|
New BBC graphics
Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd
say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? How can a perspective 3D presentation help? All areas outside the immediate UK are excluded so how can the weather be put in any context and how can this possibly help the public understanding of weather forecasts? The BBC airheads (and I don't mean weather enthusiasts) ought to be ashamed of themselves for this cretinous nonsense and should try and grow up. It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey. |
New BBC graphics
On 17 May 2005 17:36:13 -0700, "Tudor Hughes"
wrote: Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? How can a perspective 3D presentation help? All areas outside the immediate UK are excluded so how can the weather be put in any context and how can this possibly help the public understanding of weather forecasts? The BBC airheads (and I don't mean weather enthusiasts) ought to be ashamed of themselves for this cretinous nonsense and should try and grow up. It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. I've just watched it again, too and my thoughts are the same as yours: it's stupidity personnified. I don't like the colour scheme, 3D as implemented, lack of pressure and frontal information, narrow focus on the UK, perspective used (poor Scotland!), imprecise and misleading cloud and rainfall indicators, zooming around (which adds nothing to the initial stationary image of the UK)... I could go on. In fact, I cannot think of ONE improvement over the previous system - compared to a dozen poorer aspects. And the timestamps on the weather "movies" are impossible to read whilst studying the actual weather on the maps. There is now no advantage in watching BBC TV weather forecasts compared to ITV or any other channel so in future, I won't bother and I shall be writing to the BBC to tell them so. Although I haven't watched Sky Weather for some time, I guess that's now the best of the lot. Francis, here I come! -- Dave |
New BBC graphics
On 17 May 2005 17:36:13 -0700, "Tudor Hughes"
wrote: Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? How can a perspective 3D presentation help? All areas outside the immediate UK are excluded so how can the weather be put in any context and how can this possibly help the public understanding of weather forecasts? The BBC airheads (and I don't mean weather enthusiasts) ought to be ashamed of themselves for this cretinous nonsense and should try and grow up. It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. I've just watched it again, too and my thoughts are the same as yours: it's stupidity personnified. I don't like the colour scheme, 3D as implemented, lack of pressure and frontal information, narrow focus on the UK, perspective used (poor Scotland!), imprecise and misleading cloud and rainfall indicators, zooming around (which adds nothing to the initial stationary image of the UK)... I could go on. In fact, I cannot think of ONE improvement over the previous system - compared to a dozen poorer aspects. And the timestamps on the weather "movies" are impossible to read whilst studying the actual weather on the maps. There is now no advantage in watching BBC TV weather forecasts compared to ITV or any other channel so in future, I won't bother and I shall be writing to the BBC to tell them so. Although I haven't watched Sky Weather for some time, I guess that's now the best of the lot. Francis, here I come! -- Dave |
New BBC graphics
On 17 May 2005 17:36:13 -0700, "Tudor Hughes"
wrote: Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? How can a perspective 3D presentation help? All areas outside the immediate UK are excluded so how can the weather be put in any context and how can this possibly help the public understanding of weather forecasts? The BBC airheads (and I don't mean weather enthusiasts) ought to be ashamed of themselves for this cretinous nonsense and should try and grow up. It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. I've just watched it again, too and my thoughts are the same as yours: it's stupidity personnified. I don't like the colour scheme, 3D as implemented, lack of pressure and frontal information, narrow focus on the UK, perspective used (poor Scotland!), imprecise and misleading cloud and rainfall indicators, zooming around (which adds nothing to the initial stationary image of the UK)... I could go on. In fact, I cannot think of ONE improvement over the previous system - compared to a dozen poorer aspects. And the timestamps on the weather "movies" are impossible to read whilst studying the actual weather on the maps. There is now no advantage in watching BBC TV weather forecasts compared to ITV or any other channel so in future, I won't bother and I shall be writing to the BBC to tell them so. Although I haven't watched Sky Weather for some time, I guess that's now the best of the lot. Francis, here I come! -- Dave |
New BBC graphics
"Dave Ludlow" wrote in message
Although I haven't watched Sky Weather for some time, I guess that's now the best of the lot. Just off to see if they are up to much on their weather site. Last time I bothered looking -several years ago, the site was an abortion. Bloody hell! It sent me to Kiwiland: http://www.metservice.co.nz/default/index.php Worse swear words me: http://sky.wsieurope.com/weather/uk.shtml I shan't be buying into that load of crap. Ceefax is better. So it's either stick with the license fee or learn German. -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
New BBC graphics
"Dave Ludlow" wrote in message
Although I haven't watched Sky Weather for some time, I guess that's now the best of the lot. Just off to see if they are up to much on their weather site. Last time I bothered looking -several years ago, the site was an abortion. Bloody hell! It sent me to Kiwiland: http://www.metservice.co.nz/default/index.php Worse swear words me: http://sky.wsieurope.com/weather/uk.shtml I shan't be buying into that load of crap. Ceefax is better. So it's either stick with the license fee or learn German. -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
New BBC graphics
"Dave Ludlow" wrote in message
Although I haven't watched Sky Weather for some time, I guess that's now the best of the lot. Just off to see if they are up to much on their weather site. Last time I bothered looking -several years ago, the site was an abortion. Bloody hell! It sent me to Kiwiland: http://www.metservice.co.nz/default/index.php Worse swear words me: http://sky.wsieurope.com/weather/uk.shtml I shan't be buying into that load of crap. Ceefax is better. So it's either stick with the license fee or learn German. -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
New BBC graphics
On 17 May 2005 17:36:13 -0700, "Tudor Hughes"
wrote: Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. Agreed: the fact that synoptics have gone makes it very difficult using the material for A level teaching (Geography) that specifically uses basic synoptics. Cheers Robin |
New BBC graphics
On 17 May 2005 17:36:13 -0700, "Tudor Hughes"
wrote: Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. Agreed: the fact that synoptics have gone makes it very difficult using the material for A level teaching (Geography) that specifically uses basic synoptics. Cheers Robin |
New BBC graphics
On 17 May 2005 17:36:13 -0700, "Tudor Hughes"
wrote: Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. Agreed: the fact that synoptics have gone makes it very difficult using the material for A level teaching (Geography) that specifically uses basic synoptics. Cheers Robin |
New BBC graphics
On 17 May 2005 17:36:13 -0700, Tudor Hughes wrote:
What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? I doesn't move, so the X-Box generation with the attention span of a goldfish get bored. The fact that the movement detracts from the presentation of information isn't relevant to the X-box generation as they much prefer style over content. How can a perspective 3D presentation help? I donno and I noticed another slightly weird effect due to it last night. When the presenter moves their arm hand from the south to the north the fact it doesn't get smaller as it moves further away is really rather disturbing. Perceptually their arm appears to get bigger. Yet another vomit making feature... It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. Agreed. And when night falls and it gets dark (but strangely you still have "shadows" from the clouds) it all gets very dim and dull. The moon is about half at the moment so I guess shadows are allowed but will we still get them with a new moon? -- Cheers Dave. pam is missing e-mail |
New BBC graphics
On 17 May 2005 17:36:13 -0700, Tudor Hughes wrote:
What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? I doesn't move, so the X-Box generation with the attention span of a goldfish get bored. The fact that the movement detracts from the presentation of information isn't relevant to the X-box generation as they much prefer style over content. How can a perspective 3D presentation help? I donno and I noticed another slightly weird effect due to it last night. When the presenter moves their arm hand from the south to the north the fact it doesn't get smaller as it moves further away is really rather disturbing. Perceptually their arm appears to get bigger. Yet another vomit making feature... It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. Agreed. And when night falls and it gets dark (but strangely you still have "shadows" from the clouds) it all gets very dim and dull. The moon is about half at the moment so I guess shadows are allowed but will we still get them with a new moon? -- Cheers Dave. pam is missing e-mail |
New BBC graphics
On 17 May 2005 17:36:13 -0700, Tudor Hughes wrote:
What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? I doesn't move, so the X-Box generation with the attention span of a goldfish get bored. The fact that the movement detracts from the presentation of information isn't relevant to the X-box generation as they much prefer style over content. How can a perspective 3D presentation help? I donno and I noticed another slightly weird effect due to it last night. When the presenter moves their arm hand from the south to the north the fact it doesn't get smaller as it moves further away is really rather disturbing. Perceptually their arm appears to get bigger. Yet another vomit making feature... It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. Agreed. And when night falls and it gets dark (but strangely you still have "shadows" from the clouds) it all gets very dim and dull. The moon is about half at the moment so I guess shadows are allowed but will we still get them with a new moon? -- Cheers Dave. pam is missing e-mail |
New BBC graphics
Tudor Hughes wrote:
Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? How can a perspective 3D presentation help? All areas outside the immediate UK are excluded so how can the weather be put in any context and how can this possibly help the public understanding of weather forecasts? The BBC airheads (and I don't mean weather enthusiasts) ought to be ashamed of themselves for this cretinous nonsense and should try and grow up. It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. It's hit Page 3 of the Daily Mail. -- Peter |
New BBC graphics
Tudor Hughes wrote:
Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? How can a perspective 3D presentation help? All areas outside the immediate UK are excluded so how can the weather be put in any context and how can this possibly help the public understanding of weather forecasts? The BBC airheads (and I don't mean weather enthusiasts) ought to be ashamed of themselves for this cretinous nonsense and should try and grow up. It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. It's hit Page 3 of the Daily Mail. -- Peter |
New BBC graphics
Tudor Hughes wrote:
Just watched 'em - they're as bad as everyone says. In fact I'd say idiotic. They seem to have gone for the 8-12 age range except that any earnest young kid of that age would learn nothing about the weather whatsoever from this Disneyfication of the forecasts. What's wrong with a map, for goodness' sake? How can a perspective 3D presentation help? All areas outside the immediate UK are excluded so how can the weather be put in any context and how can this possibly help the public understanding of weather forecasts? The BBC airheads (and I don't mean weather enthusiasts) ought to be ashamed of themselves for this cretinous nonsense and should try and grow up. It is pure technological gimmickry for its own sake. It adds nothing and subtracts quite a lot. It's hit Page 3 of the Daily Mail. -- Peter |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 08:38 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 WeatherBanter.co.uk