if something or someone is successful, profitable and high-profile, it is subjected to a raft of vitriol. Ian |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
No channel 4 or 5 either
|
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Ian F." wrote in message ... "John Russell" wrote in message ... Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. You'll find that a lot here (umtm) - if something or someone is successful, profitable and high-profile, it is subjected to a raft of vitriol. Though that argument falls down when you consider this group's treatment of Christopher Barker :) -- Col Steal a spaceship and head for the sun, Shoot the stars with a lemonade ray gun. |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On Sat, 26 May 2007 23:23:09 +0100, Dom Robinson wrote:
In article , says... On 26 May 2007 00:22:39 -0700, Ed wrote: And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! That may be Sky's marketing spin but it still looks like spending an extra 5 pounds per month for channels you didn't want in the first place. Then why would you get a Sky+, or any PVR for that matter, if you hardly watch any TV? I think that you miss my point. Sky charge 10 pounds per month to allow your to use the recording functions of the Sky+ to record FTA/FTV channels when you don't have a SKy subscription. The proposition was that it was better value to pay 15 pounds per month after 1st July & get 'free' Sky+ but get some subscription channels too. While better value for those who currently pay 25 pounds per month for that package it's still five pounds per month more than those who currently are not subscribing to any Sky digital channel package. -- Cheers Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:58:55 GMT, "DannyT" wrote:
Nigel Barker wrote: On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:59:15 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw" wrote: "Light of Aria" wrote in message ... "Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. and doesnt receive satellite tv either - i didnt realise a cock waving contest had started. To be fair there are equivalent FTA digital satellite dual tuner PVRs that can be bought for around the same price e.g. http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?...=14&doy=search What kind of epg would such a device have? If it's just 'now/next' it wouldn't be much use to most people. Perhaps there's a way of using it with a third party epg? While the lack of an EPG is a bit of a drawback you should be able to set up manual recordings by time & channel. This method was good enough for us all to use for 20+ years with VCRs. The best bet is to wait for the launch of the BBC's Freesat service next year as the receivers will have a full EPG. -- Cheers Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
|
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Col" wrote in message
... successful, profitable and high-profile Though that argument falls down when you consider this group's treatment of Christopher Barker :) Well, I suppose one out of three's fair enough! ;-) Ian |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 May 2007 23:23:09 +0100, Dom Robinson wrote: In article , says... On 26 May 2007 00:22:39 -0700, Ed wrote: And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! That may be Sky's marketing spin but it still looks like spending an extra 5 pounds per month for channels you didn't want in the first place. Then why would you get a Sky+, or any PVR for that matter, if you hardly watch any TV? I think that you miss my point. Sky charge 10 pounds per month to allow your to use the recording functions of the Sky+ to record FTA/FTV channels when you don't have a SKy subscription. The proposition was that it was better value to pay 15 pounds per month after 1st July & get 'free' Sky+ but get some subscription channels too. While better value for those who currently pay 25 pounds per month for that package it's still five pounds per month more than those who currently are not subscribing to any Sky digital channel package. -- That's like buying a Ferrari and complaining about the running cost. If you can only afford to run a Fiat UNO that's what you buy. If you don't want SKY channels your stuck with lesser equipped box's from the FTV suppliers. SKY are not responsible for the poor spec of the FTV box's. |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
In article ,
says... "Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:59:15 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw" wrote: "Light of Aria" wrote in message ... "Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. and doesnt receive satellite tv either - i didnt realise a cock waving contest had started. To be fair there are equivalent FTA digital satellite dual tuner PVRs that can be bought for around the same price e.g. http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?...=14&doy=search -- Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. TiVo - that's better than Sky+ -- Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk /* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor) /* 1132 DVDs, 347 games, 314 CDs, 110 cinema films, 42 concerts, videos & news /* antibodies, steve hillage, burning crusade, sega psp, norah jones, kylie New music charts - http://dvdfever.co.uk/music.shtml Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=DVDfeverDom |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:19:40 +0100, "Light of Aria"
wrote: Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. Does your aerial not pick up "UKTV Bright Ideas" and all those shopping channels, then? -- |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Dom Robinson" wrote in message ... Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. TiVo - that's better than Sky+ in software by a mile, in hardware nowhere near - inferior picture and sound, only 1 tuner. -- Gareth. That fly... is your magic wand. http://www.last.fm/user/dsbmusic/ |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
John Russell wrote:
"Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. A pvr that wishes to access subscription based sky channels has to capture the signal in an anolgue fashion. This increases manufacturing costs massively, and reduces the picture quality, it also makes dual lnb feature impossible. This is the direct fault of sky, who prevent their box manufacturers from accessing the cam with equipment that is not SKY+. An open cam (the encryption is not at risk), would result in an avalaunch of tivo like variants on the market, and not what is in essence a retarded sky+ interface. Imagine xp media centre with cam access to sky and skyhd? It would give incredible picture and flexibility. Gaz |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
In article ,
says... "Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 May 2007 23:23:09 +0100, Dom Robinson wrote: In article , says... On 26 May 2007 00:22:39 -0700, Ed wrote: And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! That may be Sky's marketing spin but it still looks like spending an extra 5 pounds per month for channels you didn't want in the first place. Then why would you get a Sky+, or any PVR for that matter, if you hardly watch any TV? I think that you miss my point. Sky charge 10 pounds per month to allow your to use the recording functions of the Sky+ to record FTA/FTV channels when you don't have a SKy subscription. The proposition was that it was better value to pay 15 pounds per month after 1st July & get 'free' Sky+ but get some subscription channels too. While better value for those who currently pay 25 pounds per month for that package it's still five pounds per month more than those who currently are not subscribing to any Sky digital channel package. -- I figured that, but... That's like buying a Ferrari and complaining about the running cost. If you can only afford to run a Fiat UNO that's what you buy. If you don't want SKY channels your stuck with lesser equipped box's from the FTV suppliers. SKY are not responsible for the poor spec of the FTV box's. Precisely. And there's a lot of casual watchers out there who'll just use their VCRs anyway because A/V equipment isn't a priority and a standard Sky box (with or without subscription) is the limit of what they'll do. -- Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk /* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor) /* 1132 DVDs, 347 games, 314 CDs, 110 cinema films, 42 concerts, videos & news /* antibodies, steve hillage, burning crusade, sega psp, norah jones, kylie New music charts - http://dvdfever.co.uk/music.shtml Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=DVDfeverDom |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Gaz" wrote in message ... John Russell wrote: "Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. A pvr that wishes to access subscription based sky channels has to capture the signal in an anolgue fashion. This increases manufacturing costs massively, and reduces the picture quality, it also makes dual lnb feature impossible. This is the direct fault of sky, who prevent their box manufacturers from accessing the cam with equipment that is not SKY+. An open cam (the encryption is not at risk), would result in an avalaunch of tivo like variants on the market, and not what is in essence a retarded sky+ interface. Imagine xp media centre with cam access to sky and skyhd? It would give incredible picture and flexibility. Gaz Sky contract the design of box's to their spec for use by SKY customers. SKY are not in the business of producing box's for general use. SKY are not responsible for the crap design of non SKY box's! |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:19:40 +0100, "Light of Aria" wrote: Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. Does your aerial not pick up "UKTV Bright Ideas" and all those shopping channels, then? -- At the moment the Big 5 are responsible for most of the crap on TV! Thank god for sport on SKY! |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
John Russell wrote:
Sky contract the design of box's to their spec for use by SKY customers. SKY are not in the business of producing box's for general use. SKY are not responsible for the crap design of non SKY box's! Sky will not allow the use of their cam in non approved boxes, to keep a tight reign on what will be the future pvr market. Sky+ is a truly awful retarded product, which has had little innovation over the last few years, using outdated technology and interface. It will not change, because it doesnt have to, it is the only game in town, because nobody else has access to the cam. Gaz |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... On 26 May 2007 16:58:31 -0700, wrote: No channel 4 or 5 either The receiver I linked to does have dual CI so you could use a couple of Dragon/T.Rex CAMs with FTV cards although that does push the price up a bit enough for a couple of years subscription to Sky+ in fact. -- Good point. I know someone who paid about £600 for a professionally fitted motorised dish and all the trimmings so he could watch foreign football feeds. £600 buys a lot of subs. |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On Sun, 27 May 2007 12:39:15 +0100, Dom Robinson wrote:
In article , says... "Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:59:15 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw" wrote: "Light of Aria" wrote in message ... "Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. and doesnt receive satellite tv either - i didnt realise a cock waving contest had started. To be fair there are equivalent FTA digital satellite dual tuner PVRs that can be bought for around the same price e.g. http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?...=14&doy=search -- Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. TiVo - that's better than Sky+ Apart from the picture & sound quality of course. -- Cheers Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On Sun, 27 May 2007 15:58:04 +0100, "Gaz" wrote:
John Russell wrote: Sky contract the design of box's to their spec for use by SKY customers. SKY are not in the business of producing box's for general use. SKY are not responsible for the crap design of non SKY box's! Sky will not allow the use of their cam in non approved boxes, to keep a tight reign on what will be the future pvr market. Sky+ is a truly awful retarded product, which has had little innovation over the last few years, using outdated technology and interface. It will not change, because it doesnt have to, it is the only game in town, because nobody else has access to the cam. The User Interface for Sky & SKy+ has not changed since launch. It looks very old & clunky compared to Vista Media Center for example. The UI for the Sky HD box is just the same. It's crazy as by definition the user must have an HDTV so why is the UI designed for an SDTV? -- Cheers Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
John Russell wrote:
"Gaz" wrote in message ... John Russell wrote: "Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. A pvr that wishes to access subscription based sky channels has to capture the signal in an anolgue fashion. This increases manufacturing costs massively, and reduces the picture quality, it also makes dual lnb feature impossible. This is the direct fault of sky, who prevent their box manufacturers from accessing the cam with equipment that is not SKY+. An open cam (the encryption is not at risk), would result in an avalaunch of tivo like variants on the market, and not what is in essence a retarded sky+ interface. Imagine xp media centre with cam access to sky and skyhd? It would give incredible picture and flexibility. Gaz Sky contract the design of box's to their spec for use by SKY customers. SKY are not in the business of producing box's for general use. SKY are not responsible for the crap design of non SKY box's! You obviously love your apostrophes, but the plural of box is boxes. |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
Nigel Barker wrote:
On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:58:55 GMT, "DannyT" wrote: Nigel Barker wrote: On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:59:15 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw" wrote: "Light of Aria" wrote in message ... "Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. and doesnt receive satellite tv either - i didnt realise a cock waving contest had started. To be fair there are equivalent FTA digital satellite dual tuner PVRs that can be bought for around the same price e.g. http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?...=14&doy=search What kind of epg would such a device have? If it's just 'now/next' it wouldn't be much use to most people. Perhaps there's a way of using it with a third party epg? While the lack of an EPG is a bit of a drawback you should be able to set up manual recordings by time & channel. This method was good enough for us all to use for 20+ years with VCRs. The best bet is to wait for the launch of the BBC's Freesat service next year as the receivers will have a full EPG. Excellent news! Will there be a PVR designed to work with it (without a monthly fee)? |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
DannyT wrote:
You obviously love your apostrophes, but the plural of box is boxes. geekOr boxen.../geek |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On Sun, 27 May 2007 16:04:47 GMT, "DannyT" wrote:
Nigel Barker wrote: On Sat, 26 May 2007 20:58:55 GMT, "DannyT" wrote: Nigel Barker wrote: On Sat, 26 May 2007 17:59:15 +0100, "the dog from that film you saw" wrote: "Light of Aria" wrote in message ... "Ed" wrote in message ups.com... And as I said a while ago, the £10 fee is dropped for any sky package from 1 July. It will remain for anyone with NO sky digital subscription unfortunately, so basically a two mix package for £15 a month is now the most financially sensible way to be able to use the recording features of the box as at least you get some channels for your money! Yeeesss. My Topfield has a monthly fee of £0 and doesn't come with **** channels. and doesnt receive satellite tv either - i didnt realise a cock waving contest had started. To be fair there are equivalent FTA digital satellite dual tuner PVRs that can be bought for around the same price e.g. http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?...=14&doy=search What kind of epg would such a device have? If it's just 'now/next' it wouldn't be much use to most people. Perhaps there's a way of using it with a third party epg? While the lack of an EPG is a bit of a drawback you should be able to set up manual recordings by time & channel. This method was good enough for us all to use for 20+ years with VCRs. The best bet is to wait for the launch of the BBC's Freesat service next year as the receivers will have a full EPG. Excellent news! Will there be a PVR designed to work with it (without a monthly fee)? Yes, that was part of the plan plus HDTV. -- Cheers Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 May 2007 15:58:04 +0100, "Gaz" wrote: John Russell wrote: Sky contract the design of box's to their spec for use by SKY customers. SKY are not in the business of producing box's for general use. SKY are not responsible for the crap design of non SKY box's! Sky will not allow the use of their cam in non approved boxes, to keep a tight reign on what will be the future pvr market. Sky+ is a truly awful retarded product, which has had little innovation over the last few years, using outdated technology and interface. It will not change, because it doesnt have to, it is the only game in town, because nobody else has access to the cam. The User Interface for Sky & SKy+ has not changed since launch. It looks very old & clunky compared to Vista Media Center for example. The UI for the Sky HD box is just the same. It's crazy as by definition the user must have an HDTV so why is the UI designed for an SDTV? If you don't like it get Virgin Media! |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"DannyT" wrote in message . uk... John Russell wrote: "Gaz" wrote in message ... John Russell wrote: "Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. A pvr that wishes to access subscription based sky channels has to capture the signal in an anolgue fashion. This increases manufacturing costs massively, and reduces the picture quality, it also makes dual lnb feature impossible. This is the direct fault of sky, who prevent their box manufacturers from accessing the cam with equipment that is not SKY+. An open cam (the encryption is not at risk), would result in an avalaunch of tivo like variants on the market, and not what is in essence a retarded sky+ interface. Imagine xp media centre with cam access to sky and skyhd? It would give incredible picture and flexibility. Gaz Sky contract the design of box's to their spec for use by SKY customers. SKY are not in the business of producing box's for general use. SKY are not responsible for the crap design of non SKY box's! You obviously love your apostrophes, but the plural of box is boxes. ....and the your point is? Perhaps you'd like some kind of phonetic alphabet used on the Web so you can poor scorn on accents? |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
On Sun, 27 May 2007 18:33:58 +0100, "John Russell" wrote:
"Nigel Barker" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 27 May 2007 15:58:04 +0100, "Gaz" wrote: John Russell wrote: Sky contract the design of box's to their spec for use by SKY customers. SKY are not in the business of producing box's for general use. SKY are not responsible for the crap design of non SKY box's! Sky will not allow the use of their cam in non approved boxes, to keep a tight reign on what will be the future pvr market. Sky+ is a truly awful retarded product, which has had little innovation over the last few years, using outdated technology and interface. It will not change, because it doesnt have to, it is the only game in town, because nobody else has access to the cam. The User Interface for Sky & SKy+ has not changed since launch. It looks very old & clunky compared to Vista Media Center for example. The UI for the Sky HD box is just the same. It's crazy as by definition the user must have an HDTV so why is the UI designed for an SDTV? If you don't like it get Virgin Media! Not an option for the majority of the population in the UK. -- Cheers Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... On Sun, 27 May 2007 18:33:58 +0100, "John Russell" wrote: "Nigel Barker" wrote in message . .. On Sun, 27 May 2007 15:58:04 +0100, "Gaz" wrote: John Russell wrote: Sky contract the design of box's to their spec for use by SKY customers. SKY are not in the business of producing box's for general use. SKY are not responsible for the crap design of non SKY box's! Sky will not allow the use of their cam in non approved boxes, to keep a tight reign on what will be the future pvr market. Sky+ is a truly awful retarded product, which has had little innovation over the last few years, using outdated technology and interface. It will not change, because it doesnt have to, it is the only game in town, because nobody else has access to the cam. The User Interface for Sky & SKy+ has not changed since launch. It looks very old & clunky compared to Vista Media Center for example. The UI for the Sky HD box is just the same. It's crazy as by definition the user must have an HDTV so why is the UI designed for an SDTV? If you don't like it get Virgin Media! Not an option for the majority of the population in the UK. -- Life's a bitch! I suggest you start your own company if accepting the limitations of being a customer is getting you down. |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
In article ,
says... "Dom Robinson" wrote in message ... Exactly. The SKY+ is designed for those who want SKY channels. One minute posters condemn SKY's kit for being crap, the next they can't find anything as good as the SKY+ elsewhere and blame SKY for that as well. TiVo - that's better than Sky+ in software by a mile, in hardware nowhere near - inferior picture and sound, only 1 tuner. Here we go again... Best Quality on a TiVo is a negligible difference to the original quality, and at least I can set recordings of different qualities so I can do radio stations in basic quality (since it only affects the picture) and maximise the hard drive space that way (since Sky+ only records at one quality setting). Sure, an extra tuner would be nice, and we'd have it if TiVo had taken off in the UK since they're on a lovely HD model in the US, but the majority of stuff I want to record is repeated within the week and TiVo searches out the alternate broadcasts very easily. -- Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk /* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor) /* 1132 DVDs, 347 games, 314 CDs, 110 cinema films, 42 concerts, videos & news /* antibodies, steve hillage, burning crusade, sega psp, norah jones, kylie New music charts - http://dvdfever.co.uk/music.shtml Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=DVDfeverDom |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
at least I can set recordings of different qualities so I can do radio
stations in basic quality (since it only affects the picture) and maximise the hard drive space that way (since Sky+ only records at one quality setting). The SKY+ "dumps" the broadcast to disk. This is actually helpful as most broadcasts are low bitrate crap. It's the perfect way of getting "adaptive" recording where the space taken up on the disk reflects the quality of the broadcast. |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"steeler" wrote in message m... "Nigel Barker" wrote in message ... On 26 May 2007 16:58:31 -0700, wrote: No channel 4 or 5 either The receiver I linked to does have dual CI so you could use a couple of Dragon/T.Rex CAMs with FTV cards although that does push the price up a bit enough for a couple of years subscription to Sky+ in fact. -- Good point. I know someone who paid about £600 for a professionally fitted motorised dish and all the trimmings so he could watch foreign football feeds. £600 buys a lot of subs. I doubt you could even get a Brentford sub for £600 these days. -- Tumbleweed email replies not necessary but to contact use; tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com |
The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived
"Dom Robinson" wrote in message ... in software by a mile, in hardware nowhere near - inferior picture and sound, only 1 tuner. Here we go again... Best Quality on a TiVo is a negligible difference to the original quality, and at least I can set recordings of different qualities so I can do radio stations in basic quality (since it only affects the picture) and maximise the hard drive space that way (since Sky+ only records at one quality setting). Sure, an extra tuner would be nice, and we'd have it if TiVo had taken off in the UK since they're on a lovely HD model in the US, but the majority of stuff I want to record is repeated within the week and TiVo searches out the alternate broadcasts very easily. i'm just being honest..... tivo won't capture the 5.1 sound either and when i last used mine many channels simply had no listings at all and others like eurosport were totally wrong. -- Gareth. That fly... is your magic wand. http://www.last.fm/user/dsbmusic/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:31 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com