RE: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again
I said: I'll see if I can get Linux stats for you. Ashley has posted an update: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2007/11/linux_figures_1.html Here's what you get from Sage if you ask for a report on OS Type (as announced in the User-Agent string) and User numbers, over the month of September 2007. This isn't exactly the data that Ashley is using but I thought it might be useful for you to see the data we see. For *.bbc.co.uk: OS Type Users % of Total Users Windows 247,012,744 88.74 Macintosh 17,353,438 6.23 Nokia 3,675,224 1.32 Liberate2,784,762 1 SonyEricsson2,116,766 0.76 BlackBerry 1,921,066 0.69 Motorola1,062,323 0.38 Symbian 925,465 0.33 Samsung 802,450 0.29 LG 216,972 0.08 Orange 134,995 0.05 Sagem 104,371 0.04 TMobile 61,687 0.02 O2 39,747 0.01 Sharp 38,373 0.01 NEC 30,606 0.01 Panasonic 16,369 0.01 Linux 15,886 0.01 Sprint 13,175 0 BenQ12,008 0 DOS 9,300 0 Philips 5,853 0 VK 3,926 0 ZTE 3,523 0 Unix3,224 0 Sanyo 1,656 0 Toshiba 1,236 0 Siemens 1,067 0 Sun 539 0 Linux-gnu 171 0 IRIX88 0 AIX 85 0 HP-UX 48 0 Treo30 0 OSF111 0 Palm11 0 Lobster 10 0 Nextel 2 0 Total: 278,369,207 For news.bbc.co.uk only: OS Type Users % of Total Users Windows 113,519,850 90.49 Macintosh 10,866,724 8.66 BlackBerry 363,497 0.29 SonyEricsson180,916 0.14 Symbian 161,462 0.13 Nokia 150,007 0.12 Orange 54,518 0.04 Motorola52,587 0.04 TMobile 22,694 0.02 Samsung 20,939 0.02 O2 11,315 0.01 NEC 9,684 0.01 LG 8,218 0.01 Sprint 7,338 0.01 Linux 6,832 0.01 Unix2,764 0 VK 1,052 0 DOS 1,026 0 Sharp 968 0 ZTE 318 0 Sun 308 0 Sagem 265 0 Liberate187 0 Toshiba 175 0 Sanyo 116 0 BenQ91 0 Linux-gnu 86 0 Siemens 77 0 Philips 62 0 IRIX49 0 AIX 42 0 HP-UX 32 0 Panasonic 25 0 Treo10 0 OSF110 0 Palm10 0 Lobster 8 0 Nextel 1 0 Total: 125,444,263 Kevin. -- Kevin Hinde Head of Software Development, Journalism BBC Future Media Technology BC3 C1, Broadcast Centre t: 020 800 84725 m: 0771 501 2424 aim:kwdhinde - 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] Ashley Highfield speaks again
And it appears the Linux community has managed to ignore what he has to say and has organised a let's shout him down louder and louder until someone takes some notice of us party. No positive suggestions, just bleat bleat bleat we hate you... As ever. Cheers, R. Ashley has posted an update: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2007/11/linux_figures_1.html
RE: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again
I always hate that term community in this sense - because not all Linux users are the same after all. And I've seen plenty of Mac fans do similar things (usually when someone is critising their beloved Apple!) Anyway, where's the Windows community in all this ;) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Lockwood Sent: 05 November 2007 14:50 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again And it appears the Linux community has managed to ignore what he has to say and has organised a let's shout him down louder and louder until someone takes some notice of us party. No positive suggestions, just bleat bleat bleat we hate you... As ever. Cheers, R. Ashley has posted an update: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2007/11/linux_figures_1.html
RE: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again
The Windows community is patiently waiting for the Vista version of course :) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Bowden Sent: 05 November 2007 14:58 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again I always hate that term community in this sense - because not all Linux users are the same after all. And I've seen plenty of Mac fans do similar things (usually when someone is critising their beloved Apple!) Anyway, where's the Windows community in all this ;) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Lockwood Sent: 05 November 2007 14:50 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again And it appears the Linux community has managed to ignore what he has to say and has organised a let's shout him down louder and louder until someone takes some notice of us party. No positive suggestions, just bleat bleat bleat we hate you... As ever. Cheers, R. Ashley has posted an update: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2007/11/linux_figures_1.html
Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again
Absolutly. Not all Linux users are the same at all. I know some who are perfectly happy to accept that they've made their own decision about which OS to use, for whatever reason, and realise that because of that choice, they're going to have to make some sacrifices which may or may not outweigh the advantages. There are some on this list. The community that shouts the loudest is the one that doesn't realise this, and shouts; Bleat, bleat, me me me, bleat, I want it and I'll cry if I can't have it, bleat bleat, Slashdot, bleat bleat boo hoo IT'S NOT FAIR!!! at every perceived injustice, or slight on their beloved OS. They're the ones who royally p*** me off. I realise that that isn't every Linux user (by a long way), and I apologise for appearing to tar them all wth the same brush. Cheers, Rich. On 11/5/07, Andrew Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I always hate that term community in this sense - because not all Linux users are the same after all. And I've seen plenty of Mac fans do similar things (usually when someone is critising their beloved Apple!) Anyway, where's the Windows community in all this ;) -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Richard Lockwood *Sent:* 05 November 2007 14:50 *To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk *Subject:* Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again And it appears the Linux community has managed to ignore what he has to say and has organised a let's shout him down louder and louder until someone takes some notice of us party. No positive suggestions, just bleat bleat bleat we hate you... As ever. Cheers, R. Ashley has posted an update: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2007/11/linux_figures_1.html -- SilverDisc Ltd is registered in England no. 2798073 Registered address: 4 Swallow Court, Kettering, Northamptonshire, NN15 6XX
[backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Hi, I've just received an email from the BBC Archive project and noticed that all the email links are using Tinyurl. Now i would argue that the BBC shouldn't be using this type of service in emails, mainly as it contradicts the advice i give friends regarding following URLs in emails that do not appear associated with the sender (for example only follow links to bbc.co.uk in emails from the beeb) Tinyurl is a great service and i can understand why it is used, but i feel that using this type of service in a wider audience is a bad idea. What does everyone else think. Adam - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
I agree with you - just got the same message and had the same thought. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Adam Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 3:48 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails Hi, I've just received an email from the BBC Archive project and noticed that all the email links are using Tinyurl. Now i would argue that the BBC shouldn't be using this type of service in emails, mainly as it contradicts the advice i give friends regarding following URLs in emails that do not appear associated with the sender (for example only follow links to bbc.co.uk in emails from the beeb) Tinyurl is a great service and i can understand why it is used, but i feel that using this type of service in a wider audience is a bad idea. What does everyone else think. Adam - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Adam wrote: Tinyurl is a great service and i can understand why it is used, but i feel that using this type of service in a wider audience is a bad idea. We're having this exact same argument at the moment here, and I would agree that ideally this service should be located under the main publisher's domain. The Guardian uses tinyurl extensively, as do many other publications. We have decided to build our own system instead, as at least this way we are able to track who's clicking the links and where they're coming from as well. Seán - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On 11/5/07, Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I've just received an email from the BBC Archive project and noticed that all the email links are using Tinyurl. Now i would argue that the BBC shouldn't be using this type of service in emails, mainly as it contradicts the advice i give friends regarding following URLs in emails that do not appear associated with the sender (for example only follow links to bbc.co.uk in emails from the beeb) Tinyurl is a great service and i can understand why it is used, but i feel that using this type of service in a wider audience is a bad idea. What does everyone else think. Adam - 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/ Hi, I would have to partially agree with you on that. On the plus side, using a service like TinyURL does make life easier: URL's are shorter and prettier and helps people avoid nasty line break issues that some clients face. On the other hand, you are right - not being able to see the landing URL of a link is dangerous and potentially a security issue. I do believe however that this is mainly due to the fact that TinyURL is an external factor and not under direct control of the BBC itself. Should they actually implement a similar _private_ service , I wouldn't have any problems using it. Is. tiny.bbc.co.uk/2m2kLAp Spiros
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On Nov 5, 2007 8:03 AM, Spiros Denaxas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is. tiny.bbc.co.uk/2m2kLAp Avoiding obfuscation (and sub-domain complexity); www.bbc.co.uk/go/ashley_highfield_nov07_interview P Spiros - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On 05/11/2007, Tim Dobson wrote: Tinyurl.com isn't even that good. http://tiny.pl gives 4 digit ids to it's links and is shorter. Personally I prefer this. I once did little bit of research into similar services and found quite a few. If you are interested, here is the total list http://www.goaddr.com/ http://elfurl.com/ http://doiop.com/ http://www.shorl.com/ http://burl.fergcorp.com/ http://lnk.in/ http://lnk.in/index.php http://snipurl.com/ http://tiny.pl http://tinyurl.co.uk=at the time tinyurl.co.uk was separate from tinyurl.com http:// tinyurl.com http://tinyurl.com/ http://notlong.com/ http://makeashorterlink.com/ http://makeashorterlink.com/index.php http://www.lights.com/weblogs/shorterurls.html http://www.shorturl.com/ http://metamark.net/ http://www.freecenter.com/redirect.html http://www.2url.org/ http://link.toolbot.com/ http://enigo.com/shortlink This however was about a a year and 9 months ago, so I expect this list may have significant ommisions and errors in it, and take no responsibility at all for the content at the end of those links. Now back on topic, I agree with both, I think the BBC should give real urls, but have their own, tinyurl system as such. Much as I really don't like them, I think MSN has a similar thing something like : http://www.rubbishMSsite.com?go=DFG43 Of course loads of sites operate these systems, and there are security issues regarding them, for instance, letting public use a private one would mean that phishing scams could have links to http://redirect.ebay.com/34Fg5/ which to many would look real, especially if they ended up at 234.453.432.12:8080 and found an EXACT replica of ebay's site. I think there is some Free Software (as in Freedom for those who don't know me), code lying around that lets you do this, which might be interesting to look at, and useful to use, to adopt to the BBC's needs. Certainly a better choice than what ever Microsoft is offering cheap today. -Tim -- www.dobo.urandom.co.uk If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us still has one object. If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now has two ideas. - George Bernard Shaw
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Using TinyUrl is a symptom of poorly designed urls... On 05/11/2007, Sean Dillon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Adam wrote: Tinyurl is a great service and i can understand why it is used, but i feel that using this type of service in a wider audience is a bad idea. We're having this exact same argument at the moment here, and I would agree that ideally this service should be located under the main publisher's domain. The Guardian uses tinyurl extensively, as do many other publications. We have decided to build our own system instead, as at least this way we are able to track who's clicking the links and where they're coming from as well. Seán - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Let's not forget: http://www.GiganticURL.com/ On 11/5/07, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 05/11/2007, Tim Dobson wrote: Tinyurl.com isn't even that good. http://tiny.pl gives 4 digit ids to it's links and is shorter. Personally I prefer this. I once did little bit of research into similar services and found quite a few. If you are interested, here is the total list http://www.goaddr.com/ http://elfurl.com/ http://doiop.com/ http://www.shorl.com/ http://burl.fergcorp.com/ http://lnk.in/ http://snipurl.com/ http://tiny.pl http://tinyurl.co.uk=at the time tinyurl.co.uk was separate from tinyurl.com http:// tinyurl.com http://notlong.com/ http://makeashorterlink.com/ http://www.lights.com/weblogs/shorterurls.html http://www.shorturl.com/ http://metamark.net/ http://www.freecenter.com/redirect.html http://www.2url.org/ http://link.toolbot.com/ http://enigo.com/shortlink This however was about a a year and 9 months ago, so I expect this list may have significant ommisions and errors in it, and take no responsibility at all for the content at the end of those links. Now back on topic, I agree with both, I think the BBC should give real urls, but have their own, tinyurl system as such. Much as I really don't like them, I think MSN has a similar thing something like : http://www.rubbishMSsite.com?go=DFG43 Of course loads of sites operate these systems, and there are security issues regarding them, for instance, letting public use a private one would mean that phishing scams could have links to http://redirect.ebay.com/34Fg5/ which to many would look real, especially if they ended up at 234.453.432.12 :8080 and found an EXACT replica of ebay's site. I think there is some Free Software (as in Freedom for those who don't know me), code lying around that lets you do this, which might be interesting to look at, and useful to use, to adopt to the BBC's needs. Certainly a better choice than what ever Microsoft is offering cheap today. -Tim -- www.dobo.urandom.co.uk If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us still has one object. If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now has two ideas. - George Bernard Shaw - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On 11/5/07, George Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 17:52 +, Tom Loosemore wrote: Using TinyUrl is a symptom of poorly designed urls... It is? Lots of sites use URLs to pass data, on top of pointing at files on servers. The more complex the data, the more use it might have - the longer the URL gets - eg: http://journeyplanner.tfl.gov.uk/user/XSLT_TRIP_REQUEST2?language=ensessionID=JP26_1355129797requestID=2tripSelector1=1itdLPxx_view=detailtripSelection=oncommand=nopcalculateDistance=1 In case Tom's forgotten how to get to TVC from BH Perhaps not the best example - that link breaks, because it refers to a specific session. But if you're talking well-designed URLs for journey planning, see: http://www.traintimes.org.uk/cardiff/birmingham/8:00 - martin - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Ah! A nice phat session ID in there, loverly. Also means I can't get to that URL now: Session expired. The TFL journey planner has such potential, but from what I can see it's not terribly well built. Why does it have to ask me what type of data I'm inputting? Doesn't it know that SW1W 9TQ is a postcode, White City is a station, and Buckingham Palace is a place of interest? J On 05/11/2007, George Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 17:52 +, Tom Loosemore wrote: Using TinyUrl is a symptom of poorly designed urls... It is? Lots of sites use URLs to pass data, on top of pointing at files on servers. The more complex the data, the more use it might have - the longer the URL gets - eg: http://journeyplanner.tfl.gov.uk/user/XSLT_TRIP_REQUEST2?language=ensessionID=JP26_1355129797requestID=2tripSelector1=1itdLPxx_view=detailtripSelection=oncommand=nopcalculateDistance=1 In case Tom's forgotten how to get to TVC from BH A shorter version of that would be very useful, and I can't work out how a better designed URL would make it significantly shorter (apart from losing the /user/ and XSLT_TRIP_REQUEST2 bit) George - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 18:25 +, Jason Cartwright wrote: Ah! A nice phat session ID in there, loverly. Also means I can't get to that URL now: Session expired. The TFL journey planner has such potential, but from what I can see it's not terribly well built. Why does it have to ask me what type of data I'm inputting? Doesn't it know that SW1W 9TQ is a postcode, White City is a station, and Buckingham Palace is a place of interest? OK, that was a terrible example. I'll try and think of a better one :) 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/
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
I see the benefit of capitalisation there, lest it be misread as http://www.GigantiCurl.com/ Discovering that, ahem, Number 2 interpretation was wrong was a big relief. I'll get my coat... On Nov 5, 2007 10:10 AM, Martin Deutsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's not forget: http://www.GiganticURL.com/ On 11/5/07, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 05/11/2007, Tim Dobson wrote: Tinyurl.com isn't even that good. http://tiny.pl gives 4 digit ids to it's links and is shorter. Personally I prefer this. I once did little bit of research into similar services and found quite a few. If you are interested, here is the total list http://www.goaddr.com/ http://elfurl.com/ http://doiop.com/ http://www.shorl.com/ http://burl.fergcorp.com/ http://lnk.in/ http://snipurl.com/ http://tiny.pl http://tinyurl.co.uk=at the time tinyurl.co.uk was separate from tinyurl.com http:// tinyurl.com http://notlong.com/ http://makeashorterlink.com/ http://www.lights.com/weblogs/shorterurls.html http://www.shorturl.com/ http://metamark.net/ http://www.freecenter.com/redirect.html http://www.2url.org/ http://link.toolbot.com/ http://enigo.com/shortlink This however was about a a year and 9 months ago, so I expect this list may have significant ommisions and errors in it, and take no responsibility at all for the content at the end of those links. Now back on topic, I agree with both, I think the BBC should give real urls, but have their own, tinyurl system as such. Much as I really don't like them, I think MSN has a similar thing something like : http://www.rubbishMSsite.com?go=DFG43 Of course loads of sites operate these systems, and there are security issues regarding them, for instance, letting public use a private one would mean that phishing scams could have links to http://redirect.ebay.com/34Fg5/ which to many would look real, especially if they ended up at 234.453.432.12 :8080 and found an EXACT replica of ebay's site. I think there is some Free Software (as in Freedom for those who don't know me), code lying around that lets you do this, which might be interesting to look at, and useful to use, to adopt to the BBC's needs. Certainly a better choice than what ever Microsoft is offering cheap today. -Tim -- www.dobo.urandom.co.uk If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us still has one object. If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now has two ideas. - George Bernard Shaw - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Martin Deutsch wrote: But if you're talking well-designed URLs for journey planning, see: http://www.traintimes.org.uk/cardiff/birmingham/8:00 Thank you for that site pointer. An excellent example, and a great one to bookmark! adam - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Adam wrote: What does everyone else think. bbc.com/2e5u8e David PS it's smaller than tinyurl and it's a use for bbc.com too... (unless it's used internationally) - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On 5 Nov 2007, at 12:58, David Greaves wrote: Adam wrote: What does everyone else think. bbc.com/2e5u8e David PS it's smaller than tinyurl and it's a use for bbc.com too... (unless it's used internationally) 'course, bbc.co.uk has had some kind of redirect magic for a while: http://bbc.co.uk/zanelowe/ though i suspect the problem (and usage of tinyurl) is that to get one of those nice urls hooked up, you gotta email someone a request, who needs to get approval from a manager probably not all that efficient when all you want to do is send an email out and go home (or to the pub!) - james -- James Cox, Internet Consultant t: 07968 349990 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: http://imaj.es/
Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again
Considering, Ashley's recent interview on backstage podcast, in which he tries to dispel some of the displease aimed at the iPlayer from the Free Software and Open Source Communities, it is quite unfortunate that he has made such a public mistake at their expense, in the past few days. Considering the Communities are apparently as small as 15,000 users, I am surprised we have been able to be so vocal. (Yes I am suggesting that practically every GNU+Linux user with a user agent string including linux visits at least one page on the BBC, once a month.) My question to Kevin Hinde would be, how many users are we unsure of their Operating system? Where are they classed? For example, I have a small blog and I have some visitor statistics (using bbclone) on that. The 3rd most popular operating system is ? ie unrecognised. for an example see http://bbclone.de/demo/ The BBC must have similar results, whose OS it can't distinguish, if so where are these? This is important because many Free software web browsers, in particular those on GNU+Linux obscure, miss out, or fake the UA String. This is sometimes done for privacy; not wanting an easy way to work out which exploit get which box. more often than not it is done because some silly software designers think that on some websites (obviously not BBC, tends to be Educational Software Vendors in my experience) they can show the user something saying this site is not compatible with you browser, operating system etc. Obviously UA strings can be faked, indeed there is a firefox extension that I currently have installed which lets me change it to show me running what ever browser on what ever platform I want. -Tim -- www.dobo.urandom.co.uk If each of us have one object, and we exchange them, then each of us still has one object. If each of us have one idea, and we exchange them, then each of us now has two ideas. - George Bernard Shaw
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On 05/11/2007, David Greaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Adam Lindsay wrote: Martin Deutsch wrote: But if you're talking well-designed URLs for journey planning, see: http://www.traintimes.org.uk/cardiff/birmingham/8:00 Thank you for that site pointer. An excellent example, and a great one to bookmark! True - but that is just a clever UI to a search engine. nah, that's Matthew Somerville making our lives easier... And for any 'clever' URL scheme you can think of for indexing content I can guarantee that TMTOWTDI - and if I use *my* way to make up the URL and not your way then I'm toast You want an 8am train from Cardiff to Birmingham? http://www.traintimes.org.uk/8:00/cardiff/birmingham The requested URL /8:00/cardiff/birmingham was not found on this server. nooo! Matthew will now doubtless fix the url to work every which way, and he's got more important things to do... - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
Martin Belam wrote: though i suspect the problem (and usage of tinyurl) is that to get one of those nice urls hooked up, you gotta email someone a request, who needs to get approval from a manager Heh, heh, that's not even the half of it ;-) Of course: *that's* why tinyurl is used... Never ascribe to technical incompetence that which can be explained by management bureaucracy. David - 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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
David Greaves wrote: Adam Lindsay wrote: Martin Deutsch wrote: But if you're talking well-designed URLs for journey planning, see: http://www.traintimes.org.uk/cardiff/birmingham/8:00 Thank you for that site pointer. An excellent example, and a great one to bookmark! Thanks. :-) You want an 8am train from Cardiff to Birmingham? http://www.traintimes.org.uk/8:00/cardiff/birmingham The requested URL /8:00/cardiff/birmingham was not found on this server. Hmm, works fine here. ;-) sigh people are so complicated... Well, all you had to do was ask. ;) The reason it's as it is by default, by the way, is because URLs are hierarchical, and it's pretty pointless to supply a time without a from or a to (whereas cutting any bit off a default URL returns what you'd expect). The front page gives the manual, such as it is. Another site I've done, http://landmarktrust.dracos.co.uk/ uses a key=value URL structure, so that it doesn't matter in what order the variables are presented. TinyURL is clever - it's small and easy to *transcribe*. Well, unless you can get 1 and l, or O and 0 confused. :) ATB, Matthew | http://traintimes.org.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] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
though i suspect the problem (and usage of tinyurl) is that to get one of those nice urls hooked up, you gotta email someone a request, who needs to get approval from a manager Heh, heh, that's not even the half of it ;-) m On 05/11/2007, James Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5 Nov 2007, at 12:58, David Greaves wrote: Adam wrote: What does everyone else think. bbc.com/2e5u8e David PS it's smaller than tinyurl and it's a use for bbc.com too... (unless it's used internationally) 'course, bbc.co.uk has had some kind of redirect magic for a while: http://bbc.co.uk/zanelowe/ though i suspect the problem (and usage of tinyurl) is that to get one of those nice urls hooked up, you gotta email someone a request, who needs to get approval from a manager probably not all that efficient when all you want to do is send an email out and go home (or to the pub!) - james -- James Cox, Internet Consultant t: 07968 349990 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: http://imaj.es/ -- 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/
Re: [backstage] Use of Tinyurl in Emails
On Nov 5, 2007 10:26 PM, Matthew Somerville [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Greaves wrote: Adam Lindsay wrote: Martin Deutsch wrote: But if you're talking well-designed URLs for journey planning, see: http://www.traintimes.org.uk/cardiff/birmingham/8:00 Thank you for that site pointer. An excellent example, and a great one to bookmark! Thanks. :-) You want an 8am train from Cardiff to Birmingham? http://www.traintimes.org.uk/8:00/cardiff/birmingham The requested URL /8:00/cardiff/birmingham was not found on this server. Hmm, works fine here. ;-) sigh people are so complicated... Well, all you had to do was ask. ;) The reason it's as it is by default, by the way, is because URLs are hierarchical, and it's pretty pointless to supply a time without a from or a to (whereas cutting any bit off a default URL returns what you'd expect). How can I help? Hi, yes, I need a train now please, 8:00 from Cardiff And what's the destination? I don't care I'm sorry, madam, we do need a destination. Do you know who I am?! I'm sorry, no... I'm a Celebrity, get me out of here! P The front page gives the manual, such as it is. Another site I've done, http://landmarktrust.dracos.co.uk/ uses a key=value URL structure, so that it doesn't matter in what order the variables are presented. TinyURL is clever - it's small and easy to *transcribe*. Well, unless you can get 1 and l, or O and 0 confused. :) ATB, Matthew | http://traintimes.org.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] Ashley Highfield speaks again
My question to Kevin Hinde would be, how many users are we unsure of their Operating system? Where are they classed? For example, I have a small blog and I have some visitor statistics (using bbclone) on that. The 3rd most popular operating system is ? ie unrecognised. for an example see http://bbclone.de/demo/ The BBC must have similar results, whose OS it can't distinguish, if so where are these? data from a mainstream non-BBC site (c2m UK users a month) Windows 95.1 % Macintosh 3.2 % Unknown 1 % Linux 0.5 % - 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] Ashley Highfield speaks again
On 05/11/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This always makes me laugh, whether it's Firefox users or Linux users. Because you *can* change the UA in my favourite software, it automatically follows that 30% of reported visitors *are* faking it. (Sounds of straws being grasped) At no point have I stated 30% etc and you know that. Try backing up what you say with facts rather than a bit of fiction that everyone 1/2 believes. I wish I could say 30% of all BBC traffic was GNU+Linux. But i believe that would be lying. Just because I made a suggestion, you don't have to immediately ridicule it on the grounds that you don't like the camp I originate from because of your perceptions about GNU+Linux as a platform v windows v mac. I have not said that I hate the BBC, or anything of the sort, but if I do not stand up for what I believe in, there is no way I can guarantee anyone else will do it for me. No the only reason I am actually arguuinging this seemingly pointless point, is because I think the iPlayer has fantastic potential and that the BBC is an awesome resource that we can't afford let fall apart. But let's leave this petty disagreement aside and start afresh. If we assume that all unknowns are GNU+Linux (stupid and highly likely, untrue but just consider it) and that known linux vists are a half of all unknown visits (which for now we are assuming are linux) that means, in terms of the BBC site, going by the statistics above, we could be talking about in the region of 45,000(15000 + (2*15,000)) BBC GNU+Linux users I Think my maths is correct, if it's not my apologies, please correct me! My logic, well i know we don't know who the unknowns are or why they are unknown so one can only speculate there. ( I have) On 05/11/2007, Tom Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Windows 95.1 % Macintosh 3.2 % Unknown 1 % Linux 0.5 % What I was, and still am, interested to know is how many Unknown hits the BBC gets. whether it makes any difference to the GNU+Linux or not, it still would be comforting to see these numbers because it would make sure that nothing funny was being done with them. IT also would be good because it would tell us that the BBC didn't regard their software as 100% accurate, which I'm sure is something nobody would say, but is currently being implied.
Re: [backstage] Ashley Highfield speaks again
On 11/6/07, Tim Dobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 05/11/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This always makes me laugh, whether it's Firefox users or Linux users. Because you *can* change the UA in my favourite software, it automatically follows that 30% of reported visitors *are* faking it. (Sounds of straws being grasped) At no point have I stated 30% etc and you know that. Try backing up what you say with facts rather than a bit of fiction that everyone 1/2 believes. Oh please. Don't try and dismiss the point by picking up on one obviously illustrative statistic. Of course you never mentioned 30%. But you're claiming that the actual figures for Linux use are much higher than the evidence shows. You're choosing the kind of figures you want, concocting a theory to fit those figures, and then passing it off as fact. You're not a homeopath are you? Rich.
