RE: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas
Haha :D Careful though, now you've revealed your address to us lot you'll no doubt have emails flying your way with suggestions or requests for changes regarding your multimedia offerings ;) The last email was just directed in the area of your new boss because I know he reads this list ;) _ From: Chris Sizemore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 May 2007 22:28 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk; backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas Importance: Low (golly, mr cridland, looks like you've got the expectations of a whole darn mailing list on your shoulders?!? frankly, tho, first things first: i've got a whole stack of holiday leave forms waiting for you to sign when you're able? ah, the multi-faceted responsibilities of a newly-appointed dept. head... ;-) best-- --cs) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Brian Butterworth Sent: Tue 5/22/2007 7:47 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas The BBC News facility that works with Windows Media Center (XP or Vista) is a much better way to view these videos (when it works) and does much of what you describe. Personally, I've stuffed all the video feed URLs on an iGoogle tab... Brian Butterworth HYPERLINK http://www.ukfree.tv/www.ukfree.tv _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 22 May 2007 18:35 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] This one's for Cridland... BBC A/V interface ideas Whilst on the subject of interface and UI design, I was thinking about the BBC site's design. So, the BBC has a burgeoning portfolio of online multimedia offerings, and they have their BBC Audio/Video link in the left bar of the BBC News site (and elsewhere on the site), but once you're actually on that page you're given a rather odd selection of videos. Why not give surfers the best of both worlds, having an AV player interface which takes elements from the old player and gives you a different menu for the regular Programmes (Panorama etc) and then gives you a category list? Sometimes I just want to watch all the most recent SciTech videos, for example, which was as easy as clicking through the list on the old player, but is nigh on impossible on the new one... There's only three videos per category! Consolidating all the available videos for a certain time period in sections on the page would be very useful and helpful, plus it would probably attract more eyes because when the content is easier to get to, people'll come back! I just feel there's room for improvement, and it'd be great to have a little area in the AV player where you can choose to watch N24, or the o' clock news broadcasts, or any of the programmes, all from one place with two clicks MAX - none of this faffing about having to go to the respective programme's page just to fire up the player with the relevant stream (although that can stay, because I'm sure people do it that way too if they're entering via that particular page). Just throwing these ideas into the pot.. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 21/05/2007 14:01 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 21/05/2007 14:01
RE: [backstage] attendin' Hackday
You should do a browser check for IE and then pass to a text- or simple-graphics only version, because many people still use IE (myself included, along with FF, Opera, etc, but I have to use IE for checking web designs) and to be honest 85% of the time I use IE because I'm used to it and its quirks (mode. heh). Was a bit perplexed by a download dialog appearing when I clicked through to your site (of course everything became clear after loading it up in FF, but it'd probably confuse the heck out of IE people!) -Original Message- From: ~:'' ありがとうございました。 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 May 2007 23:32 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Cc: Simon Cobb Subject: Re: [backstage] attendin' Hackday Simon, not sure if you're referring to me and http://www.peepo.co.uk, if so... what browser are you using? http://www.peepo.co.uk been tested with recent Opera and Firefox nightlies: http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/ http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-trunk/ it's taken me nearly three years bug filing, nudging and hassling developers to include keyboard accessibility. it's not part of the SVG1.1 specification, so it's amazing devotion by the relevant personnel. regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 18 May 2007, at 19:30, Simon Cobb wrote: argh that page makes me wish I was going. hackday clearly needs flash/ flex! JC, I'm clearly missing something, but how is the web page you link to navigable by keyboard only? I had to use my mouse. Tab, space, enter and the arrows - all standard conventional access keys produce no response from the page. What's the trick here? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Tom Scott Sent: Fri 18/05/2007 12:38 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] attendin' Hackday Okay - in an effort to cut off the massive flow of I'm attending, want to make a team traffic that I've already contributed to - and because there seems to be no other official discussion routes! - I've set up http://hackdaylondon.pbwiki.com as a strictly unofficial Wiki site. Hopefully it'll be a useful discussion point as it is for BarCamp - there's a starting template for team lists and interests, useful links, etc. etc. It'll probably get overtaken by an official discussion board at some point, but it should do in the meantime! -- Tom gareth rushgrove wrote: Yeah, Some good news! The emaili just popped into my inbox to brighten up my day. Now all I need is a good idea... Any other confirmed attendees? G - 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/ - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
What amused me most about ipernity was that to me it seemed almost like a total ripoff of flickr, but with lots more social functionality added and a slightly slinkier colourscheme - the fact that it's French, and some parts of the UI are only part-translated makes it that little bit quirkier :) -Original Message- From: Gordon Joly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 May 2007 23:42 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Cc: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk; Christopher Woods Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' At 02:08 +0100 16/5/07, Christopher Woods wrote: Keeping the Flickr train of thought for a second, have you seen ipernity.com recently? With ipernity you can: * Share your photos, music, videos * Create your multimedia blog * Invite your friends, your family * Discover the world Nice! Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
Whoah, that FlashEarth site is awesome! Love that interface, very subtle and really responsive. @ Simon Cobb: you another GMSV reader? ;) -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 May 2007 17:05 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' You may also like to try this site, it has access to Google, Microsoft, Ask and NASA mapping and satellite photos... http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=51.509979lon=-0.226138z=17.8; r=0src=msl It is easily iframed Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Cartwright Sent: 16 May 2007 09:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Yes, javascript is required for the full, slick experience, obviously. All parts of the site are still usable when JS is off (that I can see), and seemingly entirely accessible via the keyboard. With JS on, the keys work in most browsers, although some require you to have the map in focus. Of course Google Maps has a well documented API that could be used to create uber-accessible versions for different needs - http://www.google.com/apis/maps/ J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 21:32 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Jason Stephen, when javascript is disabled in Opera or Camino the message is: Your web browser is not fully supported by Google Maps I wonder is the code IE7 specific? none of the keys work for me on os x unless I'm missing something this hardly qualifies as accessible... regards Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 16:57, Jason Cartwright wrote: Disable javascript. Everything works fine. J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 16:47 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Richard, how does one use http://maps.google.com/ via the keyboard? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 13:22, Richard Lockwood wrote: This particular rant seems to be about useability rather than accessibility (although I appreciate the two are often closely related). Much as I often loathe Nielsen's writing - Jason's right, it's often all about Nielsen more than it is about any actual problems - in this case he's got a point. Web 2.0 sites are often completely unuseable - MySpace being a prime example, and Flickr (although it's been a while since I tried to use it to post a few pics and it may well have improved) another. Google Maps however, I'd hold up as a prime example of excellent intuitive design and useability. Just as the phrase Web 2.0 means different things to all people (I avoid it if at all possible as I feel it just makes the user sound like a buzzword spouting bandwagon-jumper who hasn't a clue what he's actually saying ;-) ), you can't tar all Web 2.0 sites with the same brush. Anyway, I've banged on far too long now, and this is what Nielsen wants - people to discuss HIM HIM HIM!!! Frankly, the less I hear of and from this tedious old bore, the happier I am. Cheers, Rich. On 5/15/07, ~:'' [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason Gordon any good Accessible Web 2.0 websites you'd care to plug? or are you in a rush? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 10:18, Jason Cartwright wrote: This is all my personal opinion, and I entirely disagree. Mr Nielsen has a history of spouting contrary opinions to court controversy and gain publicity for himself and his company. Web 2.0[1] (for me at least) incorporates best practice methodologies of developing to standards (and the consequences of this, such as progressive enhancement etc) and trusting users as co- developers [2]. These core principals of Web 2.0 encourage good design. As with any technology, Web 2.0 will be misused - it's not the technology's fault that this happens, it's the designer/developer that fouled it up's problem. That doesn't look as good when you're goading mainstream journos into writing about you though, does it? J [1] I've stuck all these in quotes, as I think Web 2.0 means different things to different people. [2] Tim O'Reilly -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ?:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 08:48 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
Odeo.com is a classic example of a Web2 site which looks very nice but unfortunately suffers from a REAL lack of usability. I actually used the site to add a new entry to my podcast on there, and then ranted about how hard it was to do so (and half of their in-page embedded players STILL don't work for ANY podcast on there, it's just mad!) Might do another rant too, and email them the link to listen to it... Fortunately though odeo is among the minority (even odder considering the same people are behind twitter, and that's such an easy site to use!) Sites like Newsvine and Flickr really get my vote for being great Web2 standard-bearers, I don't use Flickr that much (I'd rather keep my pictures on my own site, and I don't use it enough to bother with Pro status) but for the most part I've not had any problem using Web2 sites. The whole nature of them being dynamic and not having to wait for clicks to load entirely new pages adds to the experience for me. Nielsen loves going off on one. I've often thought he should practice what he preaches and spruce up his site a little bit, it's always reeked of 1996. -Original Message- From: Stephen Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 15 May 2007 17:10 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' Well you can scroll around with the arrow keys and zoom in and out with + and -. Not sure how you change to satellite using keys, but I'm sure its in there. ~:'' ありがとうございました。 wrote: Richard, how does one use http://maps.google.com/ via the keyboard? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 13:22, Richard Lockwood wrote: This particular rant seems to be about useability rather than accessibility (although I appreciate the two are often closely related). Much as I often loathe Nielsen's writing - Jason's right, it's often all about Nielsen more than it is about any actual problems - in this case he's got a point. Web 2.0 sites are often completely unuseable - MySpace being a prime example, and Flickr (although it's been a while since I tried to use it to post a few pics and it may well have improved) another. Google Maps however, I'd hold up as a prime example of excellent intuitive design and useability. Just as the phrase Web 2.0 means different things to all people (I avoid it if at all possible as I feel it just makes the user sound like a buzzword spouting bandwagon-jumper who hasn't a clue what he's actually saying ;-) ), you can't tar all Web 2.0 sites with the same brush. Anyway, I've banged on far too long now, and this is what Nielsen wants - people to discuss HIM HIM HIM!!! Frankly, the less I hear of and from this tedious old bore, the happier I am. Cheers, Rich. On 5/15/07, ~:'' ありがとうございました。 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jason Gordon any good Accessible Web 2.0 websites you'd care to plug? or are you in a rush? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd On 15 May 2007, at 10:18, Jason Cartwright wrote: This is all my personal opinion, and I entirely disagree. Mr Nielsen has a history of spouting contrary opinions to court controversy and gain publicity for himself and his company. Web 2.0[1] (for me at least) incorporates best practice methodologies of developing to standards (and the consequences of this, such as progressive enhancement etc) and trusting users as co-developers [2]. These core principals of Web 2.0 encourage good design. As with any technology, Web 2.0 will be misused - it's not the technology's fault that this happens, it's the designer/developer that fouled it up's problem. That doesn't look as good when you're goading mainstream journos into writing about you though, does it? J [1] I've stuck all these in quotes, as I think Web 2.0 means different things to different people. [2] Tim O'Reilly -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ~:'' Sent: 15 May 2007 08:48 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] Jakob Nielsen: Web 2.0 'neglecting good design' Jakob Nielsen: Web 2.0 'neglecting good design' http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6653119.stm seems to have copied my pitch for hackday ~: has he been invited? was I? did anyone else have ideas or requirements for an accessible SVG front end? cheers Jonathan Chetwynd Accessibility Consultant on Learning Disabilities and the Internet http://www.eas-i.co.uk - 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/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/
RE: [backstage] BBC News 24 now streaming live - to your PDA
We're on the same wavelength... I've actually compiled all the BBC links I use onto a site formatted for my Vario 2 (or any =QVGA mobile device) - http://3g.totallyowns.co.uk It's uber-simple at the moment, I'll probably make it look a bit nicer and probably more dynamic (to make it easier to edit) and there's not much else on there at the moment aside from the Beeb and CNN Pipeline streams because that's all I watch and listen to! Hopefully others'll find it useful. All the links are just regular WMV/WMA links (with some of the alternative RP links too) and they'll work on any WMP-supported device afaik. _ From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 15 May 2007 01:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC News 24 now streaming live - to your PDA Right... a bit of PDA fiddling and I now have News 24 on both my iPaq PDA (wireless) and my Lobster 700TV phone (USB) - both Windows Mobile 5... If you have a Windows PDA, open Internet Explorer and go to http://ukfree.tv/24.htm and click the link... Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv http://www.ukfree.tv/ _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 15 May 2007 00:09 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC News 24 now streaming live! Just one more thought... How about having a nice short URL to get the live streams up, something like: http://bbc.co.uk/live/news24 would be much more 'viral' than: http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/player/nol/newsid_661/newsid_66 15400?redirect=6615433.stm http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/player/nol/newsid_661/newsid_6 615400?redirect=6615433.stmnews=1nbram=1bbram=1nbwm=1bbwm=1 news=1nbram=1bbram=1nbwm=1bbwm=1 if you see what I mean... I would be short enough to pop in a signature, and not fail for people with email systems that can't cope with multiline URLs. All you need a folder called 'live' with a few redirect scripts... easy. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv http://www.ukfree.tv/ _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 14 May 2007 21:52 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC News 24 now streaming live! There was a BBC press release to the effect that it's permanent. http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/05_may/08/news24 .shtml Now all I need is a Vista sidebar News 24 gadget... Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv http://www.ukfree.tv/ _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 10 May 2007 02:57 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] BBC News 24 now streaming live! I just noticed whilst reading an article on the BBC News site that there was a link to watch BBC News 24 live - I clicked and it's streaming now! Does anybody know if this is a permanent addition to the bouquet of online services from the Beeb, or just a temporary thing due to some breaking news in the recent past which I happened to miss? No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.6/794 - Release Date: 08/05/2007 14:23 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.0/801 - Release Date: 12/05/2007 18:40 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.0/801 - Release Date: 12/05/2007 18:40 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.0/801 - Release Date: 12/05/2007 18:40 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.0/801 - Release Date: 12/05/2007 18:40 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.0/801 - Release Date: 12/05/2007 18:40
[backstage] iPlayer invite emails
Just checked through my backlog of emails and I noticed (with glee) that I had one inviting me to apply for the iPlayer public trial... Sweet! So, I filled it in sharpish and fired it off (and I hope it filled it all out correctly, the more I think about it the more I'm not sure whether I chose Yes for 'are you over 16' haha).. Just wondering if anybody on here knows what the average turnaround time'll be for confirmation and activation emails if I do get accepted onto the trial? Ok, relatively stupid question now, but I'm curious: I noticed my trial ID's ridiculously large (77,802,xxx) - surely it can't have started at 1 and gone up sequentially for each tester, right? Last time I counted (yes, I did the last census on my own, it took a while) there was only circa 60m residents in the UK? :D
RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design'
Keeping the Flickr train of thought for a second, have you seen ipernity.com recently? -Original Message- From: Gordon Joly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 15 May 2007 23:22 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Web 2.0 'neglecting good Accessible design' At 21:03 +0100 15/5/07, Christopher Woods wrote: Odeo.com is a classic example of a Web2 site which looks very nice but unfortunately suffers from a REAL lack of usability. I actually used the site to add a new entry to my podcast on there, and then ranted about how hard it was to do so (and half of their in-page embedded players STILL don't work for ANY podcast on there, it's just mad!) Might do another rant too, and email them the link to listen to it... Fortunately though odeo is among the minority (even odder considering the same people are behind twitter, and that's such an easy site to use!) Sites like Newsvine and Flickr really get my vote for being great Web2 standard-bearers, I don't use Flickr that much (I'd rather keep my pictures on my own site, and I don't use it enough to bother with Pro status) but for the most part I've not had any problem using Web2 sites. The whole nature of them being dynamic and not having to wait for clicks to load entirely new pages adds to the experience for me. Nielsen loves going off on one. I've often thought he should practice what he preaches and spruce up his site a little bit, it's always reeked of 1996. My take is that FLICKR is a social software site with pcitures, whereas Webshots (for example) is about photo albums. Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] The Proms
iCal's the Mac calendar program (full name iCalendar). iCal is also the shortened name of the open standard (RFC 2445, thanks Wikipedia) calendar format, one version of which is used by iCal the program. http://www.apple.com/ical/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICalendar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICal :) -Original Message- From: Dave Whitehead [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 May 2007 00:24 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] The Proms Whats ical/ics? - Original Message - From: Sam Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 11:12 PM Subject: [backstage] The Proms Since the bbc don't provide an ical feed of the proms, and the only way I remember anything is if it's in my diary, I've put together a little script which creates an ical feed of all the proms, and dumps out some XML while I was at it which others may have fun playing with: http://sebastian.foriru.co.uk/~sams/bbc/proms for ics, xml and perl code. Hopefully someone else will find it useful. Cheers Sam www.disruptiveproactivity.com -- We can't spell failure without U R A - 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/ - 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/ - 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/
[backstage] BBC News 24 now streaming live!
I just noticed whilst reading an article on the BBC News site that there was a link to watch BBC News 24 live - I clicked and it's streaming now! Does anybody know if this is a permanent addition to the bouquet of online services from the Beeb, or just a temporary thing due to some breaking news in the recent past which I happened to miss?
RE: [backstage] DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY
They are indeed illegal, didn't stop Kevin Rose from making one on his (now-defunct) podcast show. They're illegal in the US too :D I for one will be looking forward to repeaters on the tube - though I don't live in London whenever I am in London I always feel like the Tube's a bit of a black spot when it comes to comms. Emergency comms, in particular. It makes sense to have signal on the underground, particularly given the recent past. -Original Message- From: Mark Hewis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 May 2007 10:44 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY Would a portable device/wearable device which blocked/scrambled GSM/Wireless/3-G frequencies within a 2 metre radius be illegal? I imagine it would be easier to make than blocking the sound -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Cobb Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 10:19 AM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY well that's just great. That was the last place on my commute where I was safe from azzholes in cheap suits shouting about formulating an email to fire off to the usual suspects and Dibs, you old [EMAIL PROTECTED] - how's it going? I pulled in 20k this week etc Shame it won't be limited to email/ web connex from wireless devices. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Cartwright Sent: 03 May 2007 09:58 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY Apparently TFL are trialling mobiles on the tube next year... http://www.tfl.gov.uk/modalpages/4577.aspx They are also talking about repeating DAB down the tunnels as well, which is interesting. J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Ockenden Sent: 02 May 2007 18:04 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY i see your problems and raise you life in hong kong, where i picked up a phone for HK$300 in the 3-shop, no contract, and after two months of local and international calls had a gentle SMS reminder I should pop into the shop and pay my bill of HK$29.50. that's about £2. AND the phones work on the MTR/underground. funny though there's no public toilets on the MTR here, and the corp is saying it's technically impossible blah blah blah just like London says its impossible to put in aircon and phone signals blah blah.. maybe a technology swap is in order. London gives us its toilet technology and we give London aircon and mobile phones on the tube! On 03/05/07, Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: These horror stories remind me of the companies who either accost you in the street or cold-call your mobile promising cut-price tariffs, but who don't actually work for the companies they sell contracts for - it all seems very shady stuff to me, even if they are legit. Those 6 month free deals where you send in your previous bills to get credit are all very dodgy too, even if people (including some of my coursemates) do it - I don't like the idea of handing over bills containing personal details to some random company I don't even know much about. What protection do you have? Why even bother with third party mobile companies when you can get pretty good deals through their retail outlets? I got a brand new smartphone for not a lot (less than I'd paid the previous year for an older smartphone with O2), and a great deal on a contract with unlimited data, and that was with T-Mobile retail (and I've not seen a better deal online yet)... I know these emails are a bit OT, but does anybody have a recommendation or list of reputable third-party mobile companies through which you can buy contracts which are cheaper than going direct to retail? Reply off-list if you have info but don't want to add another message to the thread (though I don't think many people would mind personally). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 May 2007 16:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY Quoting Timothy-john Bishop [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi I just been ripped off! Tried to get a new mobile and used this company - they charged a non-refundable £199.00 to my credit card - even though their webiste says its 1.99 - after a week of phoning them they are refusing to give it back! they are called mobilerainbow.co.uk DO NOT USE THEM! I would suggest calling your credit card company and initiating a charge-back for a dispute
RE: [backstage] Cridland heads to Beeb
Oo blimey - looks like we have a man inside now! How useful... -Original Message- From: Peter Bowyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 May 2007 15:22 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Cridland heads to Beeb On 03/05/07, Mario Menti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://tbites.com/2007/05/cridland-heads-to-beeb Congrats James! Eeew! We're clearly not worthy! -- Peter Bowyer Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY
These horror stories remind me of the companies who either accost you in the street or cold-call your mobile promising cut-price tariffs, but who don't actually work for the companies they sell contracts for - it all seems very shady stuff to me, even if they are legit. Those 6 month free deals where you send in your previous bills to get credit are all very dodgy too, even if people (including some of my coursemates) do it - I don't like the idea of handing over bills containing personal details to some random company I don't even know much about. What protection do you have? Why even bother with third party mobile companies when you can get pretty good deals through their retail outlets? I got a brand new smartphone for not a lot (less than I'd paid the previous year for an older smartphone with O2), and a great deal on a contract with unlimited data, and that was with T-Mobile retail (and I've not seen a better deal online yet)... I know these emails are a bit OT, but does anybody have a recommendation or list of reputable third-party mobile companies through which you can buy contracts which are cheaper than going direct to retail? Reply off-list if you have info but don't want to add another message to the thread (though I don't think many people would mind personally). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 May 2007 16:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY Quoting Timothy-john Bishop [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi I just been ripped off! Tried to get a new mobile and used this company - they charged a non-refundable £199.00 to my credit card - even though their webiste says its 1.99 - after a week of phoning them they are refusing to give it back! they are called mobilerainbow.co.uk DO NOT USE THEM! I would suggest calling your credit card company and initiating a charge-back for a dispute. Give them all the details, and in my experience they side with you and give the money back. I'm not sure of the equivilent for a debut card transaction. I see your mobilerainbow.co.uk, and raise you; http://www.themobileoutlet.co.uk I spoke to them over a week ago, and ordered a phone. They said its in stock, and can be delivered in 2-3 days. Now they are saying that they are waiting for a delivery and have no idea when I can get it. Also they want to charge £20 to cancel the order, and they are not answering the customer services numbers, nor answwering emails. When I finally get through, they said they would ring back, and then they would email. But nothing. Tom This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
Indeed, it's something I as a music tech student have both seen myself and have been told by tutors - and it makes sense. I remember putting up with dodgy projections in cinemas because the sound was alright, but the one time I was watching one of the Pirates films and the centre speaker started pumping out 20kHz digital distortion my head felt like it was going to explode. What DAB radio do you have? I'm lucky enough to have a (still-operational!) Wavefinder, which is literally 100% digital signal path until the output stage - directly sends the raw MPEG stream to the PC which decodes it and plays it back which is going through my monitors (speakers, not screens ;) and I can _definitely_ tell the difference between FM and digital, even if I do nothing more than hook up my MP3 player to my line level input on my audio interface. I've heard digital artefacts on Radio 3 on DAB. If we're ever going to turn off analogue, that problem HAS to be fixed. Also, the issues of compressing already-compressed material, the way commercial stations just send their FM-processed signal to the digital encoder without changing it... Plus the technical limitations of MPEG Layer-2 to boot. I think half the problem is that the vast majority of people don't have a decent setup for listening to their radio - and the stations they listen to don't really value preserving the quality of the source audio above making it the LOUDEST on the dial and getting listener figures. The BBC is uniquely positioned to spearhead the charge against the loss of quality in radio broadcasting, including the preservation of quality in their broadcasts. The Beeb shouldn't be pushed into putting more and more services on their already strained multiplexes by commercial expectations, because they'll never achieve the kind of quality they had on launch if they carry on doing that. These little portable DAB radios are both great and awful for the industry, and for quality standards in general. People don't expect the quality, the quality will disappear. -Original Message- From: Andrew Bowden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 19 April 2007 10:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial I have a DAB radio and I confess I can't tell the difference between (say) Radio 2 on FM and Radio 2 on DAB. I know some audiophiles who look at me in disbelief when I say that. And anyway it's actually a slight lie. When I try to compare them, the thing I notice most is the FM hiss. I'm far better on visual artifacts I must say. Interestingly though a colleague of mine from BBC News told me that surveys have shown people are far more likely to put up with a dodgy video picture if the sound is clean and crisp. - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
Many thanks for your time - unfortunately you did not meet the recruitment criteria for this trial. Ditto me, how could I possibly not qualify? I'm 21, I have a fast broadband connection, I also am an active mobile data user with a flatrate package and I'm in that perfect area of candidacy age-wise (18-24 male bracket)... Or maybe that's why I wasn't accepted... Maybe I should say I'm a 74 year old grandma of 4? -Original Message- From: Toni Sant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 18 April 2007 19:40 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial Here's what I got: Many thanks for your time - unfortunately you did not meet the recruitment criteria for this trial. Is there a list of recruitment criteria? Cheers... ...t.s. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester Sent: 18 April 2007 16:40 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] BBC Archive trial Hi All, Outside of the framework debate... The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors. Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now. There is no press launch or anything like that yet, so your really the first people to find out about this. So do it today before the 20,000 places disappear. Cheers, Ian Forrester Senior Producer, BBC Backstage BC4 B4, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7RJ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: 02080083965 - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] OS choice, assume= ass u me
Pfft. I'm rather dismissive of numbers and comparisons such as these, particularly when over 74.3% of all statistics are made up anyway. -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 April 2007 16:53 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] OS choice, assume= ass u me Yes, but you can always get a massive percentage increase from something when it starts out at 1.75% of the market. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 April 2007 14:47 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] OS choice, assume= ass u me I realised the error after sending the message ;-( Still, a significant rise for the Macs and a further indication that the OS ground does appear to be shifting. Would be interesting to know if that is reflected in stats for other companies. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 2:31 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] OS choice, assume= ass u me It would be for one month, but it's actually for sixteen... Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 April 2007 14:21 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] OS choice, assume= ass u me Seems like a lot of Mac growth in a single month.. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 2:04 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] OS choice, assume= ass u me Isn't the first, great mistake that people make with statistics to believe that everyone else does what they do? Assume makes an ass out of u and me... Can I refer people to this message, just posted which shows a 64% increase in Mac usage (to 2.87%), and a 1% drop in Windows usage (to 96.39%)... Real hard evidence, people! Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv --- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Cridland Sent: 06 April 2007 20:36 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats I'm coming late to this discussion, as always, but if you're interested, here's the information from virginradio.co.uk (sitewide). Visits by operating system in March 2007 (compared with November 2005) Windows: 96.39% (was 97.45%) Macintosh: 2.87% (was 1.75%) Linux: 0.48% (was 0.55%) Unknown: 0.25% (was 0.21%) SunOS: 0.01% (was 0.03%) FreeBSD: 34 visits OS/2: 5 visits OpenBSD 1 visit -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kirk Northrop Sent: 10 April 2007 12:57 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] OS choice Jason Cartwright wrote: I've recently 'switched' [1] (damn you Apple marketing dept!) from an XP desktop to a Macbook as my main computer. Its been almost flawless (unlike all the Vista problems we keep hearing about), and a bit of revelation after being a complete Windowsite since 3.0. Sorry, but Me too. Almost exactly the same story. On a Mac Mini though, so it's a bit slow! -- From the North, this is Kirk - 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/754 - Release Date: 09/04/2007 22:59 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/754 - Release Date: 09/04/2007 22:59 - 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/ - 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/754 - Release Date: 09/04/2007 22:59 -- No virus found in this outgoing
RE: [backstage] Multicast Trial
... That are totally reliant on the willingness of each individual higher education institution to implement multicast on their own internal networks to enable the functionality of the wider ja.net network as a whole. I think the whole situation boils down to the simple fact that it's just not cost-effective enough for most service providers to actually implement multicast, so they don't bother. Which is really annoying, because it's really holding back the takeup of IPTV imho. That, and the unfortunate situation most ISPs have whereby they're burdened with BT's prohibitive pricing structure, to boot. The mobile phone trial isn't multicast, is it? -Original Message- From: Gordon Joly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 April 2007 22:42 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Cc: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk; Brian Butterworth Subject: RE: [backstage] Multicast Trial At 09:51 +0100 10/4/07, Brian Butterworth wrote: Has there EVER been a multicast system that's worked well? I tried it on a large BT network some years ago and when it worked it was a network management nightmare. Thankfully it worked badly or not-at-all Brian Butterworth Janet and other research networks have had multicast networks for at least a decade. Gordon -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] Multicast Trial
As far as I understand it, it was more a case of the BBC (and ITV) trialing broadcasting via the multicast infrastructure - moreso than it was a trial of consumers actually watching the content. I was on a ja.net provider for an entire year and not once could I actually watch the multicast content - due to the University's unwillingness to update their own internal network to be multicast-enabled. I got multicast working ONCE, on a neighbour's ISP - but he was paying a LOT for his access, and as a business customer of their he actually worked with the isp to get multicast enabled. My parents are on Zen, and even though that's one of the apparently-supported multicast ISPs for the trial: no luck. My own ISP, a fully-LLU provider (Be*) is STILL dragging their feet on multicast enablement, although they have said it's on the cards. Don't know when though. Ironic that they're still unsure as to when they'll get their network multicast enabled - and they're in the rare position to actually benefit from multicast enablement, it'd save them money and be A Good Thing in the long run (imho), but as usual red tape and the 'left hand, right hand' syndrome have both affected progress. So, what a useful trial that's been! I agree with the sentiments of making the mobile content available for users to access, maybe behind a user/password authentication page like the multicast trial, but it should be there nonetheless - by not giving users the chance to join the trial, people like me who have the appropriate handsets, the relevant mobile data subscriptions AND the willingness to feed back, the closed trial seems rather pointless, more a propaganda-for-show thing more than anything else. /jealous/bitter -Original Message- From: George Bray [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 April 2007 09:00 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] Multicast Trial On 4/2/07, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's already been a technical trial with live streaming of BBC channels - the Multicast trial http://www.bbc.co.uk/multicast/ Hows the multicast trial going, by the way? I'm interested to know if there was interest and enthusiasm from your UK ISPs, and whether the speed of their peering links allowed for error free UDP multicast. George -- George Bray - University of Canberra, Australia - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] Browser Stats
I'd take issue with that sweeping stateent - pretty much all of my student friends have laptops, some have both. I live in a house with five other people - in total there's three mac users and three windows users. Me, I'm a Windows expert, one of my housemates is a Mac expert. The other three are more 'users' than 'power users' - but whenever there's a problem with one of the Macs, they usually end up coming to me for help (and I can usually sort the problem out even though I hate macs and osx). The mac users can't make head nor tail of how the OS works - they just don't understand it. It's like watching my mum use a computer - she uses it by rote, she doesn't understand 'how' it works or how it achieves what it does. Inded, MANY of the more technically-minded people on my course either use Windows or ave both a pc and a mac - and I only use a mac because I have to (music tech and production course, we do lotsof work with DAWs and protools et al, and that's always traditionally been a mac-led industry). I often find that people I speak to who have PCs understand how they work better than the people with Macs - they're much more newbie users. Of course, there's many MANY expert Mac users out there, but to me it seems that age range of people I hang around with seem to buy macs much more for the style impact, because they look pretty, than for what they offer technology-wise. It depresses me, we need some kind of intelligence test which will bar a machine from starting up if they get it wrong, that'll weed out the people who are clueless users fast enough (and solve problems like phishing and botnets - which would then indirectly lessen the problem of spam - imho, because only people who don't know how to secure their machines fall prey to those kinds of social engineering). /elitist/rant Personaly I always prefer to remain platform-agnostic, and it really annoys me when I have to stay locked in to any one platform, whether it's windows OR mac. After using Windows for uch a long time, there are many small things which REALLY annoy me about using OSX - to the point where I can consciously feel my productivity worsening as a result. That hacks me off. -Original Message- From: Matthew Lamont [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 30 March 2007 15:03 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Browser Stats I think that it depends on what your demographic is. If you are talking about people who barely know how to switch on a computer, then you are going to get windows users. For people who actually use a computer for what it is intended, then, for instance in the scientific community, 50% of people use Macs because of the UNIX base, then 30% are Linux users and the rest use Windows. Cheers, Matt Thank you to those who donated to my rowing challenge. We managed to raise over £3000 ($6000) for Teesside Hospice. England expects that every man will do his duty - Admiral Horatio Lord Nelson, 21st October 1805 -- -- Matthew A. C. Lamont [EMAIL PROTECTED] WNSL - West, Room 309phone: (203) 432 5834 Physics Department, Yale University fax: (203) 432 8926 P.O. Box 208124 272 Whitney Avenue New Haven, CT 06520-8124, USA -- -- - On 30 Mar 2007, at 08:11, Kirk Northrop wrote: Andy wrote: I can see how it got Netscape, FireFox is derived from the Netscape code base, but how it got from the word Linux into the word Mac I don't know. And this was for a user agent that was stating it's OS as Linux. Simple - Not Windows probably means Mac OS. In a tiny amount of cases it means Linux, or DOS or OS/2 etc, but even this is a tiny percentage compared to Mac OS, and anyone using such an OS is likely to be tech minded. -- From the North, this is Kirk - 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/ - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC announces 3G mobile syndication trial with Orange, Vodafone and 3
Oh for CRYING out loud - why not a partnership with T-Mobile? They have the best 3G HSDPA network in the UK! And I'm on T-Mobile! Typical. -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 29 March 2007 11:46 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] BBC announces 3G mobile syndication trial with Orange, Vodafone and 3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/03 _march/29/3g.s html Can we have the BBC one, BBC THREE and (in particular) BBC News 24 streams online please? If you can stream them on a mobile, it would be useful if they could be provided online in the same format (I mean, that's what you are doing anyway...) Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.20/737 - Release Date: 28/03/2007 16:23 - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC announces 3G mobile syndication trial with Orange, Vodafone and 3
Still, considering TMO have the best 3G network in the UK, and (imo) the best takeup - and selection - of flat-rate data packages, it seems a bit short-sighted to run these 'public trials' without including TMO as a carrier! Orange and Vodafone are ridiculously expensive data-wise, only 3 could be classed as a competitor with TM 3G-wise. Maybe I'm just jealous. ;) Still annoying that I've even been a member of the multicast trials for approaching a year now, and I've only ever managed to make the multicast streams actually WORK once - and that was in Halls, and then two weeks later they changed their network topology and multicast stopped working! And my ISP is stalling on multicast enablement (Be*) when they're one of the few ISPs who would actually properly benefit from a multicast-enabled network given their LLU infrastructure... Sigh. When the iPlayer is rolled out, will the mobile streams (and/or access to them) fall under the iP umbrella? I'd love to be able to authenticate with an iPlayer username which I've set up on my desktop client, then be able to watch mobile-formatted streams of the same channels via my mobile device - that'd make the morning commute so much less painful! Huge PITA to set up though :D -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 29 March 2007 14:03 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC announces 3G mobile syndication trial with Orange, Vodafone and 3 Chris, I wouldn't worry about it, the service is going to be even worse than the DAB service used by Virgin Mobile! Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 29 March 2007 13:51 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC announces 3G mobile syndication trial with Orange, Vodafone and 3 Oh for CRYING out loud - why not a partnership with T-Mobile? They have the best 3G HSDPA network in the UK! And I'm on T-Mobile! Typical. -Original Message- From: Brian Butterworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 29 March 2007 11:46 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] BBC announces 3G mobile syndication trial with Orange, Vodafone and 3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/03 _march/29/3g.s html Can we have the BBC one, BBC THREE and (in particular) BBC News 24 streams online please? If you can stream them on a mobile, it would be useful if they could be provided online in the same format (I mean, that's what you are doing anyway...) Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.20/737 - Release Date: 28/03/2007 16:23 - 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/ - 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.20/737 - Release Date: 28/03/2007 16:23 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.20/737 - Release Date: 28/03/2007 16:23 - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] xmltv.radiotimes.com
Bleb.org/tv is something I use quite often (when I don't have my laptop with Digiguide to hand on it) but unfortunately they can't show ITV listings due to legal reasons at the mo - believe a solution is being sought at the moment. Still, VERY handy site. And who watches ITV anyway. ;) -Original Message- From: Angelo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 29 March 2007 23:11 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] xmltv.radiotimes.com It's not even Safari compliant, yet. Does anyone have a better alternative with Freeview listings? On 29/03/07, John Wesley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 29/03/07, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know what's happened to this? I'm getting a 404 from http://xmltv.radiotimes.com/xmltv/channels.dat and from each of the individual channel pages (eg: http://xmltv.radiotimes.com/xmltv/92.dat) - and RadioTimes.com isn't responding. Can anyone shed any light? Cheers, R. They were doing some changes the other day as the user interface stuff now required you to login with a username and password rather than just your email address. I guess they're updating more stuff, it's not exactly the most stable of sites at the best of times... jonh -- Angelo - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC site statistics
Something I noticed earlier today - the BBC News pages show how many pages have been served in the past minute, and that cycles round with other facts about the site... When I was looking earlier this morning (around middayish) it showed over 73,000 pages served THAT MINUTE - that's insane! Right now it's saying 82,357 people are reading stories on the site right now. ! Sometimes I forget just how massive the audience is for the beebnews pages... -Original Message- From: Richard Lockwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 March 2007 11:22 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC site statistics I've always found that the more technical or geeky a site is, the higher %age of non-IE users you'll find. For a consumer website - IE all the way. Which goes to prove my point that real people use IE, geeks use Firefox. :-) Yesterday's stats from a (very much consumer-orientated) site that I manage: IE (total) 87.3% made up of: IE 5.5 - 0.1% IE 6 - 40.1% IE 7 - 47.1% Safari - 0.8% Opera - 0.6% FF (all flavours) - 11.3% Not a single hit from anything else. Cheers, R. On 3/26/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just for the record, I have a UK-focused site, so I have these figures for March 2007: www.ukfree.tv Internet explorer is 66% of all traffic. of which 7.0 52% (34.63% of total); 6.0 47% (31.4% of total), 5.0 (0.8% of total) (Firefox is 28.78% of total, Opera 1% of total) On the OS front, I get Windows NT/XP/Vista: 88%, Mac 4.8%, Windows 98 2.85 and XWindows 1.26% Hope this is useful too. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Cridland Sent: 25 March 2007 16:57 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC site statistics On 3/23/07, Allan Jardine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm wondering if anyone knows any of the site statistics for the BBC web-sites. In particular what the browser market share is, as I am wondering how much longer to support IE5 and 5.5 for certain sites - depending on their application and target market. I thing the BBC site user agent stats would be really interesting in this area, and possibly one of the least skewed se of statistics on the net for typical user agents. Not particularly helpful, but http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/newmedia/technical/browser_support.sht ml#support_table is a useful guide to what the BBC supports and what it doesn't. From the sites I can pull stats from, these are the stats for the last seven days... www.mediauk.com Internet Explorer: 85% of all traffic of which: 6.0: 59.09%; 7.0: 39.9%; rest: 1.01% james.cridland.net Internet Explorer: 44% of all traffic of which: 6.0: 60.91%; 7.0: 38.42%; rest: 0.67% www.virginradio.co.uk Internet Explorer: 85% of all traffic of which: 6.0: 62.28% ; 7.0: 37.14%; rest 0.58% Particularly based on the Media UK and Virgin Radio stats, my own thoughts would therefore be to drop any support for MSIE5 and MSIE5.5. Hope that's useful. -- http://james.cridland.net/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.17/731 - Release Date: 23/03/2007 15:27 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.18/733 - Release Date: 25/03/2007 11:07 - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] BBC site statistics
Here's a thought regarding subtitling - I know that manual subtitling or on-the-fly subtitling of live programmes has come along leaps and bounds, with voice recognition technology (which sometimes kicks up amusing misunderstandings, but seems to work very well) - how long do you think it'll be before it's all fully automatic, with the software performing voice recognition on the actual soundtrack in realtime? After seeing the lip reading segment on the last Click, it got me thinking... Who does the Beeb's subs now? -Original Message- From: Jason Cartwright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 March 2007 17:41 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC site statistics The annual report designers like big numbers too.. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/review_report_r esearch/bb cannualreport.pdf Lots of boxes saying interesting things like: 56% of children in Great Britain aged 7-15 accessed bbc.co.uk/CBBC in December 2005 91.6% of programming on BBC One was subtitled in 2005/2006 etc etc J -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 26 March 2007 17:26 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC site statistics Something I noticed earlier today - the BBC News pages show how many pages have been served in the past minute, and that cycles round with other facts about the site... When I was looking earlier this morning (around middayish) it showed over 73,000 pages served THAT MINUTE - that's insane! Right now it's saying 82,357 people are reading stories on the site right now. ! Sometimes I forget just how massive the audience is for the beebnews pages... -Original Message- From: Richard Lockwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 March 2007 11:22 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC site statistics I've always found that the more technical or geeky a site is, the higher %age of non-IE users you'll find. For a consumer website - IE all the way. Which goes to prove my point that real people use IE, geeks use Firefox. :-) Yesterday's stats from a (very much consumer-orientated) site that I manage: IE (total) 87.3% made up of: IE 5.5 - 0.1% IE 6 - 40.1% IE 7 - 47.1% Safari - 0.8% Opera - 0.6% FF (all flavours) - 11.3% Not a single hit from anything else. Cheers, R. On 3/26/07, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just for the record, I have a UK-focused site, so I have these figures for March 2007: www.ukfree.tv Internet explorer is 66% of all traffic. of which 7.0 52% (34.63% of total); 6.0 47% (31.4% of total), 5.0 (0.8% of total) (Firefox is 28.78% of total, Opera 1% of total) On the OS front, I get Windows NT/XP/Vista: 88%, Mac 4.8%, Windows 98 2.85 and XWindows 1.26% Hope this is useful too. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Cridland Sent: 25 March 2007 16:57 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC site statistics On 3/23/07, Allan Jardine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm wondering if anyone knows any of the site statistics for the BBC web-sites. In particular what the browser market share is, as I am wondering how much longer to support IE5 and 5.5 for certain sites - depending on their application and target market. I thing the BBC site user agent stats would be really interesting in this area, and possibly one of the least skewed se of statistics on the net for typical user agents. Not particularly helpful, but http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/newmedia/technical/browser_support.sht ml#support_table is a useful guide to what the BBC supports and what it doesn't. From the sites I can pull stats from, these are the stats for the last seven days... www.mediauk.com Internet Explorer: 85% of all traffic of which: 6.0: 59.09%; 7.0: 39.9%; rest: 1.01% james.cridland.net Internet Explorer: 44% of all traffic of which: 6.0: 60.91%; 7.0: 38.42%; rest: 0.67% www.virginradio.co.uk Internet Explorer: 85% of all traffic of which: 6.0: 62.28% ; 7.0: 37.14%; rest 0.58% Particularly based on the Media UK and Virgin Radio stats, my own thoughts would therefore be to drop any support for MSIE5 and MSIE5.5. Hope that's useful. -- http://james.cridland.net/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.17/731 - Release Date: 23/03/2007 15:27 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version
RE: [backstage] World Service Schedule...Missing
On a related note (schedule information), I've noticed that Digiguide doesn't offer listings information for some of the regional BBC stations like BBC WM for example - it offers some but listings for stations like BBC WM are only available on the BBC whatson subsite. Is there a particular reason for this, or are the listings available elsewhere in digiguide format so I can integrate them into my Digiguide channel matrix? Christopher _ From: Keith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 March 2007 12:04 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] World Service Schedule...Missing Whups, yeh looks like the API is fine. I forgot to increase the limit, so it was only showing two days :) Cheers, Keith Living under the Jackboot Australia is merely an island of Antarctica, and of no further significance Andrew McParland wrote: Hi Keith, I can see that the World Service page is empty from Friday and the World Service people are aware, but our API [1] seems fine to me, e.g. for Saturday [2]. Did you have a specific problem? Andrew BBC Research [1] http://www0.rdthdo.bbc.co.uk/services/api/ [2] http://www0.rdthdo.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/api/query.pl?method=bbc.schedule.getPr ogrammes http://www0.rdthdo.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/api/query.pl?method=bbc.schedule.getP rogrammeschannel_id=BBCWrldstart=2007-03-17T09:45:00Zend=2007-03-17T23:59 :59Zlimit=100detail=schedule channel_id=BBCWrldstart=2007-03-17T09:45:00Zend=2007-03-17T23:59:59Zlimi t=100detail=schedule On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 03:15:49PM +0800, Keith wrote: http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/schedules/internet/wsradio_weekly.shtml Looks like there's a bit of a problem with the schedule data from Friday onwards. The API would appear to be similarly affected. Keith Living under the Jackboot Australia is merely an island of Antarctica, and of no further significance - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] University Tour update
I sent you an email via your cubicgarden site's contact form a while back but never received a response; did you receive it? -Original Message- From: Mr I Forrester [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 March 2007 06:09 To: BBC Backstage Subject: [backstage] University Tour update Hi All, The backstage university tour continues this week. *Newcastle* Monday evening we're at the other bar in Newcastle for a social event, which your all invited to. - http://upcoming.org/event/162050/. Tuesday were at Newcastle University during the day, and a few of us might go out for a meal afterwards. On Wednesday were at Northumbria University before driving home. *Ravensbourne, London* Thursday afternoon/early evening we're going to fight it out with the SU night at Ravensbourne college. I'm sure some of us will end up at La Pasta in Bromley at some point afterwards. *Hull* Friday were up in Hull University but the Scarborough Campus. We're talking after lunch and we're trying to arrange something for Friday night. Hope to see a lot of you guys next week. If we have missed your area, don't worry. The Backstage Tour starts again in September with Brighton, Cornwall, Warwick, Glasgow, Liverpool, Swansea, Bristol high on our list. Once again if you know of a University or College which could be of interest to us, please drop us a email off the list. Cheers, Ian Forrester - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] UK trumps Europe on Linux streaming
Maybe it's the secret iPlayer-for-Linux-and-Mac-users dev project! -Original Message- From: Martin Belam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 05 March 2007 09:27 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] UK trumps Europe on Linux streaming devils advocate Wow, what an excellent use of council tax payers money. I mean, firstly nobody else has developed any kind of streaming video system, so I'm glad they spent 18 months building it themselves. And the potential user base is, what, the 1% of people in the UK with computers that run Linux, provided they also live in Waverley, and want to stream video of their local council meetings. I wonder what the cost per user is? Perhaps we can get together and do a FOI request on the council to find out? /devils advocate m On 02/03/07, Glyn Wintle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,100121,39286141,00.htm When the European Commission launched a streaming video service last year which excluded Linux users, large swathes of the open source community became deeply angry. Now, a Surrey local council has shown that open source operating systems can be included in such programmes. ...a local council in Surrey has developed a streaming project over the last 18 months. And unlike the Commission's project, developers behind the UK version have made their service available to Linux users. __ __ Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by Green Rating at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ - 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/ -- Martin Belam - http://www.currybet.net - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] UK trumps Europe on Linux streaming
It's ok, 1% of the mailing list will even pay any attention to the email at all. ;) _ From: John Wesley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 05 March 2007 10:05 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] UK trumps Europe on Linux streaming SSss!! It's a secret! On 05/03/07, Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe it's the secret iPlayer-for-Linux-and-Mac-users dev project! -Original Message- From: Martin Belam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 05 March 2007 09:27 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk mailto:backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] UK trumps Europe on Linux streaming devils advocate Wow, what an excellent use of council tax payers money. I mean, firstly nobody else has developed any kind of streaming video system, so I'm glad they spent 18 months building it themselves. And the potential user base is, what, the 1% of people in the UK with computers that run Linux, provided they also live in Waverley, and want to stream video of their local council meetings. I wonder what the cost per user is? Perhaps we can get together and do a FOI request on the council to find out? /devils advocate m On 02/03/07, Glyn Wintle [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,100121,39286141,00.htm When the European Commission launched a streaming video service last year which excluded Linux users, large swathes of the open source community became deeply angry. Now, a Surrey local council has shown that open source operating systems can be included in such programmes. ...a local council in Surrey has developed a streaming project over the last 18 months. And unlike the Commission's project, developers behind the UK version have made their service available to Linux users. __ __ Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by Green Rating at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html . Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Martin Belam - http://www.currybet.net - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] Question.
Believe not so due to licensing / royalty agreements, hence their Creative Archive license instead. Could be wrong, but that's from memory so ymmv. It makes sense to me, don't fix what's not broken etc. -Original Message- From: Gordon Joly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 March 2007 23:21 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] Question. http://www.frankieroberto.com/weblog/ Could the BBC's Creative Archive project switch to Creative Commons licences? Gordo -- Think Feynman/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]/// - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] End of week exam
Error: you need a license to view my responses. -Original Message- From: Frank Wales [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 March 2007 08:44 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] End of week exam Cynical University Where all your ideas are derivative works of ours Attempt all questions. - 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/
RE: [backstage] Traffic Info
I'd do that kind of thing around Birmingham if my GPS receiver worked amongst all those multi-storey buildings - I've tried before, dismal failure. That said, my phone (Hermes) apparently has a dormant, disconnected GPS chip in which can be activated with a firmware flash, so that's something to try... -Original Message- From: Kirk Northrop [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 01 March 2007 14:00 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Traffic Info Barry Hunter wrote: ... in fact it's something hope is been recorded over at openstreetmap.org... This is really interesting! I wanted to go out and walk more, but didn't really have a reason to do so. Now I do! Expect South Manchester to become nicely tracked soon... -- Kirk - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
-Original Message- From: Deirdre Harvey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 28 February 2007 12:32 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM? If there's a demand for that kind of service, is there a way you could implement it that doesn't compromise the public at the expense of the people with the temporary monopoly rights? ... And I just realised I didn't answer your final question. In all honesty, I can't think of a workable solution right now, it's a tough one to solve (captain obvious to the rescue!) Give me a while to come up with something... Must add though, when I wanted to timeshift radio in the past (when I was but a nipper), I always found a C90 worked quite well - at least for 2 or 3 months until I somehow managed to completely destroy them. I suppose the question I should ask you back is, IS there a demand for that specific kind of service? We can theorise on different ways to implement a time-limited, managed platform for content distribution and consumption, but the existing systems such as Listen Again work pretty well imo, and pop music is so repeated on network radio there's no real need to offer timeshifted playback of those kind of shows, you'd be creating supply where there is no demand. Or is there demand? Have I completely misinterpreted what you're saying? Feel free to correct / educate / dissect what I've said. - 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/
RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
_ From: Mario Menti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 28 February 2007 22:59 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM? On 2/28/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The claim is partly misleading because the word loss suggests events of a very different nature--events in which something they have is taken away from them. For example, if the store's stock of DVDs were burned, or if the money in the till got torn up, that would really be a loss. I'm sorry, but this sentence is patent bollocks. To define loss in these narrow terms is utter nonsense. In just about every definition, loss can mean being deprived of something, regardless of whether you physically possessed that thing in the first place. By all means keep arguing about the pros and cons of DRM, but spare us stupidities like this please. Cheers, Mario. I have to agree that this line of thought is not without its own flaws, but you have to agree that the term loss has been manipulated somewhat by the incumbent film and TV studios; they've subtly changed its meaning from that of a physical loss to that of a loss of potential income on their intellectual property. This is where we begin to get very abstract here with our definitions of 'loss' and 'theft'. So it's not complete nonsense, it's interesting to see how the classical definition of loss has been altered by the studios to fit their way of speaking - reminds me of past RIAA publications where they've mentioned xyz millions of dollars lost through piracy - when in fact it's not REALLY loss, it's just money they thought they would be getting whilst relying on a predetermined profit curve (basically, they're not factoring into the equation that people won't continue to purchase at the same rate they may initially, or a service selling content might lose 'cool' factor and become less profitable... Or, as I suspect they're actually doing, they're taking an average of figures over the past 10 years and then using those as a basis for their loss - when in fact the music industry has been in decline for a long time, and the Internet has NOT been the sole cause of its wider financial downturn). I'm not saying unlicensed redistribution of content isn't to blame at least in part, but the industry does have this habit of twisting the truth, flipping and adjusting the wording and meaning somewhat to meet its own ends. I've done a lot of research into the music industry as part of my Uni course so I know I'm not talking completely out my arse here. Thus, the industry's argument for slapping rights restrictions onto everything in sight is largely based on these continuing assertions that they are losing money through piracy which they would otherwise be receiving into their coffers, and these assertions are in turn originated on financial data and trends which tend to not factor into account these new forms of distribution. We had a lecture from two people at our Uni late last year; one person from EMI and one person from the IFPI. Even though it wasn't billed as a this is why piracy is bad and killing the music industry lecture, it was exactly that - but during the QA session I asked a few pointed questions. One included, why don't you change your price points to price pirates out of the market, follow a business model like allofmp3 where you give the customers MP3s or their own choice of formats, for a fixed price per megabyte, and there we go - the unlicensed distributors can't survive in that kind of market, where it's just as easy for the consumer to go legit as it is for them to break the law... To which the man from the IFPI answered, because we just can't, we don't, trust our consumers. I was basically stonewalled, they didn't even acknowledge that any model aside from the current one would work. I thought it was a very arrogant approach, they presented loads of stats, figures, past trends, statistical analysis of Internet bandwidth usage etc... And it was all based on the assumption that users only 'steal' music because it's part of their mindset now. So, for me, this entire matter boils down to trust; the industry's lack of trust for consumers, and in turn, consumers' lack of trust in their rights restriction schemes. They alter the meaning of established words, and somehow they manage to lobby the US Government to codify their 'modified' meanings in law! That's what really riles me, and why I don't like DRM. I won't trust a 'trust' mechanism which is run by untrustworthy people, and it's also why I don't entirely agree with the industry's version of 'loss' due to x or y reasons. If only it were clear cut enough that by not purchasing music, you were directly depriving artists of a large amount of revenue from what would otherwise be a unit sale, but in reality that's so infrequently the case. Even before the advent of Internet sharing, it was the same for many artists - large advance, then work
RE: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM?
I would've hoped that the BBC listserver either washes those kind of emails or returns them to sender. -Original Message- From: Jim Gardner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 February 2007 19:20 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Percentage of License fee going towards DRM? I'm not exactly over-the-moon about the idea that everyone's private email address is visible. What are people still using Windows supposed to do if someone decides to attach a worm? On 27 Feb 2007, at 18:13, John Drinkwater wrote: On 27/02/07, Jim Gardner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He privately mailed me and used words I won't repeat for fear they trigger the spam filter. Is he sub-normal or is that the crack on this list? If so I'm not interested in continuing with it. I got similar comments from someone else off-list related to comments i've made here and on the BBC editors site. The list certainly attracts people of various opinions, but he's certainly sub-normal. :-) On 27 Feb 2007, at 14:44, Dave Crossland wrote: The list's House Rules are simple: Be Nice To Each Other and Don't Break The Law. If you are rude or spam the list then you'll be taken off. - http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html Will this policy be acted upon? -- Regards, Dave - -- John '[Beta]' Drinkwater http://johndrinkwater.name/ - 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/ - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] Tube on Twitter
Hang on, are we playing Finsbury Rules here? -Original Message- From: Davy Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 February 2007 22:43 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Tube on Twitter Mornington Crescent. -- Davy Mitchell Blog - http://www.latedecember.co.uk/sites/personal/davy/ Twitter - http://twitter.com/daftspaniel Skype - daftspaniel - 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/ - 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/
RE: [backstage] Ad Blocking
-Original Message- From: Richard Lockwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 February 2007 07:22 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Ad Blocking Until you show me that your site isn't just a waste of bandwidth, however, you're Adblocked. If a site's a waste of bandwidth, what are you doing visiting in the first place? Making his evaluation? Don't criticise something without first knowing what you're on about, etc etc. - 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/
RE: [backstage] A couple of things including Arrington
If that's you in the background going WHAT?!, I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments. The whole point of the BBC, at least to me, is that as it's insulated to an extent from wider market forces, that is what gives it the freedom to innovate to a greater extent and spend more on RD, to bring those innovations to market and help develop the standards more than many other broadcasters. The public service remit is unique in that it's looking out for the consumer, not just the broadcaster, and if he doesn't see that (or he's been put off by the meagre output of BBC America, which is a separate branch of the Beeb anyway, right?) then he's a bit of an idiot. And here's me thinking he actually had a bit of nouse when it comes to future tech... Arrington should stick to reporting on indie Web 2.0 startups and leave criticism or appraisal of the BBC and its output to people who get a use from it - us crazy embracers know a good thing when we see it (and I for one gladly pay that license fee!) I absolutely _LOVE_ that pregnant pause after your man explains about the Public Value Test. Arrington didn't see that one coming. :D -Original Message- From: Mr I Forrester [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 February 2007 15:44 To: BBC Backstage Subject: [backstage] A couple of things including Arrington Hi All, The video form the 1st Backstage podcast is now up - http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/news/archives/2007/02/bbc_backstage _p_1.html and you might want to check out the comments from Mike TechCrunch Arrington on the BBC - http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/news/archives/2007/02/michael_arringt.html Cheers, Ian - 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/ - 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/
