RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Christopher Woods]

Bloc not block ;) 

> -Original Message-
> From: Gordon Joly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 28 May 2007 21:55
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Cc: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk; Timothy-john Bishop
> Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
> 
> At 17:43 +0100 28/5/07, Timothy-john Bishop wrote:
> >No...  the "R" is already there... It's just silent... I heard they 
> >will be running for the contract to deal with the complaints 
> with the 
> >eurovision song contesting voting irregularities..
> >
> 
> I thought the problem was with block voting by members of 
> a ... block?
> 
> Gordo
> 
> --
> "Think Feynman"/
> http://pobox.com/~gordo/
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]///
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To 
> unsubscribe, please visit 
> http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>   Unofficial list archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Gordon Joly]

At 17:43 +0100 28/5/07, Timothy-john Bishop wrote:
No...  the "R" is already there... It's just silent... I heard they 
will be running for the contract to deal with the complaints with 
the eurovision song contesting voting irregularities..




I thought the problem was with block voting by members of a ... block?

Gordo

--
"Think Feynman"/
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]///
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Timothy-john Bishop]

No...  the "R" is already there... It's just silent... I heard they will be
running for the contract to deal with the complaints with the eurovision
song contesting voting irregularities..



On 28/05/07, Gordon Joly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


At 20:04 +0100 27/5/07, Kim Plowright wrote:
>>I _suspect_ they just fob people off and ignore complaints they
>>dislike. Or maybe I was unlucky and the two people I communicated with
>>didn't do their job properly?
>
>
>Audience comms and complaints are outsourced to Capita.
>-


You missed out a letter "r" I believe?

Gordo

--
"Think Feynman"/
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]///
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  Unofficial
list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/





--
This email is intended for the named recipient(s) only.
Its contents are confidential and may only be retained by the named
recipient(s) and may only be copied or disclosed with the prior consent of
Timothy-John Bishop. If you are not the intended recipient please discard
this email and notify the sender as quickly as possible. This email and any
attached files have been scanned for the presence of computer viruses.
However, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own risk.
Please note that electronic mail may be monitored in accordance with the
Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practices) (Interception of
Communications) Regulations 2000.

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Gordon Joly]

At 20:04 +0100 27/5/07, Kim Plowright wrote:

I _suspect_ they just fob people off and ignore complaints they
dislike. Or maybe I was unlucky and the two people I communicated with
didn't do their job properly?



Audience comms and complaints are outsourced to Capita.
-



You missed out a letter "r" I believe?

Gordo

--
"Think Feynman"/
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]///
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Christopher Woods]

And the call-tracking app is being developed by iSoft...


... Two wonderful companies 

> -Original Message-
> From: Kim Plowright [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 27 May 2007 20:04
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
> 
> > I _suspect_ they just fob people off and ignore complaints they 
> > dislike. Or maybe I was unlucky and the two people I 
> communicated with 
> > didn't do their job properly?
> 
> 
> Audience comms and complaints are outsourced to Capita.
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To 
> unsubscribe, please visit 
> http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>   Unofficial list archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Kim Plowright]

I _suspect_ they just fob people off and ignore complaints they
dislike. Or maybe I was unlucky and the two people I communicated with
didn't do their job properly?



Audience comms and complaints are outsourced to Capita.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[vijay chopra]

I _suspect_ they just fob people off and ignore complaints they
dislike. Or maybe I was unlucky and the two people I communicated with
didn't do their job properly?



Nope, that's normal; I used that site to complain about the changes to the
606 message boards, I was directed to a URL that I'd already read, and made
reference to in the complaint.

I'm sure they didn't even read the complaint properly; I think they just saw
the words "606" and "message boards" and gave me a formula reply...

Vijay.

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Andy]

On 26/05/07, vijay chopra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Good luck with that; I tried to complain to Ofcom about the recent Panorama
on WiFi


I think you may want to look at:


Doubt it will do much good though.

In my experience they feed you false information on the first
complaint. On the second they tell you that it will take them time to
look into it, and that they will respond ASAP. 6 months on and still
waiting!!!

I _suspect_ they just fob people off and ignore complaints they
dislike. Or maybe I was unlucky and the two people I communicated with
didn't do their job properly?

Andy

--
First they ignore you
then they laugh at you
then they fight you
then you win.
- Mohandas Gandhi
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[vijay chopra]

On 25/05/07, Colin Moorcraft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


I only got it once. Discrimination?

Ofcom will hear of this...

- Colin



Good luck with that; I tried to complain to Ofcom about the recent Panorama
on WiFi (The whole thing was blatently misleading, factually wrong and
biased), but appeantly Ofcom dosn't deal with bias or factual innacuracy in
BBC programming (they sent me a letter with the address of the BBC trust, so
I could waste my time complaining to them instead). So they probably don't
deal with bias in email distribution either.

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Colin Moorcraft]

I only got it once. Discrimination?

Ofcom will hear of this...

- Colin


On 25 May 2007, at 21:08, Ciaran Hamilton wrote:


I got it twice too, actually - I meant to say that but I forgot.

Seems a little weird. I'm guessing it's just a glitch.

On 25/05/07, vijay chopra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On 25/05/07, Andy Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:

So did I.  Well I got it twice to be precise - sent date within 6
minutes of each other.

The same thing happened to me; does mean I  took up two invites...?






Colin Moorcraft, onTV Europe Ltd.
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://onTV.eu.com
mobile: +44-(0)7766 333067


Information in this e-mail may be legally privileged, confidential
and is intended exclusively for the addressee(s). Any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of this
e-mail is strictly prohibited without the express permission of the
sender. If you have received it in error, please immediately notify
the sender by return e-mail and delete it from your system.
The views expressed are those of the individual sender, except
where the sender specifically states them to be the views of
onTV Europe Ltd.

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Gary Kirk]

No I got two too. I assume most or all people did.

On 25/05/07, vijay chopra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On 25/05/07, Andy Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> So did I.  Well I got it twice to be precise - sent date within 6
> minutes of each other.


The same thing happened to me; does mean I  took up two invites...?




--
Gary Kirk
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Ciaran Hamilton]

I got it twice too, actually - I meant to say that but I forgot.

Seems a little weird. I'm guessing it's just a glitch.

On 25/05/07, vijay chopra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




On 25/05/07, Andy Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> So did I.  Well I got it twice to be precise - sent date within 6
> minutes of each other.


The same thing happened to me; does mean I  took up two invites...?

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[vijay chopra]

On 25/05/07, Andy Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



So did I.  Well I got it twice to be precise - sent date within 6
minutes of each other.



The same thing happened to me; does mean I  took up two invites...?

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Andy Leighton]

On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 05:44:50PM +0100, Gary Kirk wrote:
> I just received an e-mail which seemed to confirm I was part of the
> trial - excerpt:
> 
> We'll e-mail you your account details in just a few weeks and then
> you'll have access to hundreds of hours of programmes.

So did I.  Well I got it twice to be precise - sent date within 6
minutes of each other.

-- 
Andy Leighton => [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials" 
   - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Ciaran Hamilton]

I did too :D

I'm definitely looking forward to the trial. I'll definitely send in
feedback, hee.

- Ciaran.

On 25/05/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Me three ;-))


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gary Kirk
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 5:45 PM
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

I just received an e-mail which seemed to confirm I was part of the
trial - excerpt:


[cut]

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[zen16083]

Me three ;-))


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gary Kirk
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 5:45 PM
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

I just received an e-mail which seemed to confirm I was part of the
trial - excerpt:

We'll e-mail you your account details in just a few weeks and then
you'll have access to hundreds of hours of programmes.

:D!

On 19/04/07, Matthew Cashmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It¹ll take a few weeks I would imagine before you¹ll hear much  the list
is
> getting blasted at the moment as you¹d expect!
>
> I¹ll post up more information as I know it.
>
> m
>
>
> On 19/4/07 15:53, "Paul Jefferson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Do you know when we will hear if we are in or not? (Or is the fact that
> I've
> > not heard mean I'm not in?)
> > Paul (Long Time Lurker)
> >
> >
> > On 19/04/07, James Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 19 Apr 2007, at 14:39, Scot McSweeney-Roberts wrote:
> >>
> >>> > James Cox wrote:
> >>> >
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> I hope that if this gets past the various layers of governance and
> >>>> >> gets budget to become a 'real' project, some effort into hooking
> >>>> >> up into bittorrent (I'm sure Bram could come up with some trickery
> >>>> >> to have certified users (ie, license fee payers ;)) only which
> >>>> >> would permit some kind of higher bandwidth product.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > I've never really felt comfortable with distributed P2P for content
> >>> > that I've paid for. It's great when bittorrent is used for
> >>> > transfering ubuntu iso's around (as it's members of a community
> >>> > helping others in the same community), it's less great but at least
> >>> > makes some sense when it's used for piracy (as it's still a members
> >>> > of a community helping other members in a community, all be it an
> >>> > illicit one) but when it comes to content that I'm paying somebody
> >>> > to send to me, I don't see why I should waste my upload bandwith
> >>> > for someone else's business model. Even with content from the BBC,
> >>> > I pay the licence fee so why should I pay in bandwidth as well?
> >>> >
> >>
> >> Fair enough, but i love the fact I can grab an ISO or ... er...
> >> certain content very rapidly using the P2P model. Since I pay a flat
> >> rate anyhow, and i've got loads of upload bandwidth to use, I'm not
> >> that fussed. :)
> >>
> >> - james
> >> -
> >> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk <http://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/
> >>
> >
>
>
> ___
> Matthew Cashmore
> Development Producer
>
> BBC Future Media & Technology, Research and Innovation
> BC4B5, Broadcast Centre, Media Village, W12 7TS
>
> T:020 8008 3959(02  83959)
> M:07711 913241(072 83959)
>
>


--
Gary Kirk

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Gary Kirk]

I just received an e-mail which seemed to confirm I was part of the
trial - excerpt:

We'll e-mail you your account details in just a few weeks and then
you'll have access to hundreds of hours of programmes.

:D!

On 19/04/07, Matthew Cashmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

It¹ll take a few weeks I would imagine before you¹ll hear much ­ the list is
getting blasted at the moment as you¹d expect!

I¹ll post up more information as I know it.

m


On 19/4/07 15:53, "Paul Jefferson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Do you know when we will hear if we are in or not? (Or is the fact that
I've
> not heard mean I'm not in?)
> Paul (Long Time Lurker)
>
>
> On 19/04/07, James Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On 19 Apr 2007, at 14:39, Scot McSweeney-Roberts wrote:
>>
>>> > James Cox wrote:
>>> >
 >>
 >>
 >> I hope that if this gets past the various layers of governance and
 >> gets budget to become a 'real' project, some effort into hooking
 >> up into bittorrent (I'm sure Bram could come up with some trickery
 >> to have certified users (ie, license fee payers ;)) only which
 >> would permit some kind of higher bandwidth product.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I've never really felt comfortable with distributed P2P for content
>>> > that I've paid for. It's great when bittorrent is used for
>>> > transfering ubuntu iso's around (as it's members of a community
>>> > helping others in the same community), it's less great but at least
>>> > makes some sense when it's used for piracy (as it's still a members
>>> > of a community helping other members in a community, all be it an
>>> > illicit one) but when it comes to content that I'm paying somebody
>>> > to send to me, I don't see why I should waste my upload bandwith
>>> > for someone else's business model. Even with content from the BBC,
>>> > I pay the licence fee so why should I pay in bandwidth as well?
>>> >
>>
>> Fair enough, but i love the fact I can grab an ISO or ... er...
>> certain content very rapidly using the P2P model. Since I pay a flat
>> rate anyhow, and i've got loads of upload bandwidth to use, I'm not
>> that fussed. :)
>>
>> - james
>> -
>> 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/
>>
>


___
Matthew Cashmore
Development Producer

BBC Future Media & Technology, Research and Innovation
BC4B5, Broadcast Centre, Media Village, W12 7TS

T:020 8008 3959(02  83959)
M:07711 913241(072 83959)





--
Gary Kirk

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Matthew Cashmore]

It¹ll take a few weeks I would imagine before you¹ll hear much ­ the list is
getting blasted at the moment as you¹d expect!

I¹ll post up more information as I know it.

m


On 19/4/07 15:53, "Paul Jefferson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Do you know when we will hear if we are in or not? (Or is the fact that I've
> not heard mean I'm not in?)
> Paul (Long Time Lurker)
> 
>  
> On 19/04/07, James Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
>> On 19 Apr 2007, at 14:39, Scot McSweeney-Roberts wrote:
>> 
>>> > James Cox wrote:
>>> >
 >> 
 >>
 >> I hope that if this gets past the various layers of governance and
 >> gets budget to become a 'real' project, some effort into hooking
 >> up into bittorrent (I'm sure Bram could come up with some trickery
 >> to have certified users (ie, license fee payers ;)) only which
 >> would permit some kind of higher bandwidth product.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I've never really felt comfortable with distributed P2P for content
>>> > that I've paid for. It's great when bittorrent is used for
>>> > transfering ubuntu iso's around (as it's members of a community
>>> > helping others in the same community), it's less great but at least
>>> > makes some sense when it's used for piracy (as it's still a members
>>> > of a community helping other members in a community, all be it an
>>> > illicit one) but when it comes to content that I'm paying somebody
>>> > to send to me, I don't see why I should waste my upload bandwith
>>> > for someone else's business model. Even with content from the BBC,
>>> > I pay the licence fee so why should I pay in bandwidth as well?
>>> >
>> 
>> Fair enough, but i love the fact I can grab an ISO or ... er...
>> certain content very rapidly using the P2P model. Since I pay a flat
>> rate anyhow, and i've got loads of upload bandwidth to use, I'm not
>> that fussed. :)
>> 
>> - james
>> -
>> 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/
>> 
> 


___
Matthew Cashmore
Development Producer

BBC Future Media & Technology, Research and Innovation
BC4B5, Broadcast Centre, Media Village, W12 7TS

T:020 8008 3959(02  83959)
M:07711 913241(072 83959)

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Andrew Bowden]

> Slightly Off Topic, as you mentioned Ubuntu ISOs, nice to see 
> that the BBC is not covering this on it's technology news, it 
> gave an awful lot of press to Vista.

The BBC News Technology section is rather more mainstream focused - it's
not The Register.  And I think that's reflected in the content it
decides to cover.  An Ubuntu release is not going to have the mainstream
interest that a Windows release will have.

The section does cover non-Microsoft OS's -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6552113.stm is about Leopard.  And
there is some Linux coverage such as the article covering Dell
pre-installing Linux on PCs.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6506027.stm


-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Frank Wales]

Mutt Baskerville wrote:

Slightly Off Topic, as you mentioned Ubuntu ISOs, nice to see that the
BBC is not covering this on it's technology news, it gave an awful lot
of press to Vista.


They even gave coverage to some World of Warcraft expansion pack!  Then
again, I've never agreed with them on their definition of 'news'.


Perhaps it'll become newsworthy now that Michael Dell is running
Ubuntu Linux (and OpenOffice and Firefox) on his new laptop:
  http://direct2dell.com/one2one/archive/2007/04/18/12261.aspx#comments
--
Frank Wales [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Christopher Woods]

Indeed, it's something I as a music tech student have both seen myself and
have been told by tutors - and it makes sense. I remember putting up with
dodgy projections in cinemas because the sound was alright, but the one time
I was watching one of the Pirates films and the centre speaker started
pumping out 20kHz digital distortion my head felt like it was going to
explode.

What DAB radio do you have? I'm lucky enough to have a (still-operational!)
Wavefinder, which is literally 100% digital signal path until the output
stage - directly sends the raw MPEG stream to the PC which decodes it and
plays it back which is going through my monitors (speakers, not screens ;)
and I can _definitely_ tell the difference between FM and digital, even if I
do nothing more than hook up my MP3 player to my line level input on my
audio interface.


I've heard digital artefacts on Radio 3 on DAB. If we're ever going to turn
off analogue, that problem HAS to be fixed. Also, the issues of compressing
already-compressed material, the way commercial stations just send their
FM-processed signal to the digital encoder without changing it... Plus the
technical limitations of MPEG Layer-2 to boot. I think half the problem is
that the vast majority of people don't have a decent setup for listening to
their radio - and the stations they listen to don't really value preserving
the quality of the source audio above making it the LOUDEST on the dial and
getting listener figures. The BBC is uniquely positioned to spearhead the
charge against the loss of quality in radio broadcasting, including the
preservation of quality in their broadcasts. The Beeb shouldn't be pushed
into putting more and more services on their already strained multiplexes by
commercial expectations, because they'll never achieve the kind of quality
they had on launch if they carry on doing that.

These little portable DAB radios are both great and awful for the industry,
and for quality standards in general. People don't expect the quality, the
quality will disappear.

> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Bowden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 19 April 2007 10:34
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
> 
> 
> I have a DAB radio and I confess I can't tell the difference between
> (say) Radio 2 on FM and Radio 2 on DAB.  I know some 
> audiophiles who look at me in disbelief when I say that.  
> 
> And anyway it's actually a slight lie.  When I try to compare 
> them, the thing I notice most is the FM hiss.
> 
> I'm far better on visual artifacts I must say.  Interestingly 
> though a colleague of mine from BBC News told me that surveys 
> have shown people are far more likely to put up with a dodgy 
> video picture if the sound is clean and crisp.
> 
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To 
> unsubscribe, please visit 
> http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>   Unofficial list archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[James Cox]

On 19 Apr 2007, at 16:07, Mutt Baskerville wrote:

Slightly Off Topic, as you mentioned Ubuntu ISOs, nice to see that  
the
BBC is not covering this on it's technology news, it gave an awful  
lot

of press to Vista.


They even gave coverage to some World of Warcraft expansion pack!   
Then

again, I've never agreed with them on their definition of 'news'.


Would be interesting to see what would happen if Shuttleworth were to  
retain the services of waggener edstrom (microsoft's PR agency) - i'm  
sure they could get some big splashes.



-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Mutt Baskerville]

> Slightly Off Topic, as you mentioned Ubuntu ISOs, nice to see that the
> BBC is not covering this on it's technology news, it gave an awful lot
> of press to Vista.

They even gave coverage to some World of Warcraft expansion pack!  Then
again, I've never agreed with them on their definition of 'news'.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Andy]

On 19/04/07, Scot McSweeney-Roberts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Even with content
from the BBC, I pay the licence fee so why should I pay in bandwidth as
well?


Because Peer to Peer is the only current scalable way of distributing content.
Server to client just isn't scalable enough.

Server to client is also inefficient for peek loads. If you have
something that is released and loads of people go to fetch it at the
same time either your site will need enough servers to handle the peak
load, which would mean under normal load they would not being used, or
your site fails under heavy load.

Peer to Peer reduces this problem.

Slightly Off Topic, as you mentioned Ubuntu ISOs, nice to see that the
BBC is not covering this on it's technology news, it gave an awful lot
of press to Vista.

nice to see that the BBC believes in neutrality and isn't favouring
parties it has signed agreements with. /sarcasm

Andy

--
First they ignore you
then they laugh at you
then they fight you
then you win.
- Mohandas Gandhi
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Paul Jefferson]

Do you know when we will hear if we are in or not? (Or is the fact that I've
not heard mean I'm not in?)
Paul (Long Time Lurker)


On 19/04/07, James Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



On 19 Apr 2007, at 14:39, Scot McSweeney-Roberts wrote:

> James Cox wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I hope that if this gets past the various layers of governance and
>> gets budget to become a 'real' project, some effort into hooking
>> up into bittorrent (I'm sure Bram could come up with some trickery
>> to have certified users (ie, license fee payers ;)) only which
>> would permit some kind of higher bandwidth product.
>
>
> I've never really felt comfortable with distributed P2P for content
> that I've paid for. It's great when bittorrent is used for
> transfering ubuntu iso's around (as it's members of a community
> helping others in the same community), it's less great but at least
> makes some sense when it's used for piracy (as it's still a members
> of a community helping other members in a community, all be it an
> illicit one) but when it comes to content that I'm paying somebody
> to send to me, I don't see why I should waste my upload bandwith
> for someone else's business model. Even with content from the BBC,
> I pay the licence fee so why should I pay in bandwidth as well?
>

Fair enough, but i love the fact I can grab an ISO or ... er...
certain content very rapidly using the P2P model. Since I pay a flat
rate anyhow, and i've got loads of upload bandwidth to use, I'm not
that fussed. :)

- james
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  Unofficial
list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[James Cox]

On 19 Apr 2007, at 14:39, Scot McSweeney-Roberts wrote:


James Cox wrote:




I hope that if this gets past the various layers of governance and  
gets budget to become a 'real' project, some effort into hooking  
up into bittorrent (I'm sure Bram could come up with some trickery  
to have certified users (ie, license fee payers ;)) only which  
would permit some kind of higher bandwidth product.



I've never really felt comfortable with distributed P2P for content  
that I've paid for. It's great when bittorrent is used for  
transfering ubuntu iso's around (as it's members of a community  
helping others in the same community), it's less great but at least  
makes some sense when it's used for piracy (as it's still a members  
of a community helping other members in a community, all be it an  
illicit one) but when it comes to content that I'm paying somebody  
to send to me, I don't see why I should waste my upload bandwith  
for someone else's business model. Even with content from the BBC,  
I pay the licence fee so why should I pay in bandwidth as well?




Fair enough, but i love the fact I can grab an ISO or ... er...  
certain content very rapidly using the P2P model. Since I pay a flat  
rate anyhow, and i've got loads of upload bandwidth to use, I'm not  
that fussed. :)


 - james
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Scot McSweeney-Roberts]

James Cox wrote:




I hope that if this gets past the various layers of governance and 
gets budget to become a 'real' project, some effort into hooking up 
into bittorrent (I'm sure Bram could come up with some trickery to 
have certified users (ie, license fee payers ;)) only which would 
permit some kind of higher bandwidth product.



I've never really felt comfortable with distributed P2P for content that 
I've paid for. It's great when bittorrent is used for transfering ubuntu 
iso's around (as it's members of a community helping others in the same 
community), it's less great but at least makes some sense when it's used 
for piracy (as it's still a members of a community helping other members 
in a community, all be it an illicit one) but when it comes to content 
that I'm paying somebody to send to me, I don't see why I should waste 
my upload bandwith for someone else's business model. Even with content 
from the BBC, I pay the licence fee so why should I pay in bandwidth as 
well?



Scot
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Jonathan Tweed]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 01:09:24 +0100, James Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Fixed Length Trial? Public Value Test? (one has to love the steps to
> get something done. bravo for trying).

There's been a fair bit of BBC bashing on this list in the past, so thank you 
for recognising that we do care and we are trying ;-)

> Sure it makes sense - i'm not being overly grumpy, just assuming that
> most of the archive will have had to have been transcoded into
> something to enable reasonable online delivery; I presume it's stored
> in a petabyte archive store someplace, in some kind of raw or semi-
> raw format natively - thus encoding it --- getting it to real / wm is
> great- you have that, but adding in a divx/mpg transcoder so that a
> level of quality is preserved would be great.
> 
> Why do i care? because whilst streaming is great for live events,
> imho... it's not really fantastic for enjoying the backlist. 

I would love the content in different formats too. As Tom said in another 
reply, Flash would be great as an option, as would higher quality download only 
versions. I know the Archive team are thinking about this stuff, but I don't 
know any details.

> I hope that if this gets past the various layers of governance and
> gets budget to become a 'real' project, some effort into hooking up
> into bittorrent (I'm sure Bram could come up with some trickery to
> have certified users (ie, license fee payers ;)) only which would
> permit some kind of higher bandwidth product.

I would guess it's more likely that the Archive will become more closely linked 
to iPlayer as time goes on, but that would provide the same advantages.

Cheers
Jonathan

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Richard P Edwards]

No way Kim, I'm NOT normal. ;-)

On 19 Apr 2007, at 13:28, Kim Plowright wrote:


/me guesses, somehow, that the denizens of this list are somewhat
demographically homogeneous.


I got kicked off after about 60% when I said I was male. hhm.
Oh well, perhaps 35-44 age bracket is already full.


-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,  
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/ 
mailing_list.html.  Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail- 
archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/


-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Kim Plowright]

/me guesses, somehow, that the denizens of this list are somewhat
demographically homogeneous.

> I got kicked off after about 60% when I said I was male. hhm.
> Oh well, perhaps 35-44 age bracket is already full.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Kirk Northrop]

Tim Cowlishaw wrote:

True but a slight exaggeration - A certain level of video quality still
qualifies as an acceptable threshold, IMO. In addition, crystal clear sound
and crystal clear vision are both pretty useless if they're not in sync.


Indeed. But as long as the glitches are small and the audio doesn't 
glitch at the same time as the video (or vice-versa), you'd be surprised 
what you can get away with.


--
From the North, this is Kirk
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Tim Cowlishaw]

On 4/19/07, Kirk Northrop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Yes, it's well known (and proved) that you can do what you want with the
picture if the sound is OK.




True but a slight exaggeration - A certain level of video quality still
qualifies as an acceptable threshold, IMO. In addition, crystal clear sound
and crystal clear vision are both pretty useless if they're not in sync.


Cheers,

Tim

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Kirk Northrop]

Andrew Bowden wrote:

I'm far better on visual artifacts I must say.  Interestingly though a
colleague of mine from BBC News told me that surveys have shown people
are far more likely to put up with a dodgy video picture if the sound is
clean and crisp.


Yes, it's well known (and proved) that you can do what you want with the 
picture if the sound is OK.


--
From the North, this is Kirk
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Andrew Bowden]

> Do you think it's a generation gap thing? Or, like that 
> recent article I read on DigitalSpy about the results of the 
> DAB quality survey, people who don't vocalise their concern 
> about lowering quality just don't fully understand what a 
> good quality stream should look / sound like? Admittedly this 
> is maybe bordering on digital snobbery ("What? Sub-4mbps 
> bitrates in this video file? OUTRAGEOUS! JEEVES - GET THE BBC 
> TRUST ON THE LINE IMMEDIATELY" etc...) but I do believe that 
> a lot of people maybe can subconsciously detect that a stream 
> or broadcast isn't great quality, but as they have no obvious 
> benchmark to go against, or have no real grasp of the 
> potential quality that can be achieved using even the present 
> incumbent formats, they don't voice their concern or 
> complaint about it?

I have a DAB radio and I confess I can't tell the difference between
(say) Radio 2 on FM and Radio 2 on DAB.  I know some audiophiles who
look at me in disbelief when I say that.  

And anyway it's actually a slight lie.  When I try to compare them, the
thing I notice most is the FM hiss.

I'm far better on visual artifacts I must say.  Interestingly though a
colleague of mine from BBC News told me that surveys have shown people
are far more likely to put up with a dodgy video picture if the sound is
clean and crisp.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Gordon Joly]

At 19:30 +0100 18/4/07, Tom Loosemore wrote:
On 18/04/07, Gordon Joly 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


At 16:39 +0100 18/4/07, Ian Forrester wrote:

Hi All,

Outside of the framework debate...

The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.
Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form
is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go
to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.



Many thanks for your time - unfortunately due to the specifications
of this trial, we are not currently aiming to recruit past or present
BBC staff.

!!!


yep, and quite right too, if the BBC Trust's decision making is not 
just impartial but seen to be impartial. Allowing BBC staff past or 
present to join put the latter at risk, since  the data from this 
trial will form the core empirical input into the BBC Trust's Public 
Value Test on the Open Archive (which is separate from iPlayer 
'catch up' Public Value Test, the decision on which is due soonish.


That's why they need so much personal data, to make sure the sample 
is balanced across a whole series of dimensions to reflect the UK 
population as a whole (hence UK only)


We're also gonna release 50 hours for download by anyone in the UK, 
whether on the trial or not.


- oh, and it's all non-DRM'd, albeit geo-IP'd


I see. Very balanced.

Gordo

--
"Think Feynman"/
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]///
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Gordon Joly]

At 20:00 +0100 18/4/07, James Cox wrote:

I'm in-- i think?




Funny that. You are on this list. Hence, you have a close 
*association* with the BBC through Backstage.



Gordo

--
"Think Feynman"/
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]///
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Christopher Woods]

I read on the a BBC News Technology article that the iPlayer was going to be
reengineered to be Mac-compatible, which is something both I AND my
Mac-loving housemate are VERY keen to see in action!

I also watch stuff on my 17" LCD PC screen, which runs natively at 720p
(1280x720) and I can really see the difference... I'm watching some Stargate
SG-1 encodes as I write this up, the video bitrate is ~1mbps and I can still
see the artefacts. I'm used to good quality analogue TV (which today STILL
outperforms DTT imo!) and DSAT-level bitrates for TV, and I can only
tolerate Internet-level bitrates for a while before they start to wind me
up. My Dad is the same as me, but I also note that my 15-year-old sister
watches LOADS of YouTube and MySpace videos, and she has a big 16:9 monitor
on her computer (I want one like it!)

Do you think it's a generation gap thing? Or, like that recent article I
read on DigitalSpy about the results of the DAB quality survey, people who
don't vocalise their concern about lowering quality just don't fully
understand what a good quality stream should look / sound like? Admittedly
this is maybe bordering on digital snobbery ("What? Sub-4mbps bitrates in
this video file? OUTRAGEOUS! JEEVES - GET THE BBC TRUST ON THE LINE
IMMEDIATELY" etc...) but I do believe that a lot of people maybe can
subconsciously detect that a stream or broadcast isn't great quality, but as
they have no obvious benchmark to go against, or have no real grasp of the
potential quality that can be achieved using even the present incumbent
formats, they don't voice their concern or complaint about it?

Thinking out loud here...

> -Original Message-
> From: James Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 19 April 2007 02:10
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
> 
> 
> On 19 Apr 2007, at 01:48, Christopher Woods wrote:
> 
> > I bet your siblings don't watch downloaded media on a big, high- 
> > quality television set. YouTube and even broadband-bitrate 
> streaming 
> > formats just look shockingly bad on a TV screen - the old 
> interlaced 
> > sets of yore, whose method of display helped to mask the encoding 
> > artefacts to a degree, are increasingly relegated to bedrooms and 
> > lofts, with big, flatscreen LCD and plasma sets taking 
> centre stage - 
> > and they don't hide _anything_ in the source image. Even 
> when I hook 
> > up my laptop via DVI to my parents'
> > modest
> > 22" Samsung LCD (720p, HD Ready) in the kitchen, and sit a few feet 
> > away, things like BBC News streams look pretty ugly.
> >
> > Freeview looks even worse, especially on HD-ready flatscreens - but 
> > that's another bugbear of mine. If the BBC _REALLY_ cared about 
> > quality, they'd encode to H264 (or my favourite at the 
> moment, x264) - 
> > full-blown H.
> > 264/AVC
> > as used for BBC HD would be overkill because you need a BEAST of a 
> > machine to even play big resolutions back without it falling into a 
> > complete heap, but whilst x264 would be great for any HD 
> content (we 
> > can only
> > hope!) x264
> > can also give comparable quality to any of the ASP codecs 
> like xvid or 
> > divx and bring in slightly smaller filesizes.
> >
> > And, as there's things like the CCCP codec pack and freely 
> available 
> > filters, the BBC could create a simple codec bundle - the 
> BBC Playback 
> > Pack, which contained the filters, splitters and codecs 
> necessary and 
> > maybe an automated update mechanism which would run whilst you were 
> > watching a BBC video to check for updates or additional codecs down 
> > the line. And, as a bonus, the more skilled PC users could 
> keep their 
> > own codec installs if they already had them set up 
> perfectly, and then 
> > just be able to view the high-quality content without 
> having to have 
> > the BBC pack installed.
> >
> > It'd be a crying shame - and a missed opportunity - if the 
> BBC don't 
> > think of doing something like this and encoding with an AVC 
> codec, at 
> > least for any HD content that's planned to be offered 
> eventually via 
> > the platform.
> >
> > 
> >
> Well here's the kicker: they are all using their computers, 
> which have a resolution at least as high as the new flashy 
> flat screen TVs.  
> So yeah, they see the artifacts... and don't care that much. 
> (that said - free to students is obviously much more valuable 
> than great quality... )
> 
> I agree- I don't think this is any harder than trying to push 
> it via real. I

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[James Cox]

On 19 Apr 2007, at 01:48, Christopher Woods wrote:

I bet your siblings don't watch downloaded media on a big, high- 
quality
television set. YouTube and even broadband-bitrate streaming  
formats just
look shockingly bad on a TV screen - the old interlaced sets of  
yore, whose
method of display helped to mask the encoding artefacts to a  
degree, are
increasingly relegated to bedrooms and lofts, with big, flatscreen  
LCD and
plasma sets taking centre stage - and they don't hide _anything_ in  
the
source image. Even when I hook up my laptop via DVI to my parents'  
modest
22" Samsung LCD (720p, HD Ready) in the kitchen, and sit a few feet  
away,

things like BBC News streams look pretty ugly.

Freeview looks even worse, especially on HD-ready flatscreens - but  
that's
another bugbear of mine. If the BBC _REALLY_ cared about quality,  
they'd
encode to H264 (or my favourite at the moment, x264) - full-blown H. 
264/AVC
as used for BBC HD would be overkill because you need a BEAST of a  
machine
to even play big resolutions back without it falling into a  
complete heap,
but whilst x264 would be great for any HD content (we can only  
hope!) x264
can also give comparable quality to any of the ASP codecs like xvid  
or divx

and bring in slightly smaller filesizes.

And, as there's things like the CCCP codec pack and freely available
filters, the BBC could create a simple codec bundle - the BBC  
Playback Pack,
which contained the filters, splitters and codecs necessary and  
maybe an
automated update mechanism which would run whilst you were watching  
a BBC
video to check for updates or additional codecs down the line. And,  
as a
bonus, the more skilled PC users could keep their own codec  
installs if they

already had them set up perfectly, and then just be able to view the
high-quality content without having to have the BBC pack installed.

It'd be a crying shame - and a missed opportunity - if the BBC  
don't think
of doing something like this and encoding with an AVC codec, at  
least for
any HD content that's planned to be offered eventually via the  
platform.




Well here's the kicker: they are all using their computers, which  
have a resolution at least as high as the new flashy flat screen TVs.  
So yeah, they see the artifacts... and don't care that much. (that  
said - free to students is obviously much more valuable than great  
quality... )


I agree- I don't think this is any harder than trying to push it via  
real. I accept it's early days, but this is vital if the BBC wants to  
get this right - picking good quality codecs and running with them.


that said, don't forget - the source material for stuff like jeeves  
and wooster et al isn't that great to begin with -- so there's only  
so much you can do.


I can't wait to see if i have been accepted- really looking forward  
to being able to call up the great content that exists -- as and  
when. And hoping very much that it doesn't go the way of 4OD: Windows  
only!


- James

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Christopher Woods]

I bet your siblings don't watch downloaded media on a big, high-quality
television set. YouTube and even broadband-bitrate streaming formats just
look shockingly bad on a TV screen - the old interlaced sets of yore, whose
method of display helped to mask the encoding artefacts to a degree, are
increasingly relegated to bedrooms and lofts, with big, flatscreen LCD and
plasma sets taking centre stage - and they don't hide _anything_ in the
source image. Even when I hook up my laptop via DVI to my parents' modest
22" Samsung LCD (720p, HD Ready) in the kitchen, and sit a few feet away,
things like BBC News streams look pretty ugly.

Freeview looks even worse, especially on HD-ready flatscreens - but that's
another bugbear of mine. If the BBC _REALLY_ cared about quality, they'd
encode to H264 (or my favourite at the moment, x264) - full-blown H.264/AVC
as used for BBC HD would be overkill because you need a BEAST of a machine
to even play big resolutions back without it falling into a complete heap,
but whilst x264 would be great for any HD content (we can only hope!) x264
can also give comparable quality to any of the ASP codecs like xvid or divx
and bring in slightly smaller filesizes.

And, as there's things like the CCCP codec pack and freely available
filters, the BBC could create a simple codec bundle - the BBC Playback Pack,
which contained the filters, splitters and codecs necessary and maybe an
automated update mechanism which would run whilst you were watching a BBC
video to check for updates or additional codecs down the line. And, as a
bonus, the more skilled PC users could keep their own codec installs if they
already had them set up perfectly, and then just be able to view the
high-quality content without having to have the BBC pack installed.

It'd be a crying shame - and a missed opportunity - if the BBC don't think
of doing something like this and encoding with an AVC codec, at least for
any HD content that's planned to be offered eventually via the platform.



> -Original Message-
> From: James Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 19 April 2007 01:13
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
> 
> 
> On 18 Apr 2007, at 23:07, Tom Loosemore wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > > Shame. I love the idea of digging into blackadder and jeeves and 
> > > wooster and all the other comedy greats -- but getting them in a 
> > > format that is at least somewhat representative of their quality.
> > > Sucks that I'd have to stream it certainly encoding 
> into divx or 
> > > mpg would show some understanding of the marketspace.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean when you suggest encoding as divx or mpg 
> > would show an understanding of the marketplace. It is unfortunately 
> > not quite so simple.
> >
> > This is a limited, fixed length trial that will hopefully lead to a 
> > Public Value Test. Surely then it makes sense to make use 
> of the BBC's 
> > existing Real/WM infrastructure to deliver the content?
> >
> > Hell, if we were going to show some understanding of the 
> marketplace 
> > we'd do it all in Flash (which I still hope we do, TBH)
> >
> 
> It's interesting; I've got a couple of younger siblings - one young  
> enough to still be called a teenager -- just. When asking him and my  
> friends how they're consuming media online, almost all accept 
> the dip  
> in quality -- a youtube effect? -- in exchange for the immediacy of  
> delivery. It's the designers and artists amongst my friends who sit  
> patiently waiting for their HD versions to download. :)
> 
> What does that mean for the beeb? I think maybe a bit of both:  
> wouldn't it be nice to open up the archives globally to everyone  
> using flash in a youtube deal but reserving the higher quality  
> versions for uk natives
> 
> -  james
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To 
> unsubscribe, please visit 
> http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>   Unofficial list archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[James Cox]

On 18 Apr 2007, at 23:07, Tom Loosemore wrote:




> Shame. I love the idea of digging into blackadder and jeeves and
> wooster and all the other comedy greats -- but getting them in a
> format that is at least somewhat representative of their quality.
> Sucks that I'd have to stream it certainly encoding into divx
> or mpg would show some understanding of the marketspace.

I'm not sure what you mean when you suggest encoding as divx or mpg
would show an understanding of the marketplace. It is unfortunately
not quite so simple.

This is a limited, fixed length trial that will hopefully lead to a
Public Value Test. Surely then it makes sense to make use of the
BBC's existing Real/WM infrastructure to deliver the content?

Hell, if we were going to show some understanding of the  
marketplace we'd do it all in Flash (which I still hope we do, TBH)




It's interesting; I've got a couple of younger siblings - one young  
enough to still be called a teenager -- just. When asking him and my  
friends how they're consuming media online, almost all accept the dip  
in quality -- a youtube effect? -- in exchange for the immediacy of  
delivery. It's the designers and artists amongst my friends who sit  
patiently waiting for their HD versions to download. :)


What does that mean for the beeb? I think maybe a bit of both:  
wouldn't it be nice to open up the archives globally to everyone  
using flash in a youtube deal but reserving the higher quality  
versions for uk natives


-  james
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[James Cox]

On 18 Apr 2007, at 22:51, Jonathan Tweed wrote:


On 18 Apr 2007, at 20:03, James Cox wrote:



On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:34, Tom Loosemore wrote:


it'll be delivered via the internet... using that funny HTML stuff

(streamed in Real/WM I expect, cos that'll make it easier to set  
up - it is a trial after all...).


The actual site itself is very nice, IMHO (not that I had  
anything to do with it!)





Shame. I love the idea of digging into blackadder and jeeves and  
wooster and all the other comedy greats -- but getting them in a  
format that is at least somewhat representative of their quality.  
Sucks that I'd have to stream it certainly encoding into divx  
or mpg would show some understanding of the marketspace.


I'm not sure what you mean when you suggest encoding as divx or mpg  
would show an understanding of the marketplace. It is unfortunately  
not quite so simple.


This is a limited, fixed length trial that will hopefully lead to a  
Public Value Test. Surely then it makes sense to make use of the  
BBC's existing Real/WM infrastructure to deliver the content?




Fixed Length Trial? Public Value Test? (one has to love the steps to  
get something done. bravo for trying).


Sure it makes sense - i'm not being overly grumpy, just assuming that  
most of the archive will have had to have been transcoded into  
something to enable reasonable online delivery; I presume it's stored  
in a petabyte archive store someplace, in some kind of raw or semi- 
raw format natively - thus encoding it --- getting it to real / wm is  
great- you have that, but adding in a divx/mpg transcoder so that a  
level of quality is preserved would be great.


Why do i care? because whilst streaming is great for live events,  
imho... it's not really fantastic for enjoying the backlist.


I hope that if this gets past the various layers of governance and  
gets budget to become a 'real' project, some effort into hooking up  
into bittorrent (I'm sure Bram could come up with some trickery to  
have certified users (ie, license fee payers ;)) only which would  
permit some kind of higher bandwidth product.


That would almost be worth paying for. :)

-- james



Disclaimer: I work at the BBC but not on the Archive Trial. I do  
however work in a related area and have had limited access to a pre- 
trial version of the site. I really like what I've seen so far and  
would encourage anyone who is thinking about it to sign up for the  
trial before it fills up. My views are of course my own and not  
necessarily those of my employer.


understood - and thanks for commenting.

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Tom Loosemore]

> Shame. I love the idea of digging into blackadder and jeeves and
> wooster and all the other comedy greats -- but getting them in a
> format that is at least somewhat representative of their quality.
> Sucks that I'd have to stream it certainly encoding into divx
> or mpg would show some understanding of the marketspace.

I'm not sure what you mean when you suggest encoding as divx or mpg
would show an understanding of the marketplace. It is unfortunately
not quite so simple.

This is a limited, fixed length trial that will hopefully lead to a
Public Value Test. Surely then it makes sense to make use of the
BBC's existing Real/WM infrastructure to deliver the content?



Hell, if we were going to show some understanding of the marketplace we'd do
it all in Flash (which I still hope we do, TBH)

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Jonathan Tweed]

On 18 Apr 2007, at 20:03, James Cox wrote:



On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:34, Tom Loosemore wrote:


it'll be delivered via the internet... using that funny HTML stuff

(streamed in Real/WM I expect, cos that'll make it easier to set  
up - it is a trial after all...).


The actual site itself is very nice, IMHO (not that I had anything  
to do with it!)





Shame. I love the idea of digging into blackadder and jeeves and  
wooster and all the other comedy greats -- but getting them in a  
format that is at least somewhat representative of their quality.  
Sucks that I'd have to stream it certainly encoding into divx  
or mpg would show some understanding of the marketspace.


I'm not sure what you mean when you suggest encoding as divx or mpg  
would show an understanding of the marketplace. It is unfortunately  
not quite so simple.


This is a limited, fixed length trial that will hopefully lead to a  
Public Value Test. Surely then it makes sense to make use of the  
BBC's existing Real/WM infrastructure to deliver the content?


Cheers
Jonathan

Disclaimer: I work at the BBC but not on the Archive Trial. I do  
however work in a related area and have had limited access to a pre- 
trial version of the site. I really like what I've seen so far and  
would encourage anyone who is thinking about it to sign up for the  
trial before it fills up. My views are of course my own and not  
necessarily those of my employer.

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Richard P Edwards]

Thanks Tom,

I appreciate you suggestion, and will do.
Vocab looks great.
All the best
RichE

On 18 Apr 2007, at 20:04, Tom Loosemore wrote:

The Trust have to base all their decisions on the needs of UK  
licence fee payers, first and foremost.


But yes, a global internet, that challenges lots of assumptions  
that previously were not even explicity.


Why not write to them and tell 'em - seriously ,it's their job to  
hear views from people who pay the licence fee. http:// 
www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/


PS There are 100,000 of pages in welsh, gaelic etc. on bbc.co.uk  
BTW... and there will be a welsh version of iPlayer In fact one  
of the coolest hidden gems of the BBC is bbc.co.uk/vocab , which  
could very easily be adapted for polish just by adding  
dictionary... This is one of the apps I'd personally like to Open  
Source... or offer as an API...


On 18/04/07, Richard P Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey Tom,

By making it UK centric, isn't the BBC missing the public values of  
an awful lot of us that no longer inhabit that island all year?
Or are there pages written in Polish etc, just to please the total  
UK population. I wish the Trust would accept BBC internet  
presence for what it is, a part of the World-Wide Web.


(Not sarcastic, as I am a firm believer that I am English wherever  
I happen to be, especially as a UK tax payer.)

Regards
RichE

On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:30, Tom Loosemore wrote:




On 18/04/07, Gordon Joly < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 16:39 +0100 18/4/07, Ian Forrester wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Outside of the framework debate...
>
>The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.
>Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form
>is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go
>to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.


Many thanks for your time - unfortunately due to the specifications
of this trial, we are not currently aiming to recruit past or present
BBC staff.

!!!

yep, and quite right too, if the BBC Trust's decision making is  
not just impartial but seen to be impartial. Allowing BBC staff  
past or present to join put the latter at risk, since  the data  
from this trial will form the core empirical input into the BBC  
Trust's Public Value Test on the Open Archive (which is separate  
from iPlayer 'catch up' Public Value Test, the decision on which  
is due soonish.


That's why they need so much personal data, to make sure the  
sample is balanced across a whole series of dimensions to reflect  
the UK population as a whole (hence UK only)


We're also gonna release 50 hours for download by anyone in the  
UK, whether on the trial or not.


- oh, and it's all non-DRM'd, albeit geo-IP'd

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Chris Henden]

Vocab is used for English -> Somali on our South East Wales site:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/southeast/sites/help/pages/somali.shtml

(Cardiff has a large Somali population)

Chris

On 18 Apr 2007, at 20:04, Tom Loosemore wrote:

The Trust have to base all their decisions on the needs of UK  
licence fee payers, first and foremost.


But yes, a global internet, that challenges lots of assumptions  
that previously were not even explicity.


Why not write to them and tell 'em - seriously ,it's their job to  
hear views from people who pay the licence fee. http:// 
www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/


PS There are 100,000 of pages in welsh, gaelic etc. on bbc.co.uk  
BTW... and there will be a welsh version of iPlayer In fact one  
of the coolest hidden gems of the BBC is bbc.co.uk/vocab , which  
could very easily be adapted for polish just by adding  
dictionary... This is one of the apps I'd personally like to Open  
Source... or offer as an API...


On 18/04/07, Richard P Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey Tom,

By making it UK centric, isn't the BBC missing the public values of  
an awful lot of us that no longer inhabit that island all year?
Or are there pages written in Polish etc, just to please the total  
UK population. I wish the Trust would accept BBC internet  
presence for what it is, a part of the World-Wide Web.


(Not sarcastic, as I am a firm believer that I am English wherever  
I happen to be, especially as a UK tax payer.)

Regards
RichE

On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:30, Tom Loosemore wrote:




On 18/04/07, Gordon Joly < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 16:39 +0100 18/4/07, Ian Forrester wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Outside of the framework debate...
>
>The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.
>Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form
>is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go
>to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.


Many thanks for your time - unfortunately due to the specifications
of this trial, we are not currently aiming to recruit past or present
BBC staff.

!!!

yep, and quite right too, if the BBC Trust's decision making is  
not just impartial but seen to be impartial. Allowing BBC staff  
past or present to join put the latter at risk, since  the data  
from this trial will form the core empirical input into the BBC  
Trust's Public Value Test on the Open Archive (which is separate  
from iPlayer 'catch up' Public Value Test, the decision on which  
is due soonish.


That's why they need so much personal data, to make sure the  
sample is balanced across a whole series of dimensions to reflect  
the UK population as a whole (hence UK only)


We're also gonna release 50 hours for download by anyone in the  
UK, whether on the trial or not.


- oh, and it's all non-DRM'd, albeit geo-IP'd

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Eamonn Neylon]

Hey, that seems more legitimate than being denied progress for answering
'male' to the gender question!

-Eamonn

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon Joly
Sent: 18 April 2007 17:44
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Cc: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk; Ian Forrester
Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

At 16:39 +0100 18/4/07, Ian Forrester wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Outside of the framework debate...
>
>The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors. 
>Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form is 
>up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go to 
>http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.


Many thanks for your time - unfortunately due to the specifications of
this trial, we are not currently aiming to recruit past or present BBC
staff.




Gordo

--
"Think Feynman"/
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]///
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,
please visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/



-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[James Cox]

On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:34, Tom Loosemore wrote:


it'll be delivered via the internet... using that funny HTML stuff

(streamed in Real/WM I expect, cos that'll make it easier to set up  
- it is a trial after all...).


The actual site itself is very nice, IMHO (not that I had anything  
to do with it!)





Shame. I love the idea of digging into blackadder and jeeves and  
wooster and all the other comedy greats -- but getting them in a  
format that is at least somewhat representative of their quality.  
Sucks that I'd have to stream it certainly encoding into divx or  
mpg would show some understanding of the marketspace.


- james


-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Tom Loosemore]

The Trust have to base all their decisions on the needs of UK licence fee
payers, first and foremost.

But yes, a global internet, that challenges lots of assumptions that
previously were not even explicity.

Why not write to them and tell 'em - seriously ,it's their job to hear views
from people who pay the licence fee. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/

PS There are 100,000 of pages in welsh, gaelic etc. on bbc.co.uk BTW... and
there will be a welsh version of iPlayer In fact one of the coolest
hidden gems of the BBC is bbc.co.uk/vocab , which could very easily be
adapted for polish just by adding dictionary... This is one of the apps I'd
personally like to Open Source... or offer as an API...

On 18/04/07, Richard P Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Hey Tom,
By making it UK centric, isn't the BBC missing the public values of an
awful lot of us that no longer inhabit that island all year?
Or are there pages written in Polish etc, just to please the total UK
population. I wish the Trust would accept BBC internet presence for what
it is, a part of the World-Wide Web.

(Not sarcastic, as I am a firm believer that I am English wherever I
happen to be, especially as a UK tax payer.)
Regards
RichE

On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:30, Tom Loosemore wrote:



On 18/04/07, Gordon Joly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> At 16:39 +0100 18/4/07, Ian Forrester wrote:
> >Hi All,
> >
> >Outside of the framework debate...
> >
> >The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.
> >Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form
> >is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go
> >to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.
>
>
> Many thanks for your time - unfortunately due to the specifications
> of this trial, we are not currently aiming to recruit past or present
> BBC staff.
>
> !!!


yep, and quite right too, if the BBC Trust's decision making is not just
impartial but seen to be impartial. Allowing BBC staff past or present to
join put the latter at risk, since  the data from this trial will form the
core empirical input into the BBC Trust's Public Value Test on the Open
Archive (which is separate from iPlayer 'catch up' Public Value Test, the
decision on which is due soonish.

That's why they need so much personal data, to make sure the sample is
balanced across a whole series of dimensions to reflect the UK population as
a whole (hence UK only)

We're also gonna release 50 hours for download by anyone in the UK,
whether on the trial or not.

- oh, and it's all non-DRM'd, albeit geo-IP'd

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[James Cox]

I'm in-- i think?


On 18 Apr 2007, at 20:55, Richard P Edwards wrote:


And the same here .
I got kicked off after about 60% when I said I was male. hhm.
Oh well, perhaps 35-44 age bracket is already full.

On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:40, Toni Sant wrote:


Here's what I got:

 Many thanks for your time - unfortunately you did not meet the
 recruitment criteria for this trial.

Is there a list of recruitment criteria?

Cheers...

   ...t.s.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester
Sent: 18 April 2007 16:40
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: [backstage] BBC Archive trial


Hi All,

Outside of the framework debate...

The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.
Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your
interest form is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking
part in the trial, go to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.

There is no press launch or anything like that yet, so your
really the first people to find out about this. So do it
today before the 20,000 places disappear.

Cheers,

Ian Forrester
Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
BC4 B4, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7RJ

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 02080083965

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To
unsubscribe, please visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
  Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
* 

To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go  
to http://www.hull.ac.uk/legal/email_disclaimer.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/


--

James Cox,
Internet Consultant
t: 07968 349990  e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: http://www.imajes.info/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[James Bridle]

27 here, but otherwise similar profile, similarly rejected. Who are you 
expecting to get off this list?



shorttermmemoryloss.com



Christopher Woods wrote:

"Many thanks for your time - unfortunately you did not meet the recruitment
criteria for this trial."

Ditto me, how could I possibly not qualify? I'm 21, I have a fast broadband
connection, I also am an active mobile data user with a flatrate package and
I'm in that perfect area of candidacy age-wise (18-24 male bracket)... Or
maybe that's why I wasn't accepted... Maybe I should say I'm a 74 year old
grandma of 4?

  

-Original Message-
From: Toni Sant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 18 April 2007 19:40

To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

Here's what I got:

 Many thanks for your time - unfortunately you did not meet 
the  recruitment criteria for this trial.


Is there a list of recruitment criteria?

Cheers...

   ...t.s.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester

Sent: 18 April 2007 16:40
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: [backstage] BBC Archive trial


Hi All,

Outside of the framework debate...

The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors. 
Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your 
  
interest form is 

up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the 
  
trial, go to 


http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.

There is no press launch or anything like that yet, so your 
  
really the 

first people to find out about this. So do it today before 
  
the 20,000 


places disappear.

Cheers,

Ian Forrester
Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
BC4 B4, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7RJ
 
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

phone: 02080083965

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, 
please visit 
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
  Unofficial list archive: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/


  


-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

  

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Christopher Woods]

I was amazed that they're even considering opening up their archive, given
that if it's going to include anything which isn't natural history or news /
in-house documentaries, I can't see how there's NOT going to be royalties
and copyright ownership disputes. How is this being done, and what content
is being used in the trial?
 
I can easily see how the trial would be UK-only, given those very same
rights issues... Maybe the BBC's been doing some serious rights negotiations
behind the scenes in preparation for this trial?


  _  

From: Richard P Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 18 April 2007 20:47
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial


Hey Tom, 

By making it UK centric, isn't the BBC missing the public values of an awful
lot of us that no longer inhabit that island all year?
Or are there pages written in Polish etc, just to please the total UK
population. I wish the Trust would accept BBC internet presence for what
it is, a part of the World-Wide Web.

(Not sarcastic, as I am a firm believer that I am English wherever I happen
to be, especially as a UK tax payer.)
Regards
RichE

On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:30, Tom Loosemore wrote:




On 18/04/07, Gordon Joly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 

At 16:39 +0100 18/4/07, Ian Forrester wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Outside of the framework debate...
>
>The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.
>Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form 
>is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go
>to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.


Many thanks for your time - unfortunately due to the specifications 
of this trial, we are not currently aiming to recruit past or present
BBC staff.

!!!


yep, and quite right too, if the BBC Trust's decision making is not just
impartial but seen to be impartial. Allowing BBC staff past or present to
join put the latter at risk, since the data from this trial will form the
core empirical input into the BBC Trust's Public Value Test on the Open
Archive (which is separate from iPlayer 'catch up' Public Value Test, the
decision on which is due soonish. 

That's why they need so much personal data, to make sure the sample is
balanced across a whole series of dimensions to reflect the UK population as
a whole (hence UK only)

We're also gonna release 50 hours for download by anyone in the UK, whether
on the trial or not. 

- oh, and it's all non-DRM'd, albeit geo-IP'd

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Richard P Edwards]

And the same here .
I got kicked off after about 60% when I said I was male. hhm.
Oh well, perhaps 35-44 age bracket is already full.

On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:40, Toni Sant wrote:


Here's what I got:

 Many thanks for your time - unfortunately you did not meet the
 recruitment criteria for this trial.

Is there a list of recruitment criteria?

Cheers...

   ...t.s.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester
Sent: 18 April 2007 16:40
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: [backstage] BBC Archive trial


Hi All,

Outside of the framework debate...

The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.
Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your
interest form is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking
part in the trial, go to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.

There is no press launch or anything like that yet, so your
really the first people to find out about this. So do it
today before the 20,000 places disappear.

Cheers,

Ian Forrester
Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
BC4 B4, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7RJ

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 02080083965

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To
unsubscribe, please visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
  Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
** 
***
To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go  
to http://www.hull.ac.uk/legal/email_disclaimer.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] BBC Archive trial

[Christopher Woods]

"Many thanks for your time - unfortunately you did not meet the recruitment
criteria for this trial."

Ditto me, how could I possibly not qualify? I'm 21, I have a fast broadband
connection, I also am an active mobile data user with a flatrate package and
I'm in that perfect area of candidacy age-wise (18-24 male bracket)... Or
maybe that's why I wasn't accepted... Maybe I should say I'm a 74 year old
grandma of 4?

> -Original Message-
> From: Toni Sant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: 18 April 2007 19:40
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
> 
> Here's what I got:
> 
>  Many thanks for your time - unfortunately you did not meet 
> the  recruitment criteria for this trial.
> 
> Is there a list of recruitment criteria?
> 
> Cheers...
> 
>...t.s.
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester
> > Sent: 18 April 2007 16:40
> > To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> > Subject: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
> > 
> > 
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > Outside of the framework debate...
> > 
> > The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors. 
> > Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your 
> interest form is 
> > up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the 
> trial, go to 
> > http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.
> > 
> > There is no press launch or anything like that yet, so your 
> really the 
> > first people to find out about this. So do it today before 
> the 20,000 
> > places disappear.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Ian Forrester
> > Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
> > BC4 B4, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7RJ
> >  
> > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > phone: 02080083965
> > 
> > -
> > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, 
> > please visit 
> > http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
> >   Unofficial list archive: 
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
> > 

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Richard P Edwards]

Hey Tom,

By making it UK centric, isn't the BBC missing the public values of  
an awful lot of us that no longer inhabit that island all year?
Or are there pages written in Polish etc, just to please the total UK  
population. I wish the Trust would accept BBC internet presence  
for what it is, a part of the World-Wide Web.


(Not sarcastic, as I am a firm believer that I am English wherever I  
happen to be, especially as a UK tax payer.)

Regards
RichE

On 18 Apr 2007, at 19:30, Tom Loosemore wrote:




On 18/04/07, Gordon Joly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 16:39 +0100 18/4/07, Ian Forrester wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Outside of the framework debate...
>
>The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.
>Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form
>is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go
>to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.


Many thanks for your time - unfortunately due to the specifications
of this trial, we are not currently aiming to recruit past or present
BBC staff.

!!!

yep, and quite right too, if the BBC Trust's decision making is not  
just impartial but seen to be impartial. Allowing BBC staff past or  
present to join put the latter at risk, since  the data from this  
trial will form the core empirical input into the BBC Trust's  
Public Value Test on the Open Archive (which is separate from  
iPlayer 'catch up' Public Value Test, the decision on which is due  
soonish.


That's why they need so much personal data, to make sure the sample  
is balanced across a whole series of dimensions to reflect the UK  
population as a whole (hence UK only)


We're also gonna release 50 hours for download by anyone in the UK,  
whether on the trial or not.


- oh, and it's all non-DRM'd, albeit geo-IP'd

RE: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Toni Sant]

Here's what I got:

 Many thanks for your time - unfortunately you did not meet the
 recruitment criteria for this trial.

Is there a list of recruitment criteria?

Cheers...

   ...t.s.

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester
> Sent: 18 April 2007 16:40
> To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
> Subject: [backstage] BBC Archive trial
> 
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Outside of the framework debate...
> 
> The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors. 
> Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your 
> interest form is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking 
> part in the trial, go to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.
> 
> There is no press launch or anything like that yet, so your 
> really the first people to find out about this. So do it 
> today before the 20,000 places disappear.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ian Forrester
> Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
> BC4 B4, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7RJ
>  
> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> phone: 02080083965
> 
> -
> Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To 
> unsubscribe, please visit 
> http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
>   Unofficial list archive: 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
> *
To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go to 
http://www.hull.ac.uk/legal/email_disclaimer.html
*

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Tom Loosemore]

it'll be delivered via the internet... using that funny HTML stuff

(streamed in Real/WM I expect, cos that'll make it easier to set up - it is
a trial after all...).

The actual site itself is very nice, IMHO (not that I had anything to do
with it!)


On 18/04/07, James Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Ian -
any idea how this trial is going to be delivered? any tech specs on the
trial itself?

i'm thinking scary black boxes and dial groups.

wait, that was nielson.

--- :)

On 18 Apr 2007, at 16:39, Ian Forrester wrote:

Hi All,

Outside of the framework debate...

The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors. Exclusively
I can now tell you that the register your interest form is up (16:30). So if
your interested in taking part in the trial, go to
http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.

There is no press launch or anything like that yet, so your really the
first people to find out about this. So do it today before the 20,000 places
disappear.

Cheers,

Ian Forrester
Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
BC4 B4, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7RJ

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 02080083965

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  Unofficial
list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/


--

*James Cox,
*Internet Consultant
t: 07968 349990  e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: http://www.imajes.info/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Tom Loosemore]

On 18/04/07, Gordon Joly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


At 16:39 +0100 18/4/07, Ian Forrester wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Outside of the framework debate...
>
>The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.
>Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form
>is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go
>to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.


Many thanks for your time - unfortunately due to the specifications
of this trial, we are not currently aiming to recruit past or present
BBC staff.

!!!



yep, and quite right too, if the BBC Trust's decision making is not just
impartial but seen to be impartial. Allowing BBC staff past or present to
join put the latter at risk, since  the data from this trial will form the
core empirical input into the BBC Trust's Public Value Test on the Open
Archive (which is separate from iPlayer 'catch up' Public Value Test, the
decision on which is due soonish.

That's why they need so much personal data, to make sure the sample is
balanced across a whole series of dimensions to reflect the UK population as
a whole (hence UK only)

We're also gonna release 50 hours for download by anyone in the UK, whether
on the trial or not.

- oh, and it's all non-DRM'd, albeit geo-IP'd

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[James Cox]

Ian -

any idea how this trial is going to be delivered? any tech specs on  
the trial itself?


i'm thinking scary black boxes and dial groups.

wait, that was nielson.

--- :)

On 18 Apr 2007, at 16:39, Ian Forrester wrote:


Hi All,

Outside of the framework debate...

The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors.  
Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form  
is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial,  
go to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.


There is no press launch or anything like that yet, so your really  
the first people to find out about this. So do it today before the  
20,000 places disappear.


Cheers,

Ian Forrester
Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
BC4 B4, Media Village, 201 Wood Lane, London W12 7RJ

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 02080083965

-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe,  
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/ 
mailing_list.html.  Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail- 
archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/


--

James Cox,
Internet Consultant
t: 07968 349990  e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: http://www.imajes.info/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Gordon Joly]

At 16:39 +0100 18/4/07, Ian Forrester wrote:

Hi All,

Outside of the framework debate...

The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its doors. 
Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your interest form 
is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in the trial, go 
to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.



Many thanks for your time - unfortunately due to the specifications 
of this trial, we are not currently aiming to recruit past or present 
BBC staff.





Gordo

--
"Think Feynman"/
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]///
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Peter Bowyer]

On 18/04/07, Nic James Ferrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

"Ian Forrester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its
> doors. Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your
> interest form is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in
> the trial, go to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.

Euuwww... that was built with some framework wasn't it?


It's some off-the-shelf online survey framework - several of the big
market research houses use it.

Rather a lot of personal information needed for registration, I thought

Peter


--
Peter Bowyer
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Re: [backstage] BBC Archive trial

[Nic James Ferrier]

"Ian Forrester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> The BBC Archive trial is getting closer to opening its
> doors. Exclusively I can now tell you that the register your
> interest form is up (16:30). So if your interested in taking part in
> the trial, go to http://bbc.co.uk/archive now.

Euuwww... that was built with some framework wasn't it?

[bwa ha ha ha ha... and runs away laughing]
-
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/