Payment Plans SkyHD???

Why not wait after the early adopters have helped sky iron out the bugs (
and pay throught he nose in the process) and save yourself a packet in the
process?
If you hold on..who knows..maybe a year, six months Im sure not only will
it be a lot cheaper, but you might get a much broader choice of HD
programming to view....

1. I doubt if it will get much cheaper than £299 any time soon.
2. Are you saying the early adopters will not get the broader choice??

"Malcolm H" wrote in message
news

Why not wait after the early adopters have helped sky iron out the bugs (
and pay throught he nose in the process) and save yourself a packet in
the process?
If you hold on..who knows..maybe a year, six months Im sure not only will
it be a lot cheaper, but you might get a much broader choice of HD
programming to view....

1. I doubt if it will get much cheaper than £299 any time soon.
2. Are you saying the early adopters will not get the broader choice??


Well, look at the choice early adopters have at the moment...and the fact
that they are paying extra for the channels to be in Hi-Def they are **
already** paying for...
I have no doubts that sky will increase the choice in time, and I agree that
the £299 price won't drop any time soon, but how soon is soon?

Don't get me wrong, the **only** reason why I am not an early adopter of
SKY HD is simply because the hidef TV i brought was a duff sony bravia and i
struggeled to get it replaced and ultimatly got my money back.
The same TV went from £2,000 at my time of purchase to £1,600 in 3
months.....see what i'm getting at?

I am not knocking early adopters at all, but from experience they usually
get the short end of the stick for being eager.


*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

"the_niner_nation" wrote in message
om...

"Malcolm H" wrote in message
news

Why not wait after the early adopters have helped sky iron out the bugs
(
and pay throught he nose in the process) and save yourself a packet in
the process?
If you hold on..who knows..maybe a year, six months Im sure not only
will it be a lot cheaper, but you might get a much broader choice of HD
programming to view....

1. I doubt if it will get much cheaper than £299 any time soon.
2. Are you saying the early adopters will not get the broader choice??


Well, look at the choice early adopters have at the moment...and the fact
that they are paying extra for the channels to be in Hi-Def they are **
already** paying for...
I have no doubts that sky will increase the choice in time, and I agree
that the £299 price won't drop any time soon, but how soon is soon?


SkyHD is about the addition of HIGH DEFINITION not about increasing the
choice of channels. There is already far too much choice of channels, most
of which are unwatchable. It would be a dramatic improvement to have fewer
channels with higher bandwidth and improved programme quality. Incidentally
I think that BSkyB have made a good choice of channels for their initial
offering which, together with the BBC HD offerings, will make HD good value
for money.

"Malcolm H" wrote in message
...

"the_niner_nation" wrote in message
om...

"Malcolm H" wrote in message
news

Why not wait after the early adopters have helped sky iron out the bugs
(
and pay throught he nose in the process) and save yourself a packet in
the process?
If you hold on..who knows..maybe a year, six months Im sure not only
will it be a lot cheaper, but you might get a much broader choice of HD
programming to view....

1. I doubt if it will get much cheaper than £299 any time soon.
2. Are you saying the early adopters will not get the broader choice??


Well, look at the choice early adopters have at the moment...and the fact
that they are paying extra for the channels to be in Hi-Def they are **
already** paying for...
I have no doubts that sky will increase the choice in time, and I agree
that the £299 price won't drop any time soon, but how soon is soon?


SkyHD is about the addition of HIGH DEFINITION not about increasing the
choice of channels. There is already far too much choice of channels, most
of which are unwatchable. It would be a dramatic improvement to have fewer
channels with higher bandwidth and improved programme quality.
Incidentally I think that BSkyB have made a good choice of channels for
their initial offering which, together with the BBC HD offerings, will
make HD good value for money.

Sky HD terrific, apart from £10 rip-off sub, for poor choice channels, the
sub will be the first to go in a few months time, then followed by a price
reduction of the box from £299 to £199, then offers.
I would wait, history is repeating itself , this is exactly what happened
with Sky+, at least Sky+ was a unique offering. SKY HD is just a early
adopters rip-off!

[snip]

SkyHD is about the addition of HIGH DEFINITION not about increasing the
choice of channels. There is already far too much choice of channels,
most of which are unwatchable. It would be a dramatic improvement to have
fewer channels with higher bandwidth and improved programme quality.
Incidentally I think that BSkyB have made a good choice of channels for
their initial offering which, together with the BBC HD offerings, will
make HD good value for money.

Sky HD terrific, apart from £10 rip-off sub, for poor choice channels, the
sub will be the first to go in a few months time, then followed by a price
reduction of the box from £299 to £199, then offers.
I would wait, history is repeating itself , this is exactly what happened
with Sky+, at least Sky+ was a unique offering. SKY HD is just a early
adopters rip-off!


1. Which channels would you choose?
2. SkyHD is as unique as Sky+ was

The Inquisitor wrote:

Sky HD terrific, apart from £10 rip-off sub, for poor choice channels, the
sub will be the first to go in a few months time, then followed by a price
reduction of the box from £299 to £199, then offers.
I would wait, history is repeating itself , this is exactly what happened
with Sky+

The Sky+ fee still exists. It is merely waived for a limited number of
people who already pay a large sum for viewing subs.

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

"Malcolm H" wrote in message
...
[snip]

SkyHD is about the addition of HIGH DEFINITION not about increasing the
choice of channels. There is already far too much choice of channels,
most of which are unwatchable. It would be a dramatic improvement to
have fewer channels with higher bandwidth and improved programme
quality. Incidentally I think that BSkyB have made a good choice of
channels for their initial offering which, together with the BBC HD
offerings, will make HD good value for money.

Sky HD terrific, apart from £10 rip-off sub, for poor choice channels,
the sub will be the first to go in a few months time, then followed by a
price reduction of the box from £299 to £199, then offers.
I would wait, history is repeating itself , this is exactly what happened
with Sky+, at least Sky+ was a unique offering. SKY HD is just a early
adopters rip-off!


1. Which channels would you choose?
2. SkyHD is as unique as Sky+ was


Would love HBO in Hi-Def, all the documentary channels, and my gawwwd i'd be
elated if they ever broadcast ESPN sports in HD....thats something i'd have
no qualms about paying £300 for.


*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:25:41 GMT, "Malcolm H"
wrote:

1. I doubt if it will get much cheaper than £299 any time soon.
2. Are you saying the early adopters will not get the broader choice??

I got the original Sky Digital service a few days after it launched in
October 1998. It cost £ 160 as a special discounted price for existing
subscribers (£ 199 otherwise). It was buggy as hell, had no
interactive features and half the channels that were on analogue (ie
TCM/ Cartoon Network etc) were missing.

A few months later the major problems were fixed, the channels were
available and the price and been reduced to free.

I've had an HD capable TV for nearly two years now but I'm certainly
not paying another penny for a Sky box. I may well buy a FTV HD box
and ditch sky once C4/5 are FTA though.

My advice is wait, HD boxes will be standard issue soon.

Rgds
Jonathan

At 05:10:33 on 18/04/2006, JC delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:

On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:25:41 GMT, "Malcolm H"
wrote:

1. I doubt if it will get much cheaper than £299 any time soon.
2. Are you saying the early adopters will not get the broader choice??

I got the original Sky Digital service a few days after it launched in
October 1998. It cost £ 160 as a special discounted price for existing
subscribers (£ 199 otherwise). It was buggy as hell, had no
interactive features and half the channels that were on analogue (ie
TCM/ Cartoon Network etc) were missing.

A few months later the major problems were fixed, the channels were
available and the price and been reduced to free.

I've had an HD capable TV for nearly two years now but I'm certainly
not paying another penny for a Sky box. I may well buy a FTV HD box
and ditch sky once C4/5 are FTA though.

My advice is wait, HD boxes will be standard issue soon.

Just like Sky+ boxes?

HD will only be available over HDMI connections on later boxes, although
whether this will also be a firmware 'upgrade' to the first gen boxes remains
to be seen.

"Alex" wrote in message
...
At 05:10:33 on 18/04/2006, JC delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:

On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:25:41 GMT, "Malcolm H"
wrote:

1. I doubt if it will get much cheaper than £299 any time soon.
2. Are you saying the early adopters will not get the broader choice??

I got the original Sky Digital service a few days after it launched in
October 1998. It cost £ 160 as a special discounted price for existing
subscribers (£ 199 otherwise). It was buggy as hell, had no
interactive features and half the channels that were on analogue (ie
TCM/ Cartoon Network etc) were missing.

A few months later the major problems were fixed, the channels were
available and the price and been reduced to free.

I've had an HD capable TV for nearly two years now but I'm certainly
not paying another penny for a Sky box. I may well buy a FTV HD box
and ditch sky once C4/5 are FTA though.

My advice is wait, HD boxes will be standard issue soon.

Just like Sky+ boxes?

HD will only be available over HDMI connections on later boxes, although
whether this will also be a firmware 'upgrade' to the first gen boxes
remains
to be seen.

Concur, when sky are asking £299 AND a £10 sub, RIP-ORF!!, they really are
taking the ****!
Sky only get away with this because some people are mug enough to fall for
it.

Then comes al the bitching on these and other newsgroups when Sky start to
drop the sub for top packages and then start to lower box prices.

As above Sky did EXACTLY the same with Sky Digital and then Sky+, at the
moment Sky HD is vastly overpriced, both boxes and the sub.