A lot of TV in the US is done over the internet now and the connection copes just fine. There is also still free satellite TV available if you don't want to pay for a set top box.
Don't worry it will all be fine. Satellite dishes are old and clunky, TV over the internet is the future. :-)
A lot of TV in the US is done over the internet now and the connection copes just fine. There is also still free satellite TV available if you don't want to pay for a set top box.
Don't worry it will all be fine. Satellite dishes are old and clunky, TV over the internet is the future. :-)
A lot of TV in the US is done over the internet now and the connection copes just fine. There is also still free satellite TV available if you don't want to pay for a set top box.
Don't worry it will all be fine. Satellite dishes are old and clunky, TV over the internet is the future. :-)
So are land line phones, but at least you can make a call and not have it drop on you.
I've got a Sonos machine, playing now, but it drops the link too.
It may be the future, but it will be full of infuriating buffering, and everyone in the chain telling you the fault lies elsewhere in the chain.
Australia gradually slipping down the ranking regarding internet, now 55th behind Uzbekistan...you guys dont know how lucky you are back home with the speeds you get.
Unless you have fibre/cable supplied all the way into your homes, forget about ditching your dish. The average household has fibre broadband delivered to a junction somewhere in the vicinity but then has to rely on the existing copper cables to deliver the signal through the Telegraph pole and into your house.
If like me that cable hadn't been replaced for forty years your service ends up as almost non existent.
BT/Open Reach are concentrating on new build homes and businesses and will only upgrade existing homes on area demand or when it completely breaks down, or you pay out for a direct connection.
Makes perfect business sense. Satellites are expensive and risky. All eggs in one basket, the risks of developing hard to reach technical faults, being hit by space debris. Also prone to signal degradation through drift and weather. Sky would love to capitalise on a ground network, especially if some other poor bugger has put it all in for them.
I saw two shooting stars last night I wished on them but they were only satellites It's wrong to wish on space hardware I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care
I saw two shooting stars last night I wished on them but they were only satellites It's wrong to wish on space hardware I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care
Kirsty MacColl “ a New England”
Whilst she sung it very nicely that is Billy Bragg's work
Makes perfect business sense. Satellites are expensive and risky. All eggs in one basket, the risks of developing hard to reach technical faults, being hit by space debris. Also prone to signal degradation through drift and weather. Sky would love to capitalise on a ground network, especially if some other poor bugger has put it all in for them.
Totally, regardless of what I think of Sky as an organisation they are doing something that makes sense from a business perspective
I saw two shooting stars last night I wished on them but they were only satellites It's wrong to wish on space hardware I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care
Kirsty MacColl “ a New England”
Whilst she sung it very nicely that is Billy Bragg's work
I don't have fibre into my home, or cable, yet all my TV is via NowTV, Netflix and Amazon (plus catch up services), so 100% streamed. I don't get particularly stellar speeds on my connection either, yet I've had zero problems watching HD content in my current home, and very few problems in my old place (despite being 900m from the cabinet).
As long as infrastructure investment keeps up with increased demand then there won't be any problems for those who already receive a reasonable (or better) service. It's those, as detailed by the few examples earlier in the thread, who current get little to no service with not much prospect of improvement in the near future.
Probably a bit of confusion here that needs to be cleared up.
Sky are NOT abandoning satellite dishes - they still want as many people as possible to buy that service as they earn more from it.
However, they recognise that many people are not going to pay for the “full cream” package so they bring this “streaming stick” to the market and offer the same content as on satellite.
The content may be the same but what will be very different is the quality of service, the new model is being delivered “Over the Top” like Netflix etc, there ar no service guarantees in place, it’s done on a best effort basis.
This is NOT the same as what BT do with their core pay TV service, yes it is delivered over Broadband but it goes via a managed network to ensure service delivery, it is not over the open Internet.
This is really crucial because whilst on-demand viewing like Netflix works really well over broadband, live broadcasts (like live football) on a massive scale really do not - they are far better off delivered via broadcast.
In fact, if you run a live match broadcast on Sky Sports from a satellite dish next to an Internet stream of the same game then you will quickly see the Internet stream fall behind the live broadcast, it will typically be 2-3 minutes behind by full-time.
You get what you pay for basically, you may be happy paying £8 per month for NOW TV but you are getting a very different product from the guy paying for the satellite service.
It’s not really even an issue of broadband bandwidth, you only need 5Mbps to stream HD, it’s more a question of network architecture and the Internet does not do live events to massive audiences anywhere near as well as broadcast via satellite or terrestrial transmission.
Comments
Don't worry it will all be fine. Satellite dishes are old and clunky, TV over the internet is the future. :-)
I've got a Sonos machine, playing now, but it drops the link too.
It may be the future, but it will be full of infuriating buffering, and everyone in the chain telling you the fault lies elsewhere in the chain.
If like me that cable hadn't been replaced for forty years your service ends up as almost non existent.
BT/Open Reach are concentrating on new build homes and businesses and will only upgrade existing homes on area demand or when it completely breaks down, or you pay out for a direct connection.
I wished on them but they were only satellites
It's wrong to wish on space hardware
I wish, I wish, I wish you'd care
Kirsty MacColl “ a New England”
As long as infrastructure investment keeps up with increased demand then there won't be any problems for those who already receive a reasonable (or better) service. It's those, as detailed by the few examples earlier in the thread, who current get little to no service with not much prospect of improvement in the near future.
Sky are NOT abandoning satellite dishes - they still want as many people as possible to buy that service as they earn more from it.
However, they recognise that many people are not going to pay for the “full cream” package so they bring this “streaming stick” to the market and offer the same content as on satellite.
The content may be the same but what will be very different is the quality of service, the new model is being delivered “Over the Top” like Netflix etc, there ar no service guarantees in place, it’s done on a best effort basis.
This is NOT the same as what BT do with their core pay TV service, yes it is delivered over Broadband but it goes via a managed network to ensure service delivery, it is not over the open Internet.
This is really crucial because whilst on-demand viewing like Netflix works really well over broadband, live broadcasts (like live football) on a massive scale really do not - they are far better off delivered via broadcast.
In fact, if you run a live match broadcast on Sky Sports from a satellite dish next to an Internet stream of the same game then you will quickly see the Internet stream fall behind the live broadcast, it will typically be 2-3 minutes behind by full-time.
You get what you pay for basically, you may be happy paying £8 per month for NOW TV but you are getting a very different product from the guy paying for the satellite service.
It’s not really even an issue of broadband bandwidth, you only need 5Mbps to stream HD, it’s more a question of network architecture and the Internet does not do live events to massive audiences anywhere near as well as broadcast via satellite or terrestrial transmission.