Future of satellite TV feedback

[Invisiblename]

---

@Dobber1234 wrote:

It may be inevitable, but it's still not fair to put people out of work like that

---

Try telling that to the miners, steel workers, car manufacturers etc etc etc.

[Chodley]

Companies don't exist to be fair to anyone other than shareholders, unfortunately.

If I were your mate, I'd be glad I have 4-5 years to figure out what else to re-train in. Some people don't get that much warning.

[DeckF1]

Hey all!

I have an idea. How about everyone stop replying to Dobber1234? I happened upon this thread, while searching for something else, and the old 'Dreams/Reality" gif comes to mind when I read their posts. They're not going to accept the reality of how satellite TV will cease to exist by 2029/30, no matter how often you tell them. That's obvious. Leave them to rant and rave to themselves in an empty room.

[Chodley]

Ah, he's harmless enough and just wants something we can't have.

It's like when Blakes Seven ended, I was in the same state of mind.

[Dobber1234]

Sorry if I have upset anyone but I am doing nothing wrong obviously there is some kind of a rule here which prohibits talking about the same topic over and over again that's fine. I won't bother you anymore. Any of you sorry I'm extremely upset. I thought this was a space where I wouldn't be judged But obviously I was wrong. Thank you. Goodbye

[rab666]

well my sky contract is up if i go to streming it£125 and if i stay on sky q   it £156  hmmmmmm just because i want to recored and sky q in done with moden how can they charge that diff 

[Chodley]

They can charge what they like. You can decide if you want to pay it or not.

[TimmyBGood]

---

@rab666 wrote:

how can they charge that diff 

---

Largely because Q is now a legacy product (from nearly a decade ago) which wasn't developed by the current owners of Sky, and which they appear to be transitioning away from a a business policy.

[AnytimePlus+On+VM]

---

@rab666 wrote:

well my sky contract is up if i go to streming it£125 and if i stay on sky q   it £156  hmmmmmm just because i want to recored and sky q in done with moden how can they charge that diff 

---

The deals aren't what they used to be.  Whether that's the current economic climate, the newish owners combination of both or more I don't know.

Sometimes phoning them again on another day yields another offer.  It did for us, but still nothing like it used to be.  Sky is a luxury item really, it's not a requirement and they charge a luxury price.

We love our Sky Q it does everything that we wanted the old Sky+ HD to do, esp. the shared planner.  For us it's perfect, we use the recording feature a lot, but also the apps (and a mini box).

Maybe more for a Sky Stream thread rather than a Q one, but when Q finally does die I have to admit that we may no longer be a Sky customer.  By then pretty much all content (excl. sports) is going to be app based pretty much won't it.  Even the likes of Sky Atlantic will be HBO/MAX whatever their app will be.

At that point doesn't Sky Stream just become an expensive aggregator?

I'd have thought an Apple TV/Chromecast/Firestick with the apps will do and additionally subscribe to Now for the odd bit of sport required.  Or have I over simplified things 😉

[Anonymous]

@AnytimePlus+On+VM  I don't think that you've oversimplified things, but I'd argue you've underestimated how coherent the Sky Stream package is compared to competing platforms. Apple TV is the best-in-class among the big tech platforms, but when it comes to live TV and UK-focused content, it doesn't really compare to Sky imo... you can't even get subtitles on iPlayer!

Putting tech aside, I think we're reaching peak subscriptions at the moment. The costs of each of these services can now cost more than traditional pay TV ever did. I expect that we're going to see that shift back to bundling through companies like Sky, something we've already seen with Netflix and Discovery+ and the upcoming Max launch being bundled with Sky. In the US, Comcast launched "Streamsaver" which included Peacock, Netflix, Apple TV and their version of NOW in one bundle.

The Sky service on the Apple hardware would be the ultimate experience, for sure.

[Chodley]

If only AppleTV+ made the tile you've currently selected even vaguely distinguishable from all the others.

[Manestream]

I just do not think that everythign being shoved onto the internet and the internet only is the way forwards. It tends to go up and down like a yoyo, Wi-Fi connections especially and these also tend to lose 50-70% of the bandwidth plus blackspots can happen lockign out wi-fi entirely for days.

If they are goign to be shoving everythign to be internet based then they MUST have an infrastructure of no loss and no downtime (e.g 1 system goes down a backup system automatically kicks in without any disruptions). But we know that will never happen (i think BT had something like this they tried but i havent seen them advertising that in a while now, probably because their no break internet was forever breaking).

So TV, Phone, are goign internet (cable channels like BT, Virginmedia have always used this) Sky probably need to rename/rebrand themselves as they were satalite, so not only would one now have to watch out for full on power outages (but you could still make a phonecall to report this) but its all being pushed to the internet so loss of internet = dark ages loss of TV and Phone so cannot report issue's is rediculous.

Now i could be seeing all this on the bad side but right now i do think that we are linign ourselves up for a big shafting and too reliant on 1 and just 1 system that can easily be hacked and shut down by groups and i just do not think it is safe enough to stick everything onto 1 system.

[Chodley]

---

@Manestream wrote:

I just do not think that everythign being shoved onto the internet and the internet only is the way forwards. It tends to go up and down like a yoyo,

This is not true. My btoadband has been up and running for over a year, maybe two. If yours is doing this, change ISP.

Wi-Fi connections especially and these also tend to lose 50-70%

of the bandwidth

This is true if you don't  have the latest wifi 7 tech (my phone is giving about 100Mb right now out of the 1000) but it's still plenty to stream UHD video on multiple TVs.

plus blackspots can happen lockign out wi-fi entirely for days.

This is not true. I think you really beed to change ISP and / or get a wifi mesh.

If they are goign to be shoving everythign to be internet based then they MUST have an infrastructure of no loss and no downtime (e.g 1 system goes down a backup system automatically kicks in without any disruptions).

You know this is how all internet services work I assume?

But we know that will never happen (i think BT had something like this they tried but i havent seen them advertising that in a while now, probably because their no break internet was forever breaking).

Never heard of this but I know some people who run businesses from home and have a backup internet connection with transparent failover between the two connections. I don't think the risk is high enough for the cost personallly.

So TV, Phone, are goign internet (cable channels like BT, Virginmedia have always used this) Sky probably need to rename/rebrand themselves as they were satalite, so not only would one now have to watch out for full on power outages (but you could still make a phonecall to report this) but its all being pushed to the internet so loss of internet = dark ages loss of TV and Phone so cannot report issue's is rediculous.

Your power is also going out all the time?? I don't think anyone needs too report power outages (as rare as they are), the power distribution companies monitor their networks.

Now i could be seeing all this on the bad side but right now i do think that we are linign ourselves up for a big shafting and too reliant on 1 and just 1 system that can easily be hacked and shut down by groups and i just do not think it is safe enough to stick everything onto 1 system.

Security is an important issue but do you think hackers aren't already trying to ransom netflix and Disney constantly today?

---

[nigea99]

---

@Manestream wrote:

I just do not think that everythign being shoved onto the internet and the internet only is the way forwards. It tends to go up and down like a yoyo, Wi-Fi connections especially and these also tend to lose 50-70% of the bandwidth plus blackspots can happen lockign out wi-fi entirely for days.

If they are goign to be shoving everythign to be internet based then they MUST have an infrastructure of no loss and no downtime (e.g 1 system goes down a backup system automatically kicks in without any disruptions). But we know that will never happen (i think BT had something like this they tried but i havent seen them advertising that in a while now, probably because their no break internet was forever breaking).

So TV, Phone, are goign internet (cable channels like BT, Virginmedia have always used this) Sky probably need to rename/rebrand themselves as they were satalite, so not only would one now have to watch out for full on power outages (but you could still make a phonecall to report this) but its all being pushed to the internet so loss of internet = dark ages loss of TV and Phone so cannot report issue's is rediculous.

Now i could be seeing all this on the bad side but right now i do think that we are linign ourselves up for a big shafting and too reliant on 1 and just 1 system that can easily be hacked and shut down by groups and i just do not think it is safe enough to stick everything onto 1 system.

---

hi @Manestream 

I think many people are concerned that going forward internet will indeed be a single point of failure  - I have my own slight concerns over this

People with Care (or other) Alarms etc are likely to be targetted with battery backups in case of short term power failures. etc. as well as having mobile data network backup in case of a landline(Fibre) broadband failure

It is not clear from your post as to whether your reference to 'they' is just SKY or not.

SKY are responding to the way the infrastructure is indeed changing & not all in SKY's control. The switch off of analogue phones is forced on them by the switch of the underlying infrastructure that is provided by BT Openreach  

Although this doesn't explain the background here is an info page from them:

Openreach analogue phone switch off 

In most cases SKY are reacting & adapting to the way the infrastructure they rely on to deliver their services is changing .

Again I am not sure if you are aware or whether this is factored in your reply but the Terrestrial TV service is  also due to switch , probably within a few years (I forget the current planned date) after the Satellites run out of fuel . A recent speech by the BBC   Director General mentioned their commitment to this (again this is not just the BBC but will be the switch off of all DVB transmissions) 

One hopes that internet infrastructure really does improve, where needed, to provide a stable service with enough bandwith by the time all services do switch. 

No doubt there   will be bumps but there is some time before it all switches

[TimmyBGood]

---

@Manestream wrote:

If they are goign to be shoving everythign to be internet based then they MUST have an infrastructure of no loss and no downtime (e.g 1 system goes down a backup system automatically kicks in without any disruptions). But we know that will never happen (i think BT had something like this they tried but i havent seen them advertising that in a while now, probably because their no break internet was forever breaking).

---

BT is transitioning over to EE branding for domestic broadband, and EE, like BT, offers automatic failover to cellular data as an optional extra-cost add-on.  It's worked flawlessly for us on the very rare occasions it's been necessary.