On Tuesday 23 October 2007 15:36, Brian Butterworth wrote: .. > Have you ever even tried suggesting this to Sky?
No, it's a random set of thoughts about something which is eminently doable if you completely control the hardware & software platform, which Sky do. > The usage of the second tuner therefore becomes something like: > > * If not recording, > > * If not in EPG, > > * Periodically, scan channels, grab frames, dump to disk > > BSkyB say that you cannot. _Sky_ can change their own rules to make it so that _they_ can run an application on the system that does this. > > Who said anything about this being an interactive service? > > You did when you mentioned having some buttons to press. Perhaps > "application" - meaning not just watching the TV - would have been a > better word.. Same difference on a machine I don't control. (A web service such as Gmail is both a service & an application) > But the box uses an overlay to do the video, the contents of the video > buffer are not available in OpenTV. It's not MY rules... If you control the platform, because its a closed system, you can do pretty much what you like. Like, for example, change the software. Unless of course Sky did something really (not-bright) like make it impossible *FOR THEM* to update the actual software on the system. (rather than just any open tv apps on the system). (Why dumb? Every piece of software has bugs and bug fixes are the most obvious reason to need to update the software) > > Not necessarily - they might not simply have thought it worthwhile. > I don't think Sky do "worthwhile", they only do "profitable". *shrug* When I said worthwhile I meant worthwhile to them. That means profitable, or as something which they think will be popular and help sell more subscriptions. (which boils down to the same thing) > If it was worthwhile, then promo clips of the movies on "Box Office" and > the movie channels would surely have been a priority? I dunno. Their business, not mine. They *do* do promo clips of movies though on the Anytime service on a Sky+ box. Anyway, you're convinced they can't do it. I maintain that _Sky_ could do this if they want to because at the end of the day software can be updated and changed (sans caveat above), and its not a particularly difficult thing to do. > You can only have 20 favourites though. 50. > Once again this falls back to the problem with televisions being "shared" > devices, unlike a PC or mobile phone which is personal. Auto favourites is > fine, but they only work on a personal basis. No, not with LFU, it'd still make a difference. (If you wanted to be fancy you could have it tempered by the LFU counts for each hour). Least frequently used policies in web caches work particularly well for example, even where the groups of people are very disparate groups. > > By "forcing" you to skip > > past them > > its a constant reminder that you *don't* have Sky HD (if you don't :) ). > > (favourites do enable that, but I've no idea how many people use > > favourites) > > Yes, that is the idea, you should be able to get a job at Sky now :-) Heh. :-) Michael. - 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/
