BBC Blog Network

User Profile

mightyFop

Listed below are comments made by mightyFop between Monday, 8th December 2008 and Tuesday, 27th October 2009.

«Newer
Older»

24 hours with Ubuntu 10:31am on 27 Oct 2009 48. At 11:16pm on 23 Oct 2009, MrFaulty wrote:

they choose to ignore all the suffering they go through just to get one tiny little application working.....................................

I'm certainly not ignoring the suffering, I just haven't had ANY suffering using Mandriva or PCLinuxOS installations.

It was easy and it just worked (as did installing new software from the repositories).

Windows 3.X and ME (and early Vista) were real pains too, but that didn't mean that Win95, Win2000/XP and Win7 weren't ok.

Admittedly Gaming with non-Linux based/ported games is much like gaming was with Windows 3.1 (that is it's often more of a challenge to get the game working than it is to play it :-)), but general everyday "PC stuff" is easy as pie.
24 hours with Ubuntu 10:11am on 27 Oct 2009 How can a BBC technology journalist not have a genuine working knowledge of Linux?

It's true that lots of people need windows, but it's equally true that lots of people (probably the majority of home and desktop work users in fact) can do 90-100% of the things they usually do on a PC on one of the main Linux distributions.

Personally my favourites are not usually media mentioned Ubuntu (although it is good), but rather Mandriva and PClinuxOS (which completely homebrew, but equally brilliant) - which almost never get a mention in the main stream media.

Both are much easier to install and just as easy to get straight on with as any Windows OS.

The only real issue Linux still somewhat has is lack of driver support for some devices (although it's a much smaller problem that it was even a few years ago), and PC Gaming (because it only effective exists these days with DirectX).

Anyway, try out Mandriva or PCLinuxOS, not just for a day or two but for a while, as least to get a genuine understanding of what is out there.
YouTube row reflects online minefield 10:41pm on 09 Mar 2009 The Performing Right Society should learn a lesson about greed from the bankers mess.

The Pandora issue was it completely shooting itself in the foot and now this seems to be more of the same.

Good on Google/youtube, price rigging by the music industry has gone on for far too long. Although the irony is that everyone (including the PRS) would make more money if they just agreed reasonable payments with the likes of Pandora and Youtube.

But as I mentioned initially nothing blinds people quite as well as greed.
BBC News and disabled audiences 10:57am on 20 Feb 2009 "148. At 01:01am on 20 Feb 2009, FearHope wrote:

As others have pointed out, your numbers for the disabled seem wrong. Are 11 out of the 61 million general population disabled? Did you take the "long standing illness" numbers from National Statistics by mistake?

I know people have different disabilities but the NHS has numbers for the registered blind in England from 2006: 152,000 as registered blind and 155,000 as partially sighted. I couldn't find numbers for Scotland / Wales / NI but I imagine they would be a similar proportion of people.

http://www.ic.nhs.uk/statistics-and-data-collections/social-care/adult-social-care-information/people-registered-as-blind-and-partially-sighted-triennial-2006-england "

Aye a dodgy use of statistics, indeed.

However can you imagine having to read out that web-link? Or worse having to listen to it then write it down?

If they (the BBC) seriously want to address this issue, they need to implement the technology, not just pay lip service to the issue.
BBC News and disabled audiences 10:28pm on 19 Feb 2009 "91. At 7:28pm on 19 Feb 2009, paultrollope wrote:

We're not talking long urls here - from memory the BBC has some policy about having no more than two words after the bbc.co.uk anyway."

If we're talking about this blog then

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/02/bbc_news_and_disabled_audience.html

is a bit of a mouthful.

Otherwise they're basically just pointing you to the website in general.

However I can't see why they can't have audio version of website address etc. included in the program via the extra facilities digital TV is supposed to offer though.

I do think the clearly serious offence generated by calling people "viewers" should be considered and that word should go on the ever growing BBC watch list.
BBC News and disabled audiences 10:14pm on 19 Feb 2009 And we pay the licence fee for this?

Having lived with a legally blind person for more than 30 years I can say the last thing they would have ever worried about would have been the phrase "as you can see on your screen" being said on TV.

Yet more "BBCer than thou" madness.
Bash-A-Banker 11:44am on 09 Feb 2009 No lessons have been learnt.

As soon as the banks get their confidence back (how long that will be, however, I guess no one knows), we'll be back on the same treadmill, to the same ends.

The ridiculous bonuses paid to Northern Rock and possibly to RBS show that even those that have ridden the gravy train to destruction still have the same old corporate mindset.

And the politicians will only bash for so long, in the end the money involved will turn their heads just as it has for the past 30 years.
Varley: credit to shrink for up to two years 10:27am on 20 Dec 2008 The banks should say sorry, eh?

It's EASY to be "sorry" after the ridiculous bonuses and profits they've creamed off over the years, and it's especially EASY to be "sorry" when your frankly idiotic mistakes catch up with you and the taxpayer comes along with a comfy safety net.

Maybe if we give them even more money they'll be even more "sorry", who knows?
When the going gets tough... 12:17pm on 10 Dec 2008 Hmm.... so it's a classic Labour SPIN then.

Big announcement suggesting ONE thing....... but the detail actually painting a completely DIFFERENT picture.

When is Labour ever going to do what they say (or imply) they will?
Wikipedia is censored 12:02pm on 08 Dec 2008 The legality of an image must be decided by the courts.

NOT a self-appointed internet Nanny that uses the threat of "potential illegality" to scare ISP into doing what they want (whilst leaving the same image on Amazon alone, because Amazon have big scary lawyers to look after them).

This is a very dangerous path.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

mightyFop