Sky Gripe.

M

markj40

Guest
I personally feel let down by sky, the quality of their transmissions are sub standard imo, why is it that the top digital tv provider in the uk who has more subscribers than cable and freeview,continue to treat it's subscribers so badly.We as indivisuals spend thousands on the latest TV's and Digiboxes with the belief we will get the perfect viewing experience,but of course this is rarely the case.I am more than happy with my new TV and last night I watched some of Aquarivision on Artsworld and Was blown away by the stunning quality, so why then are not all HD programmes of this standard,we are paying for the sevice after all.I am no expert on the subject but if sky keep adding more and more crappy channels(that hardly anyone watches) then surely the decent channels, SD and HD are going to continue to suffer.If sky are the no 1 digital provider you would think that they would pull out all the stops to ensure that the quality of their sevice is second to none. If they don't then it just shows that they don't care. I hope in a way that Telewest's TV drive goes from strength to strength and more people quit sky in favour of them. It might just give sky the kick up the ass they need.
Rant over...
 

Deputy Dawg UK

Novice Member
And that was a rant!!!!! not having Sky HD yet (25/08/06) I can't comment but no doublt come the glorious day i will!!!!!!!
 
M

markj40

Guest
kevinthekoala said:
And that was a rant!!!!! not having Sky HD yet (25/08/06) I can't comment but no doublt come the glorious day i will!!!!!!!
More of a mini rant!!!!!!
 

Jonstone

Well-known Member
When comparing the quality of different HD broadcasts it is always best to compare similar types of recording.

If aquarivision is what it sounds like, then it will be a slow moving brightly coloured image that is tailor made for demonstrating hd and doesn't require a huge amount of bandwidth as most of the scene isn't changing much between frames.

It is no coincidence that many retail outlets use similar demos to show off their hd screens
 

packerbully

Standard Member
markj40 said:
I am no expert on the subject but if sky keep adding more and more crappy channels(that hardly anyone watches) then surely the decent channels, SD and HD are going to continue to suffer.If sky are the no 1 digital provider you would think that they would pull out all the stops to ensure that the quality of their sevice is second to none. If they don't then it just shows that they don't care. I hope in a way that Telewest's TV drive goes from strength to strength and more people quit sky in favour of them. It might just give sky the kick up the ass they need.
Rant over...
Please remember that most of the channels on the Sky EPG (exluding PPV) are not run or owned by Sky. Sky do not and can not stop channels from broadcasting. Most of the channels are owned by other companies.
 

Ewoody

Well-known Member
quote Markj40 ... regards Sky keep adding more & more crappy channels, then surely the decent SD & HD channels will eventually suffer with PQ.

What I find amazing is the number of soft porn channels & shopping channels currently on Sky ... what's the point.

Soft porn channels (906 to 959)
Shopping channels (630 to 681)

It is a ridiculous amount of utter garbage.
 

gavan

Novice Member
packerbully said:
Please remember that most of the channels on the Sky EPG (exluding PPV) are not run or owned by Sky. Sky do not and can not stop channels from broadcasting. Most of the channels are owned by other companies.
Many of the mainstream channels (UK TV group of channels, Discovery channels, Bravo, Eurosport, Nat Geo etc.) are however only available with a Sky Subscription.

Therefore, regardless of whether Sky own the channel or not, it is reasonable for the paying subscriber to gripe about the quality of 'Sky' since Sky are taking their money for that channel.

One of the downsides of monopolising the satellite TV market I'm afraid.


Gav
 

Similar threads

Top Bottom