RE: [OT] Is Sky + as crap as I think it is ?

["christopher purves" <CHRIS_PURVES@xxxxxxx>]

I don't think I could disagree any more completely than I do with that
statement. TIVO works and has done for me since the day it came out in this
country (got mine from Dixons) - no exceptions. Everyone who uses it loves
it.

SKY+ on the otherhand feels slow and stupid to use - the UI is not natural
and from what people are saying the season links keep buggering up. Further
as has been pointed out here - the sound and lip sync are screwy on the 160
model.



Chris








>From: "Gerard McGovern" <stuff@xxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: [ukha_d] [OT] Is Sky + as crap as I think it is ?
>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:01:44 +0100
>
>Yes, it is derogatory. It's great in theory but shite in practice. My
Sky+
>works and has worked from day one; no remote connections, no funky
scart
>connections etc. I will agree the Tivo UI is better but that is not to
say
>the Sky one is dire. However if you are basic user then the Sky+ system
it
>so much easier all round.
>
>G
>
>________________________________
>
>From: ukha_d@xxxxxxx on behalf of Mark McCall
>Sent: Mon 26/09/2005 12:41
>To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: [ukha_d] [OT] Is Sky + as crap as I think it is ?
>
>
>
> > Personally I find the Tivo to be toffee.
>
>No idea what that means but I assume its derogatory?
>
>If it is I have to disagree strongly.  TiVo is one of the best products
>I've
>ever used.
>
>M.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>