Now that you have pointed this out I have spotted the fact that the site can host its own videos. I will repost the footage I originally posted on my Dropbox site, a common and safe choice but I do understand the decision.
Remember, each step in both test cases is a single button push. I tried to make it a whole page each tiem but the response time of the extended push for a page had changed too and the first two steps of the second stage it was held for too short a time and gave single channel steps. Those two steps in themselves show a real problem.
If you just look you will see that this is a real issue. At startup the base behaviour is displayed. A short while later and the system is beginning to grind to a halt and will soon fall over. As a software developer you should NOT be releasing software in that condition and then taking the stance, "oh what the heck, live with it!" There are other issues which could easily be demonstrated with videos but I would have thought that one which clearly shows a programming related issue would have made people accept that these problems are real and we are not just moaners or people with "unreasonable expectations" as has been hinted at. I have cheap Chinese software which does everything it should do and totally reliably too. If they can do it why can't Sky?
One other point I would like to clear up before this ends, the problems I am complaining about are unique to the Sky Stream Puck! That is all I have ever talked about. You all seem to be assuming that my criticism is of Sky's technology across the board. Read what I write please before jumping to conclusions. You can see how considered my responses are. I have not and do not criticise Sky for its other packages and services. My Sky broadband is great and I have publicly praised them for it earlier in this thread. There are no buffering problems due to line transfer speed that I have ever seen. There certainly are issues due to streaming server response times but I am not aware they are solely Sky as some are to do with apps such as BBC iPlayer. That may be down to the programming of the apps themselves or third party content servers so I don't know if these are Sky's own, I suspect not. I neither know nor care whether the full Glass system for example works correctly, I don't have it. I only have a puck. I see it have some problems on an "every programme" basis, i.e. with every programme I watch, (later I will describe the Favourites problem as an example which is in this time frame). I also see it simply fall over and die regularly. I am not imagining it, it happens.
Oh and a point to think of. If there is a problem with the programming in the Puck or in the design of its electronics then IT IS IN EVERYONE'S SYSTEM WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTIONS. If we are all using the same model of hardware we will have exactly the same resources. Then if we are all using the same software as demonstrated by the same version info we therefore all share the same faults. There is no other possibility! These problems have nothing whatsoever to do with home network issues as is always suggested.
For example I will repeat, the Favourites listing is an absolute pain to access, whereas it worked perfectly when first purchased until a background software update was applied and then it became rat droppings. That is a big issue for me as I neither use nor want to dredge through hundreds of channels in random order all showing reality slop, dumbed down celebrity slop or playground porn. I do not imply I want these stopped, some people love them and good luck to them but I don't. I have a system where I can simply take them out of the loop only for myself. So my Favourites list is well trimmed and used as THE goto option. Except it doesn't work!!!
Choosing a channel from the Favourites listing brings up the channel. Testing by hitting the "Back" button then takes me back to the Favourites listing. Ok, function tested by Sky and working, move on to next feature. Except... If I simply wait for only a few minutes then hit the back button, as I may towards the end of a programme or at an advert break or even if I just get bored, now I am at Channel 101 of the full listing. That is every time after a short wait in a programme. And to get to the point where I can select Favourites once again I have to use the "Back" button, select listings to All Channels, then use the back button once again and select the Channel Listing a second time. Why on Earth does it take two trips through the system to be offered Favourites as an option? Once Favourites used to be accessed from the listings with a left button push where a context menu popped out. Now the menu simply doesn't appear unless you are already in the Favourites listing and what use is that? Those who don't bother with this feature will not see the problems it has or will simply ignore them as a simple very occasional minor irritant. However their attitude that it is an inconsequential problem is simply selfish. It is only inconsequential to them and not to others like me who use it all the time. By choice. It's importance is OUR own "valid opinion".
The puck "fast track backwards and forwards" system is once again completely unusable. It jumps and jerks and cannot come to rest where you choose to stop. A lot of the time it simply does not do what you tell it. One problem is that it regularly offers itself then refuses to respond to any remote button pushes, even though the scrolling track bar is showing at the bottom demonstrating it can be accessed, and it simply goes on playing as it is. Who under those circumstances would push a button once and then stop until it responds? You naturally try again when there is absolutely no response. However, the system stores all and any button pushes made while in this state and when it eventually comes out of it maybe 20seconds later, (I have seen it take minutes to come back to life and respond again), it then acts on all of them immediately without you being able to stop that. You then end up who knows where.
These are not difficult functions to programme into a system. I have old Humax boxes which work flawlessly with these features. It also isn't unheard of to make a mistake and then acknowledge it and work to repair it. That is absolutely forgiveeable. I have mentioned the Sky Remote debacle where very few worked and had to all be replaced. Sky handled that correctly and admirably in my opinion and I spoke out in their favour advising patience. This one they have ignored and are going to continue to ignore it as the puck may be a dead system from what I have heard, and that means that many customers like me have been tied into a contract paying good money to the full amount for a system which is faulty and not fit for purpose with Sky simply taking our money and responding "we-e-ell, whaddyagonnado?"
Ok, so this is the last post I will make on this issue I promise. No one is interested in discussing it in any way and my release date is set. Even the others who comment that they see this too and are not happy are loathe to take part in discussing it. They know the negative response they will meet. I take a different view. I actually hoped for more from the people here and from Sky but just like everywhere, "apathy rules, O...". Everyone here should remember the spirit of Martin Niemolleer's poem "First they came for...". How do you feel Sky will react if you have a problem with your alternative systems? Would you expect people like me, a disgruntled Puck user whose issues you denegrate, to then support you in your own case? We will all be gone. Good luck in the future and happy viewing.
_____________________________________________________________________
[Just ask! A moment of embarrassment is better than a lifetime of ignorance.]
