# And the offer is...



## Richard Loxley

Just had my phone call from Virgin - he said it was the first call he'd done.

I was offered:

£149 activation fee
free installation

(So that sounds like £90 off the standard offering?)

12 month contract
28 days cooling off period

Installation this Wednesday (!)

I already pay £25.25/month for L (10meg) broadband. To add XL TV to this would be an extra £18/month, plus £3/month for Tivo. So £21/month for Tivo, and cable TV with HD.

I don't want a phone line so didn't get a price with that.


----------



## smokie

Installation booked for Wed afternoon. Mark actually called back to say that installation couldn't be before 11th but then they relented and left it as originally planned.

Currently it is dual tuner, firmware update will add third tuner in March. 18 month contract, £40 installation waived and box cost of £149. £3 per month extra (which I will save by disconnecting the old Virgin box attached to series 1)

I was the first he'd called, I was from Roy's list as he already knew I had fully subscribed Series 1.


----------



## cwaring

That's not a bad offer 



Richard Loxley said:


> I don't want a phone line so didn't get a price with that.


It wouldn't make that much difference I don't think; maybe a couple of quid. The price you would pay for the phone line (just over £12) would be offset by a discount on your other services, but not enough to justify it if you don't need it.


----------



## smokie

Hmph - would have been first to post this but had to take the call back. Can a mod merge this with Richard's thread?

btw I already had XL TV & internet and basic phone.


----------



## ruperte

Just got my phone call too. Well confusingly the 1st call was saying, he was phoning about my mobile phone account! I don't *have* a mobile phone with them. Cue 2nd phone call moments later saying I'd registered for a Tivo.

So £149.99 install/activation fee, £32.99 a month for Tivo with XL, 10Mb Internet and Phoneline, going up to after 6 months. 18 Month contract. So not too painful 

Installation sometime after the 11th they will call me tomorrow with the details.


----------



## nocomp

Sam e deal here - VM Tivo replacong basic V box

Install on 11 Feb - I waited so long that another few days wont matter - will need the time to empty s1 TIVO!

happy days

nocomp

P.S. how come none of the regular posters here have had a call yet?


----------



## royfox

That sounds like a good offer.. 

Hope everyone is happy.


----------



## okonski_uk

Do remember, they also insist on a card payment for the &#163;149 immediately, and will not put it on the account, which I find a pain. The deal to keep any existing V+ at &#163;5pm isn't clear. I already have a V Box I pay &#163;5pm for. They can have that back and I'll keep the V+ instead, especially if the cost is the same.


----------



## nocomp

Hi

Anybody want to but a S1 1TB TIVO, available from 11 Feb ?

nocomp


----------



## cwaring

okonski_uk said:


> Do remember, they also insist on a card payment for the £149 immediately, and will not put it on the account, which I find a pain.


Yeah. £12 per month on my bill or a one-off £149. It's 50/50 I think


----------



## ColinYounger

I bet I'm last to get a call because of my surname.


----------



## okonski_uk

cwaring said:


> Yeah. £12 per month on my bill or a one-off £149. It's 50/50 I think


Not if that's true. 12 x 12 = £144, so a saving of £5. This wasn't offered to me, despite protesting.


----------



## ruperte

Just got called back, install on Sat 12th Feb, 8am - 1pm, so won't even need to take time off work! Now to phone up Sky and give them the bad news!


----------



## cwaring

Sorry. &#163;149 / 12 = &#163;12.41

I was just agreeing with you about having to pay the &#163;149 upfront


----------



## okonski_uk

cwaring said:


> Sorry. £149 / 12 = £12.41
> 
> I was just agreeing with you about having to pay the £149 upfront


----------



## big_dirk

just had the call, now to concoct a story so the Mrs doesn't kill me.........


----------



## TCM2007

Two year costs of &#163;940-odd. Ouch. I'm afraid I've got used to Freeview now, so even if I was in a Virgin area that would be a bit rich for me, especially as Sky are shifting a lot of their good stuff onto Sky Atlantic.


----------



## EdGillett

Me too! 23 Feb install for me. Same deal - &#163;90 off (&#163;149 install and activation).

I'm going up to the XL TV package from M+, and up to XL Broadband for a &#163;1 more (50MB broadband) whilst I'm at it.

My lovely wife is beside herself with glee that Tivo is coming back to our lives having had our S1 disconnected for the better part of 3 years. I'm quite excited too 

The Sales Guy sounds like he's having the easiest sales calls in his life with all our S1ers eager to accept terms 

In fact I have two children that have never heard the "bloop bloop" sound, and require an education 

Roll on Feb and well done VM for giving us S1 owners a decent offer


----------



## deshepherd

Looks good ... had hoped the "discount" would be a bit more - i.e. activation fee of &#163;99. (N.b. anyone know/asked if the activation fee includes HD activation ... V-HD and V+ boxes are HD capable but I think you have to pay &#163;49 to get the HD "activated")

Good also to see that the sign-up list here does seem to have worked!

It will be interesting to see what the special "launch offer" that VM give to the general public/new subscribers though.


----------



## deshepherd

TCM2007 said:


> Two year costs of £940-odd. Ouch. I'm afraid I've got used to Freeview now, so even if I was in a Virgin area that would be a bit rich for me, especially as Sky are shifting a lot of their good stuff onto Sky Atlantic.


Depends on your current situation ... as we already have XL TV then £149 install then £3/month seems reasonable.


----------



## RichardJH

Just had call and as mentioned before &#163;149 instead of &#163;199 upfront cost and waive of the &#163;40 activation cost.

Have opted to get rid of V+ box and old Pace STB but keep V HD box for one of my S1 Tivos.

10mb BB,XL TV with Tivo and 2nd HD box, Xl Phone call waiting and anytime calls Total cost per month &#163;49. Will have Tivo and a monthly saving of &#163;2.50

Decided to change from keeping V HD box as 2nd box to keeping V+ box instead. Same price so really a no brainer to keep a second recorder instead of a dumb non PVR box


----------



## jonphil

I missed my call by about 20mins  gutted. Hope they call back again soon.


----------



## tdenson

Feeling a bit left out here. Can anyone tell me how I can find out what details I gave on Roy's list so I can find out which phone number they will be calling.


----------



## richw

Install booked for 19th Feb


----------



## LampyDave

deshepherd said:


> N.b. anyone know/asked if the activation fee includes HD activation ... V-HD and V+ boxes are HD capable but I think you have to pay £49 to get the HD "activated")


I was on the phone making my booking as I read this so I asked the fella. The activation does include HD activation. We're SD at the moment, but he confirmed that the HD will be activated as part of the install.

All booked in for the 15th. As previously mentioned elsewhere we've got to be the easiest 'cold' sales calls in the world...


----------



## warrenrb

Oooh, I'm a bit worried about getting stung with an 'HD activation charge' on top, as I'm just on an SD box atm. Arse.


----------



## warrenrb

Ha! We posted seconds apart I think Dave. Sweet.


----------



## LampyDave

Indeed! I've not hung around on here so much for years!

I said to the sales guy that they'd been calling people for about an hour - I think he found it a little like being stalked...


----------



## okonski_uk

There is no such thing as 'HD Activation' - this is a Sky marketing ploy, and irrelevant to VM! Virgin do not charge extra for HD, unlike another satellite broadcaster I won't mention.


----------



## mikerr

Got my install booked too - Tivo to replace V+ and my bill is going *down* by a tenner.


----------



## warrenrb

okonski_uk said:


> There is no such thing as 'HD Activation' - this is a Sky marketing ploy, and irrelevant to VM! Virgin do not charge extra for HD, unlike another satellite broadcaster I won't mention.


From the Virgin Site T&Cs:

"HD: HD activation fee is £49.95 with all TV packages for all new Virgin TV customers (subject to status and credit checks). Standard installation fee (£40) remains payable. HD activation fee of £49.95 only applies to first HD Box. For second and subsequent HD Boxes, HD activation is charged at £99.95 per V+ HD Box, or £49.95 per V HD Box. V+ subscription is included with TV size XL or £5.10 a month with TV size M, TV size M+ (Starter) and TV size L. Existing customers who do not wish to keep their SD box must pay a £49.95 HD activation fee for a V HD/V+HD box. HD TV set required. V+ HD must be kept for your minimum contract term. V+ HD Box may differ to that depicted. V+ HD Box remains the property of Virgin Media. Channels may be subject to change, regional variations."


----------



## cwaring

Sorry, but I think you'll find there is 

http://shop.virginmedia.com/digital-tv/set-top-boxes/v-plus-hd-box.html


> HD: HD activation fee is £49.95 with all TV packages for all new Virgin TV customers (subject to status and credit checks).


----------



## okonski_uk

This must be a knee-jerk to capitalise on what Sky started. I certainly had no HD term imposed as a V+ customer when the kit was launched.


----------



## okonski_uk

DUPE

System's really slow at the moment....


----------



## cwaring

okonski_uk said:


> System's really slow at the moment....


Indeed it is. First time I've seen this page since I registered on here in 2002.


----------



## jonphil

I really could do with going out this evening, but don't want to miss them calling again.
Tried calling the number back and it's just a recorded message saying Virgin Media rang and they will call back


----------



## ColinYounger

I haven't had a call yet. I feel like an S1 owner in a non-cabled area.


----------



## warrenrb

No call here either (and my surname begins with B!  )

I only filled in Roy's form in the end - not the TiVo message one too (beginning to think that was a mistake).


----------



## warrenrb

Between this and the transfer window deadline day, I've got stuff all work done today.


----------



## swanny

No call here and I filled in every reg page I could find.


----------



## deshepherd

EdGillett said:


> In fact I have two children that have never heard the "bloop bloop" sound, and require an education


Well its probably easier to explain to them what TiVo is than it was for us to explain to our youngest who never experienced TV without TiVo at home why when visiting other peoples houses we could pause the TV while we did something else - to him pressing pause or record was part of the normal TV experience!


----------



## deshepherd

okonski_uk said:


> This must be a knee-jerk to capitalise on what Sky started. I certainly had no HD term imposed as a V+ customer when the kit was launched.


... but did they actually have any HD at that time ?!


----------



## Tavis75

Was off work today, but out so missed the call  Twice!

Didn't leave a message on my answer phone but 1471 showed who it was that had called, no luck calling back that number though.

Anyone tried calling back regular Virgin Media customer services to see if they're able to do the deal? Or if they even know anything about it?


----------



## smokie

Mark that I spoke to said I was the first person he'd called and he'd read the forums and seen the excitement and thought the first calls might be easy...

He wasn't able to say when the firmware update would take place Well, apart from March sometime) and could only adviser that I keep an eye on the forum to know when to reboot my box for the third tuner!!

I dunno if the TV guys are the same as the internet guys but I could do with blagging a superhub while he's here...as I read that 20mb internet will shortly be going up to 30mb if you have the superhub. &#163;75 upgrade if you haven't!


----------



## staffie2001uk

jonphil said:


> I really could do with going out this evening, but don't want to miss them calling again.
> Tried calling the number back and it's just a recorded message saying Virgin Media rang and they will call back


What is the number?

I don't want to answer the phone to TalkTalk by mistake!

Cheers.


----------



## nbaker

staffie2001uk said:


> What is the number?
> 
> I don't want to answer the phone to TalkTalk by mistake!
> 
> Cheers.


0800 052 0980


----------



## DB70+

They call from 0800 0522980

They also calling S1 non-cable users too.


----------



## okonski_uk

The TiVo Call Centre 'Real' number is 0161 614 6000 if this helps anyone.... (You can't call back the 0800 number they present)


----------



## cwaring

Tavis75 said:


> Anyone tried calling back regular Virgin Media customer services to see if they're able to do the deal? Or if they even know anything about it?


I wouldn't do that. I suspect that it will be a different team entirely.


----------



## abuelbanat

DB70+ said:


> They call from 0800 0522980
> 
> They also calling S1 non-cable users too.


having just called that number it rings through to a message from BT Callminder !


----------



## jonphil

If virgin are reading the forums call me back  rang at 4.20pm just I was still on my way home.

DE7 4 btw  like I say in case the Virgin Tivo team are looking at this. I'm home at the moment 
Was on Roy's list so maybe the one you started working on.


----------



## Tavis75

cwaring said:


> I wouldn't do that. I suspect that it will be a different team entirely.


Yep. Decided to give it a try and customer services don't know anything about the deal. So frustrating to have missed the call! Plus if they keep ringing my landline I expect I'll keep missing it due to being at work!


----------



## velocitysurfer1

DB70+ said:


> They also calling S1 non-cable users too.


I've been called and I'm in a non cable area:down:

I got the non cabled area deal: I was offered an apology!


----------



## ColinYounger

Dear VirginMedia,

I know you're reading the forum, so could you maybe call me now? I've been sitting by the phone for ages and I'm going faint from lack of food.

Also, I've run out of bottles for - well, y'know. And I need to go again.

Ta.

Me.


XXXX


----------



## maxwells_daemon

Reposting over here, because I just received The Call and am unreasonably excited.

The chap mentioned that most people he'd talked to had gone straight online and posted the fact (he even saw his name mentioned, but unfortunately I missed it), so keeping with the trend...

I had to upgrade from L to XL, but got a cheaper (and faster!) broadband package, so with the &#163;3/m TiVo change, I had to pay &#163;17.25/m extra for TiVo. Plus the &#163;149 "activation charge".

The XL package has absolutely nothing of interest, except for the TV on demand, which I remember as being pretty good, but nothing like worth the price on its own. TiVo is, of course.

My new TiVo on 15 Feb, woo!


----------



## nbaker

Haha, I need to go again also bet thats when the phone rings.

First rang me around 4:30 when I was at work, patiently waiting for another call debit card in hand, hint hint


----------



## staffie2001uk

Not a current VM customer. 

Just had the call! 

&#163;149 plus monthly of &#163;29.50 for XLTV and &#163;3 for TiVo
12 month contract.
28 days cooling off

I couldn't get any introductory offer on the monthly sub. 

However, as a non VM customer they couldn't find a TV only code that worked. So after much muttering and call backs I get a phone option at &#163;26.50 for six months, going to &#163;38.74 thereafter. So &#163;391.44 instead of &#163;390 for the first year. I expect I can cancel the phone line after 12 months. 

Or Virgin may start offering static ip addresses and I can move my phone and broadband to them. 

Installation on 15th Feb.


----------



## Brett33

Hi Everyone this is my 1st post on here...yeah...Anywho..

I registered with tivo when it all started kicking off and ive not heard anything as yet will i get a call or are they doing it in surname alphabetical order in which case i will be last as my surname begins with a "w"

P.s iam on xl tv and broadband.

Any help would be grateful.


----------



## jonphil

What time did you first miss the call Staffie2001uk, just wondering if they are now working back up the list to see who they couldn't get hold of first time round.


----------



## Tony Hoyle

Grr... not happy. Phone rings. Wife answers - recorded message 'virgin tried to reach you but we couldn't as your phone is not a virgin phone'.

Well. 
1. She answered the phone within 3 rings and clearly they could reach us because she heard the message!
2. It's most definately a virgin phone, but if they'd rather I didn't pay them for it I'm fine with that..
3. Why the H would that matter anyway?


----------



## teresatt

They called earlier while I was out and my husband took the call but said to call back as I was very interested. They called back just before 6pm and started taking my order but then said that there was a system error and he'd call back tomorrow.

What a pain. I just can't wait to get back to TiVo again.

They were offering the same as everyone else here. I asked if this was a series 1 TiVo offer but the guy said it was just because I'd registered an interest on their website.


----------



## jonphil

No... so does that mean no more calls this evening 
Really trying to decide if I should go and do the bit of shopping I need too as otherwise I need to go out tuesday instead.


----------



## Pine Cladding

jonphil said:


> No... so does that mean no more calls this evening
> Really trying to decide if I should go and do the bit of shopping I need too as otherwise I need to go out tuesday instead.


Or does anyone have a number we can contact them on


----------



## smokie

Well I just had my third call from them today. He wasn't able to make me a better offer than the first one though...


----------



## jonphil

smokie said:


> Well I just had my third call from them today. He wasn't able to make me a better offer than the first one though...


NO fair... I'm waiting for them to call back so I can get mine sorted.
So you have been getting called even though you have been saying NO?


----------



## mikerr

staffie2001uk said:


> Or Virgin may start offering static ip addresses and I can move my phone and broadband to them.


Leave your broadband modem and router plugged in 24/7
I've had the same ip for over 3 years, and was previously the same for a few years before that - it only changed when I changed router


----------



## okonski_uk

0161 614 6000 is the number of the Call Centre making the Tivo calls...


----------



## swanny

nooooooooo

Just got in and wife said some one from TiVo rang and they would ring back


----------



## smokie

jonphil said:


> So you have been getting called even though you have been saying NO?


Nah, I was apparently the first acceptance (see top of thread) - being installed on Wed.

Not alphabetical, I'm an M. RG40 postcode. Very long term cable customer (since Telecential days) but I doubt that's anything to do with it.

My call agent was Mark, he was the one who said he'd been reading the forums. He called back to say he couldn't install on Wed after all, then changed his mind again.

Third caller was Dan.


----------



## Furball

I must have been the last call of the day as I called back just now and the chap I was speaking to has now gone home 

Anyhow, the same deal was pushed accross the table ............this will INCREASE my monthly bill by around £20 

Now let me see, they are offering me something I already have, which I dont pay anything extra a month, for £240 year, plus they want relieve me of £149 for the privilege  mmmmmmm so for nearly £400 I get .......wait for it............exactly the same 

Nah sorry VM your going to have to do better than that, we really dont want XL TV, we barely watch half the channels that we get on M+ although its not M+ but some weird package.

I dont mind paying the £149 but I DONT want XL

If they wont back down on the XL TV thing then I'll just look for another S1 TiVo and run it next to the current one on a freeview box, whey hey instant twin tuner TiVo , you can get a lifetime S1 box for a lot less than £400 



Give it 6mths -12 mths and it will bound to get cheaper.



Furball


----------



## smokie

I might have a subbed S1 going soon...


----------



## nbaker

Me too


----------



## RichardJH

Me too (2) and daughter 1  that makes 3 more for fleabay.
Wow I reckon they will be going for next to nothing.

Thinks might find a place in the loft for them


----------



## okonski_uk

Last one ! spotted went for &#163;12 + &#163;6 shipping, and that was a Lifetime sub! I think I'll just keep mine....


----------



## jonphil

okonski_uk said:


> Last one ! spotted went for £12 + £6 shipping, and that was a Lifetime sub! I think I'll just keep mine....


Wait until people start to realise what Tivo is again. It's great for a 2nd TV with freeview like I use mine for, but in the age of HD I can see why people wouldn't want to pay lots for something that can only ever record SD


----------



## PaulMD

Drats, I missed the S1 offer sign up - just hope existing VM customers get a similar deal!


----------



## jonphil

PaulMD said:


> Drats, I missed the S1 offer sign up - just hope existing VM customers get a similar deal!


Someone said it's the same deal  but maybe we are ahead of the queue for getting it actually installed as it's still not officially been annouced as available.

Register on the upgrade page.


----------



## Muttley1900

royfox said:


> That sounds like a good offer..
> 
> Hope everyone is happy.


'ere, thought you were out of radio contact, or was that some ploy to help get a quick getaway if it all went horribly wrong?


----------



## hokkers999

okonski_uk said:


> There is no such thing as 'HD Activation' - this is a Sky marketing ploy, and irrelevant to VM! Virgin do not charge extra for HD, unlike another satellite broadcaster I won't mention.


Yes they do actually. We haveone of the new V - hd possible boxes. To have hd activated would be a cost.

Din't bother as we don't have an hd telly.


----------



## hokkers999

smokie said:


> Installation booked for Wed afternoon. Mark actually called back to say that installation couldn't be before 11th but then they relented and left it as originally planned.
> 
> Currently it is dual tuner, firmware update will add third tuner in March. 18 month contract, £40 installation waived and box cost of £149. £3 per month extra (which I will save by disconnecting the old Virgin box attached to series 1)
> 
> I was the first he'd called, I was from Roy's list as he already knew I had fully subscribed Series 1.


So is it 12 months or 18 months or pot luck depending on who calls you? And is it still compulsory to take XL tv at 26.50 a month?

Or is it £3 on top of your existing package?


----------



## AWT

velocitysurfer1 said:


> I've been called and I'm in a non cable area:down:
> 
> I got the non cabled area deal: I was offered an apology!


sorry, I'm a bit late to the party... Is there anything on offer for non-cabled area folks?


----------



## hokkers999

maxwells_daemon said:


> Reposting over here, because I just received The Call and am unreasonably excited.
> 
> The chap mentioned that most people he'd talked to had gone straight online and posted the fact (he even saw his name mentioned, but unfortunately I missed it), so keeping with the trend...
> 
> I had to upgrade from L to XL, but got a cheaper (and faster!) broadband package, so with the £3/m TiVo change, I had to pay £17.25/m extra for TiVo. Plus the £149 "activation charge".
> 
> The XL package has absolutely nothing of interest, except for the TV on demand, which I remember as being pretty good, but nothing like worth the price on its own. TiVo is, of course.
> 
> My new TiVo on 15 Feb, woo!


Wow, £350 for a year's viewing. Underwhelmed doesn't even begin to state it....


----------



## hokkers999

teresatt said:


> [snip]
> 
> They were offering the same as everyone else here. I asked if this was a series 1 TiVo offer but the guy said it was just because I'd registered an interest on their website.


So is the S1 deal even better then and have you all jumped the gun in your haste to bend over and take one for VM


----------



## scoopuk

AWT said:


> sorry, I'm a bit late to the party... Is there anything on offer for non-cabled area folks?


Nope nothing at all. Not even a response if you beg them for a simple contact for who to ring if you want them to cable your street.

VM customer service remains the worst ever. I'm not a Sky fan but at least their customer service does the job.

Not only that to rub salt in the wound, VM have even started sending junk mail to our flats asking people to sign up for cable. Their homeless Indian call center couldn't work out that we don't have it in our street and couldn't tell me how to get it.

Don't laugh at me but I actually started looking to move home so I could get a new HD Tivo


----------



## hokkers999

Furball said:


> I must have been the last call of the day as I called back just now and the chap I was speaking to has now gone home
> 
> Anyhow, the same deal was pushed accross the table ............this will INCREASE my monthly bill by around £20
> 
> Now let me see, they are offering me something I already have, which I dont pay anything extra a month, for £240 year, plus they want relieve me of £149 for the privilege  mmmmmmm so for nearly £400 I get .......wait for it............exactly the same
> 
> Nah sorry VM your going to have to do better than that, we really dont want XL TV, we barely watch half the channels that we get on M+ although its not M+ but some weird package.
> 
> I dont mind paying the £149 but I DONT want XL
> 
> If they wont back down on the XL TV thing then I'll just look for another S1 TiVo and run it next to the current one on a freeview box, whey hey instant twin tuner TiVo , you can get a lifetime S1 box for a lot less than £400
> 
> Give it 6mths -12 mths and it will bound to get cheaper.
> 
> Furball


Well said that man! What I've been saying for ages. Glad someone else isn't falling for the hype.


----------



## hokkers999

okonski_uk said:


> Last one ! spotted went for £12 + £6 shipping, and that was a Lifetime sub! I think I'll just keep mine....


So, get aother lifetime subby for abut £30 all in

OR

get gouged by VM for £350 for a year,

that's a hard one isn't it


----------



## AWT

scoopuk said:


> Nope nothing at all.


Bugger!  Thanks for the reply though.


----------



## hokkers999

jonphil said:


> Wait until people start to realise what Tivo is again. It's great for a 2nd TV with freeview like I use mine for, but in the age of HD I can see why people wouldn't want to pay lots for something that can only ever record SD


So you got suckered in by the HD con then? Unless you sit about 5 feet from the screen the human eyeball can't tell the difference. Google "limit of human visual acuity"

As I pointed out earlier only about 3 million in the country get hd on their telly, that leaves 57 MILLION tv sets that get only SD


----------



## scoopuk

hokkers999 said:


> So, get aother lifetime subby for abut £30 all in
> 
> OR
> 
> get gouged by VM for £350 for a year,
> 
> that's a hard one isn't it


Hey Hokkers, I respect your sceptism about this - I know everyone's having a go at you. But you are making a very good point about the costs of this.

To be honest I'm perfectly happy with my existing Tivo coupled with a Sky box - but really wish it handled HD. 
And of course three tuners would be ultra cool too.

What are the chances of Sky realising that Tivo is a superior product and they upgrade their boxes too ? Zero I suppose.


----------



## Furball

hokkers999 said:


> Well said that man! What I've been saying for ages. Glad someone else isn't falling for the hype.


I dont mind the hype, just dont want to get fleeced for it.

I equally dont mind paying good money for a good product, what I dont like is being taken for a muppet 

I just feel I'm paying all over again for exactly the same product, which is exactly why I dont buy Apple iFleece products 

Fur


----------



## mrwhizzard

Furball said:


> I must have been the last call of the day as I called back just now and the chap I was speaking to has now gone home
> 
> Anyhow, the same deal was pushed accross the table ............this will INCREASE my monthly bill by around £20
> 
> Now let me see, they are offering me something I already have, which I dont pay anything extra a month, for £240 year, plus they want relieve me of £149 for the privilege  mmmmmmm so for nearly £400 I get .......wait for it............exactly the same
> 
> Nah sorry VM your going to have to do better than that, we really dont want XL TV, we barely watch half the channels that we get on M+ although its not M+ but some weird package.
> 
> I dont mind paying the £149 but I DONT want XL
> 
> If they wont back down on the XL TV thing then I'll just look for another S1 TiVo and run it next to the current one on a freeview box, whey hey instant twin tuner TiVo , you can get a lifetime S1 box for a lot less than £400
> 
> Give it 6mths -12 mths and it will bound to get cheaper.
> 
> Furball


Am afraid to say that having XL is a pre-requisite for all VM TiVo customers at this stage. As for the deal, existing customers will get pretty much the same deal, aside from the £40 activation which you S1 owners appear to have been waived.


----------



## Furball

hokkers999 said:


> So you got suckered in by the HD con then? Unless you sit about 5 feet from the screen the human eyeball can't tell the difference. Google "limit of human visual acuity"


mmmm not so sure about that, the whole HD thing was to fix the issue that SD was never meant to be shown on anything really much larger than 32", all of a sudden folks could buy 37"-40" and bigger, thus SD blown up that big just looks naff unless your watching it from 1/2 mile away which sort of defeats the whole big screen thing  
That and the move to Plasma and LCD panels which work totally digitally rather than the old fashioned line scan way of CRT this again causes a whole host of issues to a regular SD picture being pushed on to a screen thats 40" and able to display a much high resolution than a SD picture.

But thats moving way off topic now 

Furball


----------



## abuelbanat

hokkers999 said:


> So is the S1 deal even better then and have you all jumped the gun in your haste to bend over and take one for VM


isn't the box cheaper than published? £149 v £199 - with no £40 installation fee for those contacted today?

£90 saving against the published figures? no?


----------



## Furball

mrwhizzard said:


> Am afraid to say that having XL is a pre-requisite for all VM TiVo customers at this stage. As for the deal, existing customers will get pretty much the same deal, aside from the £40 activation which you S1 owners appear to have been waived.


Sadly its just not worth it for us then, we watch about 8 channels MAX, had the full monty pack for a few years when it was NTL and we just didnt watch the rest of the tat, its mainly repeats of repeats or programs made up of other programs we found so dumped most of it. 
£40 saving on a extra £20 increase of my monthly bill doesnt thrill me in these days of having to watch the pennies.

Ah well, the thought was there I suppose, at least TiVo's back in the UK :up:

Furball


----------



## velocitysurfer1

scoopuk said:


> To be honest I'm perfectly happy with my existing Tivo coupled with a Sky box - but really wish it handled HD.
> And of course three tuners would be ultra cool too.
> 
> What are the chances of Sky realising that Tivo is a superior product


I don't have a choice as I'm not in a cabled area. But I have TiVo (lifetime sub) hooked up to a sky hd box.... so I have three tuners although one is analogue which is unused. But I can record two things, with at least one in HD, and watch something prerecorded from TiVo. All for the price of my sky sub which I think is £20 per month as I dont take the extortionate hd pack..... Overall good value for money.

My only concern is if TiVo ( and yes it will be TiVo and not Virgin) decide to turn off the EPG data. The recent message regarding the bskyb contract hasn't convinced me of their intentions either way.

Whilst sky plus is an inferior product to the new virgin TiVo (and my S1) almost everywhere in the UK (and abroad  ) can receive sky -something which is not possible for virgin media to accomplish without huge cost and disruption to the country.


----------



## cwaring

Furball said:


> Sadly its just not worth it for us then, we watch about 8 channels MAX...


Me too, but I still have the XL pack as it's the only one with SyFy in it (or it was at the time, and Bravo, which I used to watch sometimes)

Plus all the OD is free. (PPV excepted)


----------



## warrenrb

Furball said:


> I just feel I'm paying all over again for exactly the same product, which is exactly why I dont buy Apple iFleece products


I'm having similar dilemmas about potential extra cost (as an 'M' package user currently), but I don't think you can say 'exactly the same product'. It's a vast improvement over our S1 TiVo's.

But then, your 'iFleece' comment makes it sound like you might think Mac is 'exactly the same' as Windows, or Android is 'exactly the same' as iPhone, so spotting improvements might not be one of your strong-points.


----------



## deshepherd

swanny said:


> nooooooooo
> 
> Just got in and wife said some one from TiVo rang and they would ring back


same here ... plus wife denies any knowledge of my saying on at least two occasions in the past few days that VM would probably be phoning soon to ask if we wanted a TiVo.


----------



## deshepherd

hokkers999 said:


> So, get aother lifetime subby for abut £30 all in
> 
> OR
> 
> get gouged by VM for £350 for a year,
> 
> that's a hard one isn't it


So stick with my current S1 which is showing signs of imminently needing a new disk or spend £149 + £3/month (as I already have XL TV) on a new box which will store much more, have HD, I hope have a "usable" interface to iplayer etc (my vbox doesn't really as response time from key press on remote is ~5 secs) and (key point) wont on a regular basis get a channel change wrong and normally fail to change to expected channel 10x and end on 110 so you record Living-HD which ends up as a VM "you don't subscribe to to HD channels - phone xxxxxx to upgrade, press OK to watch anything else" screen.

Now that's not a hard one!


----------



## warrenrb

I didn't get my call! And now the transfer window has closed! Does that mean I won't be able to get one until the summer? Or have I just been obsessing over this site and football sites all day, and am starting to get it all a bit muddled up?


----------



## TCM2007

hokkers999 said:


> So you got suckered in by the HD con then? Unless you sit about 5 feet from the screen the human eyeball can't tell the difference. Google "limit of human visual acuity"
> 
> As I pointed out earlier only about 3 million in the country get hd on their telly, that leaves 57 MILLION tv sets that get only SD


Depends how big your TV is.

If you still have a 32-inch or smaller TV then you're right, but the "sweet spot" for TV is now 42-inch or so, and plenty are bigger still.

As for your 3m figure, the PS3 (an HD games console which plays Blu-rays) installed base passed 3m over a year ago, SkyHD has 3.5m subscribers, Virgin 1.4m and Freeview HD is just starting to grow - so your number is far too low.

And remember there are about 22m households in the UK, not 60m. Naturally only the main telly is typically HD.


----------



## cwaring

warrenrb said:


> I didn't get my call! And now the transfer window has closed!


Huh? 


> Or have I just been obsessing...


I'm saying nothing


----------



## Ovit-UK

warrenrb said:


> I didn't get my call! And now the transfer window has closed! Does that mean I won't be able to get one until the summer? Or have I just been obsessing over this site and football sites all day, and am starting to get it all a bit muddled up?


I know exactly what you mean 

No call and Nando Tosser destroys all faith in footballers.


----------



## hokkers999

TCM2007 said:


> Depends how big your TV is.
> 
> If you still have a 32-inch or smaller TV then you're right, but the "sweet spot" for TV is now 42-inch or so, and plenty are bigger still.
> 
> As for your 3m figure, the PS3 (an HD games console which plays Blu-rays) installed base passed 3m over a year ago, SkyHD has 3.5m subscribers, Virgin 1.4m and Freeview HD is just starting to grow - so your number is far too low.
> 
> And remember there are about 22m households in the UK, not 60m. Naturally only the main telly is typically HD.


Not sure the ps3 receives broadcast tv yet though


----------



## spitfires

TCM2007 said:


> Two year costs of £940-odd. Ouch.


Ouch Indeed. That's nearly as much as I've paid for "Tivo Telly" for the last 8 years total!

Remember the good ol' days when TV and VCRs were free. And if there was "nothing on" you did something more useful than watching tele'? And remember the kids tv programme "Why Don't You......"? Simpler times: happy days.

< / humbug>


----------



## TCM2007

hokkers999 said:


> Not sure the ps3 receives broadcast tv yet though


It streams hd on demand, as does the Xbox360 whose figures I could also have added. Video isn't just broadcast you know - come in join us in the hd 21st century, the water's lovely!


----------



## CeeBeeUK

TCM2007 said:


> It streams hd on demand, as does the Xbox360 whose figures I could also have added. Video isn't just broadcast you know - come in join us in the hd 21st century, the water's lovely!


You can add PlayTV to the PS3 to receive broadcast TV if you want to.

Only Freeview, not FreeviewHD yet though.


----------



## AMc

I have a PS3 but it's connected to my old but excellent 32" CRT TV. 
A bigger hard drive and PlayTV (Freeview PVR) is one option if the EPG gets turned off.
It's very useful for iPlayer and now 4OD


----------



## Furball

cwaring said:


> Me too, but I still have the XL pack as it's the only one with SyFy in it (or it was at the time, and Bravo, which I used to watch sometimes)
> 
> Plus all the OD is free. (PPV excepted)


Thats what bugs me, in this day and age you should be able to pick and choose the channels you want i.e build your own package.

I'm sorry but I dont want to pay £20 extra, a month dont forget, for what is just a bunch of channels and then another load of +1 channels which I'm not going to watch, we had Bravo on my weird super low package...... well until they shut it down 

We still get a lot of OD stuff on our lowley package :up:

Furball


----------



## deshepherd

spitfires said:


> Ouch Indeed. That's nearly as much as I've paid for "Tivo Telly" for the last 8 years total!
> 
> Remember the good ol' days when TV and VCRs were free. And if there was "nothing on" you did something more useful than watching tele'? And remember the kids tv programme "Why Don't You......"? Simpler times: happy days.
> 
> < / humbug>


Seem to remember in the "good ol' days" TVs used to be quite expensive (especially if you wanted any of this new-fangled colour picture stuff) ... as a result many people would go along to Rumbellows and sign-up for a rental set and pay a regular fee each month to be able to watch their TV


----------



## Furball

Just had the call back, they wont budge on the XL  they could see my point surprisingly, even looked to see if I could cut back on anything else (phatband, phone) but as I'm on the lowest of the low already no savings there to be made 

He did say most folks who were accepting the deal were on the XL package anyway and thus only needed to add £3 to their monthly bill.



warrenrb said:


> I'm having similar dilemmas about potential extra cost (as an 'M' package user currently), but I don't think you can say 'exactly the same product'. It's a vast improvement over our S1 TiVo's.


I'm not sure I'd term vast improvement, yes slightly better but a lot of the improvements from what I can see are not really TiVo related as such ....... unless I'm seeing it wrong 



warrenrb said:


> But then, your 'iFleece' comment makes it sound like you might think Mac is 'exactly the same' as Windows, or Android is 'exactly the same' as iPhone, so spotting improvements might not be one of your strong-points.


No you've got me all wrong  all the ifleece products from what I've seen never come out giving you the full monty, when actually they could. The first ifone had a lovely interface but then they scrimped on things like the camera and 3G when there were already phones on the market with much better cameras and had 3G connectivity, only for them to get the iFans to buy the product all over again 11mths later to get 3G but still no flash support, etc etc 
The current iFad incarnations are again being drip fed to the iFans, sorry I just dont buy into this whole drip feed of technology when there is clearly the tech out there which could be in the product now but wont be because its far better to get joe public to buy the same product 3 or 4 times over, very clever Mr Jobs ...... but your not fooling me 

Windoze and Android do at least bring out the latest stuff and dont faff about by "not including" what I would say are some pretty basic things when others already do.

Any how by me not having a ViVo it means someone else can have one earlier 

Furball


----------



## tdenson

Furball said:


> mmmm not so sure about that, the whole HD thing was to fix the issue that SD was never meant to be shown on anything really much larger than 32", all of a sudden folks could buy 37"-40" and bigger, thus SD blown up that big just looks naff unless your watching it from 1/2 mile away which sort of defeats the whole big screen thing
> That and the move to Plasma and LCD panels which work totally digitally rather than the old fashioned line scan way of CRT this again causes a whole host of issues to a regular SD picture being pushed on to a screen thats 40" and able to display a much high resolution than a SD picture.
> 
> But thats moving way off topic now
> 
> Furball


Although I've had a 42" HD capable TV for a few years now, and I have V+ so I have access to HD content, I must say that HD viewing is not that compelling. So much so that I quite often have BBC 1 on and don't even think to switch over to channel 108 where I can often watch it in HD.


----------



## TCM2007

With it being simulcast, why would you be on the SD version ever?


----------



## Tavis75

I tend to record a lot of my stuff in SD at the moment, despite having a 92" 1080p screen, simply because HD content fills up the V+ box so quickly! Will be nice to have the extra space on the TiVo.


----------



## warrenrb

92"? Is that a typo? Or do you live in a castle?


----------



## sjp

he's just bragging, bet it's tiny


----------



## warrenrb

I'm assuming we are talking about a projector.


----------



## spitfires

> he's just bragging, bet it's tiny


LOL


----------



## martink0646

tdenson said:


> Although I've had a 42" HD capable TV for a few years now, and I have V+ so I have access to HD content, I must say that HD viewing is not that compelling. So much so that I quite often have BBC 1 on and don't even think to switch over to channel 108 where I can often watch it in HD.


Hi Tdenson,

Everytime I hear someone say that I offer to pop round & sort their tv out. You wouldn't believe some of the things I see. SKY+ HD boxes connected by SCART, tv's that haven't had their colour/contrast settings sorted & are still in the shop window 'attract mode', cheap or older model 'HD ready' LCD sets that are rubbish with so much smear they are practically unwatchable, tv's placed in direct sunlight etc. The most common though is that people are either sitting too far away to get the full benefit or their eyes/prescription are just not up to it. The current recommendations are to sit about 1.5x the diagonal screen size away ( about 5 1/2 ft for a 42" screen) If you sit close enough to a properly set up tv & your eyesight is good enough you cannot fail to see a large difference.

People do say that they don't want to sit that close, fair enough, but save yourself the money & don't pay for an HDTV & service because you won't get the full benefit from it.

Sorry don't mean it to sound preachy, am trying to be helpful.

Martin

NB:- Try this calculator http://myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html)


----------



## tdenson

TCM2007 said:


> With it being simulcast, why would you be on the SD version ever?


Because my primary PVR is a Topfield (because the V+ UI is just such rubbish). It then becomes more trouble than it's worth to switch my TV over to V+ to change to the HD version (modern TVs seem to take longer and longer to change from one source to another).


----------



## hokkers999

martink0646 said:


> Everytime I hear someone say that I offer to pop round & sort their tv out.
> 
> The most common though is that people are either sitting too far away to get the full benefit or their eyes/prescription are just not up to it. The current recommendations are to sit about 1.5x the diagonal screen size away ( about 5 1/2 ft for a 42" screen)
> 
> If you sit close enough to a properly set up tv & your eyesight is good enough you cannot fail to see a large difference.
> 
> People do say that they don't want to sit that close


Right then

1. Not the tv that needs sorting, when your lounge is 17 x 12 don't matter how you "sort" the telly

2. 5 1/2 feet for a 42", our NEAREST chair to the tv is about 7 feet, furthest is 12

3. As I stated earlier for the average person in an average room, hd is an out and out marketing con trick, unless you are watching it in the "smallest room" and can get close enought to the screen 

4. You don't say? Funny how when you see a Sky or VM advert or pop into Comet or wherever they omit to tell you that to actually see any difference it'll be like going back 60 years to the 50's. With all the family hunched around the screen in a tight circle


----------



## spitfires

martink0646 said:


> The current recommendations are to sit about 1.5x the diagonal screen size away ( about 5 1/2 ft for a 42" screen)


You _are_ kidding me right? 5.5ft is the height of a person, so you expect me to sit 1 person's length away from a TV that is 3'6" wide?!!! That is soooo bad for your eyesight.

That's like people who have 21" monitors placed 18" from their nose - "for a better gaming experience". Sheesh - your eye muscles are going to be shot before you're 40.


----------



## spitfires

hokkers999 said:


> it'll be like going back 60 years to the 50's. With all the family hunched around the screen in a tight circle


 I can see it now...
A family of four all scrunched up on the sofa a mere 5.5' from the tele. That leaves just about enough room (3.5' from front of sofa to wall) to squeeze past in front of each other to get a cup of tea...unless the chap has his legs stretched out!


----------



## Tavis75

warrenrb said:


> I'm assuming we are talking about a projector.


Yep, haven't had a regular TV in the house for about 9 years now!

Not exactly sure about the viewing distance but would estimate it at about 9 foot, seems about right! Definitely a great difference between standard def and 1080p, though the difference between a well encoded DVD and a not so great 720p TV broadcast is far less noticeable. The difference between the regular and HD broadcasts of various channels does vary quite a lot though I've found.

Definitely a noticeable benefit with HD, but I have found that the small size of the V+ hard drive makes it impractical to record everything in HD, so just cherry pick my favourite programs for HD and record the rest in SD (till I get the TiVo)


----------



## warrenrb

spitfires said:


> You _are_ kidding me right? 5.5ft is the height of a person, so you expect me to sit 1 person's length away from a TV that is 3'6" wide?!!! That is soooo bad for your eyesight.
> 
> That's like people who have 21" monitors placed 18" from their nose - "for a better gaming experience". Sheesh - your eye muscles are going to be shot before you're 40.


I'm pretty sure that 'bad for your eyesight' crap is the stuff our parents used to feed us back in the 70's. 

So, when you are using a 27" iMac, for example, are you supposed to sit 3-4 feet away from it?

*How* exactly is it bad for your eyesight?

Oh, and anyone who can't see the difference between SD and HD is the one with the bad eyesight!


----------



## tdenson

Had my call from Virgin last night while I was on the phone. I hung up instantly on my other call but still missed it grrrrr.
I have tried ringing the number given here (0161 614 6000) but after 3 rings it goes click and a get a message saying the other party has hung up.


----------



## spitfires

warrenrb said:


> So, when you are using a 27" iMac, for example, are you supposed to sit 3-4 feet away from it?


Yes. Why on earth would you want a 27" screen on a computer. Do iMacs not have a 'zoom' function? And before you say it, if you are trying to "see the big picture" then surely you need to be the same distance from the billboard as the viewer?!

So the argument goes something like this:

Heck I can really see the difference between CRT and LCD when I peer at the screen from 2" away... you can really see the dots on the CRT. Therefore LCD is sooo much better and anyone who doesn't know this is blind.

Have I got that right? 

What's all his craze with having stuff pin-sharp (allegedly) anyway? Since 99% of the population have defective vision to some extent PLUS wear the wrong glasses then what does it matter? Isn't the _content_ of the programme more important than whether it looks good? - or have I missed the point 

(and yes that is made up statistic... just like 99% of all others. ooh there's another one.)

Edit: oops missed this bit


> *How* exactly is it bad for your eyesight?


Strains the eye muscles having to continuously scan such a wide area, esp. when the objects are moving around. Ask your optician about it at your next biennial check-up.


----------



## warrenrb

spitfires said:


> Yes. Why on earth would you want a 27" screen on a computer. Do iMacs not have a 'zoom' function? And before you say it, if you are trying to "see the big picture" then surely you need to be the same distance from the billboard as the viewer?!


"Zoom function"? Have you used a computer before?

Billboard? What if you are designing an A3 spread for a magazine? If you've ever used any kind of design, 3D or video editing software, to name but 3, you'll know there are a vast amount of palette windows along with the window you are actually working in. The more 'screen real-estate' the better.

I work in web-design, and use a 17" Macbook Pro hooked up to a 20" Dell in a dual-screen setup, and could certainly use more space. I have browser windows open, a visual I'm working from, a code editor, and other apps, and it makes life much easy to see a live preview update as I change code, without having to app switch between them. I need to see webpages 'actual size' - you 'zoom' idea is ridiculous.

I love showing people this photo of Al Gore's office - that's THREE 30" monitors right there. Perfect. 
http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1622338_1363003,00.html



spitfires said:


> So the argument goes something like this:
> 
> Heck I can really see the difference between CRT and LCD when I peer at the screen from 2" away... you can really see the dots on the CRT. Therefore LCD is sooo much better and anyone who doesn't know this is blind.
> 
> Have I got that right?


No. No you haven't.



spitfires said:


> What's all his craze with having stuff pin-sharp (allegedly) anyway? Since 99% of the population have defective vision to some extent PLUS wear the wrong glasses then what does it matter? Isn't the _content_ of the programme more important than whether it looks good? - or have I missed the point


What a preposterous (and as you said, made up) stat. "Why have something that's better, when some people might not see it properly". Great logic there.



spitfires said:


> Strains the eye muscles having to continuously scan such a wide area, esp. when the objects are moving around. Ask your optician about it at your next biennial check-up.


I will. With all due respect I think you are talking out of your arse. 

But I'm turning into one of those people who get into stupid off-topic arguments on internet forums! I might have to go and block myself in a minute...

I put it down to not having had my phone-call yet - it's PTCT - Pre-TiVo-Call-Tension. I'm due to go out shortly for the first time in the last 3 days, for about two hours, so that's when the call will come, right?


----------



## Ovit-UK

warrenrb said:


> "I put it down to not having had my phone-call yet - it's PTCT - Pre-TiVo-Call-Tension. I'm due to go out shortly for the first time in the last 3 days, for about two hours, so that's when the call will come, right?


You can count on that. 

Just had mine and if they're working via an installation rota, you may be soon as I'm in Belfast.

Ovit


----------



## TCM2007

spitfires said:


> You _are_ kidding me right? 5.5ft is the height of a person, so you expect me to sit 1 person's length away from a TV that is 3'6" wide?!!! That is soooo bad for your eyesight.


How so? Does some kind of magic radiation burn your retinas?

People have got used to watching a postage stamp at the other end of the room, because until recently it was all most people could afford.

People routinely tell me my TV is far too big for the room it's in, and the sofa is far too close. Then they sit down and watch a film on Blu-ray, and then they STFU.



> Strains the eye muscles having to continuously scan such a wide area, esp. when the objects are moving around. Ask your optician about it at your next biennial check-up.


Good job objects in real life keep still and dead in front of my face then, or I'd be getting terrible eye strain crossing the road.


----------



## cwaring

Ovit-UK said:


> Just had mine and if they're working via an installation rota..


Which they're obviously not or I would have been called around the same time as both my parents and some other chap on here who I believe is not too far away from me. But I have yet to be called


----------



## spitfires

warrenrb said:


> "Zoom function"? Have you used a computer before?


That's what I thought - you need to buy a real computer (i.e. Windows) to get that facility.

p.s. I was working in computers before you were born laddie!



warrenrb said:


> [snip lots of bragging about size of equipment and self-opionated importance of job  ]


So you don't have a 27" monitor - you have a 17" + a 20" - hardly the same thing is it!



warrenrb said:


> "Why have something that's better, when some people might not see it properly".


Consumerism rules.

But what's the point in having it if you can't see the difference? All these people who bang on and on about how HD really is better and "if you can't see it then you must be thick" smacks of the same argument applied by Mac users against Windows. Hey they _each_ have their pros and cons - one is better at one thing and the other at another. if you have to resort to the type of argument just mentioned then you are clutching at straws (to justify your own position).



warrenrb said:


> With all due respect I think you are talking out of your arse.


I'll pass your message on to my optician when I see her next month. You've really never heard of eye strain caused by stretching of the extra-ocular muscles, which can lead to heterophoria? Have you researched CVS (Computer Vision Syndrome) at all? I suggest you do and then come back with a reasoned argument rather than a glib personal denigration.

p.s. None of the above is meant to be an attack on the character, personality, values or beliefs of "warrenrb" or anyone else on this forum or on the internet in general, either now, in the past or in the future. All comments expressed are my _opinions_ and definitely are _not_ fact in any way shape or form. Anyone who thinks otherwise is quite clearly a dick.


----------



## martink0646

hokkers999 said:


> Right then
> 
> 1. Not the tv that needs sorting, when your lounge is 17 x 12 don't matter how you "sort" the telly
> 
> 2. 5 1/2 feet for a 42", our NEAREST chair to the tv is about 7 feet, furthest is 12
> 
> 3. As I stated earlier for the average person in an average room, hd is an out and out marketing con trick, unless you are watching it in the "smallest room" and can get close enought to the screen
> 
> 4. You don't say? Funny how when you see a Sky or VM advert or pop into Comet or wherever they omit to tell you that to actually see any difference it'll be like going back 60 years to the 50's. With all the family hunched around the screen in a tight circle


Hi Hokkers,

My post was not to tell anyone what to do, I was just pointing out that when people say they can't see the difference between sd & hd there is always a reason - the difference is huge. The point is if, like yourself, yopu are not bothered about HD, great. It's the people that have spent money (quite a lot in some cases) on the technology, don't set it or themselves up properly & then run it down when they can't see the difference. I suppose I'm saying go away, do it properly & then come back & tell me there isn't a difference.

I completely agree with peoples posts about feeling they are sitting too close to the screen. it's their house they can do what they want. For me, I've invested in the tech, understand the benefit it gives me & I am happy with where I sit. If I wasn't bothered I would go & get a b&w portable from the dump & watch that but I, personally, am bothered.

I don't quite see why you feel it's an "out & out marketing con trick". It does what it says on the tin - no trick at all. It might not be what you want, but no trick.

Martin

P.S. I would like to say that I am NOT a paid up member of the anti-Hokkers brigade on here. I actually feel a lot of his points are valid if a touch negative at times. Having a devil's advocate is not always a bad thing!!! Any way his arguments generally make more sense thatn someone who shall remain nameless


----------



## warrenrb

spitfires said:


> That's what I thought - you need to buy a real computer (i.e. Windows) to get that facility.
> 
> p.s. I was working in computers before you were born laddie!


 Haha - you are making some interesting assumptions about my age there son! 

Mac has indeed got a 'zoom function' - it's in the accessibility settings that most users don't need to use.



spitfires said:


> So you don't have a 27" monitor - you have a 17" + a 20" - hardly the same thing is it!


I didn't say it was the same thing - I was giving an example (one not based on my personal current setup, but one I have used).

I don't think anyone said not seeing the difference between SD and HD was 'thick'. I think I said you must have poor eyesight not to see it. Intelligence doesn't come into it.

I would agree if you can't see the difference, you don't need it. But that's not to say that no-one should be allowed to have it.



spitfires said:


> Anyone who thinks otherwise is quite clearly a dick.


Haha! Touché.


----------



## spitfires

warrenrb said:


> spitfires said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was working in computers before you were born laddie!
> 
> 
> 
> Haha - you are making some interesting assumptions about my age there son!
Click to expand...

D-A-D! Is that really you?! I thought I'd never see you again!


----------



## warrenrb

spitfires said:


> D-A-D! Is that really you?! I thought I'd never see you again!


I'm not surprised with that eyesight of yours!


----------



## spitfires

warrenrb said:


> I would agree if you can't see the difference, you don't need it. But that's not to say that no-one should be allowed to have it.


Absolutely. But equally, one should be allowed to _not_ have it if they don't want it. Anyone saying they prefer SD to HD on this (and other TV) forums gets blasted outta the water! 

People preferring SD should have the same right to say "anyone buying HD is wasting their money", as people preferring HD have to say "people who can't see the difference are missing something".


----------



## hokkers999

spitfires said:


> You _are_ kidding me right? 5.5ft is the height of a person, so you expect me to sit 1 person's length away from a TV that is 3'6" wide?!!!


No, not kidding, welcome to the world of physics and the human eyeball.

Don't allow your self to fall for the hd con and waste your money.


----------



## hokkers999

spitfires said:


> I can see it now...
> A family of four all scrunched up on the sofa a mere 5.5' from the tele. That leaves just about enough room (3.5' from front of sofa to wall) to squeeze past in front of each other to get a cup of tea...unless the chap has his legs stretched out!


But at least now it'll be in colour and you don't have to have the curtains closed because of poor contrast


----------



## spitfires

Colour!  You've got colour!  Bet you get BBC2 as well!


----------



## TCM2007

spitfires said:


> People preferring SD should have the same right to say "anyone buying HD is wasting their money", as people preferring HD have to say "people who can't see the difference are missing something".


You're comparing a point of opinion ("HD is not worth it, I'm fine with SD") and a point of fact ("HD is a con because it's not possible to see the difference between SD and HD").

The former opinion is perfectly fine to hold round here. Hell, one regular poster on here watches all his TV in Basic on a 4:3 CRT. Personally, I'd rather watch on a mobile phone than like that, but each to his own.

With the second though your fact is simply incorrect. I can see the difference extremely clearly between SD and HD, and know many, many people who can too.

When your proposition is based on an incorrect fact, you can expect push back.

Further if you can't see the difference between SD and HD while most others can, it's reasonable to question whether that's an issue at HD's end or yours.

http://www.specsavers.co.uk/


----------



## cwaring

^ This is what I was meaning a couple of days ago with regards to "opinons can be wrong if based on incorrect information". I just don't think I explained myself well enough


----------



## spitfires

No seriously TCM2007 _you_ should know better. I didn't say



TCM2007 said:


> [spitfires said:]"HD is a con because it's not possible to see the difference between SD and HD"


You even quoted what I _did_ say and I made no mention whatsoever of whether there _is_ a factual difference or not.

And I certainly didn't say that *I* "can't see the difference between SD and HD" as you assert.

Slag me off for what I _have_ said by all means but don't belittle me for something you made up that I didn't actually say.

Edit: p.s. I didn't even say which of the 2 positions I personally believe so your facetious referral to Specsavers is totally unjustified and insulting.


----------



## John McE

Groan! He's like bloody bindweed! Crawling round and round every thread until he chokes the life out of them.


----------



## hokkers999

TCM2007 said:


> [snip]
> 
> With the second though your fact is simply incorrect. I can see the difference extremely clearly between SD and HD, and know many, many people who can too.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> Further if you can't see the difference between SD and HD while most others can, it's reasonable to question whether that's an issue at HD's end or yours.


1. Yes IF you sit CLOSE enough to the screen, it's a simple matter of the laws of physics.

2. Come to my house (you'll have to bring an hd telly mind), sit on my sofa that's 12 FEET from the screen and then tell me you can see the difference.


----------



## spitfires

John McE said:


> Groan! He's like bloody bindweed! Crawling round and round every thread until he chokes the life out of them.


Are you referrring to me?  Incredible.

Am I not allowed to defend myself in the face of outright lies, defamatory remarks and bullying tactics?


----------



## hokkers999

spitfires said:


> Are you referrring to me?  Incredible.
> 
> Am I not allowed to defend myself in the face of outright lies, defamatory remarks and bullying tactics?


Of course not, Carl & his cronies are the only people who's opinion counts for anything at all


----------



## cwaring

Well we do seem to be the only ones actually making any sense and using facts; but okay


----------



## TCM2007

hokkers999 said:


> 1. Yes IF you sit CLOSE enough to the screen, it's a simple matter of the laws of physics.
> 
> 2. Come to my house (you'll have to bring an hd telly mind), sit on my sofa that's 12 FEET from the screen and then tell me you can see the difference.


How big's your TV?

A small TV viewed from far away won't give you a great picture, that's a truism - 12 feet is a long way from a small SD TV!


----------

