Quote:
Originally Posted by GuestUK
The difficulty here is whether something is significant is subjective rather than objective. A person who never watches Sky One or Sky News would consider their loss insignificant, whereas a person who watches nothing but would consider it very significant. It's something which has to be considered on a personal basis, rather than something you can summarise as not being 'significant changes' for anyone.
It also depends on the service and package people have - the more channels they have, the less significant a reduction it perhaps is. For those with very few channels of which Sky One and Sky News were part of, it is more significant. For example, on analogue for me, losing Sky One and Sky News has been quite significant because there are now only a couple of channels remaining (I know, my fault for not being digital, but in my case I would argue it was a significant loss - especially considering the channel number of Sky One was 7, after bbc, itv, channel four, five and itv2)
|
And I appreciate the non-digital customers have more to lose. Personally, if there is a cable, then I think VM should prioritise the upgrade to those areas as soon as possible.
Is there a reason why (apart from money) they've not been done before?