Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Max
Absolutely bang on mate, if they hadn't put so much friggin dross on their TV channels, we could be looking at a far better service imo.
|
I understand there are those without a HD tv, but they won't be spending as much because they won't be able to get the best out of their subcription fee.
It doesnt make sense to have a non HD tele and be on the VIP/Big Daddy package.
VM would probably also find, customers with HD/4K tv have access to a wider range of their services (HD/3D/4K content when it comes) will spend more per month than those without a HD tele.
Therefore they should be encouraging people to want to access the better picture quality of HD, but without making them break the bank so they can afford to purchase a TV to go with it. Afterall, as a media company, don't you want your customers to be able to enjoy the best of what your product(s) has to offer?
---------- Post added at 16:56 ---------- Previous post was at 16:54 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat
I agree to a certain degree; especially 'crappy' SD channels and VM can't afford to be left behind technology wise.
But 4k won't show any significant benefit unless the TV is 60 inches or above, and how many lounges in typical homes can comfortably accommodate 60 inch plus screens?
For the average home, 4k is not necessary and just another marketing tool for equipment manufacturers to sell more goods. They're still smarting from the fact that 3D didn't take off as they hoped, with people rushing out to replace their perfectly good TV with a 3D version.
|
The price of 4K is coming down, but there are lots of other areas in which VM can improve. I agree, they certainly cannot afford to be left behind.