SKY+

On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 19:31:45 +0100, "loz"
wrote:

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
That's your (slanted) opinion. Clearly over a million people disagree
with you.

Which mean 59 million do agree then.
Glad so many more people agree with my side of the arguement

What the..? Wha? Waiter! ... He can't do that, can he?

--

At 19:31:45 on 08/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:


"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...

No, it is because the Sky+ is a monopoly product
That's your (slanted) opinion. Clearly over a million people
disagree with you.

Which mean 59 million do agree then.

Including those who have no capability or need - whether on grounds of
finance, age, unsuitable property, or many other reasons - to subscribe
to Sky or even own/watch a TV in the first place? In fact, even if
every one of the 60m inhabitants wanted and had a TV, and 59m didn't
subscribe, that would just prove it *isn't* a monopoly.

"Jomtien" wrote in message
...
Surprising as it may seem, I have been aware of this since the Sky+
was released.
I bought my Sky+ for several reasons, none of which are related to
recording.

OK, so you have no need for the additional Sky+ service and features. As
such I take it you will not be using the recording service even if the Sky+
fee is abolished altogether.

Because it is a rip-off and unjustifiable. I would argue this even if
I didn't have one.

So as someone who has self confessed that they have no use for the Sky+
features and services including the recording service, why should the
readers of this forum take your opinion seriously? A non-zero cost service
that is useless to a user could often be described as a "rip off and
unjustifiable" as the service has no value to that user. On the other hand,
if same service to some one else (who requires that service) will always
think that it is worth something to them.

This is how the free market works - my previous company went bust despite
several extemely profitable years because the service they provided was
suddently deemed to be useless (and therefore worthless) by its major
customers when CPS was introduced one day.

I now see your point of view, but I still do not agree with your opinions
regarding the Sky+ fee though.

Alex wrote:

use
of the second tuner to receive a second data stream,

No, this is included in the purchase price.

No. The hardware is included; the licence to use it is not.

There is no "licence" to use a tuner that you have bought.


use of the EPG
data to control that recording,

No, this is provided free of charge to all users.

Perhaps, perhaps not.

No question about it.


fees to content providers,

There are none.

That you know of.

No question about it.
If there were fees then DTT PVR makers would pay them too.


and anything
else connected with recording.

There is nothing.

That you know of.

No question about it.

--
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. ;-)

Alex wrote:

use of the EPG data to control that recording,
No, this is provided free of charge to all users.
Perhaps, perhaps not.

? No perhaps about it.
The EPG is provided free of charge to all users.
Do you dispute that?

I dispute the categorical assertion without proof.

The proof is all around you. Some 10 million Sky boxes in use today
all get free firmware updates. No one has to pay to get them.

If you are foolish enough you can even trawl though the Ofcom
meanderings where you find the rules that state that the EPG MUST be
free to the end user.

--
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. ;-)

Tumbleweed wrote:

But *why*?
What is the justification for it?
No other PVR does that. Why do Sky?

Because they can.

The justification for the price of a box of eggs at tesco's is, thats a
price they have decided to charge.

No, the justification for the price of eggs at Tesco is because
someone has had to box the eggs, drive them to Tesco, put them on the
shelf, heat the store, remove the old eggs when they go stale etc.
etc.
That is what you pay for and this equates to the purchase price of
eggs and of Sky+ units and indeed any other product you buy.

The Sky+ "service" costs nothing extra to provide, over and above what
is paid for in the purchase price or by others. Therefore there should
be no monthly fee to use it.

Does Tesco ask for a monthly fee for the eggs you have bought? I don't
think so.


Thats all the "justification" Sky needs.

No, it isn't.

--
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:

There is no DTT version of Sky+.

? Wake up.

There is no DTT PVR that has anything like the range and quality of
features offered by Sky+. Quit fooling yourself.

The only advantage that the Sky+ has over DTT recorders is that it has
a rather poor copy of Tivo Season Passes.


It's not a question of not recording those channels, it's a question
of not charging to be able to record them.

It would be anti-competitive to treat any channel differently from any
other channel. If a charge is made for the recording of one channel
then it should be made for them all.

Ah. I see. So if a charge is made for viewing some channels then a
similar charge should be made for all? After all, it would be
anti-competitive for some channels to be free to view when others
require a subscription, wouldn't it?


Payment to anyone in order to record FTA or FTV channels CANNOT be
justified under any circumstances.

It can as long as you have the option to choose to pay it or not.

And has been explained, many do not have the choice when it comes to
C4 and C5.


You choose not to pay for Sky+. That's up to you. It doesn't stop you
from recording any channel you wish to by other means. Your constant
argument against the Sky+ fee is simply because you want something for
nothing.

No, it is because I don't want to pay twice for something that I have
already bought.

The only reason you don't hear me complaining about other devices that
expect you to pay to buy and then pay again to use them (without there
being any extra service supplied) is because no other device sold in
the UK does. The Sky+ is the only one.

Even the Tivo gives you the option of not paying (and being able to
record but not getting the EPG) and also of paying a one-off lifetime
fee that equates to just 20 months of Sky+ use. If the one-off Tivo
option wasn't available I would complain about that too. All that
said, I paid a total of £299 for my Tivo and life-time service. And I
have always considered that to have been the total purchase cost, even
if I paid it in two goes to two different companies.


Sky doesn't charge you for BBCi or the BBC. Sky charges for the Sky+
features and functionality.

No, that is paid for in the purchase price.

No, the Sky+ features are quite explicitly paid for by a monthly
subscription and are not conferred in the purchase price of the box.
This is made very VERY clear indeed and for you to suggest otherwise
is either desperate, stupid, or vexatious.

No, the cost of the Sky+ function is included in the purchase price.
There is then an unreasonable and unjustifiable extra fee in order to
use it. This fee is 100% profit that doesn't even go the makers of the
machine or the broadcasters.

--
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 a kick-ass DTT PVR that really works as well as Sky+ and I'll
buy one. Show me one that works as well as TiVo and I'll buy three.

You can find them in the States but they won't work here.

--
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:

Except that they control the software in the box, part of which they
would like you to pay a licence fee for.

So, extortion then.

So all payment for software is extortion? Just so I can keep up with
your pronouncements, of course.

It is if you have no choice. I pay no monthly fee to anyone to use my
PC. The OS and much other software (+ drivers) were included in the
purchase price. Since then I have added much other functionality
either for free or for a one-off payment. The OS and the software and
drivers get occasional updates, none of which are charged for.

No one attempts to get me to pay a monthly fee for any of it.

If Microsoft started charging monthly fees and if I could only buy PCs
with Windows on then I would complain just as loudly as I do about the
Sky+.

As it is, I have a wide choice of PCs and OSs which can all perform
identical functions. The same is not true of the Sky+ because it is a
monopoly.

--
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:

Because they have an excellent product, which has value to people,
which is therefore marketable.

No, it is because the Sky+ is a monopoly product

That's your (slanted) opinion. Clearly over a million people disagree
with you.

Just because they have one doesn't mean that they disagree.

--
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. ;-)