I think the problem with DirecTV on demand is that unlike Netflix it has no adaptive video quality. It’s 5 Mbps or nothing. Actually if it tests that the connection can’t deliver 5 Mbps, you get a message that your Internet is too slow to watch now and you’ll have to download to your DVR and watch later. Which shouldn’t actually be that bad, except everybody these days is like a kid with no ability for delayed gratification. Download and watch later? You’ve got to be kidding. I want my movie, and I want it now.
I’m not sure what DirecTV does if you start watching and then someone else in the house starts using some of the bandwidth. Also there are other offerings like DirecTV Now or AT&T Now or whatever the latest name for their OTT service is, I assume that is a little more like Netflix and Hulu, or it really would suck. From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Mathew Howard Sent: Friday, January 24, 2020 5:04 PM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] The Future Same here. At one point, we just started telling people that DirecTV stuff doesn't work with our service... although I haven't heard of any of those recently, so it may not be as bad as it used to be. On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 3:54 PM Robert Andrews <i...@avantwireless.com <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com> > wrote: We find the worst is DirecTV. More problems when customers are trying to download their services over internet than any others. On 01/24/2020 10:11 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > Yeah, Netflix ability to switch video quality / stream rate on the fly is > actually pretty awesome. I know we all used to bitch about Netflix, but now > I actually hold it up as the gold standard. Does Netflix work? OK, your > Internet works. If flavor of the week streaming service doesn't work as good > as Netflix, well, there you go. > > I also like that Netflix traffic is usually identifiable because an rDNS > lookup on the IP address returns something.ntflxvideo.net > <http://something.ntflxvideo.net> rather than some anonymous CDN or nothing > at all. So if you are torching a customer's traffic to tell him what is > maxing out his connection, it takes just a few seconds to say it's Netflix. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com> > On > Behalf Of Bill Prince > Sent: Friday, January 24, 2020 12:04 PM > To: af@af.afmug.com <mailto:af@af.afmug.com> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] The Future > > A few years ago, I did some testing with Netflix. I found that it would > "function" down to just under 700 Kbps. For SD quality, about double that, or > 1.5 Mbps. For HD, you needed a bit more than double that, or about 3 Mbps. > > I did some more recent tests with Prime. It would consume 5-10 Mbps if you > let it, but I found that it would "function" down to about 2 Mbps. > This function was roughly the same as Netflix SD quality. > > I periodically throttle all of them, just to see what the effects will be. To > date, Netflix does the best, and is even able to switch CODECs mid-stream > most of the time. The rest, not so much. > > > bp > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > On 1/24/2020 9:37 AM, Robert Andrews wrote: >> That's basically what I tell all my RV friends that are on the road >> complaining about streaming. Solves most of their problems at all >> the weird places... >> >> On 01/23/2020 01:17 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: >>> Yeah, last I looked that's what they said the lowest quality needed. >>> A few years back I did some testing with various speeds, and I think >>> I got down to somewhere around 500k before Netflix would break. But >>> even then, the picture quality was getting pretty ugly. >>> >>> But seriously... if Netflix defaulted to lower quality (not lowest, >>> but in the middle), and made you set it higher if you wanted, most >>> people would never know or care... and it'd save a lot of bandwidth. >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 3:14 PM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com> >>> <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> I'm pretty sure the lowest quality level on Netflix needs 0.7 >>> mbps. If your rule ended up giving them 256k+512k then it would >>> have worked. >>> >>> >>> On 1/23/2020 4:10 PM, Steve Jones wrote: >>>> Way back in the day, when powercode had the old type queue, we >>>> built our basic one to buffer at 512 long enough to maintain a 2 >>>> hour sd stream at 256k with periodic 512k bucket refills. so >>>> really it was 512k effectively. It may very vell be that >>>> expectations of "standard" definition were different back then. >>>> but I thought that was an actual resolution standard >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 2:58 PM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com >>>> <mailto:af...@kwisp.com> >>>> <mailto:af...@kwisp.com <mailto:af...@kwisp.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> I don’t remember ever being able to stream Netflix on 256K. >>>> 1M maybe, and 1.5M still gives you decent SD. You’re going >>>> to >>>> need at least 2.5M though for HD. So that’s one part of the >>>> answer is HD. Some streaming services, like DirecTV On >>>> Demand, >>>> don’t have adaptive video quality and want a minimum of 5M >>>> to >>>> stream. Another factor is “live” video, which is compressed >>>> on-the-fly and probably not as efficiently as pre-recorded >>>> content. >>>> >>>> Of course, if the customer has more, video streams will >>>> happily use it. >>>> >>>> *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com >>>> <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com> >>>> <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com> >>>> >> *On Behalf Of *Steve Jones >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, January 23, 2020 2:29 PM >>>> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com >>>> <mailto:af@af.afmug.com> >>>> <mailto:af@af.afmug.com <mailto:af@af.afmug.com> >> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] The Future >>>> >>>> we are at the end of the wireless backhaul road. when I >>>> started 15 or so years ago, we were just moving off a >>>> handdful of random T1s to a bonded 6mb circuit backhauling >>>> that was nothing. Now we have two gig circuits on separate >>>> parts of our network, and we are a tiny WISP in podunk USA.. >>>> We dont put less than 1.2gbps backhauls in for core >>>> backhauls >>>> now. The existing technology for distance in a single unit >>>> us >>>> roughly 2gbps when trying to cover any distance of merit. >>>> Sure >>>> you can do more than that, you can cheat outside link >>>> budgets >>>> and ignore your rain region. But if youre talking about most >>>> temperate region backhauls with legitimate reliability thats >>>> the wall. >>>> >>>> we keep poking a little more bits/hz out, but that not >>>> really >>>> new tech, its all dependent upon smaller and smaller path >>>> budgets, that eventually wont be attainable. so you have to >>>> start doing shorter shots, with more radios, more channel >>>> size, etc. eventually you hit the point where its no longer >>>> economically viable to keep throwing radio and lease costs >>>> at >>>> it and youll have to put glass in the dirt. >>>> >>>> Duct is whats future proof, fiber is just the current best >>>> long term option for transport. pending some breakthrough >>>> tech, its the only real long term cost effective future >>>> proofish option. >>>> >>>> We will hit a wall on demand at some point in the near term >>>> as >>>> we run out of things to connect. >>>> >>>> Can anybody answer why 256k used to be able to deliver a >>>> decent SD netflix stream and now i need multiple mbps for >>>> the >>>> same thing? asking for a friend >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 1:40 PM Carl Peterson >>>> <cpeter...@portnetworks.com <mailto:cpeter...@portnetworks.com> >>>> <mailto:cpeter...@portnetworks.com >>>> <mailto:cpeter...@portnetworks.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> "Elon started it as a project to raise money, yes. >>>> Morgan >>>> Stanley is up valuing it because they don't understand >>>> technology. This project is not even close to spacex's >>>> purpose for existing. If it disappeared it would not >>>> have >>>> any real effect on their overall mission." >>>> >>>> This isn't really true. There was one primary driver. >>>> >>>> 1) You need to bring down the cost of launch >>>> considerably >>>> in order to expand the launch market to a size where >>>> developing and maintaining a reusable rocket fleet makes >>>> sense but you can't bring down the cost of launch till >>>> you >>>> have customers to fill the launch manifest and that >>>> spool >>>> up will take years. SpaceX thinks they have solved this >>>> by >>>> becoming their own customer for all their extra launch >>>> capacity for the foreseeable future. >>>> >>>> When they looked at #1 above they realized that there >>>> was >>>> a huge potential market there and even a a few % of the >>>> global internet market could be a cash cow for years to >>>> come. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:13 PM Jason McKemie >>>> <j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com >>>> <mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> >>>> <mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com >>>> <mailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Elon started it as a project to raise money, yes. >>>> Morgan Stanley is up valuing it because they don't >>>> understand technology. This project is not even >>>> close >>>> to spacex's purpose for existing. If it disappeared >>>> it >>>> would not have any real effect on their overall >>>> mission. >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2020, Robert >>>> <i...@avantwireless.com <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com> >>>> <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com >>>> <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> um, no, Starlink is now becoming the primary >>>> reason for the huge run-up in valuation for >>>> SpaceX... >>>> >>>> >>>> https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-future-multibillion-dollar-va >>>> luation-starlink-internet-morgan-stanley-2019-9 >>>> >>>> On 1/21/20 4:15 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: >>>> >>>> The difference being that this is a side >>>> project for one of the main businesses, not >>>> their primary purpose. At best I don't think >>>> this is going to be anything besides a >>>> better >>>> alternative to other satellite internet >>>> options. >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2020, Darin Steffl >>>> <darin.ste...@mnwifi.com >>>> <mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com> >>>> <mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com <mailto:darin.ste...@mnwifi.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Guys, lots of misinformation here. >>>> >>>> They are NO plans nor hints of >>>> integrating >>>> Starlink antennas into Tesla cars. It >>>> may >>>> happen but no one has hinted of this >>>> happening. All Tesla's have 3G or 4G >>>> modems already built-in to them along >>>> with >>>> WiFi. Updates are sent via WiFi first >>>> and >>>> after the fleet has received the >>>> updates, >>>> they eventually push it to cars via >>>> cellular data that haven't updated via >>>> WiFi. >>>> >>>> Regarding B2B backhaul, I don't believe >>>> you'll see this as an option anytime >>>> soon >>>> for WISP's or other ISP's. They're >>>> targeting residential and small >>>> businesses >>>> as well as government contracts. The >>>> cost >>>> if they did offer B2B backhaul services >>>> would likely be higher than fiber to >>>> your >>>> network. Please stop thinking this will >>>> happen as I bet it will not. >>>> >>>> They may offer a self install option but >>>> they'll also have a contractor to >>>> perform >>>> most installs for a cost is my guess. >>>> Maybe they'll send a self install kit >>>> for >>>> X price and if you can't get it working, >>>> they'll schedule a contract install for >>>> XX >>>> price. >>>> >>>> I'll also say that you should not doubt >>>> Elon's passion to achieve great things. >>>> I >>>> have a Tesla and it's a work of art and >>>> by >>>> far the best vehicle I've ever driven. >>>> 99% >>>> of people who have driven one also think >>>> this. Tesla is succeeding, SpaceX is on >>>> it's way there, The Boring Company is >>>> half >>>> done with their Vegas tunnel, and >>>> Starlink >>>> will likely be a viable competitor for us. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:48 PM Ryan Ray >>>> <ryan...@gmail.com <mailto:ryan...@gmail.com> >>>> <mailto:ryan...@gmail.com <mailto:ryan...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Can you link that? What exactly were >>>> they testing? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:36 PM >>>> Robert >>>> Andrews <i...@avantwireless.com >>>> <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com> >>>> <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Somehow they passed a first >>>> review >>>> from US DOD... Can't be all >>>> smoke >>>> and mirrors in space... >>>> >>>> On 01/21/2020 12:18 PM, Ryan Ray >>>> wrote: >>>> > I'm still very wary of this. >>>> There seems to be a lot of >>>> over-promising >>>> > under delivering. In typical >>>> Elon fashion, no details but the >>>> world runs >>>> > with it and puts out all these >>>> data models that make it seem >>>> like >>>> the >>>> > second coming of christ. >>>> Customer CPE is a pizza box ufo >>>> <$200 and they >>>> > are starting in 2020, but >>>> there's no pictures or details. >>>> How is that >>>> > even possible? We're buying >>>> 450b >>>> at a more expensive cost and >>>> there >>>> > ain't no phased antenna with >>>> motors in it. >>>> > >>>> > Then all you read online is >>>> the >>>> cult following of spaceslax who >>>> takes a >>>> > twitter post as gospel and >>>> just >>>> keeps perpetuating the same >>>> tired >>>> > information. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:02 >>>> AM >>>> Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:part15...@gmail.com> >>>> <mailto:part15...@gmail.com <mailto:part15...@gmail.com> > >>>> > <mailto:part15...@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:part15...@gmail.com> >>>> <mailto:part15...@gmail.com <mailto:part15...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > If the SpaceX Starlink >>>> system works at 50% of what it's >>>> hyped, it will >>>> > become the future of rural >>>> internet. Urban is still going >>>> to be >>>> > dominated (eventually) by >>>> fiber for the foreseeable future. >>>> Higher >>>> > speed >>>> > wireless will be very, >>>> very >>>> local. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > bp >>>> > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >>>> > >>>> > On 1/19/2020 6:29 PM, Matt >>>> Hoppes wrote: >>>> > > I don’t know why, but >>>> this evening got me thinking >>>> about >>>> > broadband delivery over >>>> the >>>> past 30 years and the future of >>>> broadband. >>>> > > >>>> > > First we had nothing, >>>> then along came dial-up and that >>>> was >>>> > amazing and many companies >>>> sprung up offering the service. >>>> Giants >>>> > like AOL and Prodigy. >>>> > > >>>> > > Then DSL and Cable came >>>> along as well as wireless and >>>> dial-up has >>>> > all but died. >>>> > > >>>> > > Now DSL is basically >>>> dead, cable and wireless have >>>> gone >>>> through >>>> > several iterations and we >>>> are seeing a push to fiber. >>>> > > >>>> > > What’s the possibility >>>> in >>>> the next 10 years cable and >>>> wireless >>>> > will be dead technologies >>>> with fiber at the fore front? >>>> Possibly. >>>> > > >>>> > > But then..... is fiber >>>> really future proof? We are >>>> talking about >>>> > investing hundreds of >>>> millions into fiber >>>> infrastructure, because >>>> > it’s “the future”. But is it? >>>> > > >>>> > > So far every technology >>>> delivery mechanism to date has >>>> become >>>> > obsolete in as little as >>>> 6-10 years. >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > AF mailing list >>>> > AF@af.afmug.com >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >> >>>> > >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> -- >>>> AF mailing list >>>> AF@af.afmug.com >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>> >>>> -- AF mailing list >>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Darin Steffl >>>> >>>> Minnesota WiFi >>>> >>>> www.mnwifi.com <http://www.mnwifi.com> >>>> <http://www.mnwifi.com/> >>>> >>>> 507-634-WiFi >>>> >>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> >>>> Like us on Facebook >>>> <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> >>>> >>>> -- AF mailing list >>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Carl Peterson >>>> >>>> *PORT NETWORKS* >>>> >>>> 401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 >>>> >>>> Baltimore, MD 21202 >>>> >>>> (410) 637-3707 >>>> >>>> -- AF mailing list >>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>> >>>> -- AF mailing list >>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com >>>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>>> >>>> >>> -- AF mailing list >>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com >>> <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > >>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
