[UK] One (in the eye) for the BBC ...

[dancefloorlandmine]

Pointed out by flickgc ...

BBC Consultation on On-Demand Services

Includes such special questions as "How important is it that the proposed seven-day catch-up service over the internet is available to consumers who are not using Microsoft software?" WTF? Hell, yeah.

Comments

[gaius-octavian.livejournal.com]

This the same BBC who prefer PC-raping RealPlayer to any of the many open standards...

[flick.livejournal.com]

Something I mentioned as an example of how not to do it, when I answered the questions...

[zotz]

The responce of the BBC trust includes mandating a platform-agnostic approach with a definite timescale, and mentions that the BBC still have plans to replace realplayer with their own, or an external, solution.

[gaius-octavian.livejournal.com]

Their own? So that's why the licence fee is so high... I don't recall seeing software development in the charter.

[zotz]

Dirac's been under development for a few years.

[gaius-octavian.livejournal.com]

It's very hard for the BBC to justify hiking the TV tax when they are pissing away money on vanity projects like this while they could have had a working solution off the shelf years ago.

[zotz]

The impression I got is that there wasn't a royalty-free codec available that suited their purposes. The amount they'll be paying Real and MS in the long term would be mindblowing otherwise.

[blue-condition.livejournal.com]

Dirac is very promising, apart from the intellectual property situation ;P

[jhg.livejournal.com]

To be fair, my understanding is that they took it on board like 5/6/7 years ago when it was good - but idiotically signed some massive exclusive contract and they're now stuck with it, even though they really want to get out of it.

It's incompetence, rather than greed or malice.