I've been watching Sky HD on an HD TV for about 3 months and I can honestly say that the picture looks no different to my "old" Sky+! A neighbour of mine is of the same opinion, but are we in the minority?
We also think that the quality of picture that Sky Sports' adverts (for their coverage in HD) would have you believe you will get is exaggerated!
There is a difference. I watched the series about the South Pacific in HD and recorded it in standard and the HD picture is superior.
You do get a lot more detail, even on programmes such as Antiques Roadshow.
When watching a 'typical' tv programme like Jonathan Ross or Robin Hood, HD is pretty overrated.
We recently compared a normal DVD of Casino Royale to the Blu Ray version - it was quite stunningly different - but of course Blu Ray is 1080p whereas Sky movies in HD would be 1080i
So in answer to your question - in some things it is better, for some there is very little difference.
That was one of the biggest technology cons for years - putting 'HD Ready' on 720p TVs and neglecting to tell people it wasn't full HD. These TVs are ready for HD in the sense that they will let you plug an HD box into them, but full HD they are most certainly not. Better get saving!!
Hi surreyguy,
I've only got 2 channels on freesat hd (wont pay for sky anymore due to crap customer care).Sport and docus definately vast improvement,rest irrelevent as I dont wont to see blackheads etc