expression:gunnerpc:StarBlazer: Wow - I'm really glad you doom merchants weren't around when Mr Bell was working on his telephone - we'd still be sending stuff by Morse Code or worse - paper!!!
Wishing the company would go bust and similar comments are childish and unhelpful. If you don't like the service, state why you don't and what you would do better. To launch to 10s if not 100s of thousands of people on one day in a very narrow window of connection is no small feat which I think they pulled off reasonably well. Is it perfect? No. Will it get better? Yes. The Android app has flawless quality.
If you want to complain, write to Sky and tell them how disappointed you are that they were unable to secure the rights to the EPL. Ask them why they are not able to offer a service for EVERY game in the EPL. Also ask why they are not able to provide a service where you can select which sports you want and only pay for that rather than paying for 20+ sports that you are not interested in!
Don't give me the "there's not enough space on the satellite" cop-out. They already have iSky as a delivery platform there was nothing stopping them from extending that service in the same way that PLP have delivered.
Sky won't do it because they are a greedy monopoly. I'm happy to support anyone who challenges that.
The status-quo has to be removed - we need genuine options other than Sky.
This is where it starts with companies like PLP.
For me this analogy isn't very good.
Bell was creating something that wasn't otherwise available. A product that could and did change the world. Voice over a wire.
PLP have taken a product that already exists (TV over internet), dumbed it down, and broadcast it to the masses in the most cost effective way for them.
They didn't take a product that wasn't here and create it. They didn't even take a product that existed and made it better.
We all know its possible to broadcast better quality than they are over the internet. But will they? Maybe. When? Soon, When - Ah no one really knows. They know, but will they tell us? NO.
Trust me, they are just as greedy as sky, if not geedier in my opinion. Like for like @ 250.00 for a season you One sport for 21 per/m. Sky you get/got all sports for 26 per/m.
I do agree, I would love to pick and choose what I subscribe to.
Has PLP broken up a monopoly? No they havent, they have created a Duopoly.
Sommet Sport, they have broken up a monopoly. Football, free to air. Good on them.
And Igloo, where you can choose to subscribe to certain channels.
Thats where it starts. Not with PLP.
I'm all for the internet, its great. But tell me, whats wrong with the current way we get TV?
Why would a company want to broadcast only via the internet? Its cheaper maybe, and they don't need to invest in all that expensive broadcasting equipment.
If TV over the internet is going to be the way we all watch TV for the future, who is driving this demand? If the demand was really that strong, wouldn't all of the networks, have a lot more invested in it than they currently do. Wouldn't they be pushing us that way, rather than having it as a convenient alternative for us to watch reruns.
I know they are always adding services, but are they doing for convenience for us, or so they can try something out, that isn't quite ready yet.
Why couldn't PLP broadcast in HD and SD, over the airwaves AND online, even in conjunction with IGLOO or via their own set top box. Or on a freeview channel, with ads.
I would buy their set top box, if it meant I could get HD, and didn't have to rely on my intermittent internet, and WIFI. I would pay $200.00 for their set top box.
For me, the infrastructure of the internet, especially in NZ, isn't ready yet to be the only way someone can get access to television shows.
Investment in IPTV is growing. The commonly quoted statistic is that a third of internet traffic in America is from Netflix. Cable companies are beginning to offer access to channels over the internet in America. Sky in NZ are preparing to launch Sky Go. It is all driven by the consumer, who ultimately wants more control over the content they want to watch.
As has been mentioned previously on several occasions, capacity on broadcast technology over airwaves is almost full. The internet presents a unique opportunity to get around this.
Regarding a set top box, that requires a large investment on their part ultimately culminating in additional costs for consumers. Its more cost effective to release a plethora of apps for different devices offering access to the service.
Internet infrastructure has been improving rapidly in New Zealand for years. Data caps are growing exponentially and the availability of UFB is increasing.
I live in Pt Chev, Auckland. I cant get UFB until June 2014, I cant even get VDSL right now. I live in a fairly central Auckland suburb and I cant get these.
Imagine all of these people that live outside of the main cities and in rural NZ, they don't stand a chance.
Didn't Netflix come to NZ recently and say, no thanks, your infrastructure isn't good enough?
My point is simply, I (and Netflix) this we (NZ) isn't ready yet for this to be the only way to get media.