As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

The BBC's FREE ondemand service.Windows Only?

135

Posts

  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Yeah, I've had the trial software for a while now. It works. There's not much else to be said about it really. You can download programmes you've missed and watch them. Not all their programmes mind, there'll be the odd thing you won't get, and nothing the BBC have bought in, so no Heroes. But what's on there works perfectly.

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    I am, but it doesn't work with Vista.

    lols :(

    Rook on
  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    They'll surely get it working with Vista soon though. I imagine Mac compatibility will take a bit longer (though this is speculation based on no data). Linux? Never?

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
  • ÆthelredÆthelred Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Search their message-board on it; I'm sure I saw posts about how to make it work on Vista. And.. yeah, it just works at the moment. It's very basic. I have heard that it drains your bandwidth though - apparently they're still using p2p to distribute files, but you don't get a say in the matter..

    Æthelred on
    pokes: 1505 8032 8399
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    Linux? Never?

    It doesn't look like it. It seems to rely on WMP, although there's a possibility that whatever Mac solution they come up with might be usable.

    japan on
  • RohanRohan Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Lave wrote: »
    Just to make this clear. You will need to be UK License holders to do this. I assume they will need your License Number and check your IP address.

    Though I do remember talk about offering the service at a cost abroad - though that wouldn't happen (if it ever did) for a long while.

    What about Ireland? We've been getting BBC natively since the early eighties.

    Rohan on
    ...and I thought of how all those people died, and what a good death that is. That nobody can blame you for it, because everyone else died along with you, and it is the fault of none, save those who did the killing.

    Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
  • BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    japan wrote: »
    And Linux users as a general rule don't use closed-source software unless it's unavoidable.

    That's starting to change as Linux becomes more mainstream, though. I use things like the Adobe flash plugin and the official nvidia drivers, neither of which are open source.

    That's because there are currently no viable alternatives.
    There's growing pressure being applied to distro maintainers to allow more closed source stuff into releases. Witness, for example, Ubuntu's decision to produce two versions of each release, one which is pure OSS, and one mainstream release which contains things like closed-source binary drivers, the flash plugin, etc.

    The "freeness" of the packages installed with Ubuntu are broken up by repository. Device drivers and similar non-free components are in the restricted repository. Other non-free software (such as the flash plugin and the JRE) are in the multiverse repository, which isn't enabled by default.

    You can avoid using non-free software by disabling those repositories.

    Barrakketh on
    Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Uh, I know all that. I was just pointing out that there are Linux users (like me) that aren't raving OSS zealots.

    EDIT: To clarify, earlier it seemed that The Warlock was implying that Linux users wouldn't use the BBC service if it wasn't OSS, which I don't think is true.

    EDIT2: Regarding the two versions of Ubuntu, Shuttleworth has stated following the community consultation about proprietary drivers that in the future there will be an additional version of Ubuntu (seperate from the main release) that will be completely OSS.
    In addition to all of this, We have restarted the effort to produce a flavour of Ubuntu that includes no proprietary drivers or firmware at all. In fact, this flavour will take an ultra-conservative approach to all forms of content on the .iso, whether that be artistic or code. More on that initiative later.

    from http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS6395384305.html

    japan on
  • BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    japan wrote: »
    EDIT: To clarify, earlier it seemed that The Warlock was implying that Linux users wouldn't use the BBC service if it wasn't OSS, which I don't think is true.

    I wouldn't use it if they don't make it freely redistributable.

    The real problem is that I don't think the BBC (or whoever would develop the Linux version of the player) would give it the same kind of support as Opera does for their browser. If they would build and maintain a version for current releases of the "big" players in the Linux scene (SuSE, Red Hat, Ubuntu, Mandriva, etc.), allow maintainers to package and redistribute and be responsive with regards to bug fixes I wouldn't have a problem with using it.
    Regarding the two versions of Ubuntu, Shuttleworth has stated following the community consultation about proprietary drivers that in the future there will be an additional version of Ubuntu (seperate from the main release) that will be completely OSS.

    The initial name for it is Gobuntu. CD images for 7.10 (daily releases) are available here.

    Barrakketh on
    Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    I've been thinking about this, is there any reason other than collective groupthink and fear of 'piracy' that they don't just have a web page with downloads of all these videos in popular crossplatform formats (something like .avi for example)

    That would completely remove any issues of OS compatibility, and would be better for users.

    LewieP on
  • Lave IILave II Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    In the future that could be the case, but the main stumbling block the BBC face is, wait for it, music licensing.

    Until very recently it only licensed music (say the pop song in the background of an eastenders show) to be broadcast over the TV network. With repeat fees if the show is repeated.

    So they need to relicense everything if they want to put it on the web. And the music providers want DRM becaused they are cunts and think you'll never by "Umbrella, ella, ella, a a a a" if you can istead here a few seconds of it in the backdground of the Cafe in Eastenders.

    They are also not allowed to broadcast any classical music with the service because when the BBC orchaestra gave away some Bach for free, millions of people downloaded it, enjoyed. This pissed of the corporate classical music industry who would rather have an aging population of fans that buy there produce, than get new fans brought in by the BBC.

    So the BBC is being hampered at every corner by twats.

    Lave II on
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    What do you mean, they're not allowed to broadcast classical music? How the hell can you forbid someone from broadcasting public domain music? :|

    Glal on
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    japan wrote: »
    Uh, I know all that. I was just pointing out that there are Linux users (like me) that aren't raving OSS zealots.

    EDIT: To clarify, earlier it seemed that The Warlock was implying that Linux users wouldn't use the BBC service if it wasn't OSS, which I don't think is true.

    Wow, this got dredged up.

    If it's not freely redistributable, it won't be in the repositories. If it's not in the repositories, practically nobody is going to bother.

    If it's not open source, it's not going to run as well as an open-source equivalent, and people will only use it if there's no other alternative and simultaneously start working on other alternatives. That's the way such things tend to go. For example, look how far the GNU Gnash flash-replacement has come in two years.
    Glal wrote: »
    What do you mean, they're not allowed to broadcast classical music? How the hell can you forbid someone from broadcasting public domain music? :|

    The sheet music is public domain, the recording of the concert is copyrighted.

    Daedalus on
  • Bob The MonkeyBob The Monkey Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    What do you mean, they're not allowed to broadcast classical music? How the hell can you forbid someone from broadcasting public domain music? :|

    Probably because music doesn't come under one kind of copyright, but three separate ones. While the writing may be public domain, there are still performance and mechanical copyrights which are very much not.

    Bob The Monkey on
  • Bob The MonkeyBob The Monkey Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Things that currently annoy me about the on demand service: it doesn't allow you to download high definition versions of things that were definitely filmed in HD. Boo.

    Bob The Monkey on
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    So what's the difference between a copyrighted musical performance and a copyrighted movie in terms of licencing hassle?

    Glal on
  • Lave IILave II Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    What do you mean, they're not allowed to broadcast classical music? How the hell can you forbid someone from broadcasting public domain music? :|

    Yeah, it's the copyright of the performance. But there's crap about how the BBC, being publicy funded, can't damage the marketplace for private companies.

    And the moronic classical music industry in the UK would rather curl up and die than let the BBC regenerate the scene by producing, and releasing classical music for free. So moan whenever the Beeb promotes classical music in anyway even slighty modern. This is because they are short sighted, idiotic cunts, and deserve to die.

    Lave II on
  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Lave II wrote: »
    Glal wrote: »
    What do you mean, they're not allowed to broadcast classical music? How the hell can you forbid someone from broadcasting public domain music? :|

    Yeah, it's the copyright of the performance. But there's crap about how the BBC, being publicy funded, can't damage the marketplace for private companies.

    And the moronic classical music industry in the UK would rather curl up and die than let the BBC regenerate the scene by producing, and releasing classical music for free. So moan whenever the Beeb promotes classical music in anyway even slighty modern. This is because they are short sighted, idiotic cunts, and deserve to die.

    I think the BBC technically own the copyrights for the performances that they release since they commission them.

    But it's the same thing for audiobooks that they have on radio, they won't release them as downloadable podcasts :( I can kinda understand though, they could completely destroy the commercial tv stations quite quickly (although they seem to be doing a good job of that themselves).

    Rook on
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    How is making the content digitally accessible to the people who paid for it different from BBC broadcasting it in the first place? It's not like BBC created it out of vacuum and this is upsetting the economic zero sum with farmer gold, this is content that has already been paid for.

    Next up, EA sues Valve for allowing people to download the same content off Steam... multiple times!

    Glal on
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    How is making the content digitally accessible to the people who paid for it different from BBC broadcasting it in the first place? It's not like BBC created it out of vacuum and this is upsetting the economic zero sum with farmer gold, this is content that has already been paid for.

    Next up, EA sues Valve for allowing people to download the same content off Steam... multiple times!

    That's the absurdity of the situation. If I have a graphics card with video in, it is completely legal for me to record everything the BBC broadcast onto my hard drive, and watch it at my leisure. If I have a VCR and a stack of hundreds of cassettes, it is perfectly legal (and encouraged) for me to archive everything they broadcast and watch it at my leisure (even if it is a hassel)

    They really need to stop associating what hardware someone owns to what rights they have to acces content they have paid for.

    LewieP on
  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    LewieP wrote: »
    I've been thinking about this, is there any reason other than collective groupthink and fear of 'piracy' that they don't just have a web page with downloads of all these videos in popular crossplatform formats (something like .avi for example)

    That would completely remove any issues of OS compatibility, and would be better for users.

    They can't just give you bare video files because they need them to expire after a while. Otherwise people could download the shows and keep them forever, thus placing the future sales of all Doctor Who box-sets at grave risk.

    Edit: Though as you say, there is indeed nothing stopping you just recording all their content off the broadcast. But there you go.

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
  • Lave IILave II Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Now that's a good TOP.

    Your best bet it to get a hard drive PVR that records to a decent format and can transfer it's data to a PC. That way, you can legally record and keep anything you want (after all you directly paid for it's creation).

    However the web-future, thanks to idiots, has much less rights. 7 days? sometimes 30 days? Oh great, cheers guys.

    I feel for the BBC. Because they are being hampered by idiots.

    Hell it was fans of Dad's army and Dr Who recording the shows, that saved them after they got accidentally lost.

    The BBC thanked these people no end (I think some got there names added to the credits). Cut to ten years later and everyone who isn't the BBC would call those people Evil "Pirates."

    Lave II on
  • Lave IILave II Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    LewieP wrote: »
    I've been thinking about this, is there any reason other than collective groupthink and fear of 'piracy' that they don't just have a web page with downloads of all these videos in popular crossplatform formats (something like .avi for example)

    That would completely remove any issues of OS compatibility, and would be better for users.

    They can't just give you bare video files because they need them to expire after a while. Otherwise people could download the shows and keep them forever, thus placing the future sales of all Doctor Who box-sets at grave risk.

    They can, and they don't, and you can.

    1) I am legally entitled to record and keep FOREVER episodes of Dr Who via VCR or PVR.

    2) Worldwide total sales of DVDs of BBC products amounts to only about 5% of the BBC license fee. And the majority of that comes from international sales. Which in principle wouldn't be effected. If DVD sales were "devasted" a £5 increase in the license fee would solve that problem.

    3) See above for how the BBC is for, and thankful for people keeping programs FOREVER,

    Lave II on
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    They can't just give you bare video files because they need them to expire after a while. Otherwise people could download the shows and keep them forever, thus placing the future sales of all Doctor Who box-sets at grave risk.
    Since people already paid for said Dr Who episodes, why should they pay again for exactly the same? If you want to sell a boxset then do it by adding more content, not by making old content unavailable.

    Glal on
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    LewieP wrote: »
    I've been thinking about this, is there any reason other than collective groupthink and fear of 'piracy' that they don't just have a web page with downloads of all these videos in popular crossplatform formats (something like .avi for example)

    That would completely remove any issues of OS compatibility, and would be better for users.

    They can't just give you bare video files because they need them to expire after a while. Otherwise people could download the shows and keep them forever, thus placing the future sales of all Doctor Who box-sets at grave risk.

    Edit: Though as you say, there is indeed nothing stopping you just recording all their content off the broadcast. But there you go.
    The BBC's priority should be license payers, they can sell DVDs to non license payers (and could password protect the download page with a login that you get with your TV license)

    I can't remember the exact figures, but dvd sales revenue is under 5% iirc of the BBCs revenue. If they want to reduce the impact of allowing people to download content on DVD sales they could even wait a month or so after DVD releases. This is also ignoring the fact that not everything gets released on DVD.
    Lave II wrote: »
    Hell it was fans of Dad's army and Dr Who recording the shows, that saved them after they got accidentally lost.
    that's not really a good thing, I am pretty sure that it wasn't an accident that the BBC lost recordings of Dad's army.
    God I hate that program

    LewieP on
  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Glal wrote: »
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    They can't just give you bare video files because they need them to expire after a while. Otherwise people could download the shows and keep them forever, thus placing the future sales of all Doctor Who box-sets at grave risk.
    Since people already paid for said Dr Who episodes, why should they pay again for exactly the same? If you want to sell a boxset then do it by adding more content, not by making old content unavailable.

    Well, this is true. I suppose they'd still need some DRM though, or else every joker in every other country who didn't finance the shows would be able to get them, and the scads of cash from overseas sales would be lost.

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    You mean like they can with DVDs anyway?

    Glal on
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    Glal wrote: »
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    They can't just give you bare video files because they need them to expire after a while. Otherwise people could download the shows and keep them forever, thus placing the future sales of all Doctor Who box-sets at grave risk.
    Since people already paid for said Dr Who episodes, why should they pay again for exactly the same? If you want to sell a boxset then do it by adding more content, not by making old content unavailable.

    Well, this is true. I suppose they'd still need some DRM though, or else every joker in every other country who didn't finance the shows would be able to get them, and the scads of cash from overseas sales would be lost.

    That's what the current situation is though. Search for Doctor Who on any torrent page, and no doubt there will be tonnes of DVD rips. If people want to pirate they will.

    Edit: Hi5 Glal

    LewieP on
  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Yeah, but that's not really going to do any noticeable harm to their overseas sales. If they start specifically releasing their content in such a way as to maximise the ease with which it can be copied to people overseas, I can imagine networks being a little more reluctant to hand over the cash then.

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    Yeah, but that's not really going to do any noticeable harm to their overseas sales. If they start specifically releasing their content in such a way as to maximise the ease with which it can be copied to people overseas, I can imagine networks being a little more reluctant to hand over the cash then.

    make the page only available to UK IPs, or as I suggested before, require login with TV license details.

    LewieP on
  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    The files still have to be DRMed up though so they only play on the computer they're downloaded to, or else all that's pretty useless.

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    The files still have to be DRMed up though so they only play on the computer they're downloaded to, or else all that's pretty useless.

    Not really, without DRM we would be in the same situation we are in now. People would be able to distribute DRM free versions of licensed content via p2p.

    LewieP on
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    In that case they should stop DVD sales too, since they're negating the point of this Mystical Unbreakable DRM Solution by being easy to rip and transcode.

    Or, people can stop pretending that DRM actually deters anyone but mom&pop who don't represent the core group of piracy anyway.

    Glal on
  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Yes, obviously DVDs can be ripped and distributed. But if the BBC released bare .avi files of their shows, they would be implicitly condoning it. There's a qualitative difference between the BBC releasing programmes on the dominant commercial medium, that as it happens is susceptible to piracy by a relatively comvoluted process, and them parading .avi files all over the internet for anyone to download. I don't know how to get my BBC DVDs on to my PC in a file format that I could stick up onto some torrent site. I sure as hell know how to share an .avi file. I suspect that the companies who make the BBC's DVDs and who buy the rights to their programmes would be a bit pissed off if this were to happen. I guess that then UKTV and foreign channels and whoever else might not pay as much for the rights to these shows.

    I'm just as much in favour in principle of a DRM-free dreamworld as you. I just don't think it's realistic to expect it of the BBC in this case just because we've paid the license fee.

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
  • Lave IILave II Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Paul_IQ164 wrote: »
    Yes, obviously DVDs can be ripped and distributed. But if the BBC released bare .avi files of their shows, they would be implicitly condoning it. There's a qualitative difference between the BBC releasing programmes on the dominant commercial medium, that as it happens is susceptible to piracy by a relatively comvoluted process, and them parading .avi files all over the internet for anyone to download. I don't know how to get my BBC DVDs on to my PC in a file format that I could stick up onto some torrent site. I sure as hell know how to share an .avi file. I suspect that the companies who make the BBC's DVDs and who buy the rights to their programmes would be a bit pissed off if this were to happen. I guess that then UKTV and foreign channels and whoever else might not pay as much for the rights to these shows.

    I'm just as much in favour in principle of a DRM-free dreamworld as you. I just don't think it's realistic to expect it of the BBC in this case just because we've paid the license fee.

    Then they are implicitly condoning it when the release DRM free Radio and Digital Radio.

    Then they are implicitly condoning it when the release DRM free digital broadcasts that can't be saved by PC's with video capture cards as .avi files. Or the HUGHLY WIDESPREAD VCR that every home had over the last decade. If that isn't the past equivalent of a .avi file I don't know what is.

    Then the Music industry are implicitly condoning it when the release music on a DRM free CD.

    Hell you could even say the knife industry are implicitly condoning it when a kitchen knife is used to stab people.

    Thats a immensily flawed argument. It is not the BBC's duty to protect it's content from misuse. Commerical ventures may believe that DRM will increase revenue - but in the case of the BBC the money spent on implementing and maintaining DRM on it's content is a waste of license fee payers money. To such an extent that a good case could be made that by adding the DRM they are violating their charter, in which they have to provide good value to the public.

    Even the license fee collection agency has nothing to do with the Beeb, as it isn't there responsibility.

    Lave II on
  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Okay, so I shouldn't have said they would be explicitly condoning piracy. What I meant is that, if they released DRM-free video (as opposed to their radio, which isn't the same thing since you don't need a license fee to listen to BBC Radio), it would cause an increase in piracy. The BBC would be seen to be not taking steps that they easily could to prevent this. This would lower their revenue from DVD sales, and sales of rights to UKTV and foreign networks. Then they would have to put the license fee up, or start making cheaper and worse programming. I don't see how this is a favourable outcome for much of anyone.

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Even if this mythical increase in piracy were irrationally huge and they never sold any DVDs ever again it would only reduce their budget by... 5%.

    Truly, the beebs would be no more.

    Glal on
  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    It's more than 5% by the look of the pie charts on Wikipedia. And I think 5% would make a pretty huge difference in any case. It's 5% of the total revenue, but lots of that will go on fixed costs. As a percentage of the part of the revenue that actually affects the quality of the service it'll be rather more.

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
  • GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Now take into account that 100% piracy is retardedly retarded stupid big.

    Glal on
  • Paul_IQ164Paul_IQ164 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Copyright law provides the legal tools to deal with piracy, but if you're releasing DRM-free content, then it's not going to be practically possible to enforce copyright laws, is it? I'm not saying the BBC necessarily have any legal need to DRM-protect their content. But they have to protect their interests in further sales of those programmes to DVD and international firms and to UKTV who might not be too happy with them providing such easily-pirated copies of the shows they want to buy.
    Now take into account that 100% piracy is retardedly retarded stupid big.
    I don't even know what this sentence means.

    Paul_IQ164 on
    But obviously to make that into a viable anecdote you have to tart it up a bit.
    Tetris: 337214-901184
    Puzzle League: 073119-160185
Sign In or Register to comment.