DS Forums

 
 

Dr Who Ratings Thread (Merged)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-10-2015, 16:46
Dr Thete
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 523
I've never been able to stand iPlayer for more than a couple of mins at a time. Besides which I didn't pay a television licence to watch streaming video, I paid it to watch television broadcasts.
What are you on about? I have access to three versions of iPlayer via my TV - through Sky, through my TV's smart function and through my Blu-ray player. Each is staggeringly easy to use, and gives me a high quality picture on my TV that is indistinguishable from a broadcast image. I'm hardly alone in this, and very few people lack the necessary broadband bandwidth to do this.

And yes, you do pay your TV licence to watch streaming video. It's all part of, as the BBC put it, 'making the unmissable unmissable'.

Though via a Sky box (and I assume Virgin as well), that iPlayer copy isn't streamed but downloaded.

If the recording fails I'll download TLA or FoV's version along with matching subtitles from addic7ed.com
There is no way on earth that is easier or better than via iPlayer.

The quicker iPlayer is shut down the better.
That's just silly. iPlayer is highly rated by its users, has won design awards, is seen as a pioneer in the world of catch-up TV, and is being used more and more each year. What possible rational reason could there be for shutting it down?

You arguments are getting((?) really quite desperate now.
Dr Thete is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 02-10-2015, 16:49
adams66
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 3,703
I've never been able to stand iPlayer for more than a couple of mins at a time. Besides which I didn't pay a television licence to watch streaming video, I paid it to watch television broadcasts.

If the recording fails I'll download TLA or FoV's version along with matching subtitles from addic7ed.com

The quicker iPlayer is shut down the better.
And the award for the dopiest post of the week goes to...
adams66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 16:51
Granny McSmith
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,077
I think it's just us, ntscuser, who prefer to watch DW live.

The rest of the posters on here should be excommunicated from the forum immediately.

Personally, I watch very little TV. If something isn't important enough for me to make an effort to watch it live, then I won't usually bother watching it on later. DW used to be the exception to that - if I was out when it was on, I'd watch it on iplayer at the first opportunity.

I'm not sure that's true any more. It's not been tested yet.
Granny McSmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:06
ntscuser
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 2,343
Shut down!? Shut down!? Why on Earth would iPlayer be shut down? Millions of people happily use it every day and the BBC are expanding it's service not contracting it.
And that is one of the reasons the figures for people watching the show properly are falling.
ntscuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:09
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,698
And that is one of the reasons the figures for people watching the show properly are falling.
Yes, and leaving aside the use of the term "properly", that is wrong in what way?
mossy2103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:11
ntscuser
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 2,343
Genuine question - why does this matter to you so much, when it clearly doesn't bother anyone else one bit?
So why do they bother to 'contribute' to a thread on the subject?
ntscuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:13
Michael_Eve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
Oh, I much prefer to watch Who live, sorry, I mean "properly", but stuff happens, y'know!
Michael_Eve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:16
Michael_Eve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
So why do they bother to 'contribute' to a thread on the subject?
Well, this an old thread about ratings that covers a lot of ground, man.
Michael_Eve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:21
DiscoP
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,407
And that is one of the reasons the figures for people watching the show properly are falling.
I give up. Life's too short for anymore of this nonsense.
DiscoP is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:28
ntscuser
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 2,343
That's just silly. iPlayer is highly rated by its users, has won design awards, is seen as a pioneer in the world of catch-up TV, and is being used more and more each year. What possible rational reason could there be for shutting it down?
There's one very good and that is it is adversely affecting the ratings for Dr Who, or at least the ratings for those who watch it properly.

If you can't tell the difference in picture quality between streaming video and a proper broadcast or between streaming video and an expert video capture that is your problem and not mine.

You arguments are getting((?) really quite desperate now.
It seems to me the people in denial about Dr Who's falling ratings are the ones who are getting desperate.
ntscuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:37
ntscuser
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 2,343
Oh, I much prefer to watch Who live, sorry, I mean "properly", but stuff happens, y'know!
Yes indeed, "stuff" such as there is a programme on another channel you would rather watch.

Fortunately I don't think many people in England will want to watch their team being hammered by the Aussies but I could be wrong.
ntscuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:40
Grisonaut
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,205
More ratings to discuss tomorrow; this thread has thrashed on for another whole week with barely a dip.

Hurrah!
Grisonaut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:43
cylon6
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 23,342
More ratings to discuss tomorrow; this thread has thrashed on for another whole week with barely a dip.

Hurrah!
It was higher 5 years ago when posts weren't fragmented across several different from platforms!
cylon6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:45
Dr Thete
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 523
There's one very good and that is it is adversely affecting the ratings for Dr Who, or at least the ratings for those who watch it properly.
1) Don't be selfish.

2) Who the hell are you to say who is watching 'properly'?

If you can't tell the difference in picture quality between streaming video and a proper broadcast or between streaming video and an expert video capture that is your problem and not mine.
You're wrong. Factually wrong. Most of the population can stream from iPlayer at a bitrate/compression that gives a picture indistinguishable from that provided by Sky, Freeview or Freesat for a BBC One broadcast. I'm not open to arguing on that, It's been tested.

Plus, again, downloads are possible for most. But you continue with your more laborious (and illegal) efforts if it makes you feel better.

It seems to me the people in denial about Dr Who's falling ratings are the ones who are getting desperate.
Any discussion about Who's ratings must take into account all viewers, not just those who watch live or on the night. Before that can be agreed on, no sensible discussion can be had.
Dr Thete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:46
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,698
Fortunately I don't think many people in England will want to watch their team being hammered by the Aussies but I could be wrong.
There will be plenty who will watch in the hope that England can pull off an unexpected win.
mossy2103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 17:48
Michael_Eve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
Yes indeed, "stuff" such as there is a programme on another channel you would rather watch.

Fortunately I don't think many people in England will want to watch their team being hammered by the Aussies but I could be wrong.
I think you're going to be wrong. I'm fed up with these 8pm kick offs but it's a vital game. As a Welshman, I like your prediction, mind. Think I'm included in the overnights anyway if I watch Who after the game...
Michael_Eve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 18:01
Dr Thete
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 523
I think you're going to be wrong. I'm fed up with these 8pm kick offs but it's a vital game. As a Welshman, I like your prediction, mind. Think I'm included in the overnights anyway if I watch Who after the game...
Before 2am you would be (or, at least, you would be represented by people that will on the BARB panel).

But for ntscuser your crime will be not choosing to watch live.
Dr Thete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 18:03
ntscuser
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 2,343
2) Who the hell are you to say who is watching 'properly'?.
Who the hell are you to say what can and cannot be discussed in a Dr ratings thread?

You're wrong. Factually wrong. Most of the population can stream from iPlayer at a bitrate/compression that gives a picture indistinguishable from that provided by Sky, Freeview or Freesat for a BBC One broadcast. I'm not open to arguing on that
Or anything else it appears?

You're opinion is "fact" and anyone who disagrees with your opinion is "wrong".


Plus, again, downloads are possible for most. But you continue with your more laborious (and illegal) efforts if it makes you feel better.
Thank you I will and it's no more effort for me to download than it is for most people to watch a grossly inferior iPlayer version.

Any discussion about Who's ratings must take into account all viewers, not just those who watch live or on the night. Before that can be agreed on, no sensible discussion can be had.
The overall ratings are also in decline. There is disagreement as to by how much or the exact cause but until you become a moderator of this thread members are free to discuss any aspect of that decline they choose.
ntscuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 18:09
Michael_Eve
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,080
Before 2am you would be (or, at least, you would be represented by people that will on the BARB panel).

But for ntscuser your crime will be not choosing to watch live.
Well, this will be about the 6th time since January 1982 so I'll let myself off.
Michael_Eve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 18:13
adams66
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 3,703
Yes indeed, "stuff" such as there is a programme on another channel you would rather watch.

Fortunately I don't think many people in England will want to watch their team being hammered by the Aussies but I could be wrong.
You clearly don't understand anything about the viewing habits of most of the UK.
The rugby tommorow will get big ratings for sure as many people will want to watch the game. You may not. Fine.

And you've still not answered my earlier question - why is it so important to you that you feel people ought to watch Doctor Who on first transmission rather than do anything more important?
adams66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 18:40
Thomas Crewes
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 725
There is no way on earth that is easier or better than via iPlayer.
Just have to chime in here, if you know what you're doing (and it's not complicated) then yes it is both easier,or at the very least AS easy, and a better video quality than iPlayer.

But as for the whole thing about needing an excuse not to watch live, it's nonsense. Frankly if live watching was the only option, given the current standard of quality the past few years, I wouldn't even bother with the programme.
Thomas Crewes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 18:45
Dr Thete
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 523
Who the hell are you to say what can and cannot be discussed in a Dr ratings thread?
A poor attempt at deflection. The point wasn't about discussion, it was about you labelling people taking part in the discussion, as well a large number of viewers.

Or anything else it appears?

You're opinion is "fact" and anyone who disagrees with your opinion is "wrong".
No. It's only actual facts where I note that your disagreement is wrong. There is a whole swathe of research on this..

For example - not so long ago the BBC commissioned research into iPlayer usage. Amongst other things it found that people (in blind trials) watching an iPlayer stream from the BBC, over an average bandwidth, were unable to determine which it was when compared to various standard TV services (Sky, Virgin, Freeview and Freesat) compared to results that would be obtained via random chance.

Indeed, when asked to decide which service was giving the better picture, as many plumped for the iPlayer stream as for the alternative. Though it was the case that a majority of the sample started with an assumption that iPlayer streaming is poorer in quality. That's not surprising. In earlier days that was the case, and biases formed early on can be tough to shift.

Thank you I will and it's no more effort for me to download than it is for most people to watch a grossly inferior iPlayer version.
I just went to access Doctor Who, in HD, from my Sky box. It took 7 clicks and approximately as many seconds to start downloading. In the space of time it took to type that last sentence the box came up informing me it was available to start watching.

That's full HD, and a recording with the same bandwidth and size as my Sky+ recording of the broadcast.

If you insist your pointless accessing of an illegal copy is easier or faster, then I will find that literally unbelievable.

The overall ratings are also in decline. There is disagreement as to by how much or the exact cause but until you become a moderator of this thread members are free to discuss any aspect of that decline they choose.
You're missing the point. I'm not willing to discuss whether the ratings are in decline with anyone who won't take into account all viewers.

And I'm not modding. I've said nothing about shutting down discussion, merely defined the terms by which I believe reasonable discussion can be had, and noted those things that may be open to discussion, but are resolutely not a matter of opinion.

Seriously - level the playing field on who counts as viewing (essentially - everyone who has viewed), and I'll happily discuss whether the ratings are declining with you.
Dr Thete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 18:51
Thomas Crewes
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 725
If you insist your pointless accessing of an illegal copy is easier or faster, then I will find that literally unbelievable.
You should limit yourself to only speaking authoritatively on things you actually know about then! I could get a better version than yours in three clicks or less.
Thomas Crewes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 18:56
ntscuser
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 2,343
You clearly don't understand anything about the viewing habits of most of the UK.
The rugby tommorow will get big ratings for sure as many people will want to watch the game. You may not. Fine.
I'm sure it will but I suspect not as many as last week and not as many as some people here seem to be expecting it will.

And you've still not answered my earlier question - why is it so important to you that you feel people ought to watch Doctor Who on first transmission rather than do anything more important?
Such as washing the cat?

It's not important to me, just don't complain when they stop showing Dr Who on a Saturday night because not enough people were watching then to justify the timeslot.

I also believe it's a contributory factor to the overall decline in DW ratings, in this country at least. BBC America doesn't seem to have suffered this problem.
ntscuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2015, 18:58
Dr Thete
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 523
Just have to chime in here, if you know what you're doing (and it's not complicated) then yes it is both easier,or at the very least AS easy, and a better video quality than iPlayer.
As noted in my previous post, my iPlayer copy is the same size, same bitrate as the broadcast copy, took seconds to access and even begin viewing, and is on my TV. No fileshare copy is going to be better than the the broadcast copy.

I'm certainly mystified as to how any torrented copy can be obtained faster. Especially on a whim, as I just did a few minutes ago.

Plus, whatever the actual bitrates and compression rates, it remains the case that in testing, based on average BB speeds (and mine, for the record, is somewhat below the average), people can't tell the difference. And that's even more important than whether or not there is one.

For clarity - I'm not talking about iPlayer quality on a non-TV device. For streaming at least (my iPlayer download on my tablet of TWF is, as far as I can tell, as good as the original broadcast copy on my Sky box).
Dr Thete is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 23:52.