Ex-VM to Sky customers

[Qtx]

Is there anyone here who in the last year have left Virgin Media and switched to Sky?

Just wanted some honest opinions from those who have had recent experience of both providers.

1) Do you regret switching to Sky? (Reasons for your answer?)
2) If you switched from VM cable broadband to Sky Fibre, any comments on how they compare?
3) If you switched to sky TV, have you had any picture/quality issues?
4) How do Sky support compare to VM support, in regards to time to fix issues/quality of support?

Anything else you want to share? Thanks in advance

[muppetman11]

1) Nope no regrets at all , Sky's TV offering suits me better , love all the HD and I prefer their On Demand service both content wise and navigation , many times with VM we were unable to watch HD On Demand content between 7-10pm.
2) I went from a 30mb VM connection which was great at first but slowly got worse and worse , unfortunately my area was oversubscribed. I went over to ADSL and now only receive 9mb , it has been rock solid but obviuosly didn't match VM's headline speed.
3) I've had no picture issues with Sky , I've only ever lost picture in a thunderstorm and only for a few seconds.
4) I prefer Sky support , in my dealing they've been excellent that said VM's were pretty reliable but were inconsistent on pricing between different agents.

Obviously every individuals opinion will differ.

[dilli-theclaw]

Originally Posted by Qtx

Is there anyone here who in the last year have left Virgin Media and switched to Sky?

Just wanted some honest opinions from those who have had recent experience of both providers.

1) Do you regret switching to Sky? (Reasons for your answer?)
2) If you switched from VM cable broadband to Sky Fibre, any comments on how they compare?
3) If you switched to sky TV, have you had any picture/quality issues?
4) How do Sky support compare to VM support, in regards to time to fix issues/quality of support?

Anything else you want to share? Thanks in advance

1) No - I switched as I can't get VM here. I'd also got through 8 v+ boxes that just were crap.
2) N/A
3) I don't think so - but I'm not the best person to ask
4) Ok - just the same as VM. But I don't use the standard support line now so I find it even better.

[Qtx]

It does seem crazy that adsl can be more stable than a fibre connection but most people I know who have left VM, it has been down to bad fibre broadband performance.

I don't exactly have any concerns about Sky per say but I often hear horror stories from those who switched to VM, I thought it was prudent to see if this held true for those who moved to sky.

Customer service/support is not very good in many areas these days but it would shock me if Sky took as long as VM to fix broadband issues. The only way to find that out is to ask recent customers.

Both Sky and VM seem to have issues with their mobile tv apps with Android. Sky's does not work on Jellybean 4.1+ and VM's....I don't think VM have even done one yet. I did consider not going for the Sky TV due to this and just get their fibre. You do get to keep the 2TB box if you cancel after 12 months though, so a almost free freesat option later. This and the fact I would get more channels and twice the broadband speed for literally the same price as im paying VM for their basic TV and broken BB, its a no brainer choice. Might even go for 80mb for the £5 more, although I dont really need it.

Still after hearing more opinions though

[keepitretro]

1)No regrets here.

2)Awesome 40/10 connection here came from a half arsed VM 100/10, leaps and bounds ahead of my VM connection, (No buffering on youtube vids and pings of 0) no traffic shaping either, download any time of the day and not have to worry about getting a letter telling me i am overusing my (unlimited connection) web pages load instantly...

3)Still got the basic VM tv and phone line (Mrs wanted to keep it).
No sky tv.

4)UK support, no more speaking to an indian called Steve.....lol made me laugh as well. if there's a problem they tell you, (unlike VM who just tell you a pack of lies)..

[Qtx]

Looking forward to being able to download stuff when I want, instead of working around limits VM impose twice daily!

Didn't realise Sky had all UK support. That is a huge bonus

[Skie]

Originally Posted by Qtx

It does seem crazy that adsl can be more stable than a fibre connection but most people I know who have left VM, it has been down to bad fibre broadband performance.

VM isn't really fibre though. Its a hybrid *******ization to work around the limitations of CATV. Fibre is great, its the bits that come to your house that bugger everything up.

I've always wondered why, when VM were allowed to market it as fibre because part of their network was fibre, BT never started advertising their own ADSL products as fibre. Their exchanges have fibre links so it would be just as tenuous as Virgins current claims.

[greyposter]

Prior to leaving VM my Tivio broke down.The techy in Swansea talked me through various solutions and when they failed,she sent me a technician.He arrived next day and after getting no joy,changed the box.The box was fine.

[dilli-theclaw]

As an aside I thought I'd point out the only reason I still have sky is a)I'm getting it free for six months after phoning to cancel

b)I only pay £6.06 a month for my TV Licence

After my freebie period I'm sticking with BT Vision which does me ok.

[Mick Fisher]

Originally Posted by Qtx

Is there anyone here who in the last year have left Virgin Media and switched to Sky?

Just wanted some honest opinions from those who have had recent experience of both providers.

1) Do you regret switching to Sky? (Reasons for your answer?)

Absolutly not. I am 100% satisfied with my services and supplied hardware/firmware with the exception of the SR-101 BB Hub which I would describe as only adequate. In comparison I have never been satsfied with any of my VM supplied services, hardware/firmware especially the superhub.

Originally Posted by Qtx

2) If you switched from VM cable broadband to Sky Fibre, any comments on how they compare?

VM BB = Stork, SkyFibre = Best Butter.
No buffering, no lag, low ping, no management on sky fibre

Originally Posted by Qtx

3) If you switched to sky TV, have you had any picture/quality issues?

My sky tv experience is incalculably better, in every respect you can think of, than my VM catv was when I dumped it.

Originally Posted by Qtx

4) How do Sky support compare to VM support, in regards to time to fix issues/quality of support?

In my experience it has been much better but in the many years that I have enjoyed sky's services I have only had to use them to initially order the tv service then to upgrade to HD via the web chat and then to order skytalk and skyfibre. The services themselves have been utterly 100% reliable.

Originally Posted by Qtx

Anything else you want to share? Thanks in advance

Nope I think you might have got my drift by now.

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

As an aside I thought I'd point out the only reason I still have sky is a)I'm getting it free for six months after phoning to cancel

b)I only pay £6.06 a month for my TV Licence

After my freebie period I'm sticking with BT Vision which does me ok.

Works out cheap tv for you now then. I thought you had to be halfway in your grave with no sight or hearing for the TV licence to give you a lower rate. My condolences

Even though I am close to a main terrestrial transmitter, reception isn't that good. So figured the BT vision wouldn't be useful to me. I mostly have the TV as background noise so not massively concerned with what I get or don't get in the way of channels, just a good reception when I do choose to watch it. Figured I would cancel the Sky tv after a year and use it as a freesat with minimum costs as the box doesnt have to go back. Unless of course I can't live without their mobile app, which is something I will use a lot more while out and about.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Qtx

It does seem crazy that adsl can be more stable than a fibre connection

Not crazy at all, more perfectly normal and to be expected. VM's service is not fibre to the home, and the primary difference is ADSL gives you a dedicated line to the provider's backbone whereas on VM you share one line with hundreds to thousands of other people.

Perfectly normal to expect a dedicated line to be more stable than one shared with ~500 other users

---------- Post added at 17:28 ---------- Previous post was at 17:26 ----------

Originally Posted by Skie

I've always wondered why, when VM were allowed to market it as fibre because part of their network was fibre, BT never started advertising their own ADSL products as fibre. Their exchanges have fibre links so it would be just as tenuous as Virgins current claims.

I've argued that a few times before. I guess BT just isn't into false advertising as much as VM is

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Mick Fisher

Absolutly not. I am 100% satisfied with my services

Thanks for your experiences! Getting to be a pattern here

Seen a few comments about their new hub. The wireless side shouldn't affect me as the bandwidth intensive stuff will be hard wired and my wireless devices are mostly used within a short range. Just hope they don't have firmware issues in the same was as VM have had and still apparently have.

Not having to call support..... just seems strange after being with VM for a good few years lol.

---------- Post added at 17:44 ---------- Previous post was at 17:31 ----------

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Not crazy at all, more perfectly normal and to be expected. VM's service is not fibre to the home, and the primary difference is ADSL gives you a dedicated line to the provider's backbone whereas on VM you share one line with hundreds to thousands of other people.

Perfectly normal to expect a dedicated line to be more stable than one shared with ~500 other users

Its easy to assume based on the technology that fibre to the cabinet and then Catv/coal to the house would be more stable than old copper cable over a large distance with some tricks used to get the most out of it. More so if like most customers you don't understand the network behind the buzzwords and advertising.

So do 500 VM customers share the same fibre from the UBR/chasis or from the cabinet? I knew there could be up to 250 or so customers per line card connected to the UBR and each UBR can have x amount of line cards connected. So the line cards can be one potential bottleneck even before meeting up with the other customers. Or is that number actually higher and the 500 number you are talking about? Would be nice to finally know for sure how this works and at how many different points bottlenecks are likely to occur.

[Mick Fisher]

Originally Posted by Qtx

Thanks for your experiences! Getting to be a pattern here

Seen a few comments about their new hub. The wireless side shouldn't affect me as the bandwidth intensive stuff will be hard wired and my wireless devices are mostly used within a short range. Just hope they don't have firmware issues in the same was as VM have had and still apparently have.

The best thing to do, as always, is use your own router.

You can now get your sky username /password from the SR-101 via wireshark for use in a router running DD-WRT or you can just piggyback your own router in the SR-101's DMZ.

Originally Posted by Qtx

Not having to call support..... just seems strange after being with VM for a good few years lol.

It all just works

Quite boring when compared with the adventure of switching on a VM service.
Will it still be working or not: Will it need rebooting or not: How many TV channels are down today. Is email still working: ETC. Yeah! I miss all that stuff like I miss a hole in my head.

[Zee]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

2) I went from a 30mb VM connection which was great at first but slowly got worse and worse , unfortunately my area was oversubscribed. I went over to ADSL and now only receive 9mb , it has been rock solid but obviuosly didn't match VM's headline speed.

Have you not thought of getting Sky Fibre? or is it not available in your area?