Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
13309 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6261

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 2118380 2-Nov-2018 10:54
Send private message quote this post

Maybe they want to do it right first time and not use their customers as alpha and beta testers like another noteable player in the market. innocent





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


1474 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 155

Subscriber

  Reply # 2118396 2-Nov-2018 11:19
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

 I don't want a dedicated box, I have an Android TV box for that, I just want an app that I can install on it that does the same functions as the official box but perhaps without the tuner.


1862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 679

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2118464 2-Nov-2018 12:10
Send private message quote this post

I filled out the survey months ago too.

Was hoping something new was going to happen but if it's true that it's been shelved, well that's pathetic to be honest.

2573 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1216


  Reply # 2118509 2-Nov-2018 13:57
Send private message quote this post

Tracer:

 

DjShadow:

 

Would Sky provide their own hardware for this or could we run an app on the likes of Apple TV? (or both?)

 

 

Sounds like they still don't get it and sadly their plan is a seperate device.

 

 

I hope not. I don't want a separate device:

 

     

  1. I already have too many devices. The TV inputs, ethernet jacks and powerstrips are maxed out. Reducing the number of devices would presumably be both cheaper for them, and reduce my device clutter.
  2. I already have chromecasts. Using the chromecast would mean that I could (presumably) log in and view Sky in the bedroom or family room, instead of being tethered to the decoder in the living room as at now.
  3. Using existing devices would make it easier to stop, pause and resume subscriptions without having to pay hardware rentals or return the hardware when I'm not using it.
  4. The family would find it easier to have one device through which all services (Sky, Lightbox, Netflix or whatever) were routed.
  5. It's easier to update devices (for 4K or whatever) piecemeal, and rotate the deprecated devices to lower-use TVs.

 

It's almost a no brainer that a separate device is preferable. Which means, if Sky runs true to form, they will probably opt for a proprietary dedicated device.....


13550 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2448

Trusted

  Reply # 2118732 2-Nov-2018 20:32
Send private message quote this post

JimmyH:

 

Tracer:

 

DjShadow:

 

Would Sky provide their own hardware for this or could we run an app on the likes of Apple TV? (or both?)

 

 

Sounds like they still don't get it and sadly their plan is a seperate device.

 

 

I hope not. I don't want a separate device:

 

     

  1. I already have too many devices. The TV inputs, ethernet jacks and powerstrips are maxed out. Reducing the number of devices would presumably be both cheaper for them, and reduce my device clutter.
  2. I already have chromecasts. Using the chromecast would mean that I could (presumably) log in and view Sky in the bedroom or family room, instead of being tethered to the decoder in the living room as at now.
  3. Using existing devices would make it easier to stop, pause and resume subscriptions without having to pay hardware rentals or return the hardware when I'm not using it.
  4. The family would find it easier to have one device through which all services (Sky, Lightbox, Netflix or whatever) were routed.
  5. It's easier to update devices (for 4K or whatever) piecemeal, and rotate the deprecated devices to lower-use TVs.

 

It's almost a no brainer that a separate device is preferable. Which means, if Sky runs true to form, they will probably opt for a proprietary dedicated device.....

 

 

I pretty much agree. From a Sky viewpoint, an app is cheaper than expensing a possible dish, circa $100, expensing a MySky, circa $200. And expensing a free install at $99. If you call in, and they check its fine, too bad, sort your internet out. So a benefit to Sky. At my end, if you have Multi room, cancel the $25. If you have My Sky, cancel the $20, assuming they keep content OD for a while, no need to record.

 

If I was Sky CEO, and given the tall poppy syndrome, I'd keep this quiet until its ready for release. Then a BIG announcement (Marketing 101) There is  big added value for us consumers. Bit cheaper, Sky everywhere. 

 

BUT, if this was announced the expected consumer response is where is the $80 reduction in price.....

 

 

 

EDIT re operate device. Im not sure its preferable. Sky want retention. IPTV is deviceless. Easier. For some though, a seperate device will overcome older customers if it was PnP 


18471 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5277

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2118734 2-Nov-2018 20:35
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

BUT, if this was announced the expected consumer response is where is the $80 reduction in price.....

 

 

Heh, dude, it's NZ, they will expect Sky to pay them to use the box!

 

Best case they will expect it for damn near free.

 

 


13550 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2448

Trusted

  Reply # 2118748 2-Nov-2018 21:14
Send private message quote this post

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

BUT, if this was announced the expected consumer response is where is the $80 reduction in price.....

 

 

Heh, dude, it's NZ, they will expect Sky to pay them to use the box!

 

Best case they will expect it for damn near free.

 

 

 

 

Hey mate, free thats silly. Real silly. At least 5 bucks... :-) 

 

On a contract too. 18 minutes...


289 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 46


  Reply # 2118811 3-Nov-2018 00:10
Send private message quote this post

Vodafone TV is short of sky iptv


Glurp
8419 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3868

Subscriber

  Reply # 2118879 3-Nov-2018 10:04
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

I don't like Sky, but that is partly based on the way they were when I left them.

 

So what would make me like Sky? 

 

1. Streaming.

 

2. Technical competence. Their devices and services always seemed so backward and half-arsed.

 

3. No obligatory packages, or at least a la carte choices. 

 

4. Reasonable pricing. I don't have specific figures in mind, but as an example, maybe one stream for $8 or so a month, with progressive reduction for each additional stream. Kind of like building your own package. Each stream would correspond to an existing channel.

 

5. No promos on documentary channels. I think I hated those more than anything.

 

6. No ads interrupting programming. Blocks of ads between programs might be acceptable, though why should you have to put up with any ads at all if you are already paying for the service?

 

7. No surcharges for HD.

 

Instead of Sky spending more money on an inferior proprietary device or interface, why not use what is already out there? I am a big fan of Kodi. Surely it would not be an insurmountable challenge to create paid access add-ons? It also doesn't have to be an all or nothing proposition. Streaming for those who can do it, other technologies for those who can't.

 

I have no idea how practical this would be. Just my two cents.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


18471 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5277

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2118880 3-Nov-2018 10:08
Send private message quote this post

You want all that for $8 a month? 

 

See @tdgeek told you.

 

/me smh


Glurp
8419 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3868

Subscriber

  Reply # 2118883 3-Nov-2018 10:21
Send private message quote this post

If you are going to attack me, at least be honest about it. I very clearly said I was just pulling a figure out of the air. My suggestion was $8 for the first stream, added charges at a reducing rate for each additional stream. So a half-dozen might cost around $30. Don't make things up that aren't there.

 

 

 

 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


18471 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5277

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2118885 3-Nov-2018 10:24
Send private message quote this post

Rikkitic:

 

If you are going to attack me, at least be honest about it. I very clearly said I was just pulling a figure out of the air. My suggestion was $8 for the first stream, added charges at a reducing rate for each additional stream. So a half-dozen might cost around $40. Don't make things up that aren't there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A stream is different to a *channel* are you talking about a channel, or a stream? A channel would be like food TV, a stream is a single line of data to a single device which presumably would be like Netflix, a single device playing any available *channel*.

 

 


Glurp
8419 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3868

Subscriber

  Reply # 2118887 3-Nov-2018 10:29
Send private message quote this post

I am talking about streams as channels in the case of Sky. Normally a Kodi add-on contains many channels in a stream but it doesn't have to. I was thinking in terms of how paid access could be easily done. I'm not sure how that would be managed if you had all channels in a single stream. Maybe it wouldn't be a problem. I don't know. That is beyond my technical understanding.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


18471 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5277

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2118893 3-Nov-2018 10:58
Send private message quote this post

So, we agree I didn't make up anything, correct? I commented on what you wrote.

 

For clarification, in case you are interested, a stream is just data in a continous line (or stream). It would usually contain one channel/episode or whatever. Applied to the current Sky system you would have packages  which may contain multiple channels, like Sport, containing Sport 1, 2 3, Rugby Channel. If you were to stream something, it would be a single stream to a tablet or other device like a TV.  In Netflix you buy how many devices you want to be able to stream to at the same time. There are no content packages, it's all one package) A single stream to a single device or 3 devices which would contain 3 streams. If you did this with Sky, potentially 3 people could watch 3 channels on 3 different devices.

 

 


13550 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2448

Trusted

  Reply # 2118898 3-Nov-2018 11:05
Send private message quote this post

networkn:

 

If you did this with Sky, potentially 3 people could watch 3 channels on 3 different devices.

 

 

 

 

I would hope that they would allow say 3 devices watching 3different channels at the same time. They more or less have that now with Sky Go. I can watch a channel on Sky Go while the MySky is viewed by others on another channel. Free multiroom sort of, added value which they need. The huge issue is stopping Sky from being used by non subscribers as is probably common for Sky Go. If they can ensure only my residence is watching Sky on a few devices, and not loaning my login to others, multi devices would be an excellent added value. Two TV's, coupe of iPads, all watching different Sky content at the same time. IMHO that would be huge


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.