Sky blames piracy for lost customers. Sky: it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Sky blames piracy for lost customers. Sky: it's time to wake up and smell the coffee.

1 | ... | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | ... | 57

2138 posts

Uber Geek

#1926664 29-Dec-2017 19:46

Oblivian:

Noticed a few Kodi articles in the last few days that just realised and backing the Brittish Government that has laid down the law on these streaming boxes that sparked this, and the other law suit threads that then went off another direction.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/illicit-streaming-devices/illicit-streaming-devices

Things are moving away from Kodi, app developers are setting up their own interfaces + site scrapers with adverts or coin mining too create income.

Android isn't the only market, leonflix for windows, mac and linux doesn't even have an android version. Stremio is another doing similar stuff to Kodi

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

dafman

3791 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1926665 29-Dec-2017 19:47

Ok, I'm a non-subscriber and (as followers of this thread will know) a non-fan of Sky.

These holidays, I have stayed at friends and rellies houses with Sky - so I reacquainted myself with it.

I have to say, what an absolute piece of crap Sky is. Compared with Netflix, as an example, the Sky user interface experience is so dated and clunky. I cannot believe punters would subscribe to this for $20 a month, let alone $100 per month. I guess for access to sport, users will pay up. Sport aside, why would anyone stump up so much money for an ad-ridden, old school clunky 1980's experience?

networkn

Networkn
30209 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1926768 29-Dec-2017 22:12

Honestly, some of the last replies leave me sad for (the future of ) humanity. People need to join the rest of us in reality.

It costs $11 to go to 1 movie and yet you want unlimited viewing of (I imagine) a library of dozens if not hundreds of recent and popular releases.

If you think that's going to happen (legally) I have some land in Florida I think you should buy from me.

If it was so easy and feasible and people would make so much money doing it, it would be done already.

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1926823 30-Dec-2017 08:48

dafman:

Ok, I'm a non-subscriber and (as followers of this thread will know) a non-fan of Sky.

These holidays, I have stayed at friends and rellies houses with Sky - so I reacquainted myself with it.

I have to say, what an absolute piece of crap Sky is. Compared with Netflix, as an example, the Sky user interface experience is so dated and clunky. I cannot believe punters would subscribe to this for $20 a month, let alone $100 per month. I guess for access to sport, users will pay up. Sport aside, why would anyone stump up so much money for an ad-ridden, old school clunky 1980's experience?

At $20 I would buy it. The UI is far better than FTA, and the recording, Sky OD, and doco channels easily would do it for me. I find NF etc clunky, its a scroll fest. The Sky OD is the same, but at least easier

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1926824 30-Dec-2017 08:50

Lias:

MikeB4:
Rikkitic:

Every time there has been a 'crackdown' on piracy, a new form has emerged. When people are finally given access to all the content they want for a fair and reasonable price, without silly artificial barriers like geoblocking, piracy will cease to be a problem.

What is a fair and reasonable price?

$15/month

$15 a month for all the content that is available and in 1 service?

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1926825 30-Dec-2017 08:51

JimmyH:

MikeB4: What is a fair and reasonable price?

It depends on the range and quality of content, how easy it is to use, and how obnoxious the DRM is (which is related to usability).

Personally and excluding sport, for a good reliable service, with a *very* good range of content, and no ads or other annoyances, I would be willing to pay in the $40-60/month range. But to get me north of $50 it would have to be pretty darn special in every way.

If the content range isn't that comprehensive, there isn't an HD option of at least 720p with 5.1 sound, and/or there are ads and other annoyances, then what I am prepared to pay is likely much, much less. For netflix NZ & Lightbox types of offerings, probably in the $10-13/month range, certainly no more.

For a crappy service, with limited films and TV series, no HD stream, intrusive DRM and other annoyances I doubt I would be prepared to pay at all. Certainly no more than $3-5/m for something like the ill-fated Quikflix.

Thats more sensible. $40 to $60 for all available content.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
17234 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1926826 30-Dec-2017 08:54

If you want to look at the latest special effects extravaganzas, of course you should pay for it. If your viewing taste runs more to content than packaging, there are plenty of options. At the moment I have Tubi, Crackle, Pluto and Popcornflix on my Kodi. All (legally) free, some with advertising, but nothing anywhere near as intrusive or obnoxious as our own free to air. The film choices available from these and others are comparable to or better than Sky Premiere and Greats except there is vastly more choice and it is vastly cheaper.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Dingbatt

6418 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1926828 30-Dec-2017 09:03

I wish they would introduce the Sky Q boxes they have in the UK. They are the next generation of subscriber box. The only trouble is, when/if they do, they will charge an arm and a leg (and possibly a kidney) for the privilege of using one. After all they are cheeky enough to charge extra for HD.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1926839 30-Dec-2017 09:23

Dingbatt: I wish they would introduce the Sky Q boxes they have in the UK. They are the next generation of subscriber box. The only trouble is, when/if they do, they will charge an arm and a leg (and possibly a kidney) for the privilege of using one. After all they are cheeky enough to charge extra for HD.

Optus I think charges for HD and others do as well.

Currently the Sky boxes are a nice earner. $15 or $20 a month forever. It should be say rental up to $300 then done, no more rental.

elpenguino

2908 posts

Uber Geek

#1926873 30-Dec-2017 10:25

its the constant promos that nauseate me whenever I watch sky (motel, friends house).

Why pay and receive constant interruptions? I just dont get why sky viewers tolerate this?

Our viewing habits have changed at home since I added NextPVR to my PC. We record a lot of stuff on FTA and of course skip the ads.

While things are taping we watch netflix, or another recording.

There's adequate content for us on FTA but then we're not bothered by who is running around doing what in the sports world.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1926878 30-Dec-2017 10:35

elpenguino:

its the constant promos that nauseate me whenever I watch sky (motel, friends house).

Why pay and receive constant interruptions? I just dont get why sky viewers tolerate this?

Our viewing habits have changed at home since I added NextPVR to my PC. We record a lot of stuff on FTA and of course skip the ads.

While things are taping we watch netflix, or another recording.

There's adequate content for us on FTA but then we're not bothered by who is running around doing what in the sports world.

We also watch most Sky stuff recorded. I see ads everywhere, its not just Sky or FTA.

Newspaper, webpages, billboards, and many many and so ons. Why are all these tolerated by us? We should have no ads. Then we wont know who is having a sale, what is on special, what event is coming up, what new TV series is starting soon.

dafman

3791 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1926880 30-Dec-2017 10:45

networkn:

Honestly, some of the last replies leave me sad for (the future of ) humanity. People need to join the rest of us in reality.

It costs $11 to go to 1 movie and yet you want unlimited viewing of (I imagine) a library of dozens if not hundreds of recent and popular releases.

If you think that's going to happen (legally) I have some land in Florida I think you should buy from me.

If it was so easy and feasible and people would make so much money doing it, it would be done already.

Relax, I'm grounded in reality, humanity is ok for the near future. I'm simply comparing two current media products: Sky at $100+ per month with Netflix at $15 per month.

For Sky's $100+ per month - based on my holiday experience in the last week - subscribers get a 1980's text-based UI (anyone remember teletext?), slow response time for the remote, dead links (sorry this service is not available), numerous advertisements, limited options for viewing, and SD on many channels (did I mention the macro-blocking).

For Netflix's $15 per month, I get a modern graphical UI, no dead links, ability to view on-demand on a device my choice, all HD content, no advertisements, I can download and take on holiday (helpful, I realise now, if where you are visiting is a Sky household). I could also mention personalised recommendations based on viewing history, ability to cancel and rejoin at will without being locked into long contract periods (or stand downs).

At one of our holiday houses, my step daughter got so frustrated with Sky she fired up her phone only to discover there was no Chromecast to cast Netflix on. "It's like we're living in a museum!" - her frustrated comments.

dafman

3791 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1926884 30-Dec-2017 10:52

dafman:

networkn:

Honestly, some of the last replies leave me sad for (the future of ) humanity. People need to join the rest of us in reality.

It costs $11 to go to 1 movie and yet you want unlimited viewing of (I imagine) a library of dozens if not hundreds of recent and popular releases.

If you think that's going to happen (legally) I have some land in Florida I think you should buy from me.

If it was so easy and feasible and people would make so much money doing it, it would be done already.

Relax, I'm grounded in reality, humanity is ok for the near future. I'm simply comparing two current media products: Sky at $100+ per month with Netflix at $15 per month.

For Sky's $100+ per month - based on my holiday experience in the last week - subscribers get a 1980's text-based UI (anyone remember teletext?), slow response time for the remote, dead links (sorry this service is not available), numerous advertisements, limited options for viewing, and SD on many channels (did I mention the macro-blocking).

For Netflix's $15 per month, I get a modern graphical UI, no dead links, ability to view on-demand on a device my choice, all HD content, no advertisements, I can download and take on holiday (helpful, I realise now, if where you are visiting is a Sky household). I could also mention personalised recommendations based on viewing history, ability to cancel and rejoin at will without being locked into long contract periods (or stand downs).

At one of our holiday houses, my step daughter got so frustrated with Sky she fired up her phone only to discover there was no Chromecast to cast Netflix on. "It's like we're living in a museum!" - her frustrated comments.

Oops, I forgot to mention, there was one Sky movie that looked good on holiday. Unfortunately, it had started 20 minutes before we turned the TV on, so that was a no go. Being locked into Sky programming timing - another quaint 1980's feature I had forgotten was still around for the privilege of $100+ per month.

tdgeek

28596 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1926885 30-Dec-2017 10:54

dafman:

networkn:

Honestly, some of the last replies leave me sad for (the future of ) humanity. People need to join the rest of us in reality.

It costs $11 to go to 1 movie and yet you want unlimited viewing of (I imagine) a library of dozens if not hundreds of recent and popular releases.

If you think that's going to happen (legally) I have some land in Florida I think you should buy from me.

If it was so easy and feasible and people would make so much money doing it, it would be done already.

Relax, I'm grounded in reality, humanity is ok for the near future. I'm simply comparing two current media products: Sky at $100+ per month with Netflix at $15 per month.

For Sky's $100+ per month - based on my holiday experience in the last week - subscribers get a 1980's text-based UI (anyone remember teletext?), slow response time for the remote, dead links (sorry this service is not available), numerous advertisements, limited options for viewing, and SD on many channels (did I mention the macro-blocking).

For Netflix's $15 per month, I get a modern graphical UI, no dead links, ability to view on-demand on a device my choice, all HD content, no advertisements, I can download and take on holiday (helpful, I realise now, if where you are visiting is a Sky household). I could also mention personalised recommendations based on viewing history, ability to cancel and rejoin at will without being locked into long contract periods (or stand downs).

At one of our holiday houses, my step daughter got so frustrated with Sky she fired up her phone only to discover there was no Chromecast to cast Netflix on. "It's like we're living in a museum!" - her frustrated comments.

It obviously isn't a MySky HDi

It has your graphical UI on Sky OnDemand, SkyGo, which I only ever used for sport seems to have had an upgrade in visual quality, although it was always more than OK on my iPad but thats improved, and there is now a lot of content there too. Used to be a small handful of channels, now its a lot.

NF and Sky are not competing, its a different audience. If you are into movies, Lightbox and Netflix are not competing, different audience.

Sam91

620 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1926921 30-Dec-2017 11:49

tdgeek:

Dingbatt: I wish they would introduce the Sky Q boxes they have in the UK. They are the next generation of subscriber box. The only trouble is, when/if they do, they will charge an arm and a leg (and possibly a kidney) for the privilege of using one. After all they are cheeky enough to charge extra for HD.

Optus I think charges for HD and others do as well.

Currently the Sky boxes are a nice earner. $15 or $20 a month forever. It should be say rental up to $300 then done, no more rental.

I'm not sure if this option is still available, but it used to be. We paid $400 - $500 in 2008 for our MySky box.

1 | ... | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | ... | 57