Saturday, 13 December 2014

Damaged MSI Radeon R9 295 X2

This is a post for the support department at Overclockers showing the damage to the MSI Radeon R9 295 X2 8192MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card I purchased. The box is in perfect condition so it looks like this happened at the manufacturing stage.

Clearly with a liquid cooled solution I would be foolish to install this in a PC case as the radiator could very easily leak if I powered it up.

Here are the photos:

Can see the fins are bent in several locations.

Close up of the most damaged area, but also notice the fins to the left also show signs of damage.

Here someone has (badly) tried to cover up the damage to the radiator casing with black paint or a permanent marker.

Wednesday, 10 December 2014

Time for a new PC

My PC died yesterday, I was happily playing a game of iRacing trying to get my D license before the end of the season this week. When I quit out I had some weird messages about my backup software being unable to connect to my D:\ drive (which is my data drive, my C:\ is an SSD that runs the OS).

When I opened Explorer the D:\ was indeed missing... "odd" I thought, "that's never happened before". I'd only just used the D:\ drive to save a couple of pictures before I started playing iRacing, so I knew it had connected on boot up.

I thought I'd try a quick reboot to see if something weird had occurred in the drivers. When the PC booted into Windows I instantly got a BSOD with a KMODE_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED error message. Oh.....

My only option was another reboot, but this resulted in another BSOD and another KMODE_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED error. Mild panic began to set in, I know my backups will be okay, I have three separate copies stored elsewhere as well as the data on the disc itself. But fixing PCs is no fun!

Eventually Windows figured out there was a problem and offered to fix it... unsurprisingly it failed. So then I had the option of rolling back to an earlier restore point, so I did. I had one from just a week ago.

Sadly that didn't work either, and neither did any of the previous restore points going back six months. The next option is to try a "refresh" which keeps your files but re-installs Windows... but I was scuppered because you need the Windows install disc.

There are ways around all this, I could probably have re-installed Windows if I'd persevered long enough. but I'd been seeing the early signs of hardware failure for a while and I'd sort of ignored them. Random crashes, display glitches etc... When the PC died it made me remember a lot of things and they all made me come to the conclusion that I needed to update my system.

When I bought my current system I didn't have my three screens, I also did almost all my gaming on my XBox 360. But since I got an Eyefinity setup and the "next-gen" of consoles have been released that's all changed. I don't have an XBox One or a PS4 and every game I've played in the last 6-12 months has been on the PC.

I decided I needed a computer that could handle anything I wanted to throw at it, so I went about choosing components for a new build. Something I've not done for 10 years or more... The last two PCs I purchased were off the shelf offerings from Dell.

I figured I could get a lot more for my money by doing it myself, so without further ado please let me present you with the components I've purchased for my gaming rig 2015:

- Case: Cooler Master Cosmos SE Mid Tower Case
- Power Supply: SuperFlower Leadex Platinum 1000W Fully Modular "80 Plus Platinum" Power Supply - Black
- CPU: Intel Core i7-4790K 4.00GHz (Devil's Canyon) Socket LGA1150 Processor - Retail
- Cooler: Cooler Master V8 GTS High Performance CPU Cooler
- Memory: Kingston HyperX 16GB (2x8GB) PC3-19200C11 2400MHz Dual Channel Kit - Black/Red (HX24C11BRK2/16-OC)
- Graphics: MSI Radeon R9 295 X2 8192MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card
- Primary Storage: Samsung 1TB SSD 840 EVO SATA 6Gb/s
- Data Storage: Seagate Barracuda 4TB 5900RPM SATA 6Gb/s 64MB Cache

The price tag associated with all this is rather scary coming in at, wait for it......  £1987.85!!!!!

Yeah.....

So that's Christmas for everyone else cancelled then! It will all be delivered tomorrow by DPD, so I just have to remember how to build a PC now!

Sunday, 4 August 2013

EODS The Tempest



Last night I went to see EODS's production of The Tempest, in my job I see a lot of shows on an almost daily basis. I've never blogged about one before, but this is different. It's different because it blew me away!

Shakespeare's plays are always difficult to do well and if they aren't done extremely well then it is all too easy for the actors to lose their audience. It's simply a fact that the language he uses along with the similes and metaphors are not easily understood by today's audiences. A Shakespeare play is certainly not something you should attempt to watch if you have no prior knowledge of it, you'll likely get lost quite quickly.

That said, the quality of all the performances were truly outstanding. EODS is an amateur dramatics group, words that are sure to bring most professionals out in a cold sweat :-) However in this production there wasn't a single performer who didn't deserve their role. This is even more impressive when you learn that the lead Mike Barber (Prospero) only took on the part the week before due to the original actor having to pull out at the last minute. The fact he learnt his lines is astonishing, that he did so and put on such a strong performance is a testament to his abilities. Mike wasn't alone in taking over at short notice though, director Gareth Brighton had to step into the role of Stephano when James Bell was taken ill. Both he and Nick Carn as Trinculo played a great double act together with Nick ending up coming off worse having to take two full submersions in the pool.

Finally David Fricker as Ariel was also a fairly late addition to the cast, but his interpretation of the character was fantastic. He was very spritely in his movements and mannerisms, even when the action wasn't focused on him he remained very ethereal.

For a production beset with problems during the rehearsal period it certainly didn't show in the performances!

A stunning setting with superb staging, above
Nick Carn as Trinculo and David Fricker as Ariel
This year the choice of play really couldn't have suited the location any better. Taking place at Holywell's Italian Gardens the backdrop of the sea is the ideal setting for a play based on an island! The stunning view was aided by the natural sound effects of the waves lapping against the shore with the birds and other natural wildlife all playing their part to add to the atmosphere.

The innate beauty of the surroundings was enhanced by the fabulous staging built primarily by Ashley Jones. The central pond flanked by two catwalks and a bridge gave the actors a great set on which to work. It also had some nice hidden features that made for some memorable moments, most notably Ariel appearing from the opposite side of the arena after hiding in a wooden trunk. No doubt the input of legendary magician Paul Daniels as the magic advisor for the production played its part here. Also Calibans first entrance through the smoke from a trap door in the catwalk was simple yet tremendously effective. Mr Daniels input was evident in other small touches too and it all added to help flesh out the characters. It would have been all too easy to let the temptation of the magic overpower the show, but all the effects used felt right and were played well.

With the production starting before sunset you don't really notice the lighting until you come back from the interval. By then the moon is shining down and Douglas Morgan's design is able to take over from the sun, it's a difficult space to light with the limited resources available but he managed to do a superb job. There are general washes to make sure everything is lit well, but also numerous additions to highlight certain actors at key points. The lighting is subtle but crucial to the overall experience.

The full company
Sound is used at several points, and if there was a weak link, then this is where it lies. Although the spot effects for magical moments and storms were all good and worked well within the action, the quality of the PA was poor. It's a shame as so much more could have been made of the sound but it seems the equipment was holding them back. While being picky, the only other area that could have been improved was the set dressing. Rocks were represented with some painted ground row flats, it would have made a huge difference if they had been able to source some real rocks. Finally, the pond lining could have been disguised a bit, the blue plastic did stand out a little. But these are small things that in no way detracted from the piece as a whole.

The night I was there it was a complete sell out, and the reputation they have built over the years is well deserved. Unfortunately by the time this is posted the run will have ended, but you should never the less try to see one of their future productions!

Photos: Copyright Paul Spink, used with permission.

Thursday, 1 August 2013

Triple monitors, calibration & Eyefinity


Just over a year ago I splashed out and purchased two matching Dell U2410 IPS monitors. While normally such a high end display would cost in the region of £500 a piece, I was lucky enough to pick up a couple of "reconditioned" displays. I've always been slightly wary of such bargains in the past, however these came with a 12 month warranty and the IPS panels were guaranteed to be 100% perfect, no bright or dead pixels. The only thing the description said was there may be some superficial marks or scratches to the casing.

Well, to be honest, I didn't really care about the casing, I don't look at that anyway! Besides, if they arrived and I wasn't satisfied with their condition, there would be nothing to stop me sending them back for a refund.

They had three available and I was able to buy two of them for a total of £600 including VAT and delivery. That's almost half price!

I'd been using two monitors for a good few years already, but they had always been different sizes and resolutions, not to mention wildly different brightness / contrast and colours. This was simply because the monitors were so wildly different there was no way of getting them to even closely match.

So anyway, the new monitors were delivered the next day by courier, excellent service. I eagerly tore the tape back to inspect the quality of my goods. I wanted to see how bad these marks were! It was obvious that they had been opened before, the boxes were missing original packaging and only one box had a manual. The thing is though, who actually needs a manual for a monitor?

Once I'd assembled the panels on their stands, I was able to take a good look. To my complete surprise, no matter how hard I looked, I couldn't actually see anything wrong with them. Not a scratch to be found, these were to all intents and purposes brand new displays! WIN.

Having got them all connected things were so much better than before. As promised the panels were flawless. No dead pixels or anything to indicate they were anything other than brand new. However I wasn't entirely happy, no matter what I tried I couldn't get the colours to match across the two monitors. They were close sure, but being side by side it was still noticeable.

I lived with it for a few days and then I decided that spending so much on matching displays was a bit pointless if they didn't actually match. So I started looking into calibration. To cut a long story short I ended up buying a Spyder 3 Elite on eBay for quite a lot less than its price new.

This is a pretty cool bit of hardware, and it looks smart too. What it does is calibrate your display/s. This is important if you are into photography or any sort of graphics work and need to know that the colours you're using in your image editor such as Photoshop will match the colour of the final printed work. While this was of some interest to me, I had really bought it for its matching feature. This would enable me to calibrate one monitor, and then use the device on the other display to make sure everything matched.

Doing this was surprisingly easy, you just put the device which has a sucker on it on the monitor and run the wizard. Then save the profile and repeat the process for the second display. Once you are done you get a before & after comparison. I have to say the results were nothing like what I had expected.

I'd bought what I thought were expensive studio monitors, reviews had said these were a great choice. But the difference after calibration was like night and day! Colour reproduction was astounding, gone we're the heavily saturated colours which are frankly a marketing gimmick. Now when looking at a photo of a person, it actually looked like seeing them though a window. It's hard to describe it properly, but they looked lifelike and things seemed to have more depth. What I wanted we're matching displays, what I got was so much more!

I was so impressed that I would highly recommend you get your monitor calibrated too, even if you only have one screen. Having accurate colour reproduction will make it seem like you've invested in a new monitor! Now obviously results will vary, I got the excellent results I did because I invested in a quality display panel. If you try to calibrate a £150 display you shouldn't expect it to work miracles, but you will notice a marked improvement. Manufacturers like to set their displays to look good on a display stand, but not on your desk when you're editing your holiday snaps.

About a week or so after I'd been getting used to my new monitors, one of them just died. It came back to life, but from then on it had a habbit of just powering off at random intervals. Eventually one day it just wouldn't turn on at all, oh dear... Time to get in touch with the company who sold it to me and check out the 12 month warranty! An email to them resulted in a response within the hour apologising for the fault, they arranged for a replacment to be sent out that day and for me to return the defective monitor to them when the courier dropped off the new one. Amazing service! When buying reconditioned you're always taking a risk, that's reflected in the price you pay, but to have this level of after sale support was fantastic. As promised the replacment worked fine and I've never had a problem with them since.

I should probably tell you who this amazing retailer is, but part of me wants to keep it secret! If I tell you then you'll all buy cheap reconditioned items and leave nothing for me. But I will share it, the company is NRG:IT who can be fouud on-line at http://www.nrgit.biz, you should check them out!

Anyway, fast forwarding to a year later which is more or less now, I'd been seeing lots of talk about Eyefinity or triple monitor gaming. In the past my PC would never have been able to cope, but I purchased a new system towards the end of last year. An Intel core i7 beast with 12 Gb RAM and an AMD Radeon 7870 with a 256Gb SSD. While it's not bleeding edge, it's pretty far up there!

I decided my PC should be capable of producing enough pixels to give me a reasonable frame rate across three displays. Hence the temptation got the better of me and I was back in touch with NRG:IT for a third Dell U2410 so I had three identical displays. This was again ordered and delivered the next day, again it was in pristine "as new" condition, the only thing giving away the fact it wasn't new being the box it came in!

With three moniors the desk space required by all the stands is quite significant, so I also picked up a XFX triple monitor stand from Amazon too, which actually cost more than the monitor even though it's one of the cheapest triple monitor stands you can buy! Anyway, with everything finally assembled and calibrated I had my triple screen setup sorted.


The above photo was actually taken before the newest screen (left) had been calibrated. You can see the difference in the colour reproduction, the centre and right monitors are the older ones which had already been matched. With everything setup it would have been rude not to try some games, which after all is the whole point!

First was Dirt 3, with this game the extra width really gives an enhanced sensation of speed as things fly past your peripheral vision in a blur. With so much width it's not really a case of seeing everything at once. It's more a sense of immersion where your entire peripheral vision is taken up with the displays. You would think, and most peoples first reaction is that the bezels would be intrusive and ruin the effect. However, it really isn't noticeable after a couple of minutes. Just make sure you configure the bezel correction in the video cards driver settings, this makes sure that things line up correctly in the games.

Dirt 3 Eyefinity

With my current graphics card I'm able to run Dirt 3 at the highest quality setting and still get a steady 60+ FPS from it. Quite impressive! Other games I've tried include The Witcher 2, Half Life 2 and a few others:

Witcher 2, struggles to get a good frame rate
With Half Life 2 being an older game I was able to get over 160FPS on my Eyefinity rig. However the Witcher 2 really suffered, I had to turn the settings right down to get 30FPS. Still playable but not as beautiful as it could be.

I hadn't really thought of using my third monitor outside of gaming. Sure my dual monitors always got a lot of use, but I didn't really see how I could utilise three screens at the same time. That didn't last long though, the first Formula 1 race of the season saw me setting up all the stats and data I could wish for!

As you can see, I have live timings, a driver tracker and the TV coverage all in view. It was fantastic to have all this information right in front of me and I can't wait for the next race.

In terms of productivity, I've even made use of all my screens during the recent revamp of the ugvm website. Below the live website can be seen on the left screen, my CSS editor is in the middle allowing me to make changes on one screen and see the results in the other. The third screen had my email, Twitter and web browser open. Quite a lot going on, but it's so much nicer having the space and not having to switch windows constantly.

So, three screens, it needs a lot of space and can cost a lot of money, but the difference is incredible. The down side is that my above average GPU can't really handle the pixel pushing required for three 24" displays in modern games. I'll probably upgrade it when the new range of AMD cards are launched later in the year. My current card only has 2Gb RAM and really it needs 3Gb or preferably more. I'm sure I can manage until then with lower quality settings or enjoying some games from my back catalogue until then. Check out my new gaming diary at http://lufferov-gaming.blogspot.co.uk to hear about that.

If you can afford it, I can't recommend it highly enough, and you don't need the expensive monitors. You could get a set of three cheaper displays for the cost of one of mine. For example NRG:IT are selling some Dell 22" displays which are 1920x1080 for only £94 each. I'm sure the experience wouldn't be a great deal different, you just need to make sure your graphics card can take the strain!

Saturday, 17 September 2011

Windows 8 Preview First Impressions

I recently decided to trial the Windows 8 Developer Preview on my PC, the main reason for me wanting to do this was to see how the touch interface was going to work on tablets. I have an HP TouchSmart laptop which should have been perfect for experimenting with this. Unfortunately my efforts to install it to a Virtual Machine on my laptop didn't go too well.

Firstly I couldn't install the 64-bit version because my laptops CPU doesn't support hardware virtualisation, so I had to download the 32-bit version. This wouldn't install either for reasons I still don't understand, the Windows 8 installer just kept throwing error messages. My only option remaining is to set up a partition on my HDD and install it properly, but I'm not ready to do that just yet. Instead I decided to install it to my main desktop PC.

This was remarkably simple compared to the trials I'd been through on my laptop. The Virtual Machine was set-up in just a few seconds, I enabled the Hardware Virtualisation in my PCs BIOS and mounted the Windows 8 .iso into the virtual DVD drive. Booted it up, and the installer ran without a hitch, although it did take a while to complete.

So then, what are my thoughts? Well before going in I had reservations about the new Metro UI they have been showing off. My gut feeling was that it wasn't going to work on a desktop PC, having now used it, I can confirm my worst fears are well founded. The Metro UI feels like a badly tacked on interface that is restrictive, basic and unwieldly. It simply doesn't work well with a mouse and keyboard, the gestures are impossible to use and the UI feels very poorly thought out. There is no easy way to exit Metro apps and nothing about it seems at all intuitive. When I first picked up an iPhone, I pretty much knew exactly how to use it, the same was true for Android. However, I felt totally lost and confused inside the Metro apps, it's hard to explain it, but it all felt wrong.



One of the main problems I experienced with the Metro UI was the inability to perform touch gestures using the mouse and keyboard. I can see how in theory the Metro UI would be quite slick on a touchscreen, it just doesn't translate at all well to more traditional PC control methods. The problem with this is exacerbated by the forced use of the Metro UI as the Start menu.

Let's focus on that for just a moment, the Start menu is gone in Windows 8, you click on the Windows icon in the taskbar, it takes you into the Metro UI. From there you get the tile interface seen above, this is where you launch all your apps from. The problem with this is it's a mess, you can't get much on a screen because the tiles take up so much space and it's hard to find anything. Getting fast access to your programs is going to be a thing of the past!

The other problem is going to be with developer uptake, in order for a program to run in the new Metro UI it needs a totally new interface designed, but not just one! Traditionally a developer designs one interface for Windows and the OS deals with resizing the window to whatever the user desires. It can be any size too, unlike in Metro when you can only have two apps open side by side!

Now they need to design the traditional desktop UI, as well as a full screen Metro UI, a split screen Metro UI and the tile UI. It puts much more of an onus on the developer not only to design their applications, but also to test them too!

My prediction will be that classic Windows desktop applications, like Photoshop and office will continue to have only the desktop interface. The extra effort involved in creating all the interfaces will outweigh the benefits.

It seems that the plan is to get tablets running the same software as desktop PCs. The big problem with this is that tablets are not designed for productivity, they are designed for consumption and they are great at doing that. However, a tablet that can edit pictures in Photoshop or edit videos in Premiere is unlikely to be a realistic proposition. The CPU and graphic requirements these programs will demand is going to far outstrip tablet technology.

Microsoft have taken the wrong road, Apple and Google have both developed an OS that runs on phones and tablets. It's a tactic that works well and keeps the desktop OS separate in the case of MacOS and to a lesser extent ChromeOS.

This is what MS should have done, developed an improved Windows 7 for the desktop as Windows 8 and then developed Windows Phone 7 further to accommodate tablets.

I fear for the future of Windows now, unless MS decide to make the Metro UI totally optional so it can be disabled on a desktop, mouse & keyboard PC, I don't see any way that Windows 8 can be a success. Hopefully they'll come to this conclusion as well, and the sooner the better!

Saturday, 20 August 2011

Site connection issues

So here's the thing, I have a website (http://www.techietalk.co.uk) and I have a user who regularly contributes news articles to it. However for the last week she has been unable connect, I've not seen anyone else reporting problems. It could just be a problem with her local machine, but she has tried in several browsers and done all the basic checks such as emptying page cache etc.

It's only my site that she is having a problem with, which is odd. Can anyone think of any reason why this person is getting blocked? She is seeing error messages like:

Opera: Connection closed by remote server.
Chrome: No data received, the server closed the connection.

I've got her to connect to the site through http://www.hidemyass.com and through their proxy the site seems to load fine for her. I've just asked her to do a trace route to see if that gives any clues, but I've not had the results back yet. This one has me stumped, any suggestions?

Monday, 1 August 2011

My thoughts on the BBC/Sky F1 deal


If you are an F1 fan then there was huge, earth shattering news at the weekend which you cannot have failed to miss. For those of you who aren't, a new TV deal has been agreed that will see coverage change dramatically from next year. The exact details of how it will all work are still unclear, but essentially Sky will broadcast all the races live. The BBC will show half the races in full and the other half as a highlights package.

The areas which still remain unclear are whether the 10 races the BBC are showing will be live or deferred coverage. It is also unknown what the highlights package means and if in fact the 10 full races will actually be extended highlights as well.

My initial reaction to the news was that of unmitigated anger that F1 could move to pay TV after years of being told that could never happen. In fact we were being told this could never happen by Bernie Ecclestone (the head of FOM and television rights holder) as recently as May!
"it isn't possible that F1 could go on to pay-TV, we wouldn't want to do that." - Bernie Ecclestone

The BBC have clearly been forced to make cutbacks and it seems that rather than drop F1 totally the BBC themselves have brought Sky in on the deal. After all, the BBC have the contract until 2013 so if they pulled out early they would have to pay huge penalty fees to FOM, clearly they were eager to find a solution to avoid that scenario. It would seem the proposal they came up with would leave the BBC paying roughly the same amount it would cost in cancellation fees but allow them to keep half the races. Seems like a good deal from their point of view! Let's have a quick look at the figures shall we?

The BBC currently pays £31m per year for the television rights, under the new agreement they will be paying just £15m with Sky contributing £25m. So the BBC save around half their current spend and depending on the cancellation clauses may even be saving more money than if they'd dropped F1 entirely!

So, why did the BBC turn to Sky for help rather than another terrestrial broadcaster? Simple really, ITV had already dropped F1 and have shown no interest in it since, however Channel 4 & Five have both been in talks with FOM to make an independent bid. They wouldn't be interested in a share with the BBC, they would just take the lot. Sky on the other hand aren't in a position to bid for F1 since there is a Concorde agreement in place which exists between all the teams and FOM that states

"the Commercial Rights Holder may not permit Formula 1 events to be shown only by pay television in a country with a significant audience if it would materially adversely affect audience reach in that country."

As Sky are a Pay TV provider, they could never be granted the F1 rights while this clause existed, this is pretty much the best deal Sky could hope for in order to get their foot in the door. Of course, once they are in the pressure will then be on the teams to have that clause removed when the Concorde agreement is renewed next year, paving the way for F1 to move to Sky permanently from 2018 when the new deal expires... assuming the BBC don't drop out of this new deal early as well which wouldn't be surprising.

So where does all this leave the fans? Well they are given a whole load of spin for the BBC, FOM and Sky, but we weren't born yesterday and being told things like:

"we believe this new deal offers the best outcome for licence-fee payers." - Ben Gallop (Head of BBC F1)

"It's good for Formula 1, for sure there are going to be a lot more people viewing, and a lot more opportunities for people to view, so from that point I'm very happy." Bernie Ecclestone (FOM)

"(the deal) is rather good news and should be positively welcomed by fans." - Eric Boullier (Lotus Renault team principle)


So let's take a closer look at viewer numbers shall we? Currently the BBC F1 programme is among the highest rating shows they have, regularly topping the list of viewing figures, not just for BBC content, but for the whole of television! Currently over 6 million people regularly tune in to a race on Sunday. Sky on the other hand only have a total of 10 million subscribers, and that's everyone with a Sky box, not just those who have Sky Sports!

I'd like to know how exactly the viewing figures are going to go up? Inevitably the BBC will lose a lot of casual F1 fans if it's not being shown regularly, there will also be a lot of die-hard fans who lose interest once they can't follow the full season live. With the cost of a Sky subscription they won't be winning many new customers either, a quick look at the costs involved:

A Sky subscription with Sky Sports will cost £470 a year, if you add HD coverage to that which is free on the BBC it's another £120 a year. A total of £600! Now considering they are only broadcasting half the races exclusively live, that means they are asking an F1 fan without Sky to pay £60 PER RACE! Of course they will "enjoy" the rest of the channels and programming Sky offer, but they've lived without it in the past and would only be subscribing for coverage of the F1.

To take to task the issue of viewing figures even further, since Sky took over the rights to Cricket, they have seen audience numbers fall through the floor. When Channel 4 was covering it the sport was watched and enjoyed by many hundreds of thousands, if not millions more viewers. This is exactly what we can expect to see happen with F1!

The sponsors will also have to make some tough choices now, the calculations they make are simple. It's a very basic spend per head. You take the number of people viewing combined with the projected airtime you will get and divide it by the money you are willing to spend. Clearly with viewing figures going from several million to potentially just a few hundred thousand they will have to justify their expenditure which may prove very difficult indeed. F1 can expect to lose some of its sponsors altogether and others to reduce their spend dramatically.

Of course the fans don't actually matter at the end of the day because it's the money that talks. We are often told how the fans are crucial to F1 and that they are the one who own the sport, blah, blah, blah.... But it doesn't mean anything. The only glimmer of hope for fans is that FOTA (Formula One Teams Association) decide they don't like the new deal because it will lose them too much money in sponsorship. However, that's unlikely to happen. No doubt that of the extra £9m that FOM are making from this new deal, a fair chunk of that (if not more) is going straight to the teams to keep them sweet. The general consensus so far seems to indicate that the teams don't care about the fans either as long as they have the money in the bank. So far nobody has made a stand for the fans of the sport, F1 has found itself on a slippery slope having reached a peak in the last couple of years on the BBC.

I have to say I am utterly perplexed at how the BBC who are a public service broadcaster can simply offload one of its flagship titles in this fashion when they already own the exclusive rights for another 2 years! Losing something like football to Sky was a different scenario, since the contract had expired and they simply couldn't afford to outbid them. Here, the BBC have actively sought out and made a deal with Sky in order to shirk their responsibilities. It is truly disgraceful and all parties involved BBC, FOM, FIA and FOTA (excluding Sky, who have simply jumped at a business opportunity) should be utterly ashamed.

It's made even worse given the current situation with Rupert Murdoch!

I'll leave you with one final comment from Bernie Ecclestone himself that really sums up the whole situation:

"Sky have been trying to buy the TV rights from us for a long time, but we won’t because they are not free-to-air broadcasters. With their viewing figures it would be almost impossible for teams to find sponsors. That would be suicidal.” - Bernie Ecclestone, May 2011


Quite right Bernie, R.I.P F1!