Grr. I was being pleased with Sky the other day, for not yet having tried to lie to me about anything, while British Telecom were sending me ads for their 'wireless internet' saying it's 8 pounds per month*. Where * means "for the first three months, thereafter much more, and also that doesn't include the mandatory hardware, whose cost actually makes the first three months effectively more expensive even than the later ones", and "wireless internet" means "ADSL and a wireless router" more accurately known as "internet over a wire, and a wireless router". For bonus annoy they were also touting the increased range of the new router, for "more reliable internet connection". Does anyone have their connection fail because their wireless drops, more often than because the ADSL drops? No. Because ADSL is crappy. So "just as unreliable internet connection, now costing more than we claim!" Admittedly that doesn't make for compelling advertising.
Anyway, two points here, one is that I just saw a Sky ad that said 5 pounds for the first month of some TV channels*, where * is 20 pounds a month thereafter, and a one-off joining fee of 15 pounds. So pretty much just like BT's lies. Grr. Even if it is lies about something I don't care about.
And the other point is, BT also annoys me with many other things, such as outrageous "not direct debit" fees, and bloody phoning me all the time to try to get me to move my calls back to them, enough so that I now want to make the effort to sever all contact with them; I gather it is now possible to go elsewhere for line rental. Has anyone reading done a line-rental-ectomy? If so, how was it?
[23:04]
|