afe66: Well the sky camera that stands 5m away from me at the rugby has 4k written all over it.

Which is one component out of probably 10+ that need to be capable for the broadcast to be in 4K.

Cinema cameras have been capable of 4K long before 4K was an actual thing.

networkn:

allstarnz:

They don't want to put what they've taken away in their new marketing spin.

 

I note there's no mention for any 'Ultra HD'/4K sporting content, I'd be interested to see if that's on Sky's radar.  From what i've seen though, outside of Europe 4K Sport content is quite limited and isn't really shared much between providers yet.  I have TSN and Sportsnet in 4K and (pre-pandemic) I'd only get true 4K sports content from Canada, nothing from Europe at all.   I guess OSB would need to update their equipment, plus any relevant backhaul.

What have Sky taken away they said they would offer? 4K Sport is an incredibly niche product.  <5% of Sky subscribers would have a setup and desire to make use of it. That's not exactly a good return on what would almost certainly be a massive investment. 

 

 

networkn:

afe66: Well the sky camera that stands 5m away from me at the rugby has 4k written all over it.

Which is one component out of probably 10+ that need to be capable for the broadcast to be in 4K.

Cinema cameras have been capable of 4K long before 4K was an actual thing.

 

I'd like it, I'd pay extra for it, like you, but realistically, how many others? How long did people whine about the $10 HD fee for ? Imagine the *outrage* if people were asked to pay extra for 4K?

The reality is, the commercial case for it, almost certainly, doesn't make sense. Frustrating for those of us who would like it.

Long before I'd expect to see 4K sport, I'd like to see channels like Food TV in HD.

afe66: These camera are new. The ones a couple of years ago didn't have 4k written on them.

I am not sure the point you are trying to make? Try and buy a TV now that isn't 4K? Just because one component has 4K capability, doesn't mean the rest of them in the chain have it, or that there is a commercial case for it.

It may be there, I just seriously doubt it, but perhaps it's Sky's Ace in the hole and they are keeping it a secret? I wouldn't get your hopes up.

afe66: I suppose I was suggesting that as they replace the existing equipment they will be 4k by default so it might increase the likelihood of offering 4k service ?

Rather than making the big decision to go 4k and scrap all their gear perhaps through natural wear and tear of existing gear will be 4k by default so perhaps makes the decision to offer 4k more likely?

Sure, I mean, it's inevitable at some stage if they are still around by the time the decision gets made. Eventually, 4K sport will be the default one imagines... Don't forget though, that NZ is a TINY TINY market and the bulk of bigger markets aren't as well off as us as it relates to Broadband. One 4K stream in Australia would suck up all the available bandwidth for the entire country!

I would be happy to have an Android TV app that is installable on any device that has a similar Vodafone TV cloud recording function and a cheap yearly cost for access to Freeview HD only with the ability to add sky channels like you can with the freeview box.

I would just love to see Sky adopt a policy that if you pay your sub you can watch the content the way you want to. I HATE the current sky box interface and so for years now I have run it through MediaPortal. I still have fears that they will break this at some point. While the new box looks promising I already have an Android TV box. Can't I just install it on that even if I don't have access to the satellite functionality through it? Same thing for Apple TV. I can't see why they can't release a similar app there. Yes they lose some control but it will build massive goodwill again.

Then there's making sure that Sky subscribers have access through these apps to the same content or more than Neon subscribers. Currently I don't believe this is the case with some content only available on Neon and not on the Sky platform.

I do wonder if the new box will come with a card or whether they will transition to just straight user authentication. Either way I would still want to continue to use my MediaPortal set up even if it meant having to migrate to a iptv platform rather than satellite.

I guess non of this will happen if they still are insistent on their multi-box strategy but again how much goodwill will they get if they just say here's your sub, watch it with your device or if you want us to provide one then it'll cost you this amount per month or upfront per device. If you have device issues then hey take one of our boxes and we guarantee the experience. Use your own device and YMMV and we only provide limited support.

Sky would have to drop multiroom charge and drop the recording charge, then it would be a main one for movies for me.

Already got rid of multiroom decoder, as in back room mainly watched movies, and including multiroom I’m not paying $50 to watch movies. Cheaper to do pay per view or what’s available Netflix.

Have front room decoder for other people in house, see mainly as paying for a good TV recording device then Sky. I don’t pay for recordings, if did that would be a deal breaker current set up.

If own new decoder, wonder if they’ll charge for recording and multiroom, as I’d get it additional to front room for movies if they don’t have these charges.

On survey where it had would you be more likely to keep Sky with new box, couldn’t answer that one, put note on comments at end, would depend on how it effected subscription costs.

What's Neon go to do with Sky? Seperate services, seperate bill

Multi box strategy? Do you mean my MySky and my 9.7 iPad and my 12.9 iPad Pro?  Thats 3 boxes I use. Device issues? Never need to call them

If you wish to use Mediaportal it wont be that they break it, MP breaks it. When Sky makes a change, what happens on non supported boxes is not an issue for them, its not their fault or problem

The app, yes that would be good. Would there be more support issue? I think so. They have an app, Sky Go, I dont need the app in my living room though. MySky is there. Maybe as satellte is more reliable than newbie internet users with the wifi in tbe top drawer. The "just works" would prabably disappear with widespread internet use, due to a portion of the userbase

Klathman:

 

I would just love to see Sky adopt a policy that if you pay your sub you can watch the content the way you want to.

 

This. Very much this. I had really hoped by now, under the new CEO, this would be the case. I dont mind my Sky box, but I am not paying for Multiroom and still want to be able to watch recorded or live tv in bed or at work or whatever.

networkn:

 

Klathman:

 

I would just love to see Sky adopt a policy that if you pay your sub you can watch the content the way you want to.

 

 

This. Very much this. I had really hoped by now, under the new CEO, this would be the case. I dont mind my Sky box, but I am not paying for Multiroom and still want to be able to watch recorded or live tv in bed or at work or whatever.

 

 

 

Handsomedan:

 

If an app works for VTV and this new proposed box, surely it can be brought to ATV or iOS/Android, so people can cast to whichever TV is handy? 

 

 

 

With current casting lose quality. If watch something on back room TV do not wish to lose Dolby Digital. Can cast to it now with Sky Go but big sound quality drop compared to box watching. If could cast without loss of sound quality would be happy. No new box needed.

Edit: Casting would be more likely accessing on demand content also, where Sky doesn't provide on demand with Dolby digital. For delayed watching only recordings to hard drive are Dolby Digital, i.e to currently get DD need to be viewing direct off Sky box.