Disgraceful State of Sky online services

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Disgraceful State of Sky online services

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1610078 11-Aug-2016 12:47

networkn:

Fair enough. What I see is that as the world has changed, i.e. the internet, models have to change. News is one example. The revenue from selling papers has died, so the news is now newstainment. Its not the journos its what is required to survive as revenue gets stripped. If you want that better news service you cant expect others to subsidise it, it has a cost. And that is what I see here with these topics. A disregard for the reality of costs. Netflix is $13 so i want everything for $13. news is now free online so i want everything I had before. Someone has to pay. And it doesnt mean every business is rorting every consumer. Sky. Its profit is nothing more then sound. Its model is OLD, no, it isn't. Its tech may be old but it far outstrips SVOD in terms of quality and delivery stability. But SVOD is far cheaper, they will get there. I exact Sky will be continuing to provide service to those in the whop whops but we wont see any "good on ya mate" mentioned anywhere, even though it wont be economic.

But the point is everything has a cost, but some seem to disregard that. Its in the interests of business to make a fair profit, but also to offer a fair price otherwise no one will buy the product. If Sky was making $90 profit for those paying $100, well thats not fair. But that isn't the case.

Umm how are you accessing SkyGo if you don't have a Sky Subscription any longer?

Out of curiosity why don't you have Sky any more?

It might be a friends login. I don't use it, and it broke on a recent iOS app update, which I knew of, but as I don't really use it I wasn't bothered, but for some reason its working again. So I used it as regards your thread.

Id been considering cancelling Sky for a while as I am the only one that uses it. When we bought another house, no dish, and I cant see them attaching a dish in a way that Id be happy with, so when I thought, ok, might get Sky back, I didn't bother. Fan pass takes care of most of my sports, Curiositystream is my doco fix as is NF NZ

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1610080 11-Aug-2016 12:50

tdgeek:

networkn:

Fair enough. What I see is that as the world has changed, i.e. the internet, models have to change. News is one example. The revenue from selling papers has died, so the news is now newstainment. Its not the journos its what is required to survive as revenue gets stripped. If you want that better news service you cant expect others to subsidise it, it has a cost. And that is what I see here with these topics. A disregard for the reality of costs. Netflix is $13 so i want everything for $13. news is now free online so i want everything I had before. Someone has to pay. And it doesnt mean every business is rorting every consumer. Sky. Its profit is nothing more then sound. Its model is OLD, no, it isn't. Its tech may be old but it far outstrips SVOD in terms of quality and delivery stability. But SVOD is far cheaper, they will get there. I exact Sky will be continuing to provide service to those in the whop whops but we wont see any "good on ya mate" mentioned anywhere, even though it wont be economic.

But the point is everything has a cost, but some seem to disregard that. Its in the interests of business to make a fair profit, but also to offer a fair price otherwise no one will buy the product. If Sky was making $90 profit for those paying $100, well thats not fair. But that isn't the case.

Umm how are you accessing SkyGo if you don't have a Sky Subscription any longer?

Out of curiosity why don't you have Sky any more?

It might be a friends login. I don't use it, and it broke on a recent iOS app update, which I knew of, but as I don't really use it I wasn't bothered, but for some reason its working again. So I used it as regards your thread.

Id been considering cancelling Sky for a while as I am the only one that uses it. When we bought another house, no dish, and I cant see them attaching a dish in a way that Id be happy with, so when I thought, ok, might get Sky back, I didn't bother. Fan pass takes care of most of my sports, Curiositystream is my doco fix as is NF NZ

Ok, well I wondered if it were cost. Out of interest, is it? Would you be happy paying $120 a month for Sky with recording functionality and sport?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1610084 11-Aug-2016 13:14

tdgeek:

Fair enough. What I see is that as the world has changed, i.e. the internet, models have to change. News is one example. The revenue from selling papers has died, so the news is now newstainment. Its not the journos its what is required to survive as revenue gets stripped. If you want that better news service you cant expect others to subsidise it, it has a cost. And that is what I see here with these topics. A disregard for the reality of costs. Netflix is $13 so i want everything for $13. news is now free online so i want everything I had before. Someone has to pay. And it doesnt mean every business is rorting every consumer. Sky. Its profit is nothing more then sound. Its model is OLD, no, it isn't. Its tech may be old but it far outstrips SVOD in terms of quality and delivery stability. But SVOD is far cheaper, they will get there. I exact Sky will be continuing to provide service to those in the whop whops but we wont see any "good on ya mate" mentioned anywhere, even though it wont be economic.

But the point is everything has a cost, but some seem to disregard that. Its in the interests of business to make a fair profit, but also to offer a fair price otherwise no one will buy the product. If Sky was making $90 profit for those paying $100, well thats not fair. But that isn't the case.

These are good points, which I respect and understand. I don't know how much of Sky's income is actual profit, or whether it is 'gouging' its customers, but I don't get a sense from it, especially regarding past behaviour, that it really values its customers, other than as captive cash cows. I don't think it deals with its customers in a respectful manner. I think it tries to abuse its position of power as a monopoly provider. This is why I tend to be so critical of it.

There are other companies, even big ones, that behave better and are content with a fair profit and I have no problem at all with these. I don't believe every company that charges for a service is rorting the consumer. There are good companies and less good companies, just as there are good people and mean-spirited ones.

I agree that everything has a cost which must somehow be covered. As I am arguing in my other thread, I think some things (like quality journalism) are so important to a properly functioning society, that they should be covered by public funding if that is what it takes to keep them alive. This is not the same as wanting them for 'free'. Not everything that matters can be preserved within a purely commercial environment. Nor should it have to be.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1610095 11-Aug-2016 13:42

networkn:

tdgeek:

networkn:

Fair enough. What I see is that as the world has changed, i.e. the internet, models have to change. News is one example. The revenue from selling papers has died, so the news is now newstainment. Its not the journos its what is required to survive as revenue gets stripped. If you want that better news service you cant expect others to subsidise it, it has a cost. And that is what I see here with these topics. A disregard for the reality of costs. Netflix is $13 so i want everything for $13. news is now free online so i want everything I had before. Someone has to pay. And it doesnt mean every business is rorting every consumer. Sky. Its profit is nothing more then sound. Its model is OLD, no, it isn't. Its tech may be old but it far outstrips SVOD in terms of quality and delivery stability. But SVOD is far cheaper, they will get there. I exact Sky will be continuing to provide service to those in the whop whops but we wont see any "good on ya mate" mentioned anywhere, even though it wont be economic.

But the point is everything has a cost, but some seem to disregard that. Its in the interests of business to make a fair profit, but also to offer a fair price otherwise no one will buy the product. If Sky was making $90 profit for those paying $100, well thats not fair. But that isn't the case.

Umm how are you accessing SkyGo if you don't have a Sky Subscription any longer?

Out of curiosity why don't you have Sky any more?

It might be a friends login. I don't use it, and it broke on a recent iOS app update, which I knew of, but as I don't really use it I wasn't bothered, but for some reason its working again. So I used it as regards your thread.

Id been considering cancelling Sky for a while as I am the only one that uses it. When we bought another house, no dish, and I cant see them attaching a dish in a way that Id be happy with, so when I thought, ok, might get Sky back, I didn't bother. Fan pass takes care of most of my sports, Curiositystream is my doco fix as is NF NZ

Ok, well I wondered if it were cost. Out of interest, is it? Would you be happy paying $120 a month for Sky with recording functionality and sport?

It was $100.74 or something like that. We can afford it, but with no one else using it, and me, F1, MotoGP, Tennis, AB's thats it. Freed up one HDMI, so that there is no switching over now for other devices. Fanpass is good, and its on my iPad and rMBP as well, so I havent lost much at all. MySky is great, but we now use the BWT720 for FTA, Apple TV for Lightbox, Netflix NZ, Curiostystream, and soon Fanpass will be on there. If Sky was $50, which is is as you have it, I have no desire to get it back. re the house, there is no dish. its celcrete and concrete tile roof. The dish will have to ghave conduit going down the wall, and I dont trust it can be doen as I wnat (almost hidden away by the gate) and that drilling through the thick wall where there are power and network and aerial coax there will be done properly. In a few short years, Sky should be all SVOD or at least everything available on SVOD which we are well set up for (12 ethernet ports in the house). Thats pretty much it

UncleArthur

197 posts

Master Geek

#1610249 11-Aug-2016 18:38

Has anyone tried using the sky Olympics website?

I can use the app, which works if I want to watch on an IOS device - however as I don't have apple tv / chrome cast, I thought I'd use the advertised website to watch stuff from my PC (eg not on the current skygo schedule).

Here's how well that's been working for the last few days:

https://olympics.sky.co.nz/holding

Complete joke of a company.

Spyware

3761 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1610254 11-Aug-2016 18:59

UncleArthur:

https://olympics.sky.co.nz/holding

Complete joke of a company.

I bet we never see the site.

Spark Max Fibre using Mikrotik CCR1009-8G-1S-1S+, CRS125-24G-1S, Unifi UAP, U6-Pro, UAP-AC-M-Pro, Apple TV 4K (2022), Apple TV 4K (2017), iPad Air 1st gen, iPad Air 4th gen, iPhone 13, SkyNZ3151 (the white box). If it doesn't move then it's data cabled.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1610290 11-Aug-2016 20:21

davidcole: I've found its quality on a PC attached to the PC pretty low. But looks good on iPad, possibly fresh related? Be bet resting to see where they go when flash is blocked from chrome. I'm sure I saw a Mashable or engadget saying that wasn't far away.

Ive found browser to be a bit sad. Missed frames thats how it appears. An app is better

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1610292 11-Aug-2016 20:24

Rikkitic:

tdgeek:

Rikkitic:

Big +1 for the above. It also sums up my view (which some keep misinterpreting) quite nicely.

I dont think we misinterpret your views! :-)

I wasn't specifically referring to you, though I wouldn't exclude you. I often see comments from different people that make claims about my positions that simply are not true. One frequently-repeated one is that I want everything for free. I don't know where this started but it keeps coming up in spite of the fact that I have stated many times that I am against piracy, do not indulge in it myself, and believe that a fair price should be paid for whatever good or service is being consumed. As it happens, I am a fan of public broadcasting, which does not exist in any meaningful sense in this country, so I access it abroad with geo-unblocking. I would gladly pay for it but there is no mechanism to do so because it is public broadcasting and that is free by definition. The BBC is a special case but I am prepared to pay the license fee if I can figure out how. The content is superb and I would like to help support it. I am waiting to see what happens in September.

My criticisms here and elsewhere mainly have to do with things like fair pricing in the sense of value for money, which in the case of Sky I question. Maybe I am right, maybe I am wrong. It is just my opinion. I am also strongly opposed to geo-blocking and I have made my views on that clear elsewhere. None of this means I want or expect anything for free and I wish people would quit saying that.

I do agree with fair pricing. If we are being rorted I will be there, big time.But I don't see that.

davidcole

6029 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1610293 11-Aug-2016 20:27

tdgeek:

davidcole: I've found its quality on a PC attached to the PC pretty low. But looks good on iPad, possibly fresh related? Be bet resting to see where they go when flash is blocked from chrome. I'm sure I saw a Mashable or engadget saying that wasn't far away.

Ive found browser to be a bit sad. Missed frames thats how it appears. An app is better

if only they had one, windows 10, roku, chrome cast, apple tv, you name it I'd take it.

Previously known as psycik

Home Assistant: Gigabyte AMD A8 Brix, Home Assistant with Aeotech ZWave Controller, Raspberry PI, Wemos D1 Mini, Zwave, Shelly Humidity and Temperature sensors
Media:Chromecast v2, ATV4 4k, ATV4, HDHomeRun Dual
Server Host Plex Server 3x3TB, 4x4TB using MergerFS, Samsung 850 evo 512 GB SSD, Proxmox Server with 1xW10, 2xUbuntu 22.04 LTS, Backblaze Backups, usenetprime.com fastmail.com Sharesies Trakt.TV Sharesight

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1610331 11-Aug-2016 21:14

davidcole:

tdgeek:

davidcole: I've found its quality on a PC attached to the PC pretty low. But looks good on iPad, possibly fresh related? Be bet resting to see where they go when flash is blocked from chrome. I'm sure I saw a Mashable or engadget saying that wasn't far away.

Ive found browser to be a bit sad. Missed frames thats how it appears. An app is better

if only they had one, windows 10, roku, chrome cast, apple tv, you name it I'd take it.

As I see it, Fanpass is ok. Better than ok but not great. Where you add a PC/Mac OS thats a huge conundrum of stuff gong on, and the apps but one of them. If its an app, thats a whole different ball game, I can only assume its more efficient. Cannot wait for Fanpass on ATV4. I helped test LB. rMBP to TV, yes its good but I am picky I see jitter. App is great

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1610343 11-Aug-2016 21:42

On a completely separate note, I would be interested to learn more about the differences between apps and browsers, and the advantages of the former. I ask this because unlike most people, I use almost no mobile devices and therefore, no apps. All of my streaming up to now has been via PC browsers. This is also because my tastes run to sites that are not usually covered by apps, except for just a few like BBC. I would like to know more about the differences and why (beyond convenience) one is better than the other. If anyone can point me to more info it would be much appreciated.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1610346 11-Aug-2016 21:54

Rikkitic:

On a completely separate note, I would be interested to learn more about the differences between apps and browsers, and the advantages of the former. I ask this because unlike most people, I use almost no mobile devices and therefore, no apps. All of my streaming up to now has been via PC browsers. This is also because my tastes run to sites that are not usually covered by apps, except for just a few like BBC. I would like to know more about the differences and why (beyond convenience) one is better than the other. If anyone can point me to more info it would be much appreciated.

Good post.

What I have found, given that I have a highly capable laptop (rMBP, i7, 8GB, 512SSD) is that web streaming gives me jitter. Not network jitter, its like if its 25fps, I get a dropped frame every now and then, if its 29.94fps I still get that. I assume, that the laptop hardware with the laptop OS are doing so many other things. Wth an app, and I am assuming, that its simple, not much overhead and its great. The app may be on an ATV4, which is clearly far less workload than Windows or OSX but it just seems better.

I can watch a downloaded HD file on my laptop and its smooth as silk. Like TV. But if I stream this to my ATV via AC (current TX is 500mbps) at 4 metres, it gets that jitter. Even though I routinelydownlaod at 9MB.sec. Throughput isn't the issue. I can only put it down to the PC/Mac OS demands

davidcole

6029 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1610353 11-Aug-2016 22:03

I had similar with lightbox. Both chrome (html5) and ie (silver light) really jittery, when a 1080p video via nas no problems. This is on 100ufb with a gigabit wired connection.....and yet my chromecast via wifi gets a better picture with no jitter.

Apsattv

2388 posts

Uber Geek

#1610398 12-Aug-2016 02:08

I think they are holding back showing the live clean obs video streams on Skys Olympics site as they don't want Fairfax getting video coverage from it.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/83055849/sky-tv-battle-with-fairfax-over-olympics-rights-continues

profrink

257 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1610528 12-Aug-2016 10:23

Apsattv:

I think they are holding back showing the live clean obs video streams on Skys Olympics site as they don't want Fairfax getting video coverage from it.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/83055849/sky-tv-battle-with-fairfax-over-olympics-rights-continues

By that theory, they should temporarily shut down their satellite service too. It's not hard to rip that video feed either. If that's actually why it's down, that's insane.

I've solved my issues by just re-broadcasting a SKY satellite feed to a private Youtube channel, in full HD glory.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7