Google looks to LTE and Wi-Fi to help it lube YouTube tubes There were reports last week that Google is considering taking an MVNO mobile network and using it as a fall back for a Wi-Fi first service – in the areas where it has fibre in the ground in the US. Youtube Video Faultline thinks this is a great idea. If Google really wants YouTube to be the “daily destination of a …
Unless Google is going to pay for about x10 as many base stations Mobile can never deliver Video to the masses. It can only manage about 3 to 5 users ON AVERAGE per cell.
Fibre to home and home WiFi. Even Home WiFi at 250Mbps can struggle to provide more than 3 video streams as the total peak speed is no guide of real life average speeds.
(Why have home LTE Femto cells and pay Mobile ISPs for the traffic you already paid for on on your ISP? Femto cells are for Public places or Voice only GSM/3G calls as they don't work on WiFi).
Why have home LTE Femto cells and pay Mobile ISPs for the traffic you already paid for on on your ISP?
I suspect it's to do with the way the service is provided. The Femto cell just a (fairly) dumb device, and back-hauls everything back to the operators network via a VPN. The operator's central network then works out what to do. e.g. Do they have adult content allowed?
LTE data charges are the highest in all the land of delivery services. I don't want a single byte of video ever delivered to my portable device unless it's on WiFi.
Apple iOS and Google Android need to develop simple switches, similar to the "Accept Push Notifications?" or "xyz site wants to use your location...yes/no?" for video. Too many sites are running autoplay video ads now, and that needs to be outlawed.
LTE on my phone is unmetered - try a better contract?
Too many sites are running autoplay video ads now, and that needs to be outlawed.
Yes! That is just what the internet needs, more laws on what people are allowed to do with their computers when other people's computers connect to them and ask them for information.
I have an "uncapped" LTE contract and find I don't use web browsing except when I have no other choice due to disruptive ads. If it isn't a video ad, it's an ad with a tiny close button, or the one that opens iOS App Store or GooglePlay to entice me to download some piece-of-shit freemium game. Android has few options for ad-blocking (although I find ABP drains the battery) and iOS has only one I'm aware of without a jailbreak. If I had to pay per $DATAUNIT, invasive ads would bother me more than they already do, but there is no way I'd want a legislative body to ban the ads. I'd rather see users simply stop using the sites with obtrusive ads.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
