« Topics
1234...394041
noggin12,028 posts since 26 Jun 2001

I hate to say it, but I think iPlayer is a stronger brand with BBC Three's target audience.

Consider that BBC Three's soon to be audience are CBBC viewers who are already using iPlayer to watch their favourite kids shows, it's the natural progression to promote iPlayer over a linear brand.


Fair point, but then it comes back to the argument about whether iPlayer can serve the target demographic of BBC3 in areas where broadband/mobile internet coverage is crap and will be for a long while yet.

I'm also still baffled by the decision to shove the coverage on to BBC4, leaving repeats of Don't Tell The Bride etc in its place on BBC3.

As an aside - the posting experience on TVF on a mobile phone is awful.

How crap a connection would it have to be? Just how many people are subject to a connection that awful?

I have a connection which maxes out at ~4.5Mbps (sometimes you see 5Mbps overnight), which regularly slows down to 1-2Mbps at peak times; iPlayer is (pretty much) always stable in SD.

This is a city centre exchange which I'm on the outer reaches of (no FTTC yet). Lots of my family live in little villages in Norfolk and they have much better connections. How many people still have sub-1Mbps connections?


I think there's a minute minority still with a sub 1Mbps connection, some are in urban areas. My bog standard ADSL2+ is 17Mbps as I'm near the local exchange, but a check of the BT Broadband DSL checker shows speeds of between 3-17mbps depending on the exchange and location.

However, iPlayer uses adaptive bitrate streaming, so a viewer could still watch a programme even if it's at 512x288


There are still portions of the country who only have internet access via dial-up...

The other point that gets ignored in a lot of discussions about moving BBC Three to online is that to watch online you need an internet connection of some sort. These are very seldom zero cost - so you are effectively moving from a free-to-view platform to one that requires payment in addition to the licence fee to watch.
5
Neil Jones3,372 posts since 23 Dec 2001
Central (West) Midlands Today
There are still portions of the country who only have internet access via dial-up...

The other point that gets ignored in a lot of discussions about moving BBC Three to online is that to watch online you need an internet connection of some sort. These are very seldom zero cost - so you are effectively moving from a free-to-view platform to one that requires payment in addition to the licence fee to watch.


Yes but who's going to pay for an internet connection just to watch BBC Three live? Nobody.

"Payment in addition" can be quite cheap - less than half the cost again of the licence fee but an internet connection will get used for hundreds of other things besides BBC Three, as most members of this and every other forum will know.
London Lite6,803 posts since 4 Jan 2003
London London
Exactly - it is somewhat taken for granted the internet is the norm and also that viewers have unlimited plans. Sky are plugging a free fibre offer at the moment, but that's with a 25gb usage cap. Two or three shows in HD a week and that will be used up.


Not really, I've only had ADSL2 installed at my flat since last year and that was when unlimited broadband finally came into my price range. Before that I was using a PAYG MBB from Three which works out more expensive than a month with most ISP's.

There are capped packages which are cheap, such as BT's Basic for people on benefits which offers them 10GB per month with an ADSL2 connection, which should be enough to watch at least one episode of a show per week in SD. While not free at the point of entry, we're in a much better situation with accessing broadband to the poorest homes than in the past.

The capped 25GB 'free' fibre broadband by Sky is a ruse to really get people to spend £10 on unlimited, plus line rental.