Steve, Thanks
On 25/01/2008, Steve Jolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Brian Butterworth wrote: > > The system I wrote for ITV over 15 years ago worked down to the FRAME - > > that's 1/25 of a second. That is how channels are scheduled. > > Scheduling systems may be accurate to 1/25 of a second, but that doesn't > necessarily imply that they are equally precise. The ability to change > their minds up to the last minute *and beyond* means that the accurate > times need only reflect the schedulers' intentions, rather than being > set in stone. However, my contention is that the schedule has been changed well ahead of broadcast. I don't doubt that there are changes made late, but the use of promotional films, indent sequences and continuity announcements means that almost all programmes start exactly on time. MyTV system, which at the time was lots of companies with different schedules and with the added complication of inserting a heap of different regional advertisements, certainly needed to be accurate and precise to get everyone working together. > My point was that the schedule on BBC TWO has been deliberately nudged > > along a few minutes to gain a competitive schedule advantage, and this > > is being withheld. > > > > I could just ask the BBC TWO scheduler if this is the case or not, I > > suppose. > > That would be more useful than asserting it without any evidence, > certainly. Aside from the actual timings, of course. And the new NaT on ITV1... > Would an EPG be useful if the titles were imprecise? > > > > 99% in such environments is terrible. > > Firstly, titles *are* imprecise - they contain spelling errors and > inconsistencies (eg "Brand New Top Gear" vs "Top Gear" vs "Best of Top > Gear", etc) that make it very hard for PVRs to do useful things with > them (eg title-based series detection). Secondly, millions of people > *do* find schedules useful despite the lack of total accuracy. So 99% > in such environments is adequate. This doesn't happen. They would all be recorded with the Microsoft PVR software, I'm afraid. See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006mj59 > As a justification for doing nothing, yes. > > Something has already been done - a standard for accurate recordings has > been agreed and implemented by the broadcasters and PVR manufacturers. But who would want one of these boxes with the facilities of ZX Spectum when I have a HD, 3D PVR with a Terrabyte of storage? > I'm just thinking of the user of the PVR systems. > > The people who have bought standards-compliant PVRs get accurate > recordings. I'll get onto Microsoft about this then! 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
