5 ms·

I think live sports is the last bit of programming that prevents a lot people from getting rid of cable completely. On the other hand, sports, football in part

by tmuir 13y ago

I think live sports is the last bit of programming that prevents a lot people from getting rid of cable completely. On the other hand, sports, football in particular, are one of the biggest selling points of HDTV and the high resolution picture it provides. If the future of watching football consists of the same buffering, crappy framerates and resolution, and all around frustration of using Youtube as it exists today, this experiment will end halfway through Sunday of Week 1.

jlgreco 13y ago
> On the other hand, sports, football in particular, are one of the biggest selling points of HDTV and the high resolution picture it provides. Many consumers are not particularly aware of video quality beyond what advertising tells them. So long as the screen is big and they think it is HD (either because the settop box that they plugged in wrong says "HD" on it, or because marketing has told them that 720p is the bees knees, or whatever), then they are pretty happy. Buffering is something that everyone notices immediately though. That would make or break this.
ajross 13y ago
I'm curious about your last paragraph. Certainly on-demand video is subject to buffering, but the rest of that doesn't seem to be my experience at all. We watch both Netflix and Youtube content at home on multiple clients (e.g. browesr, phones, the now-ancient Netflix app on the TiVo HD...) and while obviously we've seen the occasional network failure I don't think any of them seem to be service-specific. Basically, watching "premium" 720p+ content on Youtube provides virtually indistinguishable quality and reliability. Is that really not your experience?
- dbarlett 13y ago
  What ISP do you have? Degraded streaming is widespread these days: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/why-youtube-buffers-the-secret-deals-that-make-and-break-online-video/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/why-yo...
  - ajross 13y ago
    It's just a Comcast line at home. But my point wasn't that video streaming works perfectly, just that I don't see a notable difference in reliability between Youtube and Netflix. They both work about the same, which is to say "well enough for me".
    - GFischer 13y ago
      I'm in Uruguay, and the difference in quality between Youtube and Netflix is staggering. Netflix is surprisingly smooth and fast and extremely good quality, while Youtube stutters awfully. It is, of course, anecdote (and not relevant to the U.S.)
- JohnTHaller 13y ago
  YouTube HD has been barely functional for most Time Warner customers for years now.
ubernostrum 13y ago
I have an MLB.tv subscription, and watch on my computer, iPad and TV (through the PS3 app). I have never had "buffering, crappy framerates and resolution, and all around frustration".
- mdaniel 13y ago
  Arguably baseball television coverage has an entirely different pace to it, and I would suspect that football has a lot more complex camera-work, including multiple cut aways per play. Based on my understanding of how most video compression works, I bet it effects the bandwidth requirements.
eli 13y ago
Heck, last year I paid Comcast for the NHL package and it had crappy framerates and very noticeable compression artifacts. I suspect someone at Comcast was trying to save some bandwidth. Other HD channels look fine. Which is a long way of saying, I don't think streaming video content via a cable modem is all that different from watching content via a cable box.
bluedino 13y ago
The good thing about sports is you can generally go to a bar or something and watch 'the game', on the plus side they have beer and food and other people to watch it with. You can't go to the bar (at least around here) for the sole purpose of watching the latest episode of 'Breaking Bad'.

by tmuir 13y ago

jlgreco 13y ago

> On the other hand, sports, football in particular, are one of the biggest selling points of HDTV and the high resolution picture it provides. Many consumers are not particularly aware of video quality beyond what advertising tells them. So long as the screen is big and they think it is HD (either because the settop box that they plugged in wrong says "HD" on it, or because marketing has told them that 720p is the bees knees, or whatever), then they are pretty happy. Buffering is something that everyone notices immediately though. That would make or break this.

ajross 13y ago

I'm curious about your last paragraph. Certainly on-demand video is subject to buffering, but the rest of that doesn't seem to be my experience at all. We watch both Netflix and Youtube content at home on multiple clients (e.g. browesr, phones, the now-ancient Netflix app on the TiVo HD...) and while obviously we've seen the occasional network failure I don't think any of them seem to be service-specific. Basically, watching "premium" 720p+ content on Youtube provides virtually indistinguishable quality and reliability. Is that really not your experience?

dbarlett 13y ago
What ISP do you have? Degraded streaming is widespread these days: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/why-youtube-buffers-the-secret-deals-that-make-and-break-online-video/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/why-yo...
- ajross 13y ago
  It's just a Comcast line at home. But my point wasn't that video streaming works perfectly, just that I don't see a notable difference in reliability between Youtube and Netflix. They both work about the same, which is to say "well enough for me".
  - GFischer 13y ago
    I'm in Uruguay, and the difference in quality between Youtube and Netflix is staggering. Netflix is surprisingly smooth and fast and extremely good quality, while Youtube stutters awfully. It is, of course, anecdote (and not relevant to the U.S.)
JohnTHaller 13y ago
YouTube HD has been barely functional for most Time Warner customers for years now.

ubernostrum 13y ago

I have an MLB.tv subscription, and watch on my computer, iPad and TV (through the PS3 app). I have never had "buffering, crappy framerates and resolution, and all around frustration".

mdaniel 13y ago
Arguably baseball television coverage has an entirely different pace to it, and I would suspect that football has a lot more complex camera-work, including multiple cut aways per play. Based on my understanding of how most video compression works, I bet it effects the bandwidth requirements.

eli 13y ago

Heck, last year I paid Comcast for the NHL package and it had crappy framerates and very noticeable compression artifacts. I suspect someone at Comcast was trying to save some bandwidth. Other HD channels look fine. Which is a long way of saying, I don't think streaming video content via a cable modem is all that different from watching content via a cable box.

bluedino 13y ago

The good thing about sports is you can generally go to a bar or something and watch 'the game', on the plus side they have beer and food and other people to watch it with. You can't go to the bar (at least around here) for the sole purpose of watching the latest episode of 'Breaking Bad'.