# on demand download speeds.



## ciurca (Apr 14, 2009)

Is it just me, with Mediacom internet or is it not an ISP issue and similar across the board? I find that DirecTV serves up on demand very slowly. I usually try to let movies load up to 30% before watching but can still wind up running out of buffer. My download speeds are usually around 20mbps. At least that is what I pay for.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

ciurca said:


> Is it just me, with Mediacom internet or is it not an ISP issue and similar across the board? I find that DirecTV serves up on demand very slowly. I usually try to let movies load up to 30% before watching but can still wind up running out of buffer. My download speeds are usually around 20mbps. At least that is what I pay for.


I have a 12 Mb/s U-Verse, which tests very close to this and I don't have buffer problems.
Some of this "may" be due to the program you're looking at, as file sizes/bit rates do vary.
SHO has been one of the larger compared to say Starz.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

ciurca said:


> Is it just me, with Mediacom internet or is it not an ISP issue and similar across the board? I find that DirecTV serves up on demand very slowly. I usually try to let movies load up to 30% before watching but can still wind up running out of buffer. My download speeds are usually around 20mbps. At least that is what I pay for.


How is your system connected to the internet? Is it hard wired or connected with a wireless connection kit?


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 19, 2013)

I have had issues with their on demand download speeds as well. I have gone wired and wireless as I have both kits. My internet is with TWC and I have the 30mbps internet tier. I have just come to my consensus that directv just limits the amount of bandwidth they can offer for uploading to their customers to keep everyone at a speed their bandwidth can handle. 

When I first got the service 2 months ago I could let a movie get to 30% and it would get to the point where it would have to buffer. However I just tried last night cause I got a new tv and let it go to 10% and it played all the way through. 

I hope you can get your issue resolved. Have you tried doing a speed test at www . speedtest . net and post your results. Maybe your provider isn't getting all the bandwidth you pay for to you. Could be a simple modem restart or maybe they need to come out and check your equipment.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

DeeZee said:


> I have had issues with their on demand download speeds as well. I have gone wired and wireless as I have both kits. My internet is with TWC and I have the 30mbps internet tier. I have just come to my consensus that directv just limits the amount of bandwidth they can offer for uploading to their customers to keep everyone at a speed their bandwidth can handle.
> 
> When I first got the service 2 months ago I could let a movie get to 30% and it would get to the point where it would have to buffer. However I just tried last night cause I got a new tv and let it go to 10% and it played all the way through.
> 
> I hope you can get your issue resolved. Have you tried doing a speed test at www . speedtest . net and post your results. Maybe your provider isn't getting all the bandwidth you pay for to you. Could be a simple modem restart or maybe they need to come out and check your equipment.


If you have a constant 10 Mb/s, you should be fine, as DirecTV will only send it "in real time".
With the Genie, there is a "watch now" where it downloads but starts playing at the same time.
I don't run out of buffer, but it also isn't feeding so much that the buffer gets larger either.
With my 12 Mb/s HD is only slightly faster the 1:1, though if I go for a program off of Starz, they seem to be around 6 Mb/s, so they come faster.


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 19, 2013)

So its the content provider I.E. HBO, SHO which actually upload the video content to you? I have under the impression Directv was sending this info over.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I think it comes from directv. I know HBO doesn't deliver it, it's one reason they won't let a non tv subscriber to pay for online access.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

DeeZee said:


> So its the content provider I.E. HBO, SHO which actually upload the video content to you? I have under the impression Directv was sending this info over.


I believe it comes from DirecTV as I've seen photos of their server room for this.
Now "what they get" from the suppliers is where the size differences come from.


----------



## Phil17108 (Apr 10, 2010)

My last few downloads there was a box that asked if I wanted hi quality or low. any one ran into this. tired both and look about the same. The hi took all night and the low was very fast? ran speed test and TWC is good.


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

We have not seen any issues with download/streaming of on demand content. My son downloaded a few Portlandia episodes the other day (this was SD of course) and they took about 5 minutes per episode. HD comes down at about twice realtime (i.e. 60 minutes for a two hour movie). We have FiOS Quantum 75mbps service.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Diana C said:


> We have not seen any issues with download/streaming of on demand content. My son downloaded a few Portlandia episodes the other day (this was SD of course) and they took about 5 minutes per episode.* HD comes down at about twice realtime* (i.e. 60 minutes for a two hour movie). We have FiOS Quantum 75mbps service.


I think you'd be the first to ever post this. If the bit-rate for this HD is close to 6 Mb/s, this time is fairly reasonable, but I haven't ever read/heard that the DirecTV stream gets higher than 9 Mb/s.


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

I admit we haven't timed it, but that's roughly what we get. :whatdidid Maybe it was 75 minutes for a 2 hour movie, certainly no more than that.


----------



## west99999 (May 12, 2007)

If the OP is DL using the HR34 then then new download should stream OD real time with their speed. I have used it several times since the update and I get a message that says preparing for playback and then it streams realtime with no buffer at all.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Diana C said:


> I admit we haven't timed it, but that's roughly what we get. :whatdidid Maybe it was 75 minutes for a 2 hour movie, certainly no more than that.


Since MPEG-4 bit-rates vary so much, it gets hard to nail down exactly what you're getting.
"Generally" the stream is just fast enough to keep up with watching real time and not have buffer problems.
I downloaded a good 10 shows off of Starz and was surprised they finished as quickly as they did. Given I only have 12 Mb/s, they came through at close to 1.5:1. 
Using DirecTV2PC, showed their bit-rates were around 6 Mb/s on the average, and yet the PQ was fine. :shrug:


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Speedtest. is fine for some things, but its measuring of the first few seconds of d/l and u/l often don't translate into real speeds over time. Don't know what the answer is to this, but network traffic between your modem and the central connection can bog down significantly. I've experienced from lightning fast to glacial- pardon the hyperbole!


----------



## SledgeHammer (Dec 28, 2007)

It's not very obvious to a lot of people (EDIT: I don't mean this as an insult, I mean its not very obvious to non-techy / non-Windows / non-UI people ), but you need to wait for the progress bar to turn green, not the %. If you have a slow connection, waiting for 30% may not turn the bar green. If you pay attention, you'll notice that the bar starts out red meaning you are DEFINITELY going to run out of buffer if you start watching now. After a while it'll turn yellow which means you MAY run out of buffer if you start watching now. After it's downloaded enough, it'll turn green and you SHOULD be good to go (can still run out of buffer if the connection speed drops significantly).

This has absolutely nothing to do with %'s. It's simply calculating your real time download speed and figuring out how much longer its going to take to download the program vs. how much of the program you have in the buffer.


----------



## brucegrr (Sep 14, 2006)

I have a 30mb down and 5mb up internet connection and generally the On Demand download speed is pathetically slow. Certainly not 1:1, but a lot slower than it should be. This is no big deal for us since we tend to download On Demand programs and watch them later. (and there are no wireless connections in the process)


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

brucegrr said:


> I have a 30mb down and 5mb up internet connection and generally the On Demand download speed is pathetically slow. Certainly not 1:1, but a lot slower than it should be. This is no big deal for us since we tend to download On Demand programs and watch them later. (and there are no wireless connections in the process)


Long ago, when this first came out, I was on a cable modem, and my 3 Mb/s was only that at 2 AM. Midday it could be almost as slow as dial-up, to the point that the last weekend I had it an SD VOD was taking 18 hr.
Next day I changed providers and never had a problem since.
I've mapped out times and mins of programing, with 3, 6, and now 12 Mb/s, and just don't see problems from DirecTV's side, though they don't look to be above ≈ 9 Mb/s.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

Yesterday I downloaded a movie from On Demand. Movie was about an hour and 26 minutes long. Total download time was less than 46 minutes. I'm on a 25 meg download but tested at 35 during that time. Router was set to prioritize download from FTP server.


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 19, 2013)

I don't know what happened, however I downloaded a movie off HBO this past weekend and started watching it right away to see if it would stop to buffer.... nope played from beginning to end without really giving it time download before playing. Well i wont complain


----------



## west99999 (May 12, 2007)

This is the new software that "fixed" the ondemand. Good internet should get you real time "streaming".


----------



## prushing (Feb 14, 2007)

I tested my HR34 for a 1 hour HD show off the AUD network. It downloaded in ~30 mins. On my previous HR21, stuff would download very slow, so looks like it may be better on the HR34. All other things were equal on the connection side.


----------



## woj027 (Sep 3, 2007)

is there a way to determine the network speed on an HRxx? I know I can go to Speedtest dot net or some other site to see my speed on my computer or smart phone, but is there some way to check it on the HRxx??


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

prushing said:


> I tested my HR34 for a 1 hour HD show off the AUD network. It downloaded in ~30 mins. On my previous HR21, stuff would download very slow, so looks like it may be better on the HR34. All other things were equal on the connection side.


The AUD channel is 720p, which might be why you got ≈ 2:1


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

woj027 said:


> is there a way to determine the network speed on an HRxx? I know I can go to Speedtest dot net or some other site to see my speed on my computer or smart phone, but is there some way to check it on the HRxx??


Not off of the receiver that I know of.
You can setup a couple of recordings and see when each starts, then look at how long each is. What gets harder is finding out the recording's bit-rate.
Some routers can monitor their ports and you can stream a program with DirecTV2PC to a computer and get an idea of the bit-rate.


----------



## prushing (Feb 14, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> The AUD channel is 720p, which might be why you got ≈ 2:1


I just checked and it also didn't have commercials so it was only 43 mins, so not great speed that I thought I was getting


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Phil17108 said:


> My last few downloads there was a box that asked if I wanted hi quality or low. any one ran into this. tired both and look about the same. The hi took all night and the low was very fast? ran speed test and TWC is good.


I've seen that box and used the better HD option. Downloaded quickly.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Not off of the receiver that I know of.
> You can setup a couple of recordings and see when each starts, then look at how long each is. What gets harder is finding out the recording's bit-rate.
> Some routers can monitor their ports and you can stream a program with DirecTV2PC to a computer and get an idea of the bit-rate.


I can usually watch OD downloads after a couple minutes, if it's something I'm planning on watching immediately. Don't have to wait for the green, I start watching after a couple minutes and never have a buffering problem. And, now they've fixed the audio and video sync problem!

I watched an episode of _Spartacus _the other day while the HR was downloading the whole season's content and when I was done watching the first episode the HR was downloading the fourth episode. Second and third episodes had already downloaded.

About the same thing happened with _Dexter _a few days ago.

My cable modem puts out about 56mbs to the router and that's where you can see what else is pulling BB from the router. Simply put, it's the router you have to measure. Speedtest just measures what you are getting to the modem. After that, the router software should tell you what's going on. I went thru all kinds of Net problems last year and it was my OOMA causing the problem. Took that off and resolved the problem.

One thing more about Speedtest, if you go from server to server you'll see each one has a different download speed. Since I have Cablevison's modem, I use the server in NYC that says "Optimum" on it.

Rich


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

Rich said:


> ...One thing more about Speedtest, if you go from server to server you'll see each one has a different download speed. Since I have Cablevison's modem, I use the server in NYC that says "Optimum" on it.
> 
> Rich


Of course that is going to give you your maximum attainable rate, since that is testing solely within Cablevision's network.

To get a more realistic idea of what a download from DirecTV's servers would run at, you could try a server at a greater distance - like Texas, or California. That will involve crossing a number of backbone routers and so include the effects of some router congestion.

Different routes will also yield different results. As an example, I just ran a test to Secaucus NJ and get 82Mbps down. Then I ran a test to Los Angeles and got 18Mbps, but a test to San Jose yielded 75Mbps.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Diana C said:


> Of course that is going to give you your maximum attainable rate, since that is testing solely within Cablevision's network.
> 
> To get a more realistic idea of what a download from DirecTV's servers would run at, you could try a server at a greater distance - like Texas, or California. That will involve crossing a number of backbone routers and so include the effects of some router congestion.
> 
> Different routes will also yield different results. As an example, I just ran a test to Secaucus NJ and get 82Mbps down. Then I ran a test to Los Angeles and got 18Mbps, but a test to San Jose yielded 75Mbps.


I know. It's kinda mind-boggling. All CV cares about is the speed from their Optimum server in NY. What happens after that is kinda up to you to figure out. When I pointed this out to a CV manager, who actually came to my house, he just said as long as we supply the modem with what we advertise, that's as far as we go.

Rich


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

Rich said:


> I know. It's kinda mind-boggling. All CV cares about is the speed from their Optimum server in NY. What happens after that is kinda up to you to figure out. When I pointed this out to a CV manager, who actually came to my house, he just said as long as we supply the modem with what we advertise, that's as far as we go.
> 
> Rich


Are you saying that CV should be concerned about the speed of the internet itself? All they can control at all is the speed TO the internet from your installation. What happens with network switching after that to skip around the world is not under their control.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> Are you saying that CV should be concerned about the speed of the internet itself? All they can control at all is the speed TO the internet from your installation. What happens with network switching after that to skip around the world is not under their control.


Tony, you don't know what I went thru with CV last year. My download speed was 2mbs most of the time (that's for ~ $79 a month). That's why the manager came to my house. He didn't want to and was told by CV to get out to my home and fix it. The main problem was with CVs antiquated delivery system. They found all kinds of problems and fixed them. What I've written about was incidental to that.

Rich


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

Rich said:


> Tony, you don't know what I went thru with CV last year. My download speed was 2mbs most of the time (that's for ~ $79 a month). That's why the manager came to my house. He didn't want to and was told by CV to get out to my home and fix it. The main problem was with CVs antiquated delivery system. They found all kinds of problems and fixed them. What I've written about was incidental to that.
> 
> Rich


Sounds pretty bad. Sorry to hear it. I was just not understanding what you were saying. If they are not delivering good thru put consistently, then the problem is theirs as they should deliver good speed from their connection to the backbone to your house.


----------



## CATCRAW (Mar 27, 2008)

ciurca said:


> Is it just me, with Mediacom internet or is it not an ISP issue and similar across the board? I find that DirecTV serves up on demand very slowly. I usually try to let movies load up to 30% before watching but can still wind up running out of buffer. My download speeds are usually around 20mbps. At least that is what I pay for.


I have the same speed, verified with Speedtest and I have the same issue reported above. I find I have to let the entire VOD download or I run into the buffering issue. My setup is wireless. I have let movies load to 50% and still run into buffering issues.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tonyd79 said:


> Sounds pretty bad. Sorry to hear it. I was just not understanding what you were saying. If they are not delivering good thru put consistently, then the problem is theirs as they should deliver good speed from their connection to the backbone to your house.


Some CV guys from Montana were at my house after Sandy hit. They had to put in a new drop. Talked to them for quite a while and they were shocked at how bad the local CV equipment is.

What I had last year was a repeat of the year before. Same thing, but CV was blaming that on someone in my neighborhood using massive servers and had trucks out looking for them. I got this from a guy who stopped by to tell me he had seen my work order and nothing was gonna get done in my home until the whole problem was solved. Nice guy, most of them are, they're just dealing with a system that needs to be upgraded.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

CATCRAW said:


> I have the same speed, verified with Speedtest and I have the same issue reported above. I find I have to let the entire VOD download or I run into the buffering issue. My setup is wireless. I have let movies load to 50% and still run into buffering issues.


I never have buffering problems with VOD or NetFlix. I'd be looking at the router. How old is it?

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

I can't speak for other ISPs, but I do have a lot of experience with those I've had.
Cable has a weakness of sharing bandwidth from the node, where copper changes to fiber.
DSL, or U-verse, has a weakness over distance to their node/VRAD, where it changes to fiber.

Cable can be great went it's managed well, and horrible when it's not.

Case in point:

A "mom & pop" local cable company finally added internet service where I used to live. This was the first broadband to come into the area.
I signed up the first week for their 1 Mb/s service. WooHoo!!!!

Over time, they were bought out and the new company upgraded the service to 3 Mb/s. Around this time DirecTV VOD came out.

The cable was sold again to another company. This was still the only broadband service for the area, so the customers had grown and the service was problematic to say the least.
There were times my speedtest showed I was just above dial-up speed for the 3 Mb/s service. 
For about a year or so, I tried to work with them to resolve this. The techs were the same from the old company and were some good guys. I could show them the speedtest results, and how it varied over time of day.
This first thing their manager did was to tweak their end so speedtest always returned a good report. This didn't change the VOD download times, but merely masked the problem.
What was strange was I could download large service packs from Microsoft at full speed, but not VOD.
The real problem was they'd oversold the service for the node, as there were over 500 customers on it. They knew they needed to add another node and split the customers, but this took them another 2 years to run the fiber needed, and DSL came into the area a year before, so I dumped cable and went with DSL.

The point of this is, speedtest and the other tests can be fooled by your ISP. They can even control what you get from what server.

Whether yours is doing this or not, I don't know, but since I changed ISPs, I've no longer run into VOD problems, and the DirecTV servers seem to stream in the range of 7-9 Mb/s.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I can't speak for other ISPs, but I do have a lot of experience with those I've had.
> Cable has a weakness of sharing bandwidth from the node, where copper changes to fiber.
> DSL, or U-verse, has a weakness over distance to their node/VRAD, where it changes to fiber.
> 
> ...


I gotta say I'm satisfied now. My VOD loads fast and the audio and video are synced properly. I watch more VOD and NF content than anything else. My wife and I watch strictly D* content, but I've showed her VOD and NF streaming and she's started to use them. And likes them.

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> I gotta say I'm satisfied now. My VOD loads fast and the audio and video are synced properly. I watch more VOD and NF content than anything else. My wife and I watch strictly D* content, but I've showed her VOD and NF streaming and she's started to use them. And likes them.
> 
> Rich


I guess I should have also added that:

The last weekend I had cable, I also had DSL, so I setup SD VOD downloads from each service to check and see what DirecTV's side was doing, as both were a 3 Mb/s service.

DSL was coming at 1:1 [SD] and the first SD over cable took about 18 hours, and the second hadn't finished after 22 hours.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

This wasn't meant to degrade cable service, as U-verse took a couple of months for them to figure out they had a bad piece of equipment on the other end of their fiber.
Once they got that fixed, my 12 Mb/s connection lets me watch HD Ondemand with the "watch now" option and I don't run into buffer problems.


----------



## swyman18 (Jan 12, 2009)

Does anyone know if DirecTV uses CDN's (Content Delivery Networks) for the on demand content? Or is everything stored on servers in one location?

If no CDN's are used, latency will play a big factor in download speeds. I've watch the realtime bandwidth monitor on my router while downloading shows and it usually averages around 5 - 7 Mbps on my 20Mbps VDSL connection. Of course, I am in Hawaii so latency is a big issue for me.


----------



## CATCRAW (Mar 27, 2008)

My router is only a year old. Linksys ea4500.


----------



## jburns (May 11, 2012)

brucegrr said:


> I have a *30mb down and 5mb *up internet connection and generally the On Demand download speed is pathetically slow. Certainly not 1:1, but a lot slower than it should be. This is no big deal for us since we tend to download On Demand programs and watch them later. (and there are no wireless connections in the process)


It's hard to make sense out of much of this thread because of improper terminology. I'm not attacking you but just using your post as an example. I don't know what mb stands for. In the context we are talking about it should either be MB or Mb. MB is megabytes. Mb is megabits. One MB equals eight Mbs. Hell of a difference when your waiting for a movie to download.


----------



## swyman18 (Jan 12, 2009)

jburns said:


> It's hard to make sense out of much of this thread because of improper terminology. I'm not attacking you but just using your post as an example. I don't know what mb stands for. In the context we are talking about it should either be MB or Mb. MB is megabytes. Mb is megabits. One MB equals eight Mbs. Hell of a difference when your waiting for a movie to download.


True, some of the terminology is vague, but do you really think that he's talking about a 240 Megabit / 40 Megabit residential connection? Granted, they do exist in places, but I think most people know what he's referring to.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

CATCRAW said:


> My router is only a year old. Linksys ea4500.


Good one. I've got the 4200 V1. Does all I ask it to.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jburns said:


> It's hard to make sense out of much of this thread because of improper terminology. I'm not attacking you but just using your post as an example. I don't know what mb stands for. In the context we are talking about it should either be MB or Mb. MB is megabytes. Mb is megabits. One MB equals eight Mbs. Hell of a difference when *your* waiting for a movie to download.


As long as everyone understands, what difference does it make? I've seen mbs and Mbs written by manufacturers and when we're talking about downloading speeds, everyone should know what we're talking about. I see someone write "esata" and I know that's not correct, but I know what it means. In other words, most texts are context driven. I'm certainly not gonna (oops, not a word) try to correct every "esata" I see as long as I can understand the meaning from the context of the post. Look at your own post. You've used "your" and that's just wrong in the context of that sentence. Think 20 of us are gonna jump on that? Of course not. We know what you mean. As you wrote, "I'm not attacking you", just trying to let you know if you expect to see every word or acronym or abbreviation written exactly as it should be, you're just gonna be constantly frustrated.

Rich


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Rich said:


> As long as everyone understands, what difference does it make? I've seen mbs and Mbs written by manufacturers and when we're talking about downloading speeds, everyone should know what we're talking about. I see someone write "esata" and I know that's not correct, but I know what it means. In other words, most texts are context driven. I'm certainly not gonna (oops, not a word) try to correct every "esata" I see as long as I can understand the meaning from the context of the post. Look at your own post. You've used "your" and that's just wrong in the context of that sentence. Think 20 of us are gonna jump on that? Of course not. We know what you mean. As you wrote, "I'm not attacking you", just trying to let you know if you expect to see every word or acronym or abbreviation written exactly as it should be, you're just gonna be constantly frustrated.
> 
> Rich


True;

Just like during an internet outage in my area late last night (TWC R.R. 12/1 service) I was checking my cable modem (SA DPC2100 Rev. 2) numbers via its 192.168.100.1 web utility.

And it list the receive and transmit power levels in "dbmV," the receive S/N ratio is also in "dbmV." And while the upstream rate is listed as "Symbol Rate" with the correct units of "Ksym/s," the downstream rate from the CMTS is labeled as "Bit Rate," but list the symbol rate for it instead, spelled all the way out with 7 figures in units of "Hz." :nono:

So yes, you have to pay close attention to the context as even manufacturers play quite loose with terminology many times.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> True;
> 
> Just like during an internet outage in my area late last night (TWC R.R. 12/1 service) I was checking my cable modem (SA DPC2100 Rev. 2) numbers via its 192.168.100.1 web utility.
> 
> ...


True. It's hard to keep up with the proper spelling as much as we'd all like to be correct all the time. As long as I can figure out what the poster is saying, I'm OK with just about any spelling, not that I know what all the abbreviations mean. But, a quick search usually answers my questions.

A thoroughly frustrated poster doesn't come here for grammar lessons, he comes here for help. Correcting his posts just drives him up the wall a little higher.

Rich


----------



## jburns (May 11, 2012)

Rich said:


> A thoroughly frustrated poster doesn't come here for grammar lessons, he comes here for help. *Correcting his posts just drives him up the wall a little higher.*
> 
> Rich


But I didn't do that did I. You seem to be having trouble with the definition of grammar. Who cares though. Terminology, grammar, its all the same. Just use whatever word you want. We can use a magic eight ball to figure out what you mean. Who cares.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

jburns said:


> But I didn't do that did I. You seem to be having trouble with the definition of grammar. Who cares though. Terminology, grammar, its all the same. Just use whatever word you want. We can use a magic eight ball to figure out what you mean. Who cares.


You meant: "But I didn't do that*,* did I*?*". You seem to be having a problem of your own. Again, "Who cares*,* though*?*. And, yet again: "Who cares*?*". You seem to have a problem with punctuation marks.

Rich


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Rich said:


> You seem to have a problem with punctuation marks.
> 
> Rich


You meant: 
"You seem to have a problem with punctuation marks!"


----------



## inhd40 (Jan 26, 2013)

I have DSL and it varies from slow to incredibly slow. It takes 15-18 hours to download 1 hour of HD content. This is on a hardwired connection to HR-34. I think my setup is fine and was pretty much the same with Dish. I'm trying to catch up on some series and would love to download in SD or some lower rez. I have never seen the box asking what resolution I would prefer. Anyone know how I can get to this?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

inhd40 said:


> I have DSL and it varies from slow to incredibly slow. It takes 15-18 hours to download 1 hour of HD content. This is on a hardwired connection to HR-34. I think my setup is fine and was pretty much the same with Dish. I'm trying to catch up on some series and would love to download in SD or some lower rez. I have never seen the box asking what resolution I would prefer. Anyone know how I can get to this?


What does your DSL connection test at?


----------



## inhd40 (Jan 26, 2013)

veryoldschool said:


> What does your DSL connection test at?


Using the providers test it is .38 Mbps download and .13 Mbps upload, with a .55 ms ping. It varies, but that is probably near the top end. This is area wide in the nieghborhood with old lines out in the country. I pay for up to 1.5 download but that is just a dream. We are scheduled to be upgraded to fiber at some point but that might be a year or two away.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

inhd40 said:


> Using the providers test it is .38 Mbps download and .13 Mbps upload, with a .55 ms ping. It varies, but that is probably near the top end. This is area wide in the nieghborhood with old lines out in the country. I pay for up to 1.5 download but that is just a dream. We are scheduled to be upgraded to fiber at some point but that might be a year or two away.


You need about 6 Mb/s to even think about HD [at 1.5:1].
Some quick number crunching shows 1 hour of HD will take you about 18-23.6 hours at that speed. :eek2:


----------



## inhd40 (Jan 26, 2013)

veryoldschool said:


> You need about 6 Mb/s to even think about HD [at 1.5:1].
> Some quick number crunching shows 1 hour of HD will take you about 18-23.6 hours at that speed. :eek2:


It does work, but it takes way too long and slows everything else down in the process. That is why I would rather download in SD just to get caught up on things. The shows I am wanting to download the only option is HD. I haven't found an option yet to do otherwise.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Laxguy said:


> You meant:
> "You seem to have a problem with punctuation marks!"


I was gonna PM you and ask you to join this discussion. You're a better grammarian than I am. Personally, as long as I can understand a post, I really don't care about the grammar or abbreviations, which is what started this discussion.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

inhd40 said:


> It does work, but it takes way too long and slows everything else down in the process. That is why I would rather download in SD just to get caught up on things. The shows I am wanting to download the only option is HD. I haven't found an option yet to do otherwise.


When you first enter VOD, you will see a list on the left. One of the options is HD. Don't click on that and you should see SD listings when you click on the other options. Not absolutely sure about this, but why else would the HD option be on the list?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

inhd40 said:


> It does work, but it takes way too long and slows everything else down in the process. That is why I would rather download in SD just to get caught up on things. The shows I am wanting to download the only option is HD. I haven't found an option yet to do otherwise.


Just curious, how much does your Net connection cost a month?

Rich


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Rich said:


> I was gonna PM you and ask you to join this discussion. You're a better grammarian than I am. Personally, as long as I can understand a post, I really don't care about the grammar or abbreviations, which is what started this discussion.
> 
> Rich


There was absolutely nothing wrong with you ending that sentence with a period instead of the exclamation point I put in. Was just funnin', trying to lighten things up.

And thanks for the complement. Er, compliment....


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

inhd40 said:


> It does work, but it takes way too long and slows everything else down in the process. That is why I would rather download in SD just to get caught up on things. *The shows I am wanting to download the only option is HD.* I haven't found an option yet to do otherwise.


Boy this is a switch,

I wonder what episodic shows those are since the overwhelmingly chief complaint of VOD for those types of programs is not any or enough HD versions available.


----------



## KyL416 (Nov 11, 2005)

HoTat2 said:


> Boy this is a switch,
> 
> I wonder what episodic shows those are since the overwhelmingly chief complaint of VOD for those types of programs is not any or enough HD versions available.


On Demand content from Viacom (Nick, MTV, VH1, etc), Scripps (HGTV, Food, DIY, etc) and A&E's networks (A&E, History, Lifetime, etc) are only available in HD now.


----------



## inhd40 (Jan 26, 2013)

Rich said:


> When you first enter VOD, you will see a list on the left. One of the options is HD. Don't click on that and you should see SD listings when you click on the other options. Not absolutely sure about this, but why else would the HD option be on the list?
> 
> Rich


What you get by not clicking the HD option is a mix of programs in HD or SD, but not both for the same program.

The price I pay is bundled with voice and that is a little over $68.00. Before it was bundled it was $40 with a lower speed. The bundling gave me the higher speed for about the same price I was paying before for both, but of course I was already getting the highest it was going to get. I have to have the voice to get the dsl or I would drop the landline, so in truth it's costing close to 70 for just the dsl. That would get me close to getting satelite internet, just not sure about download limits as I am unlimited now.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Laxguy said:


> There was absolutely nothing wrong with you ending that sentence with a period instead of the exclamation point I put in. Was just funnin', trying to lighten things up.
> 
> And thanks for the complement. Er, compliment....


Was the argument I was talking about. I knew the period was correct. I should have used the "other" Rich's method of !!!. I know that ticks off many people... :lol:

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

inhd40 said:


> What you get by not clicking the HD option is a mix of programs in HD or SD, but not both for the same program.


Didn't know what would happen. Sorry.



> The price I pay is bundled with voice and that is a little over $68.00. Before it was bundled it was $40 with a lower speed. The bundling gave me the higher speed for about the same price I was paying before for both, but of course I was already getting the highest it was going to get. I have to have the voice to get the dsl or I would drop the landline, so in truth it's costing close to 70 for just the dsl. That would get me close to getting satelite internet, just not sure about download limits as I am unlimited now.


Wow! That's expensive. I pay a bit over $75 for my ISP, Cablevision, but I do get more than 56 down.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Boy this is a switch,
> 
> I wonder what episodic shows those are since the overwhelmingly chief complaint of VOD for those types of programs is not any or enough HD versions available.


I still know a lot of folks that only have SD sets. Puzzles me, some of them are quite wealthy.

Rich


----------



## CallMeCoach (Jan 29, 2013)

This is so annoying. By the time I get something to download I'm already doing something else or just not interested anymore.


----------



## vandergraff (Sep 26, 2007)

I know this is an old topic - but I am seeing the same.

I have Comcast 25 Mbps download speed which tests at ~27 Mbps - confirmed by ShaperProbe (and long file downloads from iTunes to my AppleTV while looking at average download speed on my ASUS RT-N66U router).

When I try to view an on demand title I cannot watch in realtime and it takes a long time (hours) to complete the download of a 1 hour show.

I have no problems streaming Netflix 1080P or Vudu 3 bar HDX (which needs 8+ Mbps). Everything is connect wired.

My DVR is an HR20-100 withits somewhat unique connection to Deca.

Is it the HR20-100 that is limiting my download streaming connection. Does the HR20-100 support realtime streaming?


----------



## vandergraff (Sep 26, 2007)

Given the lack of response I am assuming what I am seeing is normal......


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

We have 75/35 Mbps FiOS service (ran the test results below as I was typing this) and we sometimes don't get the option to watch in realtime. It may be a problem with the load on DirecTV's servers or traffic on the route to the data center, but sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. There are many factors besides the spped of you ISP connection.



To give you an example, here is a test to a Charter server in Monterey Park, CA



Meanwhile, just a few miles away, the server run by Race Communcations gave much better results:


----------



## vandergraff (Sep 26, 2007)

Wow that is a big variation in reported speeds. Speedtest gives an idea of the instantaneous download - but I find ShaperProbe a much more reliable indication of true download speeds http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~partha/diffprobe/shaperprobe.html

Last night I downloaded the last 5 episodes of Game Of Thrones Season 3 from HBO on Demand - the 5 (approx 1 hour episodes) downloaded in 5.5 hours so not quite real time.

The log from my router shows a pretty constant download speed between 10:30 PM and 4 AM of between 600 - 800 kBps (so ~ 4.8 - 6.4 Mbps). See the thumbnail below.

It looks like DirecTV is limiting the download speed. I understand the point about connection to DirecTV servers - but would hope they they try to connect to the most appropriate server......


----------



## gr8ful (May 12, 2009)

vendor 


swyman18 said:


> Does anyone know if DirecTV uses CDN's (Content Delivery Netakaimworks) for the on demand content? Or is everything stored on servers in one location?
> 
> If no CDN's are used, latency will play a big factor in download speeds. I've watch the realtime bandwidth monitor on my router while downloading shows and it usually averages around 5 - 7 Mbps on my 20Mbps VDSL connection. Of course, I am in Hawaii so latency is a big issue for me.


Yes they do. I found they connect to a major CDN vendor, Akaimi (spelling?)


----------



## gr8ful (May 12, 2009)

I am sorry this topic has found no resolution. I have a 50 mega-bit-per-second cable connection that regularly tests at 30MBPS (Comcast blast).

Even in the middle of the night, when I allow only my DirecTV DVR through the internet, my downloads fail to keep with realtime (I always select highest quality).

I have the bandwidth, but DirecTV just is not delivering it. even though they use a CDN.

Getting downloads that do not allow fast forwarding adds additional aggravation.

If anyone has succeeded to improve DL speed I'd love to hear how!

Afraid it's the same sorry story. When you become a market leader, profit motivations exceed customer satisfaction.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

gr8ful said:


> I am sorry this topic has found no resolution. I have a 50 mega-bit-per-second cable connection that regularly tests at 30MBPS (Comcast blast).
> 
> Even in the middle of the night, when I allow only my DirecTV DVR through the internet, my downloads fail to keep with realtime (I always select highest quality).
> 
> ...


As I posted in "the other thread", I haven't had much problem with VOD on an 11 Mb/s connection.
Some content has higher bit-rates than the 9 Mb/s that DirecTV seems to limit at, so "Watch Now" fails and I need to use the record option.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Then there are those of us out in the tules who can't get good d/l speeds. So it's pretty easy to set a few d/l's a bit in advance so one doesn't have to be subjected to the horrors—nay, the indignity—of waiting for throughput. Oh, the humanity, the shame, the hardships one is subjected to in watching VOD.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

vandergraff said:


> Wow that is a big variation in reported speeds. Speedtest gives an idea of the instantaneous download - but I find ShaperProbe a much more reliable indication of true download speeds http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~partha/diffprobe/shaperprobe.html
> 
> Last night I downloaded the last 5 episodes of Game Of Thrones Season 3 from HBO on Demand - the 5 (approx 1 hour episodes) downloaded in 5.5 hours so not quite real time.
> 
> ...


I went to look at that program and it says it doesn't work on Windows 7! I may download it later and put it on one of my two remaining XP machines.


----------



## Rob (Apr 23, 2002)

And Genie sill tells me my internet connection is too slow. I believe the problem is on Directv's end.


----------

