# On-Demand way too slow to be usable.



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

What kinds of speeds are you all getting for so called 'On-Demand'? I've only used it a few times because of how long it takes to watch anything. I'm downloading a 30min HD On-Demand program and it has been downloading for about 90 minutes and is at 80%.

I'm wondering if my complaint should be with Comcast? My Internet is pretty darn quick - I just did a few 'speed tests' (even while the DirecTV download continues) and I am getting about 35Mbps down and 20Mbps up. That's a good thing but maybe Comcast is throttling the connections to DirecTV? I wouldn't put it past them that's for sure!

The way it stands now On-Demand for me is worthless.

I'm using DECA and there is a DECA adapter about 4' from my SWM16 plugged directly into the Comcast cable modem.

If these results are not typical I may try plugging my laptop into the DECA adapter on one of my HR22s and try the speed tests there....


----------



## allenn (Nov 19, 2005)

I have AT&T DSL, 3 Mbps, connected to a Linksys wireless "N" router which transmits to a wireless "N" gaming adapter and a wireless "G" bridge. I can download on-demand HD programs and movies, greater than 60 minutes, in less than 30 minutes. When I had a hard wired ethernet connection to the DVRs it was faster. 

I have heard that Comcast reduces download speeds for some media downloads. You may be experiencing the new bandwidth restrictions. Another possiblility is cable providers have shared bandwidth and your neighbors are all hitting the network at the same time. I'm no expert in these matters, but there are plenty of DBSTALK members who may shed light on your on-demand speed issue. Best wishes!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Mike Greer said:


> What kinds of speeds are you all getting for so called 'On-Demand'?


The limit is close to 7-8 Mb/s from their end, so even if you have a faster connection, it won't come any faster.
ISPs have been known for "choking" DirecTV On Demand, since it may compete with their own service.
HD with my 6 Mb/s varies from 1:1 to 1:1.5 [mins of programing verses download time], but checking the program bit rates has shown these are what vary, and my ISP isn't the choke point.
"In most cases" you can buffer enough within a short time, to start watching a program, without running out of buffer, unless you have a slow connection, or your ISP is choking it.
"On Demand", might better be called "on request", but it shouldn't take all that long.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Just a small point, wired or wireless should make little to no difference for VOD stuff, if your wireless network is running well, even g speeds are usually faster than your connection to your internet provider...I have AT&T's 6Mb/sec DSL package, my wireless g at 54Mb/sec is way faster than my internet connection. Hard-wiring to my network would not speed up VOD downloads one bit because my wireless connection is not the bottleneck, my ISP connection is. Until you have an ISP giving you upwards of 36Mb/sec connection speeds and no content throttling, wireless g for VOD is all that is needed.


----------



## Red Orc (Oct 11, 2011)

CCarncross said:


> Just a small point, wired or wireless should make little to no difference for VOD stuff, if your wireless network is running well, even g speeds are usually faster than your connection to your internet provider...I have AT&T's 6M DSL package, my wireless g at 54M is way faster than my internet connection. Hard-wiring to my network would not speed up VOD downloads one bit because my wireless connection is not the bottleneck, my ISP connection is. Until you have an ISP giving you upwards of 36Mb connection speeds and no content throttling, wireless g for VOD is all that is needed.


It is not possible for your wireless connection to be 54MB per second if AT&T is only providing you with 8MB per second speed. I don't think AT&T even has internet speeds that fast. Your wireless migt be 54 megaBITS per second but I very seriously doubt if it 54 megaBYTES per second.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

And for wifi, that is theoretical and dependent on many factors (other devices connected, distance from the access point, encryption etc etc.


----------



## Red Orc (Oct 11, 2011)

dpeters11 said:


> And for wifi, that is theoretical and dependent on many factors (other devices connected, distance from the access point, encryption etc etc.


I just did a speed test on my laptop using my WiFi and I got about 35MB/s, That's also the same speed as my wired connection.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Red Orc said:


> It is not possible for your wireless connection to be 54MB per second if AT&T is only providing you with 8MB per second speed. I don't think AT&T even has internet speeds that fast. Your wireless migt be 54 megaBITS per second but I very seriously doubt if it 54 megaBYTES per second.


My wireless is 54Mb/sec, usually achieving around 40+ speeds....I thought that was implied..I never implied it was 54MB/sec. The wireless speed I'm referring to is my internal wireless network speed, my connection to my ISP is 6Mb/sec( Elite package)....The wired parts of my home network are all gig connections and those devices cant download stuff any faster...my point was if you have a setup similar to mine(many would), switching from wireless to wired would not make VOD any faster, as your internal network, even the wireless parts are faster than most people's ISP connection...again provided your wireless network is up to snuff, mine is.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

B verses b does make a difference.


----------



## Red Orc (Oct 11, 2011)

CCarncross said:


> My wireless is 54Mb/sec, usually achieving around 40+ speeds....I thought that was implied..I never implied it was 54MB/sec. The wireless speed I'm referring to is my internal wireless network speed, my connection to my ISP is 6Mb/sec( Elite package)....The wired parts of my home network are all gig connections and those devices cant download stuff any faster...my point was if you have a setup similar to mine(many would), switching from wireless to wired would not make VOD any faster, as your internal network, even the wireless parts are faster than most people's ISP connection...again provided your wireless network is up to snuff, mine is.


Gotcha


----------



## allenn (Nov 19, 2005)

The weakest link is the internet service provider. In my case, I have AT&T DSL at 3 Mbs which is far less speed than my N Wireless, or G Bridge, or 1 Gb wired. Currently, AT&T has not throttled back my downloads; so On-Demand for HD programs and Movies work great. Best wishes!


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

Just ran a few speed tests on laptop connected to one of the DECA adapters off one of my HR22s... Nice and quick - about 28 down and 18 up...

Must be Comcast? This weekend I'll tether my cell phone to my laptop and connect it using ethernet to an HR24.... If On-Demand works faster over my cell phone I suppose I'll start yelling at Comcast. Not that they care!


----------



## T-Mac (Feb 16, 2012)

I'll be very interested to hear your results because I'm a Comcast customer who's about to switch TV service to DIRECTV and keep the internet with Comcast.

This seems highly unethical if they are doing this. Comcast already jacks up the monthly internet fee if you don't also have their TV or phone service. Greedy, greedy, greedy.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Mike Greer said:


> Just ran a few speed tests on laptop connected to one of the DECA adapters off one of my HR22s... Nice and quick - about 28 down and 18 up...
> 
> Must be Comcast? This weekend I'll tether my cell phone to my laptop and connect it using ethernet to an HR24.... If On-Demand works faster over my cell phone I suppose I'll start yelling at Comcast. Not that they care!


It might be Comcrap. I can only "speak" about the cable service I had, which was over sold, over loaded, and mismanaged. I worked with them over a year trying to resolve the issue. Using speed tests would show the number of users [or the affects of them] over time of day. In all the time trying to work with them, the only change they made was to have speed test always report full speed, so they know how to fool the tests. :nono:
My last few days with cable, SD On Demand shows were taking 14+ hours to download. DSL had just come into the area, and the cable company simply gave up on "my problem", so I've been with DSL ever since. 
A 6 Mb/s connection gets HD [depending on bit rate] between 1:1 to 1:1.5, which is "close to" being able to watch in real time, after a few mins of buffering time.


----------



## Red Orc (Oct 11, 2011)

veryoldschool said:


> It might be Comcrap. I can only "speak" about the cable service I had, which was over sold, over loaded, and mismanaged. I worked with them over a year trying to resolve the issue. Using speed tests would show the number of users [or the affects of them] over time of day. In all the time trying to work with them, the only change they made was to have speed test always report full speed, so they know how to fool the tests. :nono:
> My last few days with cable, SD On Demand shows were taking 14+ hours to download. DSL had just come into the area, and the cable company simply gave up on "my problem", so I've been with DSL ever since.
> A 6 Mb/s connection gets HD [depending on bit rate] between 1:1 to 1:1.5, which is "close to" being able to watch in real time, after a few mins of buffering time.


I agree that Comcast is probably the problem. My internet tests at about 35MB/second and it takes me about 2 1/2 to 3 hours to download 1 HD movie.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

The Biggest Problem with Speed Test is that they use small files and AT&T, Comcast, etc. are aware of that so they don't Throttle Back until after a certain amount of data has been Downloaded so that is just an Optimal Download Speed but Not Indicative of what takes place after a few minutes Downloading a Large File such as HD Video.

Sorry to Bust Your Bubble but they have figured out how the Speed Test works and they work around it.

Unless you can Monitor Download Speeds as they are occurring you will think you have Great Speed but it is just for a few minutes and then you are Throttled Back.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Richierich said:


> Unless you can Monitor Download Speeds as they are occurring you will think you have Great Speed but it is just for a few minutes and then you are Throttled Back.


I do and AT&T has be "good to me".
Even when I was on that crappy cable, DirecTV was choked, while large downloads from Microsoft wouldn't be [used service packs as a test]


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> I do and AT&T has be "good to me".
> Even when I was on that crappy cable, DirecTV was choked, while large downloads from Microsoft wouldn't be [used service packs as a test]


AT&T has just announced that they will Throttle Back any user that Abuses the Download Threshold which means if you are in the Top 5% of Usage per User you can be Throttled Back as you have been labelled a Data Download Abuser and if you read the Fine Lawyer Print they have the right to do this.

I just read it last week and more and more ISP Providers are being forced to do it since there is only so much space in the pipeline.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Richierich said:


> AT&T has just announced that they will Throttle Back any user that Abuses the Download Threshold which means if you are in the Top 5% of Usage per User you can be Throttled Back as you have been labelled a Data Download Abuser and if you read the Fine Lawyer Print they have the right to do this.
> 
> I just read it last week and more and more ISP Providers are being forced to do it since there is only so much space in the pipeline.


That's not exactly how they put it in their message to me, but there is a GB limit/month, that varies by account type.

Welcome to the world of video. "Unlimited access", has a limit, until the ISP has improved their supply side.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

You ought to be able to sue them as they are offered Limited "Unlimited Data Plan" but they don't tell you about the Limited Portion of the Agreement unless you can get out your magnifying glass to read the Fine Lawyer Print Data designed to hide all of the information from you.

Always Read The Fine Print!!!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Richierich said:


> You ought to be able to sue them as they are offered Limited "Unlimited Data Plan" but they don't tell you about the Limited Portion of the Agreement unless you can get out your magnifying glass to read the Fine Lawyer Print Data designed to hide all of the information from you.
> 
> Always Read The Fine Print!!!


"ought to" and "not worth it" are two different things here.
I'm in a U-verse area now, and was in a DSL area before, so I couldn't ever reach the imposed [150 GB] limit. Hell they didn't even have the equipment in place to track my usage. :lol:
U-verse limit is 250 GB, but I'm not sure if that's the higher speed service or mine. It would be something like 40-60 hours of HD On-Demand, which I'll never reach.


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

I do use a lot of Internet bandwidth and wouldn’t put my money on the speed tests but… I do a lot of FTP and HTTP transfers - ISO downloads and uploads. If my actual speed was anything close to as slow as the On-Demand rate I wouldn’t be able to use it.

I have Comcast Business Class – just means they charge me more for it than normal but they do claim that it is not throttled and/or limited if pay for ‘Business Class’.

I really do think it is Comcast but unless DirecTV adds more content I don’t think I’ll do anything to correct it. I used to have 7mb DSL but after getting used to how quickly I can transfer large ISOs etc I don’t think I could go back. Especially not for On-Demand.

The other curious thing it why don’t they also limit Netflix and/or Hulu? I don’t have any trouble streaming from them and the quality is much much better than SD DirecTV that I have to wait 20-30 minutes to start watching (that’s SD – HD I have to start the download hours before I want to watch).

I'll see what kind of actual speeds I get with large files but there's no doubt in my simple mind that I am getting 20Mbs+ downloads normally and sometimes even close to 50Mbs. Quick test of downloading a 960meg video clip - 1.54MB/sec... Pretty darn quick!


----------



## T-Mac (Feb 16, 2012)

As a potential switcher from comcast to DIRECTV who's planing to keep comcast internet, should I just forget about the on-demand "feature"?

We don't watch a lot of on-demand (practically none) so this is not a big deal. But it's disappointing to hear of this issue nonetheless.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

T-Mac said:


> As a potential switcher from comcast to DIRECTV who's planing to keep comcast internet, should I just forget about the on-demand "feature"?
> 
> We don't watch a lot of on-demand (practically none) so this is not a big deal. But it's disappointing to hear of this issue nonetheless.


"I'm sure" you can find comcrap customers that don't have problems with DirecTV On-Demand.
I think it really comes down to a local cable company's management of their system.


----------



## Red Orc (Oct 11, 2011)

Richierich said:


> The Biggest Problem with Speed Test is that they use small files and AT&T, Comcast, etc. are aware of that so they don't Throttle Back until after a certain amount of data has been Downloaded so that is just an Optimal Download Speed but Not Indicative of what takes place after a few minutes Downloading a Large File such as HD Video.
> 
> Sorry to Bust Your Bubble but they have figured out how the Speed Test works and they work around it.
> 
> Unless you can Monitor Download Speeds as they are occurring you will think you have Great Speed but it is just for a few minutes and then you are Throttled Back.


OK How about 39 minutes to download 4.21GB worth of files?
Files were added at 9:42AM estimated time to completion is another 5 minutes.


----------



## Red Orc (Oct 11, 2011)

T-Mac said:


> As a potential switcher from comcast to DIRECTV who's planing to keep comcast internet, should I just forget about the on-demand "feature"?
> 
> We don't watch a lot of on-demand (practically none) so this is not a big deal. But it's disappointing to hear of this issue nonetheless.


I wouldn't forget about it. It's extremely useful it just isn't as fast as we would like for it to be. In all honesty I have never even tried to watch OD the same night I downloaded it. I've always watched whatever it is the next day or the day after that so the speed issue really doesn't bother me all that much.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

veryoldschool said:


> "I'm sure" you can find comcrap customers that don't have problems with DirecTV On-Demand.
> I think it really comes down to a local cable company's management of their system.


I'm tied to Comcast, and my service is all over the place. On-Demand can be very good, or not. A big factor is what the neighbors are doing.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Laxguy said:


> I'm tied to Comcast, and my service is all over the place. On-Demand can be very good, or not. A big factor is what the neighbors are doing.


Yeah, that's the weakness of cable. All the users on the same node are sharing bandwidth. A "well managed" system, would split the node into two, to keep the load down.
The weakness of DSL is the distance to the remote terminal, or digital switching, though they too can have problems overloading their fiber link too.


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

allenn said:


> I have AT&T DSL, 3 Mbps, connected to a Linksys wireless "N" router which transmits to a wireless "N" gaming adapter and a wireless "G" bridge.* I can download on-demand HD programs and movies, greater than 60 minutes, in less than 30 minutes.* When I had a hard wired ethernet connection to the DVRs it was faster. ...





veryoldschool said:


> *The limit is close to 7-8 Mb/s from their end, so even if you have a faster connection, it won't come any faster*.
> 
> HD with my 6 Mb/s varies from 1:1 to 1:1.5 [mins of programing verses download time], but checking the program bit rates has shown these are what vary, and my ISP isn't the choke point.
> "In most cases" you can buffer enough within a short time, to start watching a program, without running out of buffer, unless you have a slow connection, or your ISP is choking it.
> "On Demand", might better be called "on request", but it shouldn't take all that long.


Oh well .... 

Just when I think I get these numbers for DIRECTV VOD rates straight in my head, I hear gross contradictions like allenn's.

A maximum rate of 7-8 Mb/s from DIRECTV's servers for a 1:1 download ratio for HD programs. seems reasonable enough. But now allenn reports a more than a 2:1 d/l ratio for HD material with only a 3 mb/s DSL service? I understand getting less (and in some cases far less) for some than the 7-8 mb/s-1:1 rate for the various reasons discussed in this thread, but this much more and with a DSL rate less than half the server rate?

What's up with that? 

BTW: Got TW-HSI here myself @ 12/1 service. Haven't really timed an HD download as of yet, but did d/l a favorite old SD sitcom from TVLD on demand when I just happened to be awake at around 3:00 AM last night and timed it just for fun.

It took 17 min to d/l a 22 min program. Sign ... :nono2: , not aware of any throttling of DIRECTV VOD from TWI.

But I'll try it again later for both SD and HD rates, as this must be some kind of fluke as the d/l rates have got to be better than this.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> Oh well ....
> 
> Just when I think I get these numbers for DIRECTV VOD rates straight in my head, I hear gross contradictions like allenn's.
> 
> ...


When you only have a 6 Mb/s connection, you have to trust posts from other with higher speed that 7-8 Mb/s is all they get. This does seem to be true for most posts I've read.
Now when I got HD and near 1:1, I had to wonder what was going on, since an earlier HD VOD had taken 1:1.5. DirecTV2PC showed the 1:1 HD streamed at 6 Mb/s, which looked very good for HD [insert confused here :lol:] and the 1:1.5 HD was more at 9 Mb/s streaming.
17 mins for an SD of 22 mins, sounds like it might have been around 4 Mb/s, but anything faster than 1:1 doesn't matter, since you can watch it "live" without running out of buffer.
This may be why DirecTV maxes at 7-8 on their end as this is close to live HD, and lets them feed more customers at the same time, verses a few customers getting it faster than they need to watch it "live". :shrug:


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> "I'm sure" you can find comcrap customers that don't have problems with DirecTV On-Demand.
> I think it really comes down to a local cable company's management of their system.


Everyone should be glad that they don't have to deal with Cablevision. I've been fighting with them for two years about my Net speed. They've got a server in NYC that they always go to when they check your speed and it always reads ~ 56 down. Not so with the other speed tests I use.

I finally got thoroughly disgusted with their "techs" and linemen who couldn't solve the problem and called their corporate offices. Got a guy who would only give me his first name. After explaining what was going on, I told him my lawyer needed a contact at CV's corporate headquarters to address the planned law suit. He told me he gets threatened with law suits every day and none ever appear. Asked him for his last name and a valid employee number and I'd have my lawyer call him as soon as we hung up.

Long story short, the next day I got calls from "Line" managers and even had one come to my house. Put my Droid phone on record and got the whole conversation. Asked the manager to take a short ride with me to my lawyer's office and explain the recording to him. Oh, no! You can't record me without my permission, was his reply. You're sitting in NJ, I told him. Let's go. He refused, but my Net connection got fixed within a few days.

Fight back Mike. You know how.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Red Orc said:


> I wouldn't forget about it. It's extremely useful it just isn't as fast as we would like for it to be. In all honesty I have never even tried to watch OD the same night I downloaded it. I've always watched whatever it is the next day or the day after that so the speed issue really doesn't bother me all that much.


You ought to see how fast my On Demand content downloads. Two years of frustration, but it was worth it. Now if FIOS would only come to our town, I'd get their Net service and kiss CV goodbye.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Laxguy said:


> I'm tied to Comcast, and my service is all over the place. On-Demand can be very good, or not. A big factor is what the neighbors are doing.


You ought to appreciate this. I live on a Court with four homes on it. Three of us use CV for our Net. After mine was fixed I asked one of their linemen to climb up the pole and see if the other two neighbor's feeds had been fixed too. Previous to my going berserk, all three of us were getting the same crappy readings, but the neighbors never complained. The lineman came down the ladder and said only mine had been fixed.

Guess Cablevision uses the "Squeaky Wheel" method when it comes to fixing their horribly outdated equipment.

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> You ought to see how fast my On Demand content downloads.
> Rich


So with your "new and improved" internet, how long does a one hour HD show take?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> So with your "new and improved" internet, how long does a one hour HD show take?


First, it's not "new and improved", it's what I payed for for two years and didn't get.

Second, I don't usually use On Demand since I prefer NetFlix.

Third, I was afraid to post my feelings about CV because I knew there would be "homework" involved.....:lol:

I'll download something and time it, problem is, I go from TV to TV all day long and rarely stay in one place, but for you, I'll give it a shot.

By the way, I'm still waiting for the NR for the 24s so that I can reset all my HRs and see how many of the same episodes I can put up on the UPL. So far, after the last NR, I've seen only ten at a time on my HRs. I thought I saw eleven a couple times, but I might have been wrong. Probably was.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> So with your "new and improved" internet, how long does a one hour HD show take?


Been downloading for nine minutes and it's at 7%. With my Net, before they finally fixed it, I'd have to wait forever (seemed like it, anyhow) for it to download. At this rate, I'd guess an hour for the download. I'll keep an eye on it.

Just reread your posts and it looks like no matter how fast your Net connection is, it can't download any faster than D* allows it to. Is that correct?

Just checked my speeds. From Speedtest.net I get 56 down (that's the one that CV uses), from Speakeasy, I get 37 down from Washington, can't get nothing from NYC, from my Cisco router I get about 27 down (that's the one I trust).

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> Been downloading for nine minutes and it's at 7%. With my Net, before they finally fixed it, I'd have to wait forever (seemed like it, anyhow) for it to download. At this rate, I'd guess an hour for the download. I'll keep an eye on it.
> 
> Just reread your posts and it looks like no matter how fast your Net connection is, it can't download any faster than D* allows it to. Is that correct?
> 
> ...


Would help to know how long the HD program is to relate the percentages, but it sort of looks like you're near the 7-8 Mb/s.

Testing your speed, is affected by the server you use, since if it's busy, it won't respond as fast. I see the same thing in the SFO area, and sometimes can be better results by going to places like Dallas, but normally don't when I move overseas.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Would help to know how long the HD program is to relate the percentages, but it sort of looks like you're near the 7-8 Mb/s.
> 
> Testing your speed, is affected by the server you use, since if it's busy, it won't respond as fast. I see the same thing in the SFO area, and sometimes can be better results by going to places like Dallas, but normally don't when I move overseas.


When I use the Optimum server out of NYC I always get ~ 56 down. Doesn't matter what time of day it is. That alone leads me to believe that I'm not getting the correct info. Cable just doesn't always have the same speed reading at different times of day.

Before they fixed it, I couldn't even use On Demand if I wanted to see something on the same day. I'm at 32%, 38 minutes into the download. Looks like it's gonna take over an hour, well over. Wasn't always like this, was it?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Would help to know how long the HD program is to relate the percentages, but it sort of looks like you're near the 7-8 Mb/s.
> 
> Testing your speed, is affected by the server you use, since if it's busy, it won't respond as fast. I see the same thing in the SFO area, and sometimes can be better results by going to places like Dallas, but normally don't when I move overseas.


How does the router pick which server to use? The CV guys couldn't answer that question.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

One hour and eight minutes...59%

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Rich said:


> How does the router pick which server to use? The CV guys couldn't answer that question.
> 
> Rich


Or does the modem pick the server?

Embarrassing not to know this, it is....:nono2:

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Done. An hour and fifty minutes. 55 minute HD show. Seems horribly slow, no? 

Rich


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

Yeah slow unfortunately; 

At your stated internet d/l speeds well above the max. 7-8 mb/s DIRECTV server speed for HD files, you should be able to maintain close to a 1:1 program length/download time ratio.

You're running at a little over 1:2 right now.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> One hour and eight minutes...59%
> 
> Rich


Is this a one or two hours program?

Speakeasy shows a limited number of servers on the left to pick from while
http://www.speedtest.net/ gives you worldwide options.










A bit closer:


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> Done. An hour and fifty minutes. 55 minute HD show. Seems horribly slow, no?
> 
> Rich


Maybe not "horribly slow", as this could be a program with an average 12 Mb/s bit rate, but is isn't great, and you may not be getting the full 7-8 Mb/s from DirecTV.


----------



## bigtom (Jan 23, 2009)

What VOD title are we downloading?


----------



## HoTat2 (Nov 16, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> Maybe not "horribly slow", as this could be a program with an *average 12 Mb/s bit rate*, but is isn't great, and you *may not be getting the full 7-8 Mb/s from DirecTV*.


OK, so based on the highlighted text of your statement above VOS, there are two additional considerations which need to be taken into account along with all else mentioned in this thread as to what may be responsible for slowing the d/l rates for VOD above the HD 1:1 ratio.

A higher average encoding rate (or less compression) was originally used to produce the sought for video file on the server. And for what ever reasons, every subscriber connection to the server may not get the max. 7-8 mb/s avg. d/l rate even if the subscriber's internet connection well supports it?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

HoTat2 said:


> OK, so based on the highlighted text of your statement above VOS, there are two additional considerations which need to be taken into account along with all else mentioned in this thread as to what may be responsible for slowing the d/l rates for VOD above the HD 1:1 ratio.
> 
> A higher average encoding rate (or less compression) was originally used to produce the sought for video file on the server. And for what ever reasons, every subscriber connection to the server may not get the max. 7-8 mb/s avg. d/l rate even if the subscriber's internet connection well supports it?


Think that's about right. I was somewhat [OK quite] shocked that good HD PQ could be at 6 Mb/s, [game of thrones, I think it was] and it wasn't just one program either, but I downloaded about 10 of them in the series.
Yet with almost any other HD, I'm at 1:1.5 and their bit-rates look to be about half again higher. MPEG-4 is a bit hard to measure, since it normally varies quite a lot from the lows to the peaks.


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

I have pretty slow internet, so I don't use DOD at all. But I am not sure why it doesn't work just because the internet is slow where I am. I really would not mind if I could start download of a 2-hour HD movie at bedtime or before I go to work and have it waiting for me when I got home. That sort of violates the spirit of "on demand", but it would be better than no download at all, which is what I have now. I start files and they just stall or quit partway through. Good thing I don't really care.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Try a 1080p download of some sort. Also one from hbo.


----------



## allenn (Nov 19, 2005)

I don't get it. I have AT&T 3 Mbps DSL, and I can download VOD HD in 30 minutes or less. Very weird!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

allenn said:


> I don't get it. I have AT&T 3 Mbps DSL, and I can download VOD HD in 30 minutes or less. Very weird!


That's not just "weird" but I'd say impossible or you're missing something.
I haven't found ANY HD that is a constant 3 Mb/s, from DirecTV.
16:9 SD, sure, but not HD resolution.
Do you have DirecTV2PC? If so you can monitor the bit rate as it's streaming, by monitoring the PC network.


----------



## allenn (Nov 19, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> That's not just "weird" but I'd say impossible or you're missing something.
> I haven't found ANY HD that is a constant 3 Mb/s, from DirecTV.
> 16:9 SD, sure, but not HD resolution.
> Do you have DirecTV2PC? If so you can monitor the bit rate as it's streaming, by monitoring the PC network.


Are you saying that the AT&T 3 Mbps DSL cannot deliver an HD movie in 30 minutes or less?

Yes, I have DirecTV2PC. I will do a test and see what the download rate may be. Best wishes.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

allenn said:


> Are you saying that the AT&T 3 Mbps DSL cannot deliver an HD movie in 30 minutes or less?
> 
> Yes, I have DirecTV2PC. I will do a test and see what the download rate may be. Best wishes.


It's not the download rate that you're looking for/at with DirecTV2PC, but the program streaming bit-rate.
The "download rate" can be no faster than your AT&T service, so if you have 3 Mb/s, you have around half of what I do with their 6 Mb/s service.

Besides "domino's" lol 30 mins or less most likely is an SD program.


----------



## allenn (Nov 19, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> It's not the download rate that you're looking for/at with DirecTV2PC, but the program streaming bit-rate.
> The "download rate" can be no faster than your AT&T service, so if you have 3 Mb/s, you have around half of what I do with their 6 Mb/s service.
> 
> Besides "domino's" lol 30 mins or less most likely is an SD program.


I downloaded "Only in America With Larry the Cable Guy" HD. The Win 7 PRO Performance Monitor showed approximately 2800 - 3000 kps on DirecTV2PC on the download from D*. You were correct it took longer than 30 minutes, about 46 minutes, to download the program to the HR24. I guess Domino's Pizza is quicker, but I don't do Dominos.The streaming (playback) bit rate from the HR24 to my PC was 9000 Kbps - 1 Mbps. Time flies when you are retired. I guess On-demand is fast enough for me. Thanks for keeping me honest. Best wishes!


----------



## wahooq (Oct 19, 2011)

My dl speed was 12.7 Mb/s....that being said I can dl an HD movie and start watching in like 10 minutes and never catch up


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Most routers today will let you monitor bandwidth real time in the settings. You should see if yours has that and then when you download an on demand see what the speed is. Also you should run speed tests every couple of hours for a couple of days to see what the pattern is for your area. As with most internet connections during the prime time hours speeds are reduced due to the amount of traffic.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Is this a one or two hours program?
> 
> Speakeasy shows a limited number of servers on the left to pick from while
> http://www.speedtest.net/ gives you worldwide options.
> ...


Speedtest.net is the one CV insists on using. If you put your cursor on NYC, you will see the Optimum server listed. Is there any way of locking the modem on a particular server. CV says that all it's traffic goes thru the NYC server, which always reads 56Mbs down, or thereabout. When I was having problems, I was getting 2Mbs down from that server.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Is this a one or two hours program?


55 minutes.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HoTat2 said:


> Yeah slow unfortunately;
> 
> At your stated internet d/l speeds well above the max. 7-8 mb/s DIRECTV server speed for HD files, you should be able to maintain close to a 1:1 program length/download time ratio.
> 
> You're running at a little over 1:2 right now.


Got any idea why?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Maybe not "horribly slow", as this could be a program with an average 12 Mb/s bit rate, but is isn't great, and you may not be getting the full 7-8 Mb/s from DirecTV.


I downloaded the first episode of _Spartacus, Sand and Blood_.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

bigtom said:


> What VOD title are we downloading?


_Spartacus, Sand and Blood_, first episode.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

TomCat said:


> I have pretty slow internet, so I don't use DOD at all. But I am not sure why it doesn't work just because the internet is slow where I am. I really would not mind if I could start download of a 2-hour HD movie at bedtime or before I go to work and have it waiting for me when I got home. That sort of violates the spirit of "on demand", but it would be better than no download at all, which is what I have now. I start files and they just stall or quit partway through. Good thing I don't really care.


That's how I've felt about On Demand from the git-go. To me, "on demand" should be what NetFlix does with its streaming content.

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> Speedtest.net is the one CV insists on using. If you put your cursor on NYC, you will see the Optimum server listed. * Is there any way of locking the modem on a particular server.* CV says that all it's traffic goes thru the NYC server, which always reads 56Mbs down, or thereabout. When I was having problems, I was getting 2Mbs down from that server.
> 
> Rich


Not sure what's happening on your end, but you should be able to select which server you want to use. I'm guessing the Optimum server is merely the default.
If I move the cursor over the triangle, I get five choices of servers when I'm on this screen:


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> That's how I've felt about On Demand from the git-go. To me, "on demand" should be what NetFlix does with its streaming content.
> 
> Rich


DirecTV has taken the approach of PQ over ease of downloading.
"On Demand", might better be called "on request", since there is a wait factor.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> Most routers today will let you monitor bandwidth real time in the settings. You should see if yours has that and then when you download an on demand see what the speed is.


To *VOS *and *Shades*​I've got the Linksys (Cisco) 4200 V. 1. I can monitor the speed on the router's software. Will do that later. But, in any event, the router rarely shows what Speedtest.net shows for the speed. I get 56 down and on the router which is right next to the modem, I rarely see anything close to 56 down.

I gave this a lot of thought last night and I think the router speed test must have something to do with how much bandwidth I'm using in the house. Does that make sense?



> Also you should run speed tests every couple of hours for a couple of days to see what the pattern is for your area. As with most internet connections during the prime time hours speeds are reduced due to the amount of traffic.


Been doing that for over two years. I wasn't kidding when I said I was tired of fighting with CV over this issue. I also wasn't kidding about the lawsuit. If we can figure out if it's my fault, I'll live with what I've got. If I can put up a logical case against the provider, I will go after them.

Let me add this: My son always has his X-Box on and at least one computer on at all times when he's home. He was home yesterday when I downloaded that episode of Spartacus. He goes to work today at 14:30 and I'll make sure he shuts all his equipment down. Then I'll download the same episode again.

Just had another thought, my OOMA is always on. I gather all these IP devices are gobbling up my broadband? I'm gonna do some tests and probably will end up shutting down the OOMA. Don't need it.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Not sure what's happening on your end, but you should be able to select which server you want to use. I'm guessing the Optimum server is merely the default.
> If I move the cursor over the triangle, I get five choices of servers when I'm on this screen:


Yeah, you can't move the circle at all. I don't see how the modem is gonna know which server it's gonna use, unless it uses the Optimum server. That's got the highest reading of the seven servers I can access. Is there a way to move the circle with the arrow in it?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Not sure what's happening on your end, but you should be able to select which server you want to use. I'm guessing the Optimum server is merely the default.
> If I move the cursor over the triangle, I get five choices of servers when I'm on this screen:


But how do you know the modem is accessing the server you choose?

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> But how do you know the modem is accessing the server you choose?
> 
> Rich


Back in post 44, you can see which server was used for the test. It's at the bottom of the pics.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Back in post 44, you can see which server was used for the test. It's at the bottom of the pics.


Gotcha.

Rich


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

That's pretty strange Rich - you should be able to click on any of the dots and the select a server to run the test. Are you trying to click-and -drag the circle? All you need to do is click on one of the 'other' dots to start the test with that location/server.

As for 'knowing' you are testing to a specific server - you'll basically have to take speedtest.net's word for that - or - you could use a hardware or software protocol analyzer to 'see' where the packets are coming from / going to...  I personally would just take their word for it!

On the Cisco where you see 56 down is likely representing your connection to CV and doesn't mean much other than you'll never get any higher that number in any test. 

Also - OOMA when not on an active call will have pretty much no measurable difference in your tests. While on a call you can probably see it in the test results but still is a pretty small drain compared to how much bandwidth you have. Xbox online games all very but could have a much bigger impact depending on the game and what is going on.

I still plan on testing my On-Demand speed with my 4g Verizon phone but haven't had time to do much lately....


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

You'd think with speeds like this:










That I'd at least be able to get 1:1 from On-Demand!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Mike Greer said:


> You'd think with speeds like this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Or at least 1:1.5 if it was a high bit-rate program.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Mike Greer said:


> That's pretty strange Rich - you should be able to click on any of the dots and the select a server to run the test. Are you trying to click-and -drag the circle? All you need to do is click on one of the 'other' dots to start the test with that location/server.


I can click on the dots and get a server reading. I know how to use the program.



> As for 'knowing' you are testing to a specific server - you'll basically have to take speedtest.net's word for that - or - you could use a hardware or software protocol analyzer to 'see' where the packets are coming from / going to... I personally would just take their word for it!


I have no doubt that the server I click on is sending me the proper info. What I don't get is how you lock in a server. Or tell which server you are using without going to Speedtest.



> On the Cisco where you see 56 down is likely representing your connection to CV and doesn't mean much other than you'll never get any higher that number in any test.


I get the 56 down from the modem, when I check the router I see about 20-30MB. That's what I don't understand. There are times that I've gotten 56-58 down on the router, but that is very infrequent.



> Also - OOMA when not on an active call will have pretty much no measurable difference in your tests. While on a call you can probably see it in the test results but still is a pretty small drain compared to how much bandwidth you have. Xbox online games all very but could have a much bigger impact depending on the game and what is going on.


Yeah, I know the OOMA is pretty much just sitting there most of the time, but we've decided to stop using it anyhow, so I just unplugged it. Now it will default to my cell phone until I cancel the OOMA service. I'm about due for the $120 yearly bells and whistles bill and we just don't need the OOMA anymore.

I've had my son unplug every Net device he has and I don't see much change in the readings. The router reads a bit higher than normal, a bit over 30 down. Where the hell does the rest of it go, Mike? That's what I want to know.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Or at least 1:1.5 if it was a high bit-rate program.


I'm downloading the episode of _Spartacus_ that took so long yesterday as we speak. It's got five more minutes to download and it looks like it's gonna be a bit quicker with all the son's crap shut off.

Done. 20 minutes faster than yesterday. Was it just the kid's electronics? Will we ever know for sure? Must have been.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

So, a 55 minute download today took an hour and a half. Not so bad or not so good, considering my constant 56-58 down readings?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Just checked the speed on the router after the download stopped and it went all the way up to 31 down. Is this as insane as I think it is?

Rich...a very puzzled Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Mike Greer said:


> You'd think with speeds like this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Please tell me that you're paying more than $70 a month for Net service.

Rich


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

Sorry Rich - I guess I misunderstood.

Those dots are all test points (servers) for Speedtest.net - all to give you an idea of your speed to various points on the Internet. Your normal Internet traffic isn't being routed through those points.

As for the numbers from your modem and your Linksys go - maybe a screen shot would help?

No way to know if your son's stuff was taking bandwidth away from your DirecTV connection. Chances are your bandwidth is/was sufficient to max out the top speed DirecTV allows. The variations could just be from the usual changes in available bandwidth between points on the Internet.

When you say 'The router reads a bit higher than normal, a bit over 30 down. Where the hell does the rest of it go?' We'd need to verify what the numbers from your modem and your router are showing.... The screen shots would help here. I have several Linksys/Cisco models but not a 4200... Also the make/model of your cable modem?


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

Rich said:


> Please tell me that you're paying more than $70 a month for Net service.
> 
> Rich


Yep - $115 but it's not worth it.

Those numbers are not typical anyway and I hate that I pay Comcast that much!

When it works it is usually nice and quick but the DSL I used to pay $38 for 7meg down 896k up was 1000 times more reliable. I have more down-time every month than I had in 8 years of DSL. Usually short outages but plenty of them!


----------



## Guesst925XTU (Jan 29, 2004)

Just downloaded Battle for Los Angeles HD from Starz On Demand
Run Time 1hr 57min

I am in NJ with Verizon's "Enhanced" DSL package: 15MB down/768KB up

I pay $34.99/month (no contract)

It took less than 3 hours and 30 mins. (I didn't notice exactly when it finished)


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

Rich said:


> Speedtest.net is the one CV insists on using. If you put your cursor on NYC, you will see the Optimum server listed. Is there any way of locking the modem on a particular server. CV says that all it's traffic goes thru the NYC server, which always reads 56Mbs down, or thereabout. When I was having problems, I was getting 2Mbs down from that server.
> 
> Rich


Ah - reading back here I see some of where the trouble is....

"CV says that all it's traffic goes thru the NYC server" sounds like they don't get it!

If you want to see the path that your connection is using you can use the command line utility 'tracert' It will give show you each step to the destination.

I go to the command line and type 'tracert www.xmission.com' and get these results:

Tracing route to xmission.com [198.60.22.4]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.16.1
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms gateway.usacomputer.com [173.14.238.206]
3 37 ms 20 ms 20 ms 73.110.232.1
4 14 ms 10 ms 8 ms te-4-1-ur08.saltlakecity.ut.utah.comcast.net [68
.85.39.85]
5 24 ms 11 ms 11 ms te-9-4-ar02.saltlakecity.ut.utah.comcast.net [68
.86.180.57]
6 23 ms 25 ms 21 ms te-0-1-0-0-cr01.denver.co.ibone.comcast.net [68.
86.94.109]
7 21 ms 22 ms 22 ms 4.79.82.53
8 26 ms 35 ms 24 ms vlan51.ebr1.denver1.level3.net [4.69.147.94]
9 41 ms 36 ms 33 ms ae-5-5.car2.saltlakecity1.level3.net [4.69.133.1
25]
10 36 ms 32 ms 37 ms xmission-lc.car2.saltlakecity1.level3.net [4.53.
42.142]
11 33 ms 69 ms 39 ms te-9-3.dcr2.slc.xmission.net [166.70.5.105]
12 37 ms 33 ms 34 ms www.xmission.com [198.60.22.4]

Trace complete.

Each step is a router on the Internet - From my desk about 15 miles from Xmission my path is by way of Denver......


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Mike Greer said:


> Sorry Rich - I guess I misunderstood.


No problem Mike, it's easy to misunderstand someone who doesn't have a clue as to whats going on....:lol:



> Those dots are all test points (servers) for Speedtest.net - all to give you an idea of your speed to various points on the Internet. Your normal Internet traffic isn't being routed through those points.


That, I figured out.



> As for the numbers from your modem and your Linksys go - maybe a screen shot would help?


I'll give it a shot later when I'm on my big desktop. Now all I have to do is remember how to take a screen shot.



> No way to know if your son's stuff was taking bandwidth away from your DirecTV connection.


Looking at the Cisco router's numbers I'd say it must have been, but only to a small extent.



> Chances are your bandwidth is/was sufficient to max out the top speed DirecTV allows.


Oh yeah, it's more than sufficient. If it's true.



> The variations could just be from the usual changes in available bandwidth between points on the Internet.


I understand that.



> When you say 'The router reads a bit higher than normal, a bit over 30 down. Where the hell does the rest of it go?' We'd need to verify what the numbers from your modem and your router are showing.... The screen shots would help here. I have several Linksys/Cisco models but not a 4200... Also the make/model of your cable modem?


I can tell you that my modem reads 56-58 down most of the time. And my router reads 20-30 most of the time. I bought the 4200 because CV said my old Cisco router wasn't working correctly. At least the only Tech CV has in my area told me that and it has helped. The rest of the people CV sent out were like most of D*'s installers. Didn't have a clue.

After I figure out how to take a screen shot, I'll post the pictures and we can bat that around for awhile.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Mike Greer said:


> Yep - $115 but it's not worth it.
> 
> Those numbers are not typical anyway and I hate that I pay Comcast that much!
> 
> When it works it is usually nice and quick but the DSL I used to pay $38 for 7meg down 896k up was 1000 times more reliable. I have more down-time every month than I had in 8 years of DSL. Usually short outages but plenty of them!


I've had the same problems with CV over the years. Since I threatened them with a lawsuit for not providing services paid for, they've been monitoring my home, or at least they say they are, to make sure that the problems don't reoccur. I was getting 2 down intermittently for months and the manager that came to my home (positive that I was wrong) saw that and it got fixed pretty quickly.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Mike Greer said:


> Ah - reading back here I see some of where the trouble is....
> 
> "CV says that all it's traffic goes thru the NYC server" sounds like they don't get it!
> 
> ...


Thanx Mike, that's what I was looking for.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Rich said:


> Thanx Mike, that's what I was looking for.
> 
> Rich


So, I typed in tracert www.xmission.com and it does do the trace but closes the window before I see "trace complete". Can't send you a picture of that if it closes the window down before it completes. What am I doing wrong?

Rich


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

Rich said:


> So, I typed in tracert www.xmission.com and it does do the trace but closes the window before I see "trace complete". Can't send you a picture of that if it closes the window down before it completes. What am I doing wrong?
> 
> Rich


Sorry Rich - I should have been more specific. You want to go to the 'run' line where you are typing the tracert command and type 'CMD' then hit enter. That will give you a black console box - in that box is where you want to type the tracert command. You'll then see all the results without the window closing on you. You can replace www.xmission.com with any site that you want to see the path to.

Don't worry about it if you get so far and then everything goes to 'Request timed out'. That just means that they don't reply to these 'test' packets. You'll still get a pretty good idea of how you are getting to different sites...


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Mike Greer said:


> Sorry Rich - I should have been more specific. You want to go to the 'run' line where you are typing the tracert command and type 'CMD' then hit enter. That will give you a black console box - in that box is where you want to type the tracert command. You'll then see all the results without the window closing on you. You can replace www.xmission.com with any site that you want to see the path to.
> 
> Don't worry about it if you get so far and then everything goes to 'Request timed out'. That just means that they don't reply to these 'test' packets. You'll still get a pretty good idea of how you are getting to different sites...


Thanx, Mike.

Rich


----------



## skierbri10 (Sep 18, 2006)

This is my speedtest result with WiFi

I have Comcast and nearly all of my On-Demand downloads can be watched in less than 5 minutes. They are not completely downloaded, but they turn to a green bar. Occasionally, during peak times it will be a bit slower.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

This is what I get.

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6002]
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\rich584>tracert www.xmission.com

Tracing route to xmission.com [198.60.22.4]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms RICH584 [192.168.1.1]
2 8 ms 7 ms 5 ms 10.240.177.41
3 6 ms 7 ms 7 ms 67.59.249.125
4 * * * Request timed out.
5 11 ms 9 ms 11 ms rtr4-tg11-3.wan.prnynj.cv.net [64.15.6.37]
6 * * * Request timed out.
7 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms xe-9-1-3.edge2.Newark1.Level3.net [4.30.130.237]

8 10 ms 23 ms 9 ms ae-31-51.ebr1.Newark1.Level3.net [4.69.156.30]
9 10 ms 9 ms 9 ms ae-2-2.ebr1.NewYork1.Level3.net [4.69.132.97]
10 12 ms 10 ms 9 ms ae-4-4.ebr1.NewYork2.Level3.net [4.69.141.18]
11 18 ms 10 ms 10 ms ae-1-100.ebr2.NewYork2.Level3.net [4.69.135.254]

12 31 ms 30 ms 42 ms ae-2-2.ebr1.Chicago1.Level3.net [4.69.132.65]
13 34 ms 29 ms 31 ms ae-6-6.ebr1.Chicago2.Level3.net [4.69.140.190]
14 59 ms 55 ms 54 ms ae-3-3.ebr2.Denver1.Level3.net [4.69.132.61]
15 55 ms 55 ms 65 ms ae-1-100.ebr1.Denver1.Level3.net [4.69.151.181]

16 68 ms 69 ms 67 ms ae-5-5.car2.SaltLakeCity1.Level3.net [4.69.133.1
25]
17 69 ms 70 ms 68 ms XMISSION-LC.car2.SaltLakeCity1.Level3.net [4.53.
42.142]
18 220 ms 207 ms 203 ms te-9-3.dcr2.slc.xmission.net [166.70.5.105]
19 68 ms 69 ms 67 ms www.xmission.com [198.60.22.4]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\rich584>


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Rich said:


> Thanx, Mike.
> 
> Rich


What other paths are there? My provider is Optimum.com, should I put that in place of xmission?

Rich


----------



## jahgreen (Dec 15, 2006)

I have a question, which I don't think is answered by the above.

We recently moved internet service to Comcast (not because we wanted to but there's no other choice for high-speed, as we are too far away for good DSL service). As measured by Speedtest.net, we get 24 mbps down, which is what we're supposed to get. Our DirecTV DVR is connected by ethernet to the router which is connected by ethernet to the cable modem. No wireless.

If I try DirecTV on demand, it takes almost 1-1/2 to 2 hours to d/l 1 hour of HD. I can try to watch in real time, but have to wait until a good portion has downloaded.

I just bought a Roku 2. It is also connected by ethernet to the router and by HDMI to the television. On either Amazon Prime or Netflix, a streaming movie loads in about 15 seconds and not only can I watch immediately with no problem, but I can skip ahead an hour of a movie and within 10 seconds or so the stream goes to that location and begins to play.

Presumably different technology is being used. But it seems to me that DirecTV needs to be able to match the Roku/Netflix/Amazon experience if it wants to compete.

Or am I missing something?


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

jahgreen said:


> I have a question, which I don't think is answered by the above.
> 
> We recently moved internet service to Comcast (not because we wanted to but there's no other choice for high-speed, as we are too far away for good DSL service). As measured by Speedtest.net, we get 24 mbps down, which is what we're supposed to get. Our DirecTV DVR is connected by ethernet to the router which is connected by ethernet to the cable modem. No wireless.
> 
> ...


Netflix does not transmit the movie files in the same high def the D* does. The bit rate is much lower...it only takes about 3.5 Mbps for Netflix, where D* needs about 6-7 Mbps, with peaks being twice that.


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

jahgreen said:


> I have a question, which I don't think is answered by the above.
> 
> We recently moved internet service to Comcast (not because we wanted to but there's no other choice for high-speed, as we are too far away for good DSL service). As measured by Speedtest.net, we get 24 mbps down, which is what we're supposed to get. Our DirecTV DVR is connected by ethernet to the router which is connected by ethernet to the cable modem. No wireless.
> 
> ...


Looks like yours is faster than mine...

The difference is that the 'others' lower quality to match the available bandwidth. DirecTV is the same download regardless. It also looks like Comcast is limiting access to DirecTV servers....


----------



## jahgreen (Dec 15, 2006)

Mike Greer said:


> It also looks like Comcast is limiting access to DirecTV servers....


Seems like there should be a legal issue or two there.


----------



## Red Orc (Oct 11, 2011)

jahgreen said:


> Seems like there should be a legal issue or two there.


Wasn't Comcast also accused of slowing VOIP traffic (Vonage etc)?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Red Orc said:


> Wasn't Comcast also accused of slowing VOIP traffic (Vonage etc)?


AT&T was. Don't know about Comcast.

Rich


----------



## Floyd (Nov 10, 2004)

jahgreen said:


> Presumably different technology is being used. But it seems to me that DirecTV needs to be able to match the Roku/Netflix/Amazon experience if it wants to compete.
> 
> Or am I missing something?


One big difference is that Roku ect only stream. You can't watch it later by recording it now. The On Demand stuff gets recorded so that you can watch it later(or after the buffer requirement is met and the progress bar turns green).


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Floyd said:


> One big difference is that Roku ect only stream. You can't watch it later by recording it now. The On Demand stuff gets recorded so that you can watch it later(or after the buffer requirement is met and the progress bar turns green).


Along with good PQ for HD, that the streamers lack.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> Along with good PQ for HD, that the streamers lack.


Totally disagree. Vudu offers a good if not great PQ.

Is it as good as D*? No. But it is close enough that with Vudu being far more convenient, with a much better interface and with many of the movies having 48 hour window rather than D*'s 24 hour, I choose Vudu over D* almost every time.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

raott said:


> Totally disagree. Vudu offers a good if not great PQ.
> 
> Is it as good as D*? No. But it is close enough...


Seems like you are in fact agreeing, but the decreased PQ offered is "good enough" for you, which is a whole other point.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> Seems like you are in fact agreeing, but the decreased PQ offered is "good enough" for you, which is a whole other point.


No, I am not agreeing at all. Simply, you stated the streaming services "lacked good PQ for HD". I stated I disagreed with that statement and that VUDU (a streaming service) not only has good PQ, but IMO great PQ.

It has nothing to do with the PQ being "good enough" for me. It has to do with whether a streaming service can offer really good PQ, and VUDU can.

Have you used VUDU?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Along with good PQ for HD, that the streamers lack.


Yeah, even with my upscaling BD players doing their magic, the drop in PQ when streaming is very noticeable. Let me put it more succinctly: I think streaming content sucks. Using an upscaler to bring the 720p (if you can even get that) up to 1080/60p makes it tolerable, but it can't compare to the PQ of the On Demand content.

I was quite surprised when I finally got around to checking out the OD content. I downloaded the first season of _Spartacus _and the picture was really good. I think it's been years since I downloaded any OD content and it really has improved.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

raott said:


> No, I am not agreeing at all. Simply, you stated the streaming services "lacked good PQ for HD". I stated I disagreed with that statement and that VUDU (a streaming service) not only has good PQ, but IMO great PQ.
> 
> It has nothing to do with the PQ being "good enough" for me. It has to do with whether a streaming service can offer really good PQ, and VUDU can.
> 
> Have you used VUDU?


Do they stream in 720p as NetFlix does?

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

raott said:


> No, I am not agreeing at all. Simply, you stated the streaming services "lacked good PQ for HD". I stated I disagreed with that statement and that VUDU (a streaming service) not only has good PQ, but IMO great PQ.
> 
> It has nothing to do with the PQ being "good enough" for me. It has to do with whether a streaming service can offer really good PQ, and VUDU can.
> 
> Have you used VUDU?


No I haven't, and it may be good :shrug:

Let me quote what I was replying to earlier:


> Is it as good as D*? No. But it is close enough that with Vudu being far more convenient...


As good a DirecTV looks like you said No.
"Close enough" that you're happy/content with Vudu.

This wasn't meant to become a pissing contest, but merely that streaming through the internet is of lower quality than downloading DirecTV On Demand.
It wasn't to say that all streaming totally sucks.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Rich said:


> Do they stream in 720p as NetFlix does?
> 
> Rich


There are two formats HD which is 720p and HDX which is 1080p24.

I have never used HDX because the movies are a dollar more. The 720p via VUDU is head and shoulders above what Netflix delivers.

Netflix, IMO, doesn't deliver a very good pic at all.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Might as well throw another wildcard into this thread:

If you happen to like BBCA, you may like watching the shows through On Demand, instead of the SAT feed.
The PQ seems to not have been reduced as the SAT feed is for SD, "and" you may find the program hasn't been edited to add the time for commercials that the SAT feed has been.
I first noticed this with a couple of shows: Top Gear & The Hour.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

raott said:


> There are two formats HD which is 720p and HDX which is 1080p24.
> 
> I have never used HDX because the movies are a dollar more. The 720p via VUDU is head and shoulders above what Netflix delivers.
> 
> Netflix, IMO, doesn't deliver a very good pic at all.


That 48 hour limit would bother me. I don't like having to keep schedules. Too 
much like homework.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Might as well throw another wildcard into this thread:
> 
> If you happen to like BBCA, you may like watching the shows through On Demand, instead of the SAT feed.
> The PQ seems to not have been reduced as the SAT feed is for SD, "and" you may find the program hasn't been edited to add the time for commercials that the SAT feed has been.
> I first noticed this with a couple of shows: Top Gear & The Hour.


I've been watching MI-5 and a few other shows on NetFlix DVDs. I'd forgotten how good a show MI-5 is/was.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> No I haven't, and it may be good :shrug:
> 
> Let me quote what I was replying to earlier:
> As good a DirecTV looks like you said No.
> ...


I've never paid for any streaming content except NF's. I've got the big movie package and I don't have any intention of paying to see movies in any other way. I'm not sure I'd even keep NF if it was only for streaming content.

I've tried the Apple box, tried an LG box (don't go there), sold all my Rokus, sold all my Panny BD players, all because Samsung's BD players upscale NF streaming content very well. In comparison to the boxes listed above.

But, from what I've experienced with streaming, it's not the answer I thought it would be.

Rich


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Rich said:


> That 48 hour limit would bother me. I don't like having to keep schedules. Too
> much like homework.
> 
> Rich


I don't like it either. On the upside, it is 24 hours more than D*'s. Apparently they have better negotiators than D* does.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Rich said:


> I've never paid for any streaming content except NF's. I've got the big movie package and I don't have any intention of paying to see movies in any other way. I'm not sure I'd even keep NF if it was only for streaming content.
> 
> I've tried the Apple box, tried an LG box (don't go there), sold all my Rokus, sold all my Panny BD players, all because Samsung's BD players upscale NF streaming content very well. In comparison to the boxes listed above.
> 
> ...


I watched two shows on NF streaming last night and the PQ was pretty good. I must say I have let the problems I've been having with Sammy BD players and NF flavor my prior post. The shows I watched last night certainly didn't suck as far as PQ goes. My apologies.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

raott said:


> I don't like it either. On the upside, it is 24 hours more than D*'s. Apparently they have better negotiators than D* does.


Those "limits" are what drove me away from Video Stores years ago. I don't mind paying for things, but to set limits on them (especially intangible things like streaming video) seems a bit over the top to me.

I looked at Amazon again on my new "smart" TV. The Sammy BD players don't have Amazon. Everything I looked at that interested me cost money. I could not find one thing that rewarded me for being a "Prime Shipping" member from the git-go of the program.

Rich


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

The limits of D* OD are not acceptable to me. The time that it takes for a download to reach a watchable state is not my idea of "On Demand". Further, the selection sucks. 

If it were a picture quality only issue, D* would win, but it's more about "On Demand" for me. 

Netflix isn't perfect by any stretch, but the PQ on my Roku 2's exceeds every other device that I have that streams Netflix. Even my Roku 1.

Is it perfect? Nope. But there comes a point when convenience begins to far outweigh PQ, and Netflix along with Amazon rentals are the route that I choose to take. The D* on demand and movie rentals are sub par. 

And as was the case when I tried to rent Moneyball from D*, there are times when it just doesn't work. The Amazon rental was cheaper, I didn't have to wait for the next showing to begin and the picture quality was far beyond good enough. 

D* has a long way to go. Until then I'll use Netflix, HBO Go, Amazon rentals and at times iTunes rentals.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

I know I'm coming into this thread a bit late......and sometimes I have a different view than most here.....but.....



dualsub2006 said:


> The limits of D* OD are not acceptable to me. The time that it takes for a download to reach a watchable state is not my idea of "On Demand". Further, the selection sucks.
> 
> If it were a picture quality only issue, D* would win, but it's more about "On Demand" for me.


I use D*'s VOD quite a bit, I've got 20mbps internet service with a good, clean wireless N system, my provider does not throttle me and find that with HD content I'm only "forced" to wait a few minutes before I've got enough of a program buffered to be able to begin watching without hitting the buffer.

I also have found that the selection of programming "sucking" greatly depends on the programming you subscribe. I'm fortunate enough to subscribe to the Premier Package so I've found that the selection of D*'s programming on VOD has been quite good.



dualsub2006 said:


> Netflix isn't perfect by any stretch, but the PQ on my Roku 2's exceeds every other device that I have that streams Netflix. Even my Roku 1.


I have no experience with the Roku equipment, I'd like to try one for use with HBO GO, but D* will not authenticate my subscription to HBO for use with a Roku device (another discussion).

But.....I stream Netflix through a PS3 to a 65" DLP set with outstanding results. The HD content looks wonderful and most of the time the SD content looks better than D*'s SD content. I stream Netflix through a Wii to an older 36" CRT set. At first the PQ wasn't very good, but subsequent software updates have fixed most of that so that now the PQ is quite good. I stream Netflix through an Insignia Blu-Ray player to a 32" Insignia flat panel over my wireless network and the results there are once again outstanding.

I don't have much luck streaming Netflix to my desktop PC, it's a P4 from 2003 and the stream is a bit "jerky". But, I don't have those issues when streaming to my newer Intel dual processor laptop, or even my Motorola Android phones.



dualsub2006 said:


> Is it perfect? Nope. But there comes a point when convenience begins to far outweigh PQ, and Netflix along with Amazon rentals are the route that I choose to take. The D* on demand and movie rentals are sub par.


I agree with your comments about convenience....but not with your comments about D*'s VOD being sub par. I do NOT use D*'s PPV system at all, but I use their VOD (delivered via the internet) a lot and am very happy with the service, selection, and quality.



dualsub2006 said:


> And as was the case when I tried to rent Moneyball from D*, there are times when it just doesn't work. The Amazon rental was cheaper, I didn't have to wait for the next showing to begin and the picture quality was far beyond good enough.


I wish people wouldn't mix up these topics. D*'s PPV and their VOD service are not the same thing. Their VOD service is offered at no cost to customers who have DVR's, and those DVR's must have an internet connection to make use of the service. Content availability is based on the channels they subscribe. The PQ of content coming via this service is often better than what is down linked via their satellites, and depending on your internet service (sustainable speeds and possible ISP throttling) the time between program selection and ability to view without hitting the buffer can vary.

I use all the services I get to compliment each other. Mostly I view D*'s programming in real time, I use their VOD service as well as Netflix streaming and DVD mail delivery. And YES...I have too much time on my hands.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"sdirv" said:


> I use D*'s VOD quite a bit, I've got 20mbps internet service with a good, clean wireless N system, my provider does not throttle me and find that with HD content I'm only "forced" to wait a few minutes before I've got enough of a program buffered to be able to begin watching without hitting the buffer.


I have 20/2 service and I have to wait at a minimum 20 minutes to start a program. More often than not, it's 30-40 minutes. I don't have any problems with any streaming or rental option that I use. Ever. 


"sdirv" said:


> I also have found that the selection of programming "sucking" greatly depends on the programming you subscribe. I'm fortunate enough to subscribe to the Premier Package so I've found that the selection of D*'s programming on VOD has been quite good.


I have Premier as well, and it sucks to me because the available episodes of programs are limited to the latest episodes for so many shows. Movies channels offer very little through on demand.



"sdirv" said:


> I have no experience with the Roku equipment, I'd like to try one for use with HBO GO, but D* will not authenticate my subscription to HBO for use with a Roku device (another discussion).


I use Chrome on my Google TV from time to time. Vizio will have a $99 option available soon and I will finish outfitting my TV arsenal with those when they become available.



"sdirv" said:


> I wish people wouldn't mix up these topics. D*'s PPV and their VOD service are not the same thing. Their VOD service is offered at no cost to customers who have DVR's, and those DVR's must have an internet connection to make use of the service.


I'm not mixing anything up. The few times I've browsed for a movie to watch, I've used the same browse feature of my DVR that I use for OD content. That, to me, makes them inseparable when discussing my perceived shortcomings with all things D* VOD.

Delivery mechanism and extra charges are meaningless when neither offers an acceptable level of service for me.



"sdirv" said:


> and depending on your internet service (sustainable speeds and possible ISP throttling) the time between program selection and ability to view without hitting the buffer can vary.


I'm not going to accept that as an excuse for D*. I can rent from Amazon, iTunes or Vudu and stream Netflix or Amazon without ANY buffering issues or delays. If my ISP were going to throttle they would start with one of these other services first.



"sdirv" said:


> I use all the services I get to compliment each other. Mostly I view D*'s programming in real time, I use their VOD service as well as Netflix streaming and DVD mail delivery. And YES...I have too much time on my hands.


I use the OD as well, just not often. I queue things up to watch later. If it were a paid add on, I'd drop it in a heartbeat.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

sdirv said:


> I wish people wouldn't mix up these topics. D*'s PPV and their VOD service are not the same thing. Their VOD service is offered at no cost to customers who have DVR's, and those DVR's must have an internet connection to make use of the service. Content availability is based on the channels they subscribe. The PQ of content coming via this service is often better than what is down linked via their satellites, and depending on your internet service (sustainable speeds and possible ISP throttling) the time between program selection and ability to view without hitting the buffer can vary.


D*'s VOD and PPV overlap a great deal, so one can't help to mix the topics together. Much of the PPV choices are delivered via VOD.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dualsub2006 said:


> I have 20/2 service and I have to wait at a minimum 20 minutes to start a program. More often than not, it's 30-40 minutes.


On Demand isn't going to be for everyone, and it might better be called "On Request", since there is a wait factor.
You may have a 20/2 service, but your wait times are closer to my 6/1 DSL service.
I actually found a OnDemand from HBO that was coming so fast I was able to start watching within a few mins. I setup ten recordings of the show [believe it was Game of Thrones] and they finished at a 1:1 rate. I was quite surprised and checked the streaming bit-rate and found it was 6 Mb/s and had good PQ. This sure hasn't been the normal for me, as most HD takes 1:1.5, where for every min of program, it takes a min and a half to download.
I'm waiting for my service to be upgraded to 12 Mb/s, and will then be able to see if DirecTV does limit their end to 7-8 Mb/s, which others have posted.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

dualsub2006 said:


> I have 20/2 service and I have to wait at a minimum 20 minutes to start a program. More often than not, it's 30-40 minutes. I don't have any problems with any streaming or rental option that I use. Ever.


There is a BIG difference between the service you pay for and what you may actually receive. It's not unusual for ISPs to advertise max speeds when the reality is that the services often can't maintain those speeds.

You telling me that you have to wait somewhere between 20 and 40 miutes before you can watch a selected program indicates a problem to me that I HIGHLY doubt is D*'s "fault". I've got 20mbps service from an ISP who does not throttle, I've read that the max transfer rate over the internet of D*'s content is between 6 and 9mbps. I've NEVER had to wait more than 5 minutes (usually less) before being able to watch HD programming without running up against the buffer.

If I was having to was between 20 and 40 minutes I'd start some troubleshooting.



dualsub2006 said:


> I have Premier as well, and it sucks to me because the available episodes of programs are limited to the latest episodes for so many shows. Movies channels offer very little through on demand.


To a great degree, D*'s not responsible for what the content providers allow them to make available on their VOD services....

When I look through the lists of movies available on the VOD channels for the movie channels I subscribe to I see many hundreds of titles, what is it that you are expecting??? I don't personally expect 10's of thousands of titles, first run titles, etc.



dualsub2006 said:


> I'm not mixing anything up. The few times I've browsed for a movie to watch, I've used the same browse feature of my DVR that I use for OD content. That, to me, makes them inseparable when discussing my perceived shortcomings with all things D* VOD.


I didn't say YOU were, I said that people often do mix up the two topics. Many people think that PPV and VOD are the same, they are not. Although the method of delivery may be alike, they are not the same service.



dualsub2006 said:


> I'm not going to accept that as an excuse for D*. I can rent from Amazon, iTunes or Vudu and stream Netflix or Amazon without ANY buffering issues or delays. If my ISP were going to throttle they would start with one of these other services first.


I'm sure THIS will open up an entire discussion concerning the differences between what is in the data streams of the various services, how some (like Netflix) adjust your PQ based on throughput, etc.

You may not be experiencing throttling, but what you may be experiencing is the failure of your provider to be able to consistently maintain a sustained data flow needed for this service. I've seen it happen plenty. There IS a big difference between what services are advertised, what data transfer rates you can get on a 15 to 30 second "speed test" (depending on who's providing the speed test for you) and what is needed to provide a consistent, sustained, data rate between the 6-9 mbps required for D*'s service.

My 20mbps service routinely tests between 15 and 18 mbps on prolonged testing and I've NEVER experienced the problem you've described, unless I was having some sort of hardware issue which I've always been able to find and correct.

My favorite "trick" is to run a network speed test on my PS3, it's plugged into the ethernet port on my wireless CCK (which feeds network to my entire Whole Home System). That speed test usually shows between 12-15mbps over my wireless N network.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

raott said:


> D*'s VOD and PPV overlap a great deal, so one can't help to mix the topics together. Much of the PPV choices are delivered via VOD.


As the other guy stated....method of delivery is meaningless. 

I tend to find it important to split the discussions when discussing problems with one part of the system or the other.

How do people without a DVR or internet connection on their D* setup do PPV??? Seemed like I had PPV available to me before I installed DVR's and before I hooked the internet up to my D* equipment.

But I didn't have VOD before I installed a DVR and hooked it up to the internet.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> On Demand isn't going to be for everyone, and it might better be called "On Request", since there is a wait factor.
> You may have a 20/2 service, but your wait times are closer to my 6/1 DSL service.
> I actually found a OnDemand from HBO that was coming so fast I was able to start watching within a few mins. I setup ten recordings of the show [believe it was Game of Thrones] and they finished at a 1:1 rate. I was quite surprised and checked the streaming bit-rate and found it was 6 Mb/s and had good PQ. This sure hasn't been the normal for me, as most HD takes 1:1.5, where for every min of program, it takes a min and a half to download.
> I'm waiting for my service to be upgraded to 12 Mb/s, and will then be able to see if DirecTV does limit their end to 7-8 Mb/s, which others have posted.


I ran Netflix and D*'s VOD over 12mbps service with great results. Only upgraded to 20mbps service when I started installing Netflix capable equipment in multiple rooms of the house. So far my wireless N has been able to handle it.....and my wait time for HD content over D*'s VOD is still counted in minutes.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

sdirv said:


> How do people without a DVR or internet connection on their D* setup do PPV??? Seemed like I had PPV available to me before I installed DVR's and before I hooked the internet up to my D* equipment.
> 
> But I didn't have VOD before I installed a DVR and hooked it up to the internet.


You tune to a PPV channel and and watch it off the SAT feed, and pay/selected to pay for it through the phone line.

As for wait times with VOD, some can start watching before the download status turns green, and not run out of buffer, but others may be waiting for it to be green.
If you're connection is consistence and "close" to the downloading rate, I've started watching while it shows red, and not run out of buffer, but there always is the chance I could.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

sdirv said:


> There is a BIG difference between the service you pay for and what you may actually receive. It's not unusual for ISPs to advertise max speeds when the reality is that the services often can't maintain those speeds.


Right. I get that.



sdirv said:


> You telling me that you have to wait somewhere between 20 and 40 miutes before you can watch a selected program indicates a problem to me that I HIGHLY doubt is D*'s "fault".
> 
> If I was having to was between 20 and 40 minutes I'd start some troubleshooting.


Vudu delivers 1080p and the wait is insignificant compared to D*.

On my Roku 1, you get a speed test as the movie is starting up. I always, always get the highest HD test result. With the Roku 1, if your speed falls below what is required to stream that highest quality you don't get adaptive streaming, you get a pause for buffering. My Roku 1 never buffers. Ever.

720p rentals from Amazon, which don't use adaptive streaming are never a problem. Ever.

I don't really feel the need to troubleshoot the issue because I already know what the problem is. Vudu, Netflix, Amazon and iTunes all deliver their service to me in a way that I find acceptable. D* doesn't. It's true that, depending on your equipment, Netflix and Vudu both do adaptive streaming. I'm not sure about iTunes or Amazon. If Vudu can send 1080p, 9Mbps to my wife's BluRay player that's ready to begin watching after just a minute or so then why can't D*?



sdirv said:


> To a great degree, D*'s not responsible for what the content providers allow them to make available on their VOD services....


My local cable company, which sucks beyond belief, has significantly more content available from the basic channels.



sdirv said:


> When I look through the lists of movies available on the VOD channels for the movie channels I subscribe to I see many hundreds of titles, what is it that you are expecting??? I don't personally expect 10's of thousands of titles, first run titles, etc.


I'm not talking about premium movie channels. The flaws in the D* On Demand content have been talked to death here.



sdirv said:


> I'm sure THIS will open up an entire discussion concerning the differences between what is in the data streams of the various services, how some (like Netflix) adjust your PQ based on throughput, etc.


It shouldn't bring up much discussion. Vudu works. Amazon video works. iTunes works. Netflix works.

D* downloads are slow. Bitterly, painfully slow. Too slow to be called "On Demand".



sdirv said:


> You may not be experiencing throttling, but what you may be experiencing is the failure of your provider to be able to consistently maintain a sustained data flow needed for this service.


I bought an HD movie from iTunes that was a 4GB file. It took just over an hour. For the whole file to download. That's just a bit longer than it takes to get to the 20% or so mark on a D* On Demand download. So, D* is either sending me a 20GB file, or D* has a problem. My Internet connection is NOT the problem.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

sdirv said:


> As the other guy stated....method of delivery is meaningless.


Nothing quite like pulling out only the parts of a statement that you need to make your point, regardless of context.



dualsub2006 said:


> Delivery mechanism and extra charges are meaningless *when neither offers an acceptable level of service for me.*


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dualsub2006 said:


> If Vudu can send 1080p, 9Mbps to my wife's BluRay player that's ready to begin watching after just a minute or so then why can't D*?


9 Mb/s 1080p doesn't sound that great. I have checked the bit-rates of a couple of DirecTV 1080p On demand [through DirecTV2PC] and the rates varied quite a bit as they're streamed, with some peaks being well over 14 Mb/s.

I believe I've already posted some HBO HD coming through at 6 Mb/s, so clearly there are variables between programs, as many HD have higher bit-rates, which tends to make all of this hard to compare "apples to apples".

I'm in no means trying to defend/promote DirecTV's On Demand, but merely trying to post information I've found.

I wish I could do the same with the U-verse service I'm currently playing with, because I'm seeing similar PQ as with DirecTV, but can't measure the bit-rates, and with their 32 Mb/s service and having internet, and being able to record three HD shows, while watching another live, the whole bit-rate thing doesn't seem to add up yet.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"veryoldschool" said:


> 9 Mb/s 1080p doesn't sound that great. I have checked the bit-rates of a couple of DirecTV 1080p On demand [through DirecTV2PC] and the rates varied quite a bit as they're streamed, with some peaks being well over 14 Mb/s.


No, it doesn't sound that great, but the bits of Puss In Boots that I saw looked outstanding from Vudu's 9Mb H.264 adaptive streaming.

It is absolutely an apples-to-oranges comparison technology wise, but D* wants me to believe that I don't need Netflix because I have D* On Demand. That's nuts.

D* can stream live TV to my iPad, but not my DVR. It's laughable that a little bitty box the size of a deck of cards is enough hardware to stream content to my TV, but my D* DVR can't get it done.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dualsub2006 said:


> D* wants me to believe that I don't need Netflix because I have D* On Demand. That's nuts.
> 
> D* can stream live TV to my iPad, but not my DVR. It's laughable that a little bitty box the size of a deck of cards is enough hardware to stream content to my TV, but my D* DVR can't get it done.


Not quite sure what your first part is. Does DirecTV want customers to use their On Demand? sure. There are enough ads from marketing, but hey that's marketing.
How big is that iPad screen? [don't have one but] Seems like there could be a few pixels missing and you'd never know it.
Anyway, On Demand isn't your "cup of tea", and there's nothing wrong with that.

My connection has finally been upgraded to:










So I can now see how long/fast HD downloads here.

This first one was Air Force One off Encore HD.
Checked the status at:


3 mins | program 6 mins | 2:1
6 mins | 12 mins [status bar had turned green] | 2:1
11 mins | 15 mins of program.| 1.25:1
19 mins | 24 mins.|1.26:1
30 mins | 37 mins |1.23:1
1:41|2:05|1.23:1
This is just one program and I haven't checked the bit-rate, but it is 1080, which should be high.

It looks like if I didn't use any trickplay, I could be watching this "moments" after starting the download.

The next On Demand was from HBO The American which is 1:45
The change did show a delay, as the DVR shows it started at 8:54, but showed 0 of the recording for several mins.
At 8:59 it had 2 mins
1 min later showed 3 mins
another min showed another min
another min showed 2 more mins.
at 9:11 it shows 15 mins of the program has downloaded.
9:38 showed 41 mins, so this looks to have leveled out at 1:1, which is really all On Demand needs to do.

It is hard to figure bit-rates with MPEG-4
Here's a shot of the first recording during playback,










And here's the second










Again, I'm not trying to promote the use of On Demand, but to only show "what you should get" if you have at least a 10 Mb/s connection.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

dualsub2006 said:


> It shouldn't bring up much discussion. Vudu works. Amazon video works. iTunes works. Netflix works.
> 
> D* downloads are slow. Bitterly, painfully slow. Too slow to be called "On Demand".


Ok...... You must be right.

I'll just go back to using mine without any of the trouble you've described.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> You tune to a PPV channel and and watch it off the SAT feed, and pay/selected to pay for it through the phone line.
> 
> As for wait times with VOD, some can start watching before the download status turns green, and not run out of buffer, but others may be waiting for it to be green.
> If you're connection is consistence and "close" to the downloading rate, I've started watching while it shows red, and not run out of buffer, but there always is the chance I could.


I know.......

That's why I suggested that PPV and VOD are separate topics.

But back to the VOD speed discussion......I do not at all understand why so many people have the system work well for them, while others tend to have so many problems.

All I can see is that there are SO many variables in equipment and "pipeline" that I don't find it useful at all for people to make sweeping, blanket statements like I've seen in this thread.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

dualsub2006 said:


> Nothing quite like pulling out only the parts of a statement that you need to make your point, regardless of context.


And nothing like ignoring a 

I wasn't making any point at all.......


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

sdirv said:


> But back to the VOD speed discussion......I do not at all understand why so many people have the system work well for them, while others tend to have so many problems.
> 
> All I can see is that there are SO many variables in equipment and "pipeline" that I don't find it useful at all for people to make sweeping, blanket statements like I've seen in this thread.


DirecTV isn't in control over the supply pipe.
I do know first hand that a cable provider was throttling "my access".
As I posted earlier an SD VOD was taking over 14 hours on the last day I used their service, and thankfully AT&T DSL and now Uverse has NOT done this in maybe four years now [time does fly].

I can see a customer finding a problem and not knowing the source, so they "conclude" it's DirecTV, which some times it may be, but not on any regular basis that I've seen, and I hope my work earlier today will help them understand.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"veryoldschool" said:


> I can see a customer finding a problem and not knowing the source, so they "conclude" it's DirecTV, which some times it may be, but not on any regular basis that I've seen, and I hope my work earlier today will help them understand.


I've been with D* since 2006 I think and I've had 3 different ISP's in that time. One of which was DSL from a phone company that has proven time and again that they don't care what you do until someone sends a DMCA complaint. Running servers, downloading torrents and anything else always ran at topped out speeds. Not D* OD.

That's fine though. I'm happy that it works well for some. I'm happy with what I'm doing.

Never in all the times that I've tried using OD over the last several years have I ever gotten acceptable downloads. Not once.


----------



## thomas317us (Feb 6, 2008)

I am not sure what the issue is with on demand, but it take me 4.5-5 hrs to download an HD movie, but yet I can watch netflix hd fine, or watch Vudu in HDX fine using the deca cloud, 
I have talked to my local cable provider manger (charter communications) they do not throttle, and even though they have caps for download they are not enforced in my area 

I have 100Mb/s down and 5Mb/s up from the logs that are on my router I use 6.5-7.5Gigs per day, so if they were going to throttle some one it would be me.

It takes me on average 15 mins to download an HD movie from Itunes. so something is else is an issue


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

thomas317us said:


> I am not sure what the issue is with on demand, but it take me 4.5-5 hrs to download an HD movie,...
> so something is else is an issue


I would agree and have no idea of what it might be after yesterday's timed downloads. :shrug:


----------



## oakwcj (Sep 28, 2006)

If you live in the Bay Area, you should look into Sonic.net and its Fusion ADSL2+ product. You get up to 20Mb/sec and a land line with unlimited long distance calling for $39.95 per month. There are no caps and no throttling. I'm 5,000 feet from my CO and I'm getting 11Mb/sec.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

oakwcj said:


> If you live in the Bay Area, you should look into Sonic.net and its Fusion ADSL2+ product. You get up to 20Mb/sec and a land line with unlimited long distance calling for $39.95 per month. There are no caps and no throttling. I'm 5,000 feet from my CO and I'm getting 11Mb/sec.


At over 9,000' from their CO, I think I'll pass on it.


----------



## oakwcj (Sep 28, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> At over 9,000' from their CO, I think I'll pass on it.


That is a problem. The obvious solution is to move closer to a CO.:lol:


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

oakwcj said:


> That is a problem. The obvious solution is to move closer to a CO.:lol:


I'm 2,000' further away than VOS is.... so no soap here.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

oakwcj said:


> That is a problem. The obvious solution is to move closer to a CO.:lol:


Think I might stay here and be 750' from the VRAD.


----------



## mattnboise (Mar 8, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> DirecTV isn't in control over the supply pipe.
> I do know first hand that a cable provider was throttling "my access".
> As I posted earlier an SD VOD was taking over 14 hours on the last day I used their service, and thankfully AT&T DSL and now Uverse has NOT done this in maybe four years now [time does fly].
> 
> I can see a customer finding a problem and not knowing the source, so they "conclude" it's DirecTV, which some times it may be, but not on any regular basis that I've seen, and I hope my work earlier today will help them understand.


I work for a service provider that Directv uses. Directv leases quite a few 1G ports all over the country. What type of content that is destined into those ports I couldn't say. And, we most certainly do not throttle anything. Directv would be quite upset if that were to occur. BGP and DNS have a lot to do with your routing. Same goes with Google, Amazon, Netflix...etc. They all lease internet ports with very high capacity links on multiple providers. Now do you have a onnet connection to Directv or offnet? That could make a big difference.

I suppose the only real way to find out where your content is being streamed from is to download a Wireshark utility and see.
Otherwise all this speed testing isnt telling you anything.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mattnboise said:


> I work for a service provider that Directv uses. Directv leases quite a few 1G ports all over the country. What type of content that is destined into those ports I couldn't say. And, we most certainly do not throttle anything. Directv would be quite upset if that were to occur. BGP and DNS have a lot to do with your routing. Same goes with Google, Amazon, Netflix...etc. They all lease internet ports with very high capacity links on multiple providers. Now do you have a onnet connection to Directv or offnet? That could make a big difference.
> 
> I suppose the only real way to find out where your content is being streamed from is to download a Wireshark utility and see.
> *Otherwise all this speed testing isnt telling you anything.*


Finally. That makes sense. I couldn't see how the speed tests provided any info. Got a link to that Wireshark utility?

Rich


----------



## kiknwing (Jun 24, 2009)

Rich said:


> Finally. That makes sense. I couldn't see how the speed tests provided any info. Got a link to that Wireshark utility?
> 
> Rich


http://www.wireshark.org/


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

kiknwing said:


> http://www.wireshark.org/


Thanx, now all I have to do is figure out how to use it. Is this any different than using the "tracer" command?

Rich


----------



## oakwcj (Sep 28, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> Think I might stay here and be 750' from the VRAD.


But you don't want to be too close to those boxes. They can explode:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRAD


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

oakwcj said:


> But you don't want to be too close to those boxes. They can explode:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRAD


I've got at least a "3 dB" margin, not to mention obstacles in the way of:

"Four VRADs have exploded due to faulty batteries, at least one causing shrapnel to hurl "fifty feet throughout the neighborhood."

Not much to worry about here.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

mattnboise said:


> I work for a service provider that Directv uses. Directv leases quite a few 1G ports all over the country. What type of content that is destined into those ports I couldn't say. And, we most certainly do not throttle anything. Directv would be quite upset if that were to occur. BGP and DNS have a lot to do with your routing. Same goes with Google, Amazon, Netflix...etc. They all lease internet ports with very high capacity links on multiple providers. Now do you have a onnet connection to Directv or offnet? That could make a big difference.
> 
> I suppose the only real way to find out where your content is being streamed from is to download a Wireshark utility and see.
> Otherwise all this speed testing isnt telling you anything.


If DirecTV is leasing, more than likely it's from the program providers to the uplink.

I have no clue whether I'm "onnet or offnet". I am on Uverse.
Actually this testing is telling me something. "It works here", as it did midway up the Sierras [130 miles away] where I was before.

"Now if someone was having problems" wireshark might be useful, but "if it ain't broke", it don't need fixing. :lol:


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> If DirecTV is leasing, more than likely it's from the program providers to the uplink.
> 
> I have no clue whether I'm "onnet or offnet". I am on Uverse.
> Actually this testing is telling me something. "It works here", as it did midway up the Sierras [130 miles away] where I was before.
> ...


Don't know why, but since I disconnected my OOMA, my Internet has been fine. Cancelled service yesterday.

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> Finally. That makes sense. I couldn't see how the speed tests provided any info.
> 
> Rich


This was a "two parter":


speedtest will show I wasn't getting anything faster.
the sustained download times showed:
I wasn't using all my bandwidth,
the time it takes to download agreed with others who've posted DirecTV limits their side to the 7-8 Mb/s range, which is close enough to keep HD coming in almost real time.


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

mattnboise said:


> I suppose the only real way to find out where your content is being streamed from is to download a Wireshark utility and see.
> Otherwise all this speed testing isnt telling you anything.


I'm not sure I agree that the 'Otherwise all this speed testing isn't telling you anything'. Why do you do you say that? In my case, for example, I obviously have a pretty darn quick Internet service but On-Demand service from DirecTV is pretty much unusable. The speed tests, at least to some degree, back up that my general Internet speed is good. The fact that On-Demand is slow isn't caused by my own network traffic but something between me and DirecTV - I suspect Comcast is throttling DirecTV downloads.... Still haven't set up a test with my Verizon connection to verify I get the speed through them but will soon....

Wireshark is a powerful protocol analyzer and great way to find out what is going on in a particular network but.... It is not of much use unless you either are in the 'biz' or are willing to put in a lot of time learning the geekness behind networking. It is a good time if you like to tinker!

Depending on the firewall in use you may be able see the connection without using Wireshark... In my firewall I can see that when I start downloading an On-Demand program my DVR connects to one of a few different Akamai hosted servers.....


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> Thanx, now all I have to do is figure out how to use it. Is this any different than using the "tracer" command?
> 
> Rich


First you'll need to configure your PC off a hub that is shared with the DVR's network connection.
Next you'll need to capture the stream with wireshark that's coming from the DVR ondemand.
Then you'll need to parse through the capture log to find the IP address, to then run the trace return command.

So "knowing you like I do...." !rolling


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> This was a "two parter":
> 
> 
> speedtest will show I wasn't getting anything faster.
> ...


I'm trying desperately to understand all this. I'm trying to fit the whole broadband thing into an electrical analogy.

I've learned that NetFlix has three levels for its streaming. I think the guy I talked to said they originally had me in the 6Mbs tier and he put me in the 3-4Mbs tier. There is one tier lower. I'm still trying to wrap my mind around that. He also suggested that if you get a lot of buffering, disconnecting the Ethernet cable would "refresh and renew" the connection.

All this stems from me buying three Sammy BD players and having issues with streaming on all of them. Samsung tech support (joke) assured me that they were aware of problems with the BD6500s and the BD D5500s along with most other models. None of the BD players mentioned above would stream properly. Tried two 6500s and one D5500. My C5500s have no problem with streaming. Did a lot of troubleshooting, swapping one for the other, checking cables, changing where the feeds were coming from, nothing worked. Read the reviews on Amazon and there were many complaints about streaming on most models (didn't read them all). Now I'm waiting for April when the new Sammys come out.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> First you'll need to configure your PC off a hub that is shared with the DVR's network connection.
> Next you'll need to capture the stream with wireshark that's coming from the DVR ondemand.
> Then you'll need to parse through the capture log to find the IP address, to then run the trace return command.
> 
> *So "knowing you like I do*...." !rolling


Yup, that ain't getting done. Damn, I hate being predictable....:lol:

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Mike Greer said:


> I'm not sure I agree that the 'Otherwise all this speed testing isn't telling you anything'. Why do you do you say that? In my case, for example, I obviously have a pretty darn quick Internet service but On-Demand service from DirecTV is pretty much unusable. The speed tests, at least to some degree, back up that my general Internet speed is good. The fact that On-Demand is slow isn't caused by my own network traffic but something between me and DirecTV - I suspect Comcast is throttling DirecTV downloads.... Still haven't set up a test with my Verizon connection to verify I get the speed through them but will soon....
> 
> *Wireshark is a powerful protocol analyzer and great way to find out what is going on in a particular network but.... It is not of much use unless you either are in the 'biz' or are willing to put in a lot of time learning the geekness behind networking. It is a good time if you like to tinker!*
> 
> Depending on the firewall in use you may be able see the connection without using Wireshark... In my firewall I can see that when I start downloading an On-Demand program my DVR connects to one of a few different Akamai hosted servers.....


I'm way to lazy to get into that thing.

Rich


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

veryoldschool said:


> DirecTV isn't in control over the supply pipe.
> I do know first hand that a cable provider was throttling "my access".
> As I posted earlier an SD VOD was taking over 14 hours on the last day I used their service, and thankfully AT&T DSL and now Uverse has NOT done this in maybe four years now [time does fly].
> 
> I can see a customer finding a problem and not knowing the source, so they "conclude" it's DirecTV, which some times it may be, but not on any regular basis that I've seen, and I hope my work earlier today will help them understand.


Yep......


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

veryoldschool said:


> First you'll need to configure your PC off a hub that is shared with the DVR's network connection.
> Next you'll need to capture the stream with wireshark that's coming from the DVR ondemand.
> Then you'll need to parse through the capture log to find the IP address, to then run the trace return command.
> 
> So "knowing you like I do...." !rolling


Don't forget that promiscuous network card!


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

Rich said:


> I'm way to lazy to get into that thing.
> 
> Rich


Ah, no fun in that!


----------



## mattnboise (Mar 8, 2006)

Mike Greer said:


> I'm not sure I agree that the 'Otherwise all this speed testing isn't telling you anything'. Why do you do you say that? In my case, for example, I obviously have a pretty darn quick Internet service but On-Demand service from DirecTV is pretty much unusable. The speed tests, at least to some degree, back up that my general Internet speed is good. The fact that On-Demand is slow isn't caused by my own network traffic but something between me and DirecTV - I suspect Comcast is throttling DirecTV downloads.... Still haven't set up a test with my Verizon connection to verify I get the speed through them but will soon....
> 
> Wireshark is a powerful protocol analyzer and great way to find out what is going on in a particular network but.... It is not of much use unless you either are in the 'biz' or are willing to put in a lot of time learning the geekness behind networking. It is a good time if you like to tinker!
> 
> Depending on the firewall in use you may be able see the connection without using Wireshark... In my firewall I can see that when I start downloading an On-Demand program my DVR connects to one of a few different Akamai hosted servers.....


Ding ding...Akamai. On my network we have some 40Gig Akamai internet ports. Typically these are located in a data center. Akamai hosts a lot of internet content from lots of companies. Thats their business.

Once your content gets out of the hosting enviroment its all packets to me so we put you out on wire or should I say at the speed of light to the peering point your isp has or its upstream provider.


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

mattnboise said:


> I suppose the only real way to find out where your content is being streamed from is to download a Wireshark utility and see.
> Otherwise all this speed testing isnt telling you anything.


I've always thought (and said) that the speed tests that most people run are pretty useless when trying to figure out why or why not their VOD streaming is fast, slow, or whatever.

Speed tests are performed in fairly short bursts, with fairly short files used for the tests.

Those speed tests will NOT indicate if your internet provider, or if your equipment is capable of sustained, reliable speeds, if you're being throttled, if you're experiencing network congestion, etc..

Another variable is that D*'s VOD is being compared to a variety of other providers. If those providers were streaming the same files, in the same encoding, through the same servers, etc. Then it would be a somewhat fair comparison. But they aren't.

To just state that D*'s VOD has something wrong with it and that it's unusable is a major fail. Enough people report that it works as advertised, is solid, dependable, and reliable that I can only guess that the problem would lay somewhere else.

I've run this stuff in a variety of configurations, some have been better than others...but it's always worked, and if it didn't I was able to find out what was wrong and fix it. The only time I've seen performance as poor as described here I was able to isolate a failing AC Powerline adapter. Replaced that setup with a wireless switch (which didn't work the way I though it would so...), then I replaced the switch with D*'s wireless CCK. This has been rock solid.

But.......I've also done some simple things like picking the default channel my wireless N router uses so that interference from cordless phones, other networks in the neighborhood are eliminated or reduced. Also had to pay attention to where equipment was located/mounted in my home for the best results. I've got a couple easy apps on my Droid to help me with that stuff....


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

mattnboise said:


> Ding ding...Akamai. On my network we have some 40Gig Akamai internet ports. Typically these are located in a data center. Akamai hosts a lot of internet content from lots of companies. Thats their business.
> 
> Once your content gets out of the hosting enviroment its all packets to me so we put you out on wire or should I say at the speed of light to the peering point your isp has or its upstream provider.


Yes - and I'm sure that I was 'plugged' in through/with you I'd get numbers like VOS is getting. Problem is that I have Comcast in there....


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

sdirv said:


> I've always thought (and said) that the speed tests that most people run are pretty useless when trying to figure out why or why not their VOD streaming is fast, slow, or whatever.
> 
> Speed tests are performed in fairly short bursts, with fairly short files used for the tests.
> 
> ...


Still don't agree the speed tests are 'useless' - not the end-all data but they do give a pretty good indication. I have also verified my speeds many times by transferring large files in both directions.

Nothing I have ever experienced is as slow as my 'On-Demand'.

Not blaming DirecTV... I suspect Comcast is throttling DirecTV specifically...


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

sdirv said:


> I've always thought (and said) that the speed tests that most people run are pretty useless when trying to figure out why or why not their VOD streaming is fast, slow, or whatever.
> 
> Speed tests are performed in fairly short bursts, with fairly short files used for the tests.
> 
> Those speed tests will NOT indicate if your internet provider, or if your equipment is capable of sustained, reliable speeds, if you're being throttled, if you're experiencing network congestion, etc..


But they will document when, if, and as your connection sucks.


----------



## GiantsFan383 (Jul 28, 2011)

Satellite can't compete with cable as far as on demand programming 
cable beats them hands down


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

GiantsFan383 said:


> Satellite can't compete with cable as far as on demand programming
> cable beats them hands down


It's pretty easy when you own and control the pipeline. :lol:


----------



## GiantsFan383 (Jul 28, 2011)

yep lol


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Someone sent me a link to some software that lets me look at my router, so I had to try another On Demand off SHO this time.
It has a fairly long sample time of 1 min.










The wireless link is to my DECA:


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Someone sent me a link to some software that lets me look at my router, so I had to try another On Demand off SHO this time.
> It has a fairly long sample time of 1 min.
> 
> 
> ...


That's only for U-Verse routers, right?

Rich


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Rich said:


> That's only for U-Verse routers, right?
> 
> Rich


Sorry, but yes it looks to only work with the 2wire


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Sorry, but yes it looks to only work with the 2wire


Figures....:nono2:

Rich


----------



## Mike Greer (Jan 20, 2004)

That's pretty cool - to bad most routers/modems don't have the same thing.

Is this the kind of thing you are looking at Rich? I mean when you were giving numbers for your 'modem' and for your 'router'? Did you ever figure out how to do the screen shots?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Mike Greer said:


> That's pretty cool - to bad most routers/modems don't have the same thing.


"Shall we say" AT&T didn't do this, but someone with some lol coding skills did it.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Mike Greer said:


> That's pretty cool - to bad most routers/modems don't have the same thing.
> 
> Is this the kind of thing you are looking at Rich? I mean when you were giving numbers for your 'modem' and for your 'router'? Did you ever figure out how to do the screen shots?


I did. But, oddly, removing the OOMA from my LAN seemed to stop the problems. And, being lazy, I didn't bother with the screen shots.

I would like to see a utility for Cablevision like the one *VOS *shared with us for UV.

Rich


----------



## sdirv (Dec 14, 2008)

Mike Greer said:


> Still don't agree the speed tests are 'useless' - not the end-all data but they do give a pretty good indication. I have also verified my speeds many times by transferring large files in both directions.
> 
> Nothing I have ever experienced is as slow as my 'On-Demand'.
> 
> Not blaming DirecTV... I suspect Comcast is throttling DirecTV specifically...


I didn't say they were "totally useless" :lol:, there is just so much info we need that they don't reveal that I don't find them of much use.

I play with speed test sometimes....my ISP has one, usually shows my speeds somewhat higher than they advertise (oh??), I can run a couple others and they usually show that my speeds are within 80% or so of what the ISP advertises.....

But, still don't show the capability of reliable, sustained speeds, network congestion, possible throttling. Also only shows a snapshot of the speed at your modem/router. I would rather see what speeds I'm getting at my wireless CCK and the DVR and PS3 I've got plugged into it.

I liked the screen shots posted here (forgot who posted them, I'm "old") showing speed/throughput at each device on the network, now THAT was cool.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

My wife accidentally deleted the season finale of one of her shows, so I'm downloading it from On Demand. 

5 minutes into the download and I'm already at 26%. I've done downloads at this time of day numerous times in the past and not gotten these results. 

Maybe D* is actually improving On Demand.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

dualsub2006 said:


> My wife accidentally deleted the season finale of one of her shows, so I'm downloading it from On Demand.
> 
> 5 minutes into the download and I'm already at 26%. I've done downloads at this time of day numerous times in the past and not gotten these results.
> 
> Maybe D* is actually improving On Demand.


That's not particularly fast for SD, but it would be screaming for HD.


----------



## dualsub2006 (Aug 29, 2007)

"hasan" said:


> That's not particularly fast for SD, but it would be screaming for HD.


HD. It finished a 47 minute show download in under 20 minutes.

I started a download of Despicable Me in HD just to see if this was a fluke or if speeds are actually improved for me. 17 minutes, 69% complete.

These are download times that I think are acceptable. I could start a download and be watching in just a few minutes. Much closer to my idea of On Demand.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

hasan said:


> That's not particularly fast for SD, but it would be screaming for HD.


I was surprised with an HD series I downloaded, where all ten shows came through in less than 10 hours, over my 6Mb/s connection.
PQ was great and the playback bit-rates were at ~6 Mb/s.
Not all programs compress equally.


----------



## JonW (Dec 21, 2006)

GiantsFan383 said:


> Satellite can't compete with cable as far as on demand programming
> cable beats them hands down


FIOS has more On Demand content, but they only permit 2x fast forward and rewind. The ability to actually download entire on demand programs is actually kind of cool - if your internet is fast enough.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> I was surprised with an HD series I downloaded, where all ten shows came through in less than 10 hours, over my 6Mb/s connection.
> PQ was great and the playback bit-rates were at ~6 Mb/s.
> Not all programs compress equally.


That's a really good point. I've had some act like turtles, even though the throughput appeared to be right at 6 Mb/s.


----------

