All posts by MikeB
Below are all of MikeB's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
rob: Only Vampire Willow gets away with saying 'bored now'. What you really mean is 'you keep asking a question that I seemingly cannot or do not want to answer'.
You can apparently use Google, although simply searching for 'BBC + Waste + Money' and posting whatever is on the first page is pretty basic, and ssooo 2004.
However, you kind of miss the target, even while avoiding the original question. The Express article is a bit rubbish(big surprise). Its makes into a big pile pretty much all BBC spending that anyone has ever questioned, to get to the £350m. There are also a lot of quotes from Tory MP's, which are big on outrage. Time will tell whether the relocation to Salford Quay will work, but its not a 'disaster'.
As far as payoffs are concerned, I've already said that they were a huge mistake and should never have happened. The failure of the DMI project is also a disgrace, although not all of it is down to the BBC, since it had to be brought back inhouse after Siemens failed to complete it in 2009. The BBC did make a mess of it, as this article makes plain
The BBC DMI project - what went wrong?
However, its not alone in making a mess of a computer project, as this article points out: BBC's DMI project failure is a warning to all organisations
The BBC deserves a kicking for these messups, and I have no problem pointing them out. However, this is old news, and a distraction from the original question.
You asserted that 'BBC bosses (are).. on over inflated wages'. I'm just asking for facts to back that up. Still nada from you in terms of real evidence. Shouldn't you be able to Google at least something vaguely relevant?
| link to this comment |
Steve: It might make 'logical sense' to you, but its a mother and father of a economic, technical and political problem for everyone else.
Only 5% of viewing at present is done via streaming. And the challenges of trying to have enough bandwidth for everyone (even if they could all be connected - a doubtful prospect) is a long way off, and thats before you think about 4K. Google 'net neutrality' and see what the ramifications might be if internet providers were able to chose what speed you get for particular services.
And think of reliability. My Virgin fibre cabinet is right across the road from me, and I'm in the middle of a town. Even so, the server does go down sometimes. My TV signal has never stopped.
And who is going to pay for this 'box'? And what if you want more? Is there going to be a software and hardware standard, and what happens to all the equipment we already have?
In reality, retunes are fairly rare, and most devices do it automatically anyway. Even where it is a problem, its generally not that difficult to solve.
Its one of those ideas which sound great in theory, but is vastly more complex and expensive in practice than it first appears. Horses are allowed on roads, but what replaced the horse was a new technology which became steadily cheaper and had (at least when it first appeared) fewer downsides http://www.uctc.net/acces….pdf
However, the net still has a way to go before it can deliver all our viewing, with capacity and coverage both not yet close to universal.
| link to this comment |
james wright : You havn't given a postcode, so we have no idea what that transmitter is. But its unlikely a transmitter would be out for that long, so its probably your aerial system. The bad weather might have included rain? Rain and dodgy cabling = bad signal.
| link to this comment |
donny: You havn't put a postcode into the site (which would bring up DigitalUK's site for your location, etc), but check your signal strength - it may be too high. Panasonic's are known to have sensitive tuners, BBC1 is usually the strongest signal, and if you've got 'excellent strength' on all other channels, you migth be exceeding the tuners limits, hence the drop outs (low and high signal strength can look very similar).
Put 'too much of a good thing' into the sites search box and go from there.
| link to this comment |
iain scott: Just guessing, but its likely your not tuned into Selkirk, but Calbeck. Have a look at the Digital UK link. Selkirk is on Channel 50, whilst Calbeck is 25-27. Tuners often start on the low numbers...
| link to this comment |
Simon: We really need a postcode to help you, as you'll see from the reply to John...
John: Becuase you put your postcode into the site, we can see your location in relation to the various transmitters. There could be a number of reasons, but since BBC signals tend to be the strongest, having poor reception on them would be odd. Unless you've too much signal, not too little.
Check your signal stength - if its very high then you will have problems. Your 30km from Beacon Hill, so should have no need for a booster, etc, and its possible that the signal strength is just too high for the BBC mux.
The page 'too much of a good thing' on this site will give you a lot of help.
| link to this comment |
Mardler: Is there any actual data to support your opinion? We no that there is waste at the BBC, as there are at all large organisations, and we know that there has been failed projects, overpayment of redundency agreements, etc.
However, since I have a long and fruitless attempt to get someone else to back up the charge that BBC senior exec's are 'overpaid', could you actually come up with some coherent facts and observations.
Your previous post included 'massive leftist bias, abysmal production quality, massive bureaucracy, hopelessly inefficient, duplication and redundancy' . Thats a rant, not a thesis.
| link to this comment |
Wednesday 17 December 2014 11:17PM
Wilf Docherty: Are you actually using the Craigkelly transmitter? Or has your system had a fault with a much reduced signal?