Is Foxtel (digital) worth it?

[Stephen Oakes]

Hi,
It's been a couple of years since I disconnected Foxtel due to its poor
value for money. Too many ads, not enough quality programming and too many
repeats.

Now Foxtel digital is here. Is it worth signing up for? Do they have many
more channels? Are the digital features anything more than gimmicks? Am I
likely to spend 2 weeks a year watching the cricket and nothing else? Is
there news from other countries (apart from the USA)? Are there many good
documentaries? What are the music channels like? How many movie channels
are there and are they worth watching?

What do you all like or dislike about it?

Are there still too many ads? (Hint: 2 ads per hour is too many for me. I
hate the fuckers.)

OK, maybe a better question is: Are there any channels without ads?
--
Stephen Oakes

[BenOne©]

Stephen Oakes wrote:

> Hi,
> It's been a couple of years since I disconnected Foxtel due to its poor
> value for money. Too many ads, not enough quality programming and too many
> repeats.
>
> Now Foxtel digital is here. Is it worth signing up for? Do they have many
> more channels? Are the digital features anything more than gimmicks? Am I
> likely to spend 2 weeks a year watching the cricket and nothing else? Is
> there news from other countries (apart from the USA)? Are there many good
> documentaries? What are the music channels like? How many movie channels
> are there and are they worth watching?
>
> What do you all like or dislike about it?
>
> Are there still too many ads? (Hint: 2 ads per hour is too many for me. I
> hate the fuckers.)
>
> OK, maybe a better question is: Are there any channels without ads?
> --
> Stephen Oakes
>
>

I've got analog satellite and I worked out it will cost me almost $100 for
digtal to get the channels I have now. Not worth it. Would be OK if I didn't
want movies, and would actually be cheaper to go digital but I do like the movie
channels and a few specific entertainment channels.

They should just set a price for each channel and perhaps a minimum number you
can subscribe to, with discounts for groups of channels of your choosing. So
each channel might cost $2.95, but 20 channels might only cost $50 per month. I
would pay that to get the ones I want, and 20 would be plenty. Instead i have to
pay 100 to get the 20 I want.

--
Ben Thomas
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

[Garry @ Lake Macquarie]

If you thought there was too many ads two years ago,,, you are going to hate
it now. Foxtel is now packed with ads

[Stephen Oakes]

"Garry @ Lake Macquarie" <emergencymonitor@bigpond.com> wrote...
> If you thought there was too many ads two years ago,,, you are going to
> hate
> it now. Foxtel is now packed with ads

That's what I was worried about.

Do they have ads within shows, or just between?

--
Stephen Oakes

[Ken Oaf]

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 02:32:39 GMT, "Stephen Oakes" <soakes1@XXXbigpond.net.au>
wrote:

> > If you thought there was too many ads two years ago,,, you are going to
> > hate
> > it now. Foxtel is now packed with ads
>
> That's what I was worried about.
>
> Do they have ads within shows, or just between?

Except for movies, they have ads right through shows. Not as many as FTA
though.

[bassett]

What you have is Foxtel, and Foxtel has always been a Digital transmission.
As has Austar.
This NEW digital thing, is crap, what there telling you is that it's
interactive, which it wasn't before. But I can assure you it's always been
digital.
The only thing that has changed from Analogue to Digital is the cable
service.
bassett


"BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message

> I've got analog satellite and I worked out it will cost me almost $100 for
> digtal to get the channels I have now. Not worth it. Would be OK if I
didn't
> want movies, and would actually be cheaper to go digital but I do like the
movie
> channels and a few specific entertainment channels.
>
> They should just set a price for each channel and perhaps a minimum number
you
> can subscribe to, with discounts for groups of channels of your choosing.
So
> each channel might cost $2.95, but 20 channels might only cost $50 per
month. I
> would pay that to get the ones I want, and 20 would be plenty. Instead i
have to
> pay 100 to get the 20 I want.
>
> --
> Ben Thomas
> Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
> relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
> given nor endorsed by it.
>

[BenOne©]

bassett wrote:

> What you have is Foxtel, and Foxtel has always been a Digital transmission.
> As has Austar.
> This NEW digital thing, is crap, what there telling you is that it's
> interactive, which it wasn't before. But I can assure you it's always been
> digital.
> The only thing that has changed from Analogue to Digital is the cable
> service.


I know satellite technology is actually digital, but I'm currently subscribed to
what Foxtel calls their analog service.

--
Ben Thomas
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

[bassett]

While the satellite transmission , from the satellite to your dish //
receiver is digital, this is then changed to analogue, to comply with your
TV set. Ask yourself, How many TV's are full digital. The new digital
terrestrial service is exactly the same, except if you have a digital TV
set, then you do not require a digital decoder,[set-top box]
But the reason for the digital transmission, is pure economics, with the old
analogue services [pre-pay provider if you like] it amounted to one channel
per transponder SCPC [single channel per carrier] So if the frequency was
12123, there would be one channel on the horizontal side and one on the
vertical side, Where-as with digital transmissions MCPC [multi channel per
carrier] is possible So for each Horizontal transponder, you can stack 8 //
10 // 12 channels without a problem, these would all be on the same
frequency, but you also introduce a PID [ program identification data ]
which separates each channel from each other channel on that transponder, So
you would have a Video-Pid, and Audio-Pid, and a PCR-pid,

You will quite often here, on this board, and more so on satellite forums,
"They have changed the pid, and I have lost the program", "does anyone have
the new PID settings" All these settings are available in non-provider
receivers, but not required in provider boxes [receivers] as they can be
up-dated over the air. as can the receiver software.

As for Fox calling there service analogue, I think they make it up as they
go along.


bassett



"BenOne©" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
news:rn0smc.3n5.ln@192.168.11.2...
> bassett wrote:
>
> > What you have is Foxtel, and Foxtel has always been a Digital
transmission.
> > As has Austar.
> > This NEW digital thing, is crap, what there telling you is that it's
> > interactive, which it wasn't before. But I can assure you it's always
been
> > digital.
> > The only thing that has changed from Analogue to Digital is the cable
> > service.
>
>
> I know satellite technology is actually digital, but I'm currently
subscribed to
> what Foxtel calls their analog service.
>
> --
> Ben Thomas
> Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
> relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
> given nor endorsed by it.
>