SKY+

Nigel Barker wrote:

You have to pay sky+ just to record FTA channels even if you don't have a
content subscription.

TBH you would have to be totally bonkers to pay a Sky+ subscription just to
record the FTA channels. You have a wide choice of FTA receivers with dual
tuners that will do the job just fine.

Can't say I'm aware of the choice being that wide. Unless you are
talking about DTT.


Paying 10 pounds per month for Sky+ just
for the FTV channels (Channel 4, five & Sky Three) is a bit excessive.

Indeed, though some people feel obliged to do it for the sake of
convenience and quality as there is no other way of making a direct
recording that doesn't involve unofficial CAMs with no warranty.

More so it you want to record/view two things at once.

--
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:

This is not an opinion it is a simple fact.

In order for a fee to be valid and acceptable there must be some
measure of service provision. The Sky+ fee has no measure of service
provision at all. It is a rip-off born from a monopoly. Pure and simple.

No, once again, I believe that is your "opinion". And opinion only.

No, it is a simple fact.

--
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. ;-)

At 07:45:20 on 04/09/2006, Jomtien delighted uk.media.tv.sky by
announcing:

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.

That depends on the software.

At 07:45:20 on 04/09/2006, Jomtien delighted uk.media.tv.sky by
announcing:

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.

So it doesn't record/decode the Sky signal? It doesn't use the Sky EPG
to control the recording?

On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 18:11:10 +0100, "Tumbleweed"
wrote:


"Nigel Barker" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 19:37:17 +0100, "loz"
wrote:

You have to pay sky+ just to record FTA channels even if you don't have a
content subscription.

TBH you would have to be totally bonkers to pay a Sky+ subscription just
to
record the FTA channels. You have a wide choice of FTA receivers with dual
tuners that will do the job just fine. Paying 10 pounds per month for Sky+
just
for the FTV channels (Channel 4, five & Sky Three) is a bit excessive.


Depends where you live. Where I am, FTA reception ranges from poor to none.

I mean FTA satellite.

--
Nigel Barker
Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur

"Alex" wrote in message
...
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.

So it doesn't record/decode the Sky signal? It doesn't use the Sky EPG
to control the recording?

And so does every other Sky box decode the signal and use the EPG.
Why would the Sky+ charge be for those, when you don't have to pay for them
with a normal Sky box?

Loz

On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 17:03:10 +0100, "loz"
wrote:


"Nigel Barker" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 19:37:17 +0100, "loz"
wrote:

You have to pay sky+ just to record FTA channels even if you don't have a
content subscription.

TBH you would have to be totally bonkers to pay a Sky+ subscription just
to
record the FTA channels. You have a wide choice of FTA receivers with dual
tuners that will do the job just fine. Paying 10 pounds per month for Sky+
just
for the FTV channels (Channel 4, five & Sky Three) is a bit excessive.

and E4 and More 4

E4 & More4 are only available if you pay to subscribe to BSkyb. They are not
FTA.

However, whilst you might be bonkers, I think it was more the principle that
was under discussion.
It was argued that because the Sky+ sub enabled you to watch one Sky Channel
whilst recording another it meant it was effectively worth 2 sky channel
subscriptions.
The point was made, that the Sky+ sub cannot be justified only on that basis
because it is required even to record FTA channels where no channel sub is
required.

Agreed. I was just pointing out that for FTA satellite there is an alternative
to Sky+ that is not Freeview.

--
Nigel Barker
Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur

At 14:39:47 on 03/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:

If the Sky+ fee was so easily justifiable why would Sky give it away
to any of their users with 2 premium channels?

It's called 'marketing'.

At 09:22:26 on 06/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:


"Alex" wrote in message
... 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.

So it doesn't record/decode the Sky signal? It doesn't use the Sky
EPG to control the recording?

And so does every other Sky box decode the signal and use the EPG.

To control the recording?

On Wed, 06 Sep 2006 08:35:23 +0200, Jomtien wrote:

Nigel Barker wrote:

You have to pay sky+ just to record FTA channels even if you don't have a
content subscription.

TBH you would have to be totally bonkers to pay a Sky+ subscription just to
record the FTA channels. You have a wide choice of FTA receivers with dual
tuners that will do the job just fine.

Can't say I'm aware of the choice being that wide. Unless you are
talking about DTT.

Here are a variety of dual tuner satellite receivers. The cheapest is 349 Euros
(about 235 GBP) for a FTA box
http://www.hisat.com/twp/show_produc...?stock_cat=152

Here are more from a UK supplier (not so cheap though)
http://www.hisat.com/twp/show_produc...?stock_cat=152

It does show that it is perfectly possible for manufacturers to produce a
satellite receiver with the same facilities as a Sky+ box & recoup their costs
in the purchase price rather than by a monthly ransom payment.

Paying 10 pounds per month for Sky+ just
for the FTV channels (Channel 4, five & Sky Three) is a bit excessive.

Indeed, though some people feel obliged to do it for the sake of
convenience and quality as there is no other way of making a direct
recording that doesn't involve unofficial CAMs with no warranty.

The unofficial Dragon/T.Rex CAM has been working for at least 15 months so is an
excellent choice for enthusiasts particularly for use in PC-based PVRs

More so it you want to record/view two things at once.

Just use 2 CAMS & 2 FTV cards.

--
Nigel Barker
Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur