said by Helpmehere :Latency, high traffic times of day, need for all this edge distribution mumbo jumbo.
Man, if only there were a dedicated multi-gigabyte connection between your house and some sort of serving location that could deliver this HD stuff...oh wait...that's cable/satellite/FioS video service. Cable sends 15-30 HD channels at 19.2 mbps EACH all at the same time. Dish does something less per channel but more channels (slightly worse picture). FiOS is the full bit rate but only 28 channels (for now). Regardless, any of these options KILL anything doable on the web. In fact, in two of the three cases above, the network does HD plus 300 regular channels AND carries the web.
Why use a coffee straw when you already have a fire hose? No latency or contention, no traffic issues. I just don't get it. And with caps here or on the way for up and someday maybe downstream, why burn it up?
I can see this for short format youtube stuff or basement production or even shorts from shops like atom films (remember those guys?). But for mainstream HD content, there is no way you can make economic sense out of a pay per channel or even a bundled subscription on top of the broadband fee itself when you can get HD for free or for only $10-30 more (depending on the provider) and on as big a screen as you like with zero risk of latency during peak times.
Cuban may not be 100% right, but I would never bet against a billionaire who made his money in this space...even if he can't dance!
In the future, we'll have enough bandwidth so you won't experience massive latency like you do today on some ISPs.
