>>> Bad example. Assuming you downloaded it via bit-torrent from other
>>> users, you were constrained by their very limited upload speeds.
>>
>> Except that you're downloading it from dozens of clients at once, should
>> should counteract that problem.
>
> Not always.

As in "you're not always downloading from that many clients", or as in 
"downloading from many clients doesn't give you greater bandwidth"?

>>> Which part of the Internet isn't fast enough?
>>
>> The last mile, as always.
>>
>
> Which varies a lot from place to place. First, because your DSL speed
> will be affected by

Yes, but given that 8 Mbit/sec is the maximum speed that current ADSL 
standard allow, we can take it as read that nobody is going faster than 
that.

> For example, on top of various DSL packages, my telephone
> company offers fibre connections at 7, 10, 16 or 25 Mbps.

Oh, really? Well, if you're getting 25 Mbit/sec then yes, streaming 
full-quality video in realtime /should/ work just fine.

(At least, for SD video. Apparently BRD has a transfer rate of 36 
Mbit/sec, so it looks like HD video still wouldn't work.)

>> I have no idea what "cable" is. I do know you can receive HD TV with an
>> aerial; presumably this uses higher bandwidth than a normal Internet
>> connection.
>
> Presumably? Again. After having been shown 4759483758975 times in this
> thread alone that your assumptions were wrong, you still persevere!!!

And to think people tell me I don't persevere enough...

At any rate, a cursory inspection of Wikipedia seems to indicate that, 
yes, digital TV is higher bandwidth.

> Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_television

Oh, is /that/ what that means? OK. I didn't know you could use this for 
anything other than analogue TV. Our house used to have this, before 
everything went digital.

Post a reply to this message