Posts by James Dunmore 171 publicly visible posts • joined 9 May 2007
Although I think ITV did a fantastic Vanilla F1 coverage - minus the adverts. Before it became Lewis TV, the pre-race was excellent. But, when it came to modern interactive TV - it just did not exist. I want to see (via the red button) live timings, pit cameras, choose the battles (I might want to follow the battle for 8th place), overhead circuit maps with drivers pinpointed on them, etc etc. I hope the BBC do this!!
I find it hard to believe any figures when it comes to radio - has anyone seem how RAJAR calculates is figures - a shockingly bad way of doing it (I know it is wikipedia, but it's interesting... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAJAR )
Anyway - I have a DAB radio and love it - 5Live much clearer than AM, etc. However, I can't see DAB lasting... as the article mentions, many homes have WiFi and it makes more sense to build a radio set capable of picking up internet radio stations (and how much more potential does that have !! timeshifted playback, etc, etc.))... the only problem outstanding is getting Internet Radio's into cars, where to be fair, a large majority of radio listeners exist.
Currently DAB take up for cars has been rubbish, but I'm sure with all these 3G networks, it won't be long until we can get Internet radio streaming to the car
If Sky are not allowed a stake, then nor should Virgin Media (given that is a broadcaster too - well, if you call Vm1 and Vm2 broadcast worthy !).
As a sports fan, I am a little disappointed, as (a long shot) I was hoping that Sky would pull ITV's poor (as in non-existent) interactive sports coverage into the 21st century (I'm talking about F1 coverage mainly.... no interactive 'choose your camera view', no lap times, etc.)
I (could be wrong), but always thought that HTML was the language, and XHTML was just the way you should use it and put it together.
......HTML is the language, but XHTML is just the standard you should use when implementing it (bit like programming languages and design patterns).
Therefore with HTML 5, they will just update the w3c scheme to reflect the new elements, and therefore you have XHTML compliant HTML5.0
At least we don't have to wait until the 2nd Tuesday in February for a patch.
But that aside - I agree with "So, basically ... " Who in their right mind would enter their details into a popup that is sourced from a link from a different site - I say this to everyone who asks about phishing, always type the address yourself (or use your bookmarks) when going to a shopping site/banking site/email etc. - or don't click on a link from somewhere else (i.e. another site or your email!!)
Spot on - where as before I could get everything through one medium, now I have to subscribe to others.
Although I would like to see the Sky separated into separate arms - i.e. broadcasting and content (one sends the stuff, from any one, the other makes it and offers it to others) - therefore less conflict of interest.
Really though, I can see in a few years time nobody buying tv channels at all - they just pay for what they watch, when they watch it - for example, with football, I pay x amount a month for sky sports, and there are loads of football matches I don't have time to watch (and loads of other content on those channels) - I'd rather just pay for the 3 or 4 games a week I watch - much fairer system I think - but then the BBC tax, sorry fee, would never allow that.
All a sat nav should be used for is a map that turns is own pages (i.e. a safe way to map read if there is no-one around to read the map for you) - there is no substitute for knowing where you are going before hand.
This coach driver should have known how to get there from the major roads at least (okay if he got lost up some side road or something, but a wrong turn from the (probably) sign posted a road)
I'd love to see the figures of number left against number signing up, both before and after VM took over, and before and after the SKY problem (and again now) - and see if more or less people are leaving and signing up?
(or perhaps the article did state that, and I just didn't understand!?)
I both agree and disagree with you - yes the arguing between different desktop / distro fans will stop Linux becoming mainstream - however, the fact that there are different distros and desktops to choose from is the strength of Linux on the desktop.... If you don't like the XP/Vista/MAC desktop, your pretty much stuck with it (bar a couple of creature comfort changes) - whereas Linux, you have the option to change and choose.
Linux fans just need to agree to disagree and then move forward to try and help each other.
Yes, there are a few things that don't work in Ubuntu, but there are more than a few things that don't work in Windows, and at least Ubuntu are happy to hold their hands up and try and fix/address it (hell, they even don't mind if you fix it yourself and tell them about it).
Really, you are all a bunch of school kids - my OS is better than your OS, but my OS did this first, yeah but mind did this better!! Really!!
At the end of the day, each OS suites an individual - just for starters, everyone uses the "desktop" in a different way or likes their "start menu" organised differently. Competition and difference is only a good thing for the market.
Think of it like a car - every car does the same thing (essentially, drives you from a to b), just that each car has a different set of features inside, etc. Not everyone likes the same car, and not everyone needs the same set of features, etc.
(For the record, use windows XP at work, Ubuntu at home both have pros and cons!)
"I unashamedly use XP, for what I use ot for it's rock solid (never crashes with me) and allows me to do all the stuff I want to at home - word processing, surfing, playing music and playing online games."
So which ones of those things can't you do on a free, 99% virus and security hole free Linux Desktop?
Or do you rather like paying +£100 (i've no idea what it even is) in license fee's to use an OS that is full of security holes and virus'.
(don't get me wrong, I don't hate windows, I'm just interested in why XP is so good for those tasks?!)
This article combined with this one http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/20/phone_charger/
makes you wince eh!
Anyway - back to the topic - I think a solar powered phone charger would be much more useful than a wind powered, but it is still a good idea.
That subject says it all.
I moved house recently (2months ago) and took the opportunity to move from ntl to sky. I've been with NTL (or virgin, whatever) for 5 years, and the only good thing about them is their broadband - customer service is rubbish, as is their tv box. Lost and 24 are my most fave shows on telly.
But its not just sky1 is it - who has EVER had a reliable interactive service on an NTL box - last time I pressed the "red button" on the box it killed it - new box - 3 weeks turn around - never again did I try that - not to mention no interactive on Sky Sports. Endless other TV problems (dodgy picture, sound problems, etc. engineers no idea what is up with it).
Anyway - with Sky+, sky freetime package, BT line and broadband (not sky broadband - heard it isn't up to much, yet, but I would save more money if i did) - i save £10 a month AND i've got a sky+ box compared to what I did have.
Plus, the customer service is much better - being that I have not had to call it yet!!!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
