BBC's h2g2 Goes Mobile - Again 80
zaktheduck writes "According to a recent press release, in anticipation of the new movie and the h2g2 website's sixth birthday, the BBC have relaunched the long-shelved h2g2 Mobile service. The new version of the popular community website allows access to the 7000+ and growing edited guide entries from PDAs, and smartphones. H2g2 had a WAP service back in 2001, aptly named "h2g2 on the Move", but was cancelled when the company faced financial trouble and was purchased by the BBC. Here's a copy of the old promotion page for the service."
Sorry, but no one cares (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Sorry, but no one cares (Score:5, Interesting)
So should I throw away all my reference books and keep just one encyclopaedia?
Re:Sorry, but no one cares (Score:3, Interesting)
Useful for hhgg2xml (Score:5, Interesting)
I'll have to look more closely at this new version to see if it can be parsed more easily.
Re:eehm... (Score:1, Interesting)
Actually, I believe Douglas Adams would have really liked what the Wiki has become. His books were meant to be funny, but in no way were they an indication that he did not have a very intelligent and serious side. This would be evident to anyone who had ever read anything he wrote that wasn't fiction.
Re:eehm... (Score:2, Interesting)
Communication and Wikitravel (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Sorry, but no one cares (Score:2, Interesting)
Answers.com queries wikipedia. I don't know if you get full article text, but it's great for quick lookups.
envisioned? (Score:1, Interesting)
Unlike Wikipedia, the HHG was edited by professionals. The lowest-level of professional, to be sure, but people who were paid at least slightly for doing it. And it was edited (poorly) before it was published.
On a more practical note, the HHG seemed to have more specific info than Wikipedia, probably because the HHG is more geared toward travel. It's the difference between looking up the Louvre in an encyclopedia and Fodor's.