SKY+

At 17:06:24 on 10/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:


"Alex" wrote in message
... Does your television
display a digital signal? Oh no it doesn't, it only displays an
analogue one. It only accepts an analogue input, and it only
displays it in analogue.

Do you know nothing about Sky HD and HDMI connections?
Pure digital, all the way.

With copy protection so that you cannot make a copy if the provider
doesn't want you to.

What has that got to do with it?
The question was one of whether the TV displays a digital signal, not
whether it was copy protected or not.

The whole thread is about what you can copy, and how. If you stick to
one topic at a time you may not tie yourself up in knots.

At 17:10:51 on 10/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:


"Alex" wrote in message
...
But we were talking about digitally recording DTT v digitally
recording Sky. There is no real competitor to SkyHD in the UK
market right now, so bringing SkyHD into the argument is a little
pointless.

Telewest HD doesn't exist then?

Do you actually know what they offer? Do you really think that
offering is a real competitor to SkyHD?

You still would not be able to record anything you want digitally
over HDMI if the content provider enforced HDCP.

Content protection is a valid point, but nothing to do with the
ascertion that TVs only have an analog input to which I was replying.

But that point was in relation to recording. This is, after all, what
we're discussing. If you can find a recorder with DVI/HDMI input that
supports HDCP (and is therefore compatible with the SkyHD output) then
your problem is solved.

And there is currently no suggestion that recording will be prevented
by these means

Oh, there most certainly is. Not for the short term, since it would
probably be counter-productive, but expect it to be used once HD has
taken off.

"Alex" wrote in message
...
And what are they going to do when the content providers *prevent* you
from making digital recordings, other than for time-shifting purposes?

Well that is an industry problem. Nothing specific to Sky+ or DTT PVRs.
And nothing whatsoever to do with the justification of the Sky+ fee.

Loz

"Alex" wrote in message
...
Then don't pay for it. It's really that simple.

I don't.
Doesn't mean I agree with it though

Loz

"Alex" wrote in message
...

Ooh, that's so wrong. That's what a loss leader is all about.
And rarely done on a permanent basis, for reasons I explained.
Once you make it permanent it no longer is seen as having value, and hence
it is no longer a leader.

2. you don't give things away permantently that customers
value (as you claim they do) as once you do, they cease to have a
value. You cannot say something has a value if it is free.

You certainly can, unless you don't value air.

Well, marketing air-heads can certainly try to put a value on something that
is free.
But consumers are not usually so dumb.
If something is permanently and ubiquitously free, consumers do not go
around thinking it is worth £10


3. you
don't give something away for nothing in return. Non-Sky subscribers
give Sky nothing in return

Non-Sky subscribers pay Sky nothing.
So what is the Sky+ fee a loss leader of in their case?
Why would Sky give Sky

In the case of Sky+, are you suggesting it will be given away free to
non-Sky subscribers? (you said "free to all")

I said nothing of the sort.

You did - I quoted from - "Sky will earn more cash from loyal and happy
non-cancelling customers by making Sky+ free to all."
See, at the end it says "free to all"

Loz

"Alex" wrote in message
...

What has that got to do with it?
The question was one of whether the TV displays a digital signal, not
whether it was copy protected or not.

The whole thread is about what you can copy, and how. If you stick to
one topic at a time you may not tie yourself up in knots.

But the discussion was not at any time about copy *protection*.
Sky could copy protect things now on Sky and stop Sky+ recording them.
Sky HD doesn't change that.
So its irrelevant

Loz

"Alex" wrote in message
...
At 17:10:51 on 10/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:


"Alex" wrote in message
...
But we were talking about digitally recording DTT v digitally
recording Sky. There is no real competitor to SkyHD in the UK
market right now, so bringing SkyHD into the argument is a little
pointless.

Telewest HD doesn't exist then?

Do you actually know what they offer? Do you really think that
offering is a real competitor to SkyHD?

It only differs in content availabilty, not in functionality.
So it is not true to say there is no competitor to Sky HD.

You still would not be able to record anything you want digitally
over HDMI if the content provider enforced HDCP.

Content protection is a valid point, but nothing to do with the
ascertion that TVs only have an analog input to which I was replying.

But that point was in relation to recording. This is, after all, what
we're discussing. If you can find a recorder with DVI/HDMI input that
supports HDCP (and is therefore compatible with the SkyHD output) then
your problem is solved.

Why would I need one with Sky HD or Telewest HD?
I don't get your point.

The discussion has never been about content *protection* by the way.
What has content protection got to do with the Sky+ fee?

Loz

At 17:28:53 on 10/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:

2. you don't give things away permantently that customers
value (as you claim they do) as once you do, they cease to have a
value. You cannot say something has a value if it is free.

You certainly can, unless you don't value air.

Well, marketing air-heads can certainly try to put a value on
something that is free. But consumers are not usually so dumb.
If something is permanently and ubiquitously free, consumers do not
go around thinking it is worth £10

Right. So why do they pay? It must be worth it; after all it's not a
necessity, there's no compulsion to have it, and the fee is widely
advertised and understood in advance.

3. you
don't give something away for nothing in return. Non-Sky
subscribers give Sky nothing in return

Non-Sky subscribers pay Sky nothing.
So what is the Sky+ fee a loss leader of in their case?

Sky+ users are statistically less likely to cancel their Sky account.

Why would Sky give Sky

In the case of Sky+, are you suggesting it will be given away
free to non-Sky subscribers? (you said "free to all")

I said nothing of the sort.

You did - I quoted from - "Sky will earn more cash from loyal and
happy non-cancelling customers by making Sky+ free to all." See, at
the end it says "free to all"

Let's try again: Perhaps you should remember exactly who said what.

At 17:31:02 on 10/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:


"Alex" wrote in message
...

What has that got to do with it?
The question was one of whether the TV displays a digital signal,
not whether it was copy protected or not.

The whole thread is about what you can copy, and how. If you stick
to one topic at a time you may not tie yourself up in knots.

But the discussion was not at any time about copy protection.
Sky could copy protect things now on Sky and stop Sky+ recording them.

They couldn't stop you recording them onto your VCR, only onto your
Sky+ box.

Sky HD doesn't change that.

It would prevent the recording of the digital signal. You're the one
who brought the HD box into it in the first place.

At 17:36:22 on 10/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by announcing:


"Alex" wrote in message
...
At 17:10:51 on 10/09/2006, loz delighted uk.media.tv.sky by
announcing:


"Alex" wrote in message
...
But we were talking about digitally recording DTT v digitally
recording Sky. There is no real competitor to SkyHD in the UK
market right now, so bringing SkyHD into the argument is a little
pointless.

Telewest HD doesn't exist then?

Do you actually know what they offer? Do you really think that
offering is a real competitor to SkyHD?

It only differs in content availabilty, not in functionality.
So it is not true to say there is no competitor to Sky HD.

Which is not what I said.

You still would not be able to record anything you want digitally
over HDMI if the content provider enforced HDCP.

Content protection is a valid point, but nothing to do with the
ascertion that TVs only have an analog input to which I was
replying.

But that point was in relation to recording. This is, after all,
what we're discussing. If you can find a recorder with DVI/HDMI
input that supports HDCP (and is therefore compatible with the
SkyHD output) then your problem is solved.

Why would I need one with Sky HD or Telewest HD?
I don't get your point.

No, you don't. You're confused again. Remember what we're talking
about here? Making a recording of a digital TV program.

The discussion has never been about content protection by the way.
What has content protection got to do with the Sky+ fee?

What has HD got to do with the Sky+ fee? Either expand the
conversation into the new subject you introduced, or drop the new
subject.