BT Sport

17810121330

Comments

  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:05PM
    Visionman said:

    CAT Chairman agrees to step down from tribunal investigating Sky Sports access case.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/06/chairman-steps-down-from-tribunal-investigating-sky-spo...

    My apologies for getting it the wrong way round. I didn't know Freeview was digital from the start.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Freeview_UK
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • scottscott Member, Super User Posts: 2,134 ✭✭✭
    edited 29 November 2016, 10:48AM
    Visionman said:

    CAT Chairman agrees to step down from tribunal investigating Sky Sports access case.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/06/chairman-steps-down-from-tribunal-investigating-sky-spo...

    Most of the comments about quality were on social media. Here is a small thread:-
    https://community.bt.com/t5/YouView-Boxes/Community-Shield-HD/td-p/1514981
    but watching it myself the HD pictures looked less sharp than thier normal quality.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    CAT Chairman agrees to step down from tribunal investigating Sky Sports access case.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/06/chairman-steps-down-from-tribunal-investigating-sky-spo...

    If I'm honest in the short time I've had BT TV I'm not blown away with the HD PQ.
  • redchizredchiz Member, Super User Posts: 5,454 ✭✭✭
    edited 20 December 2016, 12:57PM
    Visionman said:

    CAT Chairman agrees to step down from tribunal investigating Sky Sports access case.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/06/chairman-steps-down-from-tribunal-investigating-sky-spo...

    Yes, absolutely. Multicast via the internet is a new form of broadcast technology rechiz. They aren't streamed.
    Not streamed, really? You'll be telling us next that BT Sport is free.
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:05PM
    Visionman said:

    CAT Chairman agrees to step down from tribunal investigating Sky Sports access case.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/06/chairman-steps-down-from-tribunal-investigating-sky-spo...

    Scott>
    Most of the comments about quality were on social media. Here is a small thread:-
    https://community.bt.com/t5/YouView-Boxes/Community-Shield-HD/td-p/1514981
    but watching it myself the HD pictures looked less sharp than thier normal quality.

    Oh thats what people were talking about... Intense sunlight mixed with large dark areas on the pitch. Yes I got that and it occasionally played havoc with the picture, so I changed the picture settings on the TV to 'standard' and it was OK after that. But I think the camera angles didn't help.
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    CAT Chairman agrees to step down from tribunal investigating Sky Sports access case.

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/may/06/chairman-steps-down-from-tribunal-investigating-sky-spo...

    It wasn't just the sunlight , the general broadcast was poor in quality hopefully things improve.

    People told me on here that BT Sport PQ was far superior than that of Sky Sports on Satellite sadly at the moment I'm finding the complete opposite.
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 6 March 2017, 1:50PM
    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    That's why I wouldn't switch solely to BT too much key Sport in SD.
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:06PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    It all depends on what one watches and is personal opinion only. Each to their own.

    What isn't a personal opinion is that the Sky picture was garbage even when compared with Freeview SD. Numerous links can be provided if you like.

    I want to get a look at the new Ultra HD pictures, but don't know anyone who's got one. Yet.
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    To be honest I've never watched SD sport in a long while thankfully I don't have to.
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:06PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    No neither have I. Even on Freeview.
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • Paul19Paul19 Member Posts: 116
    edited 17 December 2016, 7:18PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    Visionman
    I was on the UHD trial and the product has improved during the trial. Since launch BT are still tweaking the delivery. Today's live broadcast Manchester V Spurs was totally stunning. It made the HD life feed look like a SD stream. It's got to the stage I only want to watch in UHD. Espically my closed sport Rugby. Any person who gets BT UHD will not want to go back. In my opinion Sky are way behind on development. I think the first time you could say this for the past 20 years.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    To be fair we have very little knowledge where they are on development , the only people who know are Sky themselves.

    I'd be tempted by BT UHD however I know I'll change and Sky will announce their product probably offering more than just sport.

    May just leave until 2016.
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:06PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    Paul>
    Visionman
    I was on the UHD trial and the product has improved during the trial. Since launch BT are still tweaking the delivery.

    Y'know, what usually happens is - provider launches box, charges a fortune for it, flogs it to death, then ten years later brings out a new one. Launches a box, charges a fortune for it, flogs it to death and ten years later brings out another new one.

    For the last 20-odd years its been the BBC & Sky that have been at the forefront of new innovation. Now YouView is on the crest and BT with its UHD. I've lost count of the number of YV boxes released since launch. My Sky HD box is 13 years old.

    Sky are not bringing out a live channel UHD box. And there are a multitude of reasons why. If anything, IF a box is currently in development, it would be via on demand only via fibre only.
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    I've just bookmarked this page for when the inevitable happens and your wrong
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:06PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    How so? I'd actually like to hear your reasons why they will and how?
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    Do tell us your views on why they won't and what the reasons are I'd love to hear them.
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:06PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    Opps. I just knew you'd say that. Give me yours David, logically.
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    It's simple all the trials conducted have been live events both by Sky UK and Sky Deutschland , the trials have included football and a concert.

    I'm not giving you a timescale I'm telling you a UHD product will arrive and will include live sport and probably other events.
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:06PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    I know about the Sky Deutschland, SES and BBC 4K tests.

    http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2015/07/24/ses-has-five-uhs4k-channels-planned/

    Further to the above Project Ethan was a feasibility study only into the launch of UHD via satellite in the UK . Oh they want to do it for sure, but I'm not giving you any timescales either. 

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/24/markets-stocks-europe-idUSL5N10438C20150724

    Fibre and Hybrid services like YouView are the future, not satellite. And YouView is here now.
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    I'd expect the 4K hardware to launch across all Sky territories , interestingly Tata Sky (India) which Murdoch's Star own 20 % of already have a 4K Satellite service available.

    BT's UHD service and Youview box are a very welcome addition and at a great price just the kick up the backside Sky need.

    Do BT have anywhere you can view the pictures ?
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:06PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    I'd expect the 4K hardware to launch across all Sky territories.

    I would definitely agree with that.

    interestingly Tata Sky (India) which Murdoch's Star own 20 % of already have a 4K Satellite service available.

    Now we get to the crux of it - cost.

    Sky have had a free run at it for 23 years but no more. They are now getting hammered from all sides. Cord cutters abound. Netflix, Amazon Prime, TalkTalk, BT, YouView (small but growing at an exponential rate) and YouTube (I mean really?).

    Theres lots of competition now but unlike Sky they are young, new and will improve. Sky uses satellite, they use the internet. And the use of the internet will be limited only by the imagination of the providers who provide it.
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • scottscott Member, Super User Posts: 2,134 ✭✭✭
    edited 29 November 2016, 10:48AM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    The issue with SKY is they hate to share. They resisted connecting their boxes for a long time because they could not control the broadband. When they finally gave in and conceded the future involved an internet connection they lobbied OFCOM like mad to get the price regulated.
    Happy with that they then told everybody downloading on demand content was the way to go and they didn't need fibre (because they can't control the price - they have tried to launch their own with city fibre and talk talk but are realising just how expensive it is and have gone quiet about that) they are now realising everybody has seen through that one too.
    When SKY launch 'SKYQ' (and they will) they have gone exactly the opposite way to everyone else. While everyone else is working hard on stripping out the cost and complexity from their boxes and moving into the cloud (using a medium SKY can't control), SKY are loading their new boxes with expensive hardware (guess who will pay for the hardware costs) and limiting future potential. They are doing this because I believe their 4K offering WILL be satellite feed driven (because they use that medium almost alone in the UK) and will therefore need a lot of hardware support (back to the tuner question).

    SKY told us for a long time that no-one had an appetite for quad play (because they had no control over mobile) they will once again reverse that decision when they enter into the market with an MVNO agreement. Something they hate doing because they can't directly control it.

    SKY have a great service because they have had it their own way for a long time, they are now facing real competition (as Visionman has said above). They will (and already have) come out fighting but BT, with YouView, are a big match for them (although I do worry slightly for TalkTalk as I think SKY were using them as a pawn to try to fight against BT and I could see them pulling their content from them if it is not working).
    I hope in the end the two might decide to play nicely but who knows what the future holds, for now I will continue to enjoy my 4K service and watch it grow (can't wait for Fear the Walking Dead on 31st August ;-) ).
  • redchizredchiz Member, Super User Posts: 5,454 ✭✭✭
    edited 6 March 2017, 9:48PM
    And the use of the internet will be limited only by the imagination of the providers who provide it.
    Visionman, what percentage of customers connected to the BT network do you reckon are capable of receiving UHD via the internet at present? That would seem to me to be a more pertinent limit than anything in anyone's imagination.
  • David8David8 Member Posts: 655 ✭✭
    edited 15 December 2016, 1:16PM
    Visionman said:

    I watched Man Utd Vs Spurs on BT Sport earlier today and the HD picture was superb at 8.5Mbps using H264 encoding. Now watching Chelsea Vs Swansea on Sky Sports 1 in SD (BT platform). My son said 'I could get a better stream than that.' To which I replied 'So could I.'

    Again I'm pretty sure cloud recording and portability across devices will also arrive with new hardware.
  • VisionmanVisionman Member, Super User Posts: 10,300 ✭✭✭
    edited 21 December 2016, 11:06PM
    redchiz said:

    And the use of the internet will be limited only by the imagination of the providers who provide it.
    Visionman, what percentage of customers connected to the BT network do you reckon are capable of receiving UHD via the internet at present? That would seem to me to be a more pertinent limit than anything in anyone's imagination.BT have said but I don't remember the figure sorry. 
    I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
  • scottscott Member, Super User Posts: 2,134 ✭✭✭
    edited 29 November 2016, 10:48AM
    redchiz said:

    And the use of the internet will be limited only by the imagination of the providers who provide it.
    Visionman, what percentage of customers connected to the BT network do you reckon are capable of receiving UHD via the internet at present? That would seem to me to be a more pertinent limit than anything in anyone's imagination.I think it was about 80% of the people who can get super fast broadband can get the speed needed for uhd. Not bad and improving all the time
  • redchizredchiz Member, Super User Posts: 5,454 ✭✭✭
    edited 20 December 2016, 12:57PM
    redchiz said:

    And the use of the internet will be limited only by the imagination of the providers who provide it.
    Visionman, what percentage of customers connected to the BT network do you reckon are capable of receiving UHD via the internet at present? That would seem to me to be a more pertinent limit than anything in anyone's [email protected] Visionman, no worries.

    @scott, that doesn't ring true, more than 80% can get 45Mbps or higher? Judging by the latest available figures from Ofcom, which covers all providers including Virgin cable, it is some way short of 30% of the total BT fibre base. Limited only by the imagination, eh?  ;-)

    http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/other/telecoms-research/broadband-speeds/broad...
  • Paul19Paul19 Member Posts: 116
    edited 17 December 2016, 7:18PM
    redchiz said:

    And the use of the internet will be limited only by the imagination of the providers who provide it.
    Visionman, what percentage of customers connected to the BT network do you reckon are capable of receiving UHD via the internet at present? That would seem to me to be a more pertinent limit than anything in anyone's imagination.I find it strange when the fiver network is not able to provide universal cover for UHD there are shouts all over the place. BT Sport is only in its third year, BT YouView has only really started to develop by BT from the Sport launch. Sky have been in this game over 20 years. How long did it take them to go from analog to digital and release the trick play option. By comparison YouView and the BT YouView product is advancing far quicker than a Sky ever did. Possible due to Sky having no real competion.

    I wonder where we will be in 3-5 years time. I believe Sky will look dated with the hardware and software progression of YouView. But until them it's all conjecture. We can all argue, debate till the cows come home!
  • redchizredchiz Member, Super User Posts: 5,454 ✭✭✭
    edited 20 December 2016, 12:57PM
    redchiz said:

    And the use of the internet will be limited only by the imagination of the providers who provide it.
    Visionman, what percentage of customers connected to the BT network do you reckon are capable of receiving UHD via the internet at present? That would seem to me to be a more pertinent limit than anything in anyone's imagination.I realise that UHD is new technology which I am sure will improve as time goes on. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the network on which it is presently carried (or "broadcast" as Visionman would have you believe). The limitations of the copper wiring to the home are such that anybody who is not close enough to their fibre cabinet will be unable to achieve the minimum bandwidth requirements. We will have to wait for BT to invest further squillions to bring fibre closer to people's homes, it may be a while yet, the term "Superfast" clearly does not refer to the snail's pace at which the current FTTC network has rolled out thus far. I imagine when any further improvements arrive they will be at yet further additional cost to subscribers, Infinity 3 anybody? And as now I imagine those in rural locations can go whistle. Finally, I don't understand how a local exchange which keels over at the hint of peak-hour congestion will have the capacity to deliver this kind of product as customer numbers rise into the millions. So essentially it is the limitations of the network which cause me to be sceptical, not UHD per se.
Sign In or Register to comment.