SKY+

Joern Bredereck wrote:

But you still don't explain why there should have been an identical
fee when the Sky+ *couldn't* record two things at once, nor do you
explain why it isn't free to record just one thing.

that's simple: The service has been improved without an additional
charge. Would you be happier if the Sky increased the fee after
improving the service?

My word, now there's a backwards argument! There is no justification
for any fee at all.


The argument "this fee is valid because I think it's worth the money"
is totally fallacious.

No, it's how free market works: supply and demand. As long as there are
people willing to buy at a certain price, this price is "valid".

There can be no free market with a monopoly product. This is why these
are banned in all free market economies.


And, in spite of much prompting, you still haven't come up with a
single good reason as to why there should be such a fee for the Sky+
but not for any other type of recorder or indeed any other type of
device.

I think I see now where your missunderstanding is: You think of "Sky+"
as a piece of electronics. But that's dead wrong. Sky+ is an ongoing
service, provided continuesly. You can't "buy" a service like this by
purchasing a piece of electronics. The Digibox is nothing more than the
neccessary infrastructure you need in order to use the service.

That is the excuse for a payment for programme content. The Sky+ is
not an ongoing service, any more than your toaster or washing machine
is. And they don't require a monthly payment for use either.


Think of
it as your PC: Just because you bought a piece of hardware that is
capable of displaying web sites that doesn't mean that you bought the
internet access itself. You still have to pay a monthly fee for your
internet service.

That equates to programme content. You do NOT have to pay a monthly
fee to use your PC or the software in it.


Great so don't subscribe to Sky+ then if you do not need the additional
service being provided. I don't fly Business Class because I do not need to
sleep in a flat bed across the Atlantic, but I don't bitch about the cost of
a Business Class ticket either!

This is totally irrelevant. There isn't a choice when it comes to
Sky+.

Take it or leave it. That sounds like a choice to me.

Well woo-hoo.

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

Joern Bredereck wrote:

The recording function of the Sky Box is part of that plattform
and not some function you bought with the Box itself just like the
sending/receiving mail function in your mobile phone is part of your
mobile providers plattform. Your Sky Box needs the content of the Sky
plattform to have something to record.

Total nonsense. This is exactly what does not happen.

You have not the faintest idea 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/ITV reception trouble? ; http://www.astra2d.com/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)

Zero Tolerance wrote:

Show me another PVR in the UK that charges for recording "services".
Answer, none.

TiVo.

Wrong again.

Which part of "Tivo records and plays back without any fee payable at
all" don't you understand? It really is surprisingly simple.

In fact Tivo is just like every other recording device you might own,
with the exception of the Sky+. The Sky+ is the only recording device
available for purchase that won't record unless a fee is paid.

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

Zero Tolerance wrote:

When there is a competing product that can do the same job then I will
buy one and I will have no more to say about the Sky+ fee. In fact no
one will have anything to say about the Sky+ fee because the day after
a VideoGuard CAM is released Sky will be obliged to scrap the Sky+ fee
altogether, to the benefit of all Sky+ owners.

Who says they'd be obliged?

And that's some nice work on lobbying for the release of a VideoGuard
CAM. "Hey Sky, release a CAM so we can pay you less money" - yeah,
that's really going to convince them, isn't it.

It is a job of the EU and the UK government to ensure that monopolies
are dismantled.

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

Zero Tolerance wrote:

But every DTT PVR in the UK is a combination of hardware and software.
Yet no DTT PVR manufacturer charges you extra to use the recording feature.

Only because they cannot find a way to do so. So for that reason, the
full cost of a DTT PVR must be recouped from the purchase price.
Whereas with Sky+, the platform operator can decide to give you the
box at a large discount, or for free.

No, they do that in return for a high-tier viewing subscription. Those
who buy the box without a viewing subscription pay the full list
price. But there is no reason why they should also have to pay extra
to use it.


But AFAIAC saying that isn't providing a valid justification for it. It's
just saying "that's the way it is - take it or leave it".

Which is the way it is with most things in life. Is there any
overarching reason why Sky+ is so critical to life and limb that it
should be deemed an exception?

Because there is no element of choice.

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

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 08:45:20 +0200, Jomtien wrote:

Right. So what? Being able to record is an service provided by Sky.

No, it isn't. It is a function of the box as purchased.

No it is not. The box as purchased does not record without a
subscription.

Would you be so happy to pay Philips every time you want to use your
VCR or washing machine?

If they are sold on that basis and someone chooses to accept that,
then why not?

--

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 08:45:20 +0200, Jomtien wrote:

There is no service involved, and more than there is with any
recording device. Which part of this don't you understand?

Excuse me for jumping in, but they clearly UNDERSTAND things quite
well. The difference is that they do not AGREE with your OPINION of
how things are.

You must be used to this by now.

--

On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 23:12:05 +0100, "loz"
wrote:

You keep saying Tivo. Why? No one can buy one.

New TiVos are quite easily available if you know where to look. The
point is that you asked for a UK PVR which charged for recording. You
didn't say anything about having to be able to find it in Dixons.

--

On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 23:08:11 +0100, "loz"
wrote:

Thats why DTT PVRs are so much more expensive than Sky+ boxes then? Not...

The two are not really comparable in terms of technology and the
features which could be offered. Sky have been slack on delivering the
full range of features that Sky+ could provide, which would leave DTT
PVRs standing.

--

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 08:45:21 +0200, Jomtien wrote:

But there is no reason why they should also have to pay extra
to use it.

Continually re-stating your opinion over and over again is not really
the way to convince people of the merit of your argument.

--