Re-arranging of Sky Channels

[Superphil]

Bit of price difference! £120 for the one with a screen and £10 for the one without. Does the screen make that big a difference?

I paid nearer to £50 for mine, a slighly older model (2009) but the ones with screens are very good, no plasticy shoddy goods, they are the same sort of quality construction as say a decent mobile phone, and the screen makes it a doddle to use too. I guess you pays your money, and takes your choice, I think Philips do one for around £500

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

I paid nearer to £50 for mine, a slighly older model (2009) but the ones with screens are very good, no plasticy shoddy goods, they are the same sort of quality construction as say a decent mobile phone, and the screen makes it a doddle to use too. I guess you pays your money, and takes your choice, I think Philips do one for around £500

Crikey. I just had a look and there are some pricey beasts available. Square versions and all sorts.

Will have a look round for a cheaper price for that screen one and hope it's not too late for Father Christmas to bring it to me

 

[Easy 10]

Does anyone else harbour a slight suspicion that Sky have made the picture on all the SD channels a LITTLE bit shittier, so as to entice/encourage people to get HD ?

I was far from convinced about the merits of HD until I started watching blu-ray discs. After that I decided to upgrade to HD, but I'm sure some of the picture quality of the SD stuff is crappier than it used to be. Or maybe HD just makes it seem that way, I dunno.

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

Does anyone else harbour a slight suspicion that Sky have made the picture on all the SD channels a LITTLE bit shittier, so as to entice/encourage people to get HD ?

I was far from convinced about the merits of HD until I started watching blu-ray discs. After that I decided to upgrade to HD, but I'm sure some of the picture quality of the SD stuff is crappier than it used to be. Or maybe HD just makes it seem that way, I dunno.

I have pondered the same thing. When I watch a non-HD channel the quality is absolutely dire compared to the HD version. Definitely think it has been lowered to boost the appeal of HD. However I'm not sure if this is just done on HD boxes to make the people who have bought them feel great about it, or if it applies to all Standard Sky+ boxes too?

 

[TheBlueAndWhiteStrips]

Does anyone else harbour a slight suspicion that Sky have made the picture on all the SD channels a LITTLE bit shittier, so as to entice/encourage people to get HD ?

I was far from convinced about the merits of HD until I started watching blu-ray discs. After that I decided to upgrade to HD, but I'm sure some of the picture quality of the SD stuff is crappier than it used to be. Or maybe HD just makes it seem that way, I dunno.

My brother has been going on about this for ages he swears that the SD picture quality has been reduced. There might be something to his ravings as I am with Virgin and he's with sky, and there is a difference between the quality despite us both having full HD televisions.

 

[Gary Leeds]

Of course it has been reduced, to make room for the HD channels they have squeezed more SD channels into the available bandwidth so rather than having 3 channels per frequency they have 6 or more.

If you know how to tune in the extra ITV regions try watching the West Country version of ITV and flick back to 103 afterwards, apparently the difference in quality is amazing because there are very few channels using the bandwidth West country ITV uses

 

[clippedgull]

Does anyone else harbour a slight suspicion that Sky have made the picture on all the SD channels a LITTLE bit shittier, so as to entice/encourage people to get HD ?

I was far from convinced about the merits of HD until I started watching blu-ray discs. After that I decided to upgrade to HD, but I'm sure some of the picture quality of the SD stuff is crappier than it used to be. Or maybe HD just makes it seem that way, I dunno.

One thing is for sure, and that is HD doesn't look as good as when the first HD channels were launched back in 2006. The bandwidth allotted to them has been reduced due to new encoders. Just looking at a BBC HD recording (concert) from 2006 that I still have on my box and comparing to a HD programme of today proves that although the picture is superior to SD broadcasts the quality has been reduced.

 

[Jello]

So does this means the renumbering is going to screw up any series links like it did when BBC 1 HD replaced BBC HD?

 

[Gary Leeds]

So does this means the renumbering is going to screw up any series links like it did when BBC 1 HD replaced BBC HD?

Probably

and it will probably just happen to break any boxes that are 13 months old as well. Seems a lot of people without extended service plans have this happen, 3 times for us now

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

I recorded something late last night and looked at it this morning to see that it was only part recorded, with the comment "upgrade" written next to it. What's that all about?

 

[Acker79]

I recorded something late last night and looked at it this morning to see that it was only part recorded, with the comment "upgrade" written next to it. What's that all about?

Boxes are being upgraded to enable anytime+.

As far as I can work out, anytime+ requires you to connect your sky box to your sky router (if you have one, if not you can't have anytime+), to allow you access to stream much more content on the anytime service.

Anytime+ hasn't been switched on yet, but all boxes are being upgraded in batches according to model.

 

[Gary Leeds]

great, thats a guarantteed new box we will need then, always the same when they do a forced update and add a new feature

 

[Rookie]

Personally don't really see the point in the re numbering especially as I'm used to SS1 on 408 SSN on 455 etc

 

[Gazwag]

So does this means the renumbering is going to screw up any series links like it did when BBC 1 HD replaced BBC HD?

You will only have to record one eastenders and press the series link button

 

[gruntage]

I much prefer HD and hate watching things that are standard definition now. If you haven't made the switch and looking to save money then I wouldn't upgrade. Once you have got used to watching it you won't want anything else, so it's best not to get used to it in the first place!

I would concur with this. Once you get HD you really won't want to give it up. I'm trying to save costs at the moment, and I keep cutting back on everything else to leave the HD intact. Sad i know - i honestly never thought i'd love it so much, but I hate watching SD channels now (especially when there is an HD version of it). MY missus doesn't notice the difference and will often put ITV1 on instead of ITV1HD. Really gets me. as the difference in quality is massive.

I'd advise staying away from HD if you are trying to avoid the costs, as once you get it, you won't give it up easily.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Does anyone else harbour a slight suspicion that Sky have made the picture on all the SD channels a LITTLE bit shittier, so as to entice/encourage people to get HD ?

I was far from convinced about the merits of HD until I started watching blu-ray discs. After that I decided to upgrade to HD, but I'm sure some of the picture quality of the SD stuff is crappier than it used to be. Or maybe HD just makes it seem that way, I dunno.

I think its more to do with the bandwidth being reduced to the barest minimum on Sky and Sky+ boxes with more channels per transponder affectingly what you see , additionally the SkyHD box gives a crappier SD picture via HDMI than a Scart connection so you think HD looks better than what it is compared to 3 or 4 years ago when the picture quality was stunning. The reason why the picture quality on BBCHD has deteriorated was the introduction of a new encoder and the BBC's commitment to platform neutrality which basically means the picture on satellite will only be as good as what can be transmitted on the terrestrial Freeview service.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

From 1st Feb 2011, if you have a HD digibox and HD subscription, the HD channels will be replacing the SD channels on the EPG

In simple terms BBC One HD will now be on 101 and BBC One will be 143; Sky Sports 1HD will be 401 and Sky Sports 1 will be 408. Makes it a lot better when they're all together

The broadcasters still have a few days left to tell Sky they want to opt out , BBC1 will probably stay at 101 because the HD version cannot show regional/local news , ITV1 will probably stay at 103 , Channel 4 at 104 and Five at 105 because regional advertising isn't local enough on the HD variants (eg ITV1HD in the Yorkshire and Lincolnshire region is a simulast of ITV1 Granada and not ITV1 Yorkshire)

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

Boxes are being upgraded to enable anytime+.

As far as I can work out, anytime+ requires you to connect your sky box to your sky router (if you have one, if not you can't have anytime+), to allow you access to stream much more content on the anytime service.

Anytime+ hasn't been switched on yet, but all boxes are being upgraded in batches according to model.

Ahh ok, thanks. Shame you have to have a sky router to access anytime+ though.

 

[manilaseagull]

What is interesting is turning on the default highlighting of true HD broadcasts and then scroll through the HD channels, Proper HD broadcasts are in orange and the rest are in white. A lot of Sky Sports is in white, most of the entertainment channels broacast SD that has been upscaled as well

can u explain how to do that please

 

[John Sayers]

Anytime+ hasn't been switched on yet, but all boxes are being upgraded in batches according to model.

We have Anytime+ working on our box already, but it only works if you have sky broadband as well. It wont work with another broadband provider. But I requested it from the mysky page on their web site