3 ms·
Why would a 1Gbps connection be required for streaming video? Netflix, YouTube, and Twitch seem to be able to service most of the world. I haven’t actually rea
by sillysaurusx 5y ago
Why would a 1Gbps connection be required for streaming video? Netflix, YouTube, and Twitch seem to be able to service most of the world.
I haven’t actually read the article, so perhaps they say as much. But if so, that’s surprising.
EDIT: thinking a bit more carefully, the limitation is upload speed, not download speed. In that area, the US has been lagging behind in tech.
Still, I wouldn’t bet against it being viable. I remember the first few months YouTube launched. The video quality was atrocious, the worst on the internet by far — this isn’t revisionism; other platforms tried to compete on quality.
Didn’t matter; youtube won. And now we enjoy 4K steaming.
- andrepew 5y agoFrom what I hear from my friends who edit video, pro video editing workflows can involve some pretty hefty bitrates beyond what 1gbit networking can handle.
- sillysaurusx 5y agoI'm not sure I understand why that would be true. If all of the assets are on the server, why wouldn't the server send down a compressed view of the video? It can do progressive sharpening too, so that e.g. if you pause the video you can see the full quality. I agree that it's not ideal, but a lot of people would use it if the price was right. I would. As far as the video assets being on the server, sure, it may suck to upload those. But people do (sometimes) upload HQ assets to youtube, so it's not unheard of.
- yunohn 5y agoIf it takes multiple hours to upload footage, because upload speeds are generally horrible and not symmetric even on gigabit lines, I can definitely see that being a massive barrier.