Sky HD vs Virgin HD

[croyde]

After buying my Panny G30, I need to go HD. Currently have Sky+ but getting the calculator out and comparing the line UPS, it would appear that I would save around 150 quid over 18 months if I go Virgin.

Less HD channels but don't really need the extra that Sky have.

So is the quality different on the two systems?

Cheers

[Bushi]

Sky HD is stable throughout the country and I find it to be very good and will be as per spec, Virgin Media however varies a lot from area to area, even from install to install, around my area, North London, I find it very poor with a LOT of noise and artefacts.

[sharpfocus]

Isn't VM over IP? (Or are the broadcast streams some old school cable still?)

[aclivity]

Virgin HD is MPEG2 at the moment, but plans were afoot to move to Mpeg4. Means nothing to the end user, in effect, except that they can fit more streams down the same pipe at Mpeg4.

Virgin, or Telewest, were the first to bring HD out, but then failed in the content grabbing game, which Sky have been very good at ... meaning that Virgin will always have less HD content than Sky.

Virgin have a better on-demand service than Sky, but again, Sky have more content, so it's a bit like having the best car in the world but only having the roads on the Isle of Man to drive it on.

Future? Well, the VM TiVo box supports all kinds of super stuff, even IP TV, YouTube HD content with a dedicated 10Mb modem built in, as well as the On demand and broadcast content. I'd be going that route if I wanted HD at the moment, and had the choice of both. YMMV.

[eybic]

I considered similar when I had sky HD, I have moved to Virgin and apart from the occasional box crash (it resets itself) I have no regrets. On demand is better as there is more choice and you can record 2 things and watch another (3 tuners whereas sky has 2).