In our previous house we had Virgin Media and had Sky Sports plus ESPN. We are soon to move into our new house and VM is an option but I wonder if Sky is a better option for us. This is based on answers to some questions though. VM was very good.
Whilst we had Sky Sports and ESPN, my wife's football team was only shown a few times a year. And likely to be similar I guess for 2010/11. But if we had Sky Sports via Sky:
- Could we see her team via the 'red button' in the evenings when they reshow games? During the day live would be better still
- How good are the bells and whistles with Sky for football along the lines of player cam etc?
- If a game came up we wanted could I get Sky Sports/ESPN for only that month and cancel again? It was an option on VM but I had a good discount so never cancelled because of the discount! I wanted to carry it forward but sold in December and complete next week.
If I go for Sky I might just junk all sports and save £27 per month. I might also miss the ability to record two channels and watch a third mind.
I am not going to get a Sky HD pack because there is little benefit.
|
|
I reckon you will also miss the superb upscaling that V+ does - almost looks like HD here.
|
It did for me before Smokie. I had V+ before we sold the house.
I was around the parents in law with Sky+ HD a few weeks ago so switched between HD and non HD versions and they looked the same on their TV. But that's also a consideration.
If I go Sky+ I'll end up with the Sky+HD box anyway but won't pay for the HD package - most people assume all channels are HD and pay the tenner. Most of what we all watch is SD..... Now I do like a bit of HD grass to look at on the football mind. Those blades can look so green.
EDIT: The new V+ boxes are not the Cisco/SA ones anymore. I think Samsung... does that affect image quality in upscaling?
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 20 May 10 at 23:37
|
Ideally you need to wait till 4th quarter (!) for the new TiVo based V+ boxes. The TiVo interface is fantastic (even on my old '90s series 1 Thompson) and I believe the boxes will have a good dollop of recording space and potentially be able to use external drives and even possibly be networked
www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/7366770/TiVos-UK-launch-could-make-British-television-personal.html and other places
|
|
you can upscale as much as you like, but if the orginal is not HD, the output is patchy at best. As per ITVs so called "HD" they should be prosecuted under the trades description act.
|
We have Virgin (V+) and I have to agree at the poor quality of ITV HD, however we have the (i think its called) the old Scientific Atlanta boxes. appernently the Samsung box is better at HD but you dont get to choose when the installer comes round its "whatever is on the van" - but ITV HD is absoultley rubbish the "upscaling" is non existant.
If i had my way we would not have subscription TV at all and just the Freeview which is more than adequate for my needs - however SWMBO insists on her American Imported programmes. - however I will not have sky and put money into Rupert Murdochs pockets where i can help it - at least the HD is free on Virgin and not a extra charge as im lead to beleive it is on sky.
Last edited by: Redviper on Fri 21 May 10 at 13:04
|
EDIT:
Also on our SA Box, the menu's are in very low resoloution when on HD, again this (acording to the forums) is down to the SA Box, and the Samsung one is a whole lot better (ive seen the difference as SWMBO's Parents have the Samsung Box) it makes me wonder if the SA box was ever suited for HD Content, and this was a feature added into it as part of the rebranding of it.
|
We had the Scientific Atlanta (part of Cisco now) box and the upscaling for SD channels was fine. I know the current new boxes are Samsungs and look different. If I go down the Sky route I won't be taking the HD package as there is little point IMO.
I wonder if anyone on here can actually answer my Sky questions though. I know all about Virgin Media having had that. I wondered about the interactive features for Sky Sports for instance.
|
...I wondered about the interactive features for Sky Sports for instance...
I've never been a great user of these, but the last time I looked during a football match several seemed to have gone the journey.
The alternative 'fanzone' commentary was still there, but no player cam, and no choice of vews.
I think ongoing match highlights was still there, as was the coverage linked to SkyBet, enabling you to watch the game and place bets 'in running'.
I watch the 'straight' coverage only, which apart from over-hyped commentary, is excellent.
The red button 'match choice' highlights on later in the evening are not quite as comprehensive as they were, because Sky can't get same day access to the few live games they don't have the rights to.
Don't overlook the good old Beeb - Match of the Day offers a comprehensive highlights package.
Some of the above might be changing for next season - I've seen a trailer on Sky saying Monday night football is coming back.
|
Thanks iffy. This is what I was after. It sounds like what I thought were benefits of the Sky Sports (on Sky) might not be there anymore.
I'm not interested in the interactive stuff during a game. I am more interested if it's possible to see the team the better half supports, either later or when they are actually playing.
|
...I am more interested if it's possible to see the team the better half supports, either later or when they are actually playing...
You don't mention who that is, but if it's a Premier League side then Sky certainly have more matches live and longer highlights than anybody else.
Don't know when you need to decide, but a few days after the new season's fixture list is published - early August possibly - Sky publish their provisional list of games to be covered live.
You can then see what's what for the first couple of months of the season.
|
Team won't be on that much - it's Sunderland.
I want to get Sky (or outside chance VM) in a week or so because we complete on a house next week. And the Sky deal for free boxes will stop just before the world cup. I can always go without Sports for now which I might now do anyway.
|
...I can always go without Sports for now...
Should work OK.
One you're up and running, it's easy enough to tinker with your package (don't titter) online.
|
If you've got output set to wide, try it without - the menus look much better.
As far as upscaling is concerned, the quality of the TV is also a factor. Some (?most) upscale whatever is sent to them. So if the TV upscales better than the box, you may see an improvement. Sometimes you might need to just fiddle with the settings a little.
In my case the best picture quality comes from having the V+ set to 720, even though my Toshiba is a 1080p full HD screen, and letting the TV do its stuff to the picture. Not sure how much, if any, broadcast HD is at 1080 anyway...
Oh, and to the original OP, Virgin all the way!
|
>> Oh, and to the original OP, Virgin all the way!
I might still do that. But it depends on answers to my original questions.
Any broadcast in HD will only ever be 720p or 1080i. There isn't the bandwidth to do 1080p at the moment.
|
Sorry, was editing to answer when you replied! Father in Law has sky hd and the interactive features work when they feel like it, the picture quality is variable (atmospherics?) but never any better than mine, and he pays a lot more than me for negligable extra. If he was in a cable area he would swop like a shot.
|
Sky Sports Question - smokie
