7. What role should the BBC play in developing technology...

[french frank]

7. What role should the BBC play in developing technology and new ways of distributing content?

If the BBC does it, that's licence fee payers' money going into it, rather than into broadcasting. Perhaps a fixed limit should be put on the amount available, rather than making available the amount needed for such 'development'.

[Anna]

I'm not a techie so unqualified to comment but .... £100m was wasted by the BBC on the DMI project, and although I can see they have to develop apps, iplayer, etc., (as that seems the way forward for people to access the BBC) there is the risk of yet another massively expensive failure using licence fee money isn't there?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22847986

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

My own feeling is that it should concentrate on the content of its programmes and let others (who do it better) develop the technology that the Beeb then uses.

It's a strange "development" of technology that broadcasts in lower sound quality than programmes made ten years ago.

Free, non-profit-making software such as Radio Downloader did what I wanted from digital technology - so the Corporation threatened it with legal action of it continued to offer BBC content. Daft byggers.

[amateur51]

I think the three posters so far have put their fingers spot on the crux of the whole thing.

I just wish that I had something original to add.

[Serial_Apologist]

My own feeling is that it should concentrate on the content of its programmes and let others (who do it better) develop the technology that the Beeb then uses.

It's a strange "development" of technology that broadcasts in lower sound quality than programmes made ten years ago.

Free, non-profit-making software such as Radio Downloader did what I wanted from digital technology - so the Corporation threatened it with legal action of it continued to offer BBC content. Daft byggers.

Do you now think the Radiophonic Workshop - creative technology developed through the existence of the BBC - to be a thing of its past then, ferney?

[Anna]

Do you now think the Radiophonic Workshop - creative technology developed through the existence of the BBC - to be a thing of its past then, ferney?

Ah, but that was a different kind of technology wasn't it - that was creative music technology (which is marvellous) and it gave us the National Insitution of - Dr. Who !

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Do you now think the Radiophonic Workshop - creative technology developed through the existence of the BBC - to be a thing of its past then, ferney?

Now - there you go, S_A. I made a sweeping, oversimplified and poorly thought-out comment, and you come along and point out the basic and obvious flaws in my (lack of) reasoning. Not very sporting of you, sir.

I suppose (the dying worm wriggles) that I was intending to comment on Broadcasting technology, rather than creative use of technology.










Wriggle wriggle wriggle

[jayne lee wilson]

My own feeling is that it should concentrate on the content of its programmes and let others (who do it better) develop the technology that the Beeb then uses.

It's a strange "development" of technology that broadcasts in lower sound quality than programmes made ten years ago.

Free, non-profit-making software such as Radio Downloader did what I wanted from digital technology - so the Corporation threatened it with legal action of it continued to offer BBC content. Daft byggers.

But the Radio 3 HDs web feed is the best SQ in Europe for live streaming, at 320 kbps AAC. And it sounds better than the dynamically-compressed FM. It's one of their best-ever innovations. Even the Berlin DCH only do 256 kbps now.

DAB radio has been a bit of a disaster, partly because the BBC went ahead with it earlier than most with an ageing codec, but mainly because of the bad influence of Ofcom. The decline in BBC's technical awareness led directly to the downgrading of digital radio services to 128 kbps mp2 etc., just to cram in more stations. iPlayer has offered some redress with its AAC.
If the BBC had remained active and knowledgeable in R&D, we might have had DAB+ as a free-to-aerials service on an AAC codec (never mind less-compressed FM for evening concerts...). I would love BBC to be technically innovative. But that BBC has probably gone for ever.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Speaking as someone working with his own ageing codec, can I request that we just ignore most of the words of #3, and concentrate on the good bits?

[mangerton]

My own feeling is that it should concentrate on the content of its programmes and let others (who do it better) develop the technology that the Beeb then uses.

It's a strange "development" of technology that broadcasts in lower sound quality than programmes made ten years ago.

Free, non-profit-making software such as Radio Downloader did what I wanted from digital technology - so the Corporation threatened it with legal action of it continued to offer BBC content. Daft byggers.

Quite. The sad thing is that others now do do it better than the BBC. And until recently that was not the case, as we've been saying on these boards for some time.

[Dave2002]

My own feeling is that it should concentrate on the content of its programmes and let others (who do it better) develop the technology that the Beeb then uses.

Sounds like a good idea to leave the technology side to others, but what makes you think that there is any other organisation better able to push the technology forward? The BBC used to have a rather good engineering group, which I believe has largely been dismantled or slimmed down. It'd be interesting to know which organisations you are aware of could do any better.

[jayne lee wilson]

Speaking as someone working with his own ageing codec, can I request that we just ignore most of the words of #3, and concentrate on the good bits?

Cheer up Ferns - I always find a mulled brandy helps on a night like this...

[Serial_Apologist]

Cheer up Ferns - I always find a mulled brandy helps on a night like this...

But Ferney has mulled over Radio 3