Sky Q my thoughts

Reviews and natter about all things on the screen and available, streaming wise.

Moderator: embleton

Post Reply
User avatar
embleton
Site Admin
Posts: 467
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 1:40 pm
Location: Plymouth
Contact:

Sky Q my thoughts

Post by embleton » Thu Jan 07, 2016 12:28 am

Sky are shortly to introduce a range of products so that it can compete with the ever growing integrated home entertainment environment. With reported far better products that use the latest standards for wifi, 1080p HD and later this year UHD (it only has a HDMI 1.4b and HDCP 1.2 spec port?). In its top of the line range of broadcasting TV satellite delivery system, but is it too far behind the times?

Most have invested in Apple and Amazon with higher standards from other suppliers. Especially competing against the likes of Apple Inc., with its current working integrated environment for music, TV programme and film environment on the new Apple TV 4th generation. With an already working Siri voice command system for searching out content from music to films available on its platforms, from iPads, Apple TVs to Apple smartphones and Apple routers that are 802.11ac wifi complaint. And with Apple Airport Expresses with the ability to optically connect to music systems throughout our premises using Apple AirPlay.

If Sky are attempting to enter those with larger homes and greater budgets. Then they're moving into an area were the richer section of our society demand an environment less likely to invest in an environment heavily into marketing by using advertisements to subsidise the cost of delivering TV programming.

The likes of other streaming providers have not taken this route. Rather taking the path of little or very little advertising on their platforms but pure music and TV programme content viewing and listening with appropriate music videos. Look at Apple Music on the new Apple TV to see their direction in the music video viewing environment. Pull is the environment that I believe most will choose for their high end viewing and listening pleasure were the content is in the cloud, we as a society don't wish to watch endless advertisement on high end platforms and those agreeing with my thoughts will pick or have already picked the Apple Inc., integrated environment already available in this respect.

Saying all that I welcome the competition from Sky and look forward to seeing really what this Sky Q environment will be all about in reality, and I hope Sky's new equipment is as good as their marketing...., and I hope they'll be able to compete against a worldwide company as large as Apple!



User avatar
embleton
Site Admin
Posts: 467
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 1:40 pm
Location: Plymouth
Contact:

Re: Sky Q my thoughts

Post by embleton » Thu Jan 07, 2016 3:38 am

It is an interesting move that Sky are going to be broadcasting on satellite in the future in UHD, and their equipment will be compatible with those standards. With the additional bandwidth requirements on satellite transponders and the requirement that the LNB needs to be upgraded on satellite dishes. And this will not be compatible with freesat LNB's. More interesting is the standard that EBU is pushing for members to adopt for future proofing broadcasting and receiving equipment and that is likely 1080p at 50fps. In the majority this is likely the format that will be adapted generally looking into the near future for broadcasting and receiving equipment as a minimum.

I'm only aware of the Humax freesat receivers being compatible with the 1080p 50fps standard currently that are in production. And no UK satellite signals are being broadcast using this standard currently but that is likely to change within a year, everyone is using 1080i currently. Whether the current Sky+HD boxes are compatible with outputting 1080p at 50fps is an interesting question, unlikely in my opinion, and a great majority of customers are going to be really disappointed that their current satellite equipment will need to be upgraded within a year or so to receive broadcast signals conforming to those standards, clearly the Sky+HD boxes will receive the signal and process it accordingly at the lower standard of 1080i and those wishing to receive higher definition standards will need to upgrade to Sky Q, and be tied into contracts accordingly.

It is certainly and interesting time as we step into the future and the demand for higher resolution picture reproduction, but before UHD takes off I personally believe 1080p at 50fps is likely to be the predominant standard for the future of broadcasting, even though I do own a UHD TV.

User avatar
embleton
Site Admin
Posts: 467
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 1:40 pm
Location: Plymouth
Contact:

Re: Sky Q my thoughts

Post by embleton » Fri Jan 08, 2016 8:37 pm

Looking through the technical specification of the Sky Q Silver box a few things strike me as odd, espectially respectfully that the ports are yesterday's technology. HDMI 1.4b, that's not UHD it's not capable of anything above 30fps at 2160p resolution and will not support HDR, UHD is 2.0a with HDCP 2.2 as the current live real UHD specification. The wifi is 802.11ac but the Ethernet port only supports 100Mbps, again the port is yesterday's technology with it not supporting 1Gbps. 2 * USB 2.0 ports for future use, again yesterday's technology as USB 3.0 is the latest iteration. AV 1.1 Powerline technology, sounding familier yesterday's technology as AV2 is the latest specification, and Sky clearly state it won't work with any other Powerline technology. A 2TB hard disk, really that's not going to be anything like enough with UHD content recording for a premium product. It's all sounding like a real cock up marketing hype and vapourware with voice commands not working out the box, with the UI no where near demonstrated fully at the opening event. The Sky Q Hub route also only has 2 * 1Gbps Ethernet ports, surely in a connected world I'd expect more Ethernet ports.

The facility to view linear TV and on demand on any device sounds interesting and seems the only thing that is forward looking in respect of Sky Q.

It has been stated that the HDMI port is hardware compatible with HDMI 2.0a HDCP 2.2 but will need a software update to fully comply with that standard, interesting the specification on the box only states HDMI 1.4b and that will be the legal statutory standard under consumer law.

User avatar
embleton
Site Admin
Posts: 467
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 1:40 pm
Location: Plymouth
Contact:

Re: Sky Q my thoughts

Post by embleton » Sat Jan 16, 2016 6:05 pm

If Sky operated this device so you purchase/rent films and programmes without advertisement, and without a subscription, just.basically pay for the product and appropriate content, then I'll considerate on my list. I wouldn't buy the product until voice search and the port is enabled 2.0a HDMI wise without a firmware/hardware is available. I'd also like to see a Cloud facility for gaining access to purchased licenses for films and TV programmes that should operate free of change for the foreseeable future.

bennieTek
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:24 am
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Sky Q my thoughts

Post by bennieTek » Wed Apr 24, 2019 1:12 am

So I am paying Ј108 per month to Sky Sports, Internet, Phone Line and 1xMulti Room Seems to be getting more and more. What is Virgin like for similar Package? Cant believe it is as much?

User avatar
embleton
Site Admin
Posts: 467
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 1:40 pm
Location: Plymouth
Contact:

Re: Sky Q my thoughts

Post by embleton » Wed Dec 25, 2019 2:00 am

Sky Q UHD HDR is not going to be available until late 2020 at the earliest. It amazes me that the equipment ever got off the ground it was so dated when it came to market with ports that are incompatible with anything modern like HDR 4K content, it's completely ridiculous. It will likely need new Sky Q equipment for UHD HDR content!

I not going to say I told you so Sky customers.

I'm glad I have chosen the Apple TV 4K direction for content in glorious UHD HDR. :D

Post Reply