So hopefully the new TiVO software will play a major catch-up role then. I note that the large majority of those are software features that should be implementable by Virgin.
Remote record? Probably not anytime soon but given Virgin seems to be a lot more interested in 3-screen continuity perhaps something they could launch near end of next year.
MPEG-4 compression? Probably not viable (or necessary) for a while. Hopefully any new generation of boxes will be mpeg-4 or H.264 compliant. Only really matters to the user in terms of storage space, bandwidth requirements are of concern to the company only, not the end user.
Bigger HDD - I really don't know why Virgin doesn't sort this out, sounds fairly easy to do - e.g. enable eSATA or USB ports or allow customer to pay to upgrade to larger HDDs. Perhaps issues to do with software. Something that could be more curable with TiVO in place.
Looks like introduction of TiVO is a big deal! They need to get it right from the start or TiVO will fizzle out in this country again.
I'm fairly sure the new generation Tivo boxes that virgin are looking at either have plans for a firmware update to support H.264, or already do - certainly I'm fairly sure Series 3 and HD are in this range - then you have to take into account the capabilities for this...Do you have a hulu account? Great! Watch TV on demand through hulu on your box. Want to watch youtube clips? great! let's do that too.
And unlike sky customers, we will be able to do that without raping our 10, 20 or 50mb internet bandwidths.
Sky offering competition, indeed.
Either way you look at it, there's an issue of value for money here - virgin's customer service is better, we actually get more value for our money in terms of tv and internet, whereas sky customers probably still have to worry about lighning storms cycling their internet connections.
I Don't normally say a thing in support of such an incompedent company like Virgin Media, but I'll make an exception.
Correction The Sky Box does not support do 3D.
Technically there is nothing to stop Virgin doing 3D just like sky does with existing Virgin boxes. All Sky 3D uses is a side by side picture on a HD channel and the TV scales the 2 pictures upto full size and output them according to the 3D standard the TV uses.
yeah, but the thing everyone is glossing over, is that 3DTV is still just a gimmick, destined to go the way of the betamax video.
No there isn't! Content plays straight away and there is no constant buffering like there is on Sky Player, the picture quality is much better too. What Sky are proposing is progressive downloading (PDL) which is nothing like the VOD VM, BTVision and TalkTalk TV provide, which is in realtime ie. 'True-VOD'.
PDL requires a buffer to download before you can start watching a program and also requires you to have a PVR.
'True-VOD' doesn't require downloading as content is played directly from the server but requires you to be on the same network as your provider to connect to the VOD servers. Also, if you look at the way BT Vision provide HD VOD on their service you can forget any HD VOD on Sky.
It only gives the users (to be Sky customers) a 'near on demand' experience.
I personally think that's worse. So although it will be a true pull VoD service, there will either be waiting time when you request to view. That waiting time may well be disguised by advertisments etc but it still won't be live.
I said I didn't know all the technical side of it (you said you did - clearly not :rolleyes:). However luckilly for us both, rather fittingly, Technix was the man (or lady) to show us the technical path we were both searching for (I was just already on the right one).
And yes to my shame I am going to say this...:o
...TOLD YOU SO!!! ;):p
p.s. We are both actually agreeing in a way. I'm calling it True VoD, you call it Pull VoD but both mean the same
It only gives the users (to be Sky customers) a 'near on demand' experience.
I personally think that's worse. So although it will be a true pull VoD service, there will either be waiting time when you request to view. That waiting time may well be disguised by advertisments etc but it still won't be live.
I said I didn't know all the technical side of it (you said you did - clearly not :rolleyes:). However luckilly for us both, rather fittingly, Technix was the man (or lady) to show us the technical path we were both searching for (I was just already on the right one).
And yes to my shame I am going to say this...:o
...TOLD YOU SO!!! ;):p
p.s. We are both actually agreeing in a way. I'm calling it True VoD, you call it Pull VoD but both mean the same
War On - just give up the game. Whatever technical means of delivery used is unimportant. The point is watch what you want, when you want as opposed to waiting for i to happen at a controlled time as happens with linear channels. Whether it is Youtube, iPlayer, BT Vision, Virgin's VOD etc etc, it's all VoD.
In very simple terms, Virgin's VoD (and even BT's I think) gets to use reserved and guaranteed bandwidth for this task. Other services like iPlayer and Youtube have to compete with other data traffic (because of net neutrality) but this can be solved through Quality of Service rules. The only other limiting factor is internet speed, if you internet is fast enough the buffering will last not more than a couple of seconds at most.
Virgin's VoD has a different but similar limitation in that there are only a certain number of available vod channels in any one area, if too many people are watching vod then you can't access it at all - surely a worse situation than buffering for a few seconds?
Sky's player is not directly comparable to virgin vod anyway - the idea is that the content can be accessed on other platforms too like the xbox 360 (and potentially mobile phones). I think this is virgin's target with the virgin player - target the other two screens in the house.
War On - just give up the game. Whatever technical means of delivery used is unimportant. The point is watch what you want, when you want as opposed to waiting for i to happen at a controlled time as happens with linear channels. Whether it is Youtube, iPlayer, BT Vision, Virgin's VOD etc etc, it's all VoD.
In very simple terms, Virgin's VoD (and even BT's I think) gets to use reserved and guaranteed bandwidth for this task. Other services like iPlayer and Youtube have to compete with other data traffic (because of net neutrality) but this can be solved through Quality of Service rules. The only other limiting factor is internet speed, if you internet is fast enough the buffering will last not more than a couple of seconds at most.
Virgin's VoD has a different but similar limitation in that there are only a certain number of available vod channels in any one area, if too many people are watching vod then you can't access it at all - surely a worse situation than buffering for a few seconds?
Sky's player is not directly comparable to virgin vod anyway - the idea is that the content can be accessed on other platforms too like the xbox 360 (and potentially mobile phones). I think this is virgin's target with the virgin player - target the other two screens in the house.
No not in my opinion. I would, by far, prefer to reselect to watch the VoD again than watch a inferior picture with the other drawbacks discussed. Your point is valid though but just my preference.
As for your last aparagraph, I'm not comparing VM VoD against Sky Anytime. I'm comparing VM VoD against the technology (and it's limitations) that Sky Anytime+ will use - which is a comparible service.
And please note what you're saying... If you're internet is fast enough it will only buffer for a few seconds etc. (What if it isn't quite fast enough..?)
All my point was/is that VoD on VM is considered true VoD - I was correct. And that the end user will notice a difference (that I cannot confirm but find me anyone who watches iplayer through their Wii console who have VM catchup iplayer :eek::rolleyes:).
Indeed we do not know what the final sky vod will be like but it will be inferior in the way of delivering that product compared to a live, true and dedicated VoD feed as you get on cable.
You should also consider that if bandwidth does end up being guaranteed and reserved like you say BT Vision is, then others in the household using internet for other tasks, will be affected by the reserved bandwidth for vod.
You will note that I said right at the beginning of this (in post 10) that most people will not notice the difference so how you open your post to me is irrelivant as I was merely making a comparrison that most off the public do not understand the technical standards. In fact you're just agreeing...
You say... "Whatever technical means of delivery used is unimportant. The point is watch what you want, when you want as opposed to waiting for i to happen at a controlled time"
I said... "when Sky eventually launch VOD, most people will not underastand that it isn't true VOD for example. Give it a few years after launch and the majority will prob end up thinking Sky pioneered and launched VOD first"
(that I cannot confirm but find me anyone who watches iplayer through their Wii console who have VM catchup iplayer :eek::rolleyes:).
I have used iPlayer on the PS3 a number times recently for programmes that are missing from VM and programmes that never get added to VM, like Heroes. I was amazed at just how good it is.
The picture quality is not quite as good as VM, and its a pity they don't have the HD stream which would be technically possible in theory. But there is certainly no buffering such as is being discussed here. You do have the benefit of subtitles as well via that method which you don't get on VM. Not sure what the Wii is like in comparison, but I wouldn't be at all dismayed if I only had access to iPlayer this way.
The other comparable service is Vidzone, again via PS3.
Going back to the thread topic, standalone 10Mbps Virgin broadband actually costs £25 a month by direct debit, not £20 a month. The £20 a month price seems to be for peeps with a Virgin phone line as well, and I haven't got one. I pay £24 a month with ebilling giving a £1 discount. I have just looked into Sky's options on their website, but was shocked by the 10Gb-a-month data allowance. And as I live on the border of two exchange, the fastest I can expect is apparently 8-10mbps. Normally I am quoted 4mbps so I'd be amazed if I can get 8-10mbps.
standalone 10Mbps Virgin broadband actually costs £25 a month by direct debit, not £20 a month. The £20 a month price seems to be for peeps with a Virgin phone line as well,
Going back to the thread topic, standalone 10Mbps Virgin broadband actually costs £25 a month by direct debit, not £20 a month. The £20 a month price seems to be for peeps with a Virgin phone line as well, and I haven't got one. I pay £24 a month with ebilling giving a £1 discount. I have just looked into Sky's options on their website, but was shocked by the 10Gb-a-month data allowance. And as I live on the border of two exchange, the fastest I can expect is apparently 8-10mbps. Normally I am quoted 4mbps so I'd be amazed if I can get 8-10mbps.
Seems I'm stuck with Virgin!
Standalone 10Mb is £25 with a £5 discount making it £20. With phone line will be similarly priced, I think it's £14 with £12 phoneline? or similar.
According to BT's site I will only get around 2.5 MB broadband with an ADSL connection!
Thats why I have always had VM broadband since the NTL days and will continue to have VM broadband! After having experience with sorting someones ADSL broadband out (through Sky), I do find that you sometimes get the run around as if there is a problem with the line then the ISP will blame BT who will then blame the ISP.
At least with VM, its there equipment, there physical network, there problem!
I have used iPlayer on the PS3 a number times recently for programmes that are missing from VM and programmes that never get added to VM, like Heroes. I was amazed at just how good it is.
The picture quality is not quite as good as VM, and its a pity they don't have the HD stream which would be technically possible in theory. But there is certainly no buffering such as is being discussed here. You do have the benefit of subtitles as well via that method which you don't get on VM. Not sure what the Wii is like in comparison, but I wouldn't be at all dismayed if I only had access to iPlayer this way.
The other comparable service is Vidzone, again via PS3.
Yeah fair enough for programmes that aren't on iPlayer through VM. That's a BBC issue though where they don't (or in hero's case, MOTD etc didn't) purchase the full VOD rights or BBC haven't added the programmes to the VM platform.
That is all in the BBC's control. Not VM's.
Don't get me wrong I still watch things on my laptop etc. But even that will probally be reduced if Tivo is as interactive as it's being made out it will be.
Comments
I'm fairly sure the new generation Tivo boxes that virgin are looking at either have plans for a firmware update to support H.264, or already do - certainly I'm fairly sure Series 3 and HD are in this range - then you have to take into account the capabilities for this...Do you have a hulu account? Great! Watch TV on demand through hulu on your box. Want to watch youtube clips? great! let's do that too.
And unlike sky customers, we will be able to do that without raping our 10, 20 or 50mb internet bandwidths.
Sky offering competition, indeed.
Either way you look at it, there's an issue of value for money here - virgin's customer service is better, we actually get more value for our money in terms of tv and internet, whereas sky customers probably still have to worry about lighning storms cycling their internet connections.
i certainley wont be buying one until i dont have to wear silly glasses and the sets are a resonable cost also
and it must have good content otherwise its an expensive gimmick
Indeed it shall. and collectively, we virgin customers will point and giggle at skys inadequately sized manhood.
metaphorically speaking.
also even offnet virgin customers will get tivo next year ideal
Is this new news then? I have not heard that before. Or the October date?
lol, sounds like a Sky fanboy to me, nothing wrong with Virgin, i get a great service from them like many others....:cool:
oh and btw your spelling is pretty incompetent....;)
From the horse's mouth (Jeremy Darroch, Sky CEO): http://paidcontent.co.uk/article/419-sky-christens-true-vod-service-sky-anytime-as-arpu-rockets/
So it won't be similar to the True-VOD from VM, just Sky Player through the Sky+HD box. That relevant link again: http://www.nds.com/pdfs/NDS_Progressive_Download_datasheet.pdf
So Daveoc64 whether it's true VoD or not (which is known and refered to again in the bolow link) bla bla bla, the following as posted by Technix http://www.nds.com/pdfs/NDS_Progressive_Download_datasheet.pdf and the info showing Sky's intentions to use such technology as shown here http://paidcontent.co.uk/article/419-sky-christens-true-vod-service-sky-anytime-as-arpu-rockets/ confirms that whatever you or I want to call it...
It's not even on demand lol. It's on 'please wait - buffering' demand.
It only gives the users (to be Sky customers) a 'near on demand' experience.
I personally think that's worse. So although it will be a true pull VoD service, there will either be waiting time when you request to view. That waiting time may well be disguised by advertisments etc but it still won't be live.
I said I didn't know all the technical side of it (you said you did - clearly not :rolleyes:). However luckilly for us both, rather fittingly, Technix was the man (or lady) to show us the technical path we were both searching for (I was just already on the right one).
And yes to my shame I am going to say this...:o
...TOLD YOU SO!!!
p.s. We are both actually agreeing in a way. I'm calling it True VoD, you call it Pull VoD but both mean the same
War On - just give up the game. Whatever technical means of delivery used is unimportant. The point is watch what you want, when you want as opposed to waiting for i to happen at a controlled time as happens with linear channels. Whether it is Youtube, iPlayer, BT Vision, Virgin's VOD etc etc, it's all VoD.
In very simple terms, Virgin's VoD (and even BT's I think) gets to use reserved and guaranteed bandwidth for this task. Other services like iPlayer and Youtube have to compete with other data traffic (because of net neutrality) but this can be solved through Quality of Service rules. The only other limiting factor is internet speed, if you internet is fast enough the buffering will last not more than a couple of seconds at most.
Virgin's VoD has a different but similar limitation in that there are only a certain number of available vod channels in any one area, if too many people are watching vod then you can't access it at all - surely a worse situation than buffering for a few seconds?
Sky's player is not directly comparable to virgin vod anyway - the idea is that the content can be accessed on other platforms too like the xbox 360 (and potentially mobile phones). I think this is virgin's target with the virgin player - target the other two screens in the house.
No not in my opinion. I would, by far, prefer to reselect to watch the VoD again than watch a inferior picture with the other drawbacks discussed. Your point is valid though but just my preference.
As for your last aparagraph, I'm not comparing VM VoD against Sky Anytime. I'm comparing VM VoD against the technology (and it's limitations) that Sky Anytime+ will use - which is a comparible service.
And please note what you're saying... If you're internet is fast enough it will only buffer for a few seconds etc. (What if it isn't quite fast enough..?)
All my point was/is that VoD on VM is considered true VoD - I was correct. And that the end user will notice a difference (that I cannot confirm but find me anyone who watches iplayer through their Wii console who have VM catchup iplayer :eek::rolleyes:).
Indeed we do not know what the final sky vod will be like but it will be inferior in the way of delivering that product compared to a live, true and dedicated VoD feed as you get on cable.
You should also consider that if bandwidth does end up being guaranteed and reserved like you say BT Vision is, then others in the household using internet for other tasks, will be affected by the reserved bandwidth for vod.
You will note that I said right at the beginning of this (in post 10) that most people will not notice the difference so how you open your post to me is irrelivant as I was merely making a comparrison that most off the public do not understand the technical standards. In fact you're just agreeing...
You say...
"Whatever technical means of delivery used is unimportant. The point is watch what you want, when you want as opposed to waiting for i to happen at a controlled time"
I said...
"when Sky eventually launch VOD, most people will not underastand that it isn't true VOD for example. Give it a few years after launch and the majority will prob end up thinking Sky pioneered and launched VOD first"
Not much of a difference if you think about it!
I have used iPlayer on the PS3 a number times recently for programmes that are missing from VM and programmes that never get added to VM, like Heroes. I was amazed at just how good it is.
The picture quality is not quite as good as VM, and its a pity they don't have the HD stream which would be technically possible in theory. But there is certainly no buffering such as is being discussed here. You do have the benefit of subtitles as well via that method which you don't get on VM. Not sure what the Wii is like in comparison, but I wouldn't be at all dismayed if I only had access to iPlayer this way.
The other comparable service is Vidzone, again via PS3.
Heroes is available on iPlayer through VM On Demand.
Must have been a missing asset fault. The only reason I would have been watching it on iPlayer was if the V+ recording failed.
Seems I'm stuck with Virgin!
The £20 price is for new customers only.
Lucky them. "New customers only" is applied to so much these days isn't it. No one ever gives special pricing for loyal customers! :-)
Try ringing as picking the "thinking of leaving" option.
Standalone 10Mb is £25 with a £5 discount making it £20. With phone line will be similarly priced, I think it's £14 with £12 phoneline? or similar.
20Mb is cheaper with a phoneline than without.
Thats why I have always had VM broadband since the NTL days and will continue to have VM broadband! After having experience with sorting someones ADSL broadband out (through Sky), I do find that you sometimes get the run around as if there is a problem with the line then the ISP will blame BT who will then blame the ISP.
At least with VM, its there equipment, there physical network, there problem!
Yeah fair enough for programmes that aren't on iPlayer through VM. That's a BBC issue though where they don't (or in hero's case, MOTD etc didn't) purchase the full VOD rights or BBC haven't added the programmes to the VM platform.
That is all in the BBC's control. Not VM's.
Don't get me wrong I still watch things on my laptop etc. But even that will probally be reduced if Tivo is as interactive as it's being made out it will be.
Call customer services or sales (not sure which is best) and quote the VM's 'Offers for all' policy.
Sadly I cannot find a link for the site that has the info.
Will keep looking though.
Don't agree. For sports 3D does add something worthwhile extra.
here you go
http://www.virginmedia.com/wehearyou/OffersForAll.html