Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

iPlayer Released for Mac, Linux; Adobe Announces AIR for Linux

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the rich-buttery-web-apps dept.

Television 231

Zoxed writes "The BBC reports that their iPlayer has just been released for Mac and Linux (download page). It is based on Adobe Air, but unfortunately the service is only available to UK IP address, so I can not test it out from my adopted homeland of Germany. Perhaps a UK-based Slashdotter could review it?" In related news, an anonymous reader writes "Adobe has announced a Linux version of its AIR 1.5 runtime environment that is supposed to allow rich web apps developed on it to run on Fedora Core 8, Ubuntu 7.10 and openSuse 10.3 with no modification. The company released versions for Windows and Mac OS X back in November."

cancel ×

231 comments

first (-1, Redundant)

Dagvl (59065) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166045)

first post?

Re:first (0, Offtopic)

Warll (1211492) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166205)

Wow, a low uid making a first post comment. Was the account hacked?

Re:first (3, Funny)

Dagvl (59065) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166275)

no, i just thought that after that many years here I should have at least on first post :)

Re:first (3, Funny)

DarthJohn (1160097) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166329)

Wow, a low uid making a first post comment. Was the account hacked?

This is slashdot.

There are trolls.

Same as it ever was.

Re:first (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166615)

Same as it ever was.

And you may find yourself
In a news website for nerds
Fighting the first post trolls
And you may find yourself
Wondering "why, in God's name, am I here?"

And the days go by...

Re:first (1)

master5o1 (1068594) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166653)

Exactly the same song I thought of! Too bad I don't have mod points.

Re:first (1)

DuctTape (101304) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167697)

And you may find yourself
Wondering "why, in God's name, am I here?"

Beats working.

DT

Re:first (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166919)

"Troll" seems to mean just about anything these days: offtopic, offensive to somebody, annoying to somebody, and sometimes even the traditional meaning.

low uid? (5, Funny)

Trepidity (597) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167089)

[*mumbles under his breath and waves cane threateningly*]

Does this girl look TOO YOUNG to anyone? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166825)

I would say I'ld do her, [dailyrama.com] but my testacles (I have three) aren't all decided. One rises in approval, two falls in protest. Sometimes they stay huddled together to keep warm, sometimes they all jump up. A part of me thinks it's the sack doing all the work trying to fool me into thinking they have minds of their own. Anyone else experience this? It would be much easier if I was diphalic. Speaking of which, there used to be a lady with two vaginas that go upto like her bellybutton and she would have sex with guys on a video. Anyone know where that went?

Re:Does this girl look TOO YOUNG to anyone? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167663)

Pencil (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166053)

A pencil is a sharp object for poking in the eye.

iPlayer? Just out for the Mac? (1, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166103)

How can that be? iWhatever means Mac. Silly Brits. Never could get anything right. Cars, roads, units, food. Napoleon was right.

Re:iPlayer? Just out for the Mac? (0, Troll)

ianare (1132971) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166207)

Troll mod huh ? I guess that the one redeeming quality of the British - their humor - can't even be counted on anymore.

Proxy, anyone? (2, Interesting)

panoptical2 (1344319) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166107)

Could you use a UK-based proxy and download the player?

Re:Proxy, anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166479)

you can download the player, it's the streaming that's going to be a problem.
Make friends with someone in UK so you can VPN in OR
download their shows via bittorrnet, like everyone else...
That's how I got The IT Crowd seasons 1, 2, and 3. It's already in AVI format so I don't
need to capture and encode anything.
Is it really stealing if I cannot buy it anywhere online (USA-based) or in a store?
I see it on amazon.co.uk and overpriced 'imports' that people are pimping on ebay and on amazon.

Re:Proxy, anyone? (4, Informative)

Tatsh (893946) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166649)

Streaming works fine over proxy; currently watching Apparitions

Re:Proxy, anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166881)

Apparitions is a fantastic show.
Enjoy.

Re:Proxy, anyone? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166907)

Don't forget imports are piracy too, as they are not licensed to be sold in that area of the world!

Proxies ? (1)

Wirr (157970) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166113)

Are there any commercial or free proxy servers which one could use to access the BBC-UK site ?

Re:Proxies ? (2, Informative)

Wizard Drongo (712526) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166851)

Our 3rd party mac app lets you use proxies well, and we're hoping to bring in an integrated VPN..
www.lawrencedudley.co.uk/iplayer

Re:Proxies ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167171)

"one" should part with some cash and pay for it like every other Brit does if you want to watch quality programming.. You're not showing "the man" by ripping off this stuff, your actions will only effect the average guy in the street who HAS to pay for a license. If you don't pay for it, you get a fine for a £1,000 - even if you never watch the channels..

Re:Proxies ? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167343)

"one" should part with some cash and pay for it like every other Brit does

Fine but you have to use English sub-titles. With the occassional replay Americans can figure out the Brits are saying but no one knows what the fuck the Welsh and Scots are banging on about.

Re:Proxies ? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167859)

At this present time you only ever need a TV license in the UK if you receive broadcast television signals across radio waves or by cable/satellite.

You do not need a license to:

  • Use your tv to watch dvd's
  • Use your tv to play games from a console
  • Use your tv to watch iPlayer (provided it's not a live broadcast)
  • Use your tv to watch other online tv services
  • Use your tv to watch downloaded material (illegal it may be, but you sure as hell don't need a license to do it)
  • Use your tv as a dust magnet

Far too many people think if you have a tv you need a license, but it's not the case. Granted that is the norm for most people who own a tv, but there are enough ways around it if you really want them and saying you will get a £1000 fine under all circumstances is just wrong. And in the context of this article, you don't actually need a license as it's using the iPlayer!

Hulu + Rhapsody = iPlayer? (1)

XPeter (1429763) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166135)

"The iPlayer is the BBC's online media player that lets viewers stream programmes for up to seven days after broadcast or download and watch them for up to 30 days." This seems like Hulu.com and Rhapsody combined. Which is an excellent idea.

Hulu lets you watch programmes that were brocasted on TV right onto your computer. Without the need for a TV Tuner or other extras.

Rhapsody lets you download those videos and put them on your iPod or other MP3 device. (Yes, some people do use Zunes...)

I'm going to install this on Ubuntu right now :)

don't do it (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166165)

it's a nazi trick

oh please people. (1)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166183)

If you can't find a proxy in the UK to use then you don't deserve to download it.

potential of Air ? (2, Interesting)

jawadde (1434863) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166193)

I'm not a pro with flash development, but given the advances that javascript, CSS and DHTML are making, combined with stuff like squirrelfish extreme and the canvas object, how much potential does flash still have ? don't get me wrong : I don't want to go on a flash-bashing parade here ! I'm just wondering if the current state of javascript in modern browsers isn't up-to-par with flash for 90% of whatever flash is doing right now. The only advantages of flash are code-protection and vector graphics. But I can't really see a bonus for either of those two when it comes to rich-application-development : vectors are irrelevant here, and anyone who thinks he can just copy someone's client-side of a complete platform, and reverse engineer the server side is bound to get his head stuck in someone's ass sooner or later

Re:potential of Air ? (4, Interesting)

Alistair Hutton (889794) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166273)

Lots. The advantage the Flash Player has over Javascript, CSS and DHTML is the when I code something for the Flash Player I know what my 1 single target platform is. When I code for the browser I'm coding for x number of subtly incompatible targets. Yes, libraries can abstract away that to a degree but not wit the ease of (the admittedly closed source) Flpash Player. Plus the player has lots of bells and whistles that frankly are really nice to use.

Air/Flash License (5, Informative)

ink (4325) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166375)

Additionally, Air and Flash have some hefty licensing restrictions. From Adobe:

For the avoidance of doubt, and by example only, Distributor shall not distribute any Adobe Runtime for use on any (a) mobile device, set top box (STB), handheld, phone, web pad, tablet or Tablet PC (other than Windows XP Tablet PC Edition and its successors), game console, TV, DVD player, media center (other than Windows XP Media Center Edition and its successors), electronic billboard or other digital signage, internet appliance or other internet-connected device, PDA, medical device, ATM, telematic device, gaming machine, home automation system, kiosk, remote control device, or any other consumer electronics device, (b) operator-based mobile, cable, satellite, or television system or (c) other closed system device. For information on licensing Adobe Runtimes for use or distribution on devices see http://www.adobe.com/licensing [adobe.com] .

So, they can call it "free" all they want, but it isn't even free-as-in-beer free.

Re:Air/Flash License (2, Insightful)

Tatsh (893946) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166725)

Adobe spends money to develop these technologies as does Microsoft. They are not going to hand out that much for free, even as in beer.

I wish every developer would look past proprietary things like Flash and AIR and use web standards instead, but I know this will never happen.

Re:Air/Flash License (4, Informative)

chrb (1083577) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167897)

iPlayer-Downloader [po-ru.com] has no licensing restrictions and no DRM :-)

Re:potential of Air ? (5, Insightful)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166387)

Actionscript 3.0 is really a pretty decent language, on par with the newest versions of javascript... and DHTML/CSS doesn't come close to the power of the flash graphics API. A decent flash game, for instance, can look & play better than most Super Nintendo games; DHTML/Javascript is still pushing hard to look like an original NES. Both, of course, are hundreds of times slower than native applications.

Flash has its problems, obviously; it breaks the whole browsing paradigm. However, there's just nothing else out there right now with the same mix of capabilities; it has its niche. (Maybe java applets, but those universally suck. Maybe Silverlight could, but nobody seriously uses it.)

Re:potential of Air ? (3, Informative)

greg_barton (5551) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166889)

However, there's just nothing else out there right now with the same mix of capabilities...

Oh, really? [javafx.com]

Re:potential of Air ? (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167317)

I agree. I think JavaFX has the most potential. It just has to take off. Hopefully people will realise its potential.

Re:potential of Air ? (2, Informative)

pallmall1 (882819) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167801)

Hopefully people will realise its potential.

Kind of hard to do that if you're running linux or solaris.

Would holding up JavaFX on 98% of desktops in hopes that Linux will get its multimedia act together really be in the interest of Sun or Java? If so, hold your breath and think "everything should be in Ogg" over and over again until you get your wish. The rest of us have better stuff to do. [java.net] -- Editor, Java.Net . What this has to do with solaris is unclear.

They promise javafx is coming to linux and solaris, but they don't mention when. Sun promised the same thing with the 64-bit plugin TWO YEARS before it was released, so why should anyone hold their breath for javafx on linux or solaris.

Linux users may have a seat at the back of the bus with Adobe, but Sun doesn't want linux or solaris users to even get on the bus.

Re:potential of Air ? (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167889)

I see JavaFX coming to linux sooner and in a better position than silverlight and AIR.

Re:potential of Air ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167473)

From the javafx site: "You must upgrade Java in order to continue."

Flash wins.

Re:potential of Air ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167327)

A decent flash game, for instance, can look & play better than most Super Nintendo games;

And it only needs a few Gigahertz to look better than almost 20 year old games!

Re:potential of Air ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167355)

DHTML/CSS doesn't come close to the power of the flash graphics API.

Not really true, given that absolutely positioned 1px X 1px DIVs give you the ability to create arbitrary images of any size. Couple that with a Turing complete language (JavaScript) and you could create Crysis in a webpage, given enough CPU.

Re:potential of Air ? (2, Informative)

Si-UCP (1359205) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167815)

I take it that you haven't heard of the Canvas element [wikipedia.org] yet?

Re:potential of Air ? (1)

einer (459199) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167553)

JavaFX (Applets 2.0) has awesome potential, but they pretty much said "screw you" to Linux which means I won't be early adopting it and neither will any of my co-workers. That said, they're already so far behind on install base that all Flash needs to nip this in the bud is release a browser independent runtime and a nicer web service binding api and there will be no practical reason not to choose it. I would like to see someone write a browser in Flash for some reason. So you could browse while you browse.

Re:potential of Air ? (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166443)

Sound and video for starters.

And that's what iPlayer does.

Technology discrimination (1, Interesting)

williamhb (758070) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167047)

Come to think of it, it's interesting that the BBC got burned for their decision only to support Windows for downloads, but haven't been told off for only supporting Adobe's platform for streaming, and tying even closer to them with the AIR announcement. (They usually draw complaints whenever they distort markets, not just when they make some viewers miss out)

Just Need to Clear the Air (1)

piercep (1434883) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167157)

I politely disagree with you; AS3, the native language of the flash player is what javascript wants be when it grows up; now i do agree that the antiquated display technologies of javascript, css, and DHTML have made some impressive strides and are able to mimic 90 percent of the things the flash player could pull off with ease five years ago; however what flash is doing very well right now is pushing the internet forward; To say that the only advantages of using the flash platform are non existent code protection and vector graphics is be misinformed; Hmm i think there are few others you could quickly add that list; how about speed; is javascript able to render 3D had a frame rate comparable to say the open sourced as3 papervision library; what about socket connections; can javascript access the read and write to xmpp like the flash player can by utilizing yet another open sourced AS3 library known as XIFF; hmm what else; easy peezey; MEDIA yeah; could you tube exist now in a javascript only world; when will we see that dawn of javascript powered browser based virtual worlds; i'll be waiting; and don't even get me started about reduced development time due to its inherently object orientated nature; if you want to look backwards by all means enjoy your javascript experiences and yes it will be a glorious day when the canvas object is supported by explorer; however in the mean time the inbetween time if you want to be on the edge of web based experiences and applications the flash player is still the best game in town;

Re:potential of Air ? (1)

Khuffie (818093) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167275)

Let me know when you can do apps like picnik [picnik.com] or buzzword [acrobat.com] in JavaScript, CSS and DHTML without having a nightmare of browser incompatabilities to work around.

Fedora Core 8 and Ubuntu 7.10 -- EOL? (3, Insightful)

whoever57 (658626) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166243)

Adobe has announced a Linux version of its AIR 1.5 runtime environment that is supposed to allow rich web apps developed on it to run on Fedora Core 8, Ubuntu 7.10 ...

Isn't this release just in time for support of those 2 versions to be discontinued?

Re:Fedora Core 8 and Ubuntu 7.10 -- EOL? (2, Informative)

platykurtic (1210910) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166311)

Those are the minimum supported versions

Re:Fedora Core 8 and Ubuntu 7.10 -- EOL? (1)

Teresita (982888) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166355)

OpenSUSE 10.3, Ubuntu 7.10? Those distros are more than a year old. Is that how long it takes Adobe to crank something out? A year is a long time out here in Penguin land. In a year I'll throw three or four completely different distros on this box just to see how they do.

AIR Linux - No Distro Love (4, Interesting)

slummy (887268) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166281)

I am on the Adobe Pre-release program and I've been testing AIR Linux since it was in engdrop form, it's never installed on Slackware or Sabayon. When will they release a version that will install across all distros? Nobody knows.

Re:AIR Linux - No Distro Love (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166459)

Sabayon? You're aware that the guy in charge is a fucking moron [wordpress.com] , right?

Re:AIR Linux - No Distro Love (1)

slummy (887268) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167347)

I don't see why he's a moron. They insulted him:

ciaranm> other than that there's nothing major. with 0.26 we'll even be able to do special distribution-specific stuff for you... you'd just need to give us a .conf file for your distro and compile with --with-default-distribution=sabayon lxnay> well if you devs are interested in sabayon, just contact me ciaranm> lxnay: we don't care about sabayon, in that none of us use it. but we have no objection to supporting it, if there's demand from users lxnay> bah lxnay> die alone then

I would be pissed off too.

Re:AIR Linux - No Distro Love (1)

dylan_- (1661) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167503)

How on earth do you read that as them insulting him?

Re:AIR Linux - No Distro Love (1)

slummy (887268) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167723)

Apologies, misread it. I no longer use Sabayon as it won't install on my Macbook Pro. I just installed Slackware 12.2 yesterday.

Re:AIR Linux - No Distro Love (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167619)

When all distros adobt something like LSB, so that producing something that installs on all distros doesn't require planetary alignment, animal sacrifice and voodoo.

IPlayer UK only (-1, Flamebait)

Kindaian (577374) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166293)

IPlayer be available only in UK based IP is a PITA... And a true fail for BBC...

Re:IPlayer UK only (2, Informative)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166405)

It's not a fail at all. It's legally required! They have paid for the rights to show the content only to brits (who paid for it with their TV license and taxes). So this is a service for the british taxpayers who paid for it. Quite reasonable really.

Now, if they could license the iPlayer tech to other broadcasters running similar schemes (here in NZ, that's ALL of them), that would be cool and a great way to recoup some of that cost for the taxpayers.

Re:IPlayer UK only (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167029)

Brits pay for this content. If anybody could watch it the people that pay for the license fee would go fucking nuts.. Everything produced on the BBC comes out of the British people's pockets - there is no advertising revenue.. It's all from Joe Public.

To all the "how can I watch it in the US?" people - you might as well get it from a torrent, because it's just as legal.. At least admit your fucking over normal, hard-working people - they're the ones paying for it, not advertisers..

Re:IPlayer UK only (2, Interesting)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167161)

I'd pay the tax in return for online access to all of the BeeB's stuff.

Re:IPlayer UK only (2, Interesting)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167375)

To be fair people outside of the UK pay for the programmes they watch via advertising. Even going to the BBC website in a non-UK country should yield ads.

So the question is, have non-British people paid for iPlayer through advertising or not? If not, then why not give them iPlayer but with ads?

Re:IPlayer UK only (2, Insightful)

Jane_Dozey (759010) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167531)

Because then it'd give way to British people wanting ads instead of the license tax...er...I mean fee. The BBC have a good thing going revenue-wise and they'll not let up. I'd love for it to become subscription or advert payrolled but this would mean the BBC have to work for their money.

All BBC programmes are paid for with the license fee money, not advertising. IIRC any advertising outside of the UK to non-British audiences is because the BBC sold a show overseas (and the buyer network is the one advertising) or are using it for money to operate in that country.

Re:IPlayer UK only (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167867)

Living in the UK, I'm aware of how things work with the TV Licence. But I also know that BBC Worldwide, the BBC websites, etc, show adverts to non licence payers. I'm not sure why that can't be done with telly on the internet if it's done with telly on the telly or with websites.

Re:IPlayer UK only (1)

growse (928427) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166455)

Why? We pay for it...?

Re:IPlayer UK only (2, Funny)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166755)

Are you paying £1000 a year for a TV license? No? Well fuck off.

Re:IPlayer UK only (4, Informative)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167395)

Who is paying £1,000 for a TV licence? It's £139.50, dumb ass.

Re:IPlayer UK only (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167517)

The people who got caught for not having one?

Having finished a Flex/Air app... (2, Insightful)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166299)

I have to say it's decent approach to the problem of deploying Web Apps. Granted we did all the backend work connecting the Flex/Air front end to the database using AMFPHP, but it's definitely a decent platform for web applications and hybrid web/desktop apps. However it still suffers one flaw: it requires a third party platform that doesn't run on everything. (think mobile devices)

I see the Support OpenSuSE 10.3, but what about 11 and 11.1 (currently downloading the ISO).

The other approach is what Google and Apple are taking with HTML/Javascript based web applications that try to be browser/standards compliant. The entity that figures out how to make it work as a standalone desktop app has a winner.

Re:Having finished a Flex/Air app... (3, Insightful)

moreati (119629) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167001)

Sorry to pick on you, but this is a bugbear of mine.

Applications written in AIR/Silverlight/whatever are not web applications. They're thick client applications that happen to use a bit of http and javascript.

Web applications run in web browsers. Not in one particular browser, and not in a third party runtime.

I'm glad AIR was a good fit for your problem.

Re:Having finished a Flex/Air app... (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167421)

JavaFX will run on anything in the near future. It's the only solution that will run web apps in the browser or on the desktop across the board. Yeah Flash is on Linux but it's always behind everyone else and doesn't always run quite right.

Linux whining FTW (4, Funny)

frieko (855745) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166347)

I'm glad all the whining us Linux fans are doing is paying off. Everybody's jumping on the Linux-supporting bandwagon, if only to stop us from telling all our friends and relatives and strangers that $COMPANY are a bunch of evil meanie heads.

Re:Linux whining FTW (1)

at_slashdot (674436) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166377)

It's not the "whining" it's the fact that there are already millions of Linux users, companies think twice to restricting access to million of potential clients.

Re:Linux whining FTW (1)

ThatGuyJon (1299463) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166691)

Just to clarify: This is the BBC. We are not "potential clients"; we have already paid the license fee. The BBC do cross-platform support because they are required to do it; they just needed a little "reminding".

Re:Linux whining FTW (1)

funkatron (912521) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166877)

Just to clarify: This is the BBC. We are not "potential clients"; we have already paid the license fee.

Not all of us. Watching on iPlayer falls just far enough outside the definition of watching TV that I don't have to pay the fee.

Re:Linux whining FTW (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167123)

Just to clarify: This is the BBC. We are not "potential clients"; we have already paid the license fee. The BBC do cross-platform support because they are required to do it; they just needed a little "reminding".

It has taken them far too long to get Apple and Linux versions of this. However, at least they have finally done it. Coincidentally I tried to watch a show on the Channel 4 website today only to find it was completely impossible if you don't have a windows machine.

The DRM really has to go. The sooner the TV nets finally get it into their thick heads that all they have to do is broadcast on the web just as they do on TV, and have GLOBAL launches for shows -- reaping global advertisers at the same time -- the better it will be for all concerned. Not only will this be more profitable and convenient for everyone, fewer good shows will get canceled since the ratings stats will actually show true values, rather than small samples. It is no surprise that Channel 4 is near bankruptcy, they just don't get it.

Re:Linux whining FTW (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167467)

The BBC has to support Linux. Otherwise, quite rightly Linux users should get a discount because we're forced to pay the tax and if a certain group can't have full access to everything then they deserve a discount.

For instance, if ever I get rid of my TV (they'll probably still charge me because I have a PC), I'll get an old black & white TV to get the reduced fee. I know they'll make me pay it so I might as well get it cheaper and let the B&W tv collect dust.

Doesn't work! (1)

danbuntu (1434873) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166449)

Went to the download link. It told me I need to upgrade my Flash. So I did. Ubuntu 8.10 and Firefox 3.0.5. Patched Flash 10 to correct version. Still telling me I need to install Flash. Hopeless

Re:Doesn't work! (1)

cs02rm0 (654673) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166493)

I've got flash 10 installed, it's not telling me to upgrade. Check your about:plugins.

That said, I don't see a download option though I do get a high quality flash version. I'm installing Adobe AIR now to see if that makes any difference.

Re:Doesn't work! (1)

cs02rm0 (654673) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166537)

AIR installed. No obvious difference.

Re:Doesn't work! (1)

FatOAP (1027480) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166605)

Re:Doesn't work! (1)

cs02rm0 (654673) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166743)

Thanks, that plus this seems to have got me somewhere:
cp /opt/Adobe\ AIR/Versions/1.0/Resources/libflashplayer.so ~/.mozilla/plugins/

Re:Doesn't work! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167291)

Doesn't seem to work for me either. Running Ubuntu 8.04 on an Eee.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/install/bbc_iplayer_desktop - told me to upgrade flash.

Flash 10.0 r15 downloaded from Adobe, ignored the deb and got the gz. Unpacked and copied the resulting libflashplugin.so to ~/.mozilla/plugins

Another visit to http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/install/bbc_iplayer_desktop - gave me an install iplayer button. Lots of installing later and I now have a nice iplayer logo in my sys tray. Looks like its installed and running. However, nothing seems to work.

'Click here to start downloading' does nothing, neither does the save settings button.

Re:Doesn't work! (4, Funny)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166563)

Even on windows I have seen flash sites tell me that I need to upgrade flash to (say) version 9 because I was already running version 10.

Thats what happens when you get teenagers to do your configuration management.

Re:Doesn't work! (2, Funny)

danbuntu (1434873) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166683)

Never mind config mgt. No-one's bothered to test it!

Re:Doesn't work! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166827)

sudo cp /usr/lib/adobe-flashplugin/libflashplayer.so /usr/lib/flashplugin-nonfree/

did the trick for me...

having trouble already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26166499)

Cant get it working for me. I have the app installed under Ubuntu 8.10 but there are no download buttons on the iplayer website next to the content. It's a shame the searching/browsing of content isn't built into the app itself.

Re:having trouble already (1)

cs02rm0 (654673) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166551)

Likewise.

Re:having trouble already (1)

abhikhurana (325468) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167119)

Same here

Re:having trouble already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167207)

try the buzzcocks - its the only thing i've found that seems to work!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00g33d7/Never_Mind_the_Buzzcocks_Series_22_Episode_11/

Re:having trouble already (1)

abhikhurana (325468) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167353)

Yeah, Buzzcocks does seem to work. Seems that they haven't got the right DRM on most of the newer shows.

Re:having trouble already (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167225)

I just hit the little play button.

I tried to watch videos (no go, not a brit) but the radio stuff worked fine.

What about anonymous proxies? (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166761)

...It is based on Adobe Air, but unfortunately the service is only available to UK IP address, so I can not test it out from my adopted homeland of Germany. Perhaps a UK-based Slashdotter could review it?"...

Couldn't you utilize an anonymous proxy?

...that is supposed to allow rich web apps developed on it to run on Fedora Core 8, Ubuntu 7.10 and OpenSuse 10.3 with no modification...

I am disappointed that all distros quoted are "old" versions of their existing ones strictly speaking. Why do software companies do this all the time?

iPlayer for Mac Third Party much better (2, Interesting)

Wizard Drongo (712526) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166837)

The 3rd party ones are better. No DRM, no AIR....

www.lawrencedudley.co.uk/iplayer

Disclaimer: I helped make that on. But it IS good.
We'll be making iTunes playlist support soon....

Re:iPlayer for Mac Third Party much better (1)

Chris_Jefferson (581445) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166891)

Of course, it also violates the terms of use so is illegal, and will be prone to the BBC breaking it at any time.

Re:iPlayer for Mac Third Party much better (2, Insightful)

Wizard Drongo (712526) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167127)

Actually, it's usage can't be illegal; all it does is allow you to watch the content available to iPhone users.
Of course you can't save stuff on the iPhone, but the BBC offers these downloads. We just allow you to get them. Kinda like changing your browsers user-agent.

I paid my licence fee, I can tape stuff off the TV. Why the hell do they use DRM when they already allow you access??

Re:iPlayer for Mac Third Party much better (1)

Molt (116343) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167333)

I paid my licence fee, I can tape stuff off the TV. Why the hell do they use DRM when they already allow you access?? Because without the DRM restrictions the BBC'd never have been able to convince the external content producers to allow them to distribute over the internet without exceptionally high payments which the BBC couldn't afford. They either added the DRM or it wasn't going to happen at all, basically.

Someone beat me at Wikipedia (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 5 years ago | (#26166855)

I wanted to update Adobe AIR's Wikipedia entry but some fella beat me on that! What the hell? This leaves me more impressed by this Wikipedia paradigm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Integrated_Runtime [wikipedia.org]

Re:Someone beat me at Wikipedia (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167371)

At least the story could have linked to the AIR download [adobe.com] page. Sure it's a simple URL and it auto detects your OS, but a link would have been nice instead of forcing people through wikipedia or the lame article.

Fedora Core 8???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26167155)

WTF takes them two years? They couldn't take another week and see how it works with the current Fedora release? Are their developers stuck with dial-up? Worthless farging bastages for bosses . . .

Instructions - how to find the download (1)

daybot (911557) | more than 5 years ago | (#26167165)

Here's what you have to do:

Turn on the beta 'labs' features here [bbc.co.uk] , then get the installer. You might be able to get the installer from this link [bbc.co.uk] , but if not, choose "Download" from this page [bbc.co.uk] .

Here's some further info for installing on the Mac [bbc.co.uk] , and installing on Linux [bbc.co.uk] - but the above should suffice.

Of course, you're better off using iplayer-dl [po-ru.com] to download the flash streams DRM-free ;)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...