Unhappy SkyD customers
![[Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/7f40604aef27c0978e9b08e1fa21ca02.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 20 Forum Member
✭
I just want to hear about the unhappy customers and how they were treated by Sky. Thanx.
0
[Deleted User]
Posts: 20 [Deleted User]
Posts: 20 [Deleted User]
Posts: 20 [Deleted User]
Posts: 20
Comments
Installation was quick, clean and painless.
I am however a little dissapointed with the recent lack of Digital Text and other promised features - Timer Etc.
Just my 2c.....Paul
[This message has been edited by Paul G (edited 19 April 2000).]
of the delay in Astra 2B???????
may be when Astra 2B launches
we will see sky promise Digital Text
[This message has been edited by mike (edited 16 August 2000).]
(I can only be brief with this as it is my partner that has been sorting this out with Sky on my behalf).
Basically, we moved into our first house and decided to get sky's combo package (phones, broadband and TV).
The guys came out promptly to put the arial and tv in, no problems there, our Internet & phone was being activated at a later date.
The day in question arrived and all was well, Internet worked and as far as I was aware so was the phone, I called my partner from the landline to her mobile so she could have our number, she called the number back for some odd reason only for the call to be answered at the other end by a little girl (there is only two of us here), my partner called sky and they have basically plugged us into someone else's phone line, and an engineer would need to be sent out to rectify the problem, days turned into weeks and after numerous phone calls still no solution, thankfully our Internet and tv has been working since but our phone hasn't.
Our internet has stopped working completely now, we left it a couple of days and then another call was made to them, this time it was not a very friendly one, we were told that they are on it and they will be issuing a follow up call on the 26th, which I think is ridiculous, my partner has said they have 7 days to sort the problem or else we are cancelling our subscription, and that's where we are at present, a month down the line and we have took no steps forward,
(Apologies for the brief detail, as I say it was my partner dealing with this on my behalf).
well it just goes to show Sky`s CS are just as bad 15yrs later when they keep banging on about how they "Believe in better"
If not must be near EOL.
Well, seeing as the original posts 15 years ago don't seem to have that much of an issue with it all, I don't think your attempt at pushing your agenda has worked out too well.
What utter nonsense, 1080i IS full HD, and the exact same resolution as 1080P - which no one uses anyway (I'm not counting the occasional 1080P25 program on Freeview, as it's only 25 and not 50, and the only way you can tell it's P at all is because the on-screen display tells you
Certainly if you're not happy, then cancel - but don't try and give bullsh*t excuses for why you're doing it
As all films are as they are inherently a24 or25 fps source.....
Whether you are watching in 1080i 50 as on DSAT or 1080p25 as the clever DTT coders mode change or Netflix , but if the circuit gets loaded Netflix will change the resolution ..
Run that one by me again, and explain the thought behind it......lost me !
and if you are paying NETFLIX for 1080p....they saw you coming LOL
Only pay £12 a month?
Thought their top package was £8.99 (4 devices plus UHD).
Does that ANDYW_9 guy have the worst HDTV ever than can't handle de-interlacing 1080i film content into 1080p for the panel. on any even remotely decent Tv it should detect the film content and be no different between 1080i or 1080p at that frame rate.
Eventually they agreed to send someone out for free but even though I had previous reset and rebuild the planner, he refused to replace it because I couldn't replicate the hang whilst he was there!
They insist on charging for a phone line that I've never asked for and never need (surely £20 / month for broadband should cover that?), and they don't support any modern technologies on broadband such as dual band so I can avoid the wireless bandwidth congestion in my area.
They spend all my cash on giving away freebies for people who are not customers (like free broadband for a year), invest very little in actual content, and are essentially middle men creaming in a profit whilst screwing their customers - in a price fixing cartel along with Virgin and BT. They all put the big bucks into getting the football rights so people like me who aren't interested in football end up funding players to be multi millionaires playing a game they enjoy rather than working.
I've cancelled movies and am changing to Virgin for broadband - its a bit more expensive but not overall because I don't pay line rental, but it does support ac etc so is not stuck in the last decade. And I'm hoping Apple will come out with something to compete with Sky and Virgin in the TV area on 9th September, otherwise I will need to find another solution.
The trouble is I do like some programs on Sky and do like them to be in HD (which rules out Sky Now), such as Madam Secretary on Sky Living and Blue Bloods and Game of Thrones on Sky Atlantic. But there are potential options like HBO coming to the UK, and if all of them keep acting like a cartel then of course people (not myself of course) will just start using XBMC TV boxes to stream it all free.
Its not even clear whether streaming is illegal and I don't like the idea of the producers of the content not getting paid. But there is no way the law abiding people are going to keep paying £50-£100 per month to prop up all the people switching providers every 12/18 months let alone those in Spain etc watching it all for free on XBMC/Android etc.
Some company must turn up which values its customers and doesn't take the p....
There is an argument that these 'pirate' XBMC boxes that are all over the place (even on Amazon configured to access copyright content for free) are legal because they don't actually download a full copy of the film/episode etc. I don't see how that can stand up in court but millions of people are doing it nonetheless...
My point is not that this is a good thing ... just that modern technology makes this type of thing more likely when you have companies like Sky Virgin \ BT acting like cartels. If that wasn't the case and they were charging a fair price then Sky wouldn't be giving away a years free broadband when they normally charge £20 per month. And they wouldn't all charge you line rental on a phone line that you don't need to get any of their packages. Virgin don't have to pay BT line rental but you can't get any of their TV packages without paying the +£15 per month line rental. The regulator is toothless...
Not as far as I'm aware, and Netflix obviously depends greatly on your broadband speed, which of course Sky doesn't.
You could replace the name Sky with ANY supplier and it would be the same, the grass is not greener on the other side, and of course all the streaming of ILLEGAL stuff is one of the reasons everyone else has to fork out high costs !
Oddly when my TV plays up the BBC (who I pay to watch) won't come out and fix my TV for free
Also the more co called 'competition' we get, then the end user will just end up payiing more and more, as the suppliers bid higher and higher to secure the rights! Monopoly far better, and they can tell the Studios / Prem league etc, take it or leave it !
I don't have (or want) Netflix, but from the many people I know who do, none have ever claimed that picture quality is any better than on Sky or Terrestrial HD channels?.
BD is obviously better than either, but you'd expect it to be.
The HD quality on Netflix is far better than the quality on Sky which can be terrible these days.
I use Netflix daily.
I have seen netflix be pretty awesome too, to think that nearly all sky and there competitors HD channels on satellite are virtually all better quality on satellite than any other platform with the exception of the BBC, I include freeview, VM, BTTV. if you think sky's HD quality can be truly terrible you should check out BTTV, that a whole new low.
As for the question, am i happy with sky, not really. not anymore. They have alot of content i like to watch, the HD on that sports content is decent. Believe in better, well only on profitable things.
However
Poor SD quality for nearly a decade, 3/4 SD and low low bitrates for entertainment and movie channels, not good enough.
Variable HD quality on movie and entertainment HD channels, Maybe a decline on the whole.
No Interactive Sport HD channels.
I remember the good old days when anything new and decent or sci-fi from the US was almost always on sky 1, what happened?
Sky should of brought a lot of other european football leagues, used HD interactive channels to show it all live, and do a goals/ review show. It's amazing how BT beat sky to that punch being so late to the party.
Sky need to realise that it's fine to buy up niche sports and show the host broadcasters coverage, you don't have to have you own studio and people for every sport.
Sky go/now tv is poor. Sports need to be 50fps not 25fps and you need to find a better player to deal with the frame rate mismatch as most devices operate at 60hz and the judder, is obvious and annoying alot of the time. A few can switch to 50hz but don't.
I would of got whatever UHD service day 1, Sky are supposed to be pioneers in technology where is it, BT sport UHD is brilliant.