BBC to Offer Video Downloads for Mac. Apple TV Considered. [Archive]

MacRumors

Feb 7, 2008, 01:12 PM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

BBC's Mark Thompson responds (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/02/iplayer_choices.html) to some criticisms about their Windows-only support for their iPlayer (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/) service, which allows users to stream and download videos to their computer. While Mac and other platforms have been able to stream shows, downloads have not been available.

Thompson explains that this is due to rights management issues and working with their limited resources. That being said, the BBC is planning on launching a download version of BBC iPlayer for Mac in 2008.

Another interesting possibility was previously raised (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/01/ip_to_tv_your_comments.html) in the same blog by BBC's Ashley Highfield, who felt Apple's refresh of the Apple TV along with rental model could introduce BBC programming direct to your TV...we can look to getting BBC iPlayer onto [the Apple TV] too, as we should be able to use the rental functionality to allow our programmes to be downloaded, free, but retained for a time window, and then erased, as our rightsholders currently insist.

On January 30th, Apple announced (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/30/apple-announces-macbook-air-shipping-apple-tv-update-delayed/) that the new Apple TV software has been delayed and will not be available for "another week or two".

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/02/07/bbc-to-offer-video-downloads-for-mac-apple-tv-considered/)

OS X Dude

Feb 7, 2008, 01:16 PM

Saw this come up just as I reloaded my page!

Nice to see :apple: TV is getting some firm support at least.

al3000

Feb 7, 2008, 01:19 PM

can't wait!

dogtanian

Feb 7, 2008, 01:20 PM

Yipee! content!

Yixian

Feb 7, 2008, 01:21 PM

OMGOMGOMG.. OMG.

BBC on iTunes. Make it happen.

philbeeney

Feb 7, 2008, 01:22 PM

Downloading BBC programs would be an excellent move, especially as the Beeb produce some quality documentaries.

snicker71

Feb 7, 2008, 01:23 PM

Fair do's, now get a move on, 'Auntie'!:D

theheyes

Feb 7, 2008, 01:24 PM

That would be great. Hopefully Channel 4 et al will get on board if its successful. I'd seriously consider an AppleTV if I could stream TV shows for free.

happydude

Feb 7, 2008, 01:26 PM

any idea if this would be available in the u.s.? might finally pull the trigger and buy me an :apple:tv!

gotohamish

Feb 7, 2008, 01:28 PM

Downloading BBC programs would be an excellent move, especially as the Beeb produce some quality documentaries.

Their online video is for UK-based viewing only though... due to national licensing.

dogtanian

Feb 7, 2008, 01:30 PM

I doubt they would do the same in the US, they could however charge for US content, we pay a liscence fee remember.

akidd

Feb 7, 2008, 01:31 PM

Their online video is for UK-based viewing only though... due to national licensing.

Was just about to say that, but according to the BBC, there may be hope for no-UK residents.

From the iPlayer website:

Can I download programmes from outside the UK?

The BBC uses Geo-IP technology to identify where you are based on the location of your internet service provider (ISP). This ensures that only internet users in the UK can enjoy programmes on BBC iPlayer.

If you download a programme to your laptop or a portable hard drive, you can watch this wherever you are in the world. However, you will only be able to download new programmes once you return to the UK.

Why do I need to be in the UK to use BBC iPlayer?

Rights agreements mean that BBC iPlayer is only available to users in the UK. However, BBC Worldwide is working on an international version, which we will make available as soon as possible.'

Knowing the BBC the international version will be ready before the Mac version.

whoami

Feb 7, 2008, 01:33 PM

nice!!!
i'd be so happy if we could also get archived bbc radio broadcasts that they only post in real player now.

Neutral Gamer

Feb 7, 2008, 01:36 PM

Hopefully Channel 4 et al will get on board if its successful. I'd seriously consider an AppleTV if I could stream TV shows for free.

Am I the only one who uses Virgin Media (formally ntl) on this site? We've been getting free on demand access to the last seven days of TV for ages now including the BBC and Channel 4 (More4, E4) channels as well as Living, Bravo and Virgin 1.

Why does no one ever mention that? It's far better quality and quicker than the BBC iPlayer and most importantly I can watch it on my large TV rather than having to watch it on my computer. Plus there's loads of other free programmes and entire series you can watch as well as payable shows and movies. The way the media are going about, you'd swear the BBC and Apple TV have (or will) somehow revolutionise the on demand TV market .... :confused:

Personally I believe they're a couple of years late. Surely I can't be the only one ... ?

FoxyKaye

Feb 7, 2008, 01:36 PM

That would be so great - there's a number of BBC programmes that I'd really enjoy downloading, so get a move on the international support BBC!

Sky Blue

Feb 7, 2008, 01:37 PM

UK only no doubt. I'd love to get BBC on iTunes so I could download Doctor Who in the US from my UK account.

HamishInsanish

Feb 7, 2008, 01:37 PM

"...though the hard drive was allowed to spin down if able"? I thought this puppy was solid state? :confused: Or, wait a minute.. was it just the optional external that's solid state?

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

BBC's Mark Thompson responds (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/02/iplayer_choices.html) to some criticisms about their Windows-only support for their iPlayer (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/) service, which allows users to stream and download videos to their computer. While Mac and other platforms have been able to stream shows, downloads have not been available.

Thompson explains that this is due to rights management issues and working with their limited resources. That being said, the BBC is planning on launching a download version of BBC iPlayer for Mac in 2008.

Another interesting possibility was previously raised (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/01/ip_to_tv_your_comments.html) in the same blog by BBC's Ashley Highfield, who felt Apple's refresh of the Apple TV along with rental model could introduce BBC programming direct to your TV.

On January 30th, Apple announced (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/30/apple-announces-macbook-air-shipping-apple-tv-update-delayed/) that the new Apple TV software has been delayed and will not be available for "another week or two".

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/02/07/bbc-to-offer-video-downloads-for-mac-apple-tv-considered/)

Popeye206

Feb 7, 2008, 01:41 PM

More content! Love it!

skyrider007

Feb 7, 2008, 01:42 PM

This is great! I'm a fan of BBC contents.

joseph2166

Feb 7, 2008, 01:42 PM

Their online video is for UK-based viewing only though... due to national licensing.

And due to the fact that we PAY for bbc content.

Having said that surely an appletv rental service would also allow them put a charge on rentals from outside the UK - not much mind you but enough ;).

cloudstrife13

Feb 7, 2008, 01:43 PM

Top Gear!?

shadowfax

Feb 7, 2008, 01:44 PM

DanBUK

Feb 7, 2008, 01:45 PM

This is great! I'm a fan of BBC contents.

This could be the only thing that makes me get an :apple:tv for the UK. Sounds good

GQB

Feb 7, 2008, 01:46 PM

Cromulent

Feb 7, 2008, 01:55 PM

Anyone else find it more than just 'annoying' that US users can't see what journalism is supposed to look like (and share the news the rest of the world gets to see), while European users aren't allowed to see and understand the brainwashing we're subjected to from our corporate news?
I think its a wee bit more than just Digital Rights.

Every UK TV viewer pays a yearly TV license which funds the BBC. There is no way that US viewers would get BBC content for free while UK viewers have to pay.

JonasLondon

Feb 7, 2008, 01:55 PM

I think BBC is one of the best documentary channels out there, that would be a great addition!

And yes, :rolleyes:, it might add a certain new "news" angle to the isolated FOX News audience... ;)

:apple:TV rocks.

PS: There's a TON of Video-Podcasts you can get for free for it already btw. But full-quality BBC documentaries would be most welcome!

onemilkid

Feb 7, 2008, 01:56 PM

I honestly would pay 200-300 Euros to get the chance to see all nba games that i want over here in europe. Technically it should be no problem, sopcasting already does it (illegally).

So why not make the appleTV a boy which also works as a IP-TV Box where you can watch sports and stuff. For and fee or some stuff even for free, if the right owner wants it

Mac-Addict

Feb 7, 2008, 01:58 PM

I would really consider getting a Apple TV if the BBC do supply content.

applemax

Feb 7, 2008, 01:58 PM

Every UK TV viewer pays a yearly TV license which funds the BBC. There is no way that US viewers would get BBC content for free while UK viewers have to pay.

I was wondering about this - surely BBC DVDs should only be the price of manufacture as we already pay for the content.

itchster

Feb 7, 2008, 01:58 PM

Anyone else find it more than just 'annoying' that US users can't see what journalism is supposed to look like (and share the news the rest of the world gets to see), while European users aren't allowed to see and understand the brainwashing we're subjected to from our corporate news?
I think its a wee bit more than just Digital Rights.

Actually some US news channels like Fox News are available (at least in the UK) via satellite so we know exactly what you get. And you can keep it :D

Cromulent

Feb 7, 2008, 02:01 PM

Actually some US news channels like Fox News are available (at least in the UK) via satellite so we know exactly what you get. And you can keep it :D

I always watch FOX news if I fancy a laugh :).

Talk about unprofessional news broadcasting.

CHROMEDOME

Feb 7, 2008, 02:01 PM

Can someone hack it up so us fat American's can watch? Please?

Kebabselector

Feb 7, 2008, 02:05 PM

Can someone hack it up so us fat American's can watch? Please?

No!!!!!

It's our BBC and we're keeping it for ourself. Though you can gladly have Eastenders and Casualty for free.

zygo

Feb 7, 2008, 02:09 PM

Cromulent

Feb 7, 2008, 02:12 PM

Would a TV license be required in the UK to ONLY watch downloaded/streamed content?

The license states something about 'live broadcasts'... so that means we wouldn't need one right?

If that is the case then there shouldn't be any issue on pricing between UK and US.

Does anyone know if the UK TV licenses been changed to account for internet viewing?

It depends what live is interpreted as. Obviously very little TV is actually live and yet you still need a license. I think you still need a license. I'm sure the BBC would be quick to fill that little loop hole.

ArcaneDevice

Feb 7, 2008, 02:17 PM

I was wondering about this - surely BBC DVDs should only be the price of manufacture as we already pay for the content.

BBC DVDs are published under the commercial arm of the BBC which are a source of additional revenue. If they lowered the price they would have to raise the licence fee to make it up.

The iPlayer will never be available to anyone outside of the UK. The content is provided freely based on the fact that every user in the UK has already paid for it. Even if they don't want to.

Paid retail distribution through iTunes overseas would not be out of the question, but they would just be treating their content like any other iTunes content provider.

zygo

Feb 7, 2008, 02:18 PM

It depends what live is interpreted as. Obviously very little TV is actually live and yet you still need a license. I think you still need a license. I'm sure the BBC would be quick to fill that little loop hole.

but it specifies 'live broadcast'-is streamed/download content defined as live broadcast?

I'm sure the BBC would quickly correct any loopholes too if that was the case, which is why I asked if anyone knew of the license changing specifically with regard internet streaming/download.

I have no T.V.

Cromulent

Feb 7, 2008, 02:20 PM

but it specifies 'live broadcast'-is streamed/download content defined as live broadcast?

I'm sure the BBC would quickly correct any loopholes too if that was the case, which is why I asked if anyone knew of the license changing specifically with regard internet streaming/download.

I have no T.V.

Well, you are streaming / downloading it live from their servers if they are taking that approach. Better safe than sorry if you ask me though.

ArcaneDevice

Feb 7, 2008, 02:22 PM

It depends what live is interpreted as. Obviously very little TV is actually live and yet you still need a license. I think you still need a license. I'm sure the BBC would be quick to fill that little loop hole.

No you don't need a licence. If you only use the iPlayer it doesn't count unless they start streaming live broadcasts of the BBC networks. You can write and tell them that you don't have any television receiving equipment and they will send someone round to check it out.

"Therefore, if you are using your PC or laptop solely to watch TV programmes from the BBC iPlayer service in its current form, you do not need to be covered by a TV Licence."

flipshot

Feb 7, 2008, 02:27 PM

I believe the BBC are trying to get the License changed so that you would need one for these online services even though they aren't live broadcasts. They wanted to make everyone with a internet connection have TV License but the government haven't let them so far.

zygo

Feb 7, 2008, 02:27 PM

Well, you are streaming / downloading it live from their servers if they are taking that approach. Better safe than sorry if you ask me though.

Agreed.

I'm just debating buying a T.V. to use only for gaming and possibly appleTV, don't see why that should require a license with their stance being 'live broadcast'.

I feel that their costs for production are covered from resale to other countries/networks. The license fee probably covers their 'broadcast' costs i.e. transmitters, frequency bands etc. I don't know but I imagine the revenue the BBC is making through it's 'business' arm far outweighs it's 'public service'.

Craigy

Feb 7, 2008, 02:28 PM

I would really consider getting a Apple TV if the BBC do supply content.

Add me to that list also. We live in the UK but are moving to New Zealand later in the year - would happily pay for some BBC and c4 content.

peewit106

Feb 7, 2008, 02:32 PM

The BBC and the National Health Service are the two greatest institutions ever developed in the world.:)

JohnStrass

Feb 7, 2008, 02:32 PM

OMGOMGOMG.. OMG.

BBC on iTunes. Make it happen.

This alone will make me purchase apple TV.
I HATE BBC america!! We just get the crap that they assume americans wan to watch. Why can't I get some of the great news programs? London Calling!!!

dogtanian

Feb 7, 2008, 02:37 PM

Agreed.

I'm just debating buying a T.V. to use only for gaming and possibly appleTV, don't see why that should require a license with their stance being 'live broadcast'.

I feel that their costs for production are covered from resale to other countries/networks. The license fee probably covers their 'broadcast' costs i.e. transmitters, frequency bands etc. I don't know but I imagine the revenue the BBC is making through it's 'business' arm far outweighs it's 'public service'.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/BBC_income_2004_in_GBP_Redvers.png

See pie chart...

skyrider007

Feb 7, 2008, 02:37 PM

Top Gear!?

one of the best car shows ever

Daveoc64

Feb 7, 2008, 02:41 PM

The BBC iPlayer is restricted to users in the UK - not just because of the licence fee, but because they have to negotiate rights with the programme makers.

They currently offer two services:

1) A download service which uses WMV files with DRM on them (for Windows XP/Vista) compatible with most devices that can support those files.

2) A streaming service that supports virtually any OS with Flash.

The new part will be that Mac users can download files with DRM (like part 1 above). How they will do that, I have no idea. Short of Apple licensing FairPlay there isn't a suitable DRM solution for the Mac.

As for the :apple: TV, the only way that would work is if they did get FairPlay from Apple. Which I would REALLY be surprised by.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer

^^ If you can't use the service now, it wont work in the future.

will99

Feb 7, 2008, 02:41 PM

How is news relevant to when we're getting the 10.5.2 update? :p

bigandy

Feb 7, 2008, 02:41 PM

I think BBC is one of the best documentary channels out there, that would be a great addition!
The BBC isn't a 'documentary channel'. :p

It depends what live is interpreted as. Obviously very little TV is actually live and yet you still need a license. I think you still need a license. I'm sure the BBC would be quick to fill that little loop hole.
Currently, the TV license is just that - a TV license.

Online streaming isn't covered.... but yeah, it will be covered soon, methinks. :rolleyes:

The minute iPlayer comes out for teh Mac, I'm going to throw my TV in the trash. :o

Short of Apple licensing FairPlay there isn't a suitable DRM solution for the Mac.

As for the :apple: TV, the only way that would work is if they did get FairPlay from Apple. Which I would REALLY be surprised by.
Downloads, I suspect, will be FairPlay. Why is that such a stretch to believe? They're climbing in to bed with Apple with serious amounts of money - moving everything to Final Cut Pro workflows...

GQB

Feb 7, 2008, 02:43 PM

Actually some US news channels like Fox News are available (at least in the UK) via satellite so we know exactly what you get. And you can keep it :D

Fox is just the most blatant... the other big 3 are owned by General Electric , Westinghouse (both war profiteers) and Disney (primary US pablum dispenser... sorry Steve).

Back on thread, I'd love to at least have BBC content available for $$. I'd spring for it.

Daveoc64

Feb 7, 2008, 02:47 PM

Downloads, I suspect, will be FairPlay. Why is that such a stretch to believe? They're climbing in to bed with Apple with serious amounts of money - moving everything to Final Cut Pro workflows...

Apple released FairPlay in 2003 and has not licensed it to anybody since then.

Also, the BBC has stated several times that Apple would not license FairPlay to them.

BlakTornado

Feb 7, 2008, 02:49 PM

That would be great. Hopefully Channel 4 et al will get on board if its successful. I'd seriously consider an AppleTV if I could stream TV shows for free.

Same here.

I was quite shocked to find that BBC weren't involved with iTunes the other day when I checked the array of videos on the UK iTunes store...

any idea if this would be available in the u.s.? might finally pull the trigger and buy me an :apple:tv!

It's possible they may allow US iTunes buying but I doubt it since it's a British Company who is funded by british tax.

Daveoc64

Feb 7, 2008, 02:53 PM

It's possible they may allow US iTunes buying but I doubt it since it's a British Company who is funded by british tax.

This service has nothing to do with iTunes.

If TV shows come to the US iTunes Store, that will be BBC Worldwide.

This service is for people in the UK only and it is not part of iTunes.

It's a website (www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer).

pyramid6

Feb 7, 2008, 03:10 PM

The BBC has some of the best programming on the planet, IMHO. I would absolutely love to be able to rent BBC programs on the apple TV. I would buy one just for that. Over half the movies we rent from NetFlicks are BBC programs.

P6

netdog

Feb 7, 2008, 03:15 PM

one of the best car shows ever

No! Top Gear is the best car show ever.

applemax

Feb 7, 2008, 03:16 PM

No! Top Gear is the best car show ever.

No! Channel Five's Fifth Gear is so much better and so original too!

By the way, I was being sarcastic. :D

Apple Architect

Feb 7, 2008, 03:28 PM

I always watch FOX news if I fancy a laugh :).

Talk about unprofessional news broadcasting.

You mean that is not a drama/comedy ? Damn, all these years i have been thinking they had some fantastic script writers, after all, how else could they produce such drivel

tadunne

Feb 7, 2008, 03:45 PM

It would be so cool if the BBC could work with apple on this one. Most of the best content in the UK comes from the BBC.

If they could have BBC shows like Dr Who, Red Dwarf etc to purchase on itunes that would be cool. Combine that with a free catch up TV service using itunes new rental model. That would totally kick arse!

They will finally have a "mostly" cross platform video delivery service.

They should extend digital purchases to other download services in the UK (are there any?) just to not be totally reliant on Apple.

tadunne

Feb 7, 2008, 03:59 PM

Whatever service they deliver. I hope it in someway supports syncing to ipods.

Otherwise there's not that much point in having a download service really as you are either downloading and playing the content from your computer until it expires or streaming online.

I suppose it would be useful for that want to download stuff to their laptop and watch it where there's no network connection, but I'm thinking thats not a big market.

It makes sense for BBC to use itunes (Cheaper and potentially more popular than streaming along) and it makes sense for Apple to do everything they can to get BBC on board (They'll sell more ipods). Come on guys (BBC,APPLE) make sense of it all!

Neutral Gamer

Feb 7, 2008, 04:05 PM

The BBC and the National Health Service are the two greatest institutions ever developed in the world.:)

They're also two of the most bloated and inefficient instituions in the world. :)

Why the BBC has not gone commercial yet is beyond me. I'd understand if they were actually offering something that isn't being produced by the commercial stations but when you look at such cultural highlights as:

"Celebrity Strictly Come Dancing"
"The Most Annoying People of the Year 2007"
"The ONE Show"
"Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps"

You realise how much they've dumbed down for the proles. Personally, cutting down Panaroma to just 30 minutes and putting it on at "prime time" was the biggest insult. The BBC aren't providing a public service anymore, instead they're trying to compete in the ratings wars with other commercial stations. Get rid of the Licence Fee TAX now!

I always watch FOX news if I fancy a laugh :).

Talk about unprofessional news broadcasting.

What I hate most about FOX News is the number of downright lies and unsubstantiated rumours that feel the need to portray as fact. And then when they're found to be false they never even have the decency to apologise.

What's more anyone who criticises them are immediately labelled by its supporters as a left wing nut clearly brainwashed by the liberal media. According to them only FOX News have the courage to bring you the truth, of course just looking at the whole "Obama / Osama" and "Mass Effect Sex Debate" shows that's clearly not the case.

No! Channel Five's Fifth Gear is so much better and so original too!

By the way, I was being sarcastic. :D

Granted Top Gear is a great piece of entertainment BUT at least with Fifth Gear they actually spend time talking about the cars rather than prancing about trying to think of ever more ridiculous "stunts" to perform. Personally I think there's room for both programmes as they provide different functions and are aimed at a different audience.

tadunne

Feb 7, 2008, 04:18 PM

They're also two of the most bloated and inefficient instituions in the world. :)

Why the BBC has not gone commercial yet is beyond me. I'd understand if they were actually offering something that isn't being produced by the commercial stations but when you look at such cultural highlights as:

"Celebrity Strictly Come Dancing"
"The Most Annoying People of the Year 2007"
"The ONE Show"
"Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps"

You realise how much they've dumbed down for the proles. Personally, cutting down Panaroma to just 30 minutes and putting it on at "prime time" was the biggest insult. The BBC aren't providing a public service anymore, instead they're trying to compete in the ratings wars with other commercial stations. Get rid of the Licence Fee TAX now!

I don't know why BBC, Channel 4 etc are trying to do their own services. It's like saying come and watch BBC, but you'll have to buy a TV that only works with BBC?

Re: the shows you've mentioned above, while I agree they are crap (Except for "The Most Annoying People of the Year 2007" I have a thing for top 100 type programmes), BBC does have to make programs for everyone and that includes people that like crap like that!

Neutral Gamer

Feb 7, 2008, 04:26 PM

BBC does have to make programs for everyone and that includes people that like crap like that!

I haven't got anything against them catering for the diversified range of people who watch programmes in this country nowadays, I just wish they made their programmes UNIQUE rather than carbon copies of the commercial channels.

After all that's supposed to be the main reason for a publicly funded TV service - to show programmes that the commercial stations wouldn't normally show. Don't get me wrong there are some excellent documentaries on the BBC such as Horizon and of course the nature programmes, I just wish they spent the same amount of time and effort on their other shows!

Dunk the Lunk

Feb 7, 2008, 05:26 PM

Why the BBC has not gone commercial yet is beyond me. I'd understand if they were actually offering something that isn't being produced by the commercial stations but when you look at such cultural highlights as:

"Celebrity Strictly Come Dancing"
"The Most Annoying People of the Year 2007"
"The ONE Show"
"Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps"

You realise how much they've dumbed down for the proles. Personally, cutting down Panaroma to just 30 minutes and putting it on at "prime time" was the biggest insult. The BBC aren't providing a public service anymore, instead they're trying to compete in the ratings wars with other commercial stations. Get rid of the Licence Fee TAX now!

How is getting rid of the licence fee going to help? The only British station that competes with the BBC is Channel 4 which is also a public service station and is also owned by the Government. So getting rid of the licence fee would create 2 government owned stations competing for advertising revenues, and would ultimately lead to a merger unless one or both were sold which would just create another ITV and no-one wants that...

dogtanian

Feb 7, 2008, 05:48 PM

How is getting rid of the licence fee going to help? The only British station that competes with the BBC is Channel 4 which is also a public service station and is also owned by the Government. So getting rid of the licence fee would create 2 government owned stations competing for advertising revenues, and would ultimately lead to a merger unless one or both were sold which would just create another ITV and no-one wants that...

Just to say that yes Channel 4 is a public service channel but it is not 'owned' by the government.

Daveoc64

Feb 7, 2008, 05:54 PM

I don't know why BBC, Channel 4 etc are trying to do their own services. It's like saying come and watch BBC, but you'll have to buy a TV that only works with BBC?

The different broadcasters are working on a combined service called "Kangaroo" (at the moment).

It will combine content from all of them so that consumers can just use one program to get the content.

Daveoc64

Feb 7, 2008, 05:57 PM

Whatever service they deliver. I hope it in someway supports syncing to ipods.

Otherwise there's not that much point in having a download service really as you are either downloading and playing the content from your computer until it expires or streaming online.

The download service allows me to download content to my PC and then stream it to my Xbox 360 to watch on the big TV.

It's also great for watching when offline.

In terms of the Mac, flash is pretty poor in Mac OS X - uses a lot of CPU and the fans get LOUD, so having a download option will be helpful.

milo

Feb 7, 2008, 06:09 PM

Fox is just the most blatant... the other big 3 are owned by General Electric , Westinghouse (both war profiteers) and Disney (primary US pablum dispenser... sorry Steve).

Westinghouse doesn't own CBS, the two merged and later sold off most of their other divisions. At this point CBS is just CBS, they don't have a parent company or own any war profiteering divisions.

twoodcc

Feb 7, 2008, 06:10 PM

seems nice. always good to see more mac support

Loge

Feb 7, 2008, 06:19 PM

Good that they are doing this. Whether they would have done so if they hadn't been required to by their regulators is another matter.

babyj

Feb 7, 2008, 06:58 PM

No you don't need a licence. If you only use the iPlayer it doesn't count unless they start streaming live broadcasts of the BBC networks. You can write and tell them that you don't have any television receiving equipment and they will send someone round to check it out.

"Therefore, if you are using your PC or laptop solely to watch TV programmes from the BBC iPlayer service in its current form, you do not need to be covered by a TV Licence."

They stream some programmes live - Match of the Day for definite as you can only watch this on iPlayer whilst it is being shown live on TV.

I never understand why people have a problem with paying the license fee. Go to another country, the US being a good example, watch their TV networks and then you'll never complain again.

One point with the TV license is that it doesn't give you the right to own and watch BBC programmes in perpetuity - just to watch them when they are broadcast (keeping a recording for a long time isn't technically legit). This is why there is the 7 day limit on watching programmes through iPlayer and why you have to pay normal prices for DVDs.

I reckon Apple and the BBC will be able to work out some kind of deal. Apple providing BBC content through iTunes to UK residents for free and selling it in other countries (at least the programming the BBC can sell).

Apple would be stupid not to work something out as it will sell Apple TV's and iPod's by the case. Though no doubt the other UK networks will complain.

superleccy

Feb 7, 2008, 07:25 PM

Though no doubt the other UK networks will complain.
Or they could just offer their stuff on iTunes too! I'm still peeved that Channel 4's (non-Brit's, that's the only British non-BBC channel that's actually innovative) 4OD service is totally Mac-unfriendly.

Of course non-BBC stuff would have to be paid for by the end user, or at least (but please, no!) supported by adverts.

SL

mrrory

Feb 7, 2008, 08:28 PM

This would be so great, but unfortunately it would most likely be for UK residents only, like so much of bbc.co.uk's content... Shame for us Brits living abroad...

Dunk the Lunk

Feb 8, 2008, 01:24 AM

Just to say that yes Channel 4 is a public service channel but it is not 'owned' by the government.

It is publicly owned ie ultimately owned by the government, much like the BBC but without the licence fee. Although ironically some of its cost for switching to Digital switchover have come from government subsidy through the licence fee...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_4
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2006/apr/25/citynews.broadcasting1

McScooby

Feb 8, 2008, 06:39 AM

Am I the only one who uses Virgin Media (formally ntl) on this site? We've been getting free on demand access to the last seven days of TV for ages now including the BBC and Channel 4 (More4, E4) channels as well as Living, Bravo and Virgin 1.

Why does no one ever mention that? It's far better quality and quicker than the BBC iPlayer and most importantly I can watch it on my large TV rather than having to watch it on my computer. Plus there's loads of other free programmes and entire series you can watch as well as payable shows and movies. The way the media are going about, you'd swear the BBC and Apple TV have (or will) somehow revolutionise the on demand TV market .... :confused:

Personally I believe they're a couple of years late. Surely I can't be the only one ... ?

I've got BTVision and its's been streaming for a while now, not bad for a £30 box, but you've gotta have BTBroadband.

The Phazer

Feb 8, 2008, 08:12 AM

Can't they just work out some kind of free rentals system with iTunes?

Apple haven't been interested up to now - with no fee, there's nothing to take a cut of to make any money on.

I dunno why that would have changed recently, though at least it's now technically feasable.

When the BBC are talking about extending their download service to Macs they're currently looking at doing it using Adobe AIR (when AIR has a bit more work done to it), which will allow the DRM and 7 day catchup (source: BBC Backstage podcasts)

Obviously this means it would not sync to iPods/iPhones. That will only happen if Apple are interested in licencing out Fairplay (which they've never done) or a deal can be done to put it out through iTunes.

Phazer

ascender

Feb 8, 2008, 08:26 AM

I would have thought its one of those deals which would suit both parties. Apple would definitely sell more Apple TVs if the BBC programmes were available on there.

pale9

Feb 8, 2008, 08:34 AM

would put most of their content like dr. who on the net for FREE! this was about 2 years ago... whatever happened to that?! i like some of their programs but the bbc actually sux! very left wing, and they cant even stream the videos like the news in decent sizes and/or bitrates. my complaint about this was at least answered, but they used some lame licensing fees as an excuse...

The Phazer

Feb 8, 2008, 09:15 AM

would put most of their content like dr. who on the net for FREE! this was about 2 years ago... whatever happened to that?!

They did it... like months ago, with iPlayer?

Phazer

The Phazer

Feb 8, 2008, 09:16 AM

I would have thought its one of those deals which would suit both parties. Apple would definitely sell more Apple TVs if the BBC programmes were available on there.

You would have thought, but I'm afraid Apple UK doesn't really have enough strategic leadership to do stuff like this on it's own back (otherwise the UK TV store wouldn't be so poor in the first place).

Phazer

pale9

Feb 8, 2008, 09:52 AM

They did it... like months ago, with iPlayer?

Phazer

well.... that only works if are physically located in the u.k. doesn't it?.....do u.s. content providers also limit to whom they broadcast on the net?

Daveoc64

Feb 8, 2008, 10:00 AM

well.... that only works if are physically located in the u.k. doesn't it?.....do u.s. content providers also limit to whom they broadcast on the net?

Yes.

Living here in the UK I can't access the services offered by the US TV networks.

pale9

Feb 8, 2008, 10:18 AM

Yes.

Living here in the UK I can't access the services offered by the US TV networks.

well then i have to say that all the overpaid network goons still haven't realized the web is a global thing. but nothings surprises me anymore as it took steve jobs to show the bonehead music industry managers how to make money with their own product on the web.

The Phazer

Feb 8, 2008, 11:22 AM

well then i have to say that all the overpaid network goons still haven't realized the web is a global thing. but nothings surprises me anymore as it took steve jobs to show the bonehead music industry managers how to make money with their own product on the web.

This is the same Steve Jobs that has completely different iTunes stores for different territories, and for instance didn't have a UK iTunes video store at all until a couple of months back, right?

Phazer

mogzieee

Feb 8, 2008, 11:35 AM

About bloody time!!

I've had to survive with my Windows PC viewing all the BBC shows!! But good to know it's coming!! :)

Dunk the Lunk

Feb 8, 2008, 11:51 AM

i like some of their programs but the bbc actually sux! very left wing,

Very left wing???!!!!!

pale9

Feb 8, 2008, 11:54 AM

This is the same Steve Jobs that has completely different iTunes stores for different territories, and for instance didn't have a UK iTunes video store at all until a couple of months back, right?

Phazer

i agree, not that steve is an angel, but look at the others (MS?). its a zoo out there....

slot-a

Feb 8, 2008, 02:38 PM

Don't expect this any time ever. Expect the non-streaming version of iPlayer to be dropped before a Mac version comes along.

The Phazer

Feb 8, 2008, 03:03 PM

Don't expect this any time ever. Expect the non-streaming version of iPlayer to be dropped before a Mac version comes along.

The non-streaming version isn't going anywhere - it's the only way you'll ever be able to sync content to portable devices, looks much better on a TV screen and will be the only plausible way to deliver HD content, all of which are being built.

The BBC would much people to use the download service, because it hasn't got the money or infrastructure to support the bandwidth required if the streaming service grows significantly - it doesn't bring in any extra revenue if it's successful, since there isn't any advertising.

Phazer

bigandy

Feb 8, 2008, 03:10 PM

This would be so great, but unfortunately it would most likely be for UK residents only, like so much of bbc.co.uk's content... Shame for us Brits living abroad...

http://www.torproject.org/

;)

it's not like it's hard to get around geolocation.

Daveoc64

Feb 8, 2008, 03:22 PM

Daveoc64

Feb 8, 2008, 03:22 PM

well then i have to say that all the overpaid network goons still haven't realized the web is a global thing. but nothings surprises me anymore as it took steve jobs to show the bonehead music industry managers how to make money with their own product on the web.

All content providers would lose money if they offered free programming on a worldwide basis.

weckart

Feb 8, 2008, 04:22 PM

http://www.torproject.org/

;)

it's not like it's hard to get around geolocation.

But a bit tougher to get past the slowdowns caused by hitching a lift through proxies. Not the ideal solution when you are trying to stream video.

MikeTheC

Feb 8, 2008, 05:42 PM

Daveoc64

Feb 8, 2008, 05:51 PM

Now if only they'd let us see and listen to their content here in the 'States...

YOu know, the thing that gets me is that they own, in general, so much of the content they're putting out, and yet they won't distribute it "for free" to the U.S. even though they *will* distribute it "for free" in the U.K. And then they have the temerity to claim "rights issues".

Oh well... Guess they still won't get money from me for one of my all-time favorite TV series... :eek:

The BBC is a public service broadcaster funded by a licence fee levied on all people who use a TV in the UK to receive TV signals.

As such, they are not allowed to sell people in the UK anything, nor are they allowed to put adverts on things aimed at the UK.

So while it's "free", the theory is that you have to pay £135.50 ($263 US) per year to support it (ignoring all debates about whether this is right or wrong, this is MacRumors - not a TV site).

They have a commercial section (BBC Worldwide) that is allowed to sell things - both in the UK and out of the UK, but as it is commercially motivated it must sell its content. In the US, that comes in the form of BBC America.

The BBC iPlayer is offered entirely by the domestic BBC, so it would not be allowed (by our government) to offer the service to people outside of the UK. There would also be a huge outcry from the general population.

The Phazer

Feb 9, 2008, 04:25 AM

YOu know, the thing that gets me is that they own, in general, so much of the content they're putting out,

They own, to all intents and purposes, 100% of *none* of their content (certainly less than a tenth of one percent).

Just for a start, nearly every BBC programme features some form of commercial music licenced from the majors. That doesn't belong to the BBC, it belongs to the majors, and is licenced for very specific territories and timeframes. That's why most DVD releases and US airings of BBC programmes have to have some of the music changed.

If there are any scriptwriters they retain copyright in their script. Any extracts belong to the company that made them. 25% of their content is made by independent production companies, and belongs to them. Any stills used belong to someone like Corbis. News footage often has a few shots from the Associated Press or Reuters. Any film clips are owned by the studio. Any actors performances are effectively owned by Equity in trust.

Phazer

firestarter

Feb 9, 2008, 06:02 AM

slot-a

Feb 9, 2008, 08:05 AM

The non-streaming version isn't going anywhere - it's the only way you'll ever be able to sync content to portable devices, looks much better on a TV screen and will be the only plausible way to deliver HD content, all of which are being built.

The BBC would much people to use the download service, because it hasn't got the money or infrastructure to support the bandwidth required if the streaming service grows significantly - it doesn't bring in any extra revenue if it's successful, since there isn't any advertising.

Phazer

The streaming service doesn't use Siemens/BBC infrastructure for content delivery - all content is delivered by Akamai and bandwidth costs simply aren't an issue. The download service's usage is probably rather insignificant when compared to streaming, which is due to it being a piece of ****. An international version of the streaming iPlayer is allegedly coming, with a subscription/ad-supported model to further boost BBC Worldwide's soaring profits.

I'd expect to see portable device streaming will be coming at some point in the near future, targeted at the current "cool" devices. DRM issues will prevent a "downloadable" version for said portable device, but what is streaming if it is not downloading and saving to a file? I'd expect to some raised eyebrows with regard to the implementation if/when it comes out. If there isn't too many industry complaints then we could see an end to the current download crapware and a move to a solution that'd make everyone happy.

But this is all just conjecture, of course..

Daveoc64

Feb 9, 2008, 09:00 AM

Or at least they have some sort of control over who gets it.

I got rid of my TV 18 months ago and haven't missed it. I also stopped paying my TV licence (naturally) as I wasn't receiving BBC TV. If there's a good TV series I want to see, I just add it to my Amazon DVD rental list (most decent documentaries come out on DVD within 2 months).

I'm worried that the BBC will force people who buy an :apple:TV or run iTunes to pay the licence fee - as they would have the CAPABILITY to receive BBC TV - much in the same way that they force SKY to include the BBC in their cable packages so that cable consumers also have to pay the fee.

None of those scenarios are accurate or true.

You need a licence to operate TV equipment for the purposes of receiving "as live" broadcast TV. That includes TVs, Set Top Boxes, Tuner Cards and IPTV services no matter what platform they are using - Cable, Satellite, IPTV (over a broadband connection), or Terrestrial.

The BBC gets the money, but you have to pay the fee regardless of whether or not you can pick up a BBC signal of any sort. Some people in very remote areas can't get any TV channels - if they want to try, they need a licence even if it is just for ITV, Channel 4 or Five.

As such, the BBC iPlayer does not currently require a TV licence to use and that would not change if it did come to iTunes or the Apple TV as you wouldn't be watching a live broadcast.

As for Cable/Satellite, they are under no obligation to carry the BBC channels (in most cases). They are very popular channels however, so not carrying them is not a good thing for the platform.

BlakTornado

Feb 9, 2008, 09:08 AM

one of the best car shows ever

Correction: One of the best shows ever.

The Phazer

Feb 9, 2008, 11:06 AM

The streaming service doesn't use Siemens/BBC infrastructure for content delivery

Yes it does, in combination with RedBee (formally BBC broadcast). I've been inside the server room. Akamai just support it.

- all content is delivered by Akamai and bandwidth costs simply aren't an issue.

They are - Akamai charge by how much their servers are being used. Bandwidth is *the* issue with them.

The download service's usage is probably rather insignificant when compared to streaming, which is due to it being a piece of ****.

Which is due to it being P2P. Indeed, the P2P service was invented instead of just streaming in the first place like the radio player

An international version of the streaming iPlayer is allegedly coming, with a subscription/ad-supported model to further boost BBC Worldwide's soaring profits.

BBC Worldwide's international iPlayer (Kangaroo) will be primarily download, as it's intended *first and foremost* to sell permanent copies of programmes to the British public. It'll be geo-IP locked on launch. It will likely offer some streaming content and some international content within 2008.

I'd expect to see portable device streaming will be coming at some point in the near future, targeted at the current "cool" devices.

I doubt it if it isn't already possible. Adobe are already doing a *lot* of work on Flash to make it near impossible to download streaming files and the server work for the BBC, which will necessitate the latest version of Flash. The files will play on devices that support the current version of Flash, and won't stream to anything that doesn't.

DRM issues will prevent a "downloadable" version for said portable device

Nope. You'll be able to sync downloaded files to portable devices that support MS DRM very shortly (indeed, it's running behind schedule), and if the Apple/iTunes rental deal ever happens it'll allow downloads to go to iPods.

but what is streaming if it is not downloading and saving to a file?

It's a transitory medium that's watched once while connected to the original content provider, and once they've removed it can't be watched again.

Microsoft and Adobe are doing *lots* of work on making saving streamed files to all intents and purposes impossible, and I've little doubt Apple will do the same in an attempt to keep market share.

I'd expect to some raised eyebrows with regard to the implementation if/when it comes out.

It's already out.

If there isn't too many industry complaints then we could see an end to the current download crapware and a move to a solution that'd make everyone happy.

HD content delivery will only be possible in the UK given our broadband infrastructure by broadband for the next twenty years at the very least. That alone will lead to a big increase in the use of the download client.

But this is all just conjecture, of course..

Mine isn't.

Phazer

pale9

Feb 9, 2008, 11:31 AM

Or at least they have some sort of control over who gets it.

I'm worried that the BBC will force people who buy an :apple:TV or run iTunes to pay the licence fee - as they would have the CAPABILITY to receive BBC TV - much in the same way that they force SKY to include the BBC in their cable packages so that cable consumers also have to pay the fee.

dont want to get tooo political here, but that is real euro-socialism at work!
they are shoving stuff down your throat for your own good, or so they think. and you have the honor of paying for it! here is the usa tv is the crappiest it has ever been, one brain dead 'reality show' after the next. good movies? those are rare now (no wonder they cost alot more to broadcast). but, and this is the big but, nobody is forcing you to pay to watch this stuff.

MikeTheC

Feb 9, 2008, 12:01 PM

[excerpted from original post]
The BBC is a license fee-funded public service broadcaster.
The BBC isn't allowed to "sell" anything, nor put ads on their broadcasts, domestically or overseas.
The broadcast is free, but you have to pay to support it.
BBC Worldwide is the BBC's commercial division, which can sell content domestically and overseas.
The BBC iPlayer is offered by the BBC, not BBC Worldwide, so cannot offer content outside of Britain.

1 & 3. I am aware of that. And you're right -- the ethics (or lack thereof) are beyond the purview of this board.

2 & 5. I am also generally aware of that, though I'll admit I was unaware of the particulars. After all, I'm not a Briton.

4. That's fine. Again, I wasn't aware of the specifics of their export business organization.

I'm not trying to argue any of those points. All I'm trying to say is that their rights restrictions do impact my ability to enjoy their content. And it's sad, too, in a way, because I actually wouldn't mind popping say £2 - £3 per episode of Dr. Who, as I quite enjoy it and would like to be able to show my support for it.

And separately, let me say that while I'm quite aware the BBC (obviously BBC Worldwide) sells Dr. Who overseas to us in the U.S., the price they're charging is more like price gouging. But that's neither here nor there for the purposes of this thread or this section of MacRumors.com.

[in essence]The BBC hardly owns anything they show.

Really? I mean, I'm aware if there's externally-produced content they want to use, it has to be licensed, and I would never gainsay that point.

I guess this is just very revealing how very complex (and in my opinion really screwed up) things are in the world of entertainment.

------

All of this kind of thing (I'm not just leveling this against the BBC, don't misunderstand) is a part of what is forcing me further and further away from the Entertainment Injusticetry. I'm just not interested in supporting (or being a party to) any of this.

I am not in the least bit interested in having to be bothered with recognizing intellectual property rights or any of the other legal brouhaha when all I am trying to do is be entertained for an hour. But the fact that our societies are trying to force all of this regulatory and licensing legality down our throats makes whatever end product that's produced not worth the effort (on my part) to obtain.