h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I see the other recent article about the H2G2 WAP support is veering off topic so I'll start a new one.

I simply wish to strongly protest the loss of WAP support here at H2G2 and I suggest that everyone else does the same.

I understand there may be legal reasons why the BBC cannot supply WAP but if that is the case why did they take over H2G2? One of the big attractions of H2G2, a reason for its future existance even, was the ability to call up the guide from _anywhere_. Just like the 'real' Hitch-Hiker's Guide you should be able to pull a device out of your pocket and look up an entry. With H2G2 you could go further than that even and add entries whilst on the move. You could add an entry for where ever you might find yourself or add important information to an existing entry (for example such and such will be closed for two weeks from x).

The loss of the WAP service (and presumably the successors to WAP) will damage this useful resource more than I'm sure any of us can yet appreciate.

Most of my concern is for the future of H2G2 more than the immediate present. Nonetheless I am about to receive my first WAP enabled mobile device and was greatly looking forward to the possibilities with it and The Guide. H2G2 is what WAP was made for. DNA's future vision has been set back with this move.

Given that currently the BBC is prevented from providing WAP services, I'd respectfully suggest that any complaints you make will fall on deaf ears. We'd love to provide a WAP service, but we can't, and all the complaining in the world won't make a blind bit of difference, I'm afraid. Rest assured that as soon as the BBC can provide WAP services, we'll be doing all we can to ensure we relaunch as part of that.

As for why the BBC took over h2g2, consider these reasons that have nothing to do with WAP:

* A ground-breaking and proprietary community-based user-publishing system
* A skin system that can provide the content to lots of platforms, such as PDA, WebTV, broadband, PC/Internet... oh, and WAP
* A wonderful community of users
* A really creative team
* A truly great, global brand

I could go on...

WAP is good and it's a shame we have had to turn it off temporarily, but it was only one feather in our bow, you know. Also the amount of WAP traffic we were receiving was not high, so although I agree it's a shame we can't do WAP, I think you're over-dramatising the situation.

Meanwhile we're working on an AvantGo version of h2g2, and continuing to work on technologies, like location-based data, which will come into their own once we can relaunch our WAP service. So it's a shame, but nothing more, because we haven't abandoned mobile technology - far from it. We're just waiting for the legalities to be cleared before we relaunch.

I understand the BBC cannot, for some nonsensical reason, provide WAP services. The point is that it is up to the BBC to put pressure on the regulator to change that and us, the users of H2G2, to put pressure on the BBC to do just that. I have little faith in the regulator moving at all or at the very least in the immediate future.

It is a crazy situation when you think about it as more and more mobile devices gain the ability to access any html service, either directly or through a WAP conversion gateway. Will H2G2 have to determine what type of device is attempting to connect and allow or disallow depending if it is via a landline or not?

Nonetheless, for the immediate future WAP is the way to go with mobile devices and I still feel it is a great loss. Yes, I am over-dramatising the situation as it currently is but it is the future I am really worried about. This all sets a nasty precedent. I have no doubt that the WAP use of H2G2 was low indeed (I wouldn't have believed otherwise) but I think it important to be there at the beginning as more and more people start to get WAP enabled handsets, not to mention the imminent release of the more viable 3rd Generation mobile technologies.

It is up to services such as H2G2 to help build the future because if they don't then less worthy services will and by then it could be too late.

With the speed of mobile technology development, WAP was out of date on the day of its release. As far as I'm concerned its only really a prototype being used to get people used to the concept and to explore the possibilities that it will provide. The G3 phones, especially when coupled with Bluetooth technology, will probably be the best aiming point for development. And by the time the BBC are allowed to support wireless platforms, WAP will probably be dead and buried.

Menza *sticking his nose in again*

It *isn't* a regulator situation, as far as I am aware. The BBC signed a deal which prevents it from providing WAP services, so it is a business situation and nothing can be done to change it. It's like going into an ice cream shop, ordering come cheese, and then getting angry with the shopkeeper because he can't sell you any.

Not a lot of point, in other words.

I happened across this debate and was pretty surprised to see the lack of understanding regarding WAP issues and the BBC. To say that the BBC offering WAP services is like an ice cream shop selling cheese strikes me as a bad analogy. A better one would be going to an ice cream shop (or information provider) and expecting the most up to date method of ice cream (or information) delivery. If the shop only offered delivery by a boy on a bike every second wednesday, you'd be suprised that they hadn't kept up to date with current ice cream (or information) delivery methods and business issues. No owner of a WAP operation provides their service for the technology alone! WAP and information provision go hand in hand, and they are certainly not a conflict of business interest!

I have no idea why the BBC can't offer WAP services, but if they didn't have a good excuse (which they surely must!) I would be shocked and disappointed that they haven't kept themselves at the forefront of information delivery. Now that I think about it, doesn't that BBC advert (the one about being able to access the news any time you want) show someone accessing the news from a WAP device? I know it shows a PDA of some sort, but I'm pretty sure it shows a phone as well. In light of the spirit of their advert, it seems very suprising that they aren't allowed to produce WAP content! I'd be interested to find out exactly why that is.

So would I - feel free to contact the main BBC people about it. All I know is that for legal reasons, which cannot be changed, we cannot offer the On the Move service over WAP until the BBC is allowed to do so.

It's a great shame, but unfortunately it's something that petitioning and complaining won't change, because those involved *want* to be able to provide WAP, but can't.

I still like the ice cream analogy, but I take your point. Since we've joined the BBC we've always made it clear that we have no WAP service because the BBC cannot provide WAP. To have someone posting a well-phrased and understandably indignant call to protest is just a little downheartening, when we've explained the situation and why it won't change, even if the public demanded it en masse.

How about this one? It's like being a shop - any kind of shop - where things used to be sold by the pound. In comes an EU directive to force this shop to sell things in kilos, and in walks a customer who demands that they be sold items in pounds still. An argument ensues, with the customer being furious that they can't buy what they want in the weight that they want... but it's not the shop's fault, it's down to the EU.

h2g2 is the shop, Adam is the customer, and the EU is the BBC. Maybe this analogy works a little better, though it's still not spot on.

Perhaps I should give up the analogies.

Please forgive me for not attempting to make any analogies of my own!

First off let me apologise, unreservedly, if I have upset or disheartened anyone with my concerns - especially those who do such a fantastic job of making H2G2 what it is.

My concerns, however, remain. I note today that GPRS has been officially released by BT Cellnet in the UK, or so called Generation 2.5 of mobile phone technologies with 'always on' internet connections and charge per kilobyte rather than second of WAP use. I also read today that BT Cellnet are just beginning trails of Generation 3 (3G) in the Isle of Wight. In the next 3 to 5 years I expect wireless Internet use to explode in popularity, this is why I am so concerned that H2G2 no longer has a WAP presence - the next couple of years will be vital in establishing brand recognition for WAP sites and I would very much like to see H2G2 be there to get some of recognition.

Okay, here's how I see the next decade (I should say that I tend to look to the future more than most, probably thanks to my interest in Science Fiction and my business in Computing). The next 5 years will see the widespread adoption of WAP. I do not agree that WAP is already dead, that is not to say I believe it is a particularly good technology but I can see why it is as it is. The problem is not bandwidth, i.e. the speed data gets to the mobile phone, by rather the mobile phone itself. The physical size of the handset dictates much, the chronically bad text entry system and the tiny screen. Attempts to integrate larger screens and 'real' keyboards have been somewhat successful (the Nokia Communicators, for example) but necessarily expensive and the displays are still woefully short. As it currently stands WAP is ideal for the average mobile handset thanks to the card system it employs and specific design for monochrome low resolution screens (whereas HTML uses full pages designed for 800x600 pixel displays showing millions of colours, normally on a device at least 10 inches across and high). WAP will evolve, already version 1.3 has been agreed upon, but don't expect to see its demise any time soon. In the 5 to 10 year timescale I expect to see devices with high resolution colour displays becoming the norm on mobile devices, perhaps with a decent keyboard, handwriting recognition or, just maybe, crude voice recognition. In this environment WAP will be superseded by whatever technologies desktop machines are using for Internet access.

So, there is my prediction and I think it is a fairly sensible one and one that many will agree with. It also stands as the basis for my concern for the future of H2G2. Once the blurring of wired/wireless truly takes place those services that have gained major inroads into the mobile arena via WAP will most likely continue to dominate the 'Internet anywhere' world.

Mark, you say that 'it's something that petitioning and complaining [about] won't change'. Perhaps you are right but the alternative of not even attempting to change something is automatic failure. Somebody somewhere does have the power to change this situation (if with some considerably effort) and if they can be persuaded of the potential good that can come of the return of WAP then all of us that enjoy H2G2 will win.

Perhaps in 5 years time we will look back at this and think it was just a storm in a tea cup, or perhaps it will be seen as the beginning of getting H2G2 back out there to what will be the mobile masses, or the beginning of the end. I certainly hope it isn't the latter. In all likelihood it will not be looked back upon at all, for whatever reason.

Sorry, no amusing analogies, just genuine concern about the rest of the world moving forwards and us moving back.

sorry,nothing to do with wap can i just say that the group calling themselves adamjpurcell are planning to take over the world. Just thought you should know.

Dear Mark Moxon,
Thank you for sending me that e-mail notifying me of my article's acceptance onto the guide. "The Loving Bonsai" is up and running.

Cool George. Great entry.

Adam - I hear you, and I agree. For what it's worth we're doing all we can internally to try to get h2g2 On the Move back up and running, but nothing's guaranteed. There may, however, be a way of getting round the restrictions for h2g2 only, which would be excellent news.

I only say that lobbying won't work because in this case it's not a case of changing someone's mind, it's a case of trying to get round the current legal situation. We're already trying to do the latter, but no amount of lobbying from the Community will actually change the legal situation; it's not someone's opinion that's created the WAP situation, after all. Still, feel free to lobby away, if you like - it's your right!

I have a quick question, Did the BBC sign away the rights to use WAP permanently, or just for a set time period?

It's a bit more subtle than that. I've done a bit of research, and here's what happened.

Yahoo came to the BBC and wanted to publish BBC News content on their WAP portal, and were happy to pay for it. The deal was done, but ITN complained, claiming that this was anti-competitive. To clear this up the Ministry of Culture would have had to be involved - a very long, drawn out process - so the whole thing was dropped, and I have no idea what progress, if any, has been made.

However we're trying to argue that h2g2 doesn't have any competitors out there, so h2g2 On the Move can't be anti-competitive. Whether this argument will work remains to be seen, but the news block will continue for some time, probably.

Confused? Join the club...

Nasty!

I hate to say it but there is a sort of current affairs thing going on on the Guide anyway. We always talk about the news or stuff on TV so that could get used in the argument against us getting to use WAP.

Having said that we do sort of fit into the Cult section of BBC Online and so might not attract ITN's attention.

Luckily its not an outright ban, its just an ocean of red tape.

We absolutely do not fit into the Cult site! The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy might, but h2g2 doesn't - we're a factual guide to life, not a sci-fi culty thing.

At least, that's what we're breaking our backs trying to emphasise...

OK, perhaps "fit" was the wrong word. But we do overlap with the kind of people that inhabit the Cult sites. h2g2 would probably be linked to from Cult, but not appear in it.

*if that makes any sense*

There's a reasonable overlap, yeah, but there's a reasonable overlap between h2g2 users and silver surfers too...

Demographics. Yum.

Fascinating, so it was Yahoo agreeing to pay for linking to the BBC from their Portal that started all this? Purely in terms of the UK, Yahoo doesn't have much support as a WAP portal AFAIK, it is more BT Cellnet's Genie and Orange. I believe that Genie has the vast majority of support, in fact.

ITN certainly have a point though, as the BBC is effectively funded through a special television tax whereas ITN have to forage for their revenue. That being said, obviously ITN have no major objection (or no real moral basis for an objection) with the BBC providing their own news service via HTML. The progression of this thought is clearly that they could hardly object to the BBC also providing WAP themselves - that is no one paying them for the service or links to it?

This would mean that Genie and the like would have to allow connection _through_ their system (in the same way they act as a gateway for any other WAP site on the Internet), that is to not explicitly block it, but that is very different to actually linking to it from their Portals. In other words they would act like any other ISP to allow a user to type in the URL but in no way endorse, publicise or otherwise draw attention to it (i.e. just as they behave towards the countless other sites out there that are not in some way affiliated with them).

Assuming all this is true, and I admit I may have easily misread the situation, they only thing lacking for the BBC to provide their own independent WAP service is political willpower?

I *think* it was more about payment for reversioning BBC content, not just for linking, so it's not to do with portals, more to do with content syndication. At least, that's what I *think*. This is way out of my remit, and I've heard various differing accounts.

As for the reason why the BBC currently doesn't have a WAP gateway, this is the reason why there isn't any BBC WAP content in areas that can be interpreted as anti-competitive, such as sports and news. However other WAP services *may* be OK if they are shown not to be in competition with anyone else. This is only the theory, mind you... and it's quite a task, given the amount of commercial WAP stuff out there.

BTW, whose 'political willpower' do you mean in your posting? Not sure I understand your final sentence...

It's interesting how some, particularly legal and corporate types I suspect, see such a difference between providing these services via 'traditional' HTML and mobile specific WAP. To my mind there is no difference. Instead of the rather clunky HTML syntax the rather more elegant (and limited) XML derived WAP is used. It's the same content and will likely come from the same backend datastore. The only difference is packaging and the chances that WAP users are browsing via a wireless device and a HTML user is likely browsing via a wired connection. This, of course, is a generalisation - I can and do use a WAP emulator on my desktop machine and I know of mobile phones that can natively view HTML. It just goes to show how perception is more important than reality!

It would be a shame if others kicked up a stink about the BBC providing its own WAP content citing anti-competitiveness. I for one would like to be able to access BBC news via WAP, though I could live without sport! If there are no serious complaints against the BBC's excellent news web site it is hard to see how there can be any more complaint over a WAP version but I wouldn't be surprised if there were. Certainly H2G2 has no peers that I am aware of and I definitely stick to my view that it could just be the 'killer application' that WAP so desperately needs.

As for 'political willpower', that was my vague assertion that I believe there is someone in the BBC, probably quite high up, that could, if they felt so motivated, push to have WAP support added to the BBC web site across the board. It may take considerable wangling and backroom dealing, hence the political angle, but I feel sure it could be done and I sincerely hope it is.

If there is anyone in particular that a polite email explaining the potential of WAP might prove beneficial then please let us know!