I can't understand everyone's willingness to pay more than they do currently for a service that should have been provided years ago.
Yes, this will raise the bar on Sky+ , but have Virgin/TW/ntl customers not already paid by having to suffer the useless in comparison V+/TVDrive for years (which has always been blown out by Sky+).
What extra functionality will you actually get from a new box?
It'll have 3 tuners - we have that now
It'll have more recording space - hardly a massive upgrade, this could be done to the existing box/platform at low cost
It'll have a new EPG - should have been dealt with years ago, always been trumped by Sky
You can watch YouTube on your telly - not exactly worth paying for
Live updating EPG - Sky have had this for years, and its criminal cable still don't
Spotify on your telly - not exactly worth paying for (you'll prob have to pay Spotify as well!)
TiVo is good (I used to have one) - the suggestions engine is great. But at the end of the day its still just a PVR - I don't see why I should pay extra each month for it when I never have since Sky+ dropped the subscription charge years ago.
And paying up front - again why? We are always told we rent the equipment from Virgin, so its being paid for by your monthly service subscription, no? A £2/300 upfront charge for one of these would be scandalous - its not groundbreaking new hardware. Charge for the engineer visit if you must, but why should I pay for something I don't own?
---------- Post added at 13:01 ---------- Previous post was at 12:57 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masque
Remember that the V+ used to cost £250 and the were plenty of takers, so regardless of cost I fully expect TiVo to have a large takeup at launch.
|
That's when a PVR was new technology, and the gadget heads were all over them. Sky used to charge for Sky+ back then, and TiVo were selling in this country.
Now its yesterday's news, and they are almost considered the norm. Where is the justification for the charge?