# Very Tempted with new Sky+HD Offer



## Glen (May 9, 2004)

Have any of you seen the new Sky+HD offer? With no HD TiVo insight for us EVER, the very good offer of £49 for the box and £30 for install instead of £60 is calling me! Anyone else tempted?


----------



## ericd121 (Dec 12, 2002)

For those of us who have never had Sky, I think the sticking point might be the monthly sub.

What is it, now? 
£17 a month for 12 months, plus £10 a month for the HD package?

I haven't looked those rates up, but I'm guessing I'm not far off.

However, I'm happy to be proved wrong; if it were possible to have a SkyHD box installed without subscribing to a Sky package
(i.e. only receiving and recording free HD and SD channels),
I'd be very tempted, as C4 HD is only on Sky at the moment.


----------



## kitschcamp (May 18, 2001)

Yeah, the HD pricing is not nice  Here in Sweden the satellite company Canal Digital offers HD broadcasts inclusive in their subscriptions. And you can, for example, subscribe to the film channels alone for around &#163;15 a month *including* a HD film channel.


----------



## verses (Nov 6, 2002)

ericd121 said:


> What is it, now?
> £17 a month for 12 months, plus £10 a month for the HD package?


What a ridiculous, over exaggeration ;
http://www.sky.com/portal/site/skycom/skyproducts/skytv/skyhd/pricing

It's only a very modest £26.25pm  aka £315 a year!


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

verses said:


> What a ridiculous, over exaggeration ;
> http://www.sky.com/portal/site/skycom/skyproducts/skytv/skyhd/pricing
> 
> It's only a very modest £26.25pm  aka £315 a year!


It is possible after your 12 month sub to then drop a mix, so it gets down to £240 per year for ability to record/watch BBCHD,C4HD,Sky1HD,EurosportHD,MTVHD,BioHD,NatGeoHD,FXHD,ArtsHD,MTVHD and a few others. Sky don't like you to do this, and you won't get free broadband unless you take at least one mix and sky talk as well.

I was about to do this until they gave me a £5 a month discount for 6 months off one of my multiroom subs.

Sky now charge an extra £5 for broadband if you dont take up their Sky Talk plan.


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

Glen said:


> With no HD TiVo insight for us EVER


You've forgotten about my master plan? - gotta get back to work


----------



## Gavin (Jan 1, 2003)

ericd121 said:


> What is it, now?
> £17 a month for 12 months, plus £10 a month for the HD package?


Plus Phone rental, At least VM throw that in (although they have less HD channels)


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

cyril said:


> You've forgotten about my master plan? - gotta get back to work
> You've forgotten about my master plan?
> 
> *I need about 500k* so we can build a UK TiVo series 3 HD ...who's with me  ?


Well, the "how many (forum) users" thread is currently up to 283

500k / 283 = £1700 or thereabouts

So currently about £1700 each for a UK HD TiVo ?


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

mikerr said:


> Well, the "how many (forum) users" thread is currently up to 283
> 
> 500k / 283 = £1700 or thereabouts
> 
> So currently about £1700 each for a UK HD TiVo ?


Cheaper than 5 years of SkyHD 

Hopefully that would pay for one machine each, but the more cash raised and bigger order volume the cheaper each unit would become!

I would want at least 4 HD satellite tuners, 2 freeview tuners (6 modular tuners so could replace with HD Freeview in 2012), 1TB disk minimum, HD component and 2 simultaneous HDMI output, enabled ethernet, eSata, optical and coax out, RF out, greater than 1TB disk support, and all new TiVo search facilities, MRV ,TTG etc..


----------



## NickB (Jun 29, 2002)

I called them yesterday offering to go back as we want Sky Sports HD. The cheapest package they could offer me was £46 per month plus the £49 to get the HD box & £30 install.

I told them I'm not interested in anything else apart from a Sports package - still £46/month.


----------



## ericd121 (Dec 12, 2002)

cyril said:


> It is possible after your 12 month sub to then drop a mix, so it gets down to £240 per year for ability to record/watch BBCHD,C4HD,Sky1HD,EurosportHD,MTVHD,BioHD,NatGeoHD,FXHD,ArtsHD,MTVHD and a few others. Sky don't like you to do this, and you won't get free broadband unless you take at least one mix and sky talk as well.


Surely, if you drop the one mix for which you're paying £16.50 per month (as per that Sky webpage), you'd be left with just £9.75 a month for the HD pack?

That would be £117 per year.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

NickB said:


> I called them yesterday offering to go back as we want Sky Sports HD. The cheapest package they could offer me was £46 per month plus the £49 to get the HD box & £30 install.
> 
> I told them I'm not interested in anything else apart from a Sports package - still £46/month.


Will they really be able to sustain this kind of price level during the forthcoming Depression?


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

ericd121 said:


> Surely, if you drop the one mix for which you're paying £16.50 per month (as per that Sky webpage), you'd be left with just £9.75 a month for the HD pack?
> 
> That would be £117 per year.


Sky won't let you do that AFAIK.

I think it's a minimum 19.75 a month for the HD pack -£10 if you have no mixes to activate Sky+ and then the 9.75 for HD mix.

If you only wanted to record BBC HD , C4HD and LuxeHD it would cost you a minimum of £10 per month , once your 12 month one mix sub has ended.


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

Pete77 said:


> Will they really be able to sustain this kind of price level during the forthcoming Depression?


Sky do offer credit crunch deals if you ask and threaten to quit or reduce your package- I'm getting £5 off a month for the next 6 months, though this is offset by Sky's increase in broadband charges of £5 per month if you don't have sky talk..


----------



## velocitysurfer1 (Sep 6, 2006)

ericd121 said:


> Surely, if you drop the one mix for which you're paying £16.50 per month (as per that Sky webpage), you'd be left with just £9.75 a month for the HD pack?


Why do that, (even if you could - which you can't within the first 12 months) without anymixes you'll only receive the "free to view" channels and no subcriber HD content, plus have no sky+ functionality (apart from TiVo  ).

It makes more sense to cancel the HD pack (it doesn't say in the online T&Cs that you have to have the HD pack for 12 months), and have one mix. Whilst you wouldn't get the HD content for the subscribed mix, you'll set get FTV/A HD content, and SD content from your one mix.


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

velocitysurfer1 said:


> Why do that, (even if you could - which you can't within the first 12 months) without anymixes you'll only receive the "free to view" channels and no subcriber HD content, plus have no sky+ functionality (apart from TiVo  ).
> 
> It makes more sense to cancel the HD pack (it doesn't say in the online T&Cs that you have to have the HD pack for 12 months), and have one mix. Whilst you wouldn't get the HD content for the subscribed mix, you'll set get FTV/A HD content, and SD content from your one mix.


I prefer to cancel the standard mix as I only really want the HD content.

Currently I get HD channels that I don't get the SD equivalent of e.g. MTV HD, BioHD and Eurosport HD.

If you don't have any mixes AFAIK you still get Sky1hD, FXHD,BioHD, ArtsHD,EurosportHD, natGeoHD, RushHD,HistoryHD as well as C4HD,BBC HD, LuxeHD etc..

This is what I'm going to downgrade to in 6 months time unless Sky continue to give me £5 per month off.

Incidentally, SkyHD is down to £29 +£30 install at Currys
http://www.avforums.com/forums/sky-hd/924105-sky-hd-29-currys.html


----------



## ericd121 (Dec 12, 2002)

cyril said:


> If you only wanted to record BBC HD , C4HD and LuxeHD it would cost you a minimum of £10 per month , once your 12 month one mix sub has ended.


Actually, this sounds like the deal I'm looking for!


ericd121 said:


> For those of us who have never had Sky, I think the sticking point might be the monthly sub... if it were possible to have a SkyHD box installed without subscribing to a Sky package
> (i.e. only receiving and recording free HD and SD channels),
> I'd be very tempted...





verses said:


> What a ridiculous, over exaggeration ;
> http://www.sky.com/portal/site/skycom/skyproducts/skytv/skyhd/pricing
> 
> It's only a very modest £26.25pm  aka £315 a year!


Having jiggled the figures a bit, I see that if I subscribed for the HD at £26.25pm
then added Sky Broadband and Sky Talk for an extra £10pm
thus making the total to Sky £36.25pm
I could cancel my PlusNet broadband at £21.52pm

The extra I would be paying each month would be £14.73 or £176.76 for the first year; adding the £49 makes £225.76 for the box and the satellite installation: not bad (especially if I can persuade the engineer to install enough cables fit a FreeSat box alongside the Sky box) .


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

ericd121 said:


> Actually, this sounds like the deal I'm looking for!
> Having jiggled the figures a bit, I see that if I subscribed for the HD at £26.25pm
> then added Sky Broadband and Sky Talk for an extra £10pm
> thus making the total to Sky £36.25pm
> ...


Slip the engineer a tenner and he should do it. Make sure you get 4 cables from your dish.

Is the £50 M&S voucher referral offer valid as well? So you could split that with a friend.

If you don't order through Currys there's an extra £20 cashback from quidco.com.

As people spend less on expensive holidays in theory they will spend more on home entertainment -so I guess Sky won't drop their prices by much more than 5%.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> Will they really be able to sustain this kind of price level during the forthcoming Depression?


A glass half empty person speaks!


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> A glass half empty person speaks!


Better to be a realistic glass half empty person than a pie in the sky and press on regardless egotistical marketing man. Surely it is the latter utterly irresponsible and unrealistic personality type that has been directly responsible for getting us all in to the recessionary mess that we are now in.

Glass half empty merchants learn from history whereas glass half full merchants are unfortunately completely incapable of carrying out such basic logical deduction.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

I thought it was the bankers and politicians who got us into the current mess, not marketeers.

Them, and the people who insist on looking an the darkest possible side by talking up "Depressions" when we've only technically been in recession a week...


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> I thought it was the bankers and politicians who got us into the current mess, not marketeers.


I thought the bankers clearly were marketeers with their repeated endless efforts to encourage people to take loans they could not afford to make purchases they did not need.

And a not wholly insignificant amount of the unaffordable borrowing also took place because of the constant efforts of magazines such as T3 to persuade people they should bin perfectly good functional pieces of electronic equipment and replace them with brand new ones in order to keep up with the Jones's

So the other main villains of the piece seems to be everyone involved in talking people in to buying an endless plethora of disposable goods that are constantly replaced with more disposable goods and estate agents and banks by encouraging the housing bubble to get ever bigger so that they could make larger and larger commissions on the transactions.

You seems to be firmly in the Brown camp in believing we can just print more money to get out of this mess without going the way of Zimbabwe. But history shows that won't work.



> Them, and the people who insist on looking an the darkest possible side by talking up "Depressions" when we've only technically been in recession a week...


Those who try to blame the curent situation on those who merely report the extraordinary mess we are now actually in really do have their heads planted well and truly in the sand.

You are definitely fooling yourself if you think this major downturn won't last at least five and probably ten years and one of the very first things people will cut out will be old style glossy coffee table magazines at 4 quid each on technology. But no doubt you are well aware of that and hence why you have started up techradar.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> You seems to be firmly in the Brown camp in believing we can just print more money to get out of this mess without going the way of Zimbabwe. But history shows that won't work.


Your powers of assumption are legendary, but that's a classic. How you got from a criticism of your undue pessimism in saying we were heading for a "depression" to that I have no idea. From one word, to a critique of my (unstated) views on the Goverment's fiscal policy - you leave me (almost) speechless Pete.



> You are definitely fooling yourself if you think this major downturn won't last at least five and probably ten years.


I sincerely hope and believe you are wrong.

By the way, T3 just had its best selling issue ever last month...


----------



## eric23 (Jan 15, 2002)

Just got a Humax Foxsat HDR - the new Freesat HD PVR. It's much better than Sky's heap of junk, and no sub!


----------



## ericd121 (Dec 12, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> So the other main villains of the piece seems to be everyone involved in talking people in to buying an endless plethora of disposable goods that are constantly replaced with more disposable goods and estate agents and banks by encouraging the housing bubble to get ever bigger so that they could make larger and larger commissions on the transactions.


I always knew you were a socialist, Pete! 

Seriously, I agree with this part of your rant.

I am a socialist/environmentalist, and during this financial meltdown and the Government's responses to it, it strikes me there is a fundamental flaw in a system that can only work if people consume more and more goods (using more and more of the worlds resources).

The Government wants the banks to lend partly so that people can go back to their old spending patterns: that economy is gone, and we should stop trying to prop it up.

We should have let the banks fail, or at least let the shares drop so far that it would have been a lot cheaper to nationalise them.

We should let the car industry die; cars are the problem, not the solution.
There are enough cars in this country to last for decades; we don't need any more new ones.

Workers from the car industry should be retrained and employed in measures to reduce our energy and food imports; in this uncertain world, it's negligent to depend on others for our basic needs.

We have already committed so much Government money to propping up the old economy; this could be used to create a new sustainable economy.

Every building could be super-insulated, both thermally and acoustically.
Every building that uses hot water could have solar panels.
Every building that has toilets could harvest rain water to flush them.
Every building that uses electricity could have solar panels.
Every suitable building that needs heating could have ground source heating.

Instead of building atomic power stations that may employ thousands in construction, these sustainable measures would employ millions.

Pete, I see your rant, and raise you one of my own.


----------



## pauljs (Feb 11, 2001)

Well this thread has gone completely off topic, hasn't it Pete!

Anyway, after 3 weeks of Sky HD I am completely underwealmed, surprising how many people I have spoke to seem surprised to hear that

Quality is fine and it normally works but the OS/EPG is just so basic and horrible to use. Including the remote, which constantly requires fiddling around with the coloured buttons at the bottom.

I'll make a new assessment when the new EPG comes out.

Why they couldn't have copied TiVo or MCE is a mystery, this is a Ftse company with millions of pounds available for R and D.

I suppose the word monopoly springs to mind


----------



## steford (Oct 9, 2002)

pauljs said:


> Well this thread has gone completely off topic, hasn't it Pete!
> 
> Anyway, after 3 weeks of Sky HD I am completely underwealmed, surprising how many people I have spoke to seem surprised to hear that
> 
> ...


or licensed it even. I fancy the HD channels but am just so reluctant to give up the Tivo.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

pauljs said:


> Well this thread has gone completely off topic, hasn't it Pete!


It was TCM2007 what started the rot your honour.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

steford said:


> I fancy the HD channels but am just so reluctant to give up the Tivo.


Snap. Having considered the alternatives for now I have decided that keeping my Tivo S1 going as my main program source is the better solution. At the end of the day an HD program is still about precisely the same thing as when watched in SD and both are in colour. If some programs were only available in HD and SD viewers could not watch them at all (oops shouln't give that idea to Sky should I) then the case for upgrading to HD would be more compelling.

I will keep the matter under review but meanwhile my bank balance likes the approach I have chosen so far.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Keeping you money in the evil bank then Pete?


----------



## pauljs (Feb 11, 2001)

steford said:


> or licensed it even. I fancy the HD channels but am just so reluctant to give up the Tivo.


Licencing TiVo would have been a great idea, Sky clearly wanted it all for themselves, so this is what we end up with unfortunately and the public still think it's cutting edge


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

pauljs said:


> Well this thread has gone completely off topic, hasn't it Pete!
> 
> Anyway, after 3 weeks of Sky HD I am completely underwealmed, surprising how many people I have spoke to seem surprised to hear that
> 
> ...


Yes, NDS was worth a lot more than TiVo when it was aquired by news Corp.
It's a shame their software is buggier and far behind TiVo's.

The SkyHD remote is not bad in itself - it's the awful EPG design that uses the coloured buttons that makes it not as nice.


----------



## pauljs (Feb 11, 2001)

I can't understand why the planner, possibly the most used page, takes 2 key presses, from either end of the remote.

*Services* is one of the 4 main buttons and you only need that at setup time.

Also why are the recorded programs listed from earliest first, surely they are the archive programs? I always watch the most recently recorded.

I don't see why the "to do" list has to be mixed up on the same page.

No progress bar, just a pointless animation and the time elapsed, another page needed to find out how much left


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

cyril said:


> Yes, NDS was worth a lot more than TiVo when it was aquired by news Corp.
> It's a shame their software is buggier and far behind TiVo's.
> 
> The SkyHD remote is not bad in itself - it's the awful EPG design that uses the coloured buttons that makes it not as nice.


To be fair to NDS, it's Sky which has insisted on keeping an ancient version of their software.

Some of these look much better:

http://www.nds.com/solutions/epgs.html


----------



## kitschcamp (May 18, 2001)

I wonder what excuse Viasat have? Their version is even older and buggy than the Sky+ version.


----------



## steford (Oct 9, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> Snap. Having considered the alternatives for now I have decided that keeping my Tivo S1 going as my main program source is the better solution. At the end of the day an HD program is still about precisely the same thing as when watched in SD and both are in colour. If some programs were only available in HD and SD viewers could not watch them at all (oops shouln't give that idea to Sky should I) then the case for upgrading to HD would be more compelling.
> 
> I will keep the matter under review but meanwhile my bank balance likes the approach I have chosen so far.


I think you're right - Tivo it is. I do have a twin tuner HD Satellite PVR anyway which can get BBCHD, ITVHD and some foreign HD channels and I only really use it for football so in terms of cost it makes sense to stick with Tivo. Lost in HD (I have Sky 1 SD) and the odd thing on History/Nat Geo (don't have the Knowledge pack) would be nice - then again I could pay just £1 extra and have those channels in SD. It would also be nice to have all recordings in 1 place and via the EPG although if that's poor/buggy there's no real benefit.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Sky's unexpected implementation of Auto Standby on my Panasonic TU-DSB20 box and the recordings I lost until I properly disabled it reminded me what having an unreliable PVR is like. All solved now on Panny TU-DSB20 after turning On and Off Auto Standby a couple of times and power cycling the Sky box.

The Sky box is so old that if it goes in to Auto Standby it then can't be turned On again until a power cycle (i.e. locked up) but with Auto Standby disabled its fine once again.

But that experience reminded me how annoying a PVR that regularly missed recordings would be. My Tivo and Sky combination are normally 99%+ reliable in getting recordings.


----------



## jonphil (Aug 7, 2002)

Have been temptd and registered to get the upgrade.

How have other people go SkyHD and Tivo connected together so I can still record SD channels on Tivo while recording HD on Sky?


----------



## Major dude (Oct 28, 2002)

jonphil said:


> Have been temptd and registered to get the upgrade.
> 
> How have other people go SkyHD and Tivo connected together so I can still record SD channels on Tivo while recording HD on Sky?


Sounds good in theory but I bet you will find yourself not bothering to programme your SkyHD at all but do everything on your TiVo.

I have cancelled my skyHD sub and use it only as a source for one of my TiVos (both running mode 0).

You may also have problems with TiVo causing interuptions of your SKYHD recordings but this is being discussed on another thread currently.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2009)

We've registered for the offer, but currently there is a 3 month back log to clear!!! time to think about it

Looks to me like :

Record majority on Tivo as Norm and use the TV via arial with inbuilt freeview to watch another channel or watch tivo recordings

Record on 2 channels Skybox making sure Tivo doesnt interupt (Tivo suggestions off) use the TV arial with inbuilt freeview to watch another channel or watch tivo recordings

Does this sound about right?


----------



## Glen (May 9, 2004)

I've decided to go for it aswell! I have a 2 to 3 week lead time now! I'm quite looking forward to it, as i'm a big watcher of Sky1, FX and Sci-Fi, but i am gonna keep my tivo running for the SD stuff. Star Trek, Stargate SG-1, Bones to name but a few in HD wow! Can't wait! I would of course be bouncing round the room if it were a TiVo controlled one lol!


----------



## DeadKenny (Nov 9, 2002)

&#163;10 a month would be more worth it if we had the kind of HD channels that the US has. 50+ or so HD channels. In particular stuff like A&E, Fox, Cartoon Network, Comedy Central, Sci Fi, HBO. Even their local news stations are in HD! (so you can see those police chases in HD of course ).

We don't even get Sci Fi in SD widescreen in this country!  (yeah I know we have an HD Sci Fi channel, but there's crap all on it. Though it's a poor channel compared to the US version anyway even in SD).

Yeah I know we have a pile of Sky movie and sports HD channels, but I don't count them as proper channels. I mean channels with fresh new TV content. Besides Sky charge extra for those, most of the US channels come as standard (HBO being an exception).


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2009)

Is this just another ploy to get rid of us, threads are about saying the Sky+ HD boxes may not come with scart??

Anyone confirm latest boxes being fitted have scart as a few of us seem to be tempted and have registered for the deal


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

The latest ones don't come with Component, are you thinking of that?


----------



## pauljs (Feb 11, 2001)

New Sky +HD EPG is apparently Imminent, so maybe sometime this year!

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a145703/new-sky-hd-software-imminent.html

I find the comment about their current "world Class EPG" totally laughable


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2009)

Sorry, you're right TCM, must have cross read a thread.....its the component video support being dropped


----------



## DeadKenny (Nov 9, 2002)

pauljs said:


> New Sky +HD EPG is apparently Imminent, so maybe sometime this year!
> 
> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a145703/new-sky-hd-software-imminent.html
> 
> I find the comment about their current "world Class EPG" totally laughable


and, "what we've got now is really going to blow the audience away."

Though sadly it is probably true as the audience is oblivious to the likes of TiVo which came almost a decade earlier 

If it's just an interface revamp and no new features (like proper Wishlist style recording at least), then I can't see how that's a blow away improvement. Unless they're referring to the amazing ability to see the picture and the guide at the same time! Woohoo


----------



## pauljs (Feb 11, 2001)

I lost interest at the mention of Series Links, still can't record every series. I guess their biggest problem with a whole new EPG is making it compatible with what they have now.

Going back to the "world Class" bit, there is a better PVR EPG on every Windows Vista PC


----------



## DanielB (Sep 7, 2007)

Would it be possible to have the TiVo work out the suggestions, and then use something like the pace link to tell the SKY+HD box to record? Will the TiVo get the HD EPG, and can a TiVo be used to control the record on another device?


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

I have also put in the order.
I am wasting my HD tv on poor quality pictures..
Suprised at the moans of the cost for the subs, you do have to remember that TiVo's EPG is &#163;10 a month also, and Sky's EPG is free.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> Suprised at the moans of the cost for the subs, you do have to remember that TiVo's EPG is £10 a month also, and Sky's EPG is free.


But I have a Lifetime Sub on my Tivo so the ongoing monthly cost is nil.

Are you saying you are only going to pay the £10 per month Sky+ fee then and only record BBC HD and C4 HD? Any other option on Sky HD comes to a lot more than £10 per month.

Also you are signing up to use a known buggy and unreliable product that regularly wipes out your recordings.

Of course halving the price of a Sky HD box is an obvious classic move by Uncle Rupey to try to kill off BBC/ITV Freesat


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

DanielB said:


> Would it be possible to have the TiVo work out the suggestions, and then use something like the pace link to tell the SKY+HD box to record? Will the TiVo get the HD EPG, and can a TiVo be used to control the record on another device?


Yes, that's been done
hack for skyHD recording


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> But I have a Lifetime Sub on my Tivo so the ongoing monthly cost is nil.
> 
> Are you saying you are only going to pay the £10 per month Sky+ fee then and only record BBC HD and C4 HD? Any other option on Sky HD comes to a lot more than £10 per month.
> 
> ...


I will be paying for the sports and the HD pack, they currently have applied a 12 month free line rental and 12 month anytime phone deal, so the saving of £180 is paying for the next 12 months, this with the saving of free broadband and the fact that I own the HD box at the end of it, makes it a no brainer.

ITV HD will have no option but to come on board with the sky option soon. Freesat only has 1 part time HD channel BBC HD, the ITV HD is occasionally available with the RED button.

Also you can cut all ties with Sky at the end and you own the equipment at the outset.

If you are not aware, some (Not sure which ones if not all) of the SKY+ box can have a firmware hack to activate the SKY+ recording without subscription, I would think the SkyHD are the same, or will be soon, so in my opinion it is a good deal. 
With SKY winning 5 out of 6 of the premiership football rights, I am looking forward to HD footy in the coming years.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

If you could keep recording with a Sky HD box without any sub on the free channels then I would get one as I do watch the Sky sub channels occasionally for the Dakar Rally and sometimes Le Mans (if not going along in person to the latter). It is the fact that you cannot record as a non subscriber that puts me off doing so.

Whilst you say that a Sky HD box can be made to record without a sub that is still clearly a violation of Sky's terms and conditions.

My preferred option would be a Windows MCE system for which there if an official CAM for watching Sky but unfortunately for the time being Sky refuses to play ball unless Ofcom forces them to do so.:down:


----------



## DanielB (Sep 7, 2007)

6022tivo said:


> I have also put in the order.
> I am wasting my HD tv on poor quality pictures..
> Suprised at the moans of the cost for the subs, you do have to remember that TiVo's EPG is £10 a month also, and Sky's EPG is free.


But with a lifetime sub, you can factor this cost into the cost of buying the unit and hence ignore it from that point forth.


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

DanielB said:


> But with a lifetime sub, you can factor this cost into the cost of buying the unit and hence ignore it from that point forth.


I suppose you could argue selling the lifetime sub tivo (Over £100) and putting that towards the cost of the subscription for the year.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Either having HD is worth it to you or it isn't. Everyone will have a different set of channels they watch, a different value attached to picture quality, a different TV, and different personal financial circumstances, so there's little point in arguing about it.

If I could physically get it, I'd have it in a flash as I have a big TV and I love the quality. Pete, who hasn't even sprung for a wide-screen conventional TV yet, will clearly have a different opinion. We're both right!


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> Either having HD is worth it to you or it isn't. Everyone will have a different set of channels they watch, a different value attached to picture quality, a different TV, and different personal financial circumstances, so there's little point in arguing about it.
> 
> If I could physically get it, I'd have it in a flash as I have a big TV and I love the quality. Pete, who hasn't even sprung for a wide-screen conventional TV yet, will clearly have a different opinion. We're both right!


For once TCM I find I am fully in agreement with you.

I therefore assume that you either eagerly await the arrival of the three new Freeview HD channels in due course and/or any decision by the BBC, ITV, C4 etc to make available true HD versions of their broadcasts for download.

Meanwhile I assume you can spend the money you would have spent on a Sky sub on purchasing a steady stream of films on Blu Ray disks. Not of course that this will help you at all with watching live Rugby in HD though.

Being realistic I will be 46 in a few days time so no doubt the hardening of my Corneas means I am already getting past the age where I am likely to derive the maximum benefits of HD viewing. Also even if that is not the case I still think it would be a short term great excitement and then hardly be noticed at all after a while. Whereas use of Tivo has been a permanent revolution that has changed my viewing habits forever.

By the way how did you come to buy a house that would not give you Sky HD reception? Can I infer from this that it is your other half who is allowed the final say over such matters in your life?


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

The sacrifices we make for the children's education Pete!

In practice once Freeview HD comes out, it will only be live sport which is an issue. For films there's Blu-ray and for TV series there are, er, other methods. I use said other methods to download UK stuff too - eg Time Team, Survivors.

I can get live sport via broadband, which is naff pic quality, but better than nothing. Most weekends I actually go to the games anyway.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> for TV series there are, er, other methods. I use said other methods to download UK stuff too - eg Time Team, Survivors.


But for how much longer? Have you not yet received one of those solicitors letters asking for a suitable payment for the royalty value of all the stuff you have illegally downloaded and then passed on to others via P2P (i.e. uploaded in their terms, which is regarded as being more serious than illegal download copyright violations).

So in the longer run I think your only hope is the arrival of faster wired and wireless connections that may allow you to watch Sky HD stuff legally again. When is your local exchange scheduled to be upgraded to BT's 21st Century Network and how much faster will it make your broadband connection?

As to the education of the children it sounds like you are reliant on moving in to the catchment area of one of the best state schools (possibly Grammar?) rather than splashing out on private school fees then?


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

Pete77 said:


> As to the education of the children it sounds like you are reliant on moving in to the catchment area of one of the best state schools (possibly Grammar?) rather than splashing out on private school fees then?


With all due respect Pete, where TCM chooses to educate his children is none of your business, and it's extremely rude to ask about it and make assumptions.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

britcub said:


> With all due respect Pete, where TCM chooses to educate his children is none of your business, and it's extremely rude to ask about it and make assumptions.


If TCM didn't want us to know the reason for his house move to a non Sky reception friendly location being largely due to wanting to be in a favourable catchment area for the right schools then I am sure he wouldn't have told us.

He would just have said something like SWMBO particularly fell in love with this very pretty house or something similar.

With respect britcub it is actually for TCM and not for you to take exception to my comments about his schooling arrangements if he actually objects to my making such comments.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> But for how much longer? Have you not yet received one of those solicitors letters asking for a suitable payment for the royalty value of all the stuff you have illegally downloaded and then passed on to others via P2P (i.e. uploaded in their terms, which is regarded as being more serious than illegal download copyright violations).


I don't P2P films, software or music, and no-one is currently that bothered about TV. There are only tiny numbers of cases being brought, and they are all for warez, music CDs or DVD RIPs, bought by their respective software federations. As there is no direct financial loss to a US broadcaster they have no incentive to take UK people to court, and while Sky might argue that they do have a financial loss, there is no copyright violation against them. Sky should be more worried about the myriad of sites which rebroadcast the live Sky stream; any live football game can be watched for free if you've a mind t.



> So in the longer run I think your only hope is the arrival of faster wired and wireless connections that may allow you to watch Sky HD stuff legally again. When is your local exchange scheduled to be upgraded to BT's 21st Century Network and how much faster will it make your broadband connection?


Not for a while, although I get a 7,616K downlink speed already. I can pull down HD in better than real time quite often.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> Not for a while, although I get a 7,616K downlink speed already. I can pull down HD in better than real time quite often.


You ought to get 14,000k or more under ADSL2+ then.

Plusnet have been trying to entice me with a very cheap Broadband Your Way Option 1 deal for one year with 10Gb per month and unlimited downloads from midnight to 8am. Transferring phone line rental across is part of the deal.

After allowing for the phone line rental that I pay anyway and cashbacks and discounts for the first 3 months it comes out at an average of £3.50 per month for the broadband in the whole of the first year. However unfortunately I seem to use about 15Gb per month these days just watching some live streaming stuff and using an internet radio and although I expect I could moderate my use I suspect that some of my streaming viewing would be throttled before I even got near the 10Gb with Plusnet. Its still a very cheap deal for a non LLU exchange area for broadband though. Far cheaper than TalkTalk, Sky or Tiscali on this non LLU exchange. It also includes free evening and weekend calls too.

However as I am based at home 7 days a week and broadband is a key essential lifeline I eventually decided that cheapest is not always best.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

I'm on PlusNet BBYW, and they don't throttle, they just charge you and extra &#163;1.50 per Gb (or whatever it is).


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> I'm on PlusNet BBYW, and they don't throttle, they just charge you and extra £1.50 per Gb (or whatever it is).


I suspect you are on Option 3 or Option 4 though where throttling is much less, especially overnight when there is no download quantity limit. Throttling is a lot greater on Option 1.

See www.kitz.co.uk/isp/plusnet_shaping.htm for more info on this topic.

I might still give it a try were this not a one year contract with big penalties for early termination.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

I only P2P midnight to 8am, so I've not noticed any shaping.


----------



## dunkan (Sep 14, 2008)

With all the talk of HD and what's available, has no one else experienced an upscaling PVR? My Panny upscales SD TV to 1080p - /almost/ as good as the Freesat HD picture - certainly far, far better than 'normal' TV. Upscaling is surely one more thing a new Tivo will need...


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

There's a lot of BS about upscaling. If you have a 1080 TV and feed it digitally with an SD (576) signal it will always be upscaled (unless you're watching a little picture floating in the middle!). The question is, will it be upscaled by the TV or upscaled by the STB. Which is better depends entirely on which one happens to have the best electronics. It's not automatically best to have the STB do it.


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

TCM2007 said:


> There's a lot of BS about upscaling. If you have a 1080 TV and feed it digitally with an SD (576) signal it will always be upscaled (unless you're watching a little picture floating in the middle!). The question is, will it be upscaled by the TV or upscaled by the STB. Which is better depends entirely on which one happens to have the best electronics. It's not automatically best to have the STB do it.


If you have a Pioneer 9th gen or Fujitsu xha58 or better you will probably (99%) be better off letting the screen upscale it.

An expensive screen (Pioneer 9th gen or Fujitsu xha58 or B&O or Aviamo or Planar/ Vidikron) usually has hundreds or even thousands of pounds worth of upscaling equipment in it, whereas 99% of STBs use the cheapest possible upscaler, maybe 70 quids worth at best.

External scalers (e.g. Lumagen and DVDO) cost around the £700 to 4 grand mark. Some of these are built into the pricier (above 1k) AV processor amps.

If you have a cheap TV than you will just have to see if it upscales better than your STB by trial and error.


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

Pete77 said:


> With respect britcub it is actually for TCM and not for you to take exception to my comments about his schooling arrangements if he actually objects to my making such comments.


The point was about your rudeness and your constant floating into fantasy worlds with your uninformed assumptions, Pete. But I should have realised that you are always right and can't accept criticism, as your record speaks for itself.

I'm well aware that TCM doesn't need me to defend him - he does an excellent job of putting you in your place almost daily.


----------



## iankb (Oct 9, 2000)

Vista MCE happily upscales SD broadcasts and recordings to my full-HD TV over HDMI.

I'm extremely impressed by the results, though whether it is VMC, the video drivers, or the video card that does this, I can't say. Probably not the former, since it doesn't seem to consume much CPU.

I tried connecting my TiVo to the TV (before the TiVo broke), and the result was, in comparison, pretty appalling. 'Though that's what you might expect with a SCART connection.


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

cyril said:


> If you have a cheap TV than you will just have to see if it upscales better than your STB by trial and error.


Any recommendations on what material to test it on? I've a Pioneer 4280 (8th gen - 1024x768 resolution so it will ALWAYS be doing some scaling internally) but my Sony amp will scale (2400ES), my blu ray player will scale and the Humax HDR will scale. At the moment I run the blu ray at 1080 and let the Pioneer scale down from that.


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

B33K34 said:


> Any recommendations on what material to test it on? I've a Pioneer 4280 (8th gen - 1024x768 resolution so it will ALWAYS be doing some scaling internally) but my Sony amp will scale (2400ES), my blu ray player will scale and the Humax HDR will scale. At the moment I run the blu ray at 1080 and let the Pioneer scale down from that.


I'd start with poorer quality sources (e.g. ITV SD on Sky) as the difference is more noticeable.
Any fast moving sports and any dark movie where detail can be easily lost.


----------



## DeadKenny (Nov 9, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> I suspect you are on Option 3 or Option 4 though where throttling is much less, especially overnight when there is no download quantity limit. Throttling is a lot greater on Option 1.
> 
> See www.kitz.co.uk/isp/plusnet_shaping.htm for more info on this topic.
> 
> I might still give it a try were this not a one year contract with big penalties for early termination.


I stuck with the old Premier package rather the falling for BBYW as Premier has a much longer off-peak (12am to 4pm instead of 12am to 8am). Throttling can occur outside of this (on P2P only generally) but doesn't count towards peak limits, unlike with BBYW.

For no throttling the only option is BBYW Pro, but there are other limits instead.

I'm happy enough with relatively unrestricted 12am to 4pm though, and at least it's a reliable connection unlike god-awful NTL (now Virgin Media), and Plus are at least open about their throttling etc. I prefer openness to blanket denial (NTL again and others).


----------

