![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
Anything HD on Sky requires DVB-S2 which the normal decoders can't do (I doubt, please correct me).
Talkiet:24grape:
Yes, this is the kinda of thing the govt should have worked out from the start. A single standard of broadcast quality (Freeview|HD) and made it available thru sky for a dollar a day. As it is freeview has different channels depending on whether its UHF or satellite.
Question: Do u actually need the MySkyHDi decoder to receive TV 1,2,3 in HD in skys basic package, of just the normal decoder?
This is not made at all clear on the Sky website, infact a lot is not made clear. Their website reminds me of Telcoms horrific website of ambiguity.
I'm sorry, why do you still believe that everyone in the country is entitled to get HD? There are always some places where for a variety of reasons it's impractical or too expensive to give the same service as is available in dense population areas.
You haven't addressed my previous post asking if you agree that someone in Fiordland should be able to get Freeview HD even if it means the govt putting up another satellite just for them.
Your other question - Yes, the MySky HDi decoder is required as far as I know for 1,2,3 in HD on the basic Sky package.
Cheers - N
24grape:Talkiet: ...
Your other question - Yes, the MySky HDi decoder is required as far as I know for 1,2,3 in HD on the basic Sky package.
WEll i'll wait for someone who does the know the answer.
grant_k: I can confirm that you need one of the MySky decoders in order to get HD on TV1/2/3. We paid for MySky outright @ $599 when it launched some years ago, therefore the extra $15 per month doesn't apply to us.
My latest Sky invoice says the following:
Monthly Services:
Basic $39.13 + GST = $44.99
Whether you choose to pay the $599 upfront (or not) is up to you. But having paid it, we are enjoying our TV in HD, 100s of km from the nearest major centre, for $44.99 per month. It's your choice whether to do the same, or keep being unhappy with the FreeView service.
For our $44.99, we also get to enjoy some of the excellent programmes on offer from BBC World, Discovery & History Channels or UKTV. I think it's a pretty good deal really, and just wish that my internet service came so cheaply.
24grape: It appears from the sky website that new subscribers pay:
$47.66/month.
24grape: Out of interest tho, does that MY SKY HDi decoder also pick-up FTA channels off Optus D1 satellite and also standard freeview satellite? I note that sky network doesn't carry all the freeview satellite channels eg George FM is not on sky.Our MySky decoder sits in the cupboard, for reasons which I won't go into here. Last time I used it, George FM was available on the channel listing, but you needed to pay a $3.16 monthly fee to access the digital music channels.
Thanks.
24grape: [snip]
I'm not going answer yr question, because the analogy u discussed is absurd. It’s not an argument around logic its an argument around numbers and proportional representation. I live in centre of about 30,000 people approx 75 km clear view from wellington. I can't believe that in this day and age of technology that centre of this size and location is struck off the list by the govt for receiving Freeview|HD.
Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.
Talkiet:24grape: [snip]
I'm not going answer yr question, because the analogy u discussed is absurd. It’s not an argument around logic its an argument around numbers and proportional representation. I live in centre of about 30,000 people approx 75 km clear view from wellington. I can't believe that in this day and age of technology that centre of this size and location is struck off the list by the govt for receiving Freeview|HD.
My analogy is absolutely not absurd. It's just a difference in the extent and cost of the problem - but it's the same issue and economic factors at work... They are just more clearly visible in the extreme example I posted.
I'm not surprised that people living in an apparently open or populous location would be upset by not getting Freeview HD... Personally I'm in the same situation. I am in South New Brighton in Chch, with a large stand of trees between me and the Freeview HD transmitter.
I don't expect anyone to put up another transmitter just for me and a few hundred others so we can get Freeview in HD - despite people 100 metres away from me being able to get it... I can get Freeview from satelite, and I can get Sky HD (which I happen to do)
Cheers - N
Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.
CYaBro:
A few trees shouldn't affect the Freeview|HD signal too much.
We have just started getting Freeview|HD here in Whangarei and there are trees between us and the transmitter and the signal is coming through loud and clear.
Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.
Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.
cyril7: From experience dense rows of trees if in the path (and significantly fowl the path) can cause significant issues.
Whilst it might not cause enough attenuation to effect service, assuming its big enough to start with, they cause a dynamic multipath situation that COFDM decoders are typically not fast enough to track, not so much a problem if there is no wind, big issue otherwise.
Best way to observe this is with a spec analyser, the multipath from trees will cause a notch in the band of carriers (seen as a tombstone), which if stationary is not a biggie as the decoders can adapt to that, but as soon as the trees move the notch will move up and down the band, if too fast the decoders will not adapt and fail, and fail big time.
CYaBro: They do have the package I was talking about!
http://skytv.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/478
$33.70 a month for free-to-air channels with a MySkyHDi box.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |