Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> ____/ [H]omer on Thursday 17 January 2008 18:46 : \____
>
>> Verily I say unto thee, that Mark Kent spake thusly:
>>
>>> 5. The BBC should explain why the adobe-flash version of iPlayer was
>>> developed and deployed in a few weeks, at negligible cost, and has
>>> already got a much greater user-base.
>>
>> That one's the biggest kicker, IMHO.
>>
>> Of course there is the "infrastructure" cost that Thomson alluded to,
>> i.e. a transcoding cluster and some storage (which they probably already
>> had) and some networking cable.
>>
>> Hmm. Where all da money go? Microsoft licenses?
>>
>> Heck, I have a handful of *scripts* here they can have for /nothing/.
>
> They are trying to do cover-up work for all I can tell. They have just hired a
> new guy.
>
The transcoder argument is an interesting one. If they'd used their
very own, free, Dirac codec, there would have been no additional cost to
it.
I would also like the BBC to explain how much they pay Microsoft for
each Codec usage, transcoding, iPlayer user, and so on, also out of
licence-fee payer's cash.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |
|
|
