Options
looks like sky may have some competion
Looks like sky may have some competion if the comments posted on another thread are any thing to go by
Quote:
Originally Posted by skywalker1010
First time poster, got my HDR1000S yesterday (Thurs), had to wait since yesterday to post on here with a new subscription
Arrived just after 2pm, I work from home, so it was down tools and open the box!
With Glee I unhooked my Sky HD 1Tb box, I have been a Sky HD customer since the rollout in May 2006, wow over 6 years!
So I have finally taken a big step, but by saving nearly £800 a year, this has got to be worth it!
The HDR1000S installation is a complete doodle, the installation screen talks you through the whole process and after putting in my Postcode it shows me a list of channels I can watch through Freeview.
After set up, I switched immediately to BBCHD and I have got to say that the picture quality is soooo noticeably better than my SkyHD box. The colours are rice and really have more 'pop', I am very happy.
I hope all you guys get sorted with boxes soon, if you are waiting as you are not going to be disappointed .
.....left hook, right hook.....murdoch is reeling on the ropes
Thanks for that, I'm doing the same and ditching Sky , getting Youview free from talktalk and planning to supplement it with this as an extra storage and probably more reliable PVR option. Would be interested to hear your impressions over the next few days especially with regards to reliability of recording and any issues you come across. Also any impressions of the backwards EPG and how much content there is and the quality of it would be appreciated. Thanks for the mini review
Cheers
Quote:
Originally Posted by skywalker1010
First time poster, got my HDR1000S yesterday (Thurs), had to wait since yesterday to post on here with a new subscription
Arrived just after 2pm, I work from home, so it was down tools and open the box!
With Glee I unhooked my Sky HD 1Tb box, I have been a Sky HD customer since the rollout in May 2006, wow over 6 years!
So I have finally taken a big step, but by saving nearly £800 a year, this has got to be worth it!
The HDR1000S installation is a complete doodle, the installation screen talks you through the whole process and after putting in my Postcode it shows me a list of channels I can watch through Freeview.
After set up, I switched immediately to BBCHD and I have got to say that the picture quality is soooo noticeably better than my SkyHD box. The colours are rice and really have more 'pop', I am very happy.
I hope all you guys get sorted with boxes soon, if you are waiting as you are not going to be disappointed .
.....left hook, right hook.....murdoch is reeling on the ropes
Thanks for that, I'm doing the same and ditching Sky , getting Youview free from talktalk and planning to supplement it with this as an extra storage and probably more reliable PVR option. Would be interested to hear your impressions over the next few days especially with regards to reliability of recording and any issues you come across. Also any impressions of the backwards EPG and how much content there is and the quality of it would be appreciated. Thanks for the mini review
Cheers
0
Comments
Hold the front page, peter05 in anti-Sky post shocker.
Absolutely nothing at all, but a perfect excuse for Peter05 to have yet another dig at Sky and advertise another piece of Humax equipment.
This OP is saving over £800 a year, i expect he is not interested in pay tv, otherwise he would have stayed with Sky, not sure how this can be competition, Freesat and Freeview has been around for a long time.
People who don't want to pay for TV - Freesat or Freeview is fine.
Those that want something extra, whether it be Sky One, Movies, Sports, that are only available on Pay TV, then Sky or Virgin Media is the way to go, not sure why some people can't grasp that, and assume that everyone only pay's Sky because they think they have to, and by them riding to the rescue on their White Steed thinks things are gonna change :rolleyes:
I daresay Peter is just responding to the usual Derek500 and ds_reader trolling in the freesat forums.
Exactly soda. Brilliant, the guy is saving £800 a year but also getting a lot less. I could save a fortune every year by driving a clapped out old banger...but then I wouldn't have a nicer car to drive would I? As per when you recommend Freesat to every Tom, Dick and Harry who asks about Sky, you neglect the fact that there's a LOT of content on Sky that is simply not available elsewhere.
I suggest you look up the definition of "monopoly".
wonder which category you are in :rolleyes:
Look at the next set of figures when Sky release them, you'll find people aren't ditching SKY anywhere near the numbers you seem to think. Sorry to ruin your day.
Having played about on my dads youview i am very impressed with it but would i swap my sky hd for it? no chance
youview is a competitior to freeview and freesat and in my opinion if i had to have 1 of those 3 it would be youview all the way
Bang on, but if you follow peter05's ridiculous posts on here, you'll know that he classes FREESAT (always all caps) as a competitor to Sky. Anyone who asks about getting Sky will always be replied to by him advising that they should get FREESAT (again with the caps) instead. All that, and he doesn't even live in the UK.
Would need to see more evidence first but if that were true it might - for instance - be a threat for second room/TVs in Sky homes. Better picture, no sub, where less channels will suffice.
But will have to see if independent tests on the box concur.
Freesat and Sky are two totally different systems and cater for different people, those who are happy with the limited FREESAT like Peter05 and people like me who do not object to paying Sky for the extra programmes I receive. Each to his own.
The OP Peter05 posted is like reading someone trying to post a spoof comedy piece especially after reading this quote
Now I do not know about anyone else here but unless there was something radically wrong with the Sky STB set up I doubt very much that the difference in quality from memory would be immediately noticeable without having a direct Sky picture to compare it with. Sorry I do not buy that one at all.
Instead of moaning about Sky VM should put more resources in at their end they certainly have the money to do so and they could quite easily compete more with Sky.
As one of the subjects I am studying is Media we have been looking at Sky Television and as far as I can see that if a few people including a certain Rupert Murdoch hadn't had the courage and the foresight and took a big risk and launched Satellite television in the late 1980s I don't know where we would be now.
So I think that these people took all the risks and they deserve credit for that. Another interesting fact is that when Sky first started broadcasting Digitally they almost went bankrupt and it is only now that they are beginning to recoup the rewards of that. So when people say Sky are a monopoly don't forget that for a few risk takers there may not have been a Sky to slag off.
Why would they have the money to do so?, they are billions in debt, and run at a loss (apart from one year, when they sold their TV channels to Sky, the money from that sale gave them a profit that year).
Their problem is the infrastructure costs, satellite broadcasting is the cheapest method possible - where cable is the most expensive - and the most cost effective areas of the country are already cabled, adding more areas would mostly cost more than the potential number of customers.
I'd love VM to come and give me superfast broadband, but it's not going to happen.
Murdoch only copied lots of other people all over the world as digital Tv was being used all other the world without sky or the Murdochs involvment. so sky and the Murdochs just copied what other people were doing sky and the murdochs were lucky to have the backing of the UK Goverments, I wonder why
Some German and Dutch channels got on board Astra 1 at the same time as Sky did, but it was hardly "lots of other people all over the world" at that time!
You are probably correct that Sky would have been more regulated, especially over their competition with the "official" UK satellite broadcaster British Satellite Broadcasting, if Labour had been in power at the time, but we'll never know!
So without Sky and Murdoch would we be left with the joys of FREESAT and FREEVIEW just to watch with everything FREE.
Wait a moment we can get the all now, we only have to have Sky if want to pay Sky and there are over 10, million subscribers happy to do so. So why keep having a go at Sky who are giving the public a service they obviously want.
No I think you will find Canada in the late 60s had satlite TV , where sky started very late 80s or early 90s