Re: [backstage] BBC tells ISPs to get stuffed

[Brian Butterworth]

I'm much of the feeling that an Internet Service Provider should Provide a
Internet Service.  Hence, as they say, the name.  If they want to provide a
Walled Garden with Limited Access to the Internet then they should call it
that and everyone can go, "urgh an AOL" and leave them well alone!

Has anyone done any research into these "N GB" limits?  Do they include up
and down traffic?  Does it include the protocol overhead, and if so, which
protocol overheads?



On 09/04/2008, David Tomlinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am not a civil or public servant (at least not yet), which allows me to
> make the false proposition, that I can tell Tiscali how to run their
> business (the advice is free).
>
> For example it turns out that Sky are already offering ADSL2+
> with their max product 16Mb/s unlimited (still subject to fair use cap!).
>
> Be/O2 are offering upto 24Mb/s with unlimited use of their top product.
> (£24.00pcm) No mention of usage caps! (In fact none of Be's products appear
> to have a usage cap).
>
> These above are just from visiting the relevant websites, others may have
> equivalent or more suitable/better offers; samknows (see below) allows you
> to select your exchange and see who provides LLU services (if any) and when
> it will get BT's 21CN (if among the first 868). I do not work for an ISP.
>
> A visit to http://www.samknows.com/broadband/ has activation dates for the
> first 868 exchanges, with ADSL2+ (All before May 2009)
>
> It also highlights regional pricing dependent upon LLU and non-LLU
> customers.  With the latter been charged much more (Thanks to BT and perhaps
> the lower numbers of customers per exchange
> (But x3 the price, wholesale ?).
>
> With the deployment of 21CN network BT should be pass on the gains of
> recent generations of Moores law to their customers.
>
> So with TalkTalk having the largest number of LLU exchanges (1645) and
> Be/O2 expanding and Sky's 70% population coverage (Level 1 MSANS), and BT's
> 21CN bandwidth should increase without any increases in price. And BT should
> have no excuse with an all new network (except the Local Loop).
>
> I fail to understand in this context why the ISP's and BT are failing to
> embrace iPlayer as a driver of the adoption of higher bandwidth products.
> They must have seen the recent Virgin Media ad's  'not see, but say whats on
> TV' (Television Liberation).
> http://www.virginmedia.com/
>
> p.s.
> According to a posting on interesting people list, Intel senior manager
> says Moores law is good until (at least) 2029 when we will have zetaflop
> supercomputers.
>
> Just how many zeros is that ? (Rhetorical question!)
>
> p.p.s
> In Japan FTTH new deployment has exceeded the new deployment of ADSL2+
> (24Mb/s).
>
>
>
>
> -
> 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/
>



-- 
Please email me back if you need any more help.

Brian Butterworth
http://www.ukfree.tv

Re: [backstage] DAB rollout...

[Brian Butterworth]

On 09/04/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  Yep, am waiting for freesat to launch as there is no digi signal on our
> transmitter until 2012. Though freesat won't give me radio reception ;-(
>
I suspect that you will find that there is already around 120 radio stations
on the 28.2 satellites for your delication and delight!  See the end of:

http://www.lyngsat.com/packages/skyuk_chno.html


>
> -Original Message-
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of *Brian Butterworth
> *Sent:* 09 April 2008 07:44
> *To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> *Subject:* Re: [backstage] DAB rollout...
>
>
>
>
>
> On 09/04/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bit of luck you didn't move to where I live There is not digital
> anything here (not TV or DAB).
>
>
>
> It's 99.9% likely that there is Freesat though!
>
>
>
> http://www.freesat.co.uk/home.php
>
>
>
> And it's always worth a try...
>
>
>
> http://www.ukfree.tv/transmitters.php
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rupert Watson
> Sent: 09 April 2008 05:35
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: Re: [backstage] DAB rollout...
>
> I bought a Sony XDRS50B DAB radio last month so my wife could listen to
> BBC
> London despite moving to Watford. As a result she loves DAB and has
> converted a number of her friends.
>
> For her it wasn't about quality; it was about convenience.
>
>
> On 09/04/2008 03:47, "Christopher Woods" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "And I'd want to switch to DAB why, exactly?"
>
> Rupert Watson
> www.root6.com
> +44 7787 554 801
>
>
>
>
> ROOT 6 LIMITED
> Registered in the UK at
> 4 WARDOUR MEWS, LONDON
> W1F 8AJ
> Company No. 03433253
>
>
> -
> 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/
>
>
>
>
> --
> Please email me back if you need any more help.
>
> Brian Butterworth
> http://www.ukfree.tv
>



-- 
Please email me back if you need any more help.

Brian Butterworth
http://www.ukfree.tv

Re: [backstage] DAB rollout...

[Brian Butterworth]

On 09/04/2008, Andrew Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Then you have GCap pulling out of DAB, the two stations closing down
> > (including Planet Rock, sniff)
>
> Planet Rock has had a reprive whilst they discuss sale options - and
> Global (who are taking over Gcap) are apparently more DAB friendly.
>
>
> > Plus my Dad prefers Radio 4 on FM because it doesn't drop to a lower
> > bitrate at peak time (why?!), call him an old cynic if you like. ;)
>
> It goes low at certain points because the station splits into two - so
> that the Long Wave opt outs can be broadcast on DAB.  For example,
> 8:30am, Today on one, Yesterday in Parliament on the other.
>
> I presume they do the same for the Daily Service.   LW Sport gets
> carried on Five Live Sports Extra, hence it's not a problem.


>From what I recall James Cridland telling me, the 5LSX service is created
out of the general bitrate pool and leaches capacity from a number of
services.

For some reason it is not the least listen to and highest bitrate service
though.


IIRC, the opt-outs take up about 45 minutes a day, so it's more cost
> effective to use this feature than it would be to broadcast a duplicate
> station.
>
> >   What worries me is that digital radio is almost still in a state
> > of flux; in the space of three years, an industry-changing
> > redefinition of the DAB standard is released and it causes all sorts
> > of headaches and potential problems for manufacturers and
> > broadcasters. FM stereo was standardised in the early 60s and it's not
>
> > really changed since, yet I still feel like my DAB receiver (my
> > venerable Wavefinder) is nothing more than 'sandbox kit', yet I've had
>
> > it for years. I think half the problem is people just can't trust
> > hardware they buy today to work in three/four years' time, whatever
> > the assurances given.
>
> I don't think it's /that/ bad but there's absolutely no denial that
> standards change quickly because technology moves quickly.  Just look at
> your PC after all.
>
> And that's the route of the problem, and personally I suspect it's going
> to get worse as time goes on.  DAB may look positively antique in 10
> years time as far as technology is concerned.
>
> However when you have sizable audience bases, it's extremely difficult
> just to turn something off because something better has come along
> because people don't want to go out and buy new equipment.  Such big
> switch-offs are rare (last one I can think of was the migration from VHF
> to UHF for TV signals which finally ended in the 1980s after UHF first
> launched in the 1960s)
>
>
> -
> 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/
>



-- 
Please email me back if you need any more help.

Brian Butterworth
http://www.ukfree.tv

Re: [backstage] 502 error

[Brian Butterworth]

vijay,

I guess it is fixed now..  I get these perfectly.

Perhaps it's the CIA?


On 09/04/2008, vijay chopra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
> does anyone else get a 502 error when trying to post to Justin Web's blog:
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/justinwebb/2008/04/letting_it_all_out.html#commentsanchor
> "Times of London" indeed... he's gone all colonial ;p
>
> Vijay.
>
>


-- 
Please email me back if you need any more help.

Brian Butterworth
http://www.ukfree.tv

Re: [backstage] iPlayer in Wii

[Tom Loosemore]

On 09/04/2008, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh that's it. I need a wii now!
>
>  The javascript fun you can have with wiis is awesome. I had a little hack
> around with them before (oddly within iplayerlist).  Its all on the opera
> website.
>
>  Think I might have to pursue this a little further.
>
>
>  On 9 Apr 2008, at 15:04, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > In case anyone hasn't seen the news:
> > 
> >
> > Discuss.
> >
> > Andy
> > -
> > 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/

am on wii now and can confirm that iplayer works. ish.
-
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] 502 error

[vijay chopra]

Hi guys,
does anyone else get a 502 error when trying to post to Justin Web's blog:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/justinwebb/2008/04/letting_it_all_out.html#commentsanchor
"Times of London" indeed... he's gone all colonial ;p

Vijay.

Re: [backstage] BBC tells ISPs to get stuffed

[David Tomlinson]

I am not a civil or public servant (at least not yet), which allows me 
to make the false proposition, that I can tell Tiscali how to run their 
business (the advice is free).


For example it turns out that Sky are already offering ADSL2+
with their max product 16Mb/s unlimited (still subject to fair use cap!).

Be/O2 are offering upto 24Mb/s with unlimited use of their top product. 
(£24.00pcm) No mention of usage caps! (In fact none of Be's products 
appear to have a usage cap).


These above are just from visiting the relevant websites, others may 
have equivalent or more suitable/better offers; samknows (see below) 
allows you to select your exchange and see who provides LLU services (if 
any) and when it will get BT's 21CN (if among the first 868). I do not 
work for an ISP.


A visit to http://www.samknows.com/broadband/ has activation dates for 
the first 868 exchanges, with ADSL2+ (All before May 2009)


It also highlights regional pricing dependent upon LLU and non-LLU 
customers.  With the latter been charged much more (Thanks to BT and 
perhaps the lower numbers of customers per exchange

(But x3 the price, wholesale ?).

With the deployment of 21CN network BT should be pass on the gains of 
recent generations of Moores law to their customers.


So with TalkTalk having the largest number of LLU exchanges (1645) and 
Be/O2 expanding and Sky's 70% population coverage (Level 1 MSANS), and 
BT's 21CN bandwidth should increase without any increases in price. And 
BT should have no excuse with an all new network (except the Local Loop).


I fail to understand in this context why the ISP's and BT are failing to 
embrace iPlayer as a driver of the adoption of higher bandwidth 
products. They must have seen the recent Virgin Media ad's  'not see, 
but say whats on TV' (Television Liberation).

http://www.virginmedia.com/

p.s.
According to a posting on interesting people list, Intel senior manager 
says Moores law is good until (at least) 2029 when we will have zetaflop 
supercomputers.


Just how many zeros is that ? (Rhetorical question!)

p.p.s
In Japan FTTH new deployment has exceeded the new deployment of ADSL2+ 
(24Mb/s).





-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Andy]

Oh that's it. I need a wii now!

The javascript fun you can have with wiis is awesome. I had a little  
hack around with them before (oddly within iplayerlist).  Its all on  
the opera website.


Think I might have to pursue this a little further.

On 9 Apr 2008, at 15:04, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


In case anyone hasn't seen the news:


Discuss.

Andy
-
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 tells ISPs to get stuffed

[Ivan Pope]

Andy,Great post.
It could be boiled down to one word: 'Phorm' (or Phormography as it should
be known).
ISPs want you to pay, then they want to sell you to the highest bidder, then
they want to cap you, then they want to shape your traffic.
But they don't want to tell you.
Don't let them Phorm you.
Ivan

On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Andy Halsall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Wednesday 09 April 2008 14:32:45 Andy wrote:
> > Mr I Forrester wrote:
> > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/03/bbc_highfield_isp_threat/
> >
> > The saga continues courtesy of the Reg.
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/09/bbc_tiscali_iplayer/
> > (BBC vs ISPs: Bandwidth row escalates as Tiscali wades in)
> >
> > ISPs seem to be upset by the idea they should provide customers with
> > what they pay for!
>
> In the case of ISP's this is sadly very true, even more so if you consider
> the
> direction of their business models. Let me explain:
>
> At present the only reason for the general public to buy internet 'access'
> (regardles of how it is bundled) is to access resources and content
> available
> on the web.  Without those resources and content there would be no need
> for
> ISP's.  It doesn't matter how fast or fabulous a data connection is, the
> whole point of the exercise is to use that connection to get at all those
> lovely resources.
>
> The unfortunate but more and more obvious direction some ISP's are going
> in is
> the old (as I remember it) AOL model.  This is where the ISP provides
> certain
> services of their own (like mail and premium content, possibly streaming
> video etc..) from within their own networks.  This is cheap for them to do
> and in theory the provision of premium ISP provided content means that
> they
> can squeeze more money out of their customers (pay to download wallpaper,
> a
> film, some oftware etc..).  The web outside of their own network is not
> useful to them except as a lure, they cant (yet) charge you for using
> amazon,
> or google services, or somehow bill you extra for the e-books you download
> from project Gutenberg).  As such some ISP's increasingly see external
> content providers (especially anything that involves a large amount of
> traffic) and the web in general (which competes with their own services)
> as a
> negative and costly addition.
>
> So, the BBC needs to (and is) fight(ing) its corner, as it should,
> customers
> pay for web access, content providers pay for web access, there is no need
> for additional charges to be levied to any particular group for specific
> services (in fact it breaks the web).
>
> The obvious solution is for the various ISP's to charge correctly for what
> they provide, a 8/1M connection should be just that, if it is capped then
> fine, make that clear, charge more for uncapped if the customer will bear
> it,
> if they wont, you wont get that customer.  This however comes with
> additional
> problems, ISP's want market penetration and large customer bases, not just
> for the monthly fee's but also so they can sell their customers additional
> stuff (and apparently so they can sell their personal data, ala Phorm
> etc..).
> If they charge higher prices, they might find adoption waning, or
> competition
> increasing.
>
> I could rehash the whole network neutrality debate in more detail here,
> but
> most people have heard it so I wont, but in essence, this really seems to
> be
> a case of ISP's wanting more money, without having to increase their
> charges
> to customers.
>
> I would have to say that the BBC has probably got the support of anyone
> who
> has any idea about this issue, they certainly have mine.
>



-- 
Ivan Pope
Snipperoo

Widget Conference WebWidgetExpo
June 16 & 17 2008 New York
http://widgetwebexpo.com

50 Providence Place
BN1 4GE Brighton

01273808458

blog.snipperoo.com
directory.snipperoo.com

Re: [backstage] BBC tells ISPs to get stuffed

[Felicia C]

I'm not really that much of a techie person and don't know if this even
applies, as presumably the Japanese infrastructure is built differently to
those in Europe/UK, but for instance: http://streaming.yahoo.co.jp/ Yahoo!
Japan and one of the major companies 'Softbank' joined forces to create this
online 'TV Bank' website, which allows streaming of high quality video over
the internet as well.

They're trialing/using a system called 'BBbroadcast':
http://www.tv-bank.com/en/bbbroadcast.html
which was unveiled last year I think (?)
http://www.tv-bank.com/en/20070531_2.html
but seems like an interesting concept as it uses an element of P2P,
particularly for iPlayer (so long as the upload volume isn't too large) but
I found it interesting reading.

Apologies if you're all aware of this/have considered it before.

On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Andy Halsall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Wednesday 09 April 2008 14:32:45 Andy wrote:
> > Mr I Forrester wrote:
> > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/03/bbc_highfield_isp_threat/
> >
> > The saga continues courtesy of the Reg.
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/09/bbc_tiscali_iplayer/
> > (BBC vs ISPs: Bandwidth row escalates as Tiscali wades in)
> >
> > ISPs seem to be upset by the idea they should provide customers with
> > what they pay for!
>
> In the case of ISP's this is sadly very true, even more so if you consider
> the
> direction of their business models. Let me explain:
>
> At present the only reason for the general public to buy internet 'access'
> (regardles of how it is bundled) is to access resources and content
> available
> on the web.  Without those resources and content there would be no need
> for
> ISP's.  It doesn't matter how fast or fabulous a data connection is, the
> whole point of the exercise is to use that connection to get at all those
> lovely resources.
>
> The unfortunate but more and more obvious direction some ISP's are going
> in is
> the old (as I remember it) AOL model.  This is where the ISP provides
> certain
> services of their own (like mail and premium content, possibly streaming
> video etc..) from within their own networks.  This is cheap for them to do
> and in theory the provision of premium ISP provided content means that
> they
> can squeeze more money out of their customers (pay to download wallpaper,
> a
> film, some oftware etc..).  The web outside of their own network is not
> useful to them except as a lure, they cant (yet) charge you for using
> amazon,
> or google services, or somehow bill you extra for the e-books you download
> from project Gutenberg).  As such some ISP's increasingly see external
> content providers (especially anything that involves a large amount of
> traffic) and the web in general (which competes with their own services)
> as a
> negative and costly addition.
>
> So, the BBC needs to (and is) fight(ing) its corner, as it should,
> customers
> pay for web access, content providers pay for web access, there is no need
> for additional charges to be levied to any particular group for specific
> services (in fact it breaks the web).
>
> The obvious solution is for the various ISP's to charge correctly for what
> they provide, a 8/1M connection should be just that, if it is capped then
> fine, make that clear, charge more for uncapped if the customer will bear
> it,
> if they wont, you wont get that customer.  This however comes with
> additional
> problems, ISP's want market penetration and large customer bases, not just
> for the monthly fee's but also so they can sell their customers additional
> stuff (and apparently so they can sell their personal data, ala Phorm
> etc..).
> If they charge higher prices, they might find adoption waning, or
> competition
> increasing.
>
> I could rehash the whole network neutrality debate in more detail here,
> but
> most people have heard it so I wont, but in essence, this really seems to
> be
> a case of ISP's wanting more money, without having to increase their
> charges
> to customers.
>
> I would have to say that the BBC has probably got the support of anyone
> who
> has any idea about this issue, they certainly have mine.
>

RE: [backstage] DAB rollout...

[Christopher Woods]

Some interesting responses guys, thanks for humouring me :) Contrary to how
it may seem occasionally, ;) I don't try to post stuff to here simply to
ruffle feathers (I find it absolutely fascinating to enter in to these kinds
of conversations with people actually involved in the broadcast industry!)

I know we as individuals can't move mountains with regards to sorting out
all the problems or situations the assorted broadcast industries are in, but
it's good to know that I'm not the only person thinking about all of this. I
have every intention of supporting digital radio takeup as long as it's
worth it (i.e. there's at least something of quality on it that's not
available on FM) but at the same time I do wonder about the success of DAB,
Freeview, choice of formats, satellite, broadband platforms etc... in the
grander scheme of things, as I suppose is a healthy thing to do...

Anyway, I appreciate the discourse. Cheers all!

-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Dave Crossland]

On 09/04/2008, Andrew Bowden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > 
>
>  http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/04/bbc_iplayer_on_wii.html

Interesting; when the BBC publishes Flash 7 SWFs, Gnash is very likely
to support them very soon - if not already (given a simple Firefox
extension to fool the BBC into serving the Flash 7 SWF instead of a
cute "we hate your freedom" message :-)

-- 
Regards,
Dave
Personal opinion only!
-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Iain Wallace]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In case anyone hasn't seen the news:
>  
>
>  Discuss.
>
>  Andy

Great! Finally I can watch iPlayer shows on my TV without a hack! ;)

The beebhack wiki has been updated with a couple of technical notes -
it's basically just swapping out for a Flash 7 compatible stream based
on the Opera for Wii user agent - not as game-changing as the iPhone
version.

Iain
-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Peter Bowyer]

On 09/04/2008, David McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave Crossland wrote:
>
> > The BBC-vs-ISP bandwidth issue could be resolved by the BBC dropping
> > DRM so that the ISPs can cache the data.
>
> The ISPs who are anticipating financial hardship are more concerned with the
> cost of bandwidth between their network and home ADSL users, and _not_ between
> their network and the outside world.
>
> This is because they are charged a metered rate by BT for all the traffic they
> relay over BT's ADSL network.
>
> Thus adding data caches to their network wouldn't solve their immediate 
> problem.

Indeed. But BTW could do it for the benefit of all of its resellers.

Peter

-- 
Peter Bowyer
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/peeebeee
-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Dave Crossland]

On 09/04/2008, David McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave Crossland wrote:
>
>  > The BBC-vs-ISP bandwidth issue could be resolved by the BBC dropping
>  > DRM so that the ISPs can cache the data.
>
> The ISPs who are anticipating financial hardship are more concerned with the
>  cost of bandwidth between their network and home ADSL users, and _not_ 
> between
>  their network and the outside world.
>  This is because they are charged a metered rate by BT for all the traffic 
> they
>  relay over BT's ADSL network.
>  Thus adding data caches to their network wouldn't solve their immediate 
> problem.

Ah okay, thanks for clarifying this! :-)

I guess this is why the BBC CDN rumours have remained vapourware.

-- 
Regards,
Dave
-
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 tells ISPs to get stuffed

[Rupert Watson]

Have you read the weasel words about Traffic Shaping aka Fair Usage on the 
Tiscali web site, they are quite a hoot.

Rupert

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: 09 April 2008 14:33
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC tells ISPs to get stuffed

Mr I Forrester wrote:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/03/bbc_highfield_isp_threat/

The saga continues courtesy of the Reg.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/09/bbc_tiscali_iplayer/
(BBC vs ISPs: Bandwidth row escalates as Tiscali wades in)

ISPs seem to be upset by the idea they should provide customers with
what they pay for! If I buy an Unlimited plan from an ISP why shouldn't
I connect my machine and transfer data full speed for the entire month?
(Which technically still isn't unlimited because I am capped by the fact
that I can't transmit at an infinite speed).

ISPs exploit customers ignorance to make money. As I stated earlier the
average man in the street has no idea what "8 GB a Month" actually means.

Maybe we should just re-nationalise the communications infrastructure?

Andy
-
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/

__
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__

-
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 tells ISPs to get stuffed

[Andy Halsall]

On Wednesday 09 April 2008 14:32:45 Andy wrote:
> Mr I Forrester wrote:
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/03/bbc_highfield_isp_threat/
>
> The saga continues courtesy of the Reg.
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/09/bbc_tiscali_iplayer/
> (BBC vs ISPs: Bandwidth row escalates as Tiscali wades in)
>
> ISPs seem to be upset by the idea they should provide customers with
> what they pay for! 

In the case of ISP's this is sadly very true, even more so if you consider the 
direction of their business models. Let me explain:

At present the only reason for the general public to buy internet 'access' 
(regardles of how it is bundled) is to access resources and content available 
on the web.  Without those resources and content there would be no need for 
ISP's.  It doesn't matter how fast or fabulous a data connection is, the 
whole point of the exercise is to use that connection to get at all those 
lovely resources.

The unfortunate but more and more obvious direction some ISP's are going in is 
the old (as I remember it) AOL model.  This is where the ISP provides certain 
services of their own (like mail and premium content, possibly streaming 
video etc..) from within their own networks.  This is cheap for them to do 
and in theory the provision of premium ISP provided content means that they 
can squeeze more money out of their customers (pay to download wallpaper, a 
film, some oftware etc..).  The web outside of their own network is not 
useful to them except as a lure, they cant (yet) charge you for using amazon, 
or google services, or somehow bill you extra for the e-books you download 
from project Gutenberg).  As such some ISP's increasingly see external 
content providers (especially anything that involves a large amount of 
traffic) and the web in general (which competes with their own services) as a 
negative and costly addition.

So, the BBC needs to (and is) fight(ing) its corner, as it should, customers 
pay for web access, content providers pay for web access, there is no need 
for additional charges to be levied to any particular group for specific 
services (in fact it breaks the web). 

The obvious solution is for the various ISP's to charge correctly for what 
they provide, a 8/1M connection should be just that, if it is capped then 
fine, make that clear, charge more for uncapped if the customer will bear it, 
if they wont, you wont get that customer.  This however comes with additional 
problems, ISP's want market penetration and large customer bases, not just 
for the monthly fee's but also so they can sell their customers additional 
stuff (and apparently so they can sell their personal data, ala Phorm etc..).  
If they charge higher prices, they might find adoption waning, or competition 
increasing.

I could rehash the whole network neutrality debate in more detail here, but 
most people have heard it so I wont, but in essence, this really seems to be 
a case of ISP's wanting more money, without having to increase their charges 
to customers.

I would have to say that the BBC has probably got the support of anyone who 
has any idea about this issue, they certainly have mine.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [backstage] iPlayer in Wii

[Billy Abbott]

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Dave Crossland wrote:


On 09/04/2008, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

In case anyone hasn't seen the news:
 

 Discuss.


I believe you can install GNU+Linux on a Wii, and then you can use the
MPEG4 streams to watch iPlayer content with free software on a Wii.


Currently, as far as I'm aware, there is no way to install anything unless 
you have a modded Wii. There's work on a LiveCD, but I think that's for 
modded ones as well (http://www.wiili.org has a bunch of details).


I would be very happy to be proved wrong.

--billy

--
Billy Abbott
http://billyabbott.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] iPlayer in Wii

[Billy Abbott]

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Andy wrote:


In case anyone hasn't seen the news:



My officemate just asked me if it worked on the PS3, as it also runs flash 
7. I suspect the answer is no, but that shouldn't be much work on the 
beeb's side.


The thing that caught my eye is the last paragraph in Anthony Rose's blog 
post 
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/04/bbc_iplayer_on_wii.html)


"As iPlayer usage on Wii takes off, we'll consider creating an optimised 
version of the iPlayer for Wii. Hopefully this won.t require people to 
shell out for the Internet Channel, and which will provide an optimized 
browsing and playback experience, perhaps even as a dedicated BBC iPlayer 
channel on Wii."


The BBC building a Wii specific app for the iPlayer? I don't know of 
anyone other than Nintendo who has any channels released at the moment, 
so this could be a rather good thing in general.


--billy
-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[David McBride]

Dave Crossland wrote:

> The BBC-vs-ISP bandwidth issue could be resolved by the BBC dropping
> DRM so that the ISPs can cache the data.

The ISPs who are anticipating financial hardship are more concerned with the
cost of bandwidth between their network and home ADSL users, and _not_ between
their network and the outside world.

This is because they are charged a metered rate by BT for all the traffic they
relay over BT's ADSL network.

Thus adding data caches to their network wouldn't solve their immediate problem.

Cheers,
David
-- 
David McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Department of Computing, Imperial College, London



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

RE: [backstage] iPlayer in Wii

Anthony Rose has blogged about this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/04/bbc_iplayer_on_wii.html 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: 09 April 2008 15:05
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: [backstage] iPlayer in Wii

In case anyone hasn't seen the news:


Discuss.

Andy
-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Andrew Bowden]

> In case anyone hasn't seen the news:
> 

There's also an interesting post on the BBC Internet Blog about the
technical issues.  Well worth a read.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/04/bbc_iplayer_on_wii.html

-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Dogsbody]

In case anyone hasn't seen the news:



LOL, my GF sent this to me almost as soon as the news release came 
out! she wants this so badly!


It says... "Early versions of the service will be available from 9 
April but more polished software will be released as the service is 
developed." ... anyone know how to get hold of an early version??


Dan
-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Peter Bowyer]

On 09/04/2008, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In case anyone hasn't seen the news:
> 

I was interested in this bit:

"It is only available in the UK to licence-fee payers. "

Presumably that isn't what Huggers said, and has been journo-ified?

Peter

-- 
Peter Bowyer
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/peeebeee
-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Dave Crossland]

On 09/04/2008, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In case anyone hasn't seen the news:
>  
>
>  Discuss.

I believe you can install GNU+Linux on a Wii, and then you can use the
MPEG4 streams to watch iPlayer content with free software on a Wii.

The BBC-vs-ISP bandwidth issue could be resolved by the BBC dropping
DRM so that the ISPs can cache the data.

-- 
Regards,
Dave
-
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] iPlayer in Wii

[Andy]

In case anyone hasn't seen the news:


Discuss.

Andy
-
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 tells ISPs to get stuffed

[Andy]

Mr I Forrester wrote:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/03/bbc_highfield_isp_threat/

The saga continues courtesy of the Reg.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/09/bbc_tiscali_iplayer/
(BBC vs ISPs: Bandwidth row escalates as Tiscali wades in)

ISPs seem to be upset by the idea they should provide customers with
what they pay for! If I buy an Unlimited plan from an ISP why shouldn't
I connect my machine and transfer data full speed for the entire month?
(Which technically still isn't unlimited because I am capped by the fact
that I can't transmit at an infinite speed).

ISPs exploit customers ignorance to make money. As I stated earlier the
average man in the street has no idea what "8 GB a Month" actually means.

Maybe we should just re-nationalise the communications infrastructure?

Andy
-
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] DAB rollout...

[Steve Jolly]

Christopher Woods wrote:
Three years after the 
BBC's digital radio rollout was first started with 6Music, the WorldDMB 
decided to specify the inclusion of HE-AAC in the spec - yet, AAC had 
been standardised in 1997. Foresight never came into the equation? BBC 
R&D were testing AAC too back in the 90s, yet MP2 was still used even 
though it would've been early enough to adopt AAC wholesale at that 
point (only pissing off the early adopters) but once one your mum gets a 
digital radio the situation gets a lot trickier.


Just 'cos a technology's standardised doesn't mean that it's 
cost-effective to deploy it.  AAC support in "MP3" players didn't become 
common until the iPod launched in 2001, despite the fact that late '90s 
MP3 players were desperately short of storage, and would have been prime 
candidates for implementing a more efficient codec.  MP3 itself could 
have been a candidate codec for DAB, but it's more sensitive to bit 
errors than MP2, so it needs a more robust FEC scheme - an expert 
colleague once told me that the overall bitrate savings from such a 
change would only amount to about 10%, which at the time probably 
wouldn't have justified the extra receiver cost.


The parents still don't 
have a digital radio, exactly because they know that the spec will 
change at some point in the future. Plus my Dad prefers Radio 4 on FM 
because it doesn't drop to a lower bitrate at peak time (why?!), call 
him an old cynic if you like. ;)


Well, the spec for every broadcasting platform will change at some point 
in the future. :-)  I guess the salient point is probably that your 
parents are satisfied with the existing FM service though.


What worries me is that digital radio is almost still in a state of 
flux; in the space of three years, an industry-changing redefinition of 
the DAB standard is released and it causes all sorts of headaches and 
potential problems for manufacturers and broadcasters. FM stereo was 
standardised in the early 60s and it's not really changed since, yet I 
still feel like my DAB receiver (my venerable Wavefinder) is nothing 
more than 'sandbox kit', yet I've had it for years. I think half the 
problem is people just can't trust hardware they buy today to work in 
three/four years' time, whatever the assurances given.


Freeview has exactly the same issue (cf discussions about Ofcom's plans 
to push broadcasters towards a particular Freeview HD solution), but 
takeup there has been much faster.  It's interesting. :-)


S



-
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] DAB rollout...

[Gareth Davis]

Andrew Bowden wrote:
> 
> However when you have sizable audience bases, it's extremely difficult
> just to turn something off because something better has come along
> because people don't want to go out and buy new equipment.  Such big
> switch-offs are rare

If we were to ditch everything and start again tomorrow I'm not
convinced we wouldn't be in the same situation. The multiplex operators
would take the same correct (from the shareholder's point of view)
commercial decisions to fit as many streams on a mux as possible. So
instead of getting 64K Mono MP2 station you will get 2 32K Mono AAC
stations. Would this be an improvement for the amount of hassle it would
cause?

> (last one I can think of was the 
> migration from VHF
> to UHF for TV signals which finally ended in the 1980s after UHF first
> launched in the 1960s)

Which released Band III, which was then available for use by DAB.

 
-- 
Gareth Davis | Production Systems Specialist
World Service Future Media, Digital Delivery Team - Part of BBC Global
News Division
* http://www.bbcworldservice.com/ * 702NE Bush House, Strand, London,
WC2B 4PH

My views - not Auntie's.

-
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] DAB rollout...

[Ben Poor]

After declaring an obvious interest, I have to say that stating GCap is
pulling out of DAB is somewhat of a very large exaggeration. 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Bowden
Sent: 09 April 2008 09:45
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] DAB rollout...

> Then you have GCap pulling out of DAB, the two stations closing down 
> (including Planet Rock, sniff)

Planet Rock has had a reprive whilst they discuss sale options - and
Global (who are taking over Gcap) are apparently more DAB friendly.

 
> Plus my Dad prefers Radio 4 on FM because it doesn't drop to a lower 
> bitrate at peak time (why?!), call him an old cynic if you like. ;)

It goes low at certain points because the station splits into two - so
that the Long Wave opt outs can be broadcast on DAB.  For example,
8:30am, Today on one, Yesterday in Parliament on the other.

I presume they do the same for the Daily Service.   LW Sport gets
carried on Five Live Sports Extra, hence it's not a problem.

IIRC, the opt-outs take up about 45 minutes a day, so it's more cost
effective to use this feature than it would be to broadcast a duplicate
station.

>   What worries me is that digital radio is almost still in a state
of 
> flux; in the space of three years, an industry-changing redefinition 
> of the DAB standard is released and it causes all sorts of headaches 
> and potential problems for manufacturers and broadcasters. FM stereo 
> was standardised in the early 60s and it's not

> really changed since, yet I still feel like my DAB receiver (my 
> venerable Wavefinder) is nothing more than 'sandbox kit', yet I've had

> it for years. I think half the problem is people just can't trust 
> hardware they buy today to work in three/four years' time, whatever 
> the assurances given.

I don't think it's /that/ bad but there's absolutely no denial that
standards change quickly because technology moves quickly.  Just look at
your PC after all.

And that's the route of the problem, and personally I suspect it's going
to get worse as time goes on.  DAB may look positively antique in 10
years time as far as technology is concerned.

However when you have sizable audience bases, it's extremely difficult
just to turn something off because something better has come along
because people don't want to go out and buy new equipment.  Such big
switch-offs are rare (last one I can think of was the migration from VHF
to UHF for TV signals which finally ended in the 1980s after UHF first
launched in the 1960s)
 

-
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/


All correspondence, attachments and agreements remain strictly subject to fully 
executed contract. (c) GCap Media plc 2008. All rights remain reserved. This 
e-mail (and any attachments) contains information which may be confidential, 
subject to intellectual property protection and may be legally privileged and 
protected from disclosure and unauthorised use. It is intended solely for the 
use of the individual(s) or entity to whom it is addressed and others 
specifically authorised to receive it. If you are not the intended recipient of 
this e-mail or any parts of it please telephone 020 7054 8000 immediately upon 
receipt. No other person is authorised to copy, adapt, forward, disclose, 
distribute or retain this e-mail in any form without prior specific permission 
in writing from an authorised representative of GCap Media plc. We will not 
accept liability for any claims arising as a result of the use of the internet 
to transmit information by or to GCap Media plc.

GCap Media plc. Registered address: 30 Leicester Square, London WC2H 7LA.  
Registered in England & Wales with No. 923454

-
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] DAB rollout...

[Andrew Bowden]

> Then you have GCap pulling out of DAB, the two stations closing down 
> (including Planet Rock, sniff)

Planet Rock has had a reprive whilst they discuss sale options - and
Global (who are taking over Gcap) are apparently more DAB friendly.

 
> Plus my Dad prefers Radio 4 on FM because it doesn't drop to a lower
> bitrate at peak time (why?!), call him an old cynic if you like. ;)

It goes low at certain points because the station splits into two - so
that the Long Wave opt outs can be broadcast on DAB.  For example,
8:30am, Today on one, Yesterday in Parliament on the other.

I presume they do the same for the Daily Service.   LW Sport gets
carried on Five Live Sports Extra, hence it's not a problem.

IIRC, the opt-outs take up about 45 minutes a day, so it's more cost
effective to use this feature than it would be to broadcast a duplicate
station.

>   What worries me is that digital radio is almost still in a state
> of flux; in the space of three years, an industry-changing 
> redefinition of the DAB standard is released and it causes all sorts 
> of headaches and potential problems for manufacturers and 
> broadcasters. FM stereo was standardised in the early 60s and it's not

> really changed since, yet I still feel like my DAB receiver (my 
> venerable Wavefinder) is nothing more than 'sandbox kit', yet I've had

> it for years. I think half the problem is people just can't trust 
> hardware they buy today to work in three/four years' time, whatever 
> the assurances given.

I don't think it's /that/ bad but there's absolutely no denial that
standards change quickly because technology moves quickly.  Just look at
your PC after all.

And that's the route of the problem, and personally I suspect it's going
to get worse as time goes on.  DAB may look positively antique in 10
years time as far as technology is concerned.

However when you have sizable audience bases, it's extremely difficult
just to turn something off because something better has come along
because people don't want to go out and buy new equipment.  Such big
switch-offs are rare (last one I can think of was the migration from VHF
to UHF for TV signals which finally ended in the 1980s after UHF first
launched in the 1960s)
 

-
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] DAB rollout...

[zen16083]

Yep, am waiting for freesat to launch as there is no digi signal on our
transmitter until 2012. Though freesat won’t give me radio reception ;-(

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brian Butterworth
Sent: 09 April 2008 07:44
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] DAB rollout...


On 09/04/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED]   <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  > wrote:
Bit of luck you didn't move to where I live There is not digital
anything here (not TV or DAB).

It's 99.9% likely that there is Freesat though!

http://www.freesat.co.uk/home.php

And it's always worth a try...

http://www.ukfree.tv/transmitters.php


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ]On Behalf Of Rupert Watson
Sent: 09 April 2008 05:35
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk 
Subject: Re: [backstage] DAB rollout...

I bought a Sony XDRS50B DAB radio last month so my wife could listen to BBC
London despite moving to Watford. As a result she loves DAB and has
converted a number of her friends.

For her it wasn't about quality; it was about convenience.


On 09/04/2008 03:47, "Christopher Woods" < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 > wrote:

> "And I'd want to switch to DAB why, exactly?"

Rupert Watson
www.root6.com 
+44 7787 554 801




ROOT 6 LIMITED
Registered in the UK at
4 WARDOUR MEWS, LONDON
W1F 8AJ
Company No. 03433253


-
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/



--
Please email me back if you need any more help.

Brian Butterworth
http://www.ukfree.tv