0

Discussion topic: Sky Q awful to use

Reply
Reply
This message was authored by HydroCarbon This message was authored by: HydroCarbon

Re: Sky Q awful to use

I agree, I've had sky Q for a while and my observation is that it's a very pretty user interface, but it's also pretty useless as a user interface. 95% of the things I want are multiple menu clicks away which is just poor design. It's not intuitive, it's not simple, it's not quick, it's not natural to use. Whoever signed this design off needs a trip to the job center. The old HD+ interface was years ahead of sky Q. No amount of using it will change that observation. I expect no actual analysis of peoples use cases was done whatsoever, hence the poor experience, pretty, but pretty vacant/

This message was authored by Skyqisawful This message was authored by: Skyqisawful

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Another downvote for sky q. Horrible interface! Horrible navigation! Opening to the stupid Home page is infuriating. Everything you want to do involves multiple scrolling/ clicking manoeuvres. And have you tried to delete a recording? Don't bother looking for a handy delete button on the recording itself - oh no! Dig down and down again - and again... 

It recommends programs I don't have access to because they're not in my subscription. Everything takes longer and is more complicated. With sky plus I  could quickly flick through different channels and see what was coming up next, I could access my recordings with 2 presses of a button, easily look through them, and delete if I wanted. Now I have to go through the horrible "homepage" to do anything. The homepage should be live TV! I bitterly regret downgrading to sky q. We were considering whether to dump sky and this has made the decision an easy one. 

This message was authored by Daniel0210 This message was authored by: Daniel0210

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@Skyqisawful wrote:

We were considering whether to dump sky and this has made the decision an easy one. 


@Skyqisawful 

You haven't said how long ago you moved to Sky Q but be aware the latest T’s and C’s explicitly state you cannot cancel within a minimum term deal unless Sky agree to it. If they agree you’ll end up paying off the rest of the discounted term in one payment.

 

If Sky agree, don’t forget to keep you proof of posting indefinitely when you return the box(es). Return packaging will be sent out towards the end of any notice period.


▪️I AM NOT A SKY EMPLOYEE ▪️
Sky customer since 2001
with: Sky Q | Sky Superfast Broadband | Sky Talk | Sky Mobile
NOTE: I only provide help on the forums and NOT via PM
This message was authored by Chodley This message was authored by: Chodley

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

The interface is a total dog's breakfast (albeit with some nice features like voice search and ffwd X minutes) but the idea that UHD isn't noticeably better is comical. Someone needs a bigger TV. (yes, some of the best streaming stuff is better still)

 

The suggestion that Reminders, where you have to be sat in front of the TV to even see them, is needed and an almost emotive topic in a world where everyone has a smartphone nearby just blows my mind.

This message was authored by Laing1 This message was authored by: Laing1

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@Skyqisawful wrote:

Another downvote for sky q. Horrible interface! Horrible navigation! Opening to the stupid Home page is infuriating. Everything you want to do involves multiple scrolling/ clicking manoeuvres. And have you tried to delete a recording? Don't bother looking for a handy delete button on the recording itself - oh no! Dig down and down again - and again... 

It recommends programs I don't have access to because they're not in my subscription. Everything takes longer and is more complicated. With sky plus I  could quickly flick through different channels and see what was coming up next, I could access my recordings with 2 presses of a button, easily look through them, and delete if I wanted. Now I have to go through the horrible "homepage" to do anything. The homepage should be live TV! I bitterly regret downgrading to sky q. We were considering whether to dump sky and this has made the decision an easy one. 


@Skyqisawful some people like it some people hate bit like marmite you do know you can access your recordings with 1 press pof a button. If you press the Sky logo on your remote (yes its a button) it takes you straight into recordings and a lot can be done by voice control 


I may be a Sky Superuser but I am still just a Sky customer

Sky Q 2 TB (Silver)Box, 2 Mini boxes since June 2016, all connected by wifi
Sky Broadband Hub/SR203, Sky Ultrafast broadband
Ultimate on Demand, Q Experience/UHD, Sky Sports, Sky Cinema
LG 49SJ 810 V UHD TV, Google Pixel 7 Pro mobile
This message was authored by TimmyBGood This message was authored by: TimmyBGood

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@Skyqisawful @HydroCarbon 

 

Q was released in 2016, so the difference between its interface and that of Sky+ / Sky+ HD really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone by now.

 

We're currently on holiday in a property with Sky+ HD, and I'd forgotten how unbelievably primitive the GUI is compared to Q and Glass/Stream.

* * * * * * *

Sky Glass 55" (on ethernet) & two Stream Pucks (one ethernet / one WiFi)
BT Halo 3+ Ultrafast FTTP (500Mbs), BT Smart Hub 2
This message was authored by HydroCarbon This message was authored by: HydroCarbon

Re: Sky Q awful to use

I'll take primitive over unusably overcomplicated every day of the week.

 

HD+ was efficient and simple, Q is bloated and overcomplex. It's a common design failure, put far too much complexity into a deep menu system resulting in a truly terrible user interface.

 

I switch the TV on and with Q I need to press a button twice before I can even watch the TV . . .  the SOLE purpose of the system, failed immediately after switch on,. Indefensible junk.

 

To scroll though my favourates and see the channel itself, impossible ?

 

It truly is a stunning failure of UI design, endlessly frustrating, slow, difficult to use, inconsistent.

 

It follows the same idiotic design philosophy as having the control to wind the windows up in a car 2 levels into a menu system on a touchscreen rather than just having a simple button. 

This message was authored by best+of+the+best This message was authored by: best+of+the+best

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@HydroCarbon wrote:

I'll take primitive over unusably overcomplicated every day of the week.

?

HD+ was efficient and simple, Q is bloated and overcomplex. It's a common design failure, put far too much complexity into a deep menu system resulting in a truly terrible user interface.

?

I switch the TV on and with Q I need to press a button twice before I can even watch the TV . . .  the SOLE purpose of the system, failed immediately after switch on,. Indefensible junk.

One button switches on TV Sky Q and Sky Soundbox

 

To scroll though my favourates and see the channel itself, impossible ?

Whilst watching a programme at full screen press select press right select Favourites then select right then either up or down arrow whilst still watching another programme 

 

It truly is a stunning failure of UI design, endlessly frustrating, slow, difficult to use, inconsistent.

?

It follows the same idiotic design philosophy as having the control to wind the windows up in a car 2 levels into a menu system on a touchscreen rather than just having a simple button. 

Unless you are in a car that only has electric windows in the front and not the rear


16913235783386667106410952843812.jpg

Quite straightforward really to see your favourite channels whilst watching something else.

Topic Author
This message was authored by Anonymous This message was authored by: Anonymous

Re: Sky Q awful to use

@Chodley 

"The interface is a total dog's breakfast (albeit with some nice features like voice search and ffwd X minutes) but the idea that UHD isn't noticeably better is comical. Someone needs a bigger TV. (yes, some of the best streaming stuff is better still)

 

The suggestion that Reminders, where you have to be sat in front of the TV to even see them, is needed and an almost emotive topic in a world where everyone has a smartphone nearby just blows my mind."

 

Frankly - its not even noticible - unless you have an HD and UHD TV side by side

And if you honestly believe that a smartphone is a good replacement for a properly designed EPG with Program Reminders - Then there is something wrong

HD did have a properly designed EPG that was user friendly and worked.

Q does NOT !

This message was authored by PandJ2020 This message was authored by: PandJ2020

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@Anonymous wrote:

Frankly - its not even noticible - unless you have an HD and UHD TV side by side

 


I spend the majority of my time actually watching UHD programmes rather than being in the UI...

 

But if your setup (or you) cannot notice the difference then don't buy a UHD sub - Sky give you the choice.

I am just another Sky customer and my views are my own
This message was authored by Chodley This message was authored by: Chodley

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@Anonymous wrote:

@Chodley 

"The interface is a total dog's breakfast (albeit with some nice features like voice search and ffwd X minutes) but the idea that UHD isn't noticeably better is comical. Someone needs a bigger TV. (yes, some of the best streaming stuff is better still)

 

The suggestion that Reminders, where you have to be sat in front of the TV to even see them, is needed and an almost emotive topic in a world where everyone has a smartphone nearby just blows my mind."

 

Frankly - its not even noticible - unless you have an HD and UHD TV side by side

And if you honestly believe that a smartphone is a good replacement for a properly designed EPG with Program Reminders - Then there is something wrong

HD did have a properly designed EPG that was user friendly and worked.

Q does NOT !



It is very noticeable on my TV. I have HD @50" in one room and UHD@65" in another and the difference is obvious.

 

not only is a phone, imho, a good replacement FOR REMINDERS, it's far better because it will remind me if I'm in the garden or pub, and with a customisable pre-warning, whereas the EPG will only remind me at the time, if I happen to be watching the TV.

This message was authored by Q-tips This message was authored by: Q-tips

Re: Sky Q awful to use


@Chodley wrote:

The suggestion that Reminders, where you have to be sat in front of the TV to even see them, is needed and an almost emotive topic in a world where everyone has a smartphone nearby just blows my mind.


According to the latest data, over 20% of us oldies don't have a smartphone, including me. But even if I had one, the idea that you would be forced to delegate reminders to a third-party device while browsing the SkyQ TV guide seems nonsensical to me. You might as well argue that SkyQ doesn't need a TV guide because you can access a better one on your smartphone - with bonus reminders and a handy zoom button (and a battery which keeps running out of juice).

--------------------
32B12C 2TB UHD Q box • Mini boxes x2 (32D0B2) • 2022 LG C2 OLED TV • Software vQ230.000.14.00L • Gigaclear gigabit FTTH broadband (935Mbps up/down) • Linksys Velop tri-band router; 3 mesh nodes • All Q boxes fully Cat6 hardwired • Q wi-fi disabled • Q picture/audio processing disabled (no sound bar) • Pixellation cured by Q170 but back again with Q190 and now every few minutes with Q210 and Q220 live broadcasts and recordings on all boxes
This message was authored by Chodley This message was authored by: Chodley

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@Q-tips wrote:

@Chodley wrote:

The suggestion that Reminders, where you have to be sat in front of the TV to even see them, is needed and an almost emotive topic in a world where everyone has a smartphone nearby just blows my mind.


According to the latest data, over 20% of us oldies don't have a smartphone, including me. But even if I had one, the idea that you would be forced to delegate reminders to a third-party device while browsing the SkyQ TV guide seems nonsensical to me. You might as well argue that SkyQ doesn't need a TV guide because you can access a better one on your smartphone - with bonus reminders and a handy zoom button (and a battery which keeps running out of juice).


I suspect if you were used to using one you'd appreciate why they make such an easy enhancement and companion to  many tasks in life. They are also in many ways a pox on it of course.

This message was authored by Colin0000 This message was authored by: Colin0000

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Wow, not a thread I've come across before but how people can compare the dinosaur that was HD+ to the Q system is unbelievable.

 

Q is the most user friendly and quick system out there, try using a Virgin box for instance and you'll stop your whinging straight away.

Sky Q 2GB 32B106 - HDMI to TV, hard wired to router with WiFi disabled on the Q box
VM 256Mpbs via rubbish VM HUB 3 router
Samsung S95C 55"
This message was authored by Chodley This message was authored by: Chodley

Re: Sky Q awful to use

Posted by a Superuser, not a Sky employee. Find out more

@Colin0000 wrote:

Wow, not a thread I've come across before but how people can compare the dinosaur that was HD+ to the Q system is unbelievable.

 

Q is the most user friendly and quick system out there, try using a Virgin box for instance and you'll stop your whinging straight away.



Now I've been using Q a long time and can just about navigate it without getting lost more than once every half hour but "most user friendly" is a bold commendation.

Reply

Was this discussion not helpful?

No problem. Browse or search to find help, or start a new discussion on Community.

Start a new discussion

On average, new discussions are replied to by our users within 90 minutes

New Discussion