Topic 'Re: LoL' in forum '' - dslreports.com

Re: LoL

Sun, 03 Mar 2013 17:21:05 EDT

watice posted :

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.

Re: LoL

Sun, 03 Mar 2013 03:53:14 EDT

KrK posted : 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

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 19:37:12 EDT

watice posted : except that in order to get busted for CP, you have to be in possession of CP, or have participated in it. Seems like a good way to violate your ISP's TOS tho. (I'm not an attorney, check your lawyer)

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 19:33:15 EDT

watice posted : 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?

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 19:14:16 EDT

wmcbrine posted :

said by Crookshanks:

You can buy music tracks for $0.99 from iTunes and Amazin, but people still pirate them....

$0.99 a song isn't really cheap. For one song, it seems like a small sum, but it adds up fast. Especially when you plot the amount of music the average teenager can consume vs. their income.

$0.10 a song, that might do something.
--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 18:44:10 EDT

Crookshanks posted : 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.

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 17:46:32 EDT

BiggA posted : If that were the case, people would already be doing that with cable. A lot of people do in multi-family homes.

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:40:42 EDT

MURICA posted : That sounds like a good way to get busted for CP when Chester the Molester decides to get his rocks off and your name is the one tied to the subscription.

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:40:04 EDT

Crookshanks posted :

said by kontos:

which is why you would want to offer it at a price point that is low enough to make sharing unnecessary.

You can buy music tracks for $0.99 from iTunes and Amazin, but people still pirate them....

said by kontos:

The real question is if Google can operate a network with those speeds and at least break even at that price-point. I'm skeptical, but Google has said that they want to prove it can be done.

They can, the question is if they can build out such a network with decent contention ratios while still making money. One suspects the contention ratios are probably fairly high, given the fact that very few households will use even a fraction of this bandwidth on a sustained basis. It will be interesting to see how the network holds up if a mainstream 'killer app' appears that actually uses this kind of bandwidth.

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:39:32 EDT

MURICA posted : 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.

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:33:35 EDT

Crookshanks posted :

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.

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:52:01 EDT

kontos posted :

said by Wilsdom:

Not sure how it will play out with Google fiber, but there is also the risk that a "too fast" connection could be shared over wifi by several households. 1 subscription could provide excellent speeds to 10-20 houses

which is why you would want to offer it at a price point that is low enough to make sharing unnecessary. a 'budget' tier would make sharing even more unnecessary. kinda like how google is doing it. :)

The real question is if Google can operate a network with those speeds and at least break even at that price-point. I'm skeptical, but Google has said that they want to prove it can be done.

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:10:38 EDT

Wilsdom posted : Not sure how it will play out with Google fiber, but there is also the risk that a "too fast" connection could be shared over wifi by several households. 1 subscription could provide excellent speeds to 10-20 houses

Re: LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 14:46:03 EDT

cableties posted : Yeah, I passed grey-haired vette drivers, and get passed by non-grey haired Prius drivers!

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

But hey, I'm moving from 25Mbps to 50Mbps for $10 more... I mean, 25Mbps for $10...
--
Splat

LoL

Fri, 01 Mar 2013 14:38:47 EDT

gatorkram posted : These guys are starting to remind me of my childhood playground experiences. "Sure, I could jump that puddle, but I don't want to"

People drive around in cars every day that can go way over the max speed limits, and we sure don't see car makers saying they are going to make slower cars because no one needs to go as fast as they can go.

I am starting to think, they don't want to offer these higher speeds, because it would affect their whole pricing structure.
--
What the heck is a GatorKram? »www.gatorkram.com