[Merged] PVR for NTL

[vileda]

Originally Posted by garyparson

__________________
So. Not just me that was a little cheesed off with NTL taking THREE years to change one major problem!
__________________

A LITTE cheesed off doesn't come close, I still remember the thread on nthw!!!. maybe it was ok for those who get their sound from the tv speakers but listening with my amp made it unbearable.

Moving to $ky+ was a liberating experience even though I'm on my 2nd box.

[garyparson]

Originally Posted by vileda

A LITTE cheesed off doesn't come close, I still remember the thread on nthw!!!. maybe it was ok for those who get their sound from the tv speakers but listening with my amp made it unbearable.

Moving to $ky+ was a liberating experience even though I'm on my 2nd box.

I'd have moved to sky ages ago as they always seem to be ahead of NTL on every count tv wise. I have this belief that cable should be a lot better than sky and should have been better ages ago. I hold out that one day they'll pull their fingers out their backsides and move quicker than a slow thing on slow day in slowsville.

I'm still waiting. (or should that be 'coming soon')

<removed>

If you want to quote people then do it correctly. Next time, I will just remove the entire post, the time after that I will remove you. (Paul).

[testcard]

I'm getting a bit lost here.......

PVR aka sky+ is the kippers elbows.

PVR transforms tv watching, no contest.

ntl does not have or will have this service in the realistic future.

This a massive minus for ntl in the coming year.

[KenK]

Originally Posted by garyparson

Sky = £42.50 pm (all channels)
Ntl = £51.50 pm (all channels)
So £9 per month more for less channels. FACT.

Originally Posted by DarthYoda
are you forgetting that NTLs tel line charge is included in that price?

Originally Posted by Wicked_and_Crazy
FACT???? Wrong again its £52.50

Whatever the cost, it seems you have to pay for NTL's tel line whether you want / use it or not; if you don't use it, tough, you still have to pay for it. I don't understand why Ofcom let NTL away with monopolistic practices like this. So it's easy to argue that it costs over £50 pm to get NTL's TV service.
(Why would someone not want the NTL tel line? See the ntl Phone & Dialup forum!)

Originally Posted by invisibleboy

and to get back on topic where is our PVR then...

"Coming Soon"

[quadplay]

Originally Posted by testcard

ntl does not have or will have this service in the realistic future.

and what would you call "the realistic future"?
__________________

Originally Posted by KenK

I don't understand why Ofcom let NTL away with monopolistic practices like this. So it's easy to argue that it costs over £50 pm to get NTL's TV service.

We've been over this before. It's not monopolistic, as they are not the only supplier. It is not stifling competition as BT is more than willing to take your business if you don't want the ntl phone line. If you want to have both services, that's your choice. The fact that when you take ntl TV, you have to take ntl phone does not make them a monopoly. OFCOM & their predecessors have said this repeatedly, and if you disagree why not write to them and see what they have to say?

Originally Posted by gary parson

__________________

But you should have.

So you admit to being a barefaced liar.

Nice one i would never have given you the credit .

[Russ]

OK please settle down people, and let's keep this on topic.

[bob_builder]

Originally Posted by testcard

I'm getting a bit lost here.......

PVR aka sky+ is the kippers elbows.

PVR transforms tv watching, no contest.

ntl does not have or will have this service in the realistic future.

This a massive minus for ntl in the coming year.

NTL have said they will launch their PVR (which is miles better than Sky+) in 2006.

[KenK]

Originally Posted by jimbo

and what would you call "the realistic future"?

if ntl announced some timescales, it might be possible to judge.

The fact that when you take ntl TV, you have to take ntl phone does not make them a monopoly. OFCOM & their predecessors have said this repeatedly

Maybe monopoly is the wrong word, but I do think it's wrong that they are allowed to enforce a bundled deal like this. Perhaps it's a matter for the OFT, rather than Ofcom.

But back to the point: having to take the bundle means that it costs over £50 pm to get all channels on NTL's TV service.

[SMHarman]

But to get the sky bundle you have to have the STB plugged into a phone socket (and they have set it up in a way you cannot use a VOIP phone line) so you have to pay BT £11 a month for that line (or NTL or TW) so you really have to add that price onto the Sky price as without dial in Sky put their costs up significantly.

[Rillington]

Originally Posted by KenK

Whatever the cost, it seems you have to pay for NTL's tel line whether you want / use it or not; if you don't use it, tough, you still have to pay for it. I don't understand why Ofcom let NTL away with monopolistic practices like this. So it's easy to argue that it costs over £50 pm to get NTL's TV service.
(Why would someone not want the NTL tel line? See the ntl Phone & Dialup forum!)
"Coming Soon"

That's the issue I have. I am forced to pay for a telephone I neither want nor use apart from when my broadband goes down as I will use the ntl line for the dial-=up broadband for my laptop.

I personally feel I am being ripped off by this and being forced to pay neck end of £50 for family and Sky Sports whereas I'd pay less than £40 on Sky, get a load more TV and radio channels, interactive apllications that are remotely useful (news 24i, Sky Newsi, Sky Sportsi) and actually work and get Sky+ for free - all for a tenner less!

[KenK]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

But to get the sky bundle you have to have the STB plugged into a phone socket (and they have set it up in a way you cannot use a VOIP phone line) so you have to pay BT £11 a month for that line (or NTL or TW) so you really have to add that price onto the Sky price as without dial in Sky put their costs up significantly.

I accept that Sky requires access to a phone line, but not a dedicated phone line. You can't simply add the cost of the line rental onto Sky's price.

Assume I'm already paying for a landline service that I'm perfectly happy with. If I want to add Sky's digital TV service, it'll cost me £42.50 (from an earlier post); if I want to add ntl's equivalent TV service, it'll cost me £52.50 (from another post). The fact that ntl provide and charge for another phone line - that I didn't ask for and don't want - doesn't change the price, it's still £10 dearer.

[SMHarman]

But if your phone requirement is a POTS line, then you can port your phone number over to NTL and ditch BT.
My frustration that I was on a BT ISDN HH line prior to the NTL BB/BT ADSL meant I could not port the number as NTL could not offer the same service but expected me to pay for the same service, not anymore, at the moment it is apathy and too many other bigger tasks.

But as I said Sky won't work on a VOIP line, so you could realistically have an NTL BB line, Sky + and a VOIP phone (dixons, vonage) and plug the sky modem into that, but being as Sky negotiate a 56k connection only (and VOIP cannot do that) it will not connect. At the moment not a problem, but there is lobbying for BT to provide naked DSL lines.

Originally Posted by lippy

Now i know why there is a record button on my new keyboard from ntl.

Didnt know ntl remotes were compatable with sky+, maybe the one left behind by the ntl engineer has a use after all, ( as I disengage it from being a doorstop )
__________________

Originally Posted by SMHarman

But to get the sky bundle you have to have the STB plugged into a phone socket (and they have set it up in a way you cannot use a VOIP phone line) so you have to pay BT £11 a month for that line (or NTL or TW) so you really have to add that price onto the Sky price as without dial in Sky put their costs up significantly.

Thats odd, because while looking at the sky stand today I am pretty sure it stated on a board, " no phone required " in advertising their sky+ package, i just knew i should have had my camera on me.
__________________

Wanting to put an end to the pvr vs sky's hd issue, what will come first, I am willing to put £10 to cancer research if ntl get pvr out on a full rollout before sky's hd, anybody willing to fight their corner with the promise of £10 donation to cancer research?

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Thats odd, because while looking at the sky stand today I am pretty sure it stated on a board, " no phone required " in advertising their sky+ package, i just knew i should have had my camera on me.
__________________

Wanting to put an end to the pvr vs sky's hd issue, what will come first, I am willing to put £10 to cancer research if ntl get pvr out on a full rollout before sky's hd, anybody willing to fight their corner with the promise of £10 donation to cancer research?

You cannot use PPV services (beyond £50) without a phone line as it needs to call the bill home (the return path on NTL does this). Where you get sky multiroom all boxes have to call home from the same CLI line to prove to Sky that they are all in the same house, else you could get multiroom and give the second box to your mate.
And being an NTL customer, to prove i'm not making this up.
http://www.vonage-forum.com/author-robguk.html
http://vonage.co.uk/help.php?article=922

On the second point, I'm willing to raise you to £50 to charity, that NTL will have a PVR service before Sky has a BB service, or should that be a proper VOD service? The reason, Sky should be quicker to market with HD as they only have to change what they uplink from one head end to the Astra sat, PVR requires funamentally more work than that.