Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

l agree.

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

I moved house in April this year, so will sky have me now in a 12 month contract unil April 2012??

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

Taken from Sky's help forum..

http://helpforum.sky.com/t5/Billing/...act/m-p/151053

"If you are moving your existing equipment which is Sky+ enabled to the new property and have arranged for a home move visit then the engineer will ensure the relevant connections are fitted (second cable from the dish) as required while installing.

You are not tied to a new contract unless you decide to upgrade or replace your existing equipment with new equipment as part of the visit.

If the dish does need replaced as part of the visit this will be done as standard as part of the home move installation visit and will not affect your contract."

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

Many thanks for that. I did look in my contract details on line with Sky, and couldn't find that info.

They did fit a new dish when I moved, but it looks like I should be able to cancel my contract and move to VM (saving loads of ££££'s) :)

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

As bias as ever :D with the exception of PB.

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

Master is PB your personal bodyguard.:D

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

There is no question whatsoever that Sky are better for TV than VM.

Some argue that tivo may supposedly show what you want when you want, but if VM don't have the channels you want then Tivo doesn't do that.

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

the poin this if you want lots of channels, great vod and fast internet then none of them fit the bill

virgin offer great vod and broadband but lukewarm channel list

sky offer great channel list, but lukewarm vod and rubbish broadband

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

But the guy who started this thread stated Virgin do carry the channels he wants, so for him personally Virgin offers a better TV package when you include Catch-Up TV, TV on Demand and TiVo.

It's all down to what you want from your TV package. Virgin offer a good balance of linear channels and demand content. For me personally I feel I always have something available to me that I really want to watch on Virgin, regardless of what time of day it is. If linear TV just so happens to be poor, I've got access to thousands of hours worth of content at the touch of a button. Also now that I have TiVo, that works behind the scenes picking up shows I might like too.

Remember if it's just a TV package, you can't access SKY Anytime via SKY unless you have their broadband and phoneline too.

---------- Post added at 12:52 ---------- Previous post was at 12:40 ----------

If you take SKY Movies and SKY Sports with the XL package on Virgin, you have almost 175 TV channels. That means in a day Virgin are offering almost 4200 hours worth of content accross all of it's channels.

I know we are missing plenty of +1 channels, HD channels and others such as SKY Atlantic and the CBS channels but just how many TV channels do people really need? How many hours worth of TV content do people need access too each day?

If the missing channels from Virgin were all delivering fresh new content then I'd want them too. In reality the vast majority of the programming on the missing channels are tired repeats that in some cases have been on both terrestrial and cable TV tiem and time again. In fact the majority of TV channels sadly fall into this category these days.

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

Sky Atlantic, since it started has shown around 5 series I want to watch, this is more than Sky One, Sky Living and BBC1 put together - yes it shows repeats, but what channel doesn't? It's the first run shows that sell a channel and Sky Atlantic has them in spades.

Yes with On Demand there are thousands of hours of viewing at he touch of a button - all repeats and often unavailable, just look at the Fringe marathon, missing episodes right left and centre, during what marathon are runners asked to wait 24 hours before starting again? None that I've ever heard of.

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

When I had sky I used to flick through the channels and think there was nothing on. Now I have fewer channels but never struggle to find anything to watch. The question is what make a good TV package and the answer is surely quality over quantity? Sky Atlantic doesn't really float my boat but even if it did I'd never swap it for thousands of hours of diverse on demand content.

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

I think which is better that are a lot of things to consider.

BUNDLES are a big winner and save a lot of money so if you have

Virgin for TV,BB,PHONE you'll make a good bundle saving

Sky for TV,BB,PHONE you'll make a good saving.

If its about content then Sky have more content but just like VIRGINMEDIA you need to be on there network in order to view ondemand.

I personally have VirginMedia 50Mb BB untill contract ends used for general browsing, BT Upto 20Mb used for online gaming as it is far superior to VM for gamers, Sky for TV. I could save a lot by bundling.

Both have good ondemand services but both require you to be on the networks.

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

VM doesn't, the box has its own connection.

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

BECAREFUL DENPHONE! If your masters Niel Berkett and Richard Branson read this your services will be stopped and you'll have to pay an activation fee to resume LMAO:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

---------- Post added at 15:43 ---------- Previous post was at 15:38 ----------

You still need to be on VM's network. WOW I thought even you would of realised that Jameseh.

Let me explain if to you, for ondemand on a VM boox you need to be within vm's network!

Re: Sky or VM for TV???
 

I think you are mistaken. VM XL TV does not have lukewarm channels. What is lukewarm is your long list of mediocre channels to be added. VM has plenty of quality viewing content.