Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[whipnet]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

I did a quick test on the Apple TV 4 with the same movie (Iron Man (2008)) on my pfSense router using NtopNG.

Total data downloaded during the first 16 minutes was 1.27GB (which would be equivalent to an average rate of 13,229 kb/s), but I think this is misleading, since the ATV4 pre-buffers quite far in advance (it's really more like progressive downloading), so that amount includes more than just the first 16 minutes of the movie. How did you exclude pre-buffering in your tests without measuring the whole movie?

I included the burst, the average with burst and the average stream once the movie was under way as well as total. There is obviously some assuming and the buffer is only so large on a Roku 2. None of this was meant to be scientific. I'll eventually do a complete movie test when I have more time to kill.

From your results it seems iTunes is up there with VUDU and Amazon. Thanks for the input.


*

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by whipnet

I included the burst, the average with burst and the average stream once the movie was under way as well as total. There is obviously some assuming and the buffer is only so large on a Roku 2.

The ATV4 has plenty of flash memory. It no longer shows the buffering on the progress bar like the ATV3 did, but I suspect it still pre-buffers the entire movie if you let it play long enough, so it's not just a short "burst". If that is true, the only way to get a valid result is to measure an entire movie (or perhaps a shorter TV episode).

[whipnet]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

but I suspect it still pre-buffers the entire movie if you let it play long enough.

That's old technology and would not be smart on their part. Even 5 minutes videos on YouTube only buffer what they need, otherwise it's a waste of bandwidth for both parties. (Now that Comcast caps you.)

*Edited for add. Most movies or TV shows regardless of provider seems to stop streaming 3-4 minutes before completion.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by whipnet

That's old technology and would not be smart on their part. Even 5 minutes videos on YouTube only buffer what they need, otherwise it's a waste of bandwidth for both parties. (Now that Comcast caps you.)

It has nothing to do with "old technology". It's just a different streaming strategy that has pros and cons. The biggest pro is that it significantly reduces the risk of playback interruptions due to transient congestion spikes or other problems (e.g. interference on your home WLAN) in the network. It's a trade-off between bandwidth and memory usage and playback robustness.

[whipnet]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

It has nothing to do with "old technology". It's just a different streaming strategy that has pros and cons. The biggest pro is that it significantly reduces the risk of playback interruptions due to transient congestion spikes or other problems (e.g. interference on your home WLAN) in the network. It's a trade-off between bandwidth and memory usage and playback robustness.

I don't speculate, so there's not a lot for me to add to this. Do you have numbers you can share that proves your theory? I would be very interested.

Thanks Fiffy.

*

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by whipnet

I don't speculate, so there's not a lot for me to add to this. Do you have numbers you can share that proves your theory? I would be very interested.

Not sure what theory you are referring to. It's obvious that larger buffers (in the extreme case large enough for the entire video) reduce the likelyhood of buffer underflows in case of network issues. There are always trade-offs between QoE and resource consumption.

[whipnet]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Not sure what theory you are referring to. It's obvious that larger buffers (in the extreme case large enough for the entire video) reduce the likelyhood of buffer underflows in case of network issues. There are always trade-offs between QoE and resource consumption.

The buffer is device dependent. I mentioned that different devices and apps will produce different results. My controlled test used a Roku 2 (4210) which has 512mb of memory. Not sure what else I can tell you. I can run full movie test, but the averages are not going to change enough to note.

*

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by whipnet

The buffer is device dependent.

Obviously the hardware limits the buffer.

I mentioned that different devices and apps will produce different results. My controlled test used a Roku 2 (4210) which has 512mb of memory. Not sure what else I can tell you. I can run full movie test, but the averages are not going to change enough to note.

The Apple TV 4 has 32 or 64GB, so there is obviously much more room for buffering, and Apple seems to utilize it. This is why, as I wrote before, the result I saw on the ATV is probably misleading. The only safe way to eliminate the ambiguity is to measure an entire video.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by whipnet

I included the burst, the average with burst and the average stream once the movie was under way as well as total. There is obviously some assuming and the buffer is only so large on a Roku 2. None of this was meant to be scientific. I'll eventually do a complete movie test when I have more time to kill.

From your results it seems iTunes is up there with VUDU and Amazon. Thanks for the input.

Well you put up some impressive numbers, and I can see that Streaming Video Quality is rapidly replacing Disc, especially with the new Codec H.265. I agree that Amazon and Vudu outperform the rest in PQ/AQ with iTunes a close third. I have always said that Bandwidth and Access has a lot to do with Streaming Performance. Thank you so much for these results, it puts credibility to Streaming Video.

[Steedeel]

You see what you want to see, the truth is very different. In the real world, ITunes is no match for Bluray. 4K UHD will remain the gold standard and none of those services can match it. What numbers like that don't tell you is, how the stream handles fog, rain, mist, moving clouds, busy action scenes, quick pans, slow pans, large areas of the same colour, different gradients of colours etc..

iTunes 1080p looks brittle even at its best. Digital shimmer is present in most bright, colourful scenes. A sort of over processed look, if you will. The compression is very evident in some dark scenes, where things get a bit ugly. Not every time, but enough to be noticeable. They do very well with the bit-rate and the picture is maybe fine for a rental, but I wouldn't want to own a movies that was so flawed technically. All just my opinion. Of course, but I have watched tons of rentals this way when I couldn't get hold of a proper copy (Blu-Ray).

As for Vudu, never tried it, it the forums seems to have many people complaining of slight stuttering, even with fibre.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

There is nothing with UV that needs replaced, polished maybe some say, but the concept is exactly what was needed. The issue some have are with their preferred store fronts not joining (although many still continue to scream for an itunes code instead of asking for them to simply join). Nobody knows why they haven't but would replacing it or changing the name help that....no clue but, in the mean time millions are not suffering with Vudu, including me

Never the less, it will be replaced. I will return to this post when relevant.

As for Vudu, it's not enough. Germany, U.K, Australia etc have rubbish options IMO. At some point, they will need to expand if they want to be what they claim IMO. The numbers for the year show Digital HD is struggling and that's all that matters to the industry. Vudu is a niche, it will soon be a shrinking niche. If digital sales are close to flatlining already, do you honestly think that is healthy?
IMO, the industry just chucks in Netflix, Amazon etc.. to paint a rosy picture but we are beginning to see the truth IMO.

[Member-353571]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Well you put up some impressive numbers, and I can see that Streaming Video Quality is rapidly replacing Disc, especially with the new Codec H.265. I agree that Amazon and Vudu outperform the rest in PQ/AQ with iTunes a close third. I have always said that Bandwidth and Access has a lot to do with Streaming Performance. Thank you so much for these results, it puts credibility to Streaming Video.

Knock it off already. It's not "rapidly replacing disc". You've already been shown this is false and you've admitted you're a troll. You constantly claim things that have been proven to be wrong.

Do you say these things just to make yourself feel better about choosing digital over disc?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Lowenbotten

Knock it off already. It's not "rapidly replacing disc". You've already been shown this is false and you've admitted you're a troll. You constantly claim things that have been proven to be wrong.

Do you say these things just to make yourself feel better about choosing digital over disc?

Yes, Im outta here. Stupid to jump back in. I never learn.

[huskerbear]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Never the less, it will be replaced. I will return to this post when relevant.

As for Vudu, it's not enough. Germany, U.K, Australia etc have rubbish options IMO. At some point, they will need to expand if they want to be what they claim IMO. The numbers for the year show Digital HD is struggling and that's all that matters to the industry. Vudu is a niche, it will soon be a shrinking niche. If digital sales are close to flatlining already, do you honestly think that is healthy?
IMO, the industry just chucks in Netflix, Amazon etc.. to paint a rosy picture but we are beginning to see the truth IMO.

Can you explain why it needs replaced vs getting the other store fronts to join? Take away consumer friendly stuff like D2D or sharing then they join? Is there a poison pill in the contract keeping them from joining or do they really not want consumers to be able to buy ANY movie elsewhere and watch it on their system? At this point I think they are starting to hurt themselves, because:

" Vudu is a niche" I think you are way off with this

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Can you explain why it needs replaced vs getting the other store fronts to join? Take away consumer friendly stuff like D2D or sharing then they join? Is there a poison pill in the contract keeping them from joining or do they really not want consumers to be able to buy ANY movie elsewhere and watch it on their system? At this point I think they are starting to hurt themselves, because:

" Vudu is a niche" I think you are way off with this

Negative public image. I believe that may be one of the reasons. Many insiders seem to view Disney as the gold standard with their (is it Keychest?) system. Maybe we will see developments there. like I said, I will return when something happens. But something does need to happen. I believe UV doesn't have a reputation globally (in the tech world) and as Netflix and Amazon have proven, expansion is vital.

[huskerbear]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Negative public image. I believe that may be one of the reasons. Many insiders seem to view Disney as the gold standard with their (is it Keychest?) system. Maybe we will see developments there. like I said, I will return when something happens. But something does need to happen. I believe UV doesn't have a reputation globally (in the tech world) and as Netflix and Amazon have proven, expansion is vital.

Negative public image? Ok, maybe with the group that was doing itunes when UV started but otherwise I disagree. Gold standard? Yes, it's hooked to more store fronts but it's ONE studios movies......I still say Disneys DMA was a move in the wrong direction. They should have joined the DECE like everybody else, and all the store fronts should have got on board. I don't need multiple DVD players to play my DVDs from different studios, we shouldn't need multiple players to play our digital purchases...I don't but, many have that problem...

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Negative public image? Ok, maybe with the group that was doing itunes when UV started but otherwise I disagree. Gold standard? Yes, it's hooked to more store fronts but it's ONE studios movies......I still say Disneys DMA was a move in the wrong direction. They should have joined the DECE like everybody else, and all the store fronts should have got on board. I don't need multiple DVD players to play my DVDs from different studios, we shouldn't need multiple players to play our digital purchases...I don't but, many have that problem...

Everything is linked to my VUDU so I watch everything on that

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by huskerbear

Negative public image? Ok, maybe with the group that was doing itunes when UV started but otherwise I disagree. Gold standard? Yes, it's hooked to more store fronts but it's ONE studios movies......I still say Disneys DMA was a move in the wrong direction. They should have joined the DECE like everybody else, and all the store fronts should have got on board. I don't need multiple DVD players to play my DVDs from different studios, we shouldn't need multiple players to play our digital purchases...I don't but, many have that problem...

People don't care who is to blame or backggrpund, they just care how they access movies. The idea was to be able to buy from any storefront and be able to store all those movies in a locker. Ultraviolet has failed miserably with that. Google Play, Amazon, ITunes, PlayStation store video, Sky (UK) and Disney are all huge players that do not work with UV. Will that be rectified? I don't believe it will. If Digital HD starts dropping, which is very possible considering very small digit growth (virtually flatline IMO) Vudu will be dropped. Just look at iTunes music downloads. There is talk of Apple killing them off in the next couple of years. That's one of the things with digital, I don't see how one can love films but not want to preserve them and risk losing access to films or for a storefront to be dropped like a bad habit.

Anyway, I'm leaving if there. I have already discussed all this and this thread is just going in circles.

Respect for your replies, I appreciate them.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Batman1980

Everything is linked to my VUDU so I watch everything on that

Pretty soon, content will be split though. Exclusives are going to be a big thing in the coming years. I 100% believe that. Your way of doing things is a risky policy in that sense IMO.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Pretty soon, content will be split though. Exclusives are going to be a big thing in the coming years. I 100% believe that. Your way of doing things is a risky policy in that sense IMO.

Wonder how that would affect my ability to watch DCs off a memory card on my tablet, kinda worried now.