The Sky+ £10 fee letter hath arrived

No channel 4 or 5 either

"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.

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

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

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.
--

Cheers

Nigel Barker
Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur

"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

"Nigel Barker" wrote in message
news
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.

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

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?

--

"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/