TiVo : Sky VS Virgin Media - Comparison

[ocav]

So... Due to the price increase I've had to switch to Sky for TV only, however there is not many comparisons to the services online except for professional reviews which haven't really been given the chance to go in depth.

CHANNELS

First up, the channels available. Arguably Sky have more channels, however in terms of channels with reasonable quality programming and following, they are pretty much the same. The main downfall here is the HD side of things. Virgin are obviously missing Sky Atlantic and the Sky Sports HD channels, however there are a view channels which are a pleasure to see in HD for the first time.

History HD, Lifetime HD, Universal HD, CI HD, Disney HD, MGM HD, and Sky News/Sports News HD are arguably the most missed channels currently on the VM platform (excluding the ones listed above) however there are a few small SD channels which im sure would be of interest to a few including Trace Sports, Pop, PopGirl, a few music channels that are still missing from VM.

However to counteract that, Scottish viewers cannot access STV HD on Sky and Ginx TV (arguably popular within the gaming community) is not available on Sky.

Regards Atlantic, I will admit I have watched it since switching, for a HBO Film which I enjoyed, but nothing else in the coming 7 days really made me want to keep watching the channel.

The Virgin EPG is a lot nicer, due to the smaller volume of channels, the EPG is neat and the order of channels is much better. However the HD swap on Sky is useful. Virgins EPG with a HD Swap would be perfect imo.

Overall since the additions this year by Virgin Media, its is very difficult to base a decision on the channels unless you are a Sports Fan or a Game of Thrones fan.

PICTURE QUALITY

Many of us now want superb picture quality through their television, you've bought a Full HD TV, you want to feel the HD. Sky win hands down in HD. The picture quality is crystal clear and near BluRay quality on my TV. This is only a comparison on HD channels shared by both platforms.

On Virgin Media my favourite channels in terms of picture quality were Comedy Central HD, Discovery HD and Cartoon Network HD. These channels look a lot better on Sky.

However, Sky does not handle SD very well. Sky 2 is appalling. The Tivo handled upscaling so much better and this is still quite important when a few channels are still only available in SD.

Overall, Sky wins for channels in HD, but the Tivo upscaling capability is hands down the best.

BOX SPEED

Not a long descriptive one, but Sky wins hands down.

ON DEMAND/CONNECTED SERVICES

Virgins Tivo wins hands down in this field. Netflix, YouTube, and Connected Red Button are seriously important applications in the modern connected world. The On Demand service is very good as it is instant and the different programming available through all available services makes the Tivo service a complete winner.

However On Demand on Sky is very good and has been thought through. Downloading and making it accessible in the Planner (My Shows) is very useful and makes you use it more.

ADDITIONAL SERVICES

Sky Go is fantastic, the fact that it allows access to the Sport channels and Movies On Demand really is the winner on this. These services are very important for Live Sports and On Demand Entertainment.

Virgin TV Anywhere does have more channels, and having BT Sports is its main one up on the competitor in this field, although the TV Anywhere app does need an On Demand facility to make it more worth while.

However the remote record, tv control and search facilities on TV Anywhere are much better than the Sky+ app (which is a separate app to Sky Go unlike TV Anywhere).

OVERALL

Each service has its ups and downs, and after experiencing both I really cannot conclude for my own preferences.

Sky - Wins Sports Fans and those who Love HD
Virgin - Wins those not bothered about the quality of the channels but like access to services like Netflix. Movies fans.

Obviously this can change very easily with just a few changes. At the moment, im torn, and it wouldn't take much to bring me back at the end of my Sky contract.

[MutleyF]

Interesting comparison.

Channels do not really bother me, but a system that often comes up with " on demand is unavailable" on Virgin would, in my opinion, need priority and stability before any channel additions.

That said, Virgin have come on leaps and bounds since they arrived on the scene. Like them or loathe them, they have invested in a better system.

Sky have been around for about 30 years (on Astra), and have not had to worry about the infrastructure of delivery, so could concentrate on technology instead (remember the old 16 channel boxes with Horizontal and Vertical Polarisation!)

Strange - I have no loyalty to any company, but I still miss screensport, lifestyle, and good old Sat1 from those days

Nostalgia time

[oliver1948uk]

What about the ability to record 3 channels at once while watching a fourth pre-recorded programme on VM Tivo? That is a very important feuture for our household.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by oliver1948uk

What about the ability to record 3 channels at once while watching a fourth pre-recorded programme on VM Tivo? That is a very important feuture for our household.

Of use on very few occasions for most. I suspect most don't bother with TiVo's gimmicks either (e.g netlix) and just use it for watching and recording Tv - weird I know......

The thing I find most noticeable compared to Sky is the speed of the box - Sky is much quicker. No doubt TiVo is slowed down by all the extras which the majority of punters don't use.

[ase001]

Originally Posted by oliver1948uk

What about the ability to record 3 channels at once while watching a fourth pre-recorded programme on VM Tivo? That is a very important feuture for our household.

Everything is repeated so often does it matter anymore, especially when supplemented with on demand and catchup?

[nicknewark]

Personally I don't think the SKY box is any quicker, I used a Sky Box for the first time in three years yesterday at a relatives, and I was really surprised how slow it was navigating the TV Guide, and generally around the menu. Having heard people say that the Tivo Box is slower than Sky's, I was quite interested to see myself, but in my case MY Tivo is quicker.

[karma mechanic]

Regarding picture quality, during the brief time that I had a Sky HD box and a Tivo I did compare them on my Full-HD projector. I could see no differences in PQ even standing close to the screen, both were 1920x1080 and neither had any objectionable artifacts or noise. I fully agree that the Tivo SD is miles better than Sky SD.

The Tivo in Netflix Super-HD (1080p) is a step up again in PQ.

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by nicknewark

Personally I don't think the SKY box is any quicker, I used a Sky Box for the first time in three years yesterday at a relatives, and I was really surprised how slow it was navigating the TV Guide, and generally around the menu. Having heard people say that the Tivo Box is slower than Sky's, I was quite interested to see myself, but in my case MY Tivo is quicker.

The older Sky+HD boxes from Samsung , Pace etc are however there's certainly no speed issues on the new DRX 890/890W and DRX 895/W.

[oliver1948uk]

Unlike many contributors to this forum, I just want to quickly record a programme, not have to change recording options or look for repeats or use On Demand or delve into the depths of Tivo's options. For this (and I suspect I am not alone) the ability to record 3 programmes while watching a pre-recorded 4th programme is a feature often used and thus I would put me off moving to a provider not offering this feature.

On the other hand, the lack of a dynamic EPG is a major fault on Tivo, in my opinion. To give one actual example, once an episode of Casualty was due to be recorded but a major sporting event overran so Casualty was postponed. Tivo recorded 55 minutes of sport (when Casualty was scheduled) but did not record Casualty when it came on at another time, presumably because it thought it had already recorded that episode. Not, to me, acceptable for a box which is hyped up so much. I would be interested to know what the Sky box would have done in such circumstances.

[Chad]

I've had services from both providers in the past 24 months. Both have their pros and cons. Very difficult to pick a winner from either. I think both offer very solid services and have their own unique selling points. It really comes down to personal preference in the end. That's why I think it'll never be possible to pick a definite winner from the two. What ticks boxes for one person doesn't for another.

[ocav]

Originally Posted by oliver1948uk

What about the ability to record 3 channels at once while watching a fourth pre-recorded programme on VM Tivo? That is a very important feuture for our household.

Forgot about that, certainly a one up for Virgin Media. However the quality and ease of use of Sky On Demand service does make the need to record something a little less urgent.

Recording decisions on the Sky+HD box will now be made based on what is either not available On Demand or Something I want to keep.

Originally Posted by nicknewark

Personally I don't think the SKY box is any quicker, I used a Sky Box for the first time in three years yesterday at a relatives, and I was really surprised how slow it was navigating the TV Guide, and generally around the menu. Having heard people say that the Tivo Box is slower than Sky's, I was quite interested to see myself, but in my case MY Tivo is quicker.

Cannot agree. My Sky+ box is a lot quicker. If I was to time how long it took to find and start a recording, the Sky box would win.

Originally Posted by oliver1948uk

On the other hand, the lack of a dynamic EPG is a major fault on Tivo, in my opinion. To give one actual example, once an episode of Casualty was due to be recorded but a major sporting event overran so Casualty was postponed. Tivo recorded 55 minutes of sport (when Casualty was scheduled) but did not record Casualty when it came on at another time, presumably because it thought it had already recorded that episode. Not, to me, acceptable for a box which is hyped up so much. I would be interested to know what the Sky box would have done in such circumstances.

Dynamic EPG is something the Tivo needs as a mater of urgency. I got to experience the Dynamic EPG on Friday with the Nelson Mandella programmes. The system updated within minutes of the new schedule being announced.

[denphone]

Don't we just love the old flag waving comparison's between these two giants.

[madmax215]

For me sky wins, The reason is sky have tv channels from the second they are made available. I used to have ntl but I got fed up with the waiting time for the channels I waited 5 years for paramount tv now (comedy central) to be made available, so I switched to sky, the channel was made available when virgin bailed out ntl, about 6 months after I switched. I still have the same sky digibox sd only NO HDD or other things just a basic sd box. HD, sports or multi recording programs do not intrest me at all.

[theone2k10]

I have both Sky and Virgin , the SKY+HD box is a lot quicker than Tivo imo however vms od is better than Sky imo. Sky have come on leaps and bounds with on demand content over the last year and VM have come on leaps and bounds with content and channels over the last year.
It's hard to pick a winner tbf but if i had to then vm would edge it by a small fraction , this is due to Sky sometimes having signal issues in bad weather.

[vincerooney]

excellent thread ocav i pretty much agree with all your points and i dont even have sky myself!