Re: F1 Media Business

Frank Adam wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 01:20:45 +1100, "Chad" <cbstun@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Bigbird wrote:
Chad wrote:

Frank Adam wrote:
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:21:13 +1100, "Chad" <cbstun@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Still i'm thinking if they were to introduce such features with
all channels, it would be interesting to give it a go and i
suppose eventually it would all get better, but only if you and
I pay for the development.
And with your negative attitude young man, that will never
happen ! It's your fault. ;-)

I remember Bill Gates saying something like "by the 21st century
interactive tv will allow us to pause shows like Seinfeld, get
information about most of the items on screen, like clothes and
music and funiture, and order it directly on screen."

Anything is possible, as long as we don't get hunted down and
killed by the climate change before that. :)
I did hear that sort of talk too and there is some possibility
that it could happen. Not sure if Seinfeld's show will ever get
that treatement, but it is a matter of mapping the objects used
in the scenes and adding some text/urls to it. When you press the
pause button, the PC(note, not TV as we know it), would highlight
all usable(read: advertised) objects. You click on one and it
takes you to a page where the information is shown just to the
left of the shopping trolley icon with your neighbour skimming
your credit card details through the wireless. Ok, maybe not
every neighbour. :)

To use the famous last words, in theory it is dead simple to do.
Just a step from what we have now on the internet, it just means
that movies and series will command a higher expense to make and
TVs have to become big PCs..


I agree, it should be possible, but it is another example of Bill
not really being visionary when it comes to predicting what people
will want or how fast things evolve.


Then again, Bill used say that 64k was more base memory than any
competent programmer would ever need too. :)

Hm, was that before or after he "stole" DOS ? By the time he
nicked the mouse and the GUI ideas from Jobs, i'm sure he knew
that the 64K was bollocks. ;)

Although Bill denies he ever said it today, I can clearly recall it
being repeated adinfinitum for years, as gospel, around IBM during
the mid 80's... undisputed. And reading more than a few quotes from
him during the late 80's where he was 'apologetic' about his error
of judgement in how low long that physical limit might be adequate.

(although I now realise it was 640k not 64, so maybe my memory isnt
as good as I think)

Perhaps you were thinking of the demoscene. Boy, that takes me back.

Ha! Now you've given yourself away as a real old school geek. :D

An *amazing* guy I worked with back then was the graphics expert for
an Amiga crackers group in Melbourne, I felt like I knew nothing
next to him, so that's about as close as I got to it.

When I got into computers, as an IBM dealer technician in 1983, it
was solely for capitalist reasons. I thought the keyboard was the
computer, the monitor was called a TV and had no idea what the box
it sat on top of was all about my first day on the job. Lucky for me
hardly anyone else that was applying for those jobs at the time knew
much either. :)

Heh, i started learning Cobol about that time with a rip off mob. I
was already quite capable in C, and wasn't happy with the drawn out
progress and after 6 months of learning about punch cards, ticker
tapes and other semi-useless stuff(and not a single line of coding
done), i've got out of it. A few years later senior C programmers were
getting a whopping 40-50Ks with analysts reaching 70 or so, while
Cobol programmers could just about set their own price well past
100Ks. Crrrrrap !!
It stayed a hobby and probably just as well. I'd probably hate
programming by now if i did it for a living.

My brother in law got "stuck" in a Cobol job with VAX based ATM stuff for
years after he thought it was a dead end. His laziness in moving on paid off
well in the end!
--
Chad


.

Quantcast