If there are any unofficial Unscrewed Army members here at Slashdot that are unaware of this, Martin Sargent has an official blog up now (and not some faker fan pretending to be Martin, as was the case 6 months ago). Check him out here:
...when are they going to ditch the *G4* name and go back to being TechTV? The news post doesn't mention how it was a former TechTV executive who was just placed back on the management team for G4 (at the behest of Comcast) is responsible for bringing this show back to G4(TechTV) in America...
"Most of the content from G4/TechTV is just awful. It's too MTV-ish geared for zit-faced basement dwelling pre-pubescent kids who'll never get a date. You know, the kind of people that would think some stereotypical black guy with cornrows, bling and a funky nickname interviewing half naked asian pornstars in between showing "drift" races is "really awesome". TechTV wasn't like that. G4 has become that. Of course, G4 is owned by Viacom, which owns MTV - I believe. TechTV was owned by Paul Allen."
G4 is owned by Comcast. TechTV started out as ZDTV - owned by Ziff Davis - and was later acquired by Paul Allen and received the name change to TechTV. Allen sold out the channel to Comcast to be "merged" with G4. Comcast wanted to acquire the property to get G4 onto the DISH Network, DirecTV, and TimeWarner Cable systems which all carried TechTV but refused G4 (no wonder). G4 subsequently cancelled the original Call for Help and moved The Screen Savers and Unscrewed with Martin Sargent down to Los Angeles to the G4 Studios. They ruined TSS and their constant censorship meddling to Unscrewed made it to where it wasn't as funny as when it was under the TechTV umbrella. Unscrewed was cancelled, and TSS was slowly churned through the meatgrinder into AOTS today, which is pretty devoid of any merit whatsoever.
If G4 were owned by Viacom (who owns MTV, VH1, ComedyCentral, SpikeTV, etc.), the programming would be better than G4. After all, the videogame programming done on SpikeTV is at a higher quality than anything G4 does. The SpikeTV videogame awards show is better than GPhoria (which is a train wreck), and Stryker's "Ultimate Gamer" is certainly better (and more rewarding to the participant) than "Arena". SpikeTV is also a basic cable channel, whereas G4, according to Martin Sargent is a "third tier digital plus platinum" channel.
One should also mention that the Golf Channel and the TV Guide Channel both receive better ratings than G4. Compare that to TechTV back in the day that received better ratings than the Bravo channel despite not being a part of the basic cable packages in most cable markets. G4 just totally sucks.
"But the bigger question is, when will Starcade return to G4?!?!I want it back!"
I must admit, I did enjoy watching the repeats of that *classic* show. I watched it for the "2 days" it was originally on back in (what, 1983?) and was disappointed when it disappeared off the screens. Rewatching it as an adult made me laugh because I really got the impression that the host was drunk at times...:)
Its more amusing to watch than Cinematech, but I'm sure the nearly braindead management at G4 cannot grasp such a concept.
Without going into great detail, they were screwing me for $300-$600 PER MONTH at my small business with 2 lines, an ISDN and later a DSL (replaced the ISDN) accounts. They kept billing me for multiple DSL accounts when I only had one. They would charge me $200 to install an additional DSL account when it didn't even exist. ONE account was valid. It should have run me $70 a month + $45ea for the two biz voice lines... When I would call up to complain about the bogus charges, they would add another DSL account and bill me to install that one. At one time they were billing me for 4 DSL accounts at the same time, still while I only had the one. When I finally got someone to understand that they charged me to disconnect the non existant accounts plus they charged me $200 each for terminating a non existant contract.
Take up the SBC incident with your State's Public Utilities Commission and your Better Business Bureau. That's a far better route to go than letting the disputed monies stay in limbo and effect your credit history (which it does). The PUC should be able to force SBC to pony up with their proof. Getting a State Assemblyperson involved might also coax your PUC to take action quickly if it seems like they are just slowly going through motions.
As for the USSB service, it sounds like they have the law on their side with the exception of the amount of the dispute. I fail to see how the $2700 applies. Plus, USSB no longer exists... Sounds like a dispute that could be settled in small claims court against whatever entity it is supposedly owed to now...
I have a collection agency that calls me once a year trying to squeeze out $120 from me from the defunct PageNet pager service. Seems they had a self-perpetuating contract on the back of their old application that I was never shown or told of when I originally signed up. I simply did not resubscribe when the contract was up. PageNet subsequently went under within two months. So this company calls each year but they don't have the force of law on their side and that's why the amount they claim I owe has never shown up on my credit history.
"You mean, something like this ? They have cheaper, older models too... they've been out for like a year now. I was actually pretty unhappy with Archos's Gmini 220, but their portable video recorders look great. And their Jukebox Recorder beats the pants off of the iPod, once you install Rockbox on it. If only these guys would release a similar OS for the Gmini... it would become the best mp3 player evar."
Archos does not have a digital distribution system (unlike Apple with iTunes) and thus it is not a serious suggestion. Even if it works with TiVo-To-Go, it would be dependent upon TiVo pushing the BBCW organization for a distribution agreement for NewWHO. As it stands, my two suggestions were independent of one another.
Archos may have been one of the first to bring out a portable video player, but Rio was one of the first to bring out a portable MP3 player but that didn't stop yesterday's news from transpiring...
"Realplayer is available for Windows, Mac OS and Linux. It is also easy to install, from a novice user's perspective. That's probably why they use Real."
Which goes to show that its a universal product; universally ugly on all platforms. I installed one of the recent versions of Real Player on my PC just so I could watch "Doctor Who Confidential" on my computer here in the States. The image quality was so horrid I quit watching 2 minutes into the program.
That, coupled with Real's historic love for installing spyware and degrading system performance are reason enough why there is such hostility aimed at Real from Slashdot users such as myself...
As good Slashdot and Digg readers (http://www.digg.com/apple/iPod_Video..._Details_) , we know that word on the street is to expect an iPod Video model to debut sometime perfect for the Christmas 2005 holiday buying season. Word is that Apple is looking for video content for such a device.
If you'd like to see the NewWHO series available for digital distribution through iTunes (and for iPod Video and iPod Photo/Color models), then let Apple know by writing to them and asking that they actively pursue acquiring digital distribution rights here in the U.S. Such a distribution agreement would create buzz not only for the allegedly upcoming iPod Video unit but also buzz for the new series here in America.
I'm including TiVo as an option since it is well known that TiVo wants to actively pursue digital downloads for their machines and they are currently testing downloads of IFC Channel original content (Greg the Bunny, etc.) through their current beta tests.
"BBC PRIME should have broadcast the new Dr Who show to Europe and other countries too. Especially since the local tv stations don't want to carry the show (except for Canada and Australia, ok and I think Korea)"
Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Sweden, etc.
Outpost Gallifrey (www.gallifreyone.com) has the whole list of countries that have bought the NewWHO series.
"No digital cable in my area = no BBCA = no Benny Hill"The satellite companies do credit checks on potential customers and people that live by cash alone and have no land line phones are discriminated against.For the past 20 years I've lived without any type of bank account what-so-ever, no loans, no CC's, nothing.Living strictly by green cash carried in my pocket."
I thought the Unabomber was in prison!:)
But seriously. If you are in an SBC area, you could get DISH Network, along with DSL and local/long distance phone service for $70 per month. It would require you to get a land line though.
Guess you could pay them via money order... But I doubt SBC would pull a credit check on you. For their Cingular mobile phone service, they probably would...
"The video download should be free of commercials and HDTV resolution (or better)... the UK equivilant of our 720p in the US. Bonus points if it's already available in NTSC format but I won't be upset if I have to re-encode it myself from PAL to NTSC."
NewWHO is not shot on HD. It is shot on DigitalBeta, so the best you would get is PAL resolution (576 visable lines). However, NewWHO is transmitted on BBC1 which is analog. It won't be anamorphic widescreen either.
NewWHO will transition to being shot on HD for Season/(or "Series" if you are British) 3, in 2007. Season 2 (debuts in 2006) is currently in production now and again is shot on DigitalBeta.
"What is the reason for not putting Doctor Who on BBC America?"
Because BBC Worldwide Americas (BBCWA) doesn't want NewWHO to be a niche property. They want it on basic cable. BBC America is not included in basic cable packages (although it is a basic station in most markets for DirecTV and DISH Network). BBCWA also charges too much money for even BBC America to even televise the ClassicSeries!
"IS the BBC greedy or are cable networks not wanting it?"
I'd say a combination of both.
BBC Worldwide Americas (BBCWA) - the licensing arm of the BBC in this region - reportedly wanted the SciFi Network to pony up $1 million per episode for the rights to televise NewWHO in the United States. That's far more than what the fees were charged to CBC of Canada or any of the other markets NewWHO is being televised in. SciFi said "no" and decided to plow the money into more of their *shlock* "original pictures" instead. SciFi also dug deep into the NBC Universal archives to update the old series "Time Tunnel" for next year as well.
It is also possible that SciFi was aware that lead actor Christopher Eccleston was leaving the show at the end of the first season before it was officially announced and they wanted to see how David Tennant did in the role prior to committing to acquiring the American televising rights.
There are others (like IGN.com) who claim(ed) BBCWA insisted that any American cable network that picked up NewWHO also had to televise the ClassicSeries as well. But that claim has been criticized severely since published.
The other problem is that the DVDs won't be released for Region1 (which the US is part of) until NewWHO Season/Series 1 is televised in America, according to BBCWA. Warner Home Video (a division of TimeWarner) holds the distribution rights to Region1 DVDs and although they probably would like to market them right now, BBCWA won't let them because they think it will hurt their chance to eventually sell the series in this market (although the logic doesn't explain really SciFi buying the rights to televise repeats of "Firefly" from Fox since that whole series has been available on DVD for two years*). The DVDs are available (in bare bones vanilla currently but a box set is coming in November) in the UK/Europe in Region2, but be advised that the MPAA (to which Warners is a part of) considers the importation of Region2 DVDs to Region1 as a form of piracy known as "parallel import." You would also need a DVD player that is capable of doing multi-regions such as the $60 Philips DVP-642 that is sold at Target.
The whole season/series is of course posted online (ahem, illegally) and Torrentspy has links to each episode. The previously mentioned Philips DVP-642 player can play Divx/Xvid encoded material so if you acquire the Region2 DVDs or the Torrented files online, you can play them through that machine on your television.
With that said, here are some links to websites covering New Doctor Who:
www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho - official site.
www.gallifreyone.com - big online fan site known as "Outpost Gallifrey."
www.aintitcool.com - Aint-it-Cool-News has covered almost every episode from the past season.
*Yes, I realize the SciFi Network, as a division of NBC Universal, acquired the rights to televise "Firefly" as a marketing campaign for the upcoming spinoff motion picture called "Serenity."
"They're ahead of CNN, ahead of NBC, Fox all the USA networks, all print media. They're even ahead of Fastclick (the web advertising network!). You gotta be impressed at how they've grasped the Internet."
I wouldn't call the BBC relying upon Real Player for streaming video as having any sort of grasp of the internet.*:)
*Yes, yes. I do know about their open source streaming video player codec (and H.264 usage) as well as the iMP commercial service. This was meant to be a cheap dig at the Beeb for not using Slashdot users' most favorite streaming player, QuickTime.
Our office's IT person yanked QuickTime off my desktop computer because according to her, it was a security problem because "QuickTime goes across the net to check the time...you know...that's why they call it Quick Time."
She also denied me the right to install Mozilla FireFox because according to her, "Mozilla has more security holes in it than IE." If anyone wonders why IE ranks so highly in visits to Slashdot, its probably because so many employers have wankers for IT staff that won't allow any other type of browser installed on the office machines.
The same IT person tried to claim that our office had to buy a new license for a copy of Microsoft Visio that was installed on a machine that nobody used anymore instead of uninstalling it from that particular machine and reinstall the program on the computer of the employee who requested the program. Management wouldn't listen to my protests on this until I produced an email from Microsoft directly indicating the extra license purchase was unnecessary.
Yet another case of bonehead government IT staff justifying their knowledge and position with an MCSE certification.
Even with the admission by Hollywood players that piracy is not to blame in the decline of theatre ticket sales, the reasoning is still self-serving. By claiming the decline is due to Joe Public having big screen televisions, surround sound, and DVD quality, the studios are trying to make their case (indirectly) that the only way to survive this multimedia age we live in will be to simultaneously release features to both the theatres and pay-per-view/DVD markets. And this means squeezing exhibitors to starve off this plan. How would they do that? By forcing exhibitor demands for better financing (and potential revenue share of the savings) of the digital projection & distribution changeover.
To me, this also means that there will be further consolidation of the exhibitor chains and the squeezing of independents which seems to happen to all industries eventually. Say hello to more Regal Cinemas blaring 20 minutes of advertisements of NBC television programming in digital cinema projection glory.
And yeah, I am still pissed that Regal no longer honors the "Regalator" cups since Regal was acquired-on-the-cheap from bankruptcy along with UA Theatres and formerly terrific Edwards Cinema. chain...
"While other console companies existed before Nintendo, they were largely unprofitable. Atari's abysmal failures in Pac-man and E.T. are just one example. In short, the entire console industry was about to be written off as just another fad. Nintendo's entry into the market was largely seen as suicide at best, according to many insiders. However, Nintendo did what Magnavox, Atari, and Colecovision could not: brought gaming into the mainstream and were comercially viable. To this day, some people call console gaming (regardless of platform) "playing Nintendo" just as some people call all sodas "coke".
You are completely wrong. Atari was the fastest growing company in American business history until Netscape. Atari is the root of the videogame industry and at one time, dominated 90% of the home industry, commanded much of the arcade, and was a major force in home computers. Up until late 1982, Atari also accounted for 2/3rds of the profits of Warner Communications (better known today as TimeWarner). The reason why Atari fell is because Atari was essentially the pioneer, there was no other example of creating a game machine platform and then licensing other companies to make software for it. In fact, it was the Atari-breakoff company named *Activision* that was the first third-party video game company. Because there was no licensing system in place, other companies learned how to make games for the Atari 2600 and there was no major player policing the market. Crappy games flooded the market and the industry crashed.
Nintendo jumped in and applied the VHS videotape method to the industry. They also practiced monopolistic business behavior in requiring third party licensed companies to buy the manufactured cartridges directly from then and artificially limited the supply. Nintendo also tied up third party titles by demanding exclusive rights to the platform and preventing the same companies from porting the same games to different video game platforms in the American market. These practices were later challenged by the two successor companies to old Atari Inc. - those being the Atari Games Corporation/Tengen and the Atari Corporation. While they lost the case, Nintendo scrapped their discredited business practices.
If you want to thank Nintendo, thank them for reviving the American videogame market from 1985-1986, when it became apparent that videogames were not a fad and prompted Atari and Sega to jump back in. And had someone else besides the Tramiel family had owned Atari Corp. at the time, they would've revived the industry before Nintendo debuted the NES in the American market. For example, the Atari 7800 was scheduled to debut in 1984 and it was delayed 2 years because of Warner selling 75% of the stock in the company to the Tramiels.
Know your roots, indeed. Nintendo is an imposter to the greatness that was Atari.
"I have a videogame collection with close to 1000 original game carts and systems as well as thousands more in emulation. When younger kids/relatives come over they don't even know how to USE a NES/SNES let alone an Atari or the likes, but once I brief them they all love them. TAZ for Atari 2600 is one game that holds up so well it is amazing, or Warlords."
I agree. Warlords is still awesome. 4 player action. Simple, yet totally effective.
Which makes me kind of laugh. Baer's games lacked a lot of that fun factor. He didn't even get it right with his version of Pong. Its kind of like the Windows GUI compared to Apple's, except if only Windows truly came first leaving Apple to get it right thereafter.
Atari Inc.'s games - with the exception of that dire 1982 year with "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "E.T" - were fun. The arcade Atari Games Corp. never let up. Their arcade games were unique, creative, and fun up until (arguably) the era of Street Fighter2 wiping everything else out of the arcades. The fighting games chased away all but the diehards and subsequently outside of Japan, the arcades died.
Maybe Bushnell can bring that feeling back with his uWink properties. I wish him the best of luck...
"2. Chips pluggable to the mobo like Atari cartridges to eight CPUs"
I wish. Loved the slot design on the Pentiums and the Athlons. No fear of breaking pins and ruining the processor purchase. Although this would upset Intel's business model of constantly changing pin configurations on new processors in order to generate sales of new mobos with new Intel chipsets to complement the new processor designs.
I'd settle on pluggable memory chips. I hate DIMMS (and before that, SIMMS). Its the only part I have someone else install when I build a new machine because I tend to force DIMMS into their slots. Pluggable memory chips (aka "cartridge format") could also negate the need to buy aftermarket chip cooling/heat sink accessories.
ps. Good show on the Atari reference. Atari never gets enough respect that it is due.
"Apple should start sending out OS X on CD AOL-style. If they really are a hardware company, that will sell them a lot of hardware later on. If they're really smart, they'll send out Panther on CD to everyone. People will pirate Tiger anyway, but that would at least get OS X onto computers that would otherwise have never pirated it, then those people can buy Apple hardware in a year or two when they upgrade."
Are you advocating a commercial Knoppix-type like distribution of OS X for x86? Let the person try what its like (a simulation of sorts) to use OS X and then give the user a discount when they come into an Apple store interested in purchasing a Macintosh?
That would only work if the people weren't existing Apple Mac owners, otherwise Apple unnecessarily cuts into its own projected sales margins. Unless they sent out those discs to holdouts that still haven't switched to OS X...:)
"2. Games. That is going to be the hard sell. The big item in most retail stores are lots of junk software for web related stuff and then GAMES. Lots and lots of games. All of which require "Windows XP". How will Apple convince developers to write for their platform?"
Your answer, Windows Vista. Thanks to the hubris of Microsoft, Windows Vista will be ignored by gamers just as they ignored Windows2000 and shunned WindowsME. Doing stupid deliberate things like retarding the performance of OpenGL in Vista in favor of DirectX is enough to alienate the likes of id Software. Combine that with the fact that the next generation console of choice will be the Sony Playstation3 (which supports OpenGL), the conversion to the computer platform of choice will be the Macs as long as videocard support becomes equal to the current Windows market and Apple offers some headless desktops that support end user expansion through PCIe cards (including SLI techniques too).
"Unless they can get some major OEMs to take a huge risk and give up Microsoft then they will be crushed like every other competitor. BeOS ran on X86 too and they could not even get a single major vendor to include them on PCs or market them, even for free as dual-boot systems. I think you're dead wrong."
Sony wants to be free of Microsoft. Unfortunately, Sony and Apple are naturally competitors to one another. Gateway has a history of not liking Microsoft. HP, bitter that they do not get Dell's discount, does not like Microsoft either.
There are OEMs that are interested this time in dumping Microsoft. The question is, will Apple accommodate those desires?
"Actually, Orange Computer (makers of a nice Apple ][ clone) might still be in business. They called one of their machines the Orange Peel. But Apple is fond of large burly teams of lawyers and shut 'em down."
Didn't Fujitsu UK buy them? No, wait, that was Acorn...
I'm not familiar with an Orange AppleII clone. Only the Laser128s and such...
Slashdot Mirror
If there are any unofficial Unscrewed Army members here at Slashdot that are unaware of this, Martin Sargent has an official blog up now (and not some faker fan pretending to be Martin, as was the case 6 months ago). Check him out here:
www.sargeworld.com
Bring back TechTV!
And Unscrewed with Martin Sargent!
www.sargeworld.com - Martin's official blog
"Most of the content from G4/TechTV is just awful. It's too MTV-ish geared for zit-faced basement dwelling pre-pubescent kids who'll never get a date. You know, the kind of people that would think some stereotypical black guy with cornrows, bling and a funky nickname interviewing half naked asian pornstars in between showing "drift" races is "really awesome". TechTV wasn't like that. G4 has become that. Of course, G4 is owned by Viacom, which owns MTV - I believe. TechTV was owned by Paul Allen."
G4 is owned by Comcast. TechTV started out as ZDTV - owned by Ziff Davis - and was later acquired by Paul Allen and received the name change to TechTV. Allen sold out the channel to Comcast to be "merged" with G4. Comcast wanted to acquire the property to get G4 onto the DISH Network, DirecTV, and TimeWarner Cable systems which all carried TechTV but refused G4 (no wonder). G4 subsequently cancelled the original Call for Help and moved The Screen Savers and Unscrewed with Martin Sargent down to Los Angeles to the G4 Studios. They ruined TSS and their constant censorship meddling to Unscrewed made it to where it wasn't as funny as when it was under the TechTV umbrella. Unscrewed was cancelled, and TSS was slowly churned through the meatgrinder into AOTS today, which is pretty devoid of any merit whatsoever.
If G4 were owned by Viacom (who owns MTV, VH1, ComedyCentral, SpikeTV, etc.), the programming would be better than G4. After all, the videogame programming done on SpikeTV is at a higher quality than anything G4 does. The SpikeTV videogame awards show is better than GPhoria (which is a train wreck), and Stryker's "Ultimate Gamer" is certainly better (and more rewarding to the participant) than "Arena". SpikeTV is also a basic cable channel, whereas G4, according to Martin Sargent is a "third tier digital plus platinum" channel.
One should also mention that the Golf Channel and the TV Guide Channel both receive better ratings than G4. Compare that to TechTV back in the day that received better ratings than the Bravo channel despite not being a part of the basic cable packages in most cable markets. G4 just totally sucks.
"But the bigger question is, when will Starcade return to G4?!?!I want it back!"
:)
I must admit, I did enjoy watching the repeats of that *classic* show. I watched it for the "2 days" it was originally on back in (what, 1983?) and was disappointed when it disappeared off the screens. Rewatching it as an adult made me laugh because I really got the impression that the host was drunk at times...
Its more amusing to watch than Cinematech, but I'm sure the nearly braindead management at G4 cannot grasp such a concept.
Without going into great detail, they were screwing me for $300-$600 PER MONTH at my small business with 2 lines, an ISDN and later a DSL (replaced the ISDN) accounts. They kept billing me for multiple DSL accounts when I only had one. They would charge me $200 to install an additional DSL account when it didn't even exist. ONE account was valid. It should have run me $70 a month + $45ea for the two biz voice lines... When I would call up to complain about the bogus charges, they would add another DSL account and bill me to install that one. At one time they were billing me for 4 DSL accounts at the same time, still while I only had the one. When I finally got someone to understand that they charged me to disconnect the non existant accounts plus they charged me $200 each for terminating a non existant contract.
Take up the SBC incident with your State's Public Utilities Commission and your Better Business Bureau. That's a far better route to go than letting the disputed monies stay in limbo and effect your credit history (which it does). The PUC should be able to force SBC to pony up with their proof. Getting a State Assemblyperson involved might also coax your PUC to take action quickly if it seems like they are just slowly going through motions.
As for the USSB service, it sounds like they have the law on their side with the exception of the amount of the dispute. I fail to see how the $2700 applies. Plus, USSB no longer exists... Sounds like a dispute that could be settled in small claims court against whatever entity it is supposedly owed to now...
I have a collection agency that calls me once a year trying to squeeze out $120 from me from the defunct PageNet pager service. Seems they had a self-perpetuating contract on the back of their old application that I was never shown or told of when I originally signed up. I simply did not resubscribe when the contract was up. PageNet subsequently went under within two months. So this company calls each year but they don't have the force of law on their side and that's why the amount they claim I owe has never shown up on my credit history.
"You mean, something like this ? They have cheaper, older models too... they've been out for like a year now.
I was actually pretty unhappy with Archos's Gmini 220, but their portable video recorders look great. And their Jukebox Recorder beats the pants off of the iPod, once you install Rockbox on it. If only these guys would release a similar OS for the Gmini... it would become the best mp3 player evar."
Archos does not have a digital distribution system (unlike Apple with iTunes) and thus it is not a serious suggestion. Even if it works with TiVo-To-Go, it would be dependent upon TiVo pushing the BBCW organization for a distribution agreement for NewWHO. As it stands, my two suggestions were independent of one another.
Archos may have been one of the first to bring out a portable video player, but Rio was one of the first to bring out a portable MP3 player but that didn't stop yesterday's news from transpiring...
"Realplayer is available for Windows, Mac OS and Linux. It is also easy to install, from a novice user's perspective. That's probably why they use Real."
Which goes to show that its a universal product; universally ugly on all platforms. I installed one of the recent versions of Real Player on my PC just so I could watch "Doctor Who Confidential" on my computer here in the States. The image quality was so horrid I quit watching 2 minutes into the program.
That, coupled with Real's historic love for installing spyware and degrading system performance are reason enough why there is such hostility aimed at Real from Slashdot users such as myself...
As good Slashdot and Digg readers (http://www.digg.com/apple/iPod_Video..._Details_
If you'd like to see the NewWHO series available for digital distribution through iTunes (and for iPod Video and iPod Photo/Color models), then let Apple know by writing to them and asking that they actively pursue acquiring digital distribution rights here in the U.S. Such a distribution agreement would create buzz not only for the allegedly upcoming iPod Video unit but also buzz for the new series here in America.
Write to Apple here:
http://www.apple.com/feedback/ipod.html
If you'd like TiVo to take a look at a digital distribution agreement for broadband equipped TiVos, write to TiVo here:
http://research.tivo.com/suggestions/2web519.htm
I'm including TiVo as an option since it is well known that TiVo wants to actively pursue digital downloads for their machines and they are currently testing downloads of IFC Channel original content (Greg the Bunny, etc.) through their current beta tests.
"BBC PRIME should have broadcast the new Dr Who show to Europe and other countries too.
Especially since the local tv stations don't want to carry the show (except for Canada and Australia, ok and I think Korea)"
Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Sweden, etc.
Outpost Gallifrey (www.gallifreyone.com) has the whole list of countries that have bought the NewWHO series.
"No digital cable in my area = no BBCA = no Benny Hill"The satellite companies do credit checks on potential customers and people that live by cash alone and have no land line phones are discriminated against.For the past 20 years I've lived without any type of bank account what-so-ever, no loans, no CC's, nothing.Living strictly by green cash carried in my pocket."
:)
I thought the Unabomber was in prison!
But seriously. If you are in an SBC area, you could get DISH Network, along with DSL and local/long distance phone service for $70 per month. It would require you to get a land line though.
Guess you could pay them via money order... But I doubt SBC would pull a credit check on you. For their Cingular mobile phone service, they probably would...
"The video download should be free of commercials and HDTV resolution (or better)... the UK equivilant of our 720p in the US. Bonus points if it's already available in NTSC format but I won't be upset if I have to re-encode it myself from PAL to NTSC."
NewWHO is not shot on HD. It is shot on DigitalBeta, so the best you would get is PAL resolution (576 visable lines). However, NewWHO is transmitted on BBC1 which is analog. It won't be anamorphic widescreen either.
NewWHO will transition to being shot on HD for Season/(or "Series" if you are British) 3, in 2007. Season 2 (debuts in 2006) is currently in production now and again is shot on DigitalBeta.
"What is the reason for not putting Doctor Who on BBC America?"
Because BBC Worldwide Americas (BBCWA) doesn't want NewWHO to be a niche property. They want it on basic cable. BBC America is not included in basic cable packages (although it is a basic station in most markets for DirecTV and DISH Network). BBCWA also charges too much money for even BBC America to even televise the ClassicSeries!
"IS the BBC greedy or are cable networks not wanting it?"
I'd say a combination of both.
BBC Worldwide Americas (BBCWA) - the licensing arm of the BBC in this region - reportedly wanted the SciFi Network to pony up $1 million per episode for the rights to televise NewWHO in the United States. That's far more than what the fees were charged to CBC of Canada or any of the other markets NewWHO is being televised in. SciFi said "no" and decided to plow the money into more of their *shlock* "original pictures" instead. SciFi also dug deep into the NBC Universal archives to update the old series "Time Tunnel" for next year as well.
It is also possible that SciFi was aware that lead actor Christopher Eccleston was leaving the show at the end of the first season before it was officially announced and they wanted to see how David Tennant did in the role prior to committing to acquiring the American televising rights.
There are others (like IGN.com) who claim(ed) BBCWA insisted that any American cable network that picked up NewWHO also had to televise the ClassicSeries as well. But that claim has been criticized severely since published.
The other problem is that the DVDs won't be released for Region1 (which the US is part of) until NewWHO Season/Series 1 is televised in America, according to BBCWA. Warner Home Video (a division of TimeWarner) holds the distribution rights to Region1 DVDs and although they probably would like to market them right now, BBCWA won't let them because they think it will hurt their chance to eventually sell the series in this market (although the logic doesn't explain really SciFi buying the rights to televise repeats of "Firefly" from Fox since that whole series has been available on DVD for two years*). The DVDs are available (in bare bones vanilla currently but a box set is coming in November) in the UK/Europe in Region2, but be advised that the MPAA (to which Warners is a part of) considers the importation of Region2 DVDs to Region1 as a form of piracy known as "parallel import." You would also need a DVD player that is capable of doing multi-regions such as the $60 Philips DVP-642 that is sold at Target.
The whole season/series is of course posted online (ahem, illegally) and Torrentspy has links to each episode. The previously mentioned Philips DVP-642 player can play Divx/Xvid encoded material so if you acquire the Region2 DVDs or the Torrented files online, you can play them through that machine on your television.
With that said, here are some links to websites covering New Doctor Who:
www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho - official site.
www.gallifreyone.com - big online fan site known as "Outpost Gallifrey."
www.aintitcool.com - Aint-it-Cool-News has covered almost every episode from the past season.
*Yes, I realize the SciFi Network, as a division of NBC Universal, acquired the rights to televise "Firefly" as a marketing campaign for the upcoming spinoff motion picture called "Serenity."
"put Benny Hill online..Thanks Beeb..."
Benny Hill repeats air weekly on BBC America, which is available on digital cable and through DirecTV and Dish Networks here in the States.
"They're ahead of CNN, ahead of NBC, Fox all the USA networks, all print media. They're even ahead of Fastclick (the web advertising network!).
:)
You gotta be impressed at how they've grasped the Internet."
I wouldn't call the BBC relying upon Real Player for streaming video as having any sort of grasp of the internet.*
*Yes, yes. I do know about their open source streaming video player codec (and H.264 usage) as well as the iMP commercial service. This was meant to be a cheap dig at the Beeb for not using Slashdot users' most favorite streaming player, QuickTime.
Our office's IT person yanked QuickTime off my desktop computer because according to her, it was a security problem because "QuickTime goes across the net to check the time...you know...that's why they call it Quick Time."
She also denied me the right to install Mozilla FireFox because according to her, "Mozilla has more security holes in it than IE." If anyone wonders why IE ranks so highly in visits to Slashdot, its probably because so many employers have wankers for IT staff that won't allow any other type of browser installed on the office machines.
The same IT person tried to claim that our office had to buy a new license for a copy of Microsoft Visio that was installed on a machine that nobody used anymore instead of uninstalling it from that particular machine and reinstall the program on the computer of the employee who requested the program. Management wouldn't listen to my protests on this until I produced an email from Microsoft directly indicating the extra license purchase was unnecessary.
Yet another case of bonehead government IT staff justifying their knowledge and position with an MCSE certification.
Even with the admission by Hollywood players that piracy is not to blame in the decline of theatre ticket sales, the reasoning is still self-serving. By claiming the decline is due to Joe Public having big screen televisions, surround sound, and DVD quality, the studios are trying to make their case (indirectly) that the only way to survive this multimedia age we live in will be to simultaneously release features to both the theatres and pay-per-view/DVD markets. And this means squeezing exhibitors to starve off this plan. How would they do that? By forcing exhibitor demands for better financing (and potential revenue share of the savings) of the digital projection & distribution changeover.
To me, this also means that there will be further consolidation of the exhibitor chains and the squeezing of independents which seems to happen to all industries eventually. Say hello to more Regal Cinemas blaring 20 minutes of advertisements of NBC television programming in digital cinema projection glory.
And yeah, I am still pissed that Regal no longer honors the "Regalator" cups since Regal was acquired-on-the-cheap from bankruptcy along with UA Theatres and formerly terrific Edwards Cinema. chain...
"While other console companies existed before Nintendo, they were largely unprofitable. Atari's abysmal failures in Pac-man and E.T. are just one example. In short, the entire console industry was about to be written off as just another fad. Nintendo's entry into the market was largely seen as suicide at best, according to many insiders. However, Nintendo did what Magnavox, Atari, and Colecovision could not: brought gaming into the mainstream and were comercially viable. To this day, some people call console gaming (regardless of platform) "playing Nintendo" just as some people call all sodas "coke".
You are completely wrong. Atari was the fastest growing company in American business history until Netscape. Atari is the root of the videogame industry and at one time, dominated 90% of the home industry, commanded much of the arcade, and was a major force in home computers. Up until late 1982, Atari also accounted for 2/3rds of the profits of Warner Communications (better known today as TimeWarner). The reason why Atari fell is because Atari was essentially the pioneer, there was no other example of creating a game machine platform and then licensing other companies to make software for it. In fact, it was the Atari-breakoff company named *Activision* that was the first third-party video game company. Because there was no licensing system in place, other companies learned how to make games for the Atari 2600 and there was no major player policing the market. Crappy games flooded the market and the industry crashed.
Nintendo jumped in and applied the VHS videotape method to the industry. They also practiced monopolistic business behavior in requiring third party licensed companies to buy the manufactured cartridges directly from then and artificially limited the supply. Nintendo also tied up third party titles by demanding exclusive rights to the platform and preventing the same companies from porting the same games to different video game platforms in the American market. These practices were later challenged by the two successor companies to old Atari Inc. - those being the Atari Games Corporation/Tengen and the Atari Corporation. While they lost the case, Nintendo scrapped their discredited business practices.
If you want to thank Nintendo, thank them for reviving the American videogame market from 1985-1986, when it became apparent that videogames were not a fad and prompted Atari and Sega to jump back in. And had someone else besides the Tramiel family had owned Atari Corp. at the time, they would've revived the industry before Nintendo debuted the NES in the American market. For example, the Atari 7800 was scheduled to debut in 1984 and it was delayed 2 years because of Warner selling 75% of the stock in the company to the Tramiels.
Know your roots, indeed. Nintendo is an imposter to the greatness that was Atari.
"Carmack is a genius, and as long as he doesn't run around and say he single handly created the FPS"
*Cough* "MIDI Maze" on the Atari ST *cough*
"I have a videogame collection with close to 1000 original game carts and systems as well as thousands more in emulation. When younger kids/relatives come over they don't even know how to USE a NES/SNES let alone an Atari or the likes, but once I brief them they all love them. TAZ for Atari 2600 is one game that holds up so well it is amazing, or Warlords."
:)
I agree. Warlords is still awesome. 4 player action. Simple, yet totally effective.
Which makes me kind of laugh. Baer's games lacked a lot of that fun factor. He didn't even get it right with his version of Pong. Its kind of like the Windows GUI compared to Apple's, except if only Windows truly came first leaving Apple to get it right thereafter.
Atari Inc.'s games - with the exception of that dire 1982 year with "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "E.T" - were fun. The arcade Atari Games Corp. never let up. Their arcade games were unique, creative, and fun up until (arguably) the era of Street Fighter2 wiping everything else out of the arcades. The fighting games chased away all but the diehards and subsequently outside of Japan, the arcades died.
Maybe Bushnell can bring that feeling back with his uWink properties. I wish him the best of luck...
Long live Atari and King Pong...
"2. Chips pluggable to the mobo like Atari cartridges to eight CPUs"
I wish. Loved the slot design on the Pentiums and the Athlons. No fear of breaking pins and ruining the processor purchase. Although this would upset Intel's business model of constantly changing pin configurations on new processors in order to generate sales of new mobos with new Intel chipsets to complement the new processor designs.
I'd settle on pluggable memory chips. I hate DIMMS (and before that, SIMMS). Its the only part I have someone else install when I build a new machine because I tend to force DIMMS into their slots. Pluggable memory chips (aka "cartridge format") could also negate the need to buy aftermarket chip cooling/heat sink accessories.
ps. Good show on the Atari reference. Atari never gets enough respect that it is due.
"Apple should start sending out OS X on CD AOL-style. If they really are a hardware company, that will sell them a lot of hardware later on. If they're really smart, they'll send out Panther on CD to everyone. People will pirate Tiger anyway, but that would at least get OS X onto computers that would otherwise have never pirated it, then those people can buy Apple hardware in a year or two when they upgrade."
:)
Are you advocating a commercial Knoppix-type like distribution of OS X for x86? Let the person try what its like (a simulation of sorts) to use OS X and then give the user a discount when they come into an Apple store interested in purchasing a Macintosh?
That would only work if the people weren't existing Apple Mac owners, otherwise Apple unnecessarily cuts into its own projected sales margins. Unless they sent out those discs to holdouts that still haven't switched to OS X...
"2. Games. That is going to be the hard sell. The big item in most retail stores are lots of junk software for web related stuff and then GAMES. Lots and lots of games. All of which require "Windows XP". How will Apple convince developers to write for their platform?"
Your answer, Windows Vista. Thanks to the hubris of Microsoft, Windows Vista will be ignored by gamers just as they ignored Windows2000 and shunned WindowsME. Doing stupid deliberate things like retarding the performance of OpenGL in Vista in favor of DirectX is enough to alienate the likes of id Software. Combine that with the fact that the next generation console of choice will be the Sony Playstation3 (which supports OpenGL), the conversion to the computer platform of choice will be the Macs as long as videocard support becomes equal to the current Windows market and Apple offers some headless desktops that support end user expansion through PCIe cards (including SLI techniques too).
"Unless they can get some major OEMs to take a huge risk and give up Microsoft then they will be crushed like every other competitor. BeOS ran on X86 too and they could not even get a single major vendor to include them on PCs or market them, even for free as dual-boot systems. I think you're dead wrong."
Sony wants to be free of Microsoft. Unfortunately, Sony and Apple are naturally competitors to one another. Gateway has a history of not liking Microsoft. HP, bitter that they do not get Dell's discount, does not like Microsoft either.
There are OEMs that are interested this time in dumping Microsoft. The question is, will Apple accommodate those desires?
"Actually, Orange Computer (makers of a nice Apple ][ clone) might still be in business. They called one of their machines the Orange Peel. But Apple is fond of large burly teams of lawyers and shut 'em down."
Didn't Fujitsu UK buy them? No, wait, that was Acorn...
I'm not familiar with an Orange AppleII clone. Only the Laser128s and such...