Freesat Dish Question

"Felicity S." [email protected] wrote in message
news:[email protected]
Nigel Barker wrote:

Krustov wrote:

John Russell Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:21:24 +0100 wrote:

How successful are Freeview PVR's?

They're very good!

That's not the point. It's to do with market share. Freeview is populer but
most people don't use a Freesat PVR to access it. Freesat could become
populer, but not necessarily using expensive PVR's. There seems to be a
view that people want free "SAT". Most people don't care how their TV is
delivered. The decision is based upon "access" to content. I can't "access"
Sky Sports any other way than via Sky!

"ADAM FOULKES" wrote in message
...
Erm - are we forgetting the far superior Tivo here? Tivo is still an
option in the UK. OK there is no new hardware but if you have a thomson
PVR - then you are sorted - best interface by far!

We can't be driven by those who think anything that's old has to changed
for it's own sake. Geeks want all kinds of things added or change which
most people have no interest in. If they win you end up with a product too
complex for it's own good. Compared to a VCR SKY+ is a doddle for anyone to
use, be it a child or technophobe pensioner.

"ADAM FOULKES" wrote in message
...
Erm - are we forgetting the far superior Tivo here? Tivo is still an
option in the UK. OK there is no new hardware but if you have a thomson
PVR - then you are sorted - best interface by far!
Ad



the interface is fine but the hardware isnt anymore - it may do if you live
alone but otherwise try telling the family they can't channel hop anymore
because it may interfere with your recording.

that's before you consider the low picture quality, missing listings for
many channels etc.

( i say this as a former tivo owner that doesn't have rose tinted
spectacles ).


--
Gareth.

that fly...... is your magic wand....

Ed wrote:

I'd like a PVR that I dont have to pay £10 a month to use, that picks
up the majority of watchable channels. I have no need for the 800
shopping/god/foreign/E4 **** that infests Sky and supposedly is worth
paying for

There was a thread about a new Freesat version of the Sky+ box that'll
be the same only bigger and better, to be sold over Sky's dead body.


Fliss

--
He said: We don't want anyone to get the wrong idea.
She said: Right, because my panties stuffed in your paper
shredder probably didn't tip them off.

John Russell wrote:

Felicity S. wrote:

John Russell wrote:

How successful are Freeview PVR's?

They're very good!

That's not the point. It's to do with market share. Freeview is populer
but most people don't use a Freesat PVR to access it.

Did you mean to write "Freeview PVR" there?


Freesat could become populer, but not necessarily using expensive PVR's.

PVRs are getting very affordable, and they're much better than Sky+.


Fliss

--
She said: So then he must have already had the head with him in the
front seat. Huh, that's weird. Why would he keep it there?
He said: I don't know. So he could use a carpool lane.

John Russell wrote:

Compared to a VCR SKY+ is a doddle for anyone to
use, be it a child or technophobe pensioner.

Don't fall for Sky propaganda that only Sky+ is a doddle, all PVRs are.


Fliss

--
She said: You're going stay here with your
ex-wife because her sheep's dying?
He said: No, because *our* sheep's dying...

"Felicity S." [email protected] wrote in message
news:[email protected]
John Russell wrote:

Compared to a VCR SKY+ is a doddle for anyone to
use, be it a child or technophobe pensioner.

Don't fall for Sky propaganda that only Sky+ is a doddle, all PVRs are.

Please read all the posts! The SKY+EPG was criticised for being dated so I
was pointing out that it's more than adequate for most people who use it. I
never implied it was better or worse than other PVR's!

"Felicity S." [email protected] wrote in message
news:[email protected]
John Russell wrote:

Felicity S. wrote:

John Russell wrote:

How successful are Freeview PVR's?

They're very good!

That's not the point. It's to do with market share. Freeview is populer
but most people don't use a Freesat PVR to access it.

Did you mean to write "Freeview PVR" there?


Freesat could become populer, but not necessarily using expensive PVR's.

PVRs are getting very affordable, and they're much better than Sky+.


Fliss

--
She said: So then he must have already had the head with him in the
front seat. Huh, that's weird. Why would he keep it there?
He said: I don't know. So he could use a carpool lane.

I can't get Sky sports on Freesat! I don't spend all day "using" the EPG for
something to do, it's just a means to access "cotnent". Content is King,
anyone who would change to Freesat just becuase of the quality of the
digibox's is daft.


P.S you don't win arguments by making comments about grammer. It shows you
up as a pompous!

On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 10:00:45 +0100, "John Russell"
wrote:

P.S you don't win arguments by making comments about grammer. It shows you
up as a pompous!

I won't point out your spelling mistake then:-)
--

Cheers

Nigel Barker
Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur

On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 00:37:53 BST, "Felicity S." [email protected]
wrote:

Don't fall for Sky propaganda that only Sky+ is a doddle, all PVRs are.

Not all PVRs are. Some of them come with the most abysmal, unusable
software you'll ever have seen.

--