Been to Japan many times, I found it funny how they pronounced Akihabara... you should have asked a local on how to pronounce it... cos they prononuced it wrong everytime.
Also TGS normally clashes with Eastenders in our household and would get more viewers if it was on a different time... the repeat show is like finding where`s wally in the listings you never know when its coming so we dont bother finding the repeat.
I did enjoy the fighting robot segment, it was certainly a better quality 'challenge' than the repetitive presenter v presenter ones of the last few series.
Testing of the computer cases was pretty much as previous series, with a different setting.
Overall, I thought there were much less 'gadgets' on the gadget show than in the past though, which is pretty much missing the point of the show in the first place it seems to me.
Travel shows do better at imparting the feel of these places, so cutting gadgets to try that seems misguided at best.
PS wasting 5 minutes of airtime reading out a list of 200 gifts is a good way to make me turn off. I get you are proud of the competition, but seriously, content is what I watch for, not a dramatic rendition of the argos catalogue.
I am probably one of the few who quite liked the show last night,.
Although it's nowhere near as good as the first series, it is better than week after week of challenges.
However, I do have one question...
You say the changes are from viewer feedback but where did this feedback come from?
I follow you on Twitter and Facebook and visit your site regularly but have never seen anyone ask for this kind of change and now the majority seem to hate it.
I can understand the comments about "low post counts" but I have actually been registered for ages. I made a few posts in the sky thread a few years ago and then forgot my user name and password.
Does it not tell you something Jessica that people like me are signing up again just to reach you? Does it not tell you something how many disaffected people you have over this change? We are trying to reach you because we hate what you have done to Suzi, Ortis and Jon. And don't try and pretend that you were up front and honest with them. They have made it clear that you weren't.
Not you personally, I am sure but you get my point?
We're signing up and posting because we care about the show and the presenters. We have grown up with them, as you so rightly point out. We have been watching them for years. Then some blonde woman comes in - intelligent you say? Oh yes - so intelligent that she felt it necessary to prance around in her knickers when guest editing T3. I'm sure Spielberg, when guest editing Empire, didn't do it in his boxers.
Anyway - some blonde woman comes in. She is vacuous in the extreme. Knows nothing about tech. And before you know it some kind of coup has taken place........All the decent presenters are suddenly gone............
The format was stale. It needed a change. But this wasn't the way to go about it.....
Also TGS normally clashes with Eastenders in our household and would get more viewers if it was on a different time... the repeat show is like finding where`s wally in the listings you never know when its coming so we dont bother finding the repeat.
Channel 5+1 will avoid the clash. I've got he show recorded and won't be watching the episodes until a few weeks as I'm in the middle of exam season. I'm very much looking forward to it.
Also I think my question has been missed unintentionally from the first page. Can I have an answer when possible please?
The ratings last night were 1 million (including C5+1). The same episode last year had about 770,000. At times last year it was below 600,000 in the overnight ratings.
The first show was always going to get a bump in viewers because of the promotion and interest in the format change.
The acid test will be the ratings for the next couple of weeks to see how many of those who came back for a look at the new format then drop out again.
In the camera test, thought the question of like for like is not clear and we don't know the pre-use set up to establish whether any bias exists. Maybe naively expecting openess, but would be good to be clear.
Jason and Polly can apparently build gadgets and write software programs to operate, the robots last night, then act like buffons generally for dramatic interest, such as the sat nav being in Japanese to their surprise!
The show repeats much of the recent years processes and it seemed more like expended trip tests of past shows.
@NoEntry2k There’ll be another run of 10 shows later in the year, in this format.
@pericom Not sure about repeats off the top of my head- I’ll get back to you on that.
@Charlottesweb I understand that the competition is not for everyone, but so many people enter it that it would be unreasonable to cut it.
@TerryH Hi. Glad you enjoyed. Re: viewer feedback- we do take note of what’s said on Twitter, Facebook and our website as well as here on the forums, in emails to the production company, and in person. It varies from place to place as to what those comments consist of; here, for example, people tend to go in to a lot more detail (see series 16 thread). Of course, viewer feedback is just one of the factors we have to take into account; there are commissioning requirements, ratings, budgets, availability of tech, and our own view on what makes for entertaining and informative TV…etc, etc…what it boils down to is that you’ll be hard pushed to see in any one place a comment that covers all the changes we’ve made this series.
@norwichred Yes, the format needed refreshing, and it became apparent that two presenters was the best way to go. Everyone has their favourites and I’m sorry that you’re disappointed; I personally have worked with Suzi, Jon and Ortis for years now, they’re fantastic presenters, very sound people, and I’ll miss them a lot. The decision on the current line up was in no way intended to hurt anyone; simply that Polly and Jason would work best with the new format.
It’s a bit depressing that some people get stuck on the blonde thing…as though someone can’t be blonde and good-looking and also know what they’re talking about!
@Charlottesweb I understand that the competition is not for everyone, but so many people enter it that it would be unreasonable to cut it.
I never said anything about not having a competition.
However, if you think 5 minutes or so reading out 200 names of gadgets is compulsive viewing, I really dont know what to say to you.
It was OK when you gave away small numbers of prizes, but 200? You need a different way of presenting the competition, because if the alternative is that you actually needed that much filler on the first show, it doesnt bode well for the later ones.
@JessicaM, I appreciate seeing amazing & expensive technology on the show but to then put the price tag up on screen in the fashion of "Best Price: £1407.60" for the fighting robot toy is like when Top Gear say the new Bugatti Veyron is £1.6m, quite outside the average person's budget for such technology.
It feels like you're trying to appeal to the consumers and the dreamers, but when you stand right in the middle of the two demographics you paint a confusing picture of what type of show you are.
@Woodentop The camcorders all used their standard settings. Wherever possible we use comparable settings in like for like tests.
Thanks for that.
Still think we don't need to be hoodwinked about the build task element. Gadget Geeks do it and it's clear they have knowledge to do so, but I don't believe Jason or Polly could build complex gadgets without assistance or in reality on their behalf. It's not weakness nor embarrassing, just give credit where due.
@redex I can see how it could be annoying! But, you know, plenty of people spend that or more on a Macbook Pro or a new TV- the robot is still a consumer gadget, after all. We don't want to miss out vital information for fans of robotics where everything else is priced.
Right, I have to go now I'm afraid; but thanks to all for your input and I'll pop back later and try to answer any more questions.
The first show was always going to get a bump in viewers because of the promotion and interest in the format change.
The acid test will be the ratings for the next couple of weeks to see how many of those who came back for a look at the new format then drop out again.
Very true. But I'm bored of people pretending the show was perfect and change of some sort wasn't needed. There was, according to the viewing figures, and comment on forums such as this one.
Good luck to the production team, I think it's great that they've taken viewer feedback on board and I really hope they can make it work. I for one enjoyed this first episode, and it's lovely to see them taking the time to answer questions on here.
Will there still be a Christmas special of The Gadget Show, Jessica? That episode in early to mid December previewing the best tech buys for the big day is always a good one.
It’s a bit depressing that some people get stuck on the blonde thing…as though someone can’t be blonde and good-looking and also know what they’re talking about!
I think this is forum life for you though jessica, and especially digital spy forum life. as i've said here many times, god help you if you're an attractive female celebrity who's on television fairly regularly .
But to take your point about responding to viewer feedback, I'd certainly be interested to know (if you're allowed to say..) how the discussion went from having smaller presenting lineups, more focus on technology, fewer presenter challenges to deciding to have the show feature largely the same sort of content but around the world ?
As I said initially, it does seem awfully overblown and over the top thing to do.
For whatever my opinion may be worth, if you wanted to switch to a two presenter lineup, you could have still done that and just rotated two presenters each week. Suzi and Jason one week, Jason and Ortis the next week, Polly and Jon the week after and so on.
I thought the new look was great. Getting really bored of the 'I wont be watching because Suzi isn't on' thing now. The programme did need a re-fresh and this goes a good way towards doing that. There was no doubt that the old shows were becoming a little stale although now people seem to be saying they were perfect before for some reason. The studio and general feel of the programme was getting pretty tired although it has to be said that they did a good job of finding content every week which is bloomin' hard.
Suzi is a great presenter but actually I thought Polly was better last night and has really improved. Its certainly not fair to criticize her because she's good looking, there's been some quite hurtful things written on the facebook page about her.
Last night was an enjoyable programme, had a better feel and pace to it. 5 presenters is too many (and too expensive). I feel for anyone loosing their jobs if this did indeed happen but this is tv and like anything else if you want to make an omelette you need to crack a few eggs. Comercial TV is really hard, budgets are tight as advertisers move online. Decisions have to be made that are not always popular with audiences.
Hi Digital Spy ... this is Colin Byrne from the Gadget Show: World Tour production team.
As you might already know, we are kicking off this new-look Gadget Show tonight (Monday, April 23rd) at 8pm on Channel 5.
Unbelievably, The Gadget Show is 8 years old. Throughout that time we’ve always listened to viewer feedback - each week reading every forum post, Facebook message, tweet and email that we've received. Recently, we've come to realise that the Digital Spy forum is one of the most popular places for viewers to post their feedback and queries about the series. So, this time around we've decided to join in the debate and answer as many questions on here as we can over the next 6 weeks.
As you've undoubtedly heard, we've made some radical changes this time around. It’s always been our goal since 2004 to make a show about technology as informative, accessible and as entertaining as possible and we believe this message has never been stronger with the new series. Shows evolve all the time to remain current and fresh. But, technology is - and will always be - at the core of The Gadget Show!
The World Tour format allows us to pair amazing features (such as Honda’s ASIMO, the stunning water powered Jetboard and IBM’s Jeopardy playing Watson super computer) alongside testing consumer gadgets in exciting locations (e.g. HD Camcorders in Japan, Coffee Machines in Central Park, All in One PC’s in Silicon Valley, Skates on Venice Beach) – we really have aimed to place technology centre stage with this new series more than ever before. It’s also in HD – something we know that everyone has been asking for!
And, to put it out there, I believe that this new run of shows represent some of the best content we’ve ever produced. I hope that you do to.
In case you're wondering who the 'we' in The Gadget Show are, myself (@colbyrne, Series Producer), Karen (@O_Donut, Director), Jess (@annaphylaxis, Director) and Chris (@chrispyuk, Producer) will all be able to answer any questions you have about the new format, or discuss any suggestions you might have.
Anyway, enjoy the show! It kicks off at 8PM tonight on Channel 5.
Colin
You sacked Suzi Perry, I will therefore no longer be watching this show. It's been on its last legs for a while anyway.
Jessca - I'm sorry you feel that some people have a "blonde" and "good looking" prejudice. Perhaps you should hire Samantha LaBrick as a presenter on the next series?
For the record I do not have a problem with Polly and her "blondeness" or "prettiness". I have a problem with style over substance. The Gadget Show, despite being required viewing, has always been about style over substance but it was always clear before Polly arrived on the scene that there was some knowledge to back it up. Jon Susi and Ortis always managed to have that balance.
My problem with Polly is her desire to jump into "sexy" outfits at a moments notice - less than five minutes last night. Her willingness to plaster herself half naked over T3 when guest editing it. All this, to me, is a sign of trying to cover up her lack of knowledge by parading her body. This is shallowness in the extreme to me. She does not come across as being particularly knowledgeable or enthusiastic about gadgets...........
I will give you some positives though - from last night. That is that the slightly more serious nature of the presenting was most welcome. Jason comes across quite well when he is not hysterically jumping around, hollering and screaming like a 12 year old wihout his daily Ritalin dose.
having said this as previously stated, I will not be watching again. People can mention viewing figures until they're blue in the face - I bet they will be lower next week.
You want feedback from us and it's great you are interacting with us. So perhaps you will answer us a question? Who decided Jason and Polly were the best presenting team? Could you also tell us why Jason has protected his twitter feed? Seems to defeat the object of the site to me.
I'm sorry. I watched The Gadget Show and I'm afraid I not only didn't like the new format but I was thoroughly bored throughout. Shame as it was my televisual highlight of the week, the one programme I'd look forward to.
I have to say that the camcorder test with Pollyanna dressed up as a Japanese schoolgirl struck me as VERY creepy. It may be 'big in Japan', but so is whaling, and I don't want to see that on TV either.
I've watched The Gadget Show since series one, episode two but I have now watched my last show. It was enormous fun and I wish everyone there the best, but it is no longer for me.
Finally, in case Suzi, Jon and Ortis stop by, I'll miss you immensely, and to Jason and Pollyanna, good luck and no hard feelings.
I had reached the stage of fast-forwarding through large portions of the previous series. TGS:WT was quite a bit better than that. (I also preferred it to Gadget Geeks.) I thought Jason and Pollyanna had good chemistry and didn't miss the other presenters. HD was very welcome; I hope you sort out the sound sync. I was fine with the pieces to camera and the on-screen data.
I'd still prefer more serious content. The bit about the production laptop getting broken in a test, or the satnav having Japanese input, and not having time to customise the robot, were on the cheesy side for me.
The competition seems like a joke. Actually, it seems like a paid-for advert embedded in the programme, with whoever donated each prize insisting on getting a bit of air-time. If you must keep it, I'd rather you spread it around a bit, and share the prize between multiple winners. Otherwise we just assume whoever wins it puts 90% on eBay the next day.
Comments
Also TGS normally clashes with Eastenders in our household and would get more viewers if it was on a different time... the repeat show is like finding where`s wally in the listings you never know when its coming so we dont bother finding the repeat.
Testing of the computer cases was pretty much as previous series, with a different setting.
Overall, I thought there were much less 'gadgets' on the gadget show than in the past though, which is pretty much missing the point of the show in the first place it seems to me.
Travel shows do better at imparting the feel of these places, so cutting gadgets to try that seems misguided at best.
PS wasting 5 minutes of airtime reading out a list of 200 gifts is a good way to make me turn off. I get you are proud of the competition, but seriously, content is what I watch for, not a dramatic rendition of the argos catalogue.
Thanks to production team for posting on here - at least they are reading criticisms & providing some feedback - commendable:)
I am probably one of the few who quite liked the show last night,.
Although it's nowhere near as good as the first series, it is better than week after week of challenges.
However, I do have one question...
You say the changes are from viewer feedback but where did this feedback come from?
I follow you on Twitter and Facebook and visit your site regularly but have never seen anyone ask for this kind of change and now the majority seem to hate it.
Watched a bit, spooled a lot, removed it from my planners.
Does it not tell you something Jessica that people like me are signing up again just to reach you? Does it not tell you something how many disaffected people you have over this change? We are trying to reach you because we hate what you have done to Suzi, Ortis and Jon. And don't try and pretend that you were up front and honest with them. They have made it clear that you weren't.
Not you personally, I am sure but you get my point?
We're signing up and posting because we care about the show and the presenters. We have grown up with them, as you so rightly point out. We have been watching them for years. Then some blonde woman comes in - intelligent you say? Oh yes - so intelligent that she felt it necessary to prance around in her knickers when guest editing T3. I'm sure Spielberg, when guest editing Empire, didn't do it in his boxers.
Anyway - some blonde woman comes in. She is vacuous in the extreme. Knows nothing about tech. And before you know it some kind of coup has taken place........All the decent presenters are suddenly gone............
The format was stale. It needed a change. But this wasn't the way to go about it.....
Channel 5+1 will avoid the clash. I've got he show recorded and won't be watching the episodes until a few weeks as I'm in the middle of exam season. I'm very much looking forward to it.
Also I think my question has been missed unintentionally from the first page. Can I have an answer when possible please?
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showpost.php?p=57827362&postcount=22
Thank you
The first show was always going to get a bump in viewers because of the promotion and interest in the format change.
The acid test will be the ratings for the next couple of weeks to see how many of those who came back for a look at the new format then drop out again.
Jason and Polly can apparently build gadgets and write software programs to operate, the robots last night, then act like buffons generally for dramatic interest, such as the sat nav being in Japanese to their surprise!
The show repeats much of the recent years processes and it seemed more like expended trip tests of past shows.
@pericom Not sure about repeats off the top of my head- I’ll get back to you on that.
@Charlottesweb I understand that the competition is not for everyone, but so many people enter it that it would be unreasonable to cut it.
@TerryH Hi. Glad you enjoyed. Re: viewer feedback- we do take note of what’s said on Twitter, Facebook and our website as well as here on the forums, in emails to the production company, and in person. It varies from place to place as to what those comments consist of; here, for example, people tend to go in to a lot more detail (see series 16 thread). Of course, viewer feedback is just one of the factors we have to take into account; there are commissioning requirements, ratings, budgets, availability of tech, and our own view on what makes for entertaining and informative TV…etc, etc…what it boils down to is that you’ll be hard pushed to see in any one place a comment that covers all the changes we’ve made this series.
@norwichred Yes, the format needed refreshing, and it became apparent that two presenters was the best way to go. Everyone has their favourites and I’m sorry that you’re disappointed; I personally have worked with Suzi, Jon and Ortis for years now, they’re fantastic presenters, very sound people, and I’ll miss them a lot. The decision on the current line up was in no way intended to hurt anyone; simply that Polly and Jason would work best with the new format.
It’s a bit depressing that some people get stuck on the blonde thing…as though someone can’t be blonde and good-looking and also know what they’re talking about!
@stillgotabox Sorry, missed that. There will be more reviews and extras up on http://fwd.channel5.com/gadget-show ; there’s some gaming news going up tonight I believe.
I never said anything about not having a competition.
However, if you think 5 minutes or so reading out 200 names of gadgets is compulsive viewing, I really dont know what to say to you.
It was OK when you gave away small numbers of prizes, but 200? You need a different way of presenting the competition, because if the alternative is that you actually needed that much filler on the first show, it doesnt bode well for the later ones.
It feels like you're trying to appeal to the consumers and the dreamers, but when you stand right in the middle of the two demographics you paint a confusing picture of what type of show you are.
Thanks for that.
Still think we don't need to be hoodwinked about the build task element. Gadget Geeks do it and it's clear they have knowledge to do so, but I don't believe Jason or Polly could build complex gadgets without assistance or in reality on their behalf. It's not weakness nor embarrassing, just give credit where due.
Right, I have to go now I'm afraid; but thanks to all for your input and I'll pop back later and try to answer any more questions.
Cheers,
Jess
Good luck to the production team, I think it's great that they've taken viewer feedback on board and I really hope they can make it work. I for one enjoyed this first episode, and it's lovely to see them taking the time to answer questions on here.
Will there still be a Christmas special of The Gadget Show, Jessica? That episode in early to mid December previewing the best tech buys for the big day is always a good one.
I think this is forum life for you though jessica, and especially digital spy forum life. as i've said here many times, god help you if you're an attractive female celebrity who's on television fairly regularly
But to take your point about responding to viewer feedback, I'd certainly be interested to know (if you're allowed to say..) how the discussion went from having smaller presenting lineups, more focus on technology, fewer presenter challenges to deciding to have the show feature largely the same sort of content but around the world ?
As I said initially, it does seem awfully overblown and over the top thing to do.
For whatever my opinion may be worth, if you wanted to switch to a two presenter lineup, you could have still done that and just rotated two presenters each week. Suzi and Jason one week, Jason and Ortis the next week, Polly and Jon the week after and so on.
Suzi is a great presenter but actually I thought Polly was better last night and has really improved. Its certainly not fair to criticize her because she's good looking, there's been some quite hurtful things written on the facebook page about her.
Last night was an enjoyable programme, had a better feel and pace to it. 5 presenters is too many (and too expensive). I feel for anyone loosing their jobs if this did indeed happen but this is tv and like anything else if you want to make an omelette you need to crack a few eggs. Comercial TV is really hard, budgets are tight as advertisers move online. Decisions have to be made that are not always popular with audiences.
Lets move on and give this a go.
You sacked Suzi Perry, I will therefore no longer be watching this show. It's been on its last legs for a while anyway.
For the record I do not have a problem with Polly and her "blondeness" or "prettiness". I have a problem with style over substance. The Gadget Show, despite being required viewing, has always been about style over substance but it was always clear before Polly arrived on the scene that there was some knowledge to back it up. Jon Susi and Ortis always managed to have that balance.
My problem with Polly is her desire to jump into "sexy" outfits at a moments notice - less than five minutes last night. Her willingness to plaster herself half naked over T3 when guest editing it. All this, to me, is a sign of trying to cover up her lack of knowledge by parading her body. This is shallowness in the extreme to me. She does not come across as being particularly knowledgeable or enthusiastic about gadgets...........
I will give you some positives though - from last night. That is that the slightly more serious nature of the presenting was most welcome. Jason comes across quite well when he is not hysterically jumping around, hollering and screaming like a 12 year old wihout his daily Ritalin dose.
having said this as previously stated, I will not be watching again. People can mention viewing figures until they're blue in the face - I bet they will be lower next week.
You want feedback from us and it's great you are interacting with us. So perhaps you will answer us a question? Who decided Jason and Polly were the best presenting team? Could you also tell us why Jason has protected his twitter feed? Seems to defeat the object of the site to me.
thanks.
http://twitter.com/#!/jasonbradbury
And off we go again.:yawn:
Funny thing is, all these 'wont be watching its a disgrace etc etc etc etc' will actually be watching. Not that they'll admit it of course.
Seriously you lot, get over yourselves.
Hi Jason! Good to see you on here. How ya doing?
I have to say that the camcorder test with Pollyanna dressed up as a Japanese schoolgirl struck me as VERY creepy. It may be 'big in Japan', but so is whaling, and I don't want to see that on TV either.
I've watched The Gadget Show since series one, episode two but I have now watched my last show. It was enormous fun and I wish everyone there the best, but it is no longer for me.
Finally, in case Suzi, Jon and Ortis stop by, I'll miss you immensely, and to Jason and Pollyanna, good luck and no hard feelings.
I had reached the stage of fast-forwarding through large portions of the previous series. TGS:WT was quite a bit better than that. (I also preferred it to Gadget Geeks.) I thought Jason and Pollyanna had good chemistry and didn't miss the other presenters. HD was very welcome; I hope you sort out the sound sync. I was fine with the pieces to camera and the on-screen data.
I'd still prefer more serious content. The bit about the production laptop getting broken in a test, or the satnav having Japanese input, and not having time to customise the robot, were on the cheesy side for me.
The competition seems like a joke. Actually, it seems like a paid-for advert embedded in the programme, with whoever donated each prize insisting on getting a bit of air-time. If you must keep it, I'd rather you spread it around a bit, and share the prize between multiple winners. Otherwise we just assume whoever wins it puts 90% on eBay the next day.