On 15/08/07, Richard Lockwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The fact that iPlayer doesn't work on (Doctorow's figure) 25% of
> computer users' computers is irrelevent. You can't use it at all if
> you haven't got a computer, it won't run on your fridge
I could if you released the specs and I put a screen on the Fridge,
and some kind of device to do calculation.
> It's not the great evil a lot of people have suggested - it's a
> flawed, but in Beta
What the heck has "Beta" got to do with anything? Do you know the
first thing about software? Are you suggesting the best way to write a
mutli-platform program is to write it for one platform, excluding all
thought of Cross-Platform from the design specs. Wait till you finish
it and then port it? If you do that you will find you made bad design
decisions, much code will be rendered useless and what is left will
need to be untangled from what remains.
No the real way to do true platform independent (and therefore
platform neutral code) is to consider this from Day1. Yes you may not
get the release at precisely the same time but it will be quick to
port.
Did the BBC do that? The BBC has failed to provide any evidence that
they did so lets look at the design decisions shall we.
Programming Language: C.
Is C platform Independent/neutral ? NO.
iPlayer is a GUI program, does C have native support (in the C
language standard, either ISO or ANSI) for GUI development ? NO.
Is there an accepted standard for OS interaction from C? YES POSIX,
Was it used? NO.
Is C portable ? Yes, provided no non standard OS calls are made and no
non-portable libraries where used, they where.
Libraries/Third Party Apps:
Kontiki
Platform Neutral: NO
Uses publicly defined communications specs (e.g. an RFC): NO
Provides access to code for porting to new platforms: NO
WMV
Platform Neutral: NO
Uses publicly defined file formats (e.g. and RFC or ISO): NO
Provides access to code for porting to new platforms: NO
So it's not evil but it made design decisions that make it as hard as
possible to achieve platform neutrality without rewriting most of the
code. I asked before, no one answered so why don't you tell us now,
How much of iPlayer is useless for a platform neutral version?
Conversely languages like Java and Python and many many others support
platform neutrality, both read byte-code to abstract even away from
the CPU (Java can be natively compiled in addition to byte compiled
for speed, Python was working on this I think.
Java has in built support for Graphics.
Python has graphics support compiled into most versions (via TK IIRC).
WMV is the single least portable solution possible, the EU even
charged the vendor with using that particular product to disrupt
competition.
Kontiki isn't platform independent either, there are much more tried
and tested protocols for peer to peer distribution.
Has the BBC even started it's _platform neutral iPlayer_? I can't see
_any_ evidence of it what-so-ever. C needs to recompiled for every
Architecture, where is the iPlayer source which is needed to make C
platform neutral, I can't find it! (Weblink to it would be helpful).
Or is the BBC rewriting iPlayer in a different programming language,
rendering the entire C based iPlayer the biggest waste of money in
recent history?
If the BBC really intended to produce a cross-platform solution why
did it make design decisions that indicate the exact opposite.
Of course the BBC must have done costings for the project and all
potential implementations. Where are these published?
Andy
--
Computers are like air conditioners. Both stop working, if you open windows.
-- Adam Heath
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
