Sky, in general.

So often many posters on this, and other fora (yes, that's correct) can only offer criticism; whilst it is certainly justified at times, I feel that Sky are often denigrated for no good reason.
My experiences with Sky - over many years (analogue, digital and now using BB) is one of "general" satisfaction. Never get "Indian" call centres, and the staff are mostly reasonably well informed, and always courteous.
It does make you wonder, perhaps, if some of the gripers only get the service/attitude that "they" originally show when speaking to Sky: just a thought,
Another thing that I find a little irritating is how people often go on about getting "only 3/4/5/6 meg, when I SHOULD be getting 8/16".Get real; line limitations mean I can only get 1/1.2 at max and at �5.00 that's not too bad at all. Count yourselves fortunate if you get appreciably more than this for a fiver.

I agree, I have had good service from sky and plan to continue to use their satellite service.

The only gripe I have had is that sky will not allow me to pay them twice as much for broadband because they are basing their decision not to provide me with max on incorrect data. So, whilst I get significantly higher speeds than you do I am not able to pay them extra to get just a little bit more (and it's actually the upstream I am interested in).

So yes, sky are much better than some people paint them but they can still get stuck in process rather than actually considering a case on it's own merits.

Main gripe i have is BBC, i wish they would scrap stupid tv license tax for people that never look at anything BBC produce and let us pay sky for channels we want and have the choice not to take BBC channels if need be as they suck!

But yeh im like you i've always had a nice relationship with sky. I have all 3 services sky supply and am happy with them all.