Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sky Q

Options
24567…45

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    bored_stupid
    Registered Users Posts: 251 ✭✭bored_stupid


    it won,t be worth the money sky will be asking for this box they can,t even give us free hd as standard and with all there price hikes .

    Android tv with sat & soarview tuners that will do me now.

    No rte player or rte hd yet [ still waiting ].

    There still rip off merchants but with a better PR team .

    Clad i cancel now .


  • Options
    #33
    The Ayatolla
    Registered Users Posts: 4,089 ✭✭✭The Ayatolla


    ECO_Mental wrote: »
    Ah here!... the USB connections are 2.0 as well, its this penny pinching that would drive you crazy

    They could always release yearly/bi-yearly iterations of the box with these kind of improvements (USB3, gigabit; if needed), similar to the improved HD+ boxes.


  • Options
    #34
    reboot
    Registered Users Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭reboot


    Sorry, but I only picked this up on the Broadcasting threads. Would not have made the important 4k connection from the heading, seems the STB way ahead of most TV models.


  • Options
    #35
    The Ayatolla
    Registered Users Posts: 4,089 ✭✭✭The Ayatolla


    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057524114


  • Options
    #36
    snaps
    Registered Users Posts: 7,138 ✭✭✭snaps


    Im sure i read a statement from sky somewhere saying "this will be the premium product priced at a premium, running slongside the old standard priced system"

    So if hd system is 100€ or so a month heaven knows what the sub will be for that!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    reboot
    Registered Users Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭reboot


    bored_stupid wrote: »
    it won,t be worth the money sky will be asking for this box they can,t even give us free hd as standard and with all there price hikes .

    Android tv with sat & soarview tuners that will do me now.

    No rte player or rte hd yet [ still waiting ].

    There still rip off merchants but with a better PR team .

    Clad i cancel now .

    You are right of course,but don't forget, lots of the country do not have access to any other signal than Sky. Parts of the Mournes in Co Down have no internet,(Up to 1 mbit),no mobile service,(2g, Outside the building),No fm signal,no Dab, but lots of Snow soon.


  • Options
    #38
    reboot
    Registered Users Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭reboot


    The Ayatolla wrote: »
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057524114

    Thanks I know that, I was just trying to flag up the 4k aspect. The Broadcast thread mentioned the new Sky 4k box in relation to a question I posed regarding UHD, UHD ready and 21/9 in respect of "The Last Panthers" on Sky. Obviously with the advent of smart TVs, the subjects may be related and various.


  • Options
    #39
    icdg
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 11,547 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    Merged


  • Options
    #40
    STB.
    Registered Users Posts: 5,380 ✭✭✭STB.


    4K Ready eh.... to be implemented with an "update"

    It was only a matter of time before someone invented the term.


  • Options
    #41
    reboot
    Registered Users Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭reboot


    STB. wrote: »
    4K Ready eh.... to be implemented with an "update"

    It was only a matter of time before someone invented the term.

    On the Samsung TV ads I am seeing,"UHD Ready",no mention in the whole ad of 4k, no wonder confused .com.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Chris_Bradley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,818 ✭✭✭Chris_Bradley


    No Netflix on this either, nothing genuinely amazing seems to jump out from this as of yet.


  • Options
    #43
    JDxtra
    Registered Users Posts: 5,876 ✭✭✭JDxtra


    Netflix is the competition - you'll never see it on a Sky device.


  • Options
    #44
    mikeym
    Registered Users Posts: 3,985 ✭✭✭mikeym


    http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34855857
    Sky has launched a new service called Sky Q that blends live and on-demand TV as it tries to compete with the likes of Netflix.
    It will showcase Ultra HD 4K on the platform, which it described as its most significant product launch since HD and "a new way to watch TV".
    The package will comprise a set-top box and a "super premium package" and will be separate from Sky's Now TV on-demand service.
    Experts questioned what it would cost.


  • Options
    #45
    ftakeith
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,251 ✭✭✭ftakeith


    mikeym wrote: »
    http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34855857

    http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34855317

    another review by bbc's rory


  • Options
    #46
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,590 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    ECO_Mental wrote: »
    Looking at pic of the specs it doesn't have a gigabit ethernet connection only 10/100:confused: if they are looking at doing 4k I would have thought this would be a min spec if you want to stream 4k (not necessary but helpful)

    While a bit cheap of them not to include Gigabit ethernet, it isn't strictly needed for what they are doing here.

    4k is likely to use only about 15 to 20Mb/s. For example Netflix 4K streams are only 16Mb/s.

    So you could fit up to 6 x 4k streams coming from this box and go to other devices (Sky Q Minibox, Sky Q App, etc.) over the 100Mb/s ethernet.
    notahappycamper wrote: »
    Wonder how the multi room will work in reality- is it streaming live tv from the main box and will there be a delay/is it dependant on your infrastructure/solid walls other wifi in your house and quality of your wiring for the powerline adaptors to work?

    Delays would be measured in milliseconds, unlikely to be noticeable.

    With it supporting both 802.11ac wifi and powerline, I don't expect it will have any issues with walls, etc. except perhaps in the most extreme cases (i.e. massive mansions).

    They mention it will be able to use either the wifi or powerline depending on which is better. A very clever idea. But I wonder if they will go a step further and actually combine the bandwidth of the wifi and powerline to give even greater throughput.

    This could be quiet powerful and interesting when you combine that with the Sky Q boxes acting as repeater/access points. That could significantly increase wifi performance throughout a home if implemented well.

    The question I have is if this new system will require a new expensive LNB setup?

    The pr mentions 5 to 12 tuners, but the box only has two coax connectors and typically Sky LNBs are quad models. So will this system require a new, more expensive and sophisticated LNB that combines 5/12 * streams onto two cables?


  • Options
    #47
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,590 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Lots of detailed information here:

    https://corporate.sky.com/media-centre/skyq/product%20fact%20sheets

    Some highlights:
    - Only the Sky Q Silver box will support 4k (in future), the "standard" Sky Q and Sky Q mini boxes will only support 1080p HD.

    - Rumour has it that the Sky Q Silver box will cost £300 to £400 plus as much as £20 per month extra sub!!

    - This will require a new wideband LNB, which will in turn make your setup incompatible with old Sky boxes and Freesat boxes.

    On the one hand, this all sounds very exciting, some very cool tech. On the other hand, it also feels like it maybe far too expensive and 5 years too late.

    After all why have a €500 box in your living room, with 12 tuners and TB of storage, when really there isn't anything you couldn't do with a €25 FireTV type stick and cloud storage.

    It all seems incredibly old fashioned and inefficient.


  • Options
    #48
    lertsnim
    Registered Users Posts: 9,728 ✭✭✭lertsnim


    That sub is insane. It will fail miserably if that £20 per month is accurate.


  • Options
    #49
    enfant terrible
    Registered Users Posts: 4,561 ✭✭✭enfant terrible


    I crazily paid 400 euro for a HD box when they launched so I think i'll sit this one out.


  • Options
    #50
    The Cush
    Registered Users Posts: 15,512 ✭✭✭✭The Cush


    bk wrote: »
    The question I have is if this new system will require a new expensive LNB setup?

    The pr mentions 5 to 12 tuners, but the box only has two coax connectors and typically Sky LNBs are quad models. So will this system require a new, more expensive and sophisticated LNB that combines 5/12 * streams onto two cables?
    bk wrote: »
    - This will require a new wideband LNB, which will in turn make your setup incompatible with old Sky boxes and Freesat boxes.

    My thoughts on it ...

    On the DS forum there was speculation that the LNB could be an SCR/Unicable type but this only requires a single cable from the LNB to feed multiple tuners by allocating a single block of frequency to each tuner and feeding the selected channel's freq/band/pol down that frequency block if I understand it correctly.

    The new SkyQ box has 2 inputs and a full-band tuner (290-2340 MHz), no RF inputs so no conflicts with terrestrial frequencies within the box. The guess over on the DS forum it that the new LNB will be wideband (full-band 10.7 - 12.75 GHz), so no hi/lo band 22khz tone switching required at the LNB and that each cable will carry a separate polarisation (H or V) so no voltage switching required at the LNB.

    Just like a terrestrial aerial signal (1 polarisation over the full band) can be easily split, this would allow the 2 raw LNB feeds (H wideband & V wideband) to the SkyQ receiver, to be split as many times as required within the box (kinda like an internal multiswitch).

    This would be a problem for legacy sat receivers within the same installation but no doubt there will be a multiswitch or splitter solution made available from the various manufacturers.
    Sky Q is incompatible with existing Sky installations. When the system is launched, early 2016, subscribers will need the LNB swapped on their existing Sky dish. The cable run remains unchanged though. It’s not possible to have a mix of Sky+ and Sky Q hardware sharing the same dish feed.

    http://www.insideci.co.uk/news/sky-q-unveiled-this-ain-t-yesterdays-satellite-tv.aspx


  • Options
    #51
    icdg
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 11,547 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    That's interesting, from the point of view that it makes downgrading from Sky to FTA a lot harder. To switch to a Freesat or generic FTA receiver will require the LNB to be swapped back to a normal one. That's all fine and dandy for some people (including I suspect many here) but others may not be so comfortable with doing it, particularly those whose dishes have been placed in a particularly high location (chimney etc). That said, arguably the type of people who will be installing SkyQ won't be about to drop Sky completely either.

    The lack of support for Freesat on the same system then brings another question to mind. Will manual tuning still be supported? The specs suggest that it will, but I think this is something many Irish homes will be wanting to know before ordering.

    I would wait till we see what Sky is proposing before commenting on pricing.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    irishgeo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,403 ✭✭✭irishgeo


    icdg wrote:
    The lack of support for Freesat on the same system then brings another question to mind. Will manual tuning still be supported? The specs suggest that it will, but I think this is something many Irish homes will be wanting to know before ordering.

    Sky don't install dishes above the 1st floor anymore


  • Options
    #53
    MarkAnthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭MarkAnthony


    icdg wrote: »
    That's interesting, from the point of view that it makes downgrading from Sky to FTA a lot harder. To switch to a Freesat or generic FTA receiver will require the LNB to be swapped back to a normal one. That's all fine and dandy for some people (including I suspect many here) but others may not be so comfortable with doing it, particularly those whose dishes have been placed in a particularly high location (chimney etc). That said, arguably the type of people who will be installing SkyQ won't be about to drop Sky completely either.

    The lack of support for Freesat on the same system then brings another question to mind. Will manual tuning still be supported? The specs suggest that it will, but I think this is something many Irish homes will be wanting to know before ordering.

    I would wait till we see what Sky is proposing before commenting on pricing.

    I can't imagine the type of person that would go in for this would really care about Freesat. They're likely to want an all in one supported service with a monthly fee. The current Sky offering will continue and anyone particularly bothered about freesat compatibility would, no doubt, be better off remaining on the current Sky service.

    Granted all of this can be done with various gizmos and gadgets around the gaffe. But anyone who thinks a company can't make bazzilions by taking an idea, polishing it up and firing it out for 2-3 times the price of the competition has clearly never heard of Apple or Steve Jobs :pac:

    (No disrespect intended BK, you're talking a lot of sense to me but I'd be a bit more techy than your average Sky customer. That said I'm also lazy so will almost certainly be jumping on this bandwagon, price dependant)


  • Options
    #54
    icdg
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 11,547 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    The manual tuning question is more about continued access to BBC and ITV regions, which is important to many people. That said (and the more technically minded may correct me on this one) I think the manual tuning is required in order for Sky to stick a DVB-S logo on it.


  • Options
    #55
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,590 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    MarkAnthony wrote: »
    I can't imagine the type of person that would go in for this would really care about Freesat. They're likely to want an all in one supported service with a monthly fee. The current Sky offering will continue and anyone particularly bothered about freesat compatibility would, no doubt, be better off remaining on the current Sky service.

    I think there are an awful lot of people out there who have a Sky+ box in the main room and then use Freesat boxes as a form of free multiroom.

    This won't be attractive to them, not with the rumoured prices for the multiroom subs.
    MarkAnthony wrote: »
    (No disrespect intended BK, you're talking a lot of sense to me but I'd be a bit more techy than your average Sky customer. That said I'm also lazy so will almost certainly be jumping on this bandwagon, price dependant)

    Actually I wasn't really talking about this from the whole techy, Kodi, free perspective.

    Having played with a FireTV, Netflix, etc. now, I'm certain this is the future of TV.

    But what I'm talking about is Sky doing their own FireTV type stick. Imagine a Sky Go Stick that you plug into the HDMI port, which gives you exactly the same interface and EPG you see on the Sky Q box and all the same channels as the Sky Q box. The only difference being the channels are streamed to you over IPTV, rather then satellite.

    Now imagine you press record or series link. It records the show for you just as it does today. But instead of storing it locally, it instead stores it in the "cloud" and when you press play it streams it from the cloud.

    Using your tablet? no problem, it can stream all the same TV channels and access all your recordings in the cloud.

    All of this from the customers perspective would work in exactly the same way as if they had a Sky Q box.

    So what would the advantage be? Well there would be no need for a big €500 box with 2TB of storage space and 12 tuners! Instead the stick would cost just €25 and give you pretty much all the same ability. You also gain access to your recordings while out and about on your tablet. With Sky Q you have to sync your recordings to the tablet before leaving your home.

    To be honest it is very inefficient placing what is basically a very powerful, expensive media center PC in every persons home, it is much more efficient to push all the hardware into the cloud.

    The advantage of the cloud is you need for less hardware as it is shared. So with the cloud, when you press record, it will make a copy of the file on the cloud server. But in reality you probably aren't the only person recording the same show, likely thousands of other people are too. So on the cloud they don't make 1000 of files, instead they make just one (with some backups obviously) and link the other 1000 recordings to this one, this saving massive amounts of space (and thus costs).

    With the Sky Q setup, they are basically pushing the cost of equipment onto the customer in a very inefficient way.

    BTW It seems that UPC/Virgin are already doing exactly what I describe above, a system where everything is in the cloud, in some of their Eastern European markets. I think it will only be a matter of time before it makes it's way here.


  • Options
    #56
    helimachoptor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 21,651 Mod ✭✭✭✭helimachoptor


    bk wrote: »
    Lots of detailed information here:

    https://corporate.sky.com/media-centre/skyq/product%20fact%20sheets

    Some highlights:
    - Only the Sky Q Silver box will support 4k (in future), the "standard" Sky Q and Sky Q mini boxes will only support 1080p HD.

    - Rumour has it that the Sky Q Silver box will cost £300 to £400 plus as much as £20 per month extra sub!!

    - This will require a new wideband LNB, which will in turn make your setup incompatible with old Sky boxes and Freesat boxes.

    On the one hand, this all sounds very exciting, some very cool tech. On the other hand, it also feels like it maybe far too expensive and 5 years too late.

    After all why have a €500 box in your living room, with 12 tuners and TB of storage, when really there isn't anything you couldn't do with a €25 FireTV type stick and cloud storage.

    It all seems incredibly old fashioned and inefficient.

    At this point prices are rumours, i wouldn't pay too much attention to them/


  • Options
    #57
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,590 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    helimachoptor wrote: »
    At this point prices are rumours, i wouldn't pay too much attention to them/

    Well given that the current 2TB Sky HD box costs €250 + €30 install and when it first launched it was close to €400, then I'd say the estimate for a new 4K, 12 tuner, 4K box that requires installation of a new LNB won't give you much change from €400. I'd say the rumours are pretty accurate.

    Why else would they announce these new boxes, but not announce a price?

    That is a normal tactic when something is very expensive. Get people all excited and good press for the new tech and then announce the far too expensive price a few months later.

    Personally I think the pricing is very accurate. Perhaps the standard non-hd Sky Q box will be more reasonably priced, but then what does it really give you over the existing boxes? Would it be worth it to lose Freesat for multiroom compatibility?


  • Options
    #58
    murpho999
    Registered Users Posts: 28,441 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    Sky product manager also referred to it as a premium product.

    Like everything else Sky introduce it will be pricey at first and then fall as new offers come on board. It's winning and keeping subs is the main revenue earner for Sky.


  • Options
    #59
    helimachoptor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 21,651 Mod ✭✭✭✭helimachoptor


    bk wrote: »
    Well given that the current 2TB Sky HD box costs €250 + €30 install and when it first launched it was close to €400, then I'd say the estimate for a new 4K, 12 tuner, 4K box that requires installation of a new LNB won't give you much change from €400. I'd say the rumours are pretty accurate.

    Why else would they announce these new boxes, but not announce a price?

    That is a normal tactic when something is very expensive. Get people all excited and good press for the new tech and then announce the far too expensive price a few months later.

    Personally I think the pricing is very accurate. Perhaps the standard non-hd Sky Q box will be more reasonably priced, but then what does it really give you over the existing boxes? Would it be worth it to lose Freesat for multiroom compatibility?

    Will just need to wait and see if you're right bk :pac:


  • Options
    #60
    former total
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭former total


    murpho999 wrote: »
    Sky product manager also referred to it as a premium product.

    Like everything else Sky introduce it will be pricey at first and then fall as new offers come on board. It's winning and keeping subs is the main revenue earner for Sky.

    This is not just true for Sky though, all new tech is priced at a premium when it comes out and prices fall as uptake increases. People having a dig at Sky for charging extra for vastly superior equipment. with all the costs that go with it, aren't living in the real world.

    From my own point of view, all this jive about multi-room connectivity isn't going to sell it for me. Like, how often are you going to pause something in one room, then move to another room and continue watching? And Sky have so much on demand/catch up content that multiple tuners really aren't a big deal.

    The key thing is going to be UHD - when is it going to come on stream and how much content will they have? For all the talk about Netflix 4K, the actual amount of programming available is ridiculously small. Content is king and if it doesn't materialise, then this isn't going to take off.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    The Ayatolla
    Registered Users Posts: 4,089 ✭✭✭The Ayatolla


    Too many advantages at the moment to using the legacy system as mentioned prior. And hopefully the launch of SkyQ has a positive effect on the price of the "older" system.

    Only two in my household at the moment.

    Sky+ box downstairs and magic eye in the main bedroom and kitchen. Paying 60 a month for every channel inc HD.

    Spare room has saorview with a Sky FTA box. Also have a PS4 in the spare room with Sky Go and an iPad (with a variety of Sky / alternative apps like TV Catchup/TVPlayer, BBC iPlayer, ITV player, 4oD.

    All TV's have Saorview and a Fire stick or Chromecast and I have Amazon Video UK and Netflix.


Advertisement