how-to block ads
|
gmwedding
join:2005-02-14
Elk Grove, CA
| Comcast On Demand or Internet downloadable movies?
Web-based alternative to Comcast Pay-Per-View movies are being ramped up — albeit slowly. A fast Internet connection is essential to utilize this new age technology. Here's a Web site that provides an accurate Speed Test of your Comcast High Speed Internet Service:
»msiad.visualware.com/
The Speed Tests on many Web sites don't provide accurate results for Comcast connections, due to Comcast's use of their "PowerBoost" technology, which speeds downloads during the first minute when connecting to each new Web page. However, the PowerBoost enhancement does nothing to improve download speed for large movie files, which take far longer than a minute to download. PowerBoost is part real, part marketing hype — it allows Comcast to advertise faster Internet speeds that the company doesn't fully deliver.
So, as Web-based on demand movies from Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, Apple and others compete with Comcast On Demand (Pay-Per-View), Cable TV customers may want to re-evaluate their Comcast High Speed Internet Service. You may find faster Internet providers in your local market. | |
maxpower
join:2006-10-09
Providence, RI
1 edit | quote:
However, the PowerBoost enhancement does nothing to improve download speed for large movie files, which take far longer than a minute to download.
So for that first minute that Powerboost is working, the faster speeds won't decrease the overall download time?
BTW that speedtest site isn't very accurate. I am on Cox with 5mbps up to 10mbps with powerboost and it shows my speed as 14mpbs. | |
gmwedding
join:2005-02-14
Elk Grove, CA
| An AVS Forum member recommended that speed test Web site as being more accurate. Indeed, it reports our 6MB Comcast connection to actually be about 4.3MB, which is about what we get on a good day. I wonder if Comcast Sacramento has turned off PowerBoost in this area? Now that you raise this question, I recall reading a post on AVS Forum in which someone recently asked if PowerBoost was still working locally. I wonder...
As for the movie (or any large photo file) downloads, PowerBoost is insignificant in speeding delivery of those files. | |
maxpower
join:2006-10-09
Providence, RI
| quote:
As for the movie (or any large photo file) downloads, PowerBoost is insignificant in speeding delivery of those files.
It may not make a huge difference but it does make a difference. Also, depending on the delivery method, Powerboost may or may not work better. I've noticed on some torrents that have a high number of seeds/peers (such as linux isos) Powerboost seems to kick in very often, and speeds things up nicely. | |
b10010011
Whats a Posting tag?
join:2004-09-07
Bellingham, WA
 ·Comcast Formerly ..
| reply to gmwedding
said by gmwedding  :So, as Web-based on demand movies from Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, Apple and others compete with Comcast On Demand (Pay-Per-View), Cable TV customers may want to re-evaluate their Comcast High Speed Internet Service. You may find faster Internet providers in your local market. Only problem I have with web based on demand is they are only web based. I really do not want to sit in front of my computer and watch a movie on a 20 inch LCD monitor. I know I could put a computer out in the living room and hook it up to the TV, been there, done that, not impressed.
I have a Tivo-HD and through it I can order movies from the Amazon Unbox service. In a nutshell picture quality is poor and I hate waiting for it to download before watching. They should at least allow you to start watching before the download in complete.
So is Comcast On-Demand facing huge competition from online services? No, not really. Maybe sometime in the future they might. | |
gmwedding
join:2005-02-14
Elk Grove, CA
| Well, the business model for Web-based content delivery is still in its infancy, so the real competition to cable is only now ramping up. Obviously, the Hollywood studios are dragging their feet on allowing Apple access to movie content, to buy time for Blu-ray and competing online download services to get established and have a fighting chance of competing against the iTunes/iPod juggernaut, which also includes the revamped Apple TV, an evolving product that is marketed as a part of the iPod, and not the Mac, product line).
The reality is that the level of content quality available on these new services will improve as U.S. Internet bandwidth improves. But ISP's like Comcast and Time Warner also are dragging their feet on this. They are not going to empower Apple and other Web-based content providers) by improving their Internet bandwidth too quickly (not until their own cable TV systems in all cities are revamped to compete with full HD services. The traditional cable companies also fear the Apple/iTunes/iPod juggernaut. The trouble is, it will take cable systems another two years (perhaps more) to rebuild their aging infrastructure.
In the interim, as this plays out, Comcast has limited bandwidth available for Internet or HDTV. As a result, competition from satellite is now forcing Comcast to REDUCE the quality of their HDTV channels, a tactic they now are trying so that they can add more HD channels and create an appearance that they are competing against all those new satellite channels.
So, I think all this unprecedented action may level the playing field as far as quality goes, and create an opportunity for the fledgling online content services. Gradually, Apple has been upgrading the resolution and audio quality of their movie and TV downloads, and their Web downloaded movies and TV shows finally are starting to look pretty good on the big screen HDTV in the family room. | |
AppleTVpfft
@comcast.net
| I know how much you are in-love with Apple TV, but it really has no chance. It's a niche in the market of video delivery and will always be. Netflix is a better and cheaper alternative at this point. You can't argue that 1080p Blu-ray is not a better alternative to 720p, which Apple will never be able to deliver.
BTW: Amazon is eating Apples lunch when it comes to non-drm music. | |
gmwedding
join:2005-02-14
Elk Grove, CA
| RE: Netflix: the key words are "at this point."
Online movie and Blu-ray sales are just getting started. The iPod and iTunes were minor players for a year after Apple's late start in music back in 2001. We'll have to wait and see how this all plays out and neither you nor I can predict the ending. Of course 1080p is a better alternative to 720p, but few people own Bluray drives as of yet, so this fact remains irrelevant for the moment. You don't really believe that disc rentals will outpace online downloads in the long run do you? Even Netflix's founder doesn't believe this, and as online movie downloads come to dominate the market, Apple will be there to compete, maybe even minus the 12-hour outages like the one that recently idled Netflix. Apple doesn't have to own this market, they just have to make sure that content is available for their hardware. If the iTunes movie store ends up with a big market share, so much the better for Apple.
As for our family, we don't purchase On Demand movies from our Comcast cable TV provider (generally poor choices of titles, little HD content and too expensive), Instead, we're still renting DVDs by mail and have not yet even committed to the AppleTV. I'm waiting just a little awhile longer for all this to play out and for the movie studios to stop delaying the rise of Apple's rental market (Apple TV does need more content, but this will come). However, I do see the handwriting on the wall and realize that online downloads are the future for movie rentals.
RE: "Amazon is eating Apples lunch when it comes to non-drm music."
So say the music labels, which have vested interest in claiming this, since they are actively trying to invent a competitor to Apple that might be able to help shift power back to their traditional, music business cartel. But so far, Apple still holds the same 80% online market-share in music that it held last year and independent sales figures are not available to confirm the recent claims about the strength of DRM-free sales made by the music labels. We do know this: Amazon is vying for a very small piece of the remaining 20% share of the market that Microsoft, Real, Rhapsody, eMusic and all the other alternative vendors share.
Even if this claim is true, it just doesn't matter. While still dominant, iTunes music sales are not as important to Apple as iPod/iPhone hardware sales. Content sales are little more than a loss leader for Apple and a way to make sure that compatible content is available for Steve Jobs' hardware products. Since Amazon's non-DRM tracks play on iPods, iPhones and Mac computers, the sales still benefit Apple as long as most people continue to purchase the company's hardware, which they will, because it has become a defacto standard.
Finally, you must agree that the industry-standard .mp4 tracks that Apple uses are a better alternative (as far as quality goes) to the old, .mp3 file standard that Amazon uses. The fact is, those Amazon .mp3 files are larger, take more time to download, and consume more storage space than comparable, modern .mp4 files. | |
AppleTVpfft
@comcast.net
| You make some great points, I agree that Comcast On Demand PPV is very limited in the amount of content it offers. That's why I chose Netflix for now.
I guess we could see room for all these different video delivery methods to co-exist, only time will tell.
Yes mp4 is a much better alternative to mp3 for file size and quality. I like FLAC so none of the distributor's have what I need.
You could be right that the music industry is fudging the numbers of Amazon sales because they have a bizarre vendetta against Steve Jobs and want to create more competition in the market place. | |
|
