My Humax Forum » Miscellaneous » Broadcast, Internet, Media

Sky Q preview - heck!

(30 posts)
  1. grahamlthompson

    grahamlthompson

    special member
    Joined: Feb '11
    Posts: 14,442

    offline

    JamesB - 2 minutes ago  » 

    grahamlthompson - 6 minutes ago  » 
    Sky Q requires a new lnb and just two cables. The lnb is not compatible with satellite boxes designed to be used with ku band universal lnbs. The two cables unlike existing systems it appears cannot be used to provide any other services.
    Anyone with existing, Sky, Freesat and generic FTA kit will require a second dish and extra cabling. Those on a communal install look as if they use existing cabling they will not be able to access multiplexed Terrestrial Digital TV and radio services. Those with only a single cable and can't get a second will not be able to get SkyQ at all. Seems to me basically you will be totally locked into Sky pay through the nose services without any easy way of going back.

    That might be a tricky road to hoe, unless they're going to keep both services running in tandem. Wouldn't it amount to putting BBC behind a paywall, which is not supposed to happen?

    Appears that isn't possible.

    The new lnb covers the whole of the ku band without band switching (wide band). As a result one cable carries both low band and high band horizontally polarised channels and the other the vertical ones, This allows two cable to feed 12 tuners in the top end SkyQ silver box.

    This means the receiver no longer has any sort of lnb control, requiring only a 12V DC power output purely for power and therefore no 22kHz tone to control the lnb local oscillator.

    Technical spec sheets here.

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

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 15:13:10 #11 |
  2. User has not uploaded an avatar

    JamesB

    special member
    Joined: Dec '13
    Posts: 1,717

    offline

    I'm lost, Graham, what are the consequences of the receiver having no lnb control?

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 15:16:18 #12 |
  3. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Pollensa1946

    special member
    Joined: Sep '12
    Posts: 1,171

    offline

    It's fairly obvious they will need to keep both services running in parallel for some number of years as not all SKY subs will switch.

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 15:17:43 #13 |
  4. grahamlthompson

    grahamlthompson

    special member
    Joined: Feb '11
    Posts: 14,442

    offline

    JamesB - 44 seconds ago  » 
    I'm lost, Graham, what are the consequences of the receiver having no lnb control?

    A standard ku band universal lnb requires control signals from a tuner to control how it functions. The ku band is split at 11700Mhz lower than this is low band and 11700 and up is low band. The presence of a 22KHz tone from the tuner switches the lnb local oscillator (the local oscillator frequency controls the block shift downwards in frequency applied to the microwave rf received from the dish) to output the same IF frequencies as the low band channels. In addition the lnb is switched by the tuner to operate with either vertical polarised channels by outputting 12.5-14.5V or 15.5-18V DC for horizontal channels.

    This also allows UHF and VHF to be multiplexed onto a single coax.

    http://www.satcure.co.uk/tech/lnb.htm

    The new lnb requires none of this and clearly you can't mix the two systems on the same coax.

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 15:28:44 #14 |
  5. User has not uploaded an avatar

    JamesB

    special member
    Joined: Dec '13
    Posts: 1,717

    offline

    Thanks for the explanation. In that case they must indeed be planning to run the two services (Sky+ and Sky Q) in tandem, not just in transition but ongoing.

    Sounds like a very risky experiment for a service with such a high churn.

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 15:37:32 #15 |
  6. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Faust

    special member
    Joined: Jun '13
    Posts: 1,598

    offline

    JamesB - 14 minutes ago  » 
    Thanks for the explanation. In that case they must indeed be planning to run the two services (Sky+ and Sky Q) in tandem, not just in transition but ongoing.
    Sounds like a very risky experiment for a service with such a high churn.

    Not sure just how much of a risk it is if you look HERE Besides, if the hardware ties you in that may reduce churn still further.

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 15:52:52 #16 |
  7. User has not uploaded an avatar

    JamesB

    special member
    Joined: Dec '13
    Posts: 1,717

    offline

    http://www.digitaltveurope.net/381622/pay-tv-churn-rate-doubles-in-six-months/

    ...if the hardware ties you in that may reduce churn still further.

    That may well be the logic that led Sky down this road. It's just that customers may be more reluctant to jump into a premium deal if it's going to be so troublesome to leave.

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 16:20:36 #17 |
  8. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Pollensa1946

    special member
    Joined: Sep '12
    Posts: 1,171

    offline

    JamesB - 22 minutes ago  » ...It's just that customers may be more reluctant to jump into a premium deal if it's going to be so troublesome to leave.

    How many of those customers will understand the technical lock-in? How many of them read forums like this? I think I know the answer...very few of them.

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 16:44:38 #18 |
  9. User has not uploaded an avatar

    JamesB

    special member
    Joined: Dec '13
    Posts: 1,717

    offline

    They'll understand that Sky Q means a new installation.

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 17:12:50 #19 |
  10. User has not uploaded an avatar

    Pollensa1946

    special member
    Joined: Sep '12
    Posts: 1,171

    offline

    JamesB - 5 minutes ago  » 
    They'll understand that Sky Q means a new installation.

    ...and so they will understand that that locks them in to SKY Q will they? Because they read forums like this?

    | Tue 26 Jan 2016 17:19:51 #20 |

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.