Quote:
Originally Posted by Jong1
We've discussed before how many, once they are used to a UI, don't want to change or can't see the benefits of an updated one. People ridiculed the iPad as an oversized phone that couldn't make calls, before they got to use one.
I'm not saying that's you, but still it can be hard to appreciate the benefits from a spec sheet or a brief play. Sky Q is still in development and has some rough edges.
|
If Sky Q just has a better UI it kind of back up my point that it's not as revolutionary as is being made out. I think the UI is very sleek but it doesn't have the functionality that I don't already have available to me. In short looks and feels great but not enough to justify taking out a Sky contract.
This comes from more than just a quick play, perhaps poor choice of words on my part. I spent a few weeks running through some tests I had to see the outcome, comparing it with my Tivo. I was genuinely interested in switching to Sky but felt slightly underwhelmed, the same way i would if someone brought a Sonos system to my house and started playing music wirelessly.....when I already have this via several of Raspery Pis and several Class-D amps.
My main point is that Sky Q isn't as far ahead that a new PVR couldn't at least match it and VM customers can at least expect this will be the case with the new Tivo. However my own opinion is that a TiVO powered VM box is unlikely to be up to the job both when it's released and, due to Sky's apparent frequency of updating Sky Q, in the future.