[ronlizpatsimon]

In my opinion; Freesat should have a forum heading to itself. The new Humax PVR (Foxsat HDR) is now very popular. "Sky" must be shaking in their proverbial boots!

[Broadz]

Originally Posted by ronlizpatsimon

In my opinion; Freesat should have a forum heading to itself.

It has.
Freesat - AVForums.com

Originally Posted by ronlizpatsimon

"Sky" must be shaking in their proverbial boots!

Why? Sky is subscription TV. Freesat (and Freeview) are free TV. People who don't want to pay for television won't get Sky or Virgin or BT Vision or Setanta or Tiscali TV or TUTV anyway, regardless of whether another free player (Freesat) joins the party. The subscription TV companies offer extra television choices for people who aren't happy with what they can get for free. How does another free TV provider change things?

[timearp]

How about the Freesat Forum found here?

Not a dedicated Freesat PVR forum granted, but as there is only one of them, I'm sure there will be room!

Edit: Beaten to it!

[ronlizpatsimon]

Hello "Broadz"; Freesat is better than Freeview because several programs are transmitted in HD and (if HD) in Dolby digital 5.1. Sky + also has HD but is not free. Admitantly addional channels are available - at additional cost. I note that my recently aquired Humax has a card slot for access to additional channels

[Ben]

Originally Posted by ronlizpatsimon

Hello "Broadz"; Freesat is better than Freeview because several programs are transmitted in HD and (if HD) in Dolby digital 5.1. Sky + also has HD but is not free.

BBC HD & Luxe HD are Free-to-Air, so can be picked up by any HD receiver (be it Sky, Freesat or otherwise). The only real difference is that Sky get C4HD & Freesat get ITV HD, so there's not really much between them is there-? (Freeview HD will probably have a similar line-up when it launches too, barring Luxe HD).

An obvious benefit in Freesat though, is you don't have to pay a monthly sub (minimum £10)

[Broadz]

Originally Posted by ronlizpatsimon

Freesat is better than Freeview because several programs are transmitted in HD and (if HD) in Dolby digital 5.1.

Yep - the free channels. Which aren't Sky's competition. Sky aren't competing against free television providers. As on price, there is no competition. Anybody who charges anything is going to come out worse on price than somebody who charges nothing. But if you compare the number of channels provided by the individual television providers (via aerial, satellite, cable or internet) Sky still offer the widest choice of channels. Sky's competition is provided by other subscription TV providers - and at the moment Sky are still coming out on top.

Originally Posted by ronlizpatsimon

Sky + also has HD but is not free.

The channels that you can receive for free on a Freesat box are free on a Sky HD box also - or will be once ITV HD appears on Sky's EPG, and C4HD appears on Freesat's EPG. Either way, it's irrelevant. Sky aren't charging you for the free high definition channels, they are charging you for the subscription high definition channels. Which nobody else but Sky is providing at the moment.

If all the subscription HD channels from Sky were available for free on a Freesat HD box then Sky might consider Freesat to be some kind of competition - but given that over two thirds of high definition channels carry the word "Sky" somewhere in their name, it's unlikely that they'll ever be available for free from anywhere else.