# Should I stay or should I go now..



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

I love my tivo...
Only in a Sky area now, am very happy with the Broadband and phone package they have given me..

With a SKY HD box now available to pick up in Tesco for £195 (not online as you only get a phone number and pack), I am so tempted to drift acros to the dark side again..

A couple of friends have just brought intergrated freeview TV's and the picture quality is so much better then the tivo... And even my pioneer has good freeview......

Really don't know what to do.. I hated the sky+ interface last time i tried (About 5 years ago.. 17min bug time).. I hope it has improved, and the HD for BBC is worth it????


----------



## julian_browne (Nov 2, 2008)

hello
just gone down that route
and as you said sky interface is bad compared to sky
so added tivo as well and i now use both 
mainly tivo for tv
and sky to tape as it has the twin turners 
regards


----------



## gadgetgaz (Dec 31, 2002)

I have just cancelled my tivo prescription that I have had since the very beginning.

It's a sad week for me. I have built a home theatre pc using vista media center and twin freeview tuners.

Season passes, wishlists and full guide data are all working great. I also bought a media extender for the other room and all is working just as I want it to. 

I guess I only need to worry about how reliable the system will be as its windows based.

Good luck with your decision.


----------



## pauljs (Feb 11, 2001)

gadgetgaz said:


> I have built a home theatre pc using vista media center and twin freeview tuners.
> 
> I guess I only need to worry about how reliable the system will be as its windows based.
> 
> Good luck with your decision.


I use Vista MCE and it is a good freeview replacement for TiVo. Finallly made it quiet. Never managed to get it to sleep and wake up in one piece. So unfortunately always on is the only way at the moment. Would prefer it if it was less CPU hungry

Still use Tivo for the Sky encrypted stuff, I had a lifetime sub since day one


----------



## pauljs (Feb 11, 2001)

julian_browne said:


> hello
> just gone down that route
> and as you said sky interface is bad compared to sky
> so added tivo as well and i now use both
> ...


I still can't believe Sky haven't improved their Sky + UI. It's not exactly rocket science. I assume they think their customers may be confused 

I have resisted Sky + for years, almost tempted to take the Tesco walk away Sky HD offer. Not going to wait in for a Sky Goon to plug it in for me. That would be like getting someone in to install my Kettle.


----------



## Bakdraft (Dec 21, 2002)

6022tivo said:


> I love my tivo...
> 
> Really don't know what to do.. I hated the sky+ interface last time i tried (About 5 years ago.. 17min bug time).. I hope it has improved, and the HD for BBC is worth it????


Hi 6022tivo... long time no type!

Don't give up:

What will the forum do without you valued contributions! I remember you starting and we had the same post count for a while.... but your valued contribution has not gone un-noticed!
I have had Sky HD from the begining but I still kept Tivo and really truthfully we use Tivo whenever we can. we hate the stupid sky interface, it drives me nuts. Personally as I have the same 505XDE as you, the HD is not a big improvement over the vbr - yes there is a difference but it is small, most people say what a great HD picture when they see the HD logo on the screen little realising it is being passed through Tivo and thus it is still SD. I actually am thinking of cancelling HD.

If you ever want to come and see for yourself first based on me having the same TV, Tivo and Sky HD, you are welcome anytime - I know we live not that far apart - just send me a PM. it may help you make up your mind

Dave


----------



## tonywalk (Sep 10, 2002)

I've got Sky HD and 2 Tivos

Tivo 1 (connected to the HD box) still gets trusted with recording the important stuff. The Sky Plus element of the HD box only gets trusted with stuff I actually want to watch in HD and as a third tuner to cope with program clashes (I work shifts so this does happen). I'll usually still set one of the Tivos as a backup if I can.

There are rumours that a completely revised interface for the HD boxes is in the labs somewhere in the bowels of Sky HQ but they keep shoving out the old rubbish for now - even software updates that cause sound dropouts - they dropped that update but I had to force a firmware download to get back to the previous version. Now if only my HD box would stop doing that on the HD channels.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

I've just upgraded my two Sky boxes to 750Gb disks. SHMBO is now in telly heaven, brownie points for me!


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> I've just upgraded my two Sky boxes to 750Gb disks. SHMBO is now in telly heaven, brownie points for me!


Yeah, but I bet you get a slap when she sits down to watch corrie and it says FAILED - Unknown reason Code 9??

I am going to stick with tivo for now... I keep getting flashbacks to Christmas Day when we as a family all sat down to watch a movie that got stuck at 17mins.. (Good old 17min bug).. It kinda spoilt a good day..


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> Yeah, but I bet you get a slap when she sits down to watch corrie and it says FAILED - Unknown reason Code 9??


Ahhh worry ye not. She'll be alright!! (Fingers Firmly Crossed)


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

I have 4 SkyHD boxes, 3 Foxsat HDRs and 3 media centres.

Still have to use a TiVo as a backup for SWMBO's programmes as that's most reliable!


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

cyril said:


> I have 4 SkyHD boxes, 3 Foxsat HDRs and 3 media centres.


Never being one to do things by halves when it comes to PVRs.

But which of these other three is the most reliable given that we know from your comments below that all of them are still less reliable than Tivo (which I still find to be be not as reliable as I would ideally like it to be from time to time)



> Still have to use a TiVo as a backup for SWMBO's programmes as that's most reliable!


Out of interest how many of you live in this house. Is it still just the two of you.

And how many cars do you own.


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

Depends on what you mean by reliable.

Media Centre is reasonable and reliable so long as you don't muck around with the PC, however I'm always installing stuff on it, so get the odd blue screen, maybe once a month.

SkyHD on average crashes every 3 or 4 weeks, and loses the odd programme every week for no reason.

The Foxsat HDRs haven't crashed yet, but have failed to record the odd programme, maybe one failure a week.

Series links are probably about the same in reliability between the Foxsat and SkyHD.

So Media Centre, Foxsat and SKyHD are all about as reliable as each other, though the Media Centre season passes are a bit better than either of the others overall. Unsurprisingly individual Sky-owned HD channels have better series link info on SkyHD than TiVo (and perhaps media centre), though TiVo's SKYHD EPG and season passes are overall better than SkyHD's EPG of course.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

So no need to give up on Tivo just yet for those of us prepared to forgo the dubious benefits of viewing in HD it appears.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> So no need to give up on Tivo just yet for those of us prepared to forgo the dubious benefits of viewing in HD it appears.


"Dubious"? I thought the "is HD a con" argument was finally over.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> "Dubious"? I thought the "is HD a con" argument was finally over.


From what I have seen from the posts of those who have got HD the argument is indeed over because they simply accept it is a con and spend most of their time still recording SD programs on their Tivos.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> From what I have seen from the posts of those who have got HD the argument is indeed over because they simply accept it is a con and spend most of their time still recording SD programs on their Tivos.


Hmm nope! I'd have to disagree with you there. I think that the HD transmissions are excellent (where of course they have been filmed in HD). HD TV is awesome


----------



## Pugwash (May 23, 2003)

Agreed. Survivors was very much better in HD and the audio is nice! I'm completely switched to Freesat but keep the TiVo recording the Freeview for the girlfriend's dubious choice of soaps!


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

There is no con in HD TV. I watch a great deal of it and it enhances TV and movies massively. When I had SkyHD I always watched anything transmitted in HD through that rather than an SD device.


----------



## Ian_m (Jan 9, 2001)

Pete77 said:


> From what I have seen from the posts of those who have got HD the argument is indeed over because they simply accept it is a con and spend most of their time still recording SD programs on their Tivos.


Oh no not again, spoken as one of those people who don't have a proper HD TV, don't have proper HD sources, have never watched a Blu-ray movie on a proper HD set and are still Ludditely ignorantly happy about Ye Olde SD pictures.....

I know a couple of people who were like this, but once they got their first "shot" of HD can't get enough now via either the Humax FreeSat PVR or even the wallet emptying SkyHD service. Mind you all of them peeved off about the cost of Blu-ray disks.....


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

I'm completely convinced by HD and now that subscription a sub free HD PVR is available I'm on the verge of kicking out Tivo. Tivo recordings, even on my hacked Tivo with the usual enhancements look very very soft on my 42" plasma.

HOWEVER, having had a good 15 minute play with the Foxsat HDR today I'd agree it's still a long way behind the >8 (!?) year old Tivo interface. It takes more button presses (and more buttons on the remote) to do simple things and search remains very poorly implemented compared to Tivo. The lack of auto-deletion and 10second plus time to delete individual recordings via the file manager was also disappointing. Tivo's ability to build a library of 'must keeps' with 'most recent' episodes of other series is great after a holiday and means most of the time it can be left just to do it's stuff. 

Cyril (or other owners) - can you offer any other advice/comments (all the older posts seem to have disappeared on this forum_


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

B33K34 said:


> I'm completely convinced by HD and now that subscription a sub free HD PVR is available I'm on the verge of kicking out Tivo. Tivo recordings, even on my hacked Tivo with the usual enhancements look very very soft on my 42" plasma.
> 
> HOWEVER, having had a good 15 minute play with the Foxsat HDR today I'd agree it's still a long way behind the >8 (!?) year old Tivo interface. It takes more button presses (and more buttons on the remote) to do simple things and search remains very poorly implemented compared to Tivo. The lack of auto-deletion and 10second plus time to delete individual recordings via the file manager was also disappointing. Tivo's ability to build a library of 'must keeps' with 'most recent' episodes of other series is great after a holiday and means most of the time it can be left just to do it's stuff.
> 
> Cyril (or other owners) - can you offer any other advice/comments (all the older posts seem to have disappeared on this forum_


Yes the Foxsat HDR is infuriating PVR wise - it's no better overall than SkyHD after all. 
You can't even delete anything if a programme is recording!!!!
Hopefully auto-deletion and other features will come in an an update soon.

If it bugs you why not try the Vista TV pack with 4 satellite and 4 freeview tuners in one box with several TB of space, and use dvbviewer or something like Media Portal for BBCHD and ITVHD? Probably cost less than £600 to put together now.

I love HD, and now 80% of my viewing is SkyHD, PC HD via Fortec, HD-DVD, Blu-ray, FoxsatHDR. This will grow to 90% of my viewing by next year and 95% the year after that I reckon. TiVo is now only used as backup and recording the odd (non-Freeview) Sky SD programme.
However their ease of use sucks compared to TiVo.

Going HD is actually cheaper than SD in some instances: in high cost areas. To get a lounge thats 24sq foot bigger so I can sit further from my TV to watch SD at optimal viewing distance it would cost me an extra £16k!


----------



## Ashley (Apr 20, 2002)

B33K34 said:


> (all the older posts seem to have disappeared on this forum_


Have you checked the settings in 'Display Options' at the bottom of the page?

You might have it set to show only the last week's postings?


----------



## Pugwash (May 23, 2003)

Ashley said:


> Have you checked the settings in 'Display Options' at the bottom of the page?
> 
> You might have it set to show only the last week's postings?


The forum default has changed to today's posts only. I had the same problem. Override it in User CP.


----------



## AENG (Dec 20, 2000)

cyril said:


> Yes the Foxsat HDR is infuriating PVR wise.
> You can't even delete anything if a programme is recording!!!!
> Hopefully auto-deletion and other features will come in an an update soon.
> 
> I love HD. ...........[but] ease of use sucks compared to TiVo.


I'm with Cyril on this. I've compromised by leaving one of my TiVo's on Freeview, for now at least, and retaining the other just as a standby and to replay archive stuff I've got on it. I just hope that more HD (e.g. Channel 4?) will find its way to Freesat sooner rather than later.

Alan


----------



## Pugwash (May 23, 2003)

I imagine they pushed for production to fill a large hole in the market before they'd done as much usability testing as they should. I agree that the interface lacks in many ways, but whilst watching playback I have no complaints.


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Well I borrowed a Freesat HD box for the Everton Match on ITV in the week....
This HD match turned it for me..

The &#163;49 SKY HD offer was taken up by me today..

I managed to negotiate 12 months Free Sky Line Rental and 12 months Anytime call package, this is nearly &#163;200 for the year, so happy to stay with sky..

I may use the tivo with the skyHD on scart, but watching HD footy the other night on my 50" Pioneer, well I can't understand why I haven't jumped before.

I will keep popping in from time to time.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> Well I borrowed a Freesat HD box for the Everton Match on ITV in the week....
> 
> This HD match turned it for me..


So you watched an HD football match on ITV HD, a channel that can only be received using a BBC/ITV Freesat box.



> The £49 SKY HD offer was taken up by me today..


You then ordered a Sky HD box which cannot receive ITV HD for the foreseeable future as it cannot handle the format in which the channel is broadcast.

Have I missed something somewhere and in particular why you did not order a Freesat box if watching HD football matches on satellite is what is most important to you.


----------



## mutant_matt2 (Dec 16, 2008)

Pete, my thoughts exactly!  I too watched the FA Cup replay match on Wednesday night via my Freesat decoder in my 50" Panny TV. I have to say, IMO, Football really is the killer app for HD, it just makes going back to SD Football look absolutely pants! I am hoping the Rugby this afternoon will look similarly fantastic!  

I am still thinking about buying a Freesat HDR for recording just the HD stuff on BBC/ITV HD, but am wary of the bugs list right now. I am waiting to see if the Panasonic rumored Freesat/Blu-Ray/Hard Disc recording thing materialises, and/or if the Humax will ever get it's bugs, and lack of features sorted out. I really don't want to give Sky *more* money every month, and wouldn't have ITV HD (as Pete said), but would get a little HD programming on C4HD instead. Everyone I know with SkyHD thinks the lack of content makes the cost a rip off, and the picture quality of the box leaves a lot to be desired, IMHO.

Anyway, I foresee a mix of TiVo + <other HD solution> for some years to come, hopefully leaning towards Freesat in the end, once HD programming becomes the majority (no time soon though!  ).

Matt.


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> So you watched an HD football match on ITV HD, a channel that can only be received using a BBC/ITV Freesat box.
> 
> You then ordered a Sky HD box which cannot receive ITV HD for the foreseeable future as it cannot handle the format in which the channel is broadcast.
> 
> Have I missed something somewhere and in particular why you did not order a Freesat box if watching HD football matches on satellite is what is most important to you.


The point was that after watching a HD match it has sold me to a HD receiver.
Freesat only has two part time HD transmissions, BBC HD which is a joke with regards to content, and a handfull of FA Cup matches on ITV HD..

As a sky subscriber anyway, getting Skyhd over freesat is a no brainer.. A freesat hard disk receiver is nearly £300, a lot more if you want the installation. Sky HD + is less than £100. And Sky broadcast over 100 Premiership matches a year, and have won more rights..


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Installed last Thursday and am very happy....

Sad to unplug mytivo...

I have to say it has improved since the last time I tried. Set up all the series links I am after (Last time some programs did not have links).

Loads of recordings at the same time, and no failed recordings.
Have the tv link/sky eye setup to the bedroom that works great.
The fast forward and rewind is perfect on my box, the last sky+ I used it was shocking, jumping, juddering, slow to react.
Nice to watch something whilst it recording something else.

HD watching is a pleasure, it really is better than imagined (Maybe my TV?)

And the SD is better than the tivo.
So far I am made up....

Check the other forum out av.. Make sure you get a good box, certain makes at the moment are a NO NO... Have a few major glitches..

Watching Everton today was stunning in HD and Dolby 5.1. Nearly as stunning as the Liverpool result..


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> Nice to watch something whilst it recording something else.


Doesn't a UK Series 1 Tivo do that then and hasn't it managed to do it for more than 8 years now?

Also what is the point of your horribile mytivo.co.uk link to the Sky HD site.:down::down::down:


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> Doesn't a UK Series 1 Tivo do that then and hasn't it managed to do it for more than 8 years now?
> 
> Also what is the point of your horribile mytivo.co.uk link to the Sky HD site.:down::down::down:


I actually meant watching something else live at the same time as recording something else. I was getting annoyed with watching a film or something and getting the tivo pop up about changing channels and having to make the decision to carry on or let it change... Annoying.

Ermmm, the www.mytivo.co.uk link used to point to this community, but as a protest to tivo not having a new UK unit... I am pointing it to a competitor.. Well not even a competitor as tivo are not doing anything to compete... The banner says it all.

There has never been a better time for a tivo freesat recorder than at the moment.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> I was getting annoyed with watching a film or something and getting the tivo pop up about changing channels and having to make the decision to carry on or let it change...


But this only happens if you make the cardinal mistake of watching Live Tv.



> There has never been a better time for a tivo freesat recorder than at the moment.


The horrible dilemma one is now faced with thanks to Ofcom's incompetence is either a Sky HD box that will not even record FTA channels if you do not carrying on paying Sky a sub or a BBC/ITV Freesat box that cannot record C4 HD or any pay HD channels, even if you are willing to pay a sub for these channels in the odd month or two a year.

I guess for those still paying Tivo monthly it starts to become more of a no brainer as for the same money they can also record in HD. For those of us with Tivo Lifetime subs the case for remaining loyal to Tivo remains stronger.

Regarding HD I still feel that its kind of a 9 day wonder and then the old issue of whether what you are actually watching is worth watching (which Tivo still does best with its Wishlists and SPs that last for years) resumes its normal place back at the top of the heap..........................


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> But this only happens if you make the cardinal mistake of watching Live Tv.
> 
> The horrible dilemma one is now faced with thanks to Ofcom's incompetence is either a Sky HD box that will not even record FTA channels if you do not carrying on paying Sky a sub or a BBC/ITV Freesat box that cannot record C4 HD or any pay HD channels, even if you are willing to pay a sub for these channels in the odd month or two a year.
> 
> ...


It is all up in the air.. The cash saved on the cost of the SkyHD box is paying part of the subscription.
The freesat HD recorder is well over £200 (I think). The fact it can not decode any sky stuff is poor, and ofcom should really start looking at this.
I have seen cheaper HD recorders in Maplin. I think I saw a sat HD received that had a USB for a external HDD for PVR for around £100. Problem with this is that it will not record or probably receive ITV HD as it is only activated with the red button at the moment..

I agree it is all up in the air.

I actually think the series linking works fine, just as well as tivo's season passes (Although I have to remember to set up again when a new season of something starts). And I never really used wishlists


----------



## kitschcamp (May 18, 2001)

6022tivo said:


> The fact it can not decode any sky stuff is poor, and ofcom should really start looking at this.


If anything, the CAM situation seems to be getting worse not better. More and more countries satellite services are using NDS for encryption. Countries such as Sweden have one operator with NDS so you can only use their boxes, and the second uses Conax but the card is tied to a specific box, so you can't select your own box and use a CAM. Sky got away with it, and now other countries are doing the same.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2009)

Sky+HD all installed for a couple of weeks now, all channels look remarkedly better than the thro Tivo, plus the mode 0 flashing was starting to annoy me, but still use Tivo to record the wifes non essential crime viewing thro the night and Sky for the quality programmes. The Sky box could really start off with a bigger Hard Drive as 160 is too small for HD recording of linked series and banking them up. I think at the moment theres still cause for both


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Wilf said:


> Sky+HD all installed for a couple of weeks now, all channels look remarkedly better than the thro Tivo, plus the mode 0 flashing was starting to annoy me, but still use Tivo to record the wifes non essential crime viewing thro the night and Sky for the quality programmes. The Sky box could really start off with a bigger Hard Drive as 160 is too small for HD recording of linked series and banking them up. I think at the moment theres still cause for both


The SkyHD hard drive is actually 300gb, but 140gb is reserved for anytime recordings...

TVGUIDE, then RED Button.

Anytime are similar to tivo's Suggestions, SkyHD records these streams when both tuners are not in use, and at night.

Sad thing about anytime is that it can record anytime suggestions of stuff you don't subscribe to so you can't view them unless you upgrade to that channel.

Also, you can turn the anytime feature off, but it does not free the HDD space for you recording.. :down:

You can stick a larger hard drive in, say 1tb, it will always reserve 140gb for anytime if it is used or not..

Glad you are enjoying HD.. I am..:up::up::up:


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> You can stick a larger hard drive in, say 1tb, it will always reserve 140gb for anytime if it is used or not..


Seems I need to persuade my brother in law of the huge increase in recording capacity (i.e. over six fold) to be gained by upgrading their very recent Sky HD unit to a 1TB drive then.


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> Seems I need to persuade my brother in law of the huge increase in recording capacity (i.e. over six fold) to be gained by upgrading their very recent Sky HD unit to a 1TB drive then.


I only ever had a 120gb in my tivo and had no problems.

We have to remember that SKY records the data stream, so programs use less space then tivo (Apart from HD stuff). Also, the tivo HDD is program storage only, no operating system..

I had a bad time with a sky+ HDD upgrade and the 17 min bug years ago. I have also been reading a avforum thread regarding blank HDDs in the morning, and they may be related to certain HDD upgrades.. SO I am sticking with the stock drive, at least until the new EPG/OS FW is downloaded in a week or two (HD boxes only)


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

6022tivo said:


> I only ever had a 120gb in my tivo and had no problems.
> 
> We have to remember that SKY records the data stream, so programs use less space then tivo (Apart from HD stuff). Also, the tivo HDD is program storage only, no operating system..
> 
> I had a bad time with a sky+ HDD upgrade and the 17 min bug years ago. I have also been reading a avforum thread regarding blank HDDs in the morning, and they may be related to certain HDD upgrades.. SO I am sticking with the stock drive, at least until the new EPG/OS FW is downloaded in a week or two (HD boxes only)


Sadly the Sky+ hard drive wiping is not limited to upgraded drives.
I've had stock 300gb drives wiped a couple of times, a 500GB wiped once and a 1TB partial wipe once over the 3 and a half years.

I think that if the hard drive encounters a file problem, instead of trying to fix it like TiVo, Sky+ decides to erase the whole disk!!
So bigger disks are more likely to be wiped only because there is more data and so more chance of something to go wrong.

So if you are not worried about warranties just go ahead and upgrade to 1TB. It's only ever so slightly more risky.
In addition the extra space means you can record the repeat showing so if you get a random 'Failed Rec' you still get your programme (unless you are unlucky to get more than one Failed Rec).


----------



## jwestoby (Oct 3, 2001)

Apologies to The Sound of Music.

I was going to start a new thread to say farewell, then I saw this.

After many, many happy years I am selling my TiVo (on eBay).

I upgraded to a HD TV and although I didn't have a HD sub/channel it just seemed a retrograde step to connect via SCART.

Instead I now use MediaPortal and 4TheRecord which gices similar capability to TiVo but also means I can have multiple tuners (currently have three tuners) and a fully digital stream from signal to screen.

After a year of familiarisation and with the latest release it is now possible to replace TiVo without my other half ripping my arm of and beating me to death with it!

Oh, the NDS is a slight non-issue as using the Predator/TRex CAM means I can get Sky directly too.

However, don't think ANY of this makes me happy.

TiVo is/was a great system and if they were still in the UK it would have been a MUCH harder decision.

So, thanks to EVERYONE who helped me when I was learning, suggesting I do the daft things of upgrading memory and bigger disks.

The help was HUGELY appreciated and still is - this is a GREAT community.


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

jwestoby said:


> Oh, the NDS is a slight non-issue as using the Predator/TRex CAM means I can get Sky directly too.
> 
> The help was HUGELY appreciated and still is - this is a GREAT community.


I was also thinking about this route but with Sky in the process of issuing new Sky Viewing cards, I was worried about how these would work in Dreamboxes or Cams..?


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

FAO Pete77

I know I praised ITV HD the other day via the Freesat box I borrowed, but people who had the new Firmware for the New Sky Operating system guide today, have been watching ITV HD on the SKYHD boxes tonight. I suppose as it is free to air, sky have found a way of adding to the planner via the new sky update.










http://www.avforums.com/forums/sky-hd/955223-itvhd-skyhd.html


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

I expect Sky would have been privately intimating to ITV that they would be likely to enter in to some sort of costly legal action if they didn't play ball.

Also how can it possibly be in ITV's long term interests to stop Sky HD customers viewing this channel when they have enough trouble as it is maintaining viewer numbers and hence advertising revenues. If the BBC had taken a priggish attitude that their service should only be watchable by BBC/ITV Freesat boxes it would have been far more understandable.

I expect ITV were relying on Sky's notoriously slow software development process to give Freesat an initial exclusive but it suits them perfectly well for Sky's customers to come in to the fold at this stage.............

I will consider acquiring a Sky HD box as and when they drop the £10 per month recording charge for FTA HD channels.


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> I expect Sky would have been privately intimating to ITV that they would be likely to enter in to some sort of costly legal action if they didn't play ball.
> 
> Also how can it possibly be in ITV's long term interests to stop Sky HD customers viewing this channel when they have enough trouble as it is maintaining viewer numbers and hence advertising revenues. If the BBC had taken a priggish attitude that their service should only be watchable by BBC/ITV Freesat boxes it would have been far more understandable.
> 
> ...


I suspect you are correct about Sky being slow. ITV can only alter the method of broadcast, and update freesat boxes accordingly I suppose. But then Sky will update the EPG again... I think it may be a cat and mouse game..

I know it is annoying that the Sky + box can not record without a subscription, but to be fair Tivo can only do manual records like the sky+ boxes without a subscription also.
Have you considered signing up to sky at the basic package and getting Free boradband?? So you cost savings on the Broadband would pay for the minimum sub and recording.

Also, (Don't know about the HD boxes) but a certain model/make of standard Sky+ box can have a firmware hack to enable the Recording functionality without a subscription you know..


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> I suspect you are correct about Sky being slow. ITV can only alter the method of broadcast, and update freesat boxes accordingly I suppose. But then Sky will update the EPG again... I think it may be a cat and mouse game..


I don't think ITV have any intention whatsoever of altering their broadcast format to stop Sky HD boxes from receiving it now. It was just an attention grabber for the initial launch of BBC/ITV Freesat for it be only available on a BBC/ITV Freesat box. After all the ITV HD EPG information will clearly only now be available on Sky HD with ITV's commercial agreement as it is their copyright.



> I know it is annoying that the Sky + box can not record without a subscription, but to be fair Tivo can only do manual records like the sky+ boxes without a subscription


75 months of Lifetime Sub at £200 = £2.67 per month. Also the marginal cost from now on to me on Tivo is zero. So the £10 per month with Sky is on top of that.



> Have you considered signing up to sky at the basic package and getting Free boradband?? So you cost savings on the Broadband would pay for the minimum sub and recording.


Some of us live in the countryside with no hope ever of Sky/Easynet LLU enabling my local exchange. Sky still charge a ridiculous £17 per month for their Sky Connect broadband on an exchange like mine. I have put it to Sky (to Jeremy Darroch the CEO) that they need to sell their BT broadband rebadge at a much lower price to people who also take tv services from them but they simply dodge the question and answer my email in their high level customer complaints department in meaningless terms.

Also 2Gb per month on their "free broadband" would be inadequate for me. I am using around 15Gb per month as I am based at home all the time.



> Also, (Don't know about the HD boxes) but a certain model/make of standard Sky+ box can have a firmware hack to enable the Recording functionality without a subscription you know..


But isn't that a bit like you saying that you know a really good way to fare dodge on the trains.


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> I don't think ITV have any intention whatsoever of altering their broadcast format to stop Sky HD boxes from receiving it now. It was just an attention grabber for the initial launch of BBC/ITV Freesat for it be only available on a BBC/ITV Freesat box. After all the ITV HD EPG information will clearly only now be available on Sky HD with ITV's commercial agreement as it is their copyright.
> 
> 75 months of Lifetime Sub at £200 = £2.67 per month. Also the marginal cost from now on to me on Tivo is zero. So the £10 per month with Sky is on top of that.
> 
> ...


All good points pete, I have been told they don;t police the 2gb limit on the free package, but as you may not be part of easynets llu, the rebadged BT package is expensive.

TiVo have moved away from Lifetime as policy, we are lucky in the UK, but again, I see your point re your current lifetime..

Anyway.. Off to bed. Night.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> All good points pete, I have been told they don't police the 2gb limit on the free package


I can't believe that is true as every other ISP polices their bandwidth allowances assiduously. After all by policing it they can force you to upgrade to a paying package in Sky's case. They may allow you to go over the limit now and again but if you breach the limit every month I am sure they take action.



> but as you may not be part of easynets llu, the rebadged BT package is expensive.


Read My Lips. I Am Not Part Of the Easynet LLU area. They only have equipment in 1100 exchanges. I am on one of the 4,400 other exchanges they have no equipment in. There are thousands of telephone exchanges with a smaller number of customers and with no fibre to the exchange other than BT owned fibre that are not cost effective to LLU enable.

Check out www.samknows.com if you don't believe me.


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

Pete77 said:


> 75 months of Lifetime Sub at £200 = £2.67 per month. Also the marginal cost from now on to me on Tivo is zero. So the £10 per month with Sky is on top of that.


So are you suggesting that if the impossible happens and TiVo launch a UK HD service, existing subscribers wouldn't have to pay to receive it?

The lifetime subscription is linked to the box, new TiVO = new sub. What's the difference between that and paying Sky for HD coverage? I resisted getting TiVo in the early days because I didn't see enough value in a £400 box + £10 a month sub. Once it dropped to £99 + £199 for the sub I was prepared to take the chance. Now Sky HD is £49 + £120 a year I think I will seriously have a look at it.

Subscription TV, in whatever guise, is all about the cost-benefit experience. YMMV and all that.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Trinitron said:


> So are you suggesting that if the impossible happens and TiVo launch a UK HD service, existing subscribers wouldn't have to pay to receive it?


No I was talking about there being no further sub to pay on my current S1 Tivo SD recorder. However if Tivo re-enters the UK I expect that may they may offer current S1 Lifetime subscribers the option to pay to upgrade to a Lifetime sub on their new Tivo box. This has happened previously for S1 Lifetime Sub owners in the USA.



> The lifetime subscription is linked to the box, new TiVO = new sub. What's the difference between that and paying Sky for HD coverage? I resisted getting TiVo in the early days because I didn't see enough value in a £400 box + £10 a month sub. Once it dropped to £99 + £199 for the sub I was prepared to take the chance. Now Sky HD is £49 + £120 a year I think I will seriously have a look at it.


The Tivo Sub is £199 for Life but the Sky one is a minimum of £120 per annum or in reality more like £30 per month if you actually want to have any reasonable choice of HD channels (in addition to just BBC HD) to record. If you don't plan to record a reasonable range of HD material then there is no point in deserting your S1 Tivo for Sky HD.

So the actual cost of switching to Sky HD seems a lot higher than you try to make out.


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

No, it's &#163;49 for the box + &#163;120 (a year) for the HD subscription. For that I get the same channels I am receiving now, plus some of the same channels in HD. 

I can see that you would have to pay more for a range of HD channels through Sky - or by purchasing a Freesat HD PVR - but I won't, as I already have all the channels I want to watch in HD. 

At the moment there is no way to stay with TiVo for watching HD programming. Having got so used to 'time shifting' my viewing habits, it's very unlikely I would watch live TV in HD - except sport, for which I mainly need Sky anyway(!) - so for me, if I want to go to HD it's going to cost me something. You seem to be wanting it all for nothing.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Trinitron said:


> At the moment there is no way to stay with TiVo for watching HD programming. Having got so used to 'time shifting' my viewing habits, it's very unlikely I would watch live TV in HD - except sport, for which I mainly need Sky anyway(!) - so for me, if I want to go to HD it's going to cost me something. You seem to be wanting it all for nothing.


I suppose if you still pay a monthly sub to Tivo and already pay a sub to Sky then things look quite different. However for those of us who who have a Lifetime Tivo sub and do not pay any sub to Sky the costs of changing to Sky HD are still fairly substantial. Especially the ongoing costs.........


----------

