BBC/ITV FreeSat - will this be any different from FreeSatFromSky?

Andrew wrote:

You don't understand. None of those others has any say in how the EPG
works at all.

What are you smoking? They provide the data that the Sky EPG is based
on.

Maybe, but they have no say in how it works.

--
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. ;-)

Zero Tolerance wrote:

You cannot prove that the fault lies with third parties.

You can't prove that it doesn't. And if the fault is due to poor data,
then there can be no question - the fault lies with the channel who
couldn't get their EPG data right.

This supposes that the fault is in the data.


Indeed it
seems much likely that the fault causing lost recordings is in the
Sky+, which as everyone knows has other bugs.

Since there are any number of reasons why a recording might fail,
lumping them all together and assuming that it's a bug is not a
particularly satisfactory piece of guesswork.

There are only two reasons why a recording should fail: incorrect data
as provided by the broadcasters or some fault in the Sky+.

--
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. ;-)

Tumbleweed wrote:

ISTR Sky only offer the EPG-only option because they are effectively
forced to do so. Even then, there seems to be lots of odd hoops to
jump. (Everyone remember itv4 launching days before its EPG started?)
If EPG-only customers can only send N updates and EPG+encryption

if if if if ...... no one here knows, all that is pure speculation.

There are no "ifs" about this. Sky are required by law to provide an
EPG position to those who want it and who can pay for it. And the
price is very high indeed given the little Sky do in return.

It is also clear that Sky don't make any effort when it comes to new
FTA channels which are apparently always at the bottom of the waiting
list.

--
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. ;-)

Zero Tolerance wrote:

That is merely a programme identifier.

Yes, and it's just one example of the behind-the-scenes data which you
repeatedly claim does not exist. So you're wrong. Thanks for playing.

No, it is *the* example of extra data transmitted with the other EPG
data, and none of it has any effect on the rest of data, nor does it
replace or contradict the other data. It just isn't displayed in the
EPG. It wouldn't mean anything to anyone if it was.
The Tivo has similar data which is visible to those with network
access to their Tivo.

In fact you give an excellent example of a Sky+ bug as the programme
identifiers appear to be re-used which seems to result in some old
recordings being listed as being of more recent programmes. Which of
course lends credence to the suggestion that failed recordings are
likely to be due to errors in the EPG design and programming rather
than errors in the data.


That is precisely the sort of thing they could do. If false data was a
real issue then I'm sure that they would have done so already. As they
haven't we can safely assume that false data is not an issue.

You don't think, for example, that a channel that would have its
income wiped out by being dropped out of the EPG might just be
sufficiently motivated by the threat to change its ways, then?

Plenty of channels have disappeared and reappeared from the EPG in the
past. Who knows why that happened? You don't, so you can't be sure.

So why aren't they doing it to the BBC who, according to you, are
directly responsible for many missed Sky+ recordings and who transmit
much false data?

--
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. ;-)

Zero Tolerance wrote:

"EPG only" customers pay more for the service, and
any trace of restrictions or favours to encryption customers would
have been jumped all over by the regulators and those who would scream
"unfair" at the first opportunity.

And paying less isn't a favour, I suppose? I wonder what it is then?

Sky clearly favour encrypted channels above FTA ones, and pay channels
above FTV ones.

Even a minister for Culture, Media and Sport could see this, if she
could tear herself away from counting the "commission" money
accumulated by her husband.

--
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. ;-)

Zero Tolerance wrote:

Now there's a totally oblique response that has nothing at all to do
with the subject.

We are talking about EPG data, not programme content.

Who mentioned programme content? Editorial control doesn't just mean
programmes, you know.

I refer you to the post that introduced the *analogy* of printers and
editors.

Either you aren't paying attention or you are obtuse.

--
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. ;-)

Nigel Barker wrote:

By virtue of charging for the Sky+ service they also have a contractual
obligation to ensure the data is correct so that there are no missed recordings.

I suspect that they have tried to wriggle out of this in the T&Cs.

There must be a point at which inaccurate data becomes unacceptable as it
renders the Sky+ service useless. They can't wriggle out of it in the T&Cs as it
would amount to an Unfair Contract. People are paying Sky for the recording
service so are entitled to the best possible service or a refund.

Indeed. And it has been well-documented here that Sky+ users have
obtained full refunds for equipment and subscription costs due to the
lack of reliability.

I don't think that Sky worry unduly about the legality of their T&Cs.
Like some other companies they rely on the fact that most people will
be put off from claiming compensation by the simple existence of the
T&Cs and will not look into their validity. Indeed most people won't
complain at all and won't ask for a refund either.

--
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. ;-)

(Zero Tolerance) [...]
It's simply not in Sky's interests to broadcast out-of-date EPG data.

I've explained ways I think it could be, so we'll probably leave that
there until new info turns up. Also, most people will blame the channel
operator, no matter whose fault it might be. (see this thread)

OK, I imagine they might have an issue if a channel decided to change
its mind 100 times in one day (ITV again) but even so there could be
no reasonable question of the number of updates being restricted. It's
a computer system. It can do as much work as is needed.

Don't you remember when real-time MP3 encoding was beyond most PCs?

On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 09:30:51 +0100, Jomtien wrote:

How the EPG works has nothing to do with what it contains.

Precisely. And the missed recordings are much more likely to be caused
by an error in the way the EPG works than by an error in the data.

There are many reasons why a recording would be missed, data errors
being most likely, errors in "the way the EPG works" far less likely.

On Wed, 01 Mar 2006 09:30:52 +0100, Jomtien wrote:

It is also clear that Sky don't make any effort when it comes to new
FTA channels which are apparently always at the bottom of the waiting
list.

It is clear that this cannot possibly be true, given the ease with
which FTA channels have been launching recently.