1. Home
  2. UK Do-It-Yourself Forum
  3. OT: Is BBC Iplayer any use?

OT: Is BBC Iplayer any use?

Every time I've searched for something on BBC Iplayer, it's unavailable. They don't seem to have much on there. Why isn't everything on there?

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword
Loading thread data ...

Well everything isn't owned by the BBC, it usually works for me but programs do expire after a while maybe their system wouldn;t be able to cope with storing everything they have shown.

Reply to
whisky-dave

I was only referring to BBC programs.

They must be stored somewhere anyway!

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

You mean its search, its crap as normal for searches. and to be honest since TV Iplayer started to mess about with passwords half the time its never actually worked properly for me anyway. Brian

Reply to
Brian Gaff

It can't bloomin well cope with streamin bloomin audio these days, how its supposed to work with video is anyones guess. Strange that Radio Caroline or many commercial stations can stream but the bbc keeps buffering all the time. Brian

Reply to
Brian Gaff

No, I mean half the stuff the BBC have made is not available to watch on it.

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

I don't have problems playing video anywhere, including from the BBC. Most likely your connection sux. I've got fibre broadband that runs at about 46 Mbit. The line will do 54, but they charge extra for that, and I didn't see the point for only 8 more speed. I'm actually only meant to get 32, but their limiter seems to be rather generous.

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

iPlayer used to be excellent. I used to use the Radio service a lot and the TV service enough to make it more than worthwhile.

However, in the last few months, the changes to the site have made it 'less user friendly' and unreliable.

I assume some of the changes relate to the 'controls' related to the TV licence paranoia.

I've mixed views on this. I don't really support the TV licence but, as long as it is the law, I accept people should have one if they have a TV and, if they are caught using a TV with out one, that they deserve to be 'done'.

However, I remain unconvinced that the measures they are putting in place to restrict access to the website are 'cost effective'- using that term to embrace cost in terms of money and convenience.

If there is an issue with 'license evasion' then they should focus on catching those who don't have licences, not make iPlayer harder to use for everyone.

Likewise, what is the issue with, say, accessing programmes from abroad? People travel- last year I spent 20% of the year aboard. Admittedly, I don't want to watch the TV that much when I'm travelling but I do, for example, like to 'catch up' on the odd thing.

Reply to
Brian Reay

Eh? I use the i-player quite a bit for TV. Buffering is the exception rather than the rule. But I do tend to use it late evening which may not be peak time.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)
[30 lines snipped]

Hear, hear. I'm a license payer, I should be able to watch the Beeb when abroad.

Reply to
Huge

You're not making sense. You disagree with the license fee but think people should be done for not having one.

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

Cann't you configure a UK proxy server when you go abroad so that to the BBC it looks like you are still in the UK?

Google for proxy server eg

formatting link

Alan

Reply to
Alan Dawes

The BBC seem to be confused about countries. Some BBC Youtube clips are available in the USA, but not in the UK!

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

I don't like freeloaders. If you are required to have a licence, then you should get one or forgo having a TV. Otherwise you are freeloading off honest people who do get one. Is honesty really so hard to understand?

Reply to
Brian Reay

You said "I don't really support the TV licence".

You have to pick ONE, and one only:

1) You agree with the TV license. 2) You disagree with the TV license.
Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

Who says I need to pick one? Some rude, jumped up, idiot on the internet?

Reply to
Brian Reay

Because you can't have conflicting opinions, or do you have a split personality?

Reply to
James Wilkinson Sword

En el artículo , Brian Reay escribió:

"James Wilkinson" (whose real name is Peter Hucker) is a sad, sociopathic troll with no life, Brian. He's been at it for years under a variety of nyms (much like someone you and I know from ura).

You're wasting your time replying to him, only generating noise.

Killfile him and be happy.

Reply to
Mike Tomlinson

available in the USA, but not in the UK!

Yes and it gets worse I tried to i useda section of a UK documentary from t he BBC showing a video of icebergs melting as part of global warming progra m, and put it to a friends music. When uploading it to youtube, youtube de tected this and said this is owe dby the BBC and yuo're video can't be moni terized (that's fair) and will only be availbe for viewing in the USA.

But more recently when one of my videos was rejected due to copyright infri ngment of another band, I emailed a defense claim or whatever they called i t and I won.

Reply to
whisky-dave

Given that programmes must be paid for somehow, there are three main ways:

  1. a licence fee that covers all radio and TV programmes
  2. a subscription fee (per programme)
  3. adverts
1 and 2 are effectively the same model, though is blanket coverage for all programmes for a given period of time, and 2 is per programme, so the more you watch, the more you pay.

There will be a break-even point beyond which 2 works out more expensive than 1; where that point lies depends on the per-programme cost and the licence fee cost.

Ideally, licence fee should only apply to programmes without commercials (otherwise you are playing twice over), but that would be impossible to police: "I was watching ITV at the time I was caught, so I should be exempt from the requirement to have a licence" would be a difficult defence.

Given that people are used to watching most programmes "free at the point of use", any introduction of per-programme usage fees ("pay £x by card before you can watch this programme") would be a big upheaval. Maybe one day BBC channels will be like Sky: you have to pay a monthly subscription to be able to watch them. And how would that monthly fee be set? 1/12 of the current licence fee? And how would DVB-T and DVB-S decoders for computers be authorised to record?

Maybe the current system of an annual watch-everything licence fee is the fairest and the simplest, with pay-per-view reserved only for some sport (eg major football matches, watched live) and some films.

Reply to
NY

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.