As I say, it doesn't matter how good your product is, if people cant buy it then they wont buy it.
You don't miss what you dont have,so the ony people who will appreciate TIVO are the 'geeks' or those already on VM who are upgraded to it by default.
The average Sky+ user won't appreciate the benefits of TIVO and so won't leave sky simply because of it.
Thats your opinion, there are a lot of homes on network that Virgin could market this too. If they didnt think so then they wouldnt have invested in it. I think they know a bit more about potential customers than you. You assume a lot.
I have a TiVo and I regularly use Sky+ at my parents' house.
They are both excellent, but, given the choice, I'd go with the TiVo every time.
I agree with red6000 that the vast majority of Sky customers won't ever have heard of TiVo or give a jot about it, though, so what incentive is there for Sky to introduce it for the benefit of a relatively few TV technology "geeks"?
Thats your opinion, there are a lot of homes on network that Virgin could market this too. If they didnt think so then they wouldnt have invested in it. I think they know a bit more about potential customers than you. You assume a lot.
Very arrogant response. Yes VM have a business plan, but to use your phrase,you assume a lot that that busness plan will be a success. I still see no subsance in yor reply that suggest that Sky should be worried.
In my opinion, the TIVO offering is an attempt to have another premium product (you could say akin to the Sky 1TB box which is premium HD). In my view, the TIVO is not there as a mass marketing tool to entice customers from Sky, it's simply a cash generator for those that enjoy premium products. The investment won't have bee huge as the technology was already there..... no real R&D just buy the license from TIVO.
A forum is about opinion and debate. Your response is inappropriate.
Very arrogant response. Yes VM have a business plan, but to use your phrase,you assume a lot that that busness plan will be a success. I still see no subsance in yor reply that suggest that Sky should be worried.
In my opinion, the TIVO offering is an attempt to have another premium product (you could say akin to the Sky 1TB box which is premium HD). In my view, the TIVO is not there as a mass marketing tool to entice customers from Sky, it's simply a cash generator for those that enjoy premium products. The investment won't have bee huge as the technology was already there..... no real R&D just buy the license from TIVO.
A forum is about opinion and debate. Your response is inappropriate.
How was my response inappropriate. I feel that it wasnt and I will debate how I see fit. Thanks for your post!
You basically said that because I didn't work for VM, my opinion was worthless. As I say, it came across very arrogant and completely dismissive of my view. Debate is about putting forward a rational reason as to why you hold a differing opinion not belittleing peoples views.
Never mind. I'll bow out if my views are worthless.
You basically said that because I didn't work for VM, my opinion was worthless. As I say, it came across very arrogant and completely dismissive of my view. Debate is about putting forward a rational reason as to why you hold a differing opinion not belittleing peoples views.
Never mind. I'll bow out if my views are worthless.
You quoted:
The average Sky+ user won't appreciate the benefits of TIVO and so won't leave sky simply because of it.
I find that there is a lot of assumption in this statement therefore I stand by my comments. Please don't tell me that my comments are inappropriate because I had an opinion about yours. You base your opinion on fact do you? :rolleyes::rolleyes:
I find that there is a lot of assumption in this statement therefore I stand by my comments. Please don't tell me that my comments are inappropriate because I had an opinion about yours. You base your opinion on fact do you? :rolleyes::rolleyes:
No I think he is saying that Sky+ users are thick !
Very arrogant response. Yes VM have a business plan, but to use your phrase,you assume a lot that that busness plan will be a success. I still see no subsance in yor reply that suggest that Sky should be worried.
In my opinion, the TIVO offering is an attempt to have another premium product (you could say akin to the Sky 1TB box which is premium HD). In my view, the TIVO is not there as a mass marketing tool to entice customers from Sky, it's simply a cash generator for those that enjoy premium products. The investment won't have bee huge as the technology was already there..... no real R&D just buy the license from TIVO.
A forum is about opinion and debate. Your response is inappropriate.
Sorry but you are wrong.
The TiVo software for VM has had to be modified quite extensively to work with VM's VOD system, 3 tuners and dedicated 10 meg for apps etc.
And this is not a "premium" product, the initial release is set as premium for those who want to be early adopters the same as the V+HD was. However the whole TV base will be TiVo so it will be standard.
With good advertising this will interest a lot of people and I see a lot of sky customers looking at VM as an alternative once they have to pay for a replacement box .
Sky should worry as if fiber over telephone poles works out cheap enougth then expect VM to expand a lot by the time TiVo is standard. They could end up loosing a lot of subscriber over the next few years.
I think SKY for now have nothing to worry about. The TIVO boxes cost a fortune (and then you don't own them) and no-one's even using them yet. A fair comment from the last poster that it 3 years they might be rolled out everywhere but thats a long way yet.
I've been on the internet since about 1995 and one thing thats remained the same every single year is cabletv fanatics saying... [highlight]
Now "insert cable TV gimmick of the month" is here everyone is going to dump SKY and move over to cable TV.[/highlight]
We will get the likes of Cablemaster and Big_Ted saying this every single year. ZZZZzzzzzz
Occasionally you get the other one they come out with which is... [highlight]
Now "nynex/cable and wireless, telewest, ntl, virgin, insert owner of the month" has taken over, cable tv is gonna be MaSsIvE!!!!.[/highlight]
In reality instead of people leaving, SKY have constantly added subscribers at a huge rate and has now bust through the 10 million+ (and rising) mark and pretty much put cable out of business.
Why wont they? They can still annihilate sky in the area's that can get cable. Its still reason to worry. Sky have an inferior product. And Virgin are getting a lot stronger. Thats cause to worry I'd say.
No one is talking about Virgin Media taking over as the big man just yet. But Surely it makes business sense to be worried about a competitor who's product offering makes your look like an bum wipe rag.
Never noticed anything inferior about Sky and no cable in my area so I don't think it matters.
From the complaints about vm from vm customers, I can't see how vm are so superior either.:)
Never noticed anything inferior about Sky and no cable in my area so I don't think it matters.
From the complaints about vm from vm customers, I can't see how vm are so superior either.:)
Have you looked around the Sky forums lately? I see plenty of unhappy sky subs so its horses for courses.
And Sky are technically inferior to Virgin Media FACT. They have an inferior HD box and a very inferior internet system.
Sky are technically inferior to Virgin Media FACT. They have an inferior HD box and a very inferior internet system.
Not round here they aren't. Virgin can't get a cable to my door, or anyone else's come to that*. I would rather have a working Sky box than a non-functioning VM box to drool over.
And Sky are technically inferior to Virgin Media FACT. They have an inferior HD box and a very inferior internet system.
In your opinion ONLY - no 'fact' about it.
The existing Sky HD box is superior to what VM currently offer, and the introduction of the new TiVo may give them a very slight advantage, but mainly is just catching up.
Obviously, where VM win hands down is on Internet speed and VOD - TiVo won't do a deal to make that any better, nor will it helps VM's far smaller TV offering.
TiVo is really just a minor update to their boxes, using a system that has already failed badly elsewhere - figures in the USA are appalling.
Sky have 10 million+ subscribers, a figure which is still growing - VM have have around 3 million, with the numbers only managing to remain around the same.
Different systems, different advantages - TiVo won't change that in any way.
I've been on the internet since about 1995 and one thing thats remained the same every single year is cabletv fanatics saying... [highlight]
Now "insert cable TV gimmick of the month" is here everyone is going to dump SKY and move over to cable TV.[/highlight]
We will get the likes of Cablemaster and Big_Ted saying this every single year. ZZZZzzzzzz
Occasionally you get the other one they come out with which is... [highlight]
Now "nynex/cable and wireless, telewest, ntl, virgin, insert owner of the month" has taken over, cable tv is gonna be MaSsIvE!!!!.[/highlight]
In reality instead of people leaving, SKY have constantly added subscribers at a huge rate and has now bust through the 10 million+ (and rising) mark and pretty much put cable out of business.
What a sad reply........
No answer to comments so bring up others posts from years ago :rolleyes:
And for a company pretty much out of business its funny that VM are growing bigger in subscribers and area covered :rolleyes:
At least get up to date with your post, its the future not the past this thread was started about
The existing Sky HD box is superior to what VM currently offer, and the introduction of the new TiVo may give them a very slight advantage, but mainly is just catching up.
Obviously, where VM win hands down is on Internet speed and VOD - TiVo won't do a deal to make that any better, nor will it helps VM's far smaller TV offering.
TiVo is really just a minor update to their boxes, using a system that has already failed badly elsewhere - figures in the USA are appalling.
Sky have 10 million+ subscribers, a figure which is still growing - VM have have around 3 million, with the numbers only managing to remain around the same.
Different systems, different advantages - TiVo won't change that in any way.
In what way is the sky box superior with the exception of the hard drive size ?
Tuners V+ has more
Both can do HD
Both can do 3D
Both can do VOD in one way or another
Both can pause live tv etc
Can't see that either is better other than in one or two ways.
The TiVo will sort the hard drive size issue
The TiVo interface will be better in many ways bringing new options and facilities that Sky HD doesn't have
Also the TiVo will have apps (100 by year end quoted by VM)
Yes Sky have more subscribers but VM will be setting up new pricing, bundle and package options in the next couple of months so will be interesting if they go a different route to Sky that may be more desirable than Sky and they have now.
Add to that with TiVo they will have option to watch recorded content from the TiVo on another device whilst someone else is watching a program on it and they have more than Sky can hope for for many years.
Not round here they aren't. Virgin can't get a cable to my door, or anyone else's come to that*. I would rather have a working Sky box than a non-functioning VM box to drool over.
* there is cable, but it's not Virgin.
There's cable round my way but it's Rediffusion and it doesn't work. In fact the old Rediffusion cable headend building is still there.
TBH VM is never going to cover 100% of the country even now that Ofcom have ruled that BT have to allow third parties to use their ducting. VM don't apparently have any plans to open up in new areas only to increase coverage in existing areas.
Brand loyalty is a wonderful thing! There are many people who will swear that either Sky or Virgin are the best even though they have never tried the opposition. I have read some posts (NOT on this thread!) that say Virgin is inferior even though the poster says they can't get cable. On what do they base their opinion?
I have run Sky and Telewest/Virgin together for over ten years, concentrating sometimes on one service and sometimes on the other. What I think is beyond dispute is that Virgin offer a vastly superior VOD and internet service. Especially Internet - Sky won't be offering 100meg anytime soon, and the average speed of their "up to" 20meg service is less than 10meg (Offcom July 2010). Oh dear!
Which leaves TV services. If I were forced to have just one service I wouldn't be too bothered if it was Sky or Virgin. If I could only have one service and could choose then a few months ago it would just about have been Sky - larger hard drive and more HD content. But with TiVo I reckon Virgin have got themselves a vastly superior TV service, and I think I will be ditching Sky pretty much as soon as I can get it.
In what way is the sky box superior with the exception of the hard drive size ?
There's that of course, plus it's MPEG4, it has magic eye capabilities, all outputs work at all times, remote record - generally a more useable box.
The advantage of V+ of course is the three tuners, for the odd occasions it might be useful, but that's more of a function of cable than of the box - you would need three individual feeds for a Sky box with three tuners.
But TiVo is no big deal - it's a decent upgrade for VM, that's all.
What I think is beyond dispute is that Virgin offer a vastly superior VOD and internet service.
I've ALWAYS said so - that's where cable has the huge advantage. Sky has the huge advantages of vastly superor cover, far better broadcast TV services, and much, much cheaper costs than VM.
Cable is by far the most expensive way to distribute TV, and satellite by far the cheapest - which is why Sky run at a profit, and VM (who have to compete with Sky's prices) run at a loss.
But with TiVo I reckon Virgin have got themselves a vastly superior TV service, and I think I will be ditching Sky pretty much as soon as I can get it.
I personally don't see TiVo as anything to get excited about - as Sky+HD does EXACTLY what I want from a TV PVR!
Be that as it may getting TiVo will certainly lock anyone into Virgin for the next several years! Paying £240(ish) for a box which is not yours (and which may well be removed if you cease to take cable)! won't give any choice to those who like to compare options each year!
There's that of course, plus it's MPEG4, it has magic eye capabilities, all outputs work at all times, remote record - generally a more useable box.
The advantage of V+ of course is the three tuners, for the odd occasions it might be useful, but that's more of a function of cable than of the box - you would need three individual feeds for a Sky box with three tuners.
But TiVo is no big deal - it's a decent upgrade for VM, that's all.
errr the V+HD and VHD box's are both mpeg4 compatable as well as flash as is the TiVo box. TiVo already has remote record, won't need a mgic eye as you will be able to watch a program whilst someone watchs something else at the same time using a second device, No idea what other outputs you could need.........so thats the first one shot down.
You will be surprised how often 3 tuners are useful, I agree with your comment about feeds on sattelite but that just shows its limits.
And TiVo is a big deal, if Sky were offering this as an option most of you knocking it would be praising it.....:rolleyes:
Comments
Thats your opinion, there are a lot of homes on network that Virgin could market this too. If they didnt think so then they wouldnt have invested in it. I think they know a bit more about potential customers than you. You assume a lot.
They are both excellent, but, given the choice, I'd go with the TiVo every time.
I agree with red6000 that the vast majority of Sky customers won't ever have heard of TiVo or give a jot about it, though, so what incentive is there for Sky to introduce it for the benefit of a relatively few TV technology "geeks"?
Very arrogant response. Yes VM have a business plan, but to use your phrase,you assume a lot that that busness plan will be a success. I still see no subsance in yor reply that suggest that Sky should be worried.
In my opinion, the TIVO offering is an attempt to have another premium product (you could say akin to the Sky 1TB box which is premium HD). In my view, the TIVO is not there as a mass marketing tool to entice customers from Sky, it's simply a cash generator for those that enjoy premium products. The investment won't have bee huge as the technology was already there..... no real R&D just buy the license from TIVO.
A forum is about opinion and debate. Your response is inappropriate.
How was my response inappropriate. I feel that it wasnt and I will debate how I see fit. Thanks for your post!
Never mind. I'll bow out if my views are worthless.
You quoted:
I find that there is a lot of assumption in this statement therefore I stand by my comments. Please don't tell me that my comments are inappropriate because I had an opinion about yours. You base your opinion on fact do you? :rolleyes::rolleyes:
No I think he is saying that Sky+ users are thick !
Sorry but you are wrong.
The TiVo software for VM has had to be modified quite extensively to work with VM's VOD system, 3 tuners and dedicated 10 meg for apps etc.
And this is not a "premium" product, the initial release is set as premium for those who want to be early adopters the same as the V+HD was. However the whole TV base will be TiVo so it will be standard.
With good advertising this will interest a lot of people and I see a lot of sky customers looking at VM as an alternative once they have to pay for a replacement box .
Sky should worry as if fiber over telephone poles works out cheap enougth then expect VM to expand a lot by the time TiVo is standard. They could end up loosing a lot of subscriber over the next few years.
[highlight]
Now "insert cable TV gimmick of the month" is here everyone is going to dump SKY and move over to cable TV.[/highlight]
We will get the likes of Cablemaster and Big_Ted saying this every single year. ZZZZzzzzzz
Occasionally you get the other one they come out with which is...
[highlight]
Now "nynex/cable and wireless, telewest, ntl, virgin, insert owner of the month" has taken over, cable tv is gonna be MaSsIvE!!!!.[/highlight]
In reality instead of people leaving, SKY have constantly added subscribers at a huge rate and has now bust through the 10 million+ (and rising) mark and pretty much put cable out of business.
Never noticed anything inferior about Sky and no cable in my area so I don't think it matters.
From the complaints about vm from vm customers, I can't see how vm are so superior either.:)
Have you looked around the Sky forums lately? I see plenty of unhappy sky subs so its horses for courses.
And Sky are technically inferior to Virgin Media FACT. They have an inferior HD box and a very inferior internet system.
* there is cable, but it's not Virgin.
Rude and obnoxious remark. Was it even worth posting that??:eek:,
I am simply adding my views and comments to an open forum, as said earlier this is supposed to be a forum where people can debate.
I have as much right to post as anyone else and I'm on topic so what's your problem.
If you don't like it then don't read it. :mad:
In your opinion ONLY - no 'fact' about it.
The existing Sky HD box is superior to what VM currently offer, and the introduction of the new TiVo may give them a very slight advantage, but mainly is just catching up.
Obviously, where VM win hands down is on Internet speed and VOD - TiVo won't do a deal to make that any better, nor will it helps VM's far smaller TV offering.
TiVo is really just a minor update to their boxes, using a system that has already failed badly elsewhere - figures in the USA are appalling.
Sky have 10 million+ subscribers, a figure which is still growing - VM have have around 3 million, with the numbers only managing to remain around the same.
Different systems, different advantages - TiVo won't change that in any way.
What a sad reply........
No answer to comments so bring up others posts from years ago :rolleyes:
And for a company pretty much out of business its funny that VM are growing bigger in subscribers and area covered :rolleyes:
At least get up to date with your post, its the future not the past this thread was started about
In what way is the sky box superior with the exception of the hard drive size ?
Tuners V+ has more
Both can do HD
Both can do 3D
Both can do VOD in one way or another
Both can pause live tv etc
Can't see that either is better other than in one or two ways.
The TiVo will sort the hard drive size issue
The TiVo interface will be better in many ways bringing new options and facilities that Sky HD doesn't have
Also the TiVo will have apps (100 by year end quoted by VM)
Yes Sky have more subscribers but VM will be setting up new pricing, bundle and package options in the next couple of months so will be interesting if they go a different route to Sky that may be more desirable than Sky and they have now.
Add to that with TiVo they will have option to watch recorded content from the TiVo on another device whilst someone else is watching a program on it and they have more than Sky can hope for for many years.
There's cable round my way but it's Rediffusion and it doesn't work.
TBH VM is never going to cover 100% of the country even now that Ofcom have ruled that BT have to allow third parties to use their ducting. VM don't apparently have any plans to open up in new areas only to increase coverage in existing areas.
I have run Sky and Telewest/Virgin together for over ten years, concentrating sometimes on one service and sometimes on the other. What I think is beyond dispute is that Virgin offer a vastly superior VOD and internet service. Especially Internet - Sky won't be offering 100meg anytime soon, and the average speed of their "up to" 20meg service is less than 10meg (Offcom July 2010). Oh dear!
Which leaves TV services. If I were forced to have just one service I wouldn't be too bothered if it was Sky or Virgin. If I could only have one service and could choose then a few months ago it would just about have been Sky - larger hard drive and more HD content. But with TiVo I reckon Virgin have got themselves a vastly superior TV service, and I think I will be ditching Sky pretty much as soon as I can get it.
There's that of course, plus it's MPEG4, it has magic eye capabilities, all outputs work at all times, remote record - generally a more useable box.
The advantage of V+ of course is the three tuners, for the odd occasions it might be useful, but that's more of a function of cable than of the box - you would need three individual feeds for a Sky box with three tuners.
But TiVo is no big deal - it's a decent upgrade for VM, that's all.
I've ALWAYS said so - that's where cable has the huge advantage. Sky has the huge advantages of vastly superor cover, far better broadcast TV services, and much, much cheaper costs than VM.
Cable is by far the most expensive way to distribute TV, and satellite by far the cheapest - which is why Sky run at a profit, and VM (who have to compete with Sky's prices) run at a loss.
Be that as it may getting TiVo will certainly lock anyone into Virgin for the next several years! Paying £240(ish) for a box which is not yours (and which may well be removed if you cease to take cable)! won't give any choice to those who like to compare options each year!
errr the V+HD and VHD box's are both mpeg4 compatable as well as flash as is the TiVo box. TiVo already has remote record, won't need a mgic eye as you will be able to watch a program whilst someone watchs something else at the same time using a second device, No idea what other outputs you could need.........so thats the first one shot down.
You will be surprised how often 3 tuners are useful, I agree with your comment about feeds on sattelite but that just shows its limits.
And TiVo is a big deal, if Sky were offering this as an option most of you knocking it would be praising it.....:rolleyes: