[Merged] PVR for NTL - Page 4

17-10-2005, 23:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbo

I would very much like them to react quickly. The problem is that quick throwing together of projects causes far too many issues. I'd rather we got it half-right than got a practically unusable box out next month.

couldn't agree more, too many things going on 'all at once' is a problem - HDTV, anyone ?

dextercat · 18-10-2005, 07:00

HDTV is covered in the Telewest box, I don't think waiting till HDTV is sorted or sorting HDTV instead is an option for PVR. It seems to be a very fashionable thing at the moment to want a PVR and NTL restricts this concept so much that I fear people will walk, rather than buy one and have very limited usage from it.

pedg · 18-10-2005, 07:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by dextercat

Multi-room?

Anyone got any idea how the multiroom works? i.e. what is the connection mechanism between the PVR and the 'remote' TV?

handyman · 18-10-2005, 08:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by pedg

Anyone got any idea how the multiroom works? i.e. what is the connection mechanism between the PVR and the 'remote' TV?

Not sure but the proposed stb has 3 tuners but only 2 decoders. Maybe the tuner from the 1st stb passes the signal to the multiroom box which simply contains a decoder and can remotly change the channel the main stb is tuned to. that way you would be able to get away with only 1 matched stb/smart card per account making things very simple.

Just an idea?

bob_builder · 18-10-2005, 09:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by handyman

Not sure but the proposed stb has 3 tuners but only 2 decoders. Maybe the tuner from the 1st stb passes the signal to the multiroom box which simply contains a decoder and can remotly change the channel the main stb is tuned to. that way you would be able to get away with only 1 matched stb/smart card per account making things very simple.

Just an idea?

Or it could be even simpler, by having two Scart outputs it could send different channels to 2 rooms!
__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbo

I would very much like them to react quickly. The problem is that quick throwing together of projects causes far too many issues. I'd rather we got it half-right than got a practically unusable box out next month.

I do not think that any sensible company would launch a major new product a couple of months before they are due to merge.

I would expect new-NTL to have to settle down before launching a new product across its whole network (orig-NTL, ex-C&W and ex-Telewest).

testcard · 18-10-2005, 17:59

ntl choice of vod over pvr is about revenue not customer choice.

I'm sure they think that vod is an instant cash cow. In every home and one click they have some cash. Even the most naive ntl customer will soon realise vod costs serious money. Your monthly bill can double with just moderate use. This will give a good product a negative image.This may turn vod into a dead cow.

Pvr requires investment and pay back will long term.

With sky+ coming upto 900,000 users and freeview pvr costing less than
4 months ntl subs time is running out for ntl.

We customers need a firm time scale for cable pvr.

As pvr gains notice, the average Mr J Public will feel unhappy with his ntl services and may leave.

KenK · 18-10-2005, 22:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob_builder

I would expect new-NTL to have to settle down before launching a new product across its whole network (orig-NTL, ex-C&W and ex-Telewest).

2008, then?

Quote:

Originally Posted by testcard

ntl choice of vod over pvr is about revenue not customer choice.
<snip>
Pvr requires investment and pay back will long term.

Partly agree, I think there was also an element of having something - anything - that neither of the other systems have (yet). vod will take a while to pay back as well. As I understand it from a post a while ago, it requires a substantial investment in equipment in each area, on top of the development cost. It's not guaranteed revenue, either; vod started here in Glasgow, and I think we've watched one item on it - and that was free!

Quote:

With sky+ coming upto 900,000 users and freeview pvr costing less than
4 months ntl subs time is running out for ntl.
We customers need a firm time scale for cable pvr.

Totally agree. Trouble is, if they say it'll be another year, that might scare away more customers than would have left otherwise.

testcard · 18-10-2005, 23:46

ntl TV homes connected
1,960,000 1st quarter 2005
1,961,800 2nd quarter 2005

ntl gained an extra 1,800 customers in the first six months of this year.
Sky gained 75,000 and there were over 700,000 Freeview boxes sold.

With ntl growth slower than other sectors, they need us- the customers
and many of these will want a pvr service.

Rillington · 20-10-2005, 23:03

but I bet if they do introduce a PVR it will cost a load of money regardless of the package you are on whereas with Sky if you take ANY premium channel you get the PVR service as a freebie.

Tristan · 20-10-2005, 23:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rillington

but I bet if they do introduce a PVR it will cost a load of money regardless of the package you are on whereas with Sky if you take ANY premium channel you get the PVR service as a freebie.

Well there's nothing like judging in advance, is there... why not just wait until there are some details before damning them?

And I thought you had to take both Sports and Movies for 12 months on Sky?

SMHarman · 20-10-2005, 23:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rillington

but I bet if they do introduce a PVR it will cost a load of money regardless of the package you are on whereas with Sky if you take ANY premium channel you get the PVR service as a freebie.

And pay ÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£ÃƒÆ’Ã† â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£ÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™ÃƒÂ ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£ to buy it in the first place

Rillington · 20-10-2005, 23:18

I am 99% sure that you only have to take EITHER sports or movies (or both) to qualify for free Sky+ as some1 I know has just the movies and they have Sky+.

dextercat · 20-10-2005, 23:23

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/pro...020&ID=5209818

WoW ! , looks good, hope the HD is a big bigger though for HDTV! and hope it's sooner rather than later!

Tristan · 21-10-2005, 01:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by dextercat

looks good, hope the HD is a big bigger though for HDTV!

Why?

As everybody seems to be forgetting (on DS too), the HD stuff will be MPEG4, and therefore use roughly the same disk space as an SD programme in standard MPEG2.

The box specs look fantastic.... let's hope NTL get this one out the door quickly.

21-10-2005, 07:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by dexter cat

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/pro...020&ID=5209818

Wow ! , looks good, hope the HD is a big bigger though for HDTV! and hope it's sooner rather than later!

Bill C <--------------- Waits for the Victor Meldrews in this thread to say that page was made up or they just Don't believe it.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill C

Quote:
Originally Posted by garyparson
Surely you meant 2016? We are talking about NTL here.

Coming soon.

Want to put your money where you mouth is

Charity of your choice.

Or will you just spout your **** as you normally do ?

And here was little ole me thinking you would have at least had the guts to answer this or take up the challenge. But i have come to expect this of the "wild and wacky statement brigade"