11/21/24
February 10, 2002
The Olympics and the Web:: how the presentation of the games online has changed since Sydney.
posted by kirkaracha to other at 09:27 PM - 3 comments
As I put together a sports site in 1999-2000, I envied Quokka's bankroll and access to big events, but I wasn't a fan of their sites. They looked good, but they didn't work. Have the wrong computer or browser? Sorry, you couldn't use their sites. They seemed so in love with their style that they forgot about the user.
posted by neuroshred at 11:08 PM on February 10, 2002
I'm disappointed that the IOC is so stubbornly against putting footage on the web. It seems like we have hardly progressed since the last Olympics, where I followed the triumphs of the USA baseball team via a Java program and cursed at the lack of coverage of table tennis. Since the demise of the triplecast and due to the unwillingness of NBC to broadcast any Olympic event (not involving the acrobatics of teenage American girls) live, I have been waiting patiently for the opportunity to shell out some cash for good quality video streams of every single event live over the web.
posted by gyc at 02:52 AM on February 11, 2002
The problem for me is not with internet coverage but with non-live TV broadcasts. Ever since I saw the moguls results from Nagano online, tape-delayed TV coverage hasn't cut it for me. Even in SLC, where live coverage would be expected, the results are widely available online hours before NBC bothers to broadcast the events. I'd like to see more elegant live internet coverage, like IBM provides for the grand slam tennis tournaments. This year's Olympic site automatically reloads the schedule and results pages so often I can't even scan the standings. IBM's tennis coverage offers an option for streaming scores, stats and still pictures.