Sky 'auto standby' to roll out from today

"Paul Hyett" wrote in message
news
In uk.tech.tv.sky on Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Mark Carver wrote :
On Mar 20, 9:49 am, "Ed" wrote:
SKY is to introduce technology that automatically switches digital
boxes to standby mode overnight - slashing energy bills by
£7.5MILLION
a year.

The boxes will go to "sleep" after 11pm if they detect they have not
been used for two hours.

The technology will be transmitted to Sky HD boxes from today and to
all Sky+ boxes from April - a total of more than two million. Sky
said
Auto Standby could save enough energy to light all the homes in
Wolverhampton for a year. It could also cut UK carbon emissions by
32,000 tons a year.

Just Sky+ boxes then ? I hope so, it'll cause chaos for communal
systems etc if it's introduced to standard boxes.

Not to mention I often record several hours of the music channels
overnight - the above will screw that up!
--
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

Why are so many people scare-mongering about imagined problems, that
have not yet occurred?

Auto standby won't screw up anything (provided the subscriber wants to
record programmes to the Sky HD (or Sky+) internal drive, as opposed to
an external recorder.

It won't matter whether the Sky HD or Sky+ receiver is "up and running"
or on standby, because the record function works equally well,
irrespective of whether the receiver is "up and running" or on standby.

A Sky+ or Sky HD receiver has two tuners, to facilitate simultaneous
recording from two different channels - OR viewing one channel and
recording from another. You can record one programme whilst you watch a
different channel - but if you want to record two channels
simultaneously, you will not be able to view transmissions from a third
(different) channel.

Consequently, I usually leave my Sky+ receiver on standby, because
standby mode reduces the possibility of clashes that could interfere
with scheduled recordings. Automatic standby mode will surely have the
same, beneficial, effect.

"steeler" wrote in message
m...

"John Russell" wrote in message
...

Yes, but a lot of people probably keep them running during the day
anyway.
You mean some people just turn the TV off (sorry put it in standby) and
forget about the digibox?
So it's of no benefit to those of us who already put the box in standby
whenever we stop watching?
Why make such a big thing of this when the problem is the fact that even
in standby some power is still consummed? The Goverment has asked the
industry to look and minimisng the power thats' required in standby, not
just introducing Auto Standby.


The power saving even in standby is worthwhile. It is true though that it
is only useful in stopping the idiots who never switch the box off (it is
not just that they are too lazy to press a button, more that it never
occurs to them).

I'm not an idiot, I leave will often watch (or at least listen to) a channel
on the sky box on the TV in the bedroom while I go to sleep. The TV has a
timer but the Sky box doesn't so the TV goes off automatically but the Sky
box doesn't. When I get up I use the box to listen to digital radio through
the hi-fi and will do that for the rest of the day until I want to watch TV
again. Yes, there are times when I could switch it off but it gets used so
much that it's not part of the culture in this house.

So is there any info that says what happens if you're copying out several
programmes to DVD - I don't want that interrupted...

Bill Wright wrote:
"Ed" wrote in message
ups.com...

Sky said

Auto Standby could save enough energy to light all the homes in
Wolverhampton for a year.

But they already have lights in Wolverhampton.

Bill


Yeah, but these will be 'electric' lights.

;-)

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 18:40:13 +0000, Mike Henry
wrote:

They'll be pleased - remember, they made a PROFIT from their 0870
numbers. Every incoming call is more money for them.

Where is this mystical call centre where the staff are paid 2p per
minute or less, then?

--

In uk.media.tv.misc, steeler wrote:
The power saving even in standby is worthwhile. It is true though that it
is only useful in stopping the idiots who never switch the box off (it is
not just that they are too lazy to press a button, more that it never occurs
to them).

There are plenty of people who are too lazy to turn things off. I used
to know some people who would turn on the TV, watch it for a bit, then
just go and do something else (including leaving the house altogether)
without turning it off. And I don't mean they left it in standby, it was
fully on.

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...

"Ed" wrote in message
ups.com...
Sky said
Auto Standby could save enough energy to light all the homes in
Wolverhampton for a year.

But they already have lights in Wolverhampton.

Bill

Eee Bill its the way you tell 'em :-))

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 19:45:18 GMT, Zero Tolerance put finger to
keyboard and typed:

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 18:40:13 +0000, Mike Henry
wrote:

They'll be pleased - remember, they made a PROFIT from their 0870
numbers. Every incoming call is more money for them.

Where is this mystical call centre where the staff are paid 2p per
minute or less, then?

Not all the time on the call will require the attention of call centre
staff. The caller is paying for the privilege of being on hold, but it
isn't costing the company anything to keep them on hold.

Assuming that the staff are being paid minimum wage, and disregarding
other costs, then incoming 0870 calls are profitable as long as the
caller is on hold for an average of four times as long as they spend
talking to an oprator. If the majority of calls are quite simple to
deal with (such as a package change, pay-per-view purchase or data
update) then the ratio of hold to talk can easily be considerably
greater than that. And, of course, people who give up waiting in the
queue before they ever get to an operator don't cost anything at all
in staffing costs.

Mark
--
Visit: http://www.MineOfUseless.info - everything you never needed to know!
"If I'm asking for help it's only because being with you has opened my eyes"

(different) channel.

Consequently, I usually leave my Sky+ receiver on standby, because standby
mode reduces the possibility of clashes that could interfere with
scheduled recordings. Automatic standby mode will surely have the same,
beneficial, effect.

But how do they know it's not being used after 11 o'clock? Sure if it's
connected to the TV via a hand shaken digital link then it might know if
the TV's still on, but some peole have said they record digital radio over
night without the TV on.

Paul Hyett submitted this idea :
In uk.tech.tv.sky on Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Mark Carver wrote :
On Mar 20, 9:49 am, "Ed" wrote:
SKY is to introduce technology that automatically switches digital
boxes to standby mode overnight - slashing energy bills by £7.5MILLION
a year.

The boxes will go to "sleep" after 11pm if they detect they have not
been used for two hours.

The technology will be transmitted to Sky HD boxes from today and to
all Sky+ boxes from April - a total of more than two million. Sky said
Auto Standby could save enough energy to light all the homes in
Wolverhampton for a year. It could also cut UK carbon emissions by
32,000 tons a year.

Just Sky+ boxes then ? I hope so, it'll cause chaos for communal
systems etc if it's introduced to standard boxes.

Not to mention I often record several hours of the music channels overnight -
the above will screw that up!

But Sky+ will still record your music channels - or do you mean you
record it to another device?

I wonder if it will switch the boxes into standby if live pause has
been used - ie. if you leave the station playing back 10 minutes behind
real time.