EC threat to BBC over downloads

[AndyClarke]

This is rather interesting. I wonder if it will make a difference to us Apple users in the EU.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6236612.stm

Any thoughts?

 

[Igantius]

Well.... the BBC has said that a Mac-friendly solution is in the pipeline, but it takes time because OS X is a proprietary system whereas Microsoft's is... errr.. well proprietary. I kid you not this is the official line.

To be honest, this might cause red faces at the Beeb but it has officially stated that Mac support would be added. Annoying for Mac users admittedly, but the BBC is hardly the first organisation that has told us to wait.

One reason the BBC may have been taking its time is because it fell out with Apple. When it first introduced streaming audio and video, there was a Quicktime option - however Apple was, let's say difficult and the BBC after a while dropped QT support due to cost and a lack of professional respect and support from Apple.

However, the BBC still uses QT for its Motion Libarary, so you can't accuse it of being against Apple.

 

[AlexisV]

Channel 4 On Demand is Win XP only - it won't even work with Vista and nobody complains about them.

 

[Zygon Gambit]

Well.... the BBC has said that a Mac-friendly solution is in the pipeline, but it takes time because OS X is a proprietary system whereas Microsoft's is... errr.. well proprietary. I kid you not this is the official line.

To be honest, this might cause red faces at the Beeb but it has officially stated that Mac support would be added. Annoying for Mac users admittedly, but the BBC is hardly the first organisation that has told us to wait.

I made an offical complaint to the BBC about the Windows only player. I pay for the BBC, and they should have worked harder to start with an OS-agnostic solution.

 

[Zygon Gambit]

Channel 4 On Demand is Win XP only - it won't even work with Vista and nobody complains about them.

That's because nobody is watching.

 

[Queso]

Channel 4 On Demand is Win XP only - it won't even work with Vista and nobody complains about them.

An excellent point. Time we marched on Horseferry Road I think.

 

[Kernow]

Channel 4 On Demand is Win XP only - it won't even work with Vista and nobody complains about them.

I think in part this is due to the fact that Channel 4 is a commercial station, largely funded by advertising revenue, whereas the BBC is publicly funded through the license fee. Therefore, more of a fuss is made when the BBC excludes Mac users since they have paid just as much as the Windows users.

 

[velocityg4]

What I did not see in this article is what about other OS's? They mention iPlayer for Mac OS X and Windows, but what about Linux, Unix, FreeBSD, BeOS, OS/2 Warp, Mac Classic?

Since the BBC is a publicly funded agency should not anything from them be available for all? It seems to me that they should just have the videos available for download so that anyone could play them on any media player on any OS. Since I don't live in the UK I do not know how it works exactly.

As I understand it in the UK you have to pay taxes to operate a television. Those taxes fund the BBC, therefore I must conclude that the BBC is a government agency. As a government agency in a democratic government they should thus be required to not show any preference to platform.

As for DRM you can record the shows over the air so why do they bother?

 

[Vidd]

I agree with the stance that since they are funded by the public, they should cater to them.
I think the 6 months between reviews is a bit poor.

 

[nbs2]

As I understand it in the UK you have to pay taxes to operate a television. Those taxes fund the BBC, therefore I must conclude that the BBC is a government agency. As a government agency in a democratic government they should thus be required to not show any preference to platform.

We're talking abotu supporting a platform, not a religion.

The government is expected to take reasonable steps to support the public through avenues of access. Does that mean that every platform and codec needs to be supported? No. Rather, it is expected to use judgment in determining what the costs and benefits are. It's possible that they could deploy in an open source format, but would the public understand how to use it? The cost of the confusion may be enough that it merited using what the people know. Since most of the public uses Windows, it makes sense to support a Windows friendly format. If you could show that supporting OS X wouldn't entail a significant increase in expenditures, could maintain the level of control that the BBC is required to maintain, and would reach a large enough population hat couldn't otherwise be reached, you'd have an argument.

Just because taxes go to support something doesn't mean that the government has to benefit you - just the public it serves at large.

 

[M3G4]

The simple fact that the UK's broadcasting companies (ITV, BBC and Channel 4) are ignoring the increasingly popular Apple Mac platform is beyond a joke, especially considering broadcast magazine ran an article explaining how quite a lot of content is edited and finalized in final cut pro. In fact, at my uni - which is a major player in the broadcasting world (Ravensbourne College), has an equal share of Mac's and PC's in its editing suites and computing rooms.

It's not on and the BBC especially should be pulled up on the issue.

Oh, and for the record, 4OD is piss poor anyway. The application is shoddy, ugly, and downright pointless.

 

[Queso]

It's not a case of ignoring. Up until Adobe Apollo there was no viable DRM solution on the Mac platform for these companies to use. So don't blame the TV companies. Their suppliers were enforcing DRM on them, and only Microsoft would supply what was required. Apple wouldn't play ball.