Foxtel Owners & Discussion Thread

[balki]

I'm a little confused......

It just doesn't make sense to me the venom with which some of you bag Foxtel, and yet when push comes to shove and people challenge you to cancel your subscription, you won't even consider that option.

I agree totally that there are two types of TV viewers - the ones who actually watch the programs and the ones who just want to admire their equipment. One of the main reasons I have Foxtel is for sport - absolutely love the NRL, Super 14, Cricket, NFL, EPL, NBA, Golf etc etc. Now I personally don't care what colour undies Shane Warne is wearing, nor do I care about the colour of David Beckham's eyes, cause thats really all that a better picture quality is going to get me. All I want to do is watch the bloody game!!!! And for that Foxtel suits me just fine.

Now I know that there are many of you out there with all the fancy gear and that's completely fine and you have every right to compain just like everybody else. But I implore you, if you hate Foxtel that much just cancel and move on with your life. I'm just sick of all the whining - surely there are more important things in your lives than complaning about a pay tv network?????

I don't hate Foxtel. If I did, I wouldn't subscribe.

But having said that - and as I've stated many times before - we pay a premium price, it would be nice to get premium quality along with premium cost. (Of course, I understand that Aus will never have world's-best pay TV... it just isn't possible given our geographic/population spread.)

It annoys me when people say things like 'it's good enough' or 'I can live with the picture quality' and then do nothing about it. [And I have no idea what those claiming 'DVD Quality' are watching, but at least (to their eyes) they have no reason to voice complaint.]

Yes, Foxtel is a business and, ultimately, they're interested in the bottom line - NOT providing you and I with the best possible TV entertainment, especially considering their monopoly position.

If, as is apparent, the majority are "happy" with the PQ (ie. they can "live with it" so don't voice their complaints) then nothing will be done. Foxtel would gladly go back to the good old days and provide us with 3 b/w channels if they thought they could get away with it. With their virtual monopoly (particularly wrt sports), they can almost pull it off.

It will be interesting to see what happens when Foxtel introduce "HD". Given their current practice of constraining bit rates, it's likely that their "HD" will also be sub-standard. Of course, the marketing boffins will be able to trumpet the new HD service. What many people don't realise is that high bit rate SD can look better than HD. The res is just one factor. If they over-compress the HD channel, then they may as well not bother. (Yes, they'll have more bandwidth available when Optus launch the new satellite, but will Foxtel be willing to pay more to improve PQ? One need only look at AFL rights to realise the answer.)

But wait a minute - evidently, I am an audiophile/videophile (fetishist? Well, that's taking it to the extreme, I guess ) - so my expectations are apparently ridiculously high. No - I don't watch/listen to my equipment, I watch/listen to the content. The problem is, I've seen what my equipment is capable of... I guess it's a case of knowing what I'm missing out on.

[gib_oz]

I don't hate Foxtel. If I did, I wouldn't subscribe.

But having said that - and as I've stated many times before - we pay a premium price, it would be nice to get premium quality along with premium cost. (Of course, I understand that Aus will never have world's-best pay TV... it just isn't possible given our geographic/population spread.)

It annoys me when people say things like 'it's good enough' or 'I can live with the picture quality' and then do nothing about it. [And I have no idea what those claiming 'DVD Quality' are watching, but at least (to their eyes) they have no reason to voice complaint.]

Yes, Foxtel is a business and, ultimately, they're interested in the bottom line - NOT providing you and I with the best possible TV entertainment, especially considering their monopoly position.

If, as is apparent, the majority are "happy" with the PQ (ie. they can "live with it" so don't voice their complaints) then nothing will be done. Foxtel would gladly go back to the good old days and provide us with 3 b/w channels if they thought they could get away with it. With their virtual monopoly (particularly wrt sports), they can almost pull it off.

It will be interesting to see what happens when Foxtel introduce "HD". Given their current practice of constraining bit rates, it's likely that their "HD" will also be sub-standard. Of course, the marketing boffins will be able to trumpet the new HD service. What many people don't realise is that high bit rate SD can look better than HD. The res is just one factor. If they over-compress the HD channel, then they may as well not bother. (Yes, they'll have more bandwidth available when Optus launch the new satellite, but will Foxtel be willing to pay more to improve PQ? One need only look at AFL rights to realise the answer.)

But wait a minute - evidently, I am an audiophile/videophile (fetishist? Well, that's taking it to the extreme, I guess ) - so my expectations are apparently ridiculously high. No - I don't watch/listen to my equipment, I watch/listen to the content. The problem is, I've seen what my equipment is capable of... I guess it's a case of knowing what I'm missing out on.

Mate,

Agree totally with what you are saying. And I agree wholeheartedly that those of you who complain about Foxtel are those that have seen what good PQ can do if you have the right equipment. And I agree that PQ in other markets is probably a whole lot better than what Foxtel provides. But I don't think that's the issue here.

I'll say it till I'm blue in the face - most people have Foxtel for CONTENT, not picture quality. Do you think the average Joe would have a clue about bit rates and over compression?? But I do know that we are sport mad country and for the average Joe, as there is hardly any sport on FTA, Foxtel is an absolute must. And I don't particularly like the notion of watching Bert Newton and Don Lane reruns because thats pretty much all that FTA is offering these days. Every single one of my mates has Foxtel for this reason and they couldn't give a flying toss about bandwidths and bit rates and stuff like that.

I would rather have Foxtel spend their resources on program content rather than on PQ because if you ask the majority of subscribers, that is what is important to them. Until HD TV's become common place in the average Aussie household (which probably won't happen for another 2-3 years) then I don't really see the point in spending resources for the minority it will benefit.

Just my opinion guys.

[GrpA]

I agree about the monopoly. Foxtel can basically do whatever they want and get away with it because there is no competition... So we do get third world picture quality in Australia.

Perhaps Richard Branson will pick up on that one and move in, since Foxtel is basically constrained by the "Digital" STBs it's upgraded to. But I suspect the Aust Gov would step in to prevent any competition from developing.

Anyway, I did leave over the issue. No animosity - it's just that Foxtel wasn't able to provide the value for what I was paying and it didn't really matter how much I paid. It simply wasn't possible.

The basic issue for me is that if I got something decent, I'd have stayed with Foxtel. I actually don't watch much at all, so when I do watch TV, I want to get the most from the experience. And I tend to watch a lot of stuff that has the lower bitrates.

It's not that Foxtel didn't ask me to stay. They have one of the best customer retention teams I have ever encountered. If you've completed your minimum term, you can get them to throw in Movies on Basic at no extra charge just by saying you're going to leave. When they throw an offer like that at you, you do reconsider staying.

But for what I pay Foxtel, I can effectively hire out new videos (and Console games too) each week. I Always get the latest releases. And I get MUCH higher quality.

I miss the documentaries, but I enjoy quality when I'm watching them, so I tend to use SBS and ABC FTA. I have a PVR so I can catch what I like from FTA.

Without IQ I simply missed most stuff on Foxtel I wanted. It's too hard to set up a normal VCR to record it, because the family watched it at times too.

So now I'm content without Foxtel. Why complain you ask?

Because Foxtel read this forum. They take notes. It's a finger on the pulse for them. It's commercially important that they follow them. What I write here they read.

After all, they put me on to this forum in the first place.

So when people on this forum complain about the quality and a bunch of disrespectful people who aren't experiencing the same pain deny the problem, Foxtel don't get the message.

Because anyone from foxtel may write off quality issues as something that only a small section of the community whines about. The ones who control things don't understand bitrates and resolutions. They probably don't even know what HD or SD are.

So people who defend the indefensible (ie, something is broken and we know it is - even Foxtel tech staff agree) basically tell the marketting guys at Foxtel everything is OK.

That means the forum isn't working.

But if this forum works correctly, then people should be able to complain about their issues and discuss the issues in depth. More respectful posters will offer suggestions on improving things.

More importantly, Foxtel will take note and start to identify ways to improve services. (Which losing customers alone won't achieve).

So basically, if you can't solve the problem, or offer meaningful comments, then denying it exists not only illustrates to everyone who does understand the issue that you don't know what you're talking about, but it obfuscates the issue to Foxtel so they can't get any benefit from the forum either.

Anyway, that's probably my closing post. Thanks again to the people who started this thread and who have provided supporting information on the problem, because it did help me to determine whether my subscription was worth it.

I'm sorry that many of you can't do the same. You're right - if you can't get the content anywhere you have to take what you can get. Hopefully, Foxtel will pick up on this sooner rather than later and realise we're all willing to pay a premium for quality.

When they do, I'll be back. The content is fine - but I want quality. not width.

Thanks

David.

[Doug1503559538]

Mate,

Agree totally with what you are saying. And I agree wholeheartedly that those of you who complain about Foxtel are those that have seen what good PQ can do if you have the right equipment. And I agree that PQ in other markets is probably a whole lot better than what Foxtel provides. But I don't think that's the issue here.

I'll say it till I'm blue in the face - most people have Foxtel for CONTENT, not picture quality. Do you think the average Joe would have a clue about bit rates and over compression?? But I do know that we are sport mad country and for the average Joe, as there is hardly any sport on FTA, Foxtel is an absolute must. And I don't particularly like the notion of watching Bert Newton and Don Lane reruns because thats pretty much all that FTA is offering these days. Every single one of my mates has Foxtel for this reason and they couldn't give a flying toss about bandwidths and bit rates and stuff like that.

I would rather have Foxtel spend their resources on program content rather than on PQ because if you ask the majority of subscribers, that is what is important to them. Until HD TV's become common place in the average Aussie household (which probably won't happen for another 2-3 years) then I don't really see the point in spending resources for the minority it will benefit.

Just my opinion guys.

Well put.

Just my opinion as well (and probably the same as the vast majority of FOXTEL customers). I would much rather have them spend their (my) money on programming content.

This forum does seem to attract people besotted with minority issues such as bit and byte rates. I actually wonder if they watch the programs on FOXTEL or are too busy analysing the PQ to notice the content ???

[tomlc]

Well put.

Just my opinion as well (and probably the same as the vast majority of FOXTEL customers). I would much rather have them spend their (my) money on programming content.

This forum does seem to attract people besotted with minority issues such as bit and byte rates. I actually wonder if they watch the programs on FOXTEL or are too busy analysing the PQ to notice the content ???

Well I am one those who is more concerned with content.

I wrote a letter to one of the big boys at Foxtel headquarters COO or CEO or something ! Not expecting a reply but said in the letter I just needed to vent my frustration over content an in particular the repeats.

I wish everyone would actually write as well as post here. So many TV1/Fox8/Fox Classics shows run through a series and then start the very next day from episode 1 but still at the same time same channel.

Of course we know they have to repeat but surely by shoving it in another time slot and replacing with another show it wouldnt be so bad but when you watch tv only at certain times of the day eg for me its

early morning before work ( news and then one of the shows for 1/2 hr ) and then only at night say

from 7-10pm ............. the number of repeats I see is unbeleivable so anyone who watches more must be going around the bend. Not only that shows like the Simpons just seem to repeating a few years worth over and over and over .

I have fingers crossed for someone like Branson or something like IPTV or whatever its called which is being trialled in NZ or if SelectTV ever bring out their extras package but I dont think I can do satellite so for me only cable at the moment.

Do Foxtel listen ? not at the moment I dont think and if anyone does offer up reasonable competition then there will be no loyalty towards Foxtel at all.

[Hopper1503560788]

My main gripe with Foxtel is watching a crappy picture quality of NBA games on ESPN (my primary initial reason for getting Foxtel), and having the US commentators repeatedly remind me that "this game is being broadcast in HD". Not into my loungeroom it isn't.

[Alfred Smee]

That is there is a group of people who are more interested in watching and listening to their equipment than watching or listening to programs. Hi Fi fetishists as I said are not really interested in music they listen to the gear.

Ok So for a group of people the picture quality on foxtel is not up to snuff but what we're dealing with is a mass market product. the cost of providing that product to the standard demanded by a small group of technophiles is just not worth it when the majority of people watching and listening on mass market equipment are more than satisfied.

so sneer and look down your noses at the proles who know no better but they are the ones who provide the revenue stream. Until the connoisseurs and AV aesthetes outnumber the great unwashed your just gonna have to live with it.

Yes I am guilty of being a Hi-Fi enthusiast. But I make no apologies. My justification has always been that I enjoy music much more when listening to it as it was meant to be heard. Recording artists, engineers and producers put a great deal of effort into getting the sound right. I'll bet I listen to much more music than you as I enjoy it so much.

Anyone with average eyesight and a screen 40+" will tell you that PQ on the Foxtel 4:3 channels is awful. The quality on the widescreen movie channels is much better but still not as good as FTA digital. Just because I notice it and you don't doesn't make me elitist or snobbish. I'm very disappointed because attitudes such as yours would have us all still watching little B&W TVs in our lounge rooms and listening to the inbuilt 3" speaker.

[strange_one]

So is 4:3 on Foxtel really that bad? I've got an installation from Optus booked for early in the new year, bit hesitant since if it looks like crap and I can't stand it I can't get out of the contract after installation without the cancel fee. This is for a 42" LCD.

A little less than FTA Digital I can deal with but I hope it isn't atrocious. I'll be connecting the IQ via scart/component so hopefully that'll at least help a bit

[balki]

So is 4:3 on Foxtel really that bad? I've got an installation from Optus booked for early in the new year, bit hesitant since if it looks like crap and I can't stand it I can't get out of the contract after installation without the cancel fee. This is for a 42" LCD.

A little less than FTA Digital I can deal with but I hope it isn't atrocious. I'll be connecting the IQ via scart/component so hopefully that'll at least help a bit

Well, "really that bad" is quite subjective (as a quick browse of this topic will show you).

The best way is to go to a friend's house and see for yourself (ideally with a screen that is comparable to yours).

Barring that, try one of the many kiosks or Foxtel display outlets.

[strange_one]

Unfortunately don't have any mates that have both Foxtel AND a flat panel screen. I've stopped and checked out a few Foxtel shopping centre booths, doesn't look too bad but whenever I ask about how they're connected and what channels are widescreen etc all I ever hear back is 'they're all DVD quality, no matter what connection you have coming from the IQ'. Helpful as usual those guys

Anyway thanks for the reply I'll probably just take the punt and hope things look decent, otherwise scale back to the cheapest possible package

[Nullack1503559755]

Foxtel image quality is worse than free to air digital tv.

576i of poor resolution, macroblocked, mosquito noise infected fecal matter!

Youd think they would have atleast used AVC or VC1 instead of mpeg2 that way atleast they could have run better images without increasing bandwidth on their satellites and other infrastructure.

Just lame.

'they're all DVD quality, no matter what connection you have coming from the IQ'. Helpful as usual those guys

Thats absolute BS! The bitrates used in Foxtel are not even within the most poorly encoded long length dvd title. And worse, the sound. Whats more, its interlaced content not progressive content like the majority of the PAL dvds.

[Paranoid666au]

I noticed on the Foxtel website it says "Digital quality picture" and "CD Quality sound"

So it doesn't look better than the analogue service? Or is it worse!?

[balki]

I noticed on the Foxtel website it says "Digital quality picture" and "CD Quality sound"

So it doesn't look better than the analogue service? Or is it worse!?

"Digital quality picture" is the most meaningless phrase possible.

Look at a site like YouTube - that has "digital quality picture".

At least with the sound, they're comparing it to something.

[Paranoid666au]

Yea, there not saying DVD Quality picture so maybe that's saying something? Ah it's just marketing fud anyway!

And although the ads for digital TV never said DVD quality either, something like crystal clear images or something. Even though a lot of time it is DVD quality.

[DrP]

Foxtel image quality is worse than free to air digital tv.

No arguments there.

Youd think they would have atleast used AVC or VC1 instead of mpeg2 that way atleast they could have run better images without increasing bandwidth on their satellites and other infrastructure.

Only if they had access to a time machine. MPEG4 AVC and VC1 wasn't even a glimmer in someones eye when Foxtel started up.

Thats absolute BS! The bitrates used in Foxtel are not even within the most poorly encoded long length dvd title. And worse, the sound. Whats more, its interlaced content not progressive content like the majority of the PAL dvds.

King Kong actually has a video bit rate comparable to the bit rate used for most FBO movies. Its the exception though.

[Nullack1503559755]

Well they could have gone for MPEG4-ASP that was around then.

And, they need to keep up with the times - I mean they are actually being beaten by free services, and foxtel is something I pay for, and it's worse. Very lame.

[Doug1503559538]

So is 4:3 on Foxtel really that bad? I've got an installation from Optus booked for early in the new year, bit hesitant since if it looks like crap and I can't stand it I can't get out of the contract after installation without the cancel fee. This is for a 42" LCD.

A little less than FTA Digital I can deal with but I hope it isn't atrocious. I'll be connecting the IQ via scart/component so hopefully that'll at least help a bit

The simple answer is no - it's not that bad. It is far better than analog television or VCR quality that we were all happy with only a few years ago.

FOXTEL have over 1,000,000 subscribers and there are about 5 unhappy ones who post on this forum (not sure why they just don't cancel).

Well they could have gone for MPEG4-ASP that was around then.

And, they need to keep up with the times - I mean they are actually being beaten by free services, and foxtel is something I pay for, and it's worse. Very lame.

I would much rather have them spend money on content. I find the PQ absolutely acceptable.

[Nullack1503559755]

How badly foxtel's crap image quality effects a particular individual assuming they have normal eyesight depends on:

1. The quality and resolution of your display to show the errors in the source

2. The calibration of your display

3. Your viewing distance from the display

I have a high end display properly calibrated and a 36 degree viewing angle with the seating distance designed for true HD 1080P material and I can assure you this makes crap sources like Foxtel to be very poor. It takes an extensive amount of digital post processing to cleanup the image to something watchable, and even then it's a stretch.

Claiming that for the entire Australian customer base only 5 people are unhappy with the quality is really just not fair dinkum. Yeah of course there will be some who have cheap small CRTs that will never look good with any source, but there's many who have made the insight that fta DTV is actually better quality than foxtel.

[DrP]

It is far better than analog television....

Since you don't appear all that often, I'll assume that you missed the post some time ago where I was comparing some frames from Charmed that were grabbed directly out of the MPEG/2 video as transmitted by FOXTEL for TV1 and matching frames that were grabbed off FTA analogue TV.

Needless to say that the analogue FTA TV came out on top. That's right. Analogue FTA had better PQ.

TV1 is transmitted as 544 x 576i. At 544 it should be able to exceed the quality of most people's analogue FTA reception. The only thing limiting it's ability to do so is Foxtel's treatment of the picture to keep bit rates down.

If you are a doubter, I can dig out the samples and post them again......

[k.j.]

no idea please help

hi i have recently aquired a foxtel smart card, is there any chance i can just use that card and stick it in my world tv box thingy would i have to turn the sattalite in a nother direction or do i need to get my hands on a foxtel digital decoder box?

thanks

[BribieG]

When I posted my original comments a few months ago, what I was referring to was not so much what Foxtel would look like on various equipment, rather the fact that Foxtel itself sets up kiosks in shopping centres staffed by Foxtel employees, presumably set up by Foxtel techs and a hand picked selection of channels displayed on TVs chosen by Foxtel to, presumably, show Foxtel Digital in the best possible light. And, to my surprise the PQ struck me as lousy.

Now, I'm not anti pay-tv as such and in the last 10 days we went on a 3 day drive to visit rellies interstate and 3 days back, stayed in motels and watched an assortment of Foxtel and Austar on little motel CRT (old and small and BLACK, which is an indication of their age) televisions, and you know what, Foxtel looked quite ok compared to 7 etc. No doubt analogue, didn't ask the motel staff.

On my return to Bribie Island, discovered that Foxtel have decided to blitz the island with Foxtel Digital (10k population so a worthwhile target) and have set up a spanking new kiosk in our Woolies shopping centre with spanking new plasmapower screens ....

And guess what, the PQ is .... Couldn't even make out the numbers on the player's backs.

Original comments stand.

[gib_oz]

Bribie - fair point. And I think we all can all agree that the bigger and better your equipment, the worse Foxtel PQ looks. I must admit, some programs, particularly on TV1 and ESPN look pretty bad.

But anyone with an ounce of business know how would know that you have to cater for your customers who provide the biggest revenue. Elsewhere on this topic, someone stated that only 1 in 28 Australian households have a widescreen TV. So, it's fair to say that on average, 27/28 households who have Foxtel will see no noticeable difference if they increase bandwidth/bitrate and improve PQ.

Now consider Foxtel's pricing structure - it is measured via program content (ie the more money you pay, the more channels you get). Now someone else mentioned in this topic that maybe Foxtel should provide an upgraded service in terms of picture quality and charge extra to those who are willing to pay for that service (which I actually think is a good idea - that way, EVERYONE will be happy).

To me, the fact that Foxtel have stuctured their packages in terms of CONTENT rather than PQ only proves that they have done their research and ascertained that content is foremost in people's minds. And from a revenue perspective, a subscriber who owns a 51 cm CRT is is worth exactly the same to their bottom line as someone who owns 55 inch hi-def plasma.

So if you're Foxtel - who's your daddy when it comes to the bottom line?? I would argue, it is the 27/28 households who don't own a widescreen TV and who most likely won't care about improving picture quality.

Mate, part of me wishes they would improve PQ as well as I have a 42 inch widescreen TV, but based on the above numbers, it just doesn't add up for Foxtel.

[BribieG]

Yep. However with new 81 cm LCDs now starting at under $895 - latest WOW catalogue - (which in real dollars is probably less than 51 / 68 cm colour TVs were up until the GST) we should shortly see a boom in WS owners, and Foxtel will hopefully bow to the inevitable (also 7 'hd' but that's a whole different thread!!)

[cttc]

Foxtel Digital satellite is carried on Optus C1 so you need to be pointing at that and your box needs something that will decode NDS Videoguard encryption.

So simple answer: won't work.

[GrpA]

Yep. However with new 81 cm LCDs now starting at under $895 - latest WOW catalogue - (which in real dollars is probably less than 51 / 68 cm colour TVs were up until the GST) we should shortly see a boom in WS owners, and Foxtel will hopefully bow to the inevitable (also 7 'hd' but that's a whole different thread!!)

7HD, There's not a lot of difference in the transport stream presently is there.

You're right about the proliferation of big screens. They're dumping 42" plasma's around here for as low as $700~$1000 each now.

But the smaller LCDs are still competing well with them and usually have 1360x768 native displays, which is definately enough to notice the difference.

They had a council pickup week here a few weeks back and every third house had a large TV sitting out the front. That really suprised me a lot. The new cheap flat panels are starting to take over.

I'd say within 24 months, high resolution flat panels will become the dominant screen in more than 50% of homes.

Then a lot more people are going to realise that Foxtel PQ is rubbish.

More importantly, these people don't (as was mentioned some time ago, ironically as a justification for the poor PQ) know or care anything about the bitrates, video signal or even the difference between component video and composite video. They wouldn't understand anything about re-encoded pictures.

But they will understand that their eyes are telling them that FTA looks good and Foxtel looks blurry in comparison.

Somehow at that point I think Foxtel is going to find that the lack of quality programming will come second to the lack of quality picture. Because these people are going to question why their picture suddenly looks lousy when they just paid a thousand dollars for a new TV. And it won't take long for the manufacturers to start pointing the finger at Foxtel.

Don't forget, the only reason people are buying these screens is because the FTA stations are doing a good job upselling their "Digital" service, and they beleive (and expect) they will get a much better picture with their shiny new LCD.

This line is also being pushed hard by the TV shops...

And the final nail in the coffin will be those who connect up their PC and Internet service to the big screen (most have VGA inputs) and set up a media centre. That's because they're going to realise their PC suddenly does what IQ does, only better.

David.