EXCLUSIVE: Special Report: Sky HD, future plans
![[Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f1c1d5fb746e9f8b61886a97840933f4.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 10,304 Forum Member
✭✭
Thought I'd point out this article thats appeared on DS's news site
EXCLUSIVE: Special Report: Sky HD, future plans
Thoughts please!
EXCLUSIVE: Special Report: Sky HD, future plans
Thoughts please!
0
Comments
Exactly why the HDD size is still a secret is beyond me though.
So what they're going to be doing is upscaling their current shows to be broadcast in HD? So for shows like Buffy (as is being discussed at the moment), will this mean that the quality will significantly improve?
At the moment I'm watching SD tv on my HDTV and I think it's being 'upscaled', so is it just gonna be the same as that?
Shows that are not native HD will be upscaled at source by hardware vastly superior to anything you can buy for the domestic market. This will give you video that looks better (making allowances for original quality) then watching a SD broadcast upconverted by the STB or TV.
Your TV is sscaling and de-interlacing SD material but the hardware doing that probably only accounts for a very small percentage of the cost of the TV. SKY will be using purpose built broadcast standard scaling hardware and the difference will be obvious.
For domestic use a £1000 scaler will outperform upscaling hardware in TV's and the new DVD players.
Ah, cheers for that. Good news, then.
Also, when are the BBC going to start some HDTV stuff? I'm guessing they'll do it for no additional cost (our license fee will cover it), so would we need to buy a new HD-TV set top box for their stuff? Kinda like a Freeview box but one that's capable of showing HDTV channels for free?
The BBC are going to trial HD sometime this year, it's likely to be on Dsat (and perhaps TW) and therefore the SKY+ HD will be able to access it either directly from the EPG or perhaps as an "other" channel.
Standard SKY hardware does this with FTA content already.
There is also going to be a DTT trial in London which for those who live there and are part of a trial will require a new STB.
I got a bit of flack for saying that the HD format will be channel based not program based.. and that the STBs would allow you to specify the output format.
I guess I was right on both cases
Historically, the BBC has delivered excellent quality with standard def TV, which (at least to my eyes) has always looked better than other channels. However, they have been slow to embrace HD. They talk about a technical trial. Surely, they should have gone beyond this and be in a position to offer a proper service, even if it is only one channel.
Now Sky is going to be the means to get the best picture quality, and not the BBC. It makes the license fee look expensive to me.
I wouldn't say the BBC has been slow to embrace HD - they are currently producing more and more shows in the format (Bleak House, Hotel Babylon, Planet Earth) and are the first broadcaster in the country to set a deadline for all content to be produced in HD.
I remember speaking to a BBC outside broadcast guy in 2002, he said they were already doing Wimbledon in High Def for a couple of years.
Because, aside from the stake in Freeview which doesn't have enough bandwidth, they don't control the means of broadcast, they have had to wait for Sky and the cable companies to start their services before they can show these programmes.
I do agree though that rather than a "trial", they should start a proper HD channel - only problem is, that would require permission from the government etc.
Anyway - on the report itself, because there's still not much detail on SkyHD yet, the most exciting thing is the confirmation of how the remote Sky+ recording will work, particularly the idea that I can sit here in the office and go on to the website and set up a recording.
SD upscaling was petty much confirmed on Sky's updated HD site but nice to know that true HD shows will be highlighted by various means.
What I was hoping for was at least a date for the announcement and/or a time period for the launch. Couldn't they say "not in Feburary but before July"? I'll be very disappointed if they don't announce the launch date before April 1st
Well for all those that thought the Sky HD box was going to be £400 or greater, looks like this is where Sky are hiding the extra cost! If you've got Sky+ just how much do you think Sky are going to charge to remove a couple of leads and attach a new box, enter installer menu and do a install? RIP OFF !!!!! :mad:
Sky might know more about their new box but I'm sure the customer is going to know more about setting up their HD TV than a installer is.
Also it seems that every interview and announcement that Sky does they contradict themselves. First they announce a gradual launch with a big push later and now they report they're just going to pull out all the stops and are hoping the boxes go out of stock. Yes here comes another X-box, PSP ... etc saga!
He's bloody right you know.
I agree, the news of the octo lnb being out in time, or shortly after the HD launch is a huge relief to me. It means i no longer need to try and organise a new dish and installation, and can wait for Sky to do it for me (at a cost of course)
I was also hoping for news on the launch date etc, but was not suprised to find there was no news of this kind.
The BBC already get a lot of flak for spending too much of the licence fee on output that isn't accessable to all the license fee payers. To invest large sums in a new format that won't be available on freeview etc for many years would probably be considered as a poor use of the license fee by many
1. Not getting HD out soon enough - the licence fee looks expensive.
2. Getting HD too quickly - waste of the licence fee!
I would reply to point 1 that Sky want the complete cost of the licence fee for HD alone, never mind all their channels! With BBC/ITV/rest of world HD, the cost is already included in your UK licence.
To point 2, HD is coming very soon on Freesat (and it will be free). Freesat is available to practically everyone in the UK. It's Freeview that isn't globally available so it doesn't matter if that is held up by a bit. What would be cause for complaint is if HD came to Freeview first.
...although the number of licence fee payers with tv's capable of displaying an HD picture is very small and likely to stay in the minority for a long time
I think you will find that the majority of licence payers would say the BBC shouldn't spend money developing services that they would have to go out and spend £600 plus to make use of.
I personally would like to see the BBC launch an all singing and dancing HD service, but I do not believe at the current time the amount of people who will benefit from it justifies the expenditure of licence fee payers money
... e.g. again rip off ... :mad:
http://www.crunchinjelly.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/DSC04815.JPG
http://www.crunchinjelly.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/DSC04816.JPG
Nice one CrunchinJelly.