Re: BBC iMP Trial - My Thoughts


Dom Robinson wrote:
> Time To Burn wrote:
> > Dom Robinson wrote:
> >
> > > > In that case, please explain the continued success of TV listings
> > > > magazines, and TV listings pages in newspapers. All of which list the
> > > > programmes that are on, categorised by CHANNEL.
> > >
> > > TV listings magazines are not an interactive way of viewing listings.
> > > Go back to your fruit bowl if you want to compare apples with oranges.
> >
> > So you can't explain it then? Why are we only talking about
> > interactive listings? I'm talking about your average digital TV viewer
> > who uses the Radio Times/Daily Mirror etc TV guide to plan his
> > evening's/week's viewing.
>
> And this you're still stuck in the past. You can't see past the end of
> your own nose. You won't adapt to change and you steadfastly refuse to
> acknowledge anyone else's point of view.

Can you answer the question or not? Why do printed listings magazines,
which list digital channels, continue to be so successful if nobody
cares what channel anything is on any more? I think it's because MOST
people STILL like to browse a PAPER guide, and categorise their viewing
by CHANNEL.

> > > > > > > > > I've watched/listened to those because of what was on, not because I'm loyal
> > > > > > > > > to any channel.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I agree with this! Man you don't listen to me.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So you're not loyal to channels either. So logos similarly have no use
> > > > > > > for you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But neither me nor you are typical of your average viewer.
> > > > >
> > > > > You're confirming there that logos are no use to you, and you admitted
> > > > > that you underestimate the British public. Go and do a survey on
> > > > > whether the general public find logos useful and report back to us.
> > > >
> > > > You have no such data either.
> > >
> > > You're the one who's claiming that logos are useful for the public,
> > > hence you're the one that's meant to be supplying the data. Go on, get
> > > on with it.
> >
> > Whenever I have asked you for data in the past, you have claimed it all
> > to be in your head.
>
> Right, so that's your admission you've got no argument on the necessity
> of logos.

Oh no it isn't. I'm just making the point that you have no official
data on this and neither do I. And the fact that you have no official
data on matters such as this has never stopped you before.

> > > > Such as Dixons,
> > > > Currys, Powerhouse, wherever. Your counter argument was "you can get
> > > > one off ebay". My counter argument was most people do not buy their
> > > > electrical goods off Ebay, they buy them from your average high-street
> > > > shop. Such as Dixons, Currys, Powerhouse, wherever.
> > >
> > > It doesn't matter what *most* people do.
> >
> > Yes it does! Broadcasters want to target *most* people. Advertisers
> > want to reach *most* people.
>
> Oh, so now *most* IS important to you? In that case, most digital
> viewers watch on Sky, so most digital viewers have access to A-Z
> programme listings but that wasn't good enough for you before.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. Most
people may have Sky, but do most use A-Z programme listings? I'll bet
that most want to know what is on at a particular time, on the channels
of interest.

Does Sky have a favourite channels facility? I have heard it mentioned
before so I imagine that is a YES, like most Freeview boxes. Why does
such a facility exist, do you suppose?

> > > Stop having such a closed mind
> > > to things and continuing to have such a restricted view of how the
> > > general public is ADAPTING TO CHANGE (horrible marketing term, I know,
> > > but it's what you need to do)
> >
> > Very slowly.
>
> So slowly you're in fucking reverse.
>
> Now what happened to your reply about comparable channels? Oh, you
> don't have one.

Couldn't be bothered to answer such an irrelevant point.

> > > > > > > So you know what's best for each and every single viewer?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The average viewer doesn't CARE what channel he's on, but you still
> > > > > > > maintain that he does.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ask any viewer if they need to know what channel they're on, which
> > > > > > > option would they take:
> > > > > > > 1) A permanent logo onscreen
> > > > > > > 2) The option to press 'i' when required
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Every single viewer, but you, would choose (2). Go on, tell us why they
> > > > > > > should choose (1).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The viewer would choose neither as they (wrongly) don't think they need
> > > > > > to know which channel they're watching.
> > > > >
> > > > > You've yet to put forward a coherent argument that tells us WHY they
> > > > > need to have a logo onscreen despite the fact they know what channel
> > > > > they're watching and if they didn't they couldn't find it on the
> > > > > digibox itself.
> > > >
> > > > No they don't, as I have said before. If viewers stumble across an
> > > > unknown channel while channel-hopping, they will be looking for a
> > > > programme which interests them, and that's what they will be
> > > > concentrating on. Not some text that appears on-screen for a couple of
> > > > seconds just after tuning in.
> > >
> > > What you're missing is the next bit: And then if they enjoy the
> > > programme, and they've forgotten the name of the channel (if they
> > > choose to set it up on a VCR/PVR, since that may be - but isn't always
> > > - one of the requirements depending on how you set it up), they'll
> > > press 'i'. Easy!
> >
> > No, it doesn't work like that. They enjoy the programme, have
> > forgotten the name of the channel, don't realise they need to remember
> > the name of it, then proceed about their future TV viewing, paying no
> > attention to that channel. Unless there's a DOG there, in which the
> > channel name will stick in the viewer's mind, and the viewer will stop
> > there in future.
>
> You keep believing that, then, mate. I could tell you you're wrong, but
> it wouldn't convince you.

"You're wrong" wouldn't convince me, no. Shame for you, as that's the
extent of your argument against it.

> > > > Sky IS a proprietary satellite TV system, so I'm not "Wrong".
> > >
> > > That's an irrelevance. Much like yourself.
> > >
> > > Clearly you don't know how to use the A-Z programme listing and so you
> > > tar everyone else with the same brush. Do you know anyone with a Sky
> > > box? Go check it out.
> >
> > Why should I. Again, your argument holds no water as it is based
> > around one and only one particular usage scenario.
>
> I'd forgotten what an ignorant fool you are. Thanks for reminding me.

No I'm not. If everybody only ever used ONE particular facility on ONE
digital platform then your argument stands. Your argument does NOT
stand up in the face of other facilities available on MANY digital
platforms (including the one you're concentrating on). Facilities such
as browsing a channel guide and favourite channel lists. Why do these
features still exist if they are so redundant and little-used?

> > > > > You scorn when I make good points about something a TiVo can do because
> > > > > you claim no-one has one,
> > > >
> > > > Rightly so. "DOGs are useless to the few users of a system that you
> > > > can no longer buy in the UK, therefore they are useless to everybody"
> > > > is a ridiculous argument.
> > >
> > > You can still buy TiVo in the UK and it is supported by TiVo. It's not
> > > going away. You've been told this.
> >
> > Yes it is, and it is currently used by sufficiently few people as to be
> > an irrelevance. So please stop citing TiVo-specific usage scenarios.
>
> TiVo still support it. Hence, it's not going away. Again, your
> ignorance knows no bounds.

It's not growing though is it? It's a permanently niche market in the
UK. What's TiVo's user base in the UK?

> > > > Yes it does. Not all programmes on all digital TV platforms are well
> > > > categorised by genre. I'll bet that most viewers find the CHANNEL THAT
> > > > THE PROGRAMMES ARE ON to be the best means of categorising their
> > > > programmes.
> > >
> > > It doesn't matter what you 'bet'. You're basing an argument on what you
> > > believe, I've based mine on what I have proved. Please go and look at a
> > > friend's Sky box and check it out.
> >
> > No thanks. I won't accept an argument based on one particular usage
> > scenario. In general, you cannot accurately search by genre. And like
> > it or not, analogue switch off is happening all over the UK by 2012,
> > meaning MORE Freeview homes than ever. So if anything, by your
> > reasoning, DOGs will become even MORE essential than they are now.
>
> You really are completely around the bend.

No, it makes sense. You're saying that DOGs are only unnecessary if
most viewers have the facility to, and are in the habit of, accurately
categorising viewing by genre in an EPG. This is NOT supported by many
(any?) Freeview boxes. So by your reasoning, as Freeview is on the
increase, more digital viewers will not have access to your killer
feature. So DOGs will become even MORE essential than they are now.

> > > > > > Yes YOU can. Not everybody.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why can't everybody? You press 'green' for soaps, 'red' for sport, etc.
> > > >
> > > > Because not everybody has Sky digital.
> > >
> > > The 'everybody' we are discussing, which you implied because we're
> > > discussing Sky digital is "everybody who has Sky digital", so
> > > 'everybody' can.
> >
> > Well that is NOT the 'everybody'. YOU seem to think it is, as that's
> > what YOU have. It's not, so please get it in to your head.
>
> You believe what you like, then, given your ignorance.

Not ignorance - in fact it's YOU who is ignorant of any other scenario
than A-Z programme listings classified by genre on Sky.

TTB

.

Loading