It would be interesting to see if Apple set this limit differently from country to country, depending on what they see as the ability of the carrier - now that would give some fuel to the AT&T attackers!
Huh?
Quote:
You must include a low quality stream of no more than 64 Kbps for your app to resort to when network conditions demand it, along with the higher quality streams you want to deliver to your customers when the network can support it
Apple isn't saying that 3G will FORCE all video down to 64Kbps...
What they seem to be saying is this... when streaming via 3G (generally a smaller pipe than most WIFI) there is a better chance that the network (AT&T/Verizon/etc) may throttle down to a much lower than 'expected' speed. When this happens Apple says they don't want iPad users to see 'nothing' or worse 'crash'... Instead they INSIST that the content provider offerers a very low Kbs version so 'the show can go on'...
Even IF the show is of a much reduced quality... Apple is simply saying to the content streamers have a 'fall back' quality of the content available if the 3G network is having a very hard time.
As a content provider you are more than welcome to offer whatever quality you think the 3G networks in your area can support... but have lower bandwidth content on the sidelines if 3G isn't able to sustain the 'full 3G quality' stream you wanted to deliver.
I agree with you. If I am not mistaken, streaming video using your computer did the same thing few years back. The player determined how much bandwidth you have and adjust the bit rate. I am not sure if it is still done though.
That's exactly right.
I remember when Realnetworks first invented streaming music. At first this played over dial-up, though I had ISDN, so it was better. The quality would vary from 8kbps to 64kbps, and you could hear the change in quality. It would even drop out. If they just used 64kbps, it would hardly work at all for anyone.
Nowadays, you can often choose which quality video stream you want. But buffering helps.
Apple isn't saying that 3G will FORCE all video down to 64Kbps...
What they seem to be saying is this... when streaming via 3G (generally a smaller pipe than most WIFI) there is a better chance that the network (AT&T/Verizon/etc) may throttle down to a much lower than 'expected' speed. When this happens Apple says they don't want iPad users to see 'nothing' or worse 'crash'... Instead they INSIST that the content provider offerers a very low Kbs version so 'the show can go on'...
Even IF the show is of a much reduced quality... Apple is simply saying to the content streamers have a 'fall back' quality of the content available if the 3G network is having a very hard time.
As a content provider you are more than welcome to offer whatever quality you think the 3G networks in your area can support... but have lower bandwidth content on the sidelines if 3G isn't able to sustain the 'full 3G quality' stream you wanted to deliver.
This is how I'm reading it anyway... Am I wrong?
I think you're right, I'm just wondering why 64kbps was the magic number they picked. Why not 128? Or 32?
But surely if the AT&T network could handle, say 1Mbps (we can dream!), Apple would set the limit much higher, so the number they have picked must in some way reflect on the networks capability?
I understand that it's sensible to work with the carrier, but I do wonder if the limit would be different if on a different carrier.
It doesn't work that way. And it handles 3.6 Mbps now, and 7.2 in many places. Mobile devices can't take advantage of this even if they have the proper chips, but that's for another discussion.
It's not just AT&T. Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile have the same problems, and so does every other carrier on the world.
When you're indoors, for example, the network speeds drop seriously. The further you may be in a building the more they drop. It doesn't matter what carrier you have.
I know you want to blame someone, but it's not that simple.
Apple isn't saying that 3G will FORCE all video down to 64Kbps...
What they seem to be saying is this... when streaming via 3G (generally a smaller pipe than most WIFI) there is a better chance that the network (AT&T/Verizon/etc) may throttle down to a much lower than 'expected' speed. When this happens Apple says they don't want iPad users to see 'nothing' or worse 'crash'... Instead they INSIST that the content provider offerers a very low Kbs version so 'the show can go on'...
Even IF the show is of a much reduced quality... Apple is simply saying to the content streamers have a 'fall back' quality of the content available if the 3G network is having a very hard time.
As a content provider you are more than welcome to offer whatever quality you think the 3G networks in your area can support... but have lower bandwidth content on the sidelines if 3G isn't able to sustain the 'full 3G quality' stream you wanted to deliver.
This is how I'm reading it anyway... Am I wrong?
You're not reading it wrong. As I keep telling people, this is a BACKUP stream. It's not what people should be seeing most of the time.
You're not reading it wrong. As I keep telling people, this is a BACKUP stream. It's not what people should be seeing most of the time.
Somehow, some people aren't getting it.
Sorry I'm not getting it, so here come some stupid questions!
Where you say this is a backup stream, does this mean it's effectively letting content providers plan for the worst case scenario? That being the case, what bit rate does it use normally (i.e. when it's not using the backup)?
The way I was reading it was that if you try and use video over the 3G network, it's going to be limited to 64kpbs (albeit by the iPad, not the network)?
Improve your mind. Kill your television. Even if it is on the Ipad. Remember, television programing is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Your comment is outrageous and insulting. While I'd agree that much of the programming on network television is produced solely for entertainment purposes (which you might keep in mind), there are many programs that are extremely engaging and informative.
For example:
Life - a miniseries on nature shot in stunning HD
How it works - a series that details products and what makes them tick
The Pacific - a docu-drama exploring a soldiers life in WWII
FoodTV - a channel who's programming centers around cooking
DIY - a channel that teaches home improvement and other useful shows
History Channel - numerous shows about history. In fact, "America - The Story of Us" is one of the most factual and informative shows I've seen in a long time. (http://www.history.com/shows/america-the-story-of-us)
Your comment was nothing but rude and assumptive. Not everyone who watches TV is hooked on non-stop police dramas. There is good TV out there - good shows, good topics, and good intention. Stop generalizing.
It doesn't work that way. And it handles 3.6 Mbps now, and 7.2 in many places. Mobile devices can't take advantage of this even if they have the proper chips, but that's for another discussion.
It's not just AT&T. Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile have the same problems, and so does every other carrier on the world.
When you're indoors, for example, the network speeds drop seriously. The further you may be in a building the more they drop. It doesn't matter what carrier you have.
I know you want to blame someone, but it's not that simple.
I don't want to blame anyone.
What I don't understand is where this 64kbps number comes from. I understand that the maximum will be variable based on reception conditions.
Sorry I'm not getting it, so here come some stupid questions!
Where you say this is a backup stream, does this mean it's effectively letting content providers plan for the worst case scenario? That being the case, what bit rate does it use normally (i.e. when it's not using the backup)?
The way I was reading it was that if you try and use video over the 3G network, it's going to be limited to 64kpbs (albeit by the iPad, not the network)?
Now you're getting it! This is for worst case network conditions where the normal high quality stream can't be supported.
The normal stream will be much higher quality, though lower than WiFi, because WiFi bandwidth is still going to be higher for various reasons.
I don't know what the actual bitrate will be unless ABC tells us, or it's measured once the app is updated. Some apps tell you what the bandwidth is. But it will be several times as much. Even on the internet as a whole, the bandwidth is usually 256 kbps to 728 kbps for high quality streaming. Occasionally, it might be higher, but rarely above 1 Mbps.
What I don't understand is where this 64kbps number comes from. I understand that the maximum will be variable based on reception conditions.
Sorry. I was thinking of someone else.
As I said, Apple has people in their R&D departments who do this kind of work. There is equipment for analyzing network quality. They can also access quality by simply using equipment in the field.
Here, there's some equipment used for this analysis:
When they do this analysis, they can determine what the best backup speed should be, based on a number of factors. I can't give you the exact reason why they decided on 64kbps, but be assured that it was the highest quality they felt the network could handle under poor conditions.
Be assured that no one wants to deliver the lowest quality signal.
Now you're getting it! This is for worst case network conditions where the normal high quality stream can't be supported.
The normal stream will be much higher quality, though lower than WiFi, because WiFi bandwidth is still going to be higher for various reasons.
I don't know what the actual bitrate will be unless ABC tells us, or it's measured once the app is updated. Some apps tell you what the bandwidth is. But it will be several times as much. Even on the internet as a whole, the bandwidth is usually 256 kbps to 728 kbps for high quality streaming. Occasionally, it might be higher, but rarely above 1 Mbps.
Right, I think I'm starting to get it.
The thing that confuses me though is that the initial article says:
Quote:
ABC's streaming video application for the iPad will not work over a 3G cellular network such as AT&T, as a result of Apple's rules for HTTP Live Streaming and ABC's development of the application.
As noted by Engadget, the restriction in the ABC player was self-imposed, as the developers chose to skip the option of providing a 64 Kbps stream for 3G playback. That decision is why the ABC application does not allow streaming over 3G, while Netflix and YouTube do, albeit with lower bitrates.
So, I get that the ABC app only works on WiFi. What it then goes on to say is that ABC didn't want to provide 64kbps stream, which as I understand it would mean them having on their servers a lower quality video.
It then says that Netflix and YouTube do allow 3G streaming at lower bitrates, which I assume to be 64kbps, though I'm now wondering if they have two sets of videos on their servers, one which is say 728kbps and is the one they will try and get across to you if they can, and one which meets the "worst case" scenario of 64kbps?
If I'm right about that, it means Apple is saying what the worst case is going to be on the network and if you want to be able to stream video on 3G, you need to provide content that will be OK for the worst case.
And finally, bringing this back to what I was wondering in the first place, does the 64kbps "worst case" not reflect somehow on the capability of the network and a "better" network would have a worst case of say 128kbps?
Your comment is outrageous and insulting. While I'd agree that much of the programming on network television is produced solely for entertainment purposes (which you might keep in mind), there are many programs that are extremely engaging and informative.
For example:
Life - a miniseries on nature shot in stunning HD
How it works - a series that details products and what makes them tick
The Pacific - a docu-drama exploring a soldiers life in WWII
FoodTV - a channel who's programming centers around cooking
DIY - a channel that teaches home improvement and other useful shows
History Channel - numerous shows about history. In fact, "America - The Story of Us" is one of the most factual and informative shows I've seen in a long time. (http://www.history.com/shows/america-the-story-of-us)
Your comment was nothing but rude and assumptive. Not everyone who watches TV is hooked on non-stop police dramas. There is good TV out there - good shows, good topics, and good intention. Stop generalizing.
Wow! Someone hit a nerve. Do you work in TV or something?
Truth is that although there is a substantial amount of educational and beneficial programming available it's not what most people watch. Ever check the Neilson top rated shows? In overwhelming numbers people choose the dumb stuff. When was the last time Washington Week in Review was the top rated news program? Oh yea, never.
The OPs opinion is completely justified. I actually find it comical you find it "insulting." Just about everything in life is more important than what you choose to watch on TV.
The thing that confuses me though is that the initial article says:
So, I get that the ABC app only works on WiFi. What it then goes on to say is that ABC didn't want to provide 64kbps stream, which as I understand it would mean them having on their servers a lower quality video.
It then says that Netflix and YouTube do allow 3G streaming at lower bitrates, which I assume to be 64kbps, though I'm now wondering if they have two sets of videos on their servers, one which is say 728kbps and is the one they will try and get across to you if they can, and one which meets the "worst case" scenario of 64kbps?
If I'm right about that, it means Apple is saying what the worst case is going to be on the network and if you want to be able to stream video on 3G, you need to provide content that will be OK for the worst case.
And finally, bringing this back to what I was wondering in the first place, does the 64kbps "worst case" not reflect somehow on the capability of the network and a "better" network would have a worst case of say 128kbps?
Yes, you've got it!
Apparently, ABC was afraid that the backup stream was too low in quality for them. As we can see in this thread, there will always be people who jump out and accuse companies of deliberately screwing things up for their own nefarious reasons. I'm not including you in that now that I realize it was someone else I meant.
Companies are afraid that when that happens, more people will think their product is of low quality. Rather than have bad publicity over accusations of poor quality, they might rather not provide the service at all.
Have you seen the truly lousy quality of the YouTube streams to the iPad? I have here. They are bad. But then, no one really expects most YouTube video to be anything other than bad.
Netflix is lower quality over 3G, even when it's good. But it's not bad. I haven't seen a really bad Netflix stream yet, so I don't know just how bad it will be, but I expect it will be as bad as YouTube streams.
But if Netflix doesn't care, that's their business, right?
I have 802.n WiFi at home with a 6Mbps internet connection which will beat in a practical way, any phone, no matter what they will claim. That's just the way of it. It has to do with interference.
When I'm not using WiFi, but when using my 1Gbps Ethernet wired network, WiFi seems like it's crawling in comparison, even over the internet connection. I've made tests using my 2009 2 chip Mac Pro. When I'm using wired Ethernet, my internet speeds are about twice as fast as over WiFi. You wouldn't think that would happen, but it does.
Then comes the iPad using WiFi, then my 3G iPhone over WiFi, then the iPad over 3G, then last and least, my 3G iPhone over 3G.
Improve your mind. Kill your television. Even if it is on the Ipad. Remember, television programing is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Wow! Someone hit a nerve. Do you work in TV or something?
Truth is that although there is a substantial amount of educational and beneficial programming available it's not what most people watch. Ever check the Neilson top rated shows? In overwhelming numbers people choose the dumb stuff. When was the last time Washington Week in Review was the top rated news program? Oh yea, never.
The OPs opinion is completely justified. I actually find it comical you find it "insulting." Just about everything in life is more important than what you choose to watch on TV.
But them again. I find people who hold their nose up at Tv, but read comic books, trying to claim they're literature. Same thing with most movies. mostly crap, right? Music as well. We could get into an argument on what music out there is good based on what some people like.
I mean, liking something means it's good. Doesn't it? How many people want to admit, even to themselves, that they have poor taste, and can't tell quality from crap? But most people are like that.
It doesn't really matter. People like what they do.
Why is this ABC's fault? If its not AT&T, this is clearly Apple's fault.
Why should Apple be dictating how much AT&T's network can handle.
Apple should relax this restriction. If its not needed, its not needed. Apple over control again.
In a world of unlimited bandwidth, I would agree with you. But it's not, so I don't.
As we should have all learned by now, AT&T probably doesn't have the network capacity to deal with this kind of heavy use. Other cellular providers may find themselves in a similar predicament if suddenly faced with 250MB/hour streams.
Self-imposed throttling of bandwidth usage on a low-bandwidth network is simply being a good network citizen. This isn't Apple exerting excessive control, because bandwidth limiting is needed. To give a potential real-world scenario, I don't want to be blocked from internet access because the stadium next door has a few hundred fans trying to simultaneously stream the ballgame to their devices (whatever those devices may be).
Comments
It would be interesting to see if Apple set this limit differently from country to country, depending on what they see as the ability of the carrier - now that would give some fuel to the AT&T attackers!
Huh?
You must include a low quality stream of no more than 64 Kbps for your app to resort to when network conditions demand it, along with the higher quality streams you want to deliver to your customers when the network can support it
Apple isn't saying that 3G will FORCE all video down to 64Kbps...
What they seem to be saying is this... when streaming via 3G (generally a smaller pipe than most WIFI) there is a better chance that the network (AT&T/Verizon/etc) may throttle down to a much lower than 'expected' speed. When this happens Apple says they don't want iPad users to see 'nothing' or worse 'crash'... Instead they INSIST that the content provider offerers a very low Kbs version so 'the show can go on'...
Even IF the show is of a much reduced quality... Apple is simply saying to the content streamers have a 'fall back' quality of the content available if the 3G network is having a very hard time.
As a content provider you are more than welcome to offer whatever quality you think the 3G networks in your area can support... but have lower bandwidth content on the sidelines if 3G isn't able to sustain the 'full 3G quality' stream you wanted to deliver.
This is how I'm reading it anyway... Am I wrong?
I agree with you. If I am not mistaken, streaming video using your computer did the same thing few years back. The player determined how much bandwidth you have and adjust the bit rate. I am not sure if it is still done though.
That's exactly right.
I remember when Realnetworks first invented streaming music. At first this played over dial-up, though I had ISDN, so it was better. The quality would vary from 8kbps to 64kbps, and you could hear the change in quality. It would even drop out. If they just used 64kbps, it would hardly work at all for anyone.
Nowadays, you can often choose which quality video stream you want. But buffering helps.
Apple isn't saying that 3G will FORCE all video down to 64Kbps...
What they seem to be saying is this... when streaming via 3G (generally a smaller pipe than most WIFI) there is a better chance that the network (AT&T/Verizon/etc) may throttle down to a much lower than 'expected' speed. When this happens Apple says they don't want iPad users to see 'nothing' or worse 'crash'... Instead they INSIST that the content provider offerers a very low Kbs version so 'the show can go on'...
Even IF the show is of a much reduced quality... Apple is simply saying to the content streamers have a 'fall back' quality of the content available if the 3G network is having a very hard time.
As a content provider you are more than welcome to offer whatever quality you think the 3G networks in your area can support... but have lower bandwidth content on the sidelines if 3G isn't able to sustain the 'full 3G quality' stream you wanted to deliver.
This is how I'm reading it anyway... Am I wrong?
I think you're right, I'm just wondering why 64kbps was the magic number they picked. Why not 128? Or 32?
But surely if the AT&T network could handle, say 1Mbps (we can dream!), Apple would set the limit much higher, so the number they have picked must in some way reflect on the networks capability?
I understand that it's sensible to work with the carrier, but I do wonder if the limit would be different if on a different carrier.
It doesn't work that way. And it handles 3.6 Mbps now, and 7.2 in many places. Mobile devices can't take advantage of this even if they have the proper chips, but that's for another discussion.
It's not just AT&T. Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile have the same problems, and so does every other carrier on the world.
When you're indoors, for example, the network speeds drop seriously. The further you may be in a building the more they drop. It doesn't matter what carrier you have.
I know you want to blame someone, but it's not that simple.
Apple isn't saying that 3G will FORCE all video down to 64Kbps...
What they seem to be saying is this... when streaming via 3G (generally a smaller pipe than most WIFI) there is a better chance that the network (AT&T/Verizon/etc) may throttle down to a much lower than 'expected' speed. When this happens Apple says they don't want iPad users to see 'nothing' or worse 'crash'... Instead they INSIST that the content provider offerers a very low Kbs version so 'the show can go on'...
Even IF the show is of a much reduced quality... Apple is simply saying to the content streamers have a 'fall back' quality of the content available if the 3G network is having a very hard time.
As a content provider you are more than welcome to offer whatever quality you think the 3G networks in your area can support... but have lower bandwidth content on the sidelines if 3G isn't able to sustain the 'full 3G quality' stream you wanted to deliver.
This is how I'm reading it anyway... Am I wrong?
You're not reading it wrong. As I keep telling people, this is a BACKUP stream. It's not what people should be seeing most of the time.
Somehow, some people aren't getting it.
it appears ABC does have an app for streaming...
They already have an app for streaming.
You mean they are completing an app to stream over 3G.
I think you're right, I'm just wondering why 64kbps was the magic number they picked. Why not 128? Or 32?
I already told you.
You're not reading it wrong. As I keep telling people, this is a BACKUP stream. It's not what people should be seeing most of the time.
Somehow, some people aren't getting it.
Sorry I'm not getting it, so here come some stupid questions!
Where you say this is a backup stream, does this mean it's effectively letting content providers plan for the worst case scenario? That being the case, what bit rate does it use normally (i.e. when it's not using the backup)?
The way I was reading it was that if you try and use video over the 3G network, it's going to be limited to 64kpbs (albeit by the iPad, not the network)?
Improve your mind. Kill your television. Even if it is on the Ipad. Remember, television programing is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Your comment is outrageous and insulting. While I'd agree that much of the programming on network television is produced solely for entertainment purposes (which you might keep in mind), there are many programs that are extremely engaging and informative.
For example:
- Life - a miniseries on nature shot in stunning HD
- How it works - a series that details products and what makes them tick
- The Pacific - a docu-drama exploring a soldiers life in WWII
- FoodTV - a channel who's programming centers around cooking
- DIY - a channel that teaches home improvement and other useful shows
- History Channel - numerous shows about history. In fact, "America - The Story of Us" is one of the most factual and informative shows I've seen in a long time. (http://www.history.com/shows/america-the-story-of-us)
Your comment was nothing but rude and assumptive. Not everyone who watches TV is hooked on non-stop police dramas. There is good TV out there - good shows, good topics, and good intention. Stop generalizing.It doesn't work that way. And it handles 3.6 Mbps now, and 7.2 in many places. Mobile devices can't take advantage of this even if they have the proper chips, but that's for another discussion.
It's not just AT&T. Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile have the same problems, and so does every other carrier on the world.
When you're indoors, for example, the network speeds drop seriously. The further you may be in a building the more they drop. It doesn't matter what carrier you have.
I know you want to blame someone, but it's not that simple.
I don't want to blame anyone.
What I don't understand is where this 64kbps number comes from. I understand that the maximum will be variable based on reception conditions.
Sorry I'm not getting it, so here come some stupid questions!
Where you say this is a backup stream, does this mean it's effectively letting content providers plan for the worst case scenario? That being the case, what bit rate does it use normally (i.e. when it's not using the backup)?
The way I was reading it was that if you try and use video over the 3G network, it's going to be limited to 64kpbs (albeit by the iPad, not the network)?
Now you're getting it! This is for worst case network conditions where the normal high quality stream can't be supported.
The normal stream will be much higher quality, though lower than WiFi, because WiFi bandwidth is still going to be higher for various reasons.
I don't know what the actual bitrate will be unless ABC tells us, or it's measured once the app is updated. Some apps tell you what the bandwidth is. But it will be several times as much. Even on the internet as a whole, the bandwidth is usually 256 kbps to 728 kbps for high quality streaming. Occasionally, it might be higher, but rarely above 1 Mbps.
I don't want to blame anyone.
What I don't understand is where this 64kbps number comes from. I understand that the maximum will be variable based on reception conditions.
Sorry. I was thinking of someone else.
As I said, Apple has people in their R&D departments who do this kind of work. There is equipment for analyzing network quality. They can also access quality by simply using equipment in the field.
Here, there's some equipment used for this analysis:
http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/...0&cc=US&lc=eng
Agilent used to be part of Hp.
When they do this analysis, they can determine what the best backup speed should be, based on a number of factors. I can't give you the exact reason why they decided on 64kbps, but be assured that it was the highest quality they felt the network could handle under poor conditions.
Be assured that no one wants to deliver the lowest quality signal.
Now you're getting it! This is for worst case network conditions where the normal high quality stream can't be supported.
The normal stream will be much higher quality, though lower than WiFi, because WiFi bandwidth is still going to be higher for various reasons.
I don't know what the actual bitrate will be unless ABC tells us, or it's measured once the app is updated. Some apps tell you what the bandwidth is. But it will be several times as much. Even on the internet as a whole, the bandwidth is usually 256 kbps to 728 kbps for high quality streaming. Occasionally, it might be higher, but rarely above 1 Mbps.
Right, I think I'm starting to get it.
The thing that confuses me though is that the initial article says:
ABC's streaming video application for the iPad will not work over a 3G cellular network such as AT&T, as a result of Apple's rules for HTTP Live Streaming and ABC's development of the application.
As noted by Engadget, the restriction in the ABC player was self-imposed, as the developers chose to skip the option of providing a 64 Kbps stream for 3G playback. That decision is why the ABC application does not allow streaming over 3G, while Netflix and YouTube do, albeit with lower bitrates.
So, I get that the ABC app only works on WiFi. What it then goes on to say is that ABC didn't want to provide 64kbps stream, which as I understand it would mean them having on their servers a lower quality video.
It then says that Netflix and YouTube do allow 3G streaming at lower bitrates, which I assume to be 64kbps, though I'm now wondering if they have two sets of videos on their servers, one which is say 728kbps and is the one they will try and get across to you if they can, and one which meets the "worst case" scenario of 64kbps?
If I'm right about that, it means Apple is saying what the worst case is going to be on the network and if you want to be able to stream video on 3G, you need to provide content that will be OK for the worst case.
And finally, bringing this back to what I was wondering in the first place, does the 64kbps "worst case" not reflect somehow on the capability of the network and a "better" network would have a worst case of say 128kbps?
Your comment is outrageous and insulting. While I'd agree that much of the programming on network television is produced solely for entertainment purposes (which you might keep in mind), there are many programs that are extremely engaging and informative.
For example:
- Life - a miniseries on nature shot in stunning HD
- How it works - a series that details products and what makes them tick
- The Pacific - a docu-drama exploring a soldiers life in WWII
- FoodTV - a channel who's programming centers around cooking
- DIY - a channel that teaches home improvement and other useful shows
- History Channel - numerous shows about history. In fact, "America - The Story of Us" is one of the most factual and informative shows I've seen in a long time. (http://www.history.com/shows/america-the-story-of-us)
Your comment was nothing but rude and assumptive. Not everyone who watches TV is hooked on non-stop police dramas. There is good TV out there - good shows, good topics, and good intention. Stop generalizing.Wow! Someone hit a nerve. Do you work in TV or something?
Truth is that although there is a substantial amount of educational and beneficial programming available it's not what most people watch. Ever check the Neilson top rated shows? In overwhelming numbers people choose the dumb stuff. When was the last time Washington Week in Review was the top rated news program? Oh yea, never.
The OPs opinion is completely justified. I actually find it comical you find it "insulting." Just about everything in life is more important than what you choose to watch on TV.
Right, I think I'm starting to get it.
The thing that confuses me though is that the initial article says:
So, I get that the ABC app only works on WiFi. What it then goes on to say is that ABC didn't want to provide 64kbps stream, which as I understand it would mean them having on their servers a lower quality video.
It then says that Netflix and YouTube do allow 3G streaming at lower bitrates, which I assume to be 64kbps, though I'm now wondering if they have two sets of videos on their servers, one which is say 728kbps and is the one they will try and get across to you if they can, and one which meets the "worst case" scenario of 64kbps?
If I'm right about that, it means Apple is saying what the worst case is going to be on the network and if you want to be able to stream video on 3G, you need to provide content that will be OK for the worst case.
And finally, bringing this back to what I was wondering in the first place, does the 64kbps "worst case" not reflect somehow on the capability of the network and a "better" network would have a worst case of say 128kbps?
Yes, you've got it!
Apparently, ABC was afraid that the backup stream was too low in quality for them. As we can see in this thread, there will always be people who jump out and accuse companies of deliberately screwing things up for their own nefarious reasons. I'm not including you in that now that I realize it was someone else I meant.
Companies are afraid that when that happens, more people will think their product is of low quality. Rather than have bad publicity over accusations of poor quality, they might rather not provide the service at all.
Have you seen the truly lousy quality of the YouTube streams to the iPad? I have here. They are bad. But then, no one really expects most YouTube video to be anything other than bad.
Netflix is lower quality over 3G, even when it's good. But it's not bad. I haven't seen a really bad Netflix stream yet, so I don't know just how bad it will be, but I expect it will be as bad as YouTube streams.
But if Netflix doesn't care, that's their business, right?
I have 802.n WiFi at home with a 6Mbps internet connection which will beat in a practical way, any phone, no matter what they will claim. That's just the way of it. It has to do with interference.
When I'm not using WiFi, but when using my 1Gbps Ethernet wired network, WiFi seems like it's crawling in comparison, even over the internet connection. I've made tests using my 2009 2 chip Mac Pro. When I'm using wired Ethernet, my internet speeds are about twice as fast as over WiFi. You wouldn't think that would happen, but it does.
Then comes the iPad using WiFi, then my 3G iPhone over WiFi, then the iPad over 3G, then last and least, my 3G iPhone over 3G.
Improve your mind. Kill your television. Even if it is on the Ipad. Remember, television programing is designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Have you ever watched The Wire?
Wow! Someone hit a nerve. Do you work in TV or something?
Truth is that although there is a substantial amount of educational and beneficial programming available it's not what most people watch. Ever check the Neilson top rated shows? In overwhelming numbers people choose the dumb stuff. When was the last time Washington Week in Review was the top rated news program? Oh yea, never.
The OPs opinion is completely justified. I actually find it comical you find it "insulting." Just about everything in life is more important than what you choose to watch on TV.
But them again. I find people who hold their nose up at Tv, but read comic books, trying to claim they're literature. Same thing with most movies. mostly crap, right? Music as well. We could get into an argument on what music out there is good based on what some people like.
I mean, liking something means it's good. Doesn't it? How many people want to admit, even to themselves, that they have poor taste, and can't tell quality from crap? But most people are like that.
It doesn't really matter. People like what they do.
Why is this ABC's fault? If its not AT&T, this is clearly Apple's fault.
Why should Apple be dictating how much AT&T's network can handle.
Apple should relax this restriction. If its not needed, its not needed. Apple over control again.
In a world of unlimited bandwidth, I would agree with you. But it's not, so I don't.
As we should have all learned by now, AT&T probably doesn't have the network capacity to deal with this kind of heavy use. Other cellular providers may find themselves in a similar predicament if suddenly faced with 250MB/hour streams.
Self-imposed throttling of bandwidth usage on a low-bandwidth network is simply being a good network citizen. This isn't Apple exerting excessive control, because bandwidth limiting is needed. To give a potential real-world scenario, I don't want to be blocked from internet access because the stadium next door has a few hundred fans trying to simultaneously stream the ballgame to their devices (whatever those devices may be).