BREAKING NEWS: BskyB and Sony join hands for HDTV

digitalsatmandigitalsatman Posts: 7,057
Forum Member
BSkyB and Sony are due to unveil a joint initiative today to sell high definition flat screen TV sets alongside digital satellite boxes.


The agreement is designed to help kick-start the UK market for HDTV, which offers viewers greatly enhanced picture quality and Dolby digital surround sound.

BSkyB hopes the new technology will give its Sky Digital service a competitive advantage over Freeview and digital cable as the UK moves towards analogue switch-off.

Under the deal consumers will be offered savings when they buy Sony's Bravia flat screen HDTV sets as a package with BSkyB's new HDTV-enabled Sky+ set-top box.

The BSkyB chief executive, James Murdoch, described HDTV as a "very, very important new product for us".

"It's extraordinary. We've been shooting a lot of football this year to get used to [the new HDTV technology] and [you can see] the detail from the string in the nets to the individual blades of grass to the sweat beads down individual players' faces," Mr Murdoch told the Daily Telegraph.

The Sony tie-up comes as BSkyB is planning to launch four HDTV versions of four channels - Sky One, Artsworld, Sky Sports and Sky Movies - early next year.

BSkyB's HDTV channels will be broadcast to a new HD Sky+ box capable of storing and time-shifting programmes and offering a picture quality around five times better than that of normal TV.

The Sky HD service will come with a version of the latest sound system used in cinemas, Dolby 5.1.

In addition to offering four HD channels, BSkyB will also offer pay-per-view, video-on -demand content to the HD Sky+ boxes, which will come with a broadband connection.
Source: Media Guardian

Comments

  • SteveMcKSteveMcK Posts: 5,457
    Forum Member
    "It's extraordinary. We've been shooting a lot of football this year to get used to [the new HDTV technology] and [you can see] the detail from the string in the nets to the individual blades of grass to the sweat beads down individual players' faces," Mr Murdoch told the Daily Telegraph.
    You could see that on standard definition TV if Murdoch & Co actually used decent bitrates :(

    What next, deliberate reduction in SD Sky quality to persuade people that HDTV really is worth it?
  • RuokasiRuokasi Posts: 3,593
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I expected that they would do this..

    Will there be any deals for exchanging SDTVs and Sky for a cheap HDTV and Sky system?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,266
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Come On! All they need is a resonable Finance plan and were connected.
  • ExskyengineerExskyengineer Posts: 796
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The real problem is the first customers to take up the new HD Stb will pay around twice that of a customer upgrading a year later when they will no doubt release a HD V2. I think I will hang on a bit as I did with Sky+ !!
    Have they confirmed their intentions of charging a monthy sub for the pleasure of this new product yet and how much ?

    Regards

    Darren
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 80
    Forum Member
    It would not surprise me if these special offers will be made available to new customers only, as with Sky+ I doubt that existing customers will be permitted to take advantage of it.
  • Roger G CamRoger G Cam Posts: 1,844
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What would be interesting would be to know whether they intend to subsidise the price of Plasma's or LCD's.

    I suppose - cynically - it's a question of where the main profit lies. LCD - or Plasma. Big price doesn't necessarily mean big profit.

    When LCD hits about £600 for a quality package - then we might be talking. I am unwilling to part with more than about £800 for both TV and HD box and have effectively ruled myself out of HD for the next 2 years.

    Roger
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 18,132
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The real problem is the first customers to take up the new HD Stb will pay around twice that of a customer upgrading a year later when they will no doubt release a HD V2. I think I will hang on a bit as I did with Sky+ !!
    Have they confirmed their intentions of charging a monthy sub for the pleasure of this new product yet and how much ?

    Regards

    Darren





    Yeah but we will be enjoying HD for so much longer and using SKY+ as the example I have had no regrets from buying from launch both in terms of performance and reliability.
    In fact I would argue that SKY have shown they are better equipped at bug fixing when they have a single STB model, complications arise when code has to be configured for more than one box and on the hardware side more issues arise from cost cutting and integration then with the first gen model:)


    There is no question that HD will entail an additional sub but no word yet, nothing will be released until the product is officially offered to the public.
  • Roger G CamRoger G Cam Posts: 1,844
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Jarrak wrote:
    .... I have had no regrets from buying from launch both in terms of performance and reliability.

    In fact I would argue that SKY have shown they are better equipped at bug fixing when they have a single STB model, complications arise when code has to be configured for more than one box and on the hardware side more issues arise from cost cutting and integration then with the first gen model:)

    There is certainly a case to say that Sky will be a lot hungrier at launch - and that means that there will be much more technical focus on sorting it out.

    But......for a premium that could be well over £500? It's too much.

    I shall, of course, read all the reports by the early adopters, avidy!

    Roger
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 18,132
    Forum Member
    ✭✭

    But......for a premium that could be well over £500? It's too much.

    I shall, of course, read all the reports by the early adopters, avidy!

    Roger



    I can't argue against those who site cost as a factor for waiting but I've had a HD panel for a year now and you can only download so much HD goodness and view upscaled DVD's:)

    Hopefully there will be lots of good reports but I'm sure there will be horror stories as well.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,237
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    SteveMcK wrote:
    You could see that on standard definition TV if Murdoch & Co actually used decent bitrates :(
    Don't talk rubbish, Sky Sports uses the highest bitrates on the platform.

    If you want low bitrates, try Setanta! :)
  • SystemSystem Posts: 2,096,970
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    bignoise wrote:
    Don't talk rubbish, Sky Sports uses the highest bitrates on the platform.

    If you want low bitrates, try Setanta! :)

    That can't be said for all the channels included in the Sky service, which is what I took the poster to mean when they said "Murdoch and Co".

    The fact is a large number of channel that are part of "Sky Digital" do broadcast at poor bitrates.
  • pburke90pburke90 Posts: 14,754
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Extremely poor actually.

    Also, there was talk around the start of Sky's announcement of HD that they would be charging around £50 for the HD sub alone, and thats only for a handful of channels. If that's what they're going to charge, along with a rediculously high price for a box, I can see this entire thing falling flat on it's face.

    Sky's channels look awful as it is, so I'm pretty sure bitrates have already been lowered so when people start to call up asking about HD, they can say, "Isn't your picture blocky? Well, it won't be any more with HD...(Insert crap sales pitch here)".

    Paddy :D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 283
    Forum Member
    It's the same with any new tech, starts out really expensive and is taken on by the hardcore, then it drops in price to the point where most people can afford it. I don't see HD-TV taking off big time in this country for quite a few years yet, it will be for the select few only at first. I'd rather spend my money on a Xbox 360 though, rather than a Sky box. :)
  • ExskyengineerExskyengineer Posts: 796
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    If Sky wanted to make a real success of HD why bother to charge a sub for it ? The main HD channels from launch are premium channels i.e sports / movies I can't see any reason to charge extra on top of that other than greed !
    There is going to be some cost in developing the new platform but for a company that now has 8 million customers they are shooting themselves in the foot by pricing themselves out of the market, Rumours of £500 for the new box and £50 a month HD sub (£600 a year!) for not much extra in the way of channels!
    I am not on the breadline but would struggle to justify spending that amount of money.

    Darren
  • SteveMcKSteveMcK Posts: 5,457
    Forum Member
    jfman wrote:
    That can't be said for all the channels included in the Sky service, which is what I took the poster to mean when they said "Murdoch and Co".
    Indeed.
    The fact is a large number of channel that are part of "Sky Digital" do broadcast at poor bitrates.
    Yes, I was watching something the other night and in a fight scene, as the camera did a fast pan to track the character being thrown across the room, the background broke up and lost all detail :(
  • SteveMcKSteveMcK Posts: 5,457
    Forum Member
    If Sky wanted to make a real success of HD why bother to charge a sub for it ? The main HD channels from launch are premium channels i.e sports / movies I can't see any reason to charge extra on top of that other than greed !
    There is going to be some cost in developing the new platform but for a company that now has 8 million customers they are shooting themselves in the foot by pricing themselves out of the market, Rumours of £500 for the new box and £50 a month HD sub (£600 a year!) for not much extra in the way of channels!

    I think that it will also depend on what material they show. Most current programme material isn't going to be significantly better just because it's in HD (will it really make any different to cr@p like Big Brother or Eastenders :D !?)

    Nature/wildlife stuff will be excellent in HD, but the market isn't likely to to be big enough to pay for the costs. Films certainly will look good, but I'd still rather go to the cinema.

    That leaves the traditional Sky market: sports fans. Will they pay a lot more to see big matches in HD? Frankly I doubt it.
  • ExskyengineerExskyengineer Posts: 796
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    SteveMcK wrote:
    That leaves the traditional Sky market: sports fans. Will they pay a lot more to see big matches in HD? Frankly I doubt it.

    Agreed these Sports fans who already have to pay extra for prem plus !

    Darren
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,266
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    bignoise wrote:
    Don't talk rubbish, Sky Sports uses the highest bitrates on the platform.

    If you want low bitrates, try Setanta! :)

    From what I see of Setanta and Nasn the Bitrate is not too bad, if you want low bitrate I think your looking for Rapture rather than Setanta
Sign In or Register to comment.