dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
17
share rss forum feed

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
reply to cableties

Re: LoL

said by cableties:

And Verizon, even at 50Mbps, You-tube sucks.

YouTube sucks because it's based on Flash, not because of bandwidth limitations on the sending or receiving end. Most Netflix streams use far more bandwidth, both total and bitrate, and there aren't nearly as many people having problems with Netflix as YT.

MURICA

join:2013-01-03

YouTube sucks because Google is cheap on the bandwidth upgrades. Flash has nothing to do with it. When you're having to serve billions of views every month you start looking for ways to cut costs.

All the subscription XXX sites which use flash for streaming 1080p video at higher bitrates than YouTube have no problem delivering the goods.

What's the different between porn sites, Netflix, and YouTube?

You actually PAY for two of those things.


Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

Yes, bandwidth is clearly Google's problem. 8-)

A Fortune 100 company that is currently sitting on forty plus billion dollars and whose entire business model revolves around the internet is being cheap with bandwidth upgrades. The same company that has data centers all over the world and essentially runs their own CDN. The same company that everybody on DSLR is going gaga over because of their 1gbit/s FTTH project.

FWIW I have no problems streaming HD YT videos under Linux, or using YT on my phone. Hell, I watched the entirety of all four Presidential debates on YT, via my cell phone, during a lengthy commute in 3G only areas. I rarely use Windows but I can't recall any issues there either. I suspect this has to do with buggy/outdated Flash installations and slow machines.


watice

join:2008-11-01
New York, NY

Google's issue with YouTube on VZFios has been discussed extensively in the VerizonFios forums. The general consensus seems to be a problem on YouTube's end, with the majority of blame being on Google being cheap with the peering agreements. It doesn't matter how much money you make with one product, if another one is free (and isn't generating the revenue it's supposed to), you WILL cheap out on it. Notice they cheaped out & put up a fight on the GoogleFiber TV lineup as well? And the countless discontinued/failed Google products? Google Wave, Google Health, etc?



KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

And the majority of the blame would be wrong.

Cheapness on peering, Google is not. Google has been very aggressive in peering and placing of local caching servers at ISP's.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


watice

join:2008-11-01
New York, NY

said by KrK:

And the majority of the blame would be wrong.

Cheapness on peering, Google is not. Google has been very aggressive in peering and placing of local caching servers at ISP's.

Interesting, do you have an insider source @Google for this specific problem with VZ & Youtube? I didn't want to single anyone out, but the peering suggestion came from a veteran VZ employee (Dave). It's all in the thread.