BBC Signs 'Memo of Understanding' With Microsoft 190
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft has signed a memorandum of understanding with the BBC for 'strategic partnerships' in the development of next-generation digital broadcasting techniques. They are also speaking to other companies such as Real and Linden Labs. Windows Media Centre platform, Windows Live Messenger application and the Xbox 360 console have all been suggested as potential gateways for BBC content. It is unclear how this impacts on existing BBC research projects such as Dirac, although it is understood that the BBC would face heavy criticism if its content was only available via Microsoft products."
I wonder what the BBC will get from this (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd welcome WMA (Score:3, Insightful)
how annoying, (Score:5, Insightful)
*which they largely squander on stupidly high pay for the executives whilst sacking many of the people responsible for content - Damn them.
Re:I wonder... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who the BBC is (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, it's only illegal to own a receiver on which you receive public broadcasts without paying a license.
The fee is not small. It is well north of $150 a year. It rises every year, faster than inflation. It is probably one of the most regressive taxes ever devised, and falls most heavily on those who can least afford it.
You could say the same about road tax. Much like road tax, it is only paid by people who own and use cars on the public roads. However, most of us realise that the roads are a sufficiently useful public service that this is necessary. Many of us also realise that the same applies both to the TV and the radio.
The BBC also does a very good job of keeping down the number of adverts on commercial TV, too. If you don't believe me, come spend some time over here (the US) and watch some cable (which costs more anually than the license fee). A whole heck of a lot more ads than Channel 5, that's for sure.
What we in the UK need more than anything is to make subscription to the State Broadcaster optional, and to stop jailing poor people for the crime of wanting to watch some other TV channels, while not subscribing to it.
It is. Don't pick up broadcasts, and you won't have to pay the tax. Of course you'll be a bit of a hipocrite if you ever listen to one of the BBCs many radio stations, or ever use its website, but it isn't illegal to be a hipocrite without a license.
And you're also forgetting the final thing. The BBC seems to have the ability to
piss off the Government more than any other organisation in England. That is a public service which would be cheap at twice the price.
Re:Who the BBC is (Score:4, Insightful)
Dude. That's *12* dollars a month... 12 dollars! And it's on a f'ing luxury (yes, TV is a luxury... if you're a single mother who can't spare $12/month, you've got other problems and should probably just sacrifice the damn TV). In exchange, you have world-class media coverage on multiple formats, and online content that's only just being seen in other countries, and most of it without commercials! Seriously, you don't understand how great you have it.
If the alternative is that I have to pay more money for crappier content *and* have to watch 20 minutes of commercials per hour... I'll pay the damn $12, thank you very much.
Re:Who the BBC is (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Issues of access? (Score:2, Insightful)
or downright impossible for Non-MS software/OS users to partake
in their media experience. Hasn't history repeated itself enough
for our generation to catch on to this?
Microsoft has a bad habit of making other companies proprietary
to suit their own portfolio.
This may be all that MS has to grasp on to, once they are out of the
PC O.S. business.
Becoming their new business model for the next decade or 3.
Re:I'd welcome WMA (Score:3, Insightful)
We're closer to having FOSS wmv3 support than we are RM support. Either way, it doesn't matter, RM sucks.
Re:Who the BBC is (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I'd welcome WMA (Score:3, Insightful)
Screw all this, the BBC should simply use the real current standard: H.264 with AAC audio. And don't tell me "that's an Apple-only thing" just because Apple happens to like H.264/AAC.
Re:Who the BBC is (Score:1, Insightful)
Have you seen what TV is like in other countries ? It's just awful. Low quality & full of advertising.
Having been outside the UK for 1 year, I dearly miss the BBC and it's programming and would gladly pay the licence free if I were allowed to receive broadcasts overseas.
I think that everyone that complains about the licence fee would soon complain bitterly if the BBC stopped running.
Although I would agree that some kind of lower rate (or free) for pensioners would be good.
That's my rant
Re:Who the BBC is (Score:4, Insightful)
Since an organization's revenue stream will ultimately determine its biases, the BBC is funded independantly of the tax system. Charging a license fee in a "one-viewer-one-vote" fashion avoids conflicts of interest in covering both the private sector and state affairs. This helps dispell greed and political interference in how it goes about its job.
If the BBC received significant funds from tax revenue, then it would be a state-controlled broadcaster.
If they scaled the fee according to an individual's means, then their bias would slant toward serving the interests of the wealthy (which is what many anti-licensing activists very badly want).
A flat fee may not be a good model for many services. But for an organization that is supposed to serve the entire public without bias, to reflec that society which it serves, and to serve as a watchdog, IMO you cannot do better.
By just being in the wider broadcasting market, they change it for the better.
Re:I wonder what the BBC will get from this (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft is always the big winner. I don't want to give too much detail but I just attended a conference at which the keynote speaker was supposed to be a guy from microsoft's hospitality division. He was coming on second, after some people from the company holding the conference. Each of them (three I think?) mentioned the Xbox 360 even though it really had no relevance WHATSOEVER to what we were talking about - obviously a blatant Microsoft advertisement. Well the Microsoft guy didn't bother to show up but he sent some of his peons instead and they gave a really bland, boring presentation to a room that was about half technical staff - with NO TECHNICAL INFORMATION WHATSOEVER. They also utterly failed to give a back-slap back to the conference holders in exchange for whoring themselves out to sell Xboxes.
there's a They Might Be Giants lyric that I like to always keep in mind when discussing Microsoft: "Can't shake the devil's hand and say you're only kidding / This is where the party ends" and it goes on from there (the song is called "your racist friend" IIRC, and the racism isn't really applicable here so I stop quoting) but the point is, everyone who makes a deal with Microsoft comes out behind, and Microsoft always comes out ahead. I often wonder why those morons at Sun decided to hop into bed with Microsoft again, can't they see it will kill them eventually?