# 1 night with Sky+. Missing Tivo already.



## EdGillett (Dec 19, 2002)

Well, we finally bit the bullet and installed Sky. Managed to pick up a SkyHD box off eBay which was faulty (stuck in stand by). Replaced the hard disk with a 500GB, and now all is well again, and was installed by a remarkably helpful Sky sub contractor yesterday (he even managed to install the dish so we could hardly see it, but still had excellent signal strength - perhaps 4 inches peek over the top of a wall above over our entry porch).

When I finally managed to convice Sky to activate the Sky+ functionality without needing to buy a £10 Sky HD sub (it can be done ...), I started to realise how truly amazing Tivo continues to be in terms of usability, and just how badly Sky+ users have it.

Damn you Murdoch for killing Tivo in it's prime! I swear he was building his evil PVR in the shadows whilst he was failing to adequately market Tivo. Damn him, damn him again.

My Series 1 Tivo has never missed a beat in 6 years. And oh how I wish I'd bought a Lifetime Sub. I still pay my £10 a month, but now that Sky+ is likely doing the majority of the recording in the house, I can see Tivo's role diminishing, and that £10 a month looking like an increasingly unnecessary expense 

We love our Tivo to bits, and my lovely wife couldn't understand why Sky+ didn't have all the Tivo functions, even though it was brand new, and Tivo came out 6 years ago (or more). It would feel like pulling the life support from a close family member if I cancelled my Tivo sub!

Tivo's still hooked up to Freeview, and is faithfully recording away.

Theoretically, given the fact that the SkyHD box is twin tuner, I could get Tivo to control the box and record some stuff, whilst it's also recording something else, but that limits our sky watching to what Tivo needs to record, and somewhat misses the point. 

I dread the first time Sky+ messes up a Series Link. Something my Tivo has never done ...

Not interested in paying for HD just yet (and I don't have an HDTV yet anyway).

Even the Sky HD remote seems hard and unfriendly ... I miss my Peanut (another beautiful example of ergonomics and usability) ...


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Sadly, you get used to it...


----------



## EdGillett (Dec 19, 2002)

And that, right there, is a tragedy ...

I guess the people right here on this board are probably the few remaining in the UK that remember how a decent PVR is supposed to work.

Tivo - Come back to the UK. Never has the UK market been more ready to accept you back again. Please! Come in with a shiny new Dual Tuner, HD toting box and more and call it "Series 4" just to irritate the US a bit that for once we have something they don't first ...


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

EdGillett said:


> I swear he was building his evil PVR in the shadows whilst he was failing to adequately market Tivo. Damn him, damn him again.


Nah! He wouldn't do that because that would be anti-competetive and, as we all know, Sky aren't anti-competetive are they?


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

EdGillett said:


> I dread the first time Sky+ messes up a Series Link. Something my Tivo has never done ...


It is a horrible feeling.. You get that sinking feeling...

Don't know if the software, or reliability has inproved. But the frustration of seeing.. RECORDING FAILED, and the REASON CODE 9 (Or other crap information)

Then the series links stopping and having to add them again. And for every new series you have to add another series link... Frustrating.. and sad.. It annoys me when you hear people who have never had a pvr, big up Sky+...

You know the types you overhear in the pub, going on about Sky+ recording at home and they love it, and can not imagine life without Sky+.. Annoying.... lol


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> You know the types you overhear in the pub, going on about Sky+ recording at home and they love it, and can not imagine life without Sky+.. Annoying.... lol


Hopefully once Freeview Playback with Series Link and no subscription gets going it will shut up these "great bores of today".


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

EdGillett said:


> I dread the first time Sky+ messes up a Series Link. Something my Tivo has never done ...


While I'd certainly say TiVo is more reliable than Sky+, if you've never had a Season Pass fail in six years you've either been exceptionally lucky or don't record much outside of the most popular shows on the most popular channels. See the errors thread for examples.


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

One soon gets used to the + points of Sky given a week or so.

Series links are not perfect and as my uncle said who just got Sky+ installed


> How on earth can it miss the end of a recording in this day and age


Once I explained the primitive epg and that one has to set 5 mins on the end he seemed happy again.

Automan.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Automan said:


> One soon gets used to the + points of Sky given a week or so.


And these are??????

Dual tuner and ummm dual tuner and ummm dual tuner?


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> And these are??????
> 
> Dual tuner and ummm dual tuner and ummm dual tuner?


Picture quality, no MPEG re-encode/decode.

When they use the EPG right then late starts/overruns are compensated for.

The press green during a trailer to set a recording.

Set recordings by SMS etc.

Umm.

Struggling now...


----------



## OzSat (Feb 15, 2001)

TCM2007 said:


> Picture quality, no MPEG re-encode/decode.


Yes



TCM2007 said:


> When they use the EPG right then late starts/overruns are compensated for.


on some channels.



TCM2007 said:


> The press green during a trailer to set a recording.


On a very few programmes



TCM2007 said:


> Set recordings by SMS etc.


This is good - I get the Sky planner on my telephone and can set recordings.

But you missed out the number of times programmes just vanish from the planner - especially on HD recordings in bad weather.

The Sky+ system is very good - but is missing:

a useful search - recording a series without having to know which channel it is on / or search by actor etc.
season passes beyond a week or two (TiVo will remember these forever - Sky can only remember a series where the next episode is already scheduled within the next week or two - the link is lost beyond that).


----------



## EdGillett (Dec 19, 2002)

- no visible indication as to how long a recording has left when you're playing back

- no jump points on playback

- no "View Upcoming Episodes"

- no intelligent scheduling of viewings across multiple channels (such as the +1 channel repeats, odd 3am repeats etc.)

- no audible feedback on actions (it's the friendly Tivo usability elements like this which you only really miss when they're not there. I miss my Tivo sounds!)

- filtering programme lists beyond first letter of alphabet (surely a SkyHD/Sky+ box could cache some of this data and allow you to do this??)

I currently like ..

... dual tuners.

and that's about it.

I presume all the EPG data comes directly off the sat signal (hence delays showing data when you +24hrs etc.), and the reason why you can't via prog info (i) when you have both tuners in use recording different channels and want to do program info on a third.

I am so tempted to go back to single tuner and re-encode again on Tivo, but will persevere a little longer.

I studied Economics for a while. The fact that Tivo exists and people praise Sky+ is a prime example of Imperfect Knowledge in the Marketplace.

Maybe I should go to the States. Or if Australia actually gets a new Tivo ...


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

TCM2007 said:


> The press green during a trailer to set a recording.


....but surely you can only do that if you are watching LIVE TV.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

EdGillett said:


> I currently like ..
> 
> ... dual tuners.
> 
> and that's about it.


I thought I had that right. The other quoted advantages seem trivial in relation to all the things one loses.



> I am so tempted to go back to single tuner and re-encode again on Tivo, but will persevere a little longer.


I'm curious as to how you came to switch to Sky+ in the first place. I only had to be shown its interface at a Currys to know that it was not for me. Its program control that is my priority rather than worrying about how many pixels the damn thing is shown at. An SD and an HD picture once stored in your brain both seem the same whereas a black and white program does not.



> I studied Economics for a while. The fact that Tivo exists and people praise Sky+ is a prime example of Imperfect Knowledge in the Marketplace...


The fact that TalkTalk broadband has any customers at all seems to be yet another example of imperfect Knowledge In The Marketplace.


----------



## Raisltin Majere (Mar 13, 2004)

Automan said:


> One soon gets used to the + points of Sky given a week or so.


Not me, gave it a try for a while and *hated* it. It's now relegated to recording the wife's programs and LazyTown for the little un.

Tivo is dedicated to me


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

EdGillett said:


> - no visible indication as to how long a recording has left when you're playing back


Press select during playback



> - no jump points on playback


press backup, select and enter time also of course bookmark function and jump to bookmarks is available.



> - no "View Upcoming Episodes"


True, primitive epg which predates UK Tivo.



> - no intelligent scheduling of viewings across multiple channels (such as the +1 channel repeats, odd 3am repeats etc.)


True but series links can link a series of movies and other special events.



> - no audible feedback on actions (it's the friendly Tivo usability elements like this which you only really miss when they're not there. I miss my Tivo sounds!)


Some folks turn off the Tivo sounds - Sky+ can beep when you get your pin wrong 



> - filtering programme lists beyond first letter of alphabet (surely a SkyHD/Sky+ box could cache some of this data and allow you to do this??)


Yes I always thought with a hard drive they could enchance the epg but Sky seem not to care with their virtual monopoly.



> I currently like ..
> 
> ... dual tuners.
> 
> ...


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

katman said:


> ....but surely you can only do that if you are watching LIVE TV.


I think it works from a recording.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> I thought I had that right. The other quoted advantages seem trivial in relation to all the things one loses.


Indeed, with the exception of improved pricture quality - I know some say that they can't tell the difference between Mode 0 and the original, but that's a function of their TV equipment, there most certainly is a difference.


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

TCM2007 said:


> I think it works from a recording.


but surely if you are watching a recording you will be wizzing through the trailer and adverts LOL


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

Alas the green button to book a program to view/record only works when watching live tv so it is inert & useless IMHO

Automan.



TCM2007 said:


> I think it works from a recording.


----------



## mrtickle (Aug 26, 2001)

Automan said:


> > no "View Upcoming Episodes"
> 
> 
> True, primitive epg which predates UK Tivo.


Well quite. The A-Z "search" function (and I use the word "search" in its loosest possible sense) was added in July 2000, just before TiVo's launch I think.

7 day's worth of listings instead of the 2or3 days we had before was added to the EPG in May 2001, but that was just more data and not new functionality.

I don't see why the timing should be any excuse for it being so poor.



Automan said:


> Yes I always thought with a hard drive they could enchance the epg but Sky seem not to care with their virtual monopoly.


And maybe that's the point


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

What they claim if you ask them is that they consider it important that Sky+ works in exactly the same way as a regular Sky box, and as the regular Sky box has no HD etc it's EPG cannot be upgraded much.

No, I didn't believe it either!


----------



## DeadKenny (Nov 9, 2002)

TCM2007 said:


> Picture quality, no MPEG re-encode/decode.


Very big point for me and anyone with a large size LCD (HD or otherwise). I wondered what the fuss was about until I got my LCD and realised just how poor the digital->analogue->digital->analogue process was with TiVo (and worse if then into any TV with digital processing as that's another analogue->digital conversion). With SkyHD it's digital->digital over HDMI.



> When they use the EPG right then late starts/overruns are compensated for.


If it works, this would be a big plus for me too. TiVo's generally right on all the main channels, but it can't cope with overruns. It's also hopeless on some channels (e.g. Cartoon Network the schedule is frequently wrong).



> Set recordings by SMS etc.


The stuff for Nokia phones looks interesting. EPG on your phone. Okay there's TiVoWeb, but it's expensive to get a network card and stuff on top of the fact you've shelved out £300 for the box, plus a sub, compared to a fraction for Sky+ or SkyHD (the latter of which will drop the sub next year I bet).



> Umm.
> 
> Struggling now...


DD5.1

I love TiVo to bits though, but there are key advantages with Sky now, especially once HD expands.



TCM2007 said:


> What they claim if you ask them is that they consider it important that Sky+ works in exactly the same way as a regular Sky box, and as the regular Sky box has no HD etc it's EPG cannot be upgraded much.
> 
> No, I didn't believe it either!


I can understand why. For Joe Sixpack and your average granny, the way to encourage them to get Sky+/HD is to make it the same as what they've got just with effectively an extra button to record stuff. Most people don't like change.


----------



## Restorer (Jan 6, 2002)

TCM2007 said:


> Sadly, you get used to it...


Indeed, but thought it would take me longer than it did - just a week or 2!

Nobody's mentioned one of my biggest misses: with Tivo you could pause live TV, fiddle in menus or watch a recording for a while and come back to pick up liveTV. With Sky+ every time you open the menus the live buffer resets.

Also there's no instant replay button.


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

If you get used to never watching that helps resolve the pause live tv issue and you can still play with the menus.

Tivo gives you zero access to any menu when playing a recording without it stopping playback.

All things you will get used to with Sky+ 

Automan.


Restorer said:


> Indeed, but thought it would take me longer than it did - just a week or 2!
> 
> Nobody's mentioned one of my biggest misses: with Tivo you could pause live TV, fiddle in menus or watch a recording for a while and come back to pick up liveTV. With Sky+ every time you open the menus the live buffer resets.
> 
> Also there's no instant replay button.


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

Automan said:


> Tivo gives you zero access to any menu when playing a recording without it stopping playback.


Yes, but I think the point is that at least Tivo doesn't lose where you are when you go into the menus; and it certainly doesn't lose the buffer when doing so


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

While MCE lets you view the menus as a semi-transparent overlay or reduces the playback to a thumbnail


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> While MCE lets you view the menus as a semi-transparent overlay or reduces the playback to a thumbnail


This must be the first time ever when Microsoft has come up with the most technically excellent solution rather than the solution with merely the largest amount of marketing muscle and hype behind it.

Perhaps the fact that Microsoft has no existing reputation for a product in this area forces it produce the very best solution, unlike Sky who can get away with simply inflicting any old PVR solution on their customers.


----------



## Restorer (Jan 6, 2002)

Automan said:


> If you get used to never watching that helps resolve the pause live tv issue and you can still play with the menus.


Eh?! I assume you mean never watching live TV. I am a sports fan and have a need to watch live - or at least very near it! Tivo's ability to "keep your place" is greatly missed. A practice of mine during boring bits of play was to pause Tivo - fiddle on with menus or watch something else and then return to FF the boring bits back to live. The only way I can get a workaround on Sky+ is to get it to actually record the programme and then keep jumping back in via bookmarks - very clumsy and not worth the effort. Fact is too the drive's not big enough to accommodate 7-8 hours of test match cricket in HD.



TCM2007 said:


> While MCE lets you view the menus as a semi-transparent overlay or reduces the playback to a thumbnail


I got Vista Media Center working recently and I have to say the whole Menu Display system is superb. I love the way the picture you are watching fades into the menu below.

To get back to the topic, I don't know how Sky's software people can take any kind professional pride in their work when they see what's happening elsewhere. Even the £20 Freeview card in my PC comes with a much more attractive menu system!

Most annoying of all though is, given Sky's continued attempts to justify its ancient clunky system, it will not be changing for a very long time indeed. The introduction of the HD boxes would have been the ideal time to try out something new and it didnt happen.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Restorer said:


> Most annoying of all though is, given Sky's continued attempts to justify its ancient clunky system, it will not be changing for a very long time indeed. The introduction of the HD boxes would have been the ideal time to try out something new and it didnt happen.


But to some extent Tivo also seem stuck with the interface they introduced in 1998 and the fear of upsetting customers by changing it significantly. Fortunately it was a much better interface than the one Sky still inflicts on us.

However I have been amazed how more recent Tivo machines still appear to use the same menu system rather than one that lets you watch tv while you are setting up Wishlists etc, etc. Of course I'm only judging on the basis of the odd downloaded US promo video I have seen for the newer Tivos.

I suspect I may review my whole tv setup more carefully with a thought to going MCE once we know what the main five channels are going to be doing in respect of HD television plans. But for the time being and as one who refuses to pay the Murdoch HD dollar there is no hurry to move on from Tivo.


----------



## EdGillett (Dec 19, 2002)

I got two "Partial Recording"s last night. 

What the hell is that all about? It couldn't be bothered either to fail or succeed adequately so instead just gave up halfway through!!! Grr ...


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

EdGillett said:


> I got two "Partial Recording"s last night.
> 
> What the hell is that all about? It couldn't be bothered either to fail or succeed adequately so instead just gave up halfway through!!! Grr ...


That would be caused either by a power cut during the recording (flashing kitchen clocks etc might give you a clue) or by the Tivo spontaneously rebooting in the middle of the recording. The latter would probably tend to indicate a hard drive on its way out unless you were doing any especially demanding Tivoweb access like Highlights or using Tracker during the recording. Demanding Tivoweb use can be responsible for making a Tivo reboot on occasions.


----------



## verses (Nov 6, 2002)

I think Ed's referring to on his Sky+ box.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

verses said:


> I think Ed's referring to on his Sky+ box.


No further explanation needed then. 

Me thinks tis time for Ed to return to the land of Tivo.


----------



## chrisd (Oct 24, 2003)

Another really annoying thing i've discovered is that once you've watched something from the planner it is a real pain to delete it... go back to the guide, back into planner, search for the program and delete it (and hope to hell you picked the right one).

Also, it lets you delete alot of stuff without confirming.. mind those clumsy fingers!


----------



## EdGillett (Dec 19, 2002)

Yes. I was indeed referring to SkyMinus as I shall refer it from now on ...

And yes. As a computer programmer by trade, a delete without a confirmation is a shooting offence. Basic Usability error.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

EdGillett said:


> Yes. I was indeed referring to SkyMinus as I shall refer it from now on ...
> 
> And yes. As a computer programmer by trade, a delete without a confirmation is a shooting offence. Basic Usability error.


OK agreed but then what persuaded you to go for Sky Plus to start with as everything ever written on this forum suggests its rubbish plus my test drive experience of a Sky+ box at a Currys (where it was revealed that recordings were hidden in the middle of the ordinary Sky EPG) was the final clincher on the matter for me. Windows MCE on the other hand seems to be regularly highly applauded here, its only downside being not able to work easily with Sky pay tv channels.

I think Sky+ usually gets rated about as badly as TalkTalk broadband by most people in this forum. So for me that makes it a no brainer to stick with Tivo and then see what the BBC offers for their Freesat HD satellite product and PVR box next year.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

chrisd said:


> Another really annoying thing i've discovered is that once you've watched something from the planner it is a real pain to delete it... go back to the guide, back into planner, search for the program and delete it (and hope to hell you picked the right one).
> 
> Also, it lets you delete alot of stuff without confirming.. mind those clumsy fingers!


IIRC just pressing Back Up will take you to the planner with the show you just watched highlighted. Then press Yellow.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

EdGillett said:


> I got two "Partial Recording"s last night.
> 
> What the hell is that all about? It couldn't be bothered either to fail or succeed adequately so instead just gave up halfway through!!! Grr ...


Were they actually partial? IIRC it shows "partial" fs the set padding caould not be added becuase of a clash.

Not that I'm defending them; Mountain failed on Sunday leaving the box locked up so it missed Test the Nation altogether!


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> IIRC just pressing Back Up will take you to the planner with the show you just watched highlighted. Then press Yellow.


I think his point relates to deleting stuff later if you don't delete it at the time. Obviously with Tivo or Tivoweb this is still dead easy and there is no question of you not realising that the recording is still even there.

Of course I am in the situation of not having personally had to use this substandard and badly designed PVR interface on a regular basis.


----------



## chrisd (Oct 24, 2003)

Pete77 said:


> I think his point relates to deleting stuff later if you don't delete it at the time.


Er, nope. 

Stuart had it right (in theory anyway, i'll have to test it out tonight when I get home from work, but when is he ever wrong?*  )

*Rhetorical question, Pete


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

chrisd said:


> but when is he ever wrong?*  )


When he suddenly goes silent in response to a post that corrects one of his errors.

The cunning part is that like the best of marketing men he never ever admits when he has made an error.


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

<sniff>

<sniff>

What's that smell?

<sniff>

<sniff>

Ah yes - Pete returning to baiting.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

I was just stating a fact that TCM regularly corrects the factual errors of other posters in this forum but on the rare occasions when he gets a fact wrong one tends to hear absolutely nothing further from him in response.


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

Ok. 

Is that the same as deleting posts in a thread? <EvilGrin>


----------



## chrisd (Oct 24, 2003)

_*"rhetorical question"*_

noun 
a statement that is formulated as a question but that is not supposed to be answered


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> I was just stating a fact that TCM regularly corrects the factual errors of other posters in this forum but on the rare occasions when he gets a fact wrong one tends to hear absolutely nothing further from him in response.


As opposed to Pete, who replies, but usually about Ofcom or FreeSat or Freoview Playback, whichever is least related to the subject at hand.


----------



## EdGillett (Dec 19, 2002)

On the subject of Persuasion. What on Earth possessed me to give up Tivo and give Sky+ a whirl? Pretty much that I saw a SkyHD box faulty on eBay, and decided I could resurrect it by replacing the hard disk that was probably knackered. It was. So I got a 500GB PVR with dual tuners in the end for about £100 when I'd bought a remote off eBay, replacement hard disk etc.

And I was intrigued by HD, particularly with new Freesat HD services to launch in the spring (I presume the channels would be shown FTA on SkyHD, much the same as BBC HD is currently?).

I've got Vista on my Laptop *shudder* but have briefly tooled around with the Media Center - it does have some nice usability features, like the overlays.

I (very) briefly owned a Hannspree 32" HDTV before it got sent back to eBuyer for a refund for being truly abysmal, but in the short period of time that I had it hooked up, I did connect it to my laptop via HDMI to try out the MCE interface as it was intended - on the big screen - and it did look very good.

I may yet be tempted to go down that road, particularly when they release an extender which doesn't sound like a jet engine (by which I am referring to the only Vista Media Center compatible extender - the Xbox 360). Am currently redecorating our house and running Cat5e to each room - Gigabit video streaming anyone? 

I will say one thing for Sky+ (which is mainly Sky rather than Sky+), the direct recording of the bitstream does result in very good pictures. I'm watching on a 32" Thomson CRT, and particularly the downscaled BBC HD looks fantastic.

Another pain in the neck - Widescreen switching via a Quattro+  The minute I hooked the sky box up, somewhere in the back of my mind I remember reading about issues with pin 8 based widescreen switching not working through the Quattro+. Most irritating. TV only has one RGB scart, and the Tivo, Freeview, SkyHD and DVD are all switched via the Quattro+. The only one which has issues with widescreen switching is the Sky Box. There is a hack to a Quintro+ with the use of a soldering iron to correct the issue, but I don't know if I can be bothered currently.

New TV would have solved that issue of course, but all those LCDs still can't match my trusty goldfish bowl in terms of picture clarity, particularly with SD sources ...


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

EdGillett said:


> but all those LCDs still can't match my trusty goldfish bowl in terms of picture clarity, particularly with SD sources ...


Yes that is precisely my issue and why I see no case for currently getting a new HDTV and dumping Tivo (which the former seems to then make people think that they have to do).

I like technology that gives me more control but HDTV is not about more control but about a 5 day excitement about a supposedly better quality picture but that in the long run I very much doubt makes much difference to your enjoyment of the actual programs. Perhaps coverage of golf or tennis or cricket (all use small balls on very large screen areas) might be genuinely better in HD but I can't see there being much difference for football, rugby or Formula 1 motor racing. Meanwhile your SD programs actually look worse on the new HDTV. This is the same problem as with rushing to get a widescreen tv in the days when most television was still being broadcast in 4:3 - again why I resisted it.

Also the ever shorter cycles within which new technology now becomes redundant and the realisation that a lot of it is more about taking more of your money than about providing something genuinely better does make one more wary of always immediately buying the next new technology as moves on in to one's middle age...........................


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> I like technology that gives me more control but HDTV is not about more control but about a 5 day excitement about a supposedly better quality picture but that in the long run I very much doubt makes much difference to your enjoyment of the actual programs. Perhaps coverage of golf or tennis or cricket (all use small balls on very large screen areas) might be genuinely better in HD but I can't see there being much difference for football, rugby or Formula 1 motor racing. Meanwhile your SD programs actually look worse on the new HDTV.


I've had HD well over a year now, and it doesn't wear off!


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

Yes I must agree watching HD is still so much cooler than grotty old SD even after a year.

At the moment I am watching "Silent Running" in HD and it is so cool....

Hold on picture has frozen, audio continues and no response from the remote.

Only seen this issue three times before and only cure is the three pin reset (mains plug).

HD is cool but sky+ has a lot to desire in MANY areas.

EDIT:
Actually power down key on remote still worked and put the box in standby.

A press of Sky key and play resumed "Silent Running" playback okay.

Automan.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> I've had HD well over a year now, and it doesn't wear off!


Doesn't that contradict what you said in some of your earlier posts or am I think of other Tivocommunity members with Sky HD.

However good it is I don't think I could justify paying around £550 a year in Sky subs more than I am currently paying (i.e. zero). And its not presently worth having HD unless you are prepared to pay those extra subs as most of the HD content is on Sky channels.

If and when FTA and FTV channels widely adopt HD then I will look again at getting it but the fact that HD content requires me to stop using Tivo is a very big disincentive.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

You're thinking of someone else.

More and more is on BBC HD in fact - this week Rick Stein's Mediterranean Escapes, Heroes, Great British Journeys, Top Gear, Gavin & Stacey, Saxondale, Silent Witness, Mountain, Antiques Roadshow, India with Sanjeev Bhaskar, Who Do You Think You are, plus live Proms and Paul Weller in concert.

It's not _all _Planet Earth and Bleak House repeats anymore.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> More and more is on BBC HD in fact - this week Rick Stein's Mediterranean Escapes, Heroes, Great British Journeys, Top Gear, Gavin & Stacey, Saxondale, Silent Witness, Mountain, Antiques Roadshow, India with Sanjeev Bhaskar, Who Do You Think You are, plus live Proms and Paul Weller in concert.
> 
> It's not _all _Planet Earth and Bleak House repeats anymore.


I can see the case will be made out in the next year to 18 months. Especially when the BBC's HD Freesat box launch then pressurises their rivals at ITV, C4 and Five to start going HD.

For the time being I'm content to wait and for the price of HDTVs to fall further while their picture quality increases.

A key think to find out is whether there is any reason to go for a BBC Freeview box rather than a second hand Sky HD one off Ebay. A lot of that will depend on what kind of PVR software the BBC box uses. But obviously if it can't receive any Sky pay HD channels then I imagine a secondhand Sky HD box will make more sense.


----------



## johala_reewi (Oct 30, 2002)

DeadKenny said:


> The stuff for Nokia phones looks interesting. EPG on your phone. Okay there's TiVoWeb, but it's expensive to get a network card and stuff on top of the fact you've shelved out £300 for the box, plus a sub, compared to a fraction for Sky+ or SkyHD (the latter of which will drop the sub next year I bet).


Though With tivoweb you get a bit more than just programming recordings.



> I can understand why. For Joe Sixpack and your average granny, the way to encourage them to get Sky+/HD is to make it the same as what they've got just with effectively an extra button to record stuff. Most people don't like change.


Probably why Tivo falied to take off in the UK. Far too radical for those who still had trouble with the VCR. My ex's reaction when I got Tivo was "why do we need that, we've got a VCR". On the plus side, when I left her and took Tivo with me, she went and got her own.


----------



## mrtickle (Aug 26, 2001)

EdGillett said:


> I will say one thing for Sky+ (which is mainly Sky rather than Sky+), the direct recording of the bitstream does result in very good pictures. I'm watching on a 32" Thomson CRT, and particularly the downscaled BBC HD looks fantastic.


See that fantastic picture quality on your 32" CRT? That's how good normal SD digital TV could and should look! And it's how it used to look, back in the days when they used adequate bitrates for both DSAT and DTT. Just before the 2000 Olympics the BBC dropped their bitrates like a stone, and they only went partly back up. The picture quality of SD DSAT between 1998-2000 was really good from most broadcasters, before they all decided to abandon technical quailty and just settle on the lowest bitrate at which the complaints could be easily fobbed off.

And if you think they won't do the same with HD bitrates in the future, think again :-(


----------



## Restorer (Jan 6, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> Perhaps coverage of golf or tennis or cricket (all use small balls on very large screen areas) might be genuinely better in HD but I can't see there being much difference for football, rugby or Formula 1 motor racing. .


Sadly F1 is not in HD but the difference between SD and HD for both football and rugby is huge. I've had HD for over 3 months now and it still provides some truly jaw-dropping moments.


----------



## OzSat (Feb 15, 2001)

Pete77 said:


> I like technology that gives me more control but HDTV is not about more control but about a 5 day excitement about a supposedly better quality picture but that in the long run I very much doubt makes much difference to your enjoyment of the actual programs. Perhaps coverage of golf or tennis or cricket (all use small balls on very large screen areas) might be genuinely better in HD but I can't see there being much difference for football, rugby or Formula 1 motor racing. Meanwhile your SD programs actually look worse on the new HDTV.


The picture different between HD and SD is amazing - even on football.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

ozsat said:


> The picture different between HD and SD is amazing - even on football.


OK but is the difference in PVR functionality between a Tivo and the primitive Sky+ recording interface not also still amazing. Also is the monthly cost of a full blown Sky package plus HD also not still amazingly high.

A case of horses for courses at the moment I think. When all the major FTA broadcasters are offering lots of HD programming there will then be no excuse for not switching over to it (given than an HDTV only costs around £800 or so for a decent one that will last say 10 years compared to nearly £600 a year for the full blown Sky HD sub).


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> OK but is the difference in PVR functionality between a Tivo and the primitive Sky+ recording interface not also still amazing.


More depressing than amazing!



> Also is the monthly cost of a full blown Sky package plus HD also not still amazingly high.


£120 a year, significant, but not exactly amazing. (The comparison is Sky SD vs Sky HD, not Freeview vs Sky HD)


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> £120 a year, significant, but not exactly amazing. (The comparison is Sky SD vs Sky HD, not Freeview vs Sky HD)


If you want a choice of HD programs of any significance at present you have to get Sky HD. For me that would mean £47 per month I am not presently paying.

Are you sure you don't moonlight as a Sky marketing man at the weekends TCM.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> If you want a choice of HD programs of any significance at present you have to get Sky HD. For me that would mean £47 per month I am not presently paying.
> 
> Are you sure you don't moonlight as a Sky marketing man at the weekends TCM.


No that's nonsensical. The cost of getting HD over the cost of getting the same channels in SD is £10 a month. If you weren't prepared to pay for those channels in SD then clearly you wouldn't want them in HD, so the question doesn't arise.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> No that's nonsensical. The cost of getting HD over the cost of getting the same channels in SD is £10 a month. If you weren't prepared to pay for those channels in SD then clearly you wouldn't want them in HD, so the question doesn't arise.


But it wouldn't be worth buying an expensive HD tv and a secondhand Sky HD box just to get the BBC HD would it?

If someone accepts the premise that they want a decent choice of HD programs then they have to accept that the expensive £37 per month + £10 HD fee Sky premium channels package is the only place to get it at the present time.

Ultimately this is why the only early adopters of HD are those of you who were previously prepared to pay Sky £37 per month. For the rest of us the marginal cost of early adopting HDTV is simply prohibitive and is not the £10 per month you mention.

It is only £10 per month extra for you personally TCM but not for a large number of other people in the forum for whom it would cost much more. I suspect that the BBC HD Freesat project is likely to be stillborn until such time as they can also persuade ITV, C4 and Five to start pumping out HD content purely because BBC HD content on its own won't justify most people going for a whole new satellite system install.


----------



## mrtickle (Aug 26, 2001)

You wrote "a choice of HD programs [sic] of any significance", so it hinges on what you define as significant. You didn't say films, and if we put aside sports and PPV events (which aren't in a package) it's down to just

BBC HD
Sky One HD (Variety mix)
Sky Arts HD (Style & Culture mix)
Discovery HD (Knowledge mix)
National Geographic HD (Knowledge mix)
History HD (Knowledge mix)

So in that position go with Sky's 2-mix HD package for £17+£10, and choose the Variety and Knowledge mixes. That would get me 4 of the 5 subscription HD channels and BBC HD so that is a significant choice of programmes I think. And of course roughly 60 SD channels also in those mixes together with 330 FTA TV and radio channels, and basic Sky+ recording functions.


----------



## Restorer (Jan 6, 2002)

The development of HD is an extremely expensive undertaking. As usual, it will be the early adopters from whom much of the outlay will be recouped. 

My guess is most of those moving to HD, like me, already subscribed to Sports and/or Movies. The price of a pint of beer a week is not breaking any banks around here and, given the big increase in viewing pleasure for what is probably 90% of my TV watching, I personally do not begrudge contributing. 

I just wish Sky had seen fit to diverting a small fraction of the money into developing a decent HD PVR.


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

And of course FX channel will be in HD sometime early next year.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a73068/hd-version-of-fx-in-the-pipeline.html

Automan.


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

HD? They're not even Widescreen yet!!


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Pete77 said:


> But it wouldn't be worth buying an expensive HD tv and a secondhand Sky HD box just to get the BBC HD would it?


Some have. It's a personal decision. Of course an HDTV can play HD from other sources than broadcast satellite.



> If someone accepts the premise that they want a decent choice of HD programs then they have to accept that the expensive £37 per month + £10 HD fee Sky premium channels package is the only place to get it at the present time.


If you to have Sky One, Sky Movies and Sky Sports to feel you have a decent choice of HD channels, then you also have to have those channels to have a decent choice of SD channels. The person who won't pay for Sky Sports SD but will pay for Sky Sports HD doesn't exist. HD is an upgrade to your viewing of an existing channel set, not a new set of channels.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

mrtickle said:


> You wrote "a choice of HD programs [sic] of any significance", so it hinges on what you define as significant. You didn't say films, and if we put aside sports and PPV events (which aren't in a package) it's down to just
> 
> BBC HD
> Sky One HD (Variety mix)
> ...


Actually if you are on a 2 mix + HD you get ALL the HD channels which are part of any mix package. I recently downgraded to 2 mixes, and can still watch Sky Arts HD but not not Sky Arts SD!


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

If you are going to make a technology leap make it a big one 

I hope the Sci-fi channel do the same one day....

Automan.


cwaring said:


> HD? They're not even Widescreen yet!!


----------



## OzSat (Feb 15, 2001)

cwaring said:


> HD? They're not even Widescreen yet!!


The two do not go together

Both Discovery Channel and History Channel channel have HD channels - but their SD services are not widescreen.

Along with National Geographic - their HD channels are not HD versions of the regular channel - but schedules only consisting of HD material.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

ozsat said:


> Along with National Geographic - the HD channels are not just HD versions of the regular channel - but schedules only consisting of HD material.


Presumably this is because the amount of content available in HD is still more limited than that available in SD?

So by insisting on watching only in HD you would then dimish your total avilable range of program choice on these channels?


----------



## OzSat (Feb 15, 2001)

Pete77 said:


> Presumably this is because the amount of content available in HD is still more limited than that available in SD?
> 
> So by insisting on watching only in HD you would then dimish your total avilable range of program choice on these channels?


There are something like 4 hours a day of programming - repeated 4-5 times.

But then so are some SD channels - Zone Romantica launches next week and seems to be just 5 hours of programmes repeated throughout the day.


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

ozsat said:


> The two do not go together.


So they can afford either W/S or HD and are going with HD?


----------



## OzSat (Feb 15, 2001)

TCM2007 said:


> You're thinking of someone else.
> 
> More and more is on BBC HD in fact - this week Rick Stein's Mediterranean Escapes, Heroes, Great British Journeys, Top Gear, Gavin & Stacey, Saxondale, Silent Witness, Mountain, Antiques Roadshow, India with Sanjeev Bhaskar, Who Do You Think You are, plus live Proms and Paul Weller in concert.
> 
> It's not _all _Planet Earth and Bleak House repeats anymore.


BBC-HD is winding up its content ready for a proper launch


----------



## OzSat (Feb 15, 2001)

cwaring said:


> So they can afford either W/S or HD and are going with HD?


All proper HD output is W/S

Making SD into W/S is a big step - launching HD is a big step - doing both is two big (but different) steps.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

ozsat said:


> Zone Romantica launches next week and seems to be just 5 hours of programmes repeated throughout the day.


Let us hope that Tribune manages to source the EPG data rather more rapidly for Zone Romantica than they seemed inclined to for Zone Thriller despite the enthusiasm of the channel itself to be included in the Tivo EPG.

See www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/printthread.php?t=323699&p=4518092


----------



## mrtickle (Aug 26, 2001)

TCM2007 said:


> Actually if you are on a 2 mix + HD you get ALL the HD channels which are part of any mix package. I recently downgraded to 2 mixes, and can still watch Sky Arts HD but not not Sky Arts SD!


Interesting, thanks!

Some of the recent new Megastructures epsiodes on National Geographic (sadly now relagated to "material of the week" because they've already done most of the world's Megastructures - they've done Bricks, soon it'll be Straw) have been widescreen and shown in letterbox on the SD channel.


----------



## Milhouse (Sep 15, 2001)

So I already have the full Sky package (movies + sports) and I'm about to buy a HD TV (Philips 42PFL9900D). I believe I can upgrade to Sky HD for just the cost of the STB (£100 or something like that?) - are there any other costs? I've already got a quad LNB and two feeds, although I only use one feed with my current Sky digibox.

I don't want to stop using my TiVo, and I'm only interested in watching the occasional live HD showing (football, rugby etc.) - I want to use the TiVo to continue recording Sky broadcasts via the SkyHD STB.

So my question is: can I use SkyHD as a normal set top box connected to a TiVo via SCART cable, while also plugging the SkyHD HDMI output into my TV so that I can watch live HD material?

I'm assuming the TiVo records whatever is being output by the SkyHD box, but as I don't intend to record anything to the SkyHD disk the biggest problem is that I will miss any warnings when the TiVo wants to change channel in the middle of whatever I may be watching live.

Finally... how noisy is the SkyHD box... and any advice on ordering?


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Milhouse said:


> So I already have the full Sky package (movies + sports) and I'm about to buy a HD TV (Philips 42PFL9900D). I believe I can upgrade to Sky HD for just the cost of the STB (£100 or something like that?) - are there any other costs? I've already got a quad LNB and two feeds, although I only use one feed with my current Sky digibox.
> 
> I don't want to stop using my TiVo, and I'm only interested in watching the occasional live HD showing (football, rugby etc.) - I want to use the TiVo to continue recording Sky broadcasts via the SkyHD STB.
> 
> ...


To get the pay HD channels it's an extra £10 a month on your Sky sub.

The box is noisier than a TiVo, but perfectly fine.

You can use TiVo to control the Sky HD box in the same way (and with the same disadvantages) as a Sky+ box.

In practice, particularly witha 42-inch set, you'll probably find that the increaded pic quality on SD of using the Sky recorder will outweigh the pluses of Tivo.


----------



## Milhouse (Sep 15, 2001)

TCM2007 said:


> To get the pay HD channels it's an extra £10 a month on your Sky sub.
> 
> The box is noisier than a TiVo, but perfectly fine.
> 
> ...


Oooh bugger... another £10/month even when I'm already paying top whack? That sucks  I wonder if there's any room for negotiation with Sky in order to get HD for free - I don't mind paying a reasonable amount up front to buy the box (say, up to £150 to buy it outright).

What exactly are the "same disadvantages as a Sky+ box" - essentially that I can't use the Sky+/SkyHD box as a recorder, and that TiVo only "sees" what the Sky box is "playing" (either recorded or live)? Are there any problems changing channels? My TiVo works flawlessly with my standard Sky digibox, which is basically how I want the SkyHD box to operate - as a regular digibox, but with HD support.

Thanks for answering my questions!


----------



## Restorer (Jan 6, 2002)

Milhouse said:


> Oooh bugger... another £10/month even when I'm already paying top whack? That sucks  I wonder if there's any room for negotiation with Sky in order to get HD for free - I don't mind paying a reasonable amount up front to buy the box (say, up to £150 to buy it outright).


I think you are going to be disappointed! The current price of the HD box is £299 plus £60 installation. There is an offer on at the moment which reduces the price of the box according to how long you've been a Sky customer. The cheapest is if you have been with them for 6 years or more - £199 plus £30 installation.

There are 2 alternatives to using Sky themselves: 
1. Pick up a box off ebay and install yourself
2. Find a local installation firm - most are still doing the box for £149 plus £60 install. There may be VAT on top of this though.

Since you already have the feeds you would probably want to go the ebay route.

However you should wait to see what you think of Tivo's PQ on your new TV. You don't say if your Tivo is networked. Mode0 makes for a more acceptable picture on a big set.

Unless you just want to use your HD box without the Sky+ functionality there will be problems continuing to use Tivo. There is a long thread on the subject somewhere though I don't have time to find it right now.


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

Talk on digitalspy of a new Samsung Sky HD box sometime in the future...

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=654743

http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/today/?p=1932

EDIT: See also http://www.homecinemachoice.com/cgi-bin/shownews.php?id=9323 re HD viewing habits vs SD

Automan.


----------



## Milhouse (Sep 15, 2001)

Restorer said:


> The current full price of the HD box from Sky themselves is £299 plus £60 installation. There is an offer on at the moment which reduces the price of the box according to how long you've been a Sky customer. The cheapest is if you have been with them for 6 years or more - £199 plus £30 installation.
> 
> There are 2 alternatives to using Sky themselves:
> 1. Pick up a box off ebay and install yourself
> ...


My TiVo is networked (Cachecard) and running Mode 0, but you're right I should see what the PQ is like first then have a sniff around eBay for a good deal!

There's really nothing to install my end, it's just a matter of swapping the boxes over and then registering the new box with Sky HQ I reckon - charging me £60 would be a liberty! 

And the prospect of new HD boxes becoming available (Samsung) gives me another reason to take a wait and see approach for another two to three months...  (thanks Automan)


----------



## EdGillett (Dec 19, 2002)

Dawned on me yesterday I'm now rather reliant on the Thomson brand for my TV experience - 

Thomson Scenium (TIVO!)
Thomson Widescreen 32" CRT (Goldfish bowl, heavy lump of glass - looks good as a monitor)
Thomson Sky HD box.

I'm sure half the noise from the SkyHD box is the fact that it's largely made out of non sound absorbing plastic. Tivo's whisper quiet cos it's in a case that feels like it's hewn from a solid lump of metal with a chisel (ok, not quite, but still - build quality up there with the best).

My HD box has a 500GB Western Digital Hard Disk (Western Digital Caviar SE16 500GB 5000AAKS SATA-II 16MB Cache), and the disk seeking is quite noticeable. The original disk was never working, so I have no source for comparison. Might try changing the Acoustic Management setting on the drive (if there is one) to operate in it's quietest mode and see what a difference that makes. Sure you can do this. Will just need to get a e-SATA caddy for the laptop first ...

Do the fans run all the time in people's SkyHD boxes? Mine is alone on top of a shelf, so should have loads of ventilation. Will have a check tonight and see if it comes on and stays on after a power cycle.

Aside from that, Sky+'s FF and RW speeds are bugging the hell out of me! Sure I'll get used to the speed difference in comparison to Tivo, and the fact that I'll need to break myself out of the "expect it to jumpback compensating for your reaction times" behavior of the Tivo, but the 30x top speed seems pretty slow in comparison to a quick Tivo "blip blip blip"


----------



## mrtickle (Aug 26, 2001)

Automan said:


> Talk on digitalspy of a new Samsung Sky HD box sometime in the future...


That's a huge relief. A couple of weeks ago reading the news about Sky absorbing Amsturd, things were looking very bad indeed with the future prospect of an increasing number of HD boxes being Amstrads!


----------



## teresatt (Dec 21, 2001)

I'm planning to upgrade from my 42" SD plasma to a 50" HD plasma and as I really want to watch broadcast HD, I'm going to have to go to SkyHD. I really don't want to give up my Tivo. It's currently being fed by a VirginMedia box which I will be giving up. Perhaps I'll get a Freeview box and feed TiVo with that. TiVo has been like a good friend of the family over the years and it would be very sad to see it go. We also have a Toppy PVR, but the family prefer TiVo despite it only having one tuner compared to Toppy's twin tuners.

I just hope I can get on with the Sky+ software. It's probably going to drive me mad not being able to do all the things that TiVo does, but I long for HD TV on a big screen.


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

Assuming you're not getting Sky because you miss their channels on VM, have you considered their V+ Box? It's cheaper than the HD Sky+ and better spec'd. You could conceivably run your Tivo off the 'external' tuner as well


----------



## teresatt (Dec 21, 2001)

cwaring said:


> Assuming you're not getting Sky because you miss their channels on VM, have you considered their V+ Box? It's cheaper than the HD Sky+ and better spec'd. You could conceivably run your Tivo off the 'external' tuner as well


The VM has very little HD. With Sky I will get about five HD channels, including one that I miss very much which is Sky One. There's just no contest.


----------



## Langree (Apr 29, 2004)

I spent a bit of time with a sky box on my visit last week... wow... It would drive me bonkers to use all the time after having Tivo.


----------



## cwaring (Feb 12, 2002)

teresatt said:


> The VM has very little HD. With Sky I will get about five HD channels, including one that I miss very much which is Sky One. There's just no contest.


Fair enough. I did mention SO


----------



## Restorer (Jan 6, 2002)

teresatt said:


> I just hope I can get on with the Sky+ software. It's probably going to drive me mad not being able to do all the things that TiVo does, but I long for HD TV on a big screen.


As TCM2007 said at the start of the thread, you will, sadly, get used to it. I hooked my Tivo up to a Freeview box and, for a week or so, continued to use it for SD stuff. It was not long though I am ashamed to say before laziness took over (although I use the excuse of PQ not the fact I had to keep switching inputs on the TV)) and SD stuff was getting recorded from Sky too.

I do think though when the new season of shows starts I will be taking advantage of Tivo's excellent season pass system for SD stuff. Series Link is hopeless in comparison. I also continue to have a few Wish Lists set up on the Tivo for occasional viewing.


----------



## DeadKenny (Nov 9, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> Meanwhile your SD programs actually look worse on the new HDTV.


If the SD input quality is of top quality most HDTVs will actually upscale them without noticeable degredation. On top of that SkyHD boxes have the option to upscale internally.

Have to say I'm amazed by the quality of DVDs on my HD telly based on just the TV's upscaling. It's not worse than my old CRT, if anything it's better. That's considering I haven't even got an upscaling DVD player which is apparently even better (producing images approaching HD quality, though obviously not HD. In fact this is where many companies are concentrating at the moment rather than going for true HD like Blu-Ray / HD DVD).

However SD from a TiVo box does look pretty bad, but then that's because it's gone through D->A->D->A->D conversions and by default the compression of a TiVo is pretty bad.



> This is the same problem as with rushing to get a widescreen tv in the days when most television was still being broadcast in 4:3 - again why I resisted it.


Get a big enough widescreen telly and watch 4:3 material in it's proper ratio with bars on the side instead of using awful stretch modes... problem solved. That's what I did. I bought into widescreen due to the vast amount of widescreen DVDs though, not what was on TV.

In fact Britain has driven a widescreen revolution when the US has dragged their feet for so long (only with HD are they starting to buy widescreen TVs).



ozsat said:


> BBC-HD is winding up its content ready for a proper launch


Have the Trust okayed it then? It was down to them whether BBC-HD would even launch at all after trials and potentially they could decide it's not worth it at the moment given high cost and small audiences.

Though until they shoot Doctor Who in HD it's not worth it anyway


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

DeadKenny said:


> However SD from a TiVo box does look pretty bad, but then that's because it's gone through D->A->D->A->D conversions and by default the compression of a TiVo is pretty bad.


OK so for as long as there no better PVR out there than Tivo I'm happy to put up with my SD Tv and keep another £800 to £1000 in my bank account.


----------



## teresatt (Dec 21, 2001)

I've just had SkyHD installed and I'm already hating it. However, I really, really want HD which looks brilliant on my 42" SD plasma. I just hope I can get used to life with Sky+. I've got my 50" HD plasma arriving in a couple of weeks.

It took me ages to set 4400 to record. I knew which channel it was on but not the day. Therefore I couldn't use the A to Z search as it only seems to cover a days worth of EPG. Paging through the tiny view of the Sky+ EPG is very tortuous.

I haven't even looked at the planner yet.


----------



## teresatt (Dec 21, 2001)

Oh dear. I've just been looking at the planner and series links. I'm really depressed now.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

teresatt said:


> Oh dear. I've just been looking at the planner and series links. I'm really depressed now.


Didn't you believe all the other UK Tivo owners who had previously got Sky HD and reported just how poor it was as a PVR compared to Tivo? 

By the way TCM will be along shortly to point out how you soon get used to it and how having HD totally outweighs being forced to use the crap Sky+ interface.


----------



## teresatt (Dec 21, 2001)

Pete77 said:


> Didn't you believe all the other UK Tivo owners who had previously got Sky HD and reported just how poor it was as a PVR compared to Tivo?
> 
> By the way TCM will be along shortly to point out how you soon get used to it and how having HD totally outweighs being forced to use the crap Sky+ interface.


I didn't not believe them. It's just hit me more now that I have to use it.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

teresatt said:


> I didn't not believe them. It's just hit me more now that I have to use it.


I guess the difference is that my subscription to Sky Freesat is £0 per month so that for me not paying about £45 per month or more for Sky HD and a much worse interface is a no brainer. Not to mention saving £299 for the Sky HD box.

Obviously for you guys already paying mid £30s per month to Sky then as its only a tenner extra plus the cost of the box then it may be easier to become tempted.


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

I also don't understand people paying £299 for a SkyHD box.

Get the free one when you sign up, then buy a HD box from a reseller for about £160.

Also this way you don't have to pay the SkyHD £10 fee (Unless you want the sky HD channels that you already pay for in HD). BBC HD is free.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> I also don't understand people paying £299 for a SkyHD box.
> 
> Get the free one when you sign up, then buy a HD box from a reseller for about £160.
> 
> Also this way you don't have to pay the SkyHD £10 fee (Unless you want the sky HD channels that you already pay for in HD). BBC HD is free.


I would imagine this only works if you previously sign up for Sky+ and get a dish with a Quad LNB installed with that by Sky before buying a Sky HD box on Ebay? Otherwise you end up with a dish install with a single LNB that can do HD but can't support the Sky+ functionality?

Obviously for a Freesat customer like me though I can presumably buy a secondhand Sky HD box Ebay and make do without the Sky+ functionality if I just want to watch the HD content that is on the non subscription channels?

Of course I need to buy a widescreen HD television before its worth me doing any of those things. I vaguely keep hoping that my 100hz 4:3 Philips tv will die on me but even though its been repaired twice in its earlier life (for a lightning strike when it was nearly new and then a dry joint nearly 5 years ago now) I can see its going to refuse to die on me now for many years knowing that it will mean the Knackers Yard for it rather than a nice holiday at the repair shop.


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

Pete77 said:


> By the way TCM will be along shortly to point out how you soon get used to it and how having HD totally outweighs being forced to use the crap Sky+ interface.


At 50" it's a toss-up.

At 60" or more HD is kind of necessary!

However you can use TiVo's EPG instead of the crap Sky+ one to find stuff.

I paid £299 for my 2nd SkyHD box as I though it might be less dodgy than one bought off Ebay. However, I think the software is the main problem that affects SkyHD reliability, so I bought my 3rd SkyHD box off Ebay for £145.
You might find you need two SkyHD box so that if one fails to record for some reason you might get it on the 2nd SkyHD box. Of course you can record it on TiVo as a 3rd backup as well 

The only 2 nice Sky+ PVR features aside from HD, sound and twin tuners:

1.Pressing Play resumes playing your last recording, even in other menus
2. Left then red sorts your planner A-Z

Having mobile phone style A-Z entry is nice, but is made redundant by the near useless A-Z search facility.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

cyril said:


> At 50" it's a toss-up.
> 
> At 60" or more HD is kind of necessary!


But is a 60" Widescreen HDTV a necessity?  

Also having three Sky HD boxes kind of assumes you can afford the subs. Also I thought Sky didn't yet have a Multiroom subs model with either Sky+ or Sky HD boxes as secondary or tertiary boxes yet? So how do you make this work?


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

Pete77 said:


> But is a 60" Widescreen HDTV a necessity?
> 
> Also having three Sky HD boxes kind of assumes you can afford the subs. Also I thought Sky didn't yet have a Multiroom subs model with either Sky+ or Sky HD boxes as secondary or tertiary boxes yet? So how do you make this work?


Once you have seen a 60"+ screen it kind of becomes a necessity 
Especially for films and sport.

Unfortunately Sky charge an extra £20 per month per SkyHD box if you want to mirror your HD sub.
It's £10 extra per box if you just want BBCHD and SD only.

So I only have 2 boxes subbed, the 3rd box is a spare (it's dodgy and out of warranty), and will be used for BBC HD (which is free) in the winter.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

cyril said:


> Once you have seen a 60"+ screen it kind of becomes a necessity
> Especially for films and sport.


Why stop at 60 inches though.

I see the latest 103 inch Panasonic is a mere £43,616 including delivery. 

See www.pricerunner.co.uk/pl/2-900287/TVs/Panasonic-TH103PF9EK-Compare-Prices

Of course a 65 inch Panasonic widescreen model is only a more modest £6750

But when a Panasonic 50 inch set only costs £1100 and a 37" set would still be around £800 it kind of seems obvious where the value for money in these units begins to run out.

Of course if price is no object then why not get the very best but then why don't you have the 103" Panasonic unit Cyril.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

The 100-inch plus units I've seen don't have that great picture quality - after all they are first generation at that size. At 42-inch we're on to seventh or eight generation now, and it shows.

Size isn't everything, but it's definitely part of the mix!


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> The 100-inch plus units I've seen don't have that great picture quality - after all they are first generation at that size. At 42-inch we're on to seventh or eight generation now, and it shows.
> 
> Size isn't everything, but it's definitely part of the mix!


Plus you need a serious large piece of wall for that screen size, although I expect most people who can afford a 103 inch set will have one.

Or may be its only intended at the corporate market where 40 odd grand is a mere drop in the ocean.

I would have thought they would still have learned most of the lessons from the several generations of smaller LCD and Plasma sets in this larger unit though.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Plenty of people have a screen that size, but they usually use a projector to get it.


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

Only reason I don't have a 103 Panny is I am waiting for the Fujitsu version. 

Seriusly it is down to London house prices .
If I could get a good sized 1000sq ft flat in Chelsea for 400k instead of 1m the spare 640k would pay for the plasma, the ferrari,lambo,aston martin and a few years parking. 3 garages in Chelsea coud cost 450k though.


----------



## EdGillett (Dec 19, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> I would imagine this only works if you previously sign up for Sky+ and get a dish with a Quad LNB installed with that by Sky before buying a Sky HD box on Ebay? Otherwise you end up with a dish install with a single LNB that can do HD but can't support the Sky+ functionality?


When I got my Sky installed, the engineer turned up with a Single LNB and a single cable run. I asked him nicely and he used a Quad LNB and Shotgun Cable when I said I was about to hook up my eBay purchased SkyHD box. Worth asking


----------



## glenbo (May 18, 2004)

If you think Sky +, is bad, you should try the topup tv box.

As a freeview only household thought I would give it a go, after the 5th missed recording and 5 over the air updates. Its was moved to the bedroom and the tivo given pride of place back in the front room.

Have to agree with previous posters though, that in the absence of a new tivo for the UK has to be MCE all the way.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

glenbo said:


> If you think Sky +, is bad, you should try the topup tv box.


Based on my previous experience as a long time OnDigital customer and then a TopUpTv customer before we finally got the communal Sky dish here I fully expected TopUpTv Anytime to be a sad and unreliable joke. A company that claimed to have Eurosport but then only showed it for 7 or 8 hours per day could not be taken seriously.

BT Vision looks more interesting so long as you are prepared to pay the small additional premium for BT Broadband.


----------



## Cainam (May 25, 2004)

> BT Vision looks more interesting so long as you are prepared to pay the small additional premium for BT Broadband.


I have had my BT Vision box less than month, and am impressed with it. It does not have the functionality of Tivo, but it is streets ahead of the previous hard-drive Freeview box I had (a Thomson one).

It is not connected into Tivo at all (Sky box does that), but it is very useful for the occasional program clash, etc.

While I still watch a lot of programs on Sky One it is not going to replace Tivo any time soon, but it is very useable. It even includes a 30-second skip button...

Also, the ability to download some fairly recent films (e.g. Blood Diamond, School for Scoundrels) for £2.99, when they are still £3.75 to get from Blockbuster, is a bonus.

Not sure how well the series links work - they seem to have a kind of fuzzy logic based on time, channel and program name. So setting a series link for The Simpsons on Channel 4 records any showing "at around 6:30pm", or some such wording. This way, if you set one for EastEnders or something, when the time changes each day between 7:30pm and 8:00pm, the same season pass picks up both.

But using the search and wishlist features in Tivo, and putting clashes onto BT Vision seems to be working well for me at least.

And the fact that the box only cost £0.01 helps too (benefits of having a wife who works for BT, which also means free broadband!)


----------



## Sneals2000 (Aug 25, 2002)

cyril said:


> At 50" it's a toss-up.
> 
> At 60" or more HD is kind of necessary!


That is kind of a matter of opinion cyril, and depends significantly on your viewing distance / screen height ratio.

I have a 40" Full 1080 screen - and the benefit of HD over SD (even lightly compressed SD) is, to me, massive - and certainly not a toss-up. I can easily tell HD from SD at this screen size - absolutely no problem seeing the benefits. (Then again I work in the broadcast industry and am used to watching grade 1 and grade 2 CRTs and have worked with HD)

The difference between the same shows on BBC HD and BBC SD (even ignoring heavier compression) is huge, as is the difference between DVD and HD-DVD/BluRay playback.

I do sit reasonably close to the screen - as it was a straight replacement for a 28" CRT and my viewing distance didn't change (the lounge didn't suddenly expand!) - but not THAT close.

I'd say HD starts having a significant quality improvement in resolution terms once you get get over 28" screen diagonals at normal viewing distances (i.e. the Lechner distance)


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Cainam said:


> And the fact that the box only cost £0.01 helps too (benefits of having a wife who works for BT, which also means free broadband!)


But for anyone else BT Broadband is still questionable as they try to lock you in to an 18 month contract to get their best value deal. You are really forced to go for Option 3 as Option 2 only offers 8Gb a month. And BT Vision is not even available to Plusnet customers, even though BT now own it and even though Plusnet offers better value broadband on only a one month contract. There was talk that BT Vision would be made available to non BT broadband customers and that there would be a self install deal.

Unfortunately my mum needs an aerial upgrade costing £200 to get all Freeview channels properly and since BT Vision does not cover this it ruled it out for her as otherwise she is the sort of person who has a lot of faith in being with BT. Instead I got her Sky Pay Once Watch Forever for £75. It does makes sense since as our family is political she watches a lot of news and she also has investments so extra Freesat chanels like Bloomberg, Euronews, CNN, Al Jazeerah English, Russia Today, France 24 and Overseas Property and Real Estate Channels (she is a property price following holic) are likely to interest her more than E4, More4, TMF and The Hits or Sky Sports News, which she would never watch.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Sneals2000 said:


> at normal viewing distances (i.e. the Lechner distance)


Would you care to expand on this for folk not working in the broadcasting industry.


----------



## Raisltin Majere (Mar 13, 2004)

Pete77 said:


> Would you care to expand on this for folk not working in the broadcasting industry.


9 foot


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Raisltin Majere said:


> 9 foot


I suppose a read of Wikipedia is needed for more info.


----------



## mrtickle (Aug 26, 2001)

Cainam said:


> Also, the ability to download some fairly recent films (e.g. Blood Diamond, School for Scoundrels) for £2.99, when they are still £3.75 to get from Blockbuster, is a bonus.


Hmm. School for Scoundrels really is an excellent film, showcasing one of Terry-Thomas's best performances, but at 47 years old I'd hardly call it recent. (Unless you mean last year's atrocious remake!). That aside - for modern films  - is the picture quality the same as DVD, is there 5.1 sound, are there commentary tracks, behind the scenes documentaries and extra features?


----------



## Cainam (May 25, 2004)

mrtickle said:


> Hmm. School for Scoundrels really is an excellent film, showcasing one of Terry-Thomas's best performances, but at 47 years old I'd hardly call it recent. (Unless you mean last year's atrocious remake!). That aside - for modern films  - is the picture quality the same as DVD, is there 5.1 sound, are there commentary tracks, behind the scenes documentaries and extra features?


Nope, none of them. TBH, I have never really noticed extra features such as commentary tracks and documentaries on rented DVDs. Maybe they are there and I just have not being paying attention!


----------



## chimaera (Nov 13, 2000)

Automan said:


> And of course FX channel will be in HD sometime early next year.
> 
> http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a73068/hd-version-of-fx-in-the-pipeline.html
> 
> Automan.


Channel 4 HD in December:

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a75939/channel-4-hd-to-launch-in-december.html

And ITV1 HD early next year:

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a75516/hd-version-of-itv1-to-launch-next-spring.html

We may even get F1 in HD for next season with luck. And it looks like BBC HD becoming a proper channel instead of a trial is now a formality.


----------



## Restorer (Jan 6, 2002)

So how does BTVision work for non-Freeview stuff? Overnight downloads or what? I see they are offering live Premiership. How does this work? What's the PQ like - I've got visions of those blocky little windows from Chinese TV lol.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Restorer said:


> So how does BTVision work for non-Freeview stuff? Overnight downloads or what? I see they are offering live Premiership. How does this work? What's the PQ like - I've got visions of those blocky little windows from Chinese TV lol.


Its only available with BT Broadband. Its live video streaming for the video on demand stuff that they give special priority to ahead of all other ADSL broadband traffic on their network.

It also has a hard drive and can work as a conventional Freeview Playback PVR.

You can also watch stuff from the BBC's new Watch Again/IPlayer service from the last week but BT charge an extra monthly fee for this as part of one of the various packages.


----------



## Restorer (Jan 6, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> Its live video streaming for the video on demand stuff that they give special priority to ahead of all other ADSL broadband traffic on their network.


So do you have to be close to the exchange to get a decent quality picture?


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Restorer said:


> So do you have to be close to the exchange to get a decent quality picture?


Inevitably BT have had to work on the basis of the lowest common denominator so a Sync rate down to 1.5Mpbs or so can still handle the picture as I understand it. Mind you they do ask you to provide your postcode and phone number when you apply for the product.

See www.bt.com/btvision

From www.btvision.bt.com/vision/help_support/support_preorder.htm

"Can everyone get it"



> *BT Vision will currently work on residential BT lines where the line speed checker (www.bt.com/btbroadband) indicates a minimum guaranteed line speed required for the line concerned.* To get the Freeview channels, you'll also need to be in a Freeview reception area, which you can check at www.freeview.co.uk. However, even if you can't get Freeview, you will be able to use BT Vision's On Demand and interactive services, while getting regular TV channels through your aerial. However, you won't be able to use its DTR functions like pausing live TV and recording up to 80 hours of programmes.


Unfortunately they don't seem to specify what that minimum guaranteed line speed is. I think its as low as say 1.5Mbps or 2Mbps on ADSL Max though so most BT customers will be able to get it.


----------



## Restorer (Jan 6, 2002)

Hmmm. I'm thinking 1.5 mbps will get you a pretty crappy picture. Anyone actually seen BTVision in action?


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

Sneals2000 said:


> That is kind of a matter of opinion cyril, and depends significantly on your viewing distance / screen height ratio.


To be clear, I wasn't debating just distance /screen ratio.

It was:

a) distance,screen
b) limited availability of HD channels and content
c) high cost of SkyHD box and subs
e) crummy reliability and very poor Sky+ EPG and PVR interface

versus

known and reliable and feature full SD TiVo.

In fact I have unsubbed completely from Sky.

Having a few TB of SD stuff to catch up on helps. . I have only had time to watch one HD-DVD in the last 2 years, and not had time to watch any of my Blu-Ray discs either.

When Stargate Atlantis and BSG return it I might change my mind 

I guess the Panny 103 should look OK if coupled with a Lumagen Radiance and iScan VP50.

Hopefully BT vision has better quality than Tiscali TV( was Homechoice). AFAIK Tiscali haven't planned to go HD for another 2 years.


----------



## chimaera (Nov 13, 2000)

cyril said:


> b) limited availability of HD channels and content


It's been a bit slow to start, but with C4 and ITV coming it won't be long before 5 follow suit. It depends what you watch, but I mostly watch HD nowadays (movies and BBC) and I find enough to fill my viewing time. When and if 5 get their act together most of the US shows they air are made in HD, so I will be watching hardly any SD.



cyril said:


> c) high cost of SkyHD box and subs


Yes, TiVo is cheaper if you already have the TiVo and you only record free channels. However, for pay channels, you would be paying the subs whether you recorded them in SD or HD. The Sky+ sub is waived if you subscribe to movies or sport. The £10 HD fee is the same as TiVo's sub, and the box itself is a lot cheaper than TiVo was when new. So it's not that bad.



cyril said:


> e) crummy reliability and very poor Sky+ EPG and PVR interface


There seems to be a misconception here that Sky+ is unusable due to either reliability or poor PVR functionality. It isn't. It does screw up the odd recording (about once a month for me on average). The EPG is lamentable but Digiguide resolves that problem, except you still have to manually enter the recordings (or do it via web/mobile phone). It's not as good as TiVo, there's no debate about that, but it does work and it can be used. I've had mine for 16 months now and while I miss TiVo's ease of use, there's no way I would even consider going back. Particularly given the huge difference in picture quality of HD, having twin tuners, and the timing signals/dynamic EPG meaning I've only ever missed the end of two programmes (both F1 on ITV). The 'auto' padding setting seems to be pretty effective. I prefer skipping commercial breaks on the HD box - hit backup, add x minutes to the time, start playing. You soon work out how long the breaks are on a given channel and you can jump straight over them instantly.

I was one of the first TiVo customers in the UK, and if they were to introduce their twin tuner HD TiVo with a built in Sky card reader I would be first in line again, but sadly that's unlikely to ever happen. In the meantime, Sky HD is a workable solution, even though I hate to find myself defending a Sky product.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

chimaera said:


> The Sky+ sub is waived if you subscribe to movies or sport.


Its now waived for anyone who pays a Sky subscription. The minimum being 1 Mix at £16 per month.


----------



## cyril (Sep 5, 2001)

chimaera said:


> It's been a bit slow to start, but with C4 and ITV coming it won't be long before 5 follow suit. It depends what you watch, but I mostly watch HD nowadays (movies and BBC) and I find enough to fill my viewing time. When and if 5 get their act together most of the US shows they air are made in HD, so I will be watching hardly any SD.
> 
> Yes, TiVo is cheaper if you already have the TiVo and you only record free channels. However, for pay channels, you would be paying the subs whether you recorded them in SD or HD. The Sky+ sub is waived if you subscribe to movies or sport. The £10 HD fee is the same as TiVo's sub, and the box itself is a lot cheaper than TiVo was when new. So it's not that bad.
> 
> ...


Well as soon as there's more HD content I am jumping straight back!

If you only had one TiVo then the twin tuners are a definite plus.
As I have had far more than that padding and clashes have never been a problem for me 

I guess it depends on how flaky your particular SkyHD box has been. All 3 of mine screwed up every now and then.


----------



## DeadKenny (Nov 9, 2002)

£10 SkyHD sub will be gone next year I bet. Rubbish though the Sky interface is, I'll jump in an instant if it's a £200 max outlay on the box and no sub. Better with the box around £150 and a free or cheap installation.

I think Sky are just waiting to milk the Sky+ sign ups thanks to scrapping the subs, and for enough HD content, then go for milking SkyHD.

I'm not even too fussed about HD content as I'm looking forward to a box that has an HDMI connection and SD upscaling to 1080i.


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

You don't have to pay the HD sub, for BBC HD, and I assume the ITV, CH4, CH5 channels coming.
The £10 is only for the Sky HD channels. You can use a SKY HD box (Brought from ebay from resellers new for £150) and get BBC HD for free anyway, as soon as the others come on board I will be getting one, and subscribing to a minimum Sky package (£16 or £17 I understand) for the recording capability.

So I will have all the old terestial channels on HD, and some sky for £16, don't forget £110 quidco.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> You don't have to pay the HD sub, for BBC HD, and I assume the ITV, CH4, CH5 channels coming.
> The £10 is only for the Sky HD channels. You can use a SKY HD box (Brought from ebay from resellers new for £150) and get BBC HD for free anyway, as soon as the others come on board I will be getting one, and subscribing to a minimum Sky package (£16 or £17 I understand) for the recording capability.


So if I only have a single Sky feed here due to the communal Sky dish aerial and cannot get a dual feed installed will a Sky HD box still work to show me all the HD programs on the FTA HD channels, even though its Sky+ recording functionality won't work unless I subscribe to Sky?


----------



## 6022tivo (Oct 29, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> So if I only have a single Sky feed here due to the communal Sky dish aerial and cannot get a dual feed installed will a Sky HD box still work to show me all the HD programs on the FTA HD channels, even though its Sky+ recording functionality won't work unless I subscribe to Sky?


I am unsure how a Sky+/HD deals with a single feed. I suppose people have tried it??. Have a google.?


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

6022tivo said:


> I am unsure how a Sky+/HD deals with a single feed. I suppose people have tried it??. Have a google.?


/www.digital-forums.com/archive/index.php/t-296312.html

In essence yes you get HD but you can only record anything off the channel the box is currently tuned in to and you can't watch one channel while recording something else etc, etc.


----------

