Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu
I could not agree more, BUT l would say that by going to 3D are taking technology that bit further, and the customer will benefit in the long run.
But l would also say that broadcastor's must take that gamble, as it is the future we are looking at, to me sadly VM are still banging on the techn door, and are not prepared to take on the challenge, there is so much that VM could offer there customers, but won't.
I would like to see VM offer customers more channels, that are out there, l was told by a cable engineer, that VM can hold so many channels, but will only offer channels that benefit them, and not the customer.
|
For a start Arthur, if VM have nothing to offer, why do you have both VM and Sky? Secondly I am sure VM do only offer channels that benefit them. It isn't hard to work out though that what benefits us also benefits them. If they don't keep us happy then there will be no VM.
The big difference between VM and Sky is that Sky have bags of money and VM are cash constrained. For the foreseeable future Sky will be ahead of VM as far as new technology is concerned. If Virgin tried to keep up they would soon be bankrupt. Why worry though? How does Sky showing 3d in a few pubs impact on us as customers? It doesn't does it? Even if they were showing loads of 3d on their satellite, how many of us are going to splash out on a 3d tv in the next couple of years. I think we need to stay focused on what matters to us.
VM will be embracing new technologies that will make a big difference to our service, Tivo for instance. Also with network upgrades and the removal of analogue they will be adding more HD and more sd channels. That makes more difference to us than them showing 3d in a pub.