Wireless TV? – Forumite.site

This topic has 15 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 9 months ago by Bob Williams.

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)

Author

Posts
June 11, 2018 at 4:17 pm #21748
Jukebox
Participant
@jukebox
Forumite Points: 4
My son is buying a new house (under construction) but it is very basic unless he pays a fortune for extras. There are only 2 TV points (lounge and kitchen) but the builder wants £65 per outlet for any more! Installation of wired outlets after completion is not going to be practical due to the design of the build and I am wondering if any forumite has used a wireless system (if there is such a thing) which would distribute a TV signal from the main outlet to other rooms.
June 11, 2018 at 4:54 pm #21749
PlaneMan
Participant
@planeman
Forumite Points: 196
I have to ask, why bother? Loads of low priced streaming units available unless there’s a specific reason I can’t see the point.

Get a Fire Stick or 2 and load the on demand apps onto it.
June 11, 2018 at 5:21 pm #21750
Richard
Participant
@sawboman
Forumite Points: 16
To be fair £65 per outlet does not appear a royal fortune when you count the labour plus overhead plus parts, though when you are buying I know every penny counts.Still, it is only about the same as some monthly entertainment packages or so I am told.

I can see PM’s point, though would all that they want be available that way?A lateral thinking solution might be the best option, (though we do now have 8 TV aerial points at the moment).

Come to that how future proof would any of today’s solutions be? I guess it would partially depend on what services they plan on having over the next few years
June 11, 2018 at 7:05 pm #21759
Ed P
Participant
@edps
Forumite Points: 39
If a good wifi signal is available wherever needed then no additional TV points are required. Sky etc basically allow TV without TV points and of course there are other options such as Roku etc.
June 11, 2018 at 7:23 pm #21762
johnbarry
Participant
@johnbarry
Forumite Points: 13
Ed as you say about Sky and they no longer provide wired for the bedroom, it is all WiFi

Cheers
John
June 11, 2018 at 10:15 pm #21766
Dave Rice
Participant
@ricedg
Forumite Points: 7
Sky Q can still be wired.

£65 per socket isn’t a rip off. How much do you charge for your time when working?
June 11, 2018 at 10:20 pm #21767
johnbarry
Participant
@johnbarry
Forumite Points: 13
It shows how much I know.

It was based on 2 I know were only offered WiFi for the bedroom with Sky Q.

I wasn’t aware you were still offered wired for the bedroom.

Dave I don’t have it (Sky in the beedroom) so I shouldn’t have stepped in.

Cheers
John
June 12, 2018 at 7:45 am #21773
Dave Rice
Participant
@ricedg
Forumite Points: 7
John, it’s down to the installers 99% of which are what I call the “nail it to the wall” brigade. They have no real knowledge of what’s behind the technology they’re installing. They learn one way of doing it and that’s that. No other way exists.

They learn how to nail the boxes to the wall, how to connect them and how to do a basic setup, which is little more than turning it on.
June 12, 2018 at 8:07 am #21776
Ed P
Participant
@edps
Forumite Points: 39
The Sky installers are to blame, their customer script says to push wifi broadband and preferably that of Sky. It is only if you have an existing point and you want it used that they will go to the master menu’s wired options setup section. (a reluctant admission from a Sky installer)
June 12, 2018 at 8:54 am #21778
Richard
Participant
@sawboman
Forumite Points: 16
Wi Fi is OK when and if it works but if the house has some types of insulated walls, some types of blockwork internal walls, is larger or has a different layout then the issues mount up.

Dave, I am with you on the extra socket costs which I thought were very reasonable. If you do not want the high costs of Sky or Virgin then the cost saving there pays for a lot of sockets and cable.
June 12, 2018 at 10:53 am #21784
blacklion1725
Participant
@blacklion1725
Forumite Points: 2
Yep I’ve done a couple of Sky Q mini-boxes from wirleess to wired after which they worked a lot better. On the TV points, I agree the cost seems reasonable – as long as it is done properly. Which for multiple outlets means a distribution amp should be catered for (even if he doesn’t supply it). If the TVs are used one at a time – or if there are only two and the signal is strong then a passive splitter will do – but if you have multiple sets on at the same time then an active amp is likely to be a “must”.
June 12, 2018 at 12:51 pm #21785
RSB
Keymaster
@bdthree
Forumite Points: 5,183
A long shot alternative and how I pass my TV around the house. 1 small sized tvheadend box with tuners on ubuntu and as many as you like Amazon TV sticks with Kodi on them. Amazon fire tv sticks seem to be cheaper than wall outlets plus they come with more than the wall outlets do 😉

Not for everyone but works for me 🙂

Americans: Over Sexed, Over Payed and Over here, Wat Wat!
June 12, 2018 at 6:26 pm #21806
Bob Williams
Participant
@bullstuff2
Forumite Points: 0
When I had Sky Q, I used Ethernet 5e to connect the krappy Sky router across my loft. (No.2 gson provided labour and crawling over the insulation.) The problem with the router, is that it has only 2x LAN ports. But it worked much better than WiFi.

When the Thought Police arrive at your door, think -
I'm out.
June 12, 2018 at 7:48 pm #21815
blacklion1725
Participant
@blacklion1725
Forumite Points: 2
Yeah Sky Q iwould have been interesting 10 – 15 years ago – now as a (more or less) closed patform it is very unappealing – and not particularly well designed or implemented from what I’ve seen.

One other thing on the original points about TV points – worth paying for decent (e.g. WF100) cable and decent connectors – epecially anything behind walls or under floors that you won’t want to replace. Possible that a builder by default might use whatever he has on his van or is cheapest (and the cheap stuff is terrible).
June 13, 2018 at 12:11 am #21833
The Duke
Participant
@sgb101
Forumite Points: 5
Having no signal in my house, sky Q would of been a dream 15 years ago. I’ve said here before, about 2008 I asked a top tier sky customer services guy about this “sky server” I’d read of, he said it’s way way off, barely a rumour.

By the time it arrived, I could get 80meg down so had no use for sky. Or any ota tv.

Iptv for me all day long. Also cleans the whole wire muss up some what.

BL a friend of mine has Q, and the whole interface is a mess. I never liked the prettier but less functional HD menu change. The Q would of been my last straw.

They you view menu is the winner ui for tv, a few use it now, so has 5o be either cheap or opensource, sky should of used that with a sky skin.

It just great, anyone can instantly use it. Just like the original sky ui.
June 13, 2018 at 10:36 pm #21851
Bob Williams
Participant
@bullstuff2
Forumite Points: 0
Sky Q was a mess for me, the EPG had so many channels, most of which were either crap, duplicated or both. Scrolling through all of that, even divided into categories, took too much time. It would have been better if channels could have been deleted, as they can on Freesat Humax and even my Haupagge DVBTV dual tuner on this Desktop. The Sky Hub router has only 2 LAN ports and the Wifi was horrible, much better with wired Ethernet. Even with the new-type Gigabit Plusnet Hub now, (which is in exactly the same position that the Sky Hub operated from) there are 4 LAN ports and the WiFi is much stronger.

Sky is being overtaken and passed, doesn’t seem to have a clue. The fact that Fox looks like owning Sky, will be the death knell IMO.

When the Thought Police arrive at your door, think -
I'm out.
Author

Posts