View Full Version : Sky goes terrestrial [Merged]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6343715.stm
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/digitaltv/a42523/sky-to-launch-new-dtt-service.html
Sky is to make some of its most popular programmes, movies and sports available on digital terrestrial television.
...
Sky Three, Sky News and Sky Sports News will disappear from digital terrestrial to make way
Live premiership football for free? Doesn't sound bad...
Live premiership football for free? Doesn't sound bad...
The new service will allow customers to receive some of Sky's most popular programmes - including sport and movies - through a conventional rooftop aerial and a DTT box for a monthly subscription.
Except it's not free. You need to buy a new freeview box and subscription. Now if I was the cynical type I could suggest that Sky might use this as a way to say "We don't need to give cable our channels, if people can't put up a dish they can use an aerial."
Luckily I'm not the cynical type. ;)
Except it's not free. You need to buy a new freeview box and subscription. Now if I was the cynical type I could suggest that Sky might use this as a way to say "We don't need to give cable our channels, if people can't put up a dish they can use an aerial."
Luckily I'm not the cynical type. ;)
:doh: I read that as digital freeview. *writes out 100 times, I must read posts/links properly*
Be interesting to see how much content they eventually provide and what cost.
Good for people who can't get Sky and/or VM.
ohhh, but its seems everyone missed the most IMPORTANT point.
a 3rd party available DVB-T PCI/USB2 box that can do mpeg-4 AVC decoding
(not just your old mpeg-4 ASP [divx/xvid] or the old outdated mpeg2 only).
"Pay-TV battle
Sky will replace its three existing DTT channels with four new 24-hour streams using the more efficient Mpeg4 compression technology.
The company hopes a range of set-top box manufacturers will start making receivers with compatible software once the service has launched. The announcement came on the same day that Sky's cable rival NTL/Telewest relaunched under the name Virgin Media. "
that means MPeg-4 AVC/H.264 to be made available to the DVB-T transport steam, and in doing so makes it far more likely and helpful to the hope that the Hi-Def BBC trials will become available country wise.
once again making NTL's opting for the outdated and far more wastful Mpeg2 codec look even more short sighted and flat earth thinking :dozey:
thats were the 4 new AVC channels into the 3 old mpeg2 channels space works great, as AVC is far smaller yet has as a lossless mode.
i assume the 3rd partys DVB-T box makers will also include all the abilitys they learned from the DVB-T/DVB-S(2) HD bbc trials, mbaff etc in the new boxs? not that they need use them to start with but its always wise to include all your future profit making/hardware usability options inside the initial prototype board for others to licence and copy for everyones benefit later.
all we need than is some good PCI and USB2 PC cards that can also take the DTT subscription slot/card and we are ready to tap directly into the transport stream for a far better quality PC playback that your average stand alone SD cable/sat box (as they dont have anything but analogue out) .
anyone know of a current DVB-T card or USB box that takes the DTT cards as these id assume would be the first to offer the new AVC (mpeg-4 part10) 3rd party kit?.
in combination with something like this http://www.ruckuswireless.com/products/mediaflex_router/ your really starting to rock with end user content options.
to see how good AVC can be just look at some of the AVC encoded trailers etc here
http://www.zudeo.com/az-web/content/FeaturedContent.html
and gont get fobbed off by salesmen that try and sell 'mpeg4' as the term, remember to ALLWAYS ask but does it do AVC/H.264
rememeber mpeg-4 asp IS OLD divX/Xvid [Mpeg-4 part2]
the new MPeg-4 AVC is what you want [Mpeg-4 part10] (along with mpeg2 and VC-1 if you must).
No contest really, you have to admire SKY, as Virgin Media gives you masses of flashy adverts and a rebranding but no new end user usability or innovation (thats liberate software boxs for you).
SKY gives you a potential new DVB-T innovation with real AVC content that can only grow better as 3rd partys are allowed to give end users what they want to pay for, unlike the current closed cable network that could be so much better if 3rd partys were allowed access to users cable ends.
and dont forget if sky does DVB-T AVC then the other broadcasters are sure to follow, as it then makes it easy to take off the old digital mpeg2 channels and replace them with far more AVC DVB-T channels, and thats before they even start to think about the old alalogue turn off and all the extras that will possably enable if they give some of the released spectum back to the broadcasters use.
Except it's not free. You need to buy a new freeview box and subscription. Now if I was the cynical type I could suggest that Sky might use this as a way to say "We don't need to give cable our channels, if people can't put up a dish they can use an aerial."
Luckily I'm not the cynical type. ;)
So they expect us to pay for Freeview... lol
What an absolute joke - I understand Sky have a right to say "not all our customers are allowed a dish or cable for whatever reasons" but they make enough revenue to keep Freeview what it really was intended for surely.
I remember when freeserve used to be free... that soon changed as well. :rolleyes:
Sorry but Freeview rubs me up the wrong way... its great if your stuck in an area where you cant get sky or cable... but I predicted when it first come out it wouldnt really be "free" for very long... (least not the good channels anyway)
pedantic
09-02-2007, 00:06
So............let's get this right !
Anyone with built in digital freeview, are now having channels taken away from them, to make way for new subscription channels, which can't be viewed, because they are Mpeg4 broadcasts................
Thanks a lot Sky ! :upyours:
I'm not happy about this. :mad: :td:
pedantic
09-02-2007, 00:20
I'm not happy about this. :mad: :td:
The launch of the new service is subject to approval by Ofcom
I hope ofcom step in here personally.
However judging by ofcom's recent news that the space left by analogue in a few years time, will be up for auction as apposed to giving any space for further freeview channels, I doubt it very much. No way the likes of ITV etc can compete with Sky/Cable in an auction. :fit:
well this is a joke, lets remove free channels and replace them with paid for ones, not only that but lets make it so people need to buy new equipment to even recieve them
Free ? No chance, pay Sky a subscription and then have to buy a Sky freeview box too...... sounds like a rip off to me. OFCOM should tell them where to go but then we know OFCOM have verys small cojones ;)
Creative
09-02-2007, 08:56
Free ? No chance, pay Sky a subscription and then have to buy a Sky freeview box too...... sounds like a rip off to me. OFCOM should tell them where to go but then we know OFCOM have verys small cojones ;)
I don't see what the big fuss is about. Advertising revenues are falling. Sky will spend money developing the STB, and providing the equipment to do the compression, and will pay to maintain it. Add to this the fact that if you don't want to pay Sky for these channels then YOU DON'T HAVE TO! Sky can only sell this product to people who actually want to pay for it
Too many people seem to want everything for free. You don't want to pay then do without.
Popper, VLC will play Part10 Level 3 streams OK. Obviously you need the unencrypted stream.
I don't see what the big fuss is about. Advertising revenues are falling. Sky will spend money developing the STB, and providing the equipment to do the compression, and will pay to maintain it. Add to this the fact that if you don't want to pay Sky for these channels then YOU DON'T HAVE TO! Sky can only sell this product to people who actually want to pay for it
Too many people seem to want everything for free. You don't want to pay then do without.
Popper, VLC will play Part10 Level 3 streams OK. Obviously you need the unencrypted stream.
From previous post
Sky will replace its three existing DTT channels with four new 24-hour streams using the more efficient Mpeg4 compression technology.
The company hopes a range of set-top box manufacturers will start making receivers with compatible software once the service has launched.
I understand that Sky 3, Sky News and Sky Sports News are the free channels being dropped - it's a shame that Sky 3 is going, and Sky News is OK-ish when there's a breaking news story, but I wouldn't be sad to see the back of Sky Sports News if I was a Freeview user.
Free ? No chance, pay Sky a subscription and then have to buy a Sky freeview box too...... sounds like a rip off to me. OFCOM should tell them where to go but then we know OFCOM have verys small cojones ;)
No, the government loves Murdoch.
Chrysalis
09-02-2007, 13:44
sky sports news and sky news are a big loss.
Creative
09-02-2007, 14:18
From previous post
So Sky will launch a service without any STb's being available? They will launch a service with nothing to test it on?
They will work hand in hand with manufacturers, (with a baseball bat hidden behind their back). This work won't be a couple of hours it will take months. Are you suggesting it will not cost Sky any money?
Manufacturers will hope the service is succesful so they can sell more STB's.
Once again, if you don't want it then you don't have to buy it.
So Sky will launch a service without any STb's being available? They will launch a service with nothing to test it on?
They will work hand in hand with manufacturers, (with a baseball bat hidden behind their back). This work won't be a couple of hours it will take months. Are you suggesting it will not cost Sky any money?
Manufacturers will hope the service is succesful so they can sell more STB's.
Once again, if you don't want it then you don't have to buy it.
Hey, buddy, don't shoot the messenger - it's what Sky said, not me (from the BBC webpage) -
"Sky will replace its three existing DTT channels with four new 24-hour streams using the more efficient Mpeg4 compression technology.
The company hopes a range of set-top box manufacturers will start making receivers with compatible software once the service has launched."
Not that we're unused to Sky being economical with the truth -
DigiSpy (http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/broadcasting/a42480/sky-tv-ads-banned-by-asa.html)
"Sky has been criticised by the Advertising Standards Authority for advertising which implied the digital switchover would mean that all terrestrial TV signals would be turned off.
The copy stated: "Don't worry that your terrestrial TV signal is being switched off. We've got it covered", with another part saying "Switch to digital with Sky now". The ads were targeted at consumers in the Whitehaven area of Cumbria.
A second ad had the headline "Want to be ready when your terrestrial TV signal is switched off? Sky TV is the only way to go digital right now".
The ASA noted that Sky had worked with Digital UK on the campaign, but said the headlines were still inaccurate and misleading. It ruled that Sky must make it clear in future that Freeview would be available to Whitehaven residents after switchover. "
Barton71
09-02-2007, 15:17
Once again, if you don't want it then you don't have to buy it.
That's true, but for me the issue isn't about losing the 3 Sky Channels, but more about space being used for more subscription channels, which could be used by someone who wants to offer free channels. If this goes ahead it will result in less choice, and it will strengthen Murdochs hold on the media. If Sky no longer want to broadcast on Freeview, then that's fine, but they should leave the space behind.
So Sky will launch a service without any STb's being available? They will launch a service with nothing to test it on?
They will work hand in hand with manufacturers, (with a baseball bat hidden behind their back). This work won't be a couple of hours it will take months. Are you suggesting it will not cost Sky any money?
Manufacturers will hope the service is succesful so they can sell more STB's.
Once again, if you don't want it then you don't have to buy it.
i wonder if they are going to use Tandberg AVC kit for the feed....
http://www.lightreading.com/quote.asp?GUID=890441&Page=MediaViewer&Ticker=ARRS
ARRIS Releases Details of $1.2B Acquisition of TANDBERG Television and Tuesday, January 16th, 8:30 AM EST Conference Call
its interesting we didnt hear anything about arris buying them as NTL:tw do seem to like arris kit at least for trials.....
Once again, if you don't want it then you don't have to buy it.
I dont buy things I dont want...what kind of silly person would do that :confused:
But if the man upstairs decided to label something stupid like oxygen for example... and called it FreeAir.. allowing all of us to continue to breath in and out, safe in the knowledge our air is free.. (it has to be... its called freeair isnt it) then one day he quickly changed the t&c's to include a subscription charge then I think you might have a different take on this. ;)
etccarmageddon
09-02-2007, 18:18
but freeview already has 'pay' channels in the form of 'topup tv'.
Creative
09-02-2007, 18:20
I dont buy things I dont want...what kind of silly person would do that :confused:
But if the man upstairs decided to label something stupid like oxygen for example... and called it FreeAir.. allowing all of us to continue to breath in and out, safe in the knowledge our air is free.. (it has to be... its called freeair isnt it) then one day he quickly changed the t&c's to include a subscription charge then I think you might have a different take on this. ;)
DTT is not labelled as being free. Freeview is just one of the users of the DTT platform.
EDIT : Doh! Beaten to it!
Chrysalis
09-02-2007, 19:47
It was obvious to me freeview would eventually get subscription channels, the marketing would be freeview to get people on it and its easier to start selling subscriptions to people when they already have the box.
themelon
09-02-2007, 21:31
OFCOM Absolutely must step in on this matter Sky is becoming an ever more disgraceful monopolyand mustbe stopped. When will they have the balls. Freeview is Free, Sky can see that people will only put up with paying for crap for so long before they ditch it and get Freeview, their solution is to make Freeview less attractive by removing 3 channels. Very poor
There is one simple solution to all this if you dont want it dont pay for it. Before freeview please remember you only had 5 channels and that is if you are lucky most peoples channel 5 was terrible.
There is one simple solution to all this if you dont want it dont pay for it. Before freeview please remember you only had 5 channels and that is if you are lucky most peoples channel 5 was terrible.
But if Sky remove the channels and turn them into pay only it's just making Freeview worse as a free platform. It's actually quite good at the moment considering it's free, but it's at it's capacity and can't have many more channels added until analogue switch off. I'm seriously hoping Sky aren't aloud to do this.
There is one simple solution to all this if you dont want it dont pay for it. Before freeview please remember you only had 5 channels and that is if you are lucky most peoples channel 5 was terrible.
That is very very silly. Freeview was meant to be the new 'normal' tv after switch off - all the space should be for free channels - It is particularly disgraceful that Sky News which is Murdoch's only public service offering will not be available on the majority platform I have protested to ofcom and I hope others do too
Freeview should be free
pedantic
10-02-2007, 17:18
There's an interesting petition here (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/openhdtv/) regarding Freeview. ;)
Original source here (http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=472957), with a discussion on the subject.
iain_herts
10-02-2007, 18:32
well if this is true i feel sorry for 1 very big betting company to save money instead of haveing sky which cost's them £300 pm per shop they are installing freeview box's to get sky sports news
Chrysalis
10-02-2007, 20:21
its a free service I dont see how people can complain as sky have the right to make people pay for sky sports news, sky subscribers have to pay for it.
pedantic
11-02-2007, 01:40
I think this does raise a few questions, if this move does go forward. Looking at the Freeview listings, there are a few channels that are also listed on the Sky platform. How many more channels does Sky intend on removing, and then replacing with subscription channels. This latest move by Sky, could well be the start of a snowball effect. And the term "Freeview" would become something of a farce, when describing the platform. Sky should have been told, if they are going to offer channels on the Freeview platform, they should remain free.
its a free service I dont see how people can complain as sky have the right to make people pay for sky sports news, sky subscribers have to pay for it.
It is NOT a free service if you HAVE to buy Skys' particular set top box. If it were just a "Top Up TV" scenario then why not allow people to use the boxes already out there with card slots?
This is nothing more than Sky trying to increase their revenue now that the switch to digital only is getting nearer.
But if Sky remove the channels and turn them into pay only it's just making Freeview worse as a free platform. It's actually quite good at the moment considering it's free, but it's at it's capacity and can't have many more channels added until analogue switch off. I'm seriously hoping Sky aren't aloud to do this.
I do not see how to you can Sky HAS to give free channels for the general publics benefit. At the end of the day they are a company.
---------- Post added at 15:54 ---------- Previous post was at 15:52 ----------
It is NOT a free service if you HAVE to buy Skys' particular set top box. If it were just a "Top Up TV" scenario then why not allow people to use the boxes already out there with card slots?
This is nothing more than Sky trying to increase their revenue now that the switch to digital only is getting nearer.
It is because of them using MPEG4 to allow more channels.
I do not see how to you can Sky HAS to give free channels for the general publics benefit. At the end of the day they are a company.
My point was Sky is wrecking FREEview by removing the free channels and replacing them with channels that aren't free, which in my opinion is not good for Freeview as it doesn't have any free space left for new free channels, until analogue switch off.
And i didn't say Sky HAS to give free channels.
etccarmageddon
11-02-2007, 21:04
I do not see how to you can Sky HAS to give free channels for the general publics benefit. At the end of the day they are a company. ....it depends if the channel has enough revenue via adverts.
Chrysalis
12-02-2007, 14:59
It is NOT a free service if you HAVE to buy Skys' particular set top box. If it were just a "Top Up TV" scenario then why not allow people to use the boxes already out there with card slots?
This is nothing more than Sky trying to increase their revenue now that the switch to digital only is getting nearer.
Sorry am I wrong freeview isnt free subscription?
It will be quite interesting to see that happen...
1) VM have MPEG2 to but its HD which makes MPEG4. This is reletivly new technology which is rendered as useless unless you have an HD ready TV.
2) The fact its FREEVIEW brings a great financial risk to Sky
Look at what happened to ONDIGITAL (ITV DIGITAL), they went broke because of pirate cards being created, this happends then you know there is going to be problems for them and they will have to stop.
Freeview dont really charge for anything therefore they dont have to worry about people robbing or nicking the service for free.
3) another desperate move from sky
Going back to ITV move they made on NTL:Telewest, No Teleport functions, No filmflex, no HD and 2 Decoder STBs with 80hrs recording.
Only several HD channels (Again until HD has properly kicked off in the TV market its pretty poor)
Same as when DVD players where first made, those who rushed to buy them found them selves with...
1) Not a big variety of movies
2) Poor technology compared to todays
3) High prices compared to now
In 2000 I purchases a ALBA multiregional DVD from Toys R Us £160.00
Now a DVD player can be purchased for £30.00 (6yrs on)
Imagine back in 1997 when they where brand new
This sort of thing puts people off from rushing to using the new technology
but it will kick off within the next 2yrs without dought properly since it has been running for about 2-3yrs making HD ready TVs and advertising it mainly in the last 1-2yrs.
For years NTL and Telewest had advantages on Sky by being able to provide Broadband Phone and TV where as Sky could only offer a discount with BT and TV
Since ofcom changed the rules, this enabled Sky to purchase Easy.net (i think it was called) called it Sky Broadband and they used it as a ADSL connection via BT lines.
Problem with ADSL.
Lags the further away you are
Old Technology and Limited
I think if it goes freeview
The marketing people who will purchase this will be...
Young people (ages 18-25) who are moving regularly
People who cannot afford the full services (Probably on an lower income than £13.000)
Couples with No children
People in good signal areas
probably willing to pay for more than its worth via Sky directly or Virgin Media for the sake of it being available via the airways
Instead of it being 24.00 it could end up being 32.00
With poor service refunds, Example: Poor signal strength then will Sky or Freeview arrange refunds? nope how will they proove you did have an issue and not just saying that?, probably part of the terms and conditions, so you could be paying for a service you couldnt watch
Tezcatlipoca
14-02-2007, 00:21
It will be quite interesting to see that happen...
1) VM have MPEG2 to but its HD which makes MPEG4. This is reletivly new technology which is rendered as useless unless you have an HD ready TV.
I'm not exactly sure what point you're making...
VM uses MPEG2 for SD & HD digital cable TV.
Sky uses MPEG2 for SD digital satellite TV, & MPEG4 part 10 (aka H.264, aka AVC) for HD digital satellite TV.
Freeview/TUTV uses MPEG2 for SD digital terrestrial TV.
Sky's proposed digital terrestrial TV service will use MPEG4 part 10, for SD channels (4 SD channels in MPEG4 instead of 3 SD channels in MPEG2).
What's rendered useless unless you have an HD-Ready TV?
EDIT: Or you mean that the only point of MPEG4 is for HD, & there's no point in HD if you have no HDTV? MPEG4 isn't just for HD...
2) The fact its FREEVIEW brings a great financial risk to Sky
Look at what happened to ONDIGITAL (ITV DIGITAL), they went broke because of pirate cards being created, this happends then you know there is going to be problems for them and they will have to stop.
Freeview dont really charge for anything therefore they dont have to worry about people robbing or nicking the service for free.
ONDIGITAL used a crappy encryption system, which was easily hacked.
Sky have their own encryption system - VideoGuard - which is fully owned & controlled by the Murdoch Empire, & is lacking the various flaws which the ONDIGITAL encryption system suffered from.
If/when Sky start their own MPEG4 SD DTT service, it will require their own boxes, & you can be certain they would use their own encryption system again, like they do for satellite TV.... there would be no dodgy CAMs & card cloning like happened to ONDIGITAL.
themelon
14-02-2007, 11:21
This is utter utter crap. Sky can not be allowed to do this. It takes 3 Free channels away from all Freeview and Top Up TV users and replaces it with 4channels which they can not watch unless they get a new box. Wahoo that is great. It is bad for Top Up TV as their boxes/encryption will be incompatible with Skys so they will have to have two boxes or their subscribers will loose channels. It is bad for Freeview as it makes the service less attractive for those sick of being ripped off by Sky.
This is another Sky bully boy tactic, OFCOM has to stamp it authority before it gets out of hand, and unprecedented fine and sanctions must be imposed on Skys monopoly.
Media Boy UK
10-06-2007, 17:15
BskyB is expected to get the go-ahead for a pay-TV service on Freeview, so long as if offers the new channels, at a price, to rival TV providers such as Setanta and Top Up TV. Ofcom is to consultations on Sky's plans to broadcast four paid-for TV channels on Freeview. Sky are set to remove Sky Three, Sky News & Sky Sports News to put their four new channels on-air. Info from the Mail on Sunday.
Tezcatlipoca
10-06-2007, 17:38
Merged with the existing thread.
Sorry to be pedantic, but they won't be on "Freeview", by the way...as, well, they won't be free.
Freeview is a form of DTT, but not all DTT is Freeview.
Also, as well as not being free (& so not being "Freeview"), the new DTT channels from Sky were previously reported as being expected to use MPEG-4 Part 10 (AVC/H.264), & also will in all likelihood use Sky's own proprietary Conditional Access System, & so will not be compatible with existing "Freeview" STBs & TVs - you'd need a new Sky DTT STB to view them.
Merged with the existing thread.
Also, as well as not being free (& so not being "Freeview"), the new DTT channels from Sky were previously reported as being expected to use MPEG-4 Part 10 (AVC/H.264), & also will in all likelihood use Sky's own proprietary Conditional Access System, & so will not be compatible with existing "Freeview" STBs & TVs - you'd need a new Sky DTT STB to view them.
As per in some of the news articles, for examle here (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=421158&in_page_id=3), it seems that they are likely to be asked to share their channels with other providers (presumably compatabillity with their boxes and access systems). If this is a requirement, it would be most likely Sky would have to give up on mpeg4 and videoguard protection, or have to give up the idea alltogether. That is, of course, if that requirement is made of Sky.
I think it would probably be in Sky's best interests however. Sky's channels are available in other protection styles to other providers already, they were on ITV digital as well.
Plus, if this isn't a requirement, they'll most likely come up with proprietary boxes and systems which I don't think would be in the interests of the DTT platform. On the other hand, if they are recquired to be compatible, not only would customers on TTV and Setanta and with compatible boxes be able to get Sky's servive easily (which I think is a benefit, ready to go) it'd also hepl keep DTT more standardised and prevent Sky from gaining too much of a hold on UK DTT.
Merged with the existing thread.
Sorry to be pedantic, but they won't be on "Freeview", by the way...as, well, they won't be free.
Freeview is a form of DTT, but not all DTT is Freeview.
Also, as well as not being free (& so not being "Freeview"), the new DTT channels from Sky were previously reported as being expected to use MPEG-4 Part 10 (AVC/H.264), & also will in all likelihood use Sky's own proprietary Conditional Access System, & so will not be compatible with existing "Freeview" STBs & TVs - you'd need a new Sky DTT STB to view them.
:tu:
lets not forget the BBC are also asking for AVC as their prefered long term format.
Tezcatlipoca
10-06-2007, 19:15
As per in some of the news articles, for examle here (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=421158&in_page_id=3), it seems that they are likely to be asked to share their channels with other providers (presumably compatabillity with their boxes and access systems). If this is a requirement, it would be most likely Sky would have to give up on mpeg4 and videoguard protection, or have to give up the idea alltogether. That is, of course, if that requirement is made of Sky.
I think it would probably be in Sky's best interests however. Sky's channels are available in other protection styles to other providers already, they were on ITV digital as well.
Plus, if this isn't a requirement, they'll most likely come up with proprietary boxes and systems which I don't think would be in the interests of the DTT platform. On the other hand, if they are recquired to be compatible, not only would customers on TTV and Setanta and with compatible boxes be able to get Sky's servive easily (which I think is a benefit, ready to go) it'd also hepl keep DTT more standardised and prevent Sky from gaining too much of a hold on UK DTT.
I can't see Sky offering the channels to Setanta & TUTV unless forced to.
Or maybe they'll offer them, but at a price they know won't be accepted ;)
The Mail article does say "Viewers would need an upgraded set-top box to watch the new channels.", plus still mentions the plan being to remove the current three channels & replace them with four.
Also, I can't see Sky wanting their channels to use the insecure MediaGuard that TUTV/Setanta use on DTT, rather than their own still unbroken VideoGuard.
As for having to buy new equipment, that already happens for anyone who wants to use the "TopUp TV Anytime" DTT service (push-VOD like Sky Anytime), as you need a proprietary "TopUp TV Anytime" DTT PVR.
Hmm. Actually, looking at the TopUp TV website, it seems that the *only* "TopUp TV" option available for new subscribers is to buy the TopUp TV PVR. Seems the old-style TopUp TV smart card / CAM option only remains for existing subscribers.
As per in some of the news articles, for examle here (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=421158&in_page_id=3), it seems that they are likely to be asked to share their channels with other providers (presumably compatabillity with their boxes and access systems). If this is a requirement, it would be most likely Sky would have to give up on mpeg4-AVC and videoguard protection, or have to give up the idea alltogether. That is, of course, if that requirement is made of Sky.
I think it would probably be in Sky's best interests however. Sky's channels are available in other protection styles to other providers already, they were on ITV digital as well.
Plus, if this isn't a requirement, they'll most likely come up with proprietary boxes and systems which I don't think would be in the interests of the DTT platform. On the other hand, if they are recquired to be compatible, not only would customers on TTV and Setanta and with compatible boxes be able to get Sky's servive easily (which I think is a benefit, ready to go) it'd also hepl keep DTT more standardised and prevent Sky from gaining too much of a hold on UK DTT.
but its already been stated they want AVC (and IP too, dont forget that other key ability)as the long term option, sky dont mess around milking the old MPEG2 format like VM do , they see were the wind blows and move there, as do the BBC in all their AVC multicasting IP trials etc.
why do people keep ignoring this point, stated over and over?.
"Sky needs Ofcom to approve its plans to show live Premiership football, along with entertainment and news, on the paid-for channels, which will replace three free ones on Freeview. Viewers would need an upgraded set-top box to watch the new channels. "
that upgraded DTT STB/USB2 box will include AVC/H.264 alongside the old MPEG2 decoding, how could it not, given all the CPU/SoC chips are including it as a standard feature today for any company to take advantage of, even samsung and SA etc.
sky will commission a standard (whatever they deam standard for their long term needs)STB that can take them forward for the next 5 to 10 years and so as time passes this STB will become far cheaper for them as scale increases and BOM reduces, thats just good long term thinking and maximises return of investment, as its modular and easy to fix or replace.
arcamalpha2004
11-06-2007, 22:03
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=421158&in_page_id=3
Discuss :)
Tezcatlipoca
11-06-2007, 22:12
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and-markets/article.html?in_article_id=421158&in_page_id=3
Discuss :)
We already are ;)
Merged.
Go back a page... TV Boy quoted from the same story in your link yesterday.
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/64/33607666-sky-goes-terrestrial-merged-page-3.html#post34325465
:)
arcamalpha2004
12-06-2007, 22:07
We already are ;)
Merged.
Go back a page... TV Boy quoted from the same story in your link yesterday.
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/64/33607666-sky-goes-terrestrial-merged-page-3.html#post34325465
:)
Thanks Matt ;)
My tuppence is that if you dont want it nobody is bending your arm up your back, as someone mentioned we all survived with 5 channels in the past.
At the end of the day the public will decide over the shouts of " rip off "
Vm are presently charging their tv subscribers more for the equivalent package from sky, no shouts of rip off over that one.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.