Recommended Posts

On 5/27/2019 at 8:40 PM, BudMan said:

Be ready for a very deep rabbit hole ;)  And keep in mind that your going to be using different window sizes, and then there SACK so you don't need to send ack for every packet, etc

 

My point is that you NEED upload speed to be able to download anything..  If you have lots of different sessions going on - say multiple streaming sessions to multiple devices, your going to need more upload then if just 1 stream, etc.  And yeah your prob not going to run into an an issue unless your upload is very limited..  But its a very good idea to know what your upload limit is..

 

Here is an example what talking about that your uploading when downloading.

 

This is during a speedtest, you can see what currently downloading at, and the upload being used to support that download.

 

speedtest.thumb.png.694b9b44b9172f632b3e61da1a8ba9bc.png

 

There are many factors at play.. the RTT between locations, the window sized being used, any loss on the line, is SACK being used?  Are there a lot of retrans, etc. etc.

 

The take away here again is that is not all about the download speed they say they can provide, if they do not provide enough upload.. Normally this is not an issue true - but you should be aware of what your paying for vs 100, is 100/10, 100/5, 100/20, etc. etc.

 

In a perfect world we would all have symmetrical where we get X/X, same up as down vs X/Y for bandwidth packages.

Well I'll definitely keep that in mind if I run into streaming/speed issues. And to be honest I never asked about upload speeds or looked for that when I was comparing the plans. I was more concerned with 1. Price 2. Speed enough to meet our real world usage. I will say this though you guys have me curious now. Guess the good thing is that they said I could upgrade without any charge, just have to call in.

My only thing that concerns me is if you have a monthly bandwidth cap.  I haven't heard about this in a while but it was active in some areas.  Usually the higher plans have either no cap or a much higher cap.  

 

IMO, I think you will be fine with the 150....if it is causing issues you can always upgrade to the better service offering.   Check on those caps.  Upload is usually 10Mb/s I can stream/game on every tv (3), computer (6), and Ipad (3) without issues.  

On 5/30/2019 at 12:54 PM, sc302 said:

My only thing that concerns me is if you have a monthly bandwidth cap.  I haven't heard about this in a while but it was active in some areas.  Usually the higher plans have either no cap or a much higher cap.  

 

IMO, I think you will be fine with the 150....if it is causing issues you can always upgrade to the better service offering.   Check on those caps.  Upload is usually 10Mb/s I can stream/game on every tv (3), computer (6), and Ipad (3) without issues.  

I'm pretty sure there is. I've had family that have Xfinity and they've received a message on their screen (WTF) saying they're approaching their monthly bandwidth cap but if they go over they'll get the overage for free since it was their first time. That's not a direct quote but something like that saying they'll get this month free if they go over but not month they won't. But they have heavy downloaders, torrents, downloading movies to their laptops and phones, downloading console games.

 

Now that it's summer so I'm sure we'll be watching more TV than during the school year. However, I'd be very surprised if just watching streaming services puts us over a typical monthly cap no? Shoot, I'd imagine we'd have to be streaming on all our devices simultaneously 24/7? 

Depends on what your streaming... Netflix UHD streaming can be quite a bit of bandwidth for example. Says 1 hour is up to 7GB..   Few devices watch a few hours per day at UHD.. And you could be easy be pushing 100GB a day..  Summer if you leave the TV streaming, etc. etc.  You would be surprised how fast it can add up ;)

  • Like 2
6 hours ago, thisdude said:

I'm pretty sure there is. I've had family that have Xfinity and they've received a message on their screen (WTF) saying they're approaching their monthly bandwidth cap but if they go over they'll get the overage for free since it was their first time. That's not a direct quote but something like that saying they'll get this month free if they go over but not month they won't. But they have heavy downloaders, torrents, downloading movies to their laptops and phones, downloading console games.

 

Now that it's summer so I'm sure we'll be watching more TV than during the school year. However, I'd be very surprised if just watching streaming services puts us over a typical monthly cap no? Shoot, I'd imagine we'd have to be streaming on all our devices simultaneously 24/7? 

You can see here, I use quite a bit.  We are a streaming household. No torrenting, video games and streaming only.   I also don’t have a cap on my tier. I have a lot of devices streaming Netflix or YouTube or Comcast tv or music or gaming or something all of the time. Family of 5....no tv, complete cord cutters (Comcast streaming beta app for tv)   A lot is just to have some noise in the background, I don’t have any 4K devices all of this is HD. 

 

 

8B340B54-78B2-4FE8-AC11-0573FAC1BF36.png

100 more than enough

On 6/2/2019 at 3:29 PM, BudMan said:

Depends on what your streaming... Netflix UHD streaming can be quite a bit of bandwidth for example. Says 1 hour is up to 7GB..   Few devices watch a few hours per day at UHD.. And you could be easy be pushing 100GB a day..  Summer if you leave the TV streaming, etc. etc.  You would be surprised how fast it can add up ;)

I just have the basic subscription not the standard of premium subscriptions.

On 6/2/2019 at 5:24 PM, sc302 said:

You can see here, I use quite a bit.  We are a streaming household. No torrenting, video games and streaming only.   I also don’t have a cap on my tier. I have a lot of devices streaming Netflix or YouTube or Comcast tv or music or gaming or something all of the time. Family of 5....no tv, complete cord cutters (Comcast streaming beta app for tv)   A lot is just to have some noise in the background, I don’t have any 4K devices all of this is HD. 

 

 

8B340B54-78B2-4FE8-AC11-0573FAC1BF36.png

I would love to completely cut the cord. But my wife and I like to watch the local news (lol yes I know we're old). That's really cool how it shows you that on the app. Is that the My Account Xfinity app?

9 hours ago, thisdude said:

I would love to completely cut the cord. But my wife and I like to watch the local news (lol yes I know we're old). That's really cool how it shows you that on the app. Is that the My Account Xfinity app?

Just by going to the xfinity site on my phone and opening up my services and internet. 

choose 640*480 for streaming

13 hours ago, BudMan said:

So you watch in SD?  Uggghhhh ;)

Haha! Yeah but I can't really tell the difference. I know our living room TV is a LG 4K UHD. The others are just 1080p or 720p on the smaller ones. But I can't tell the difference. And no one else has groaned about the quality. Hm, maybe I'll try it and see how much of a difference it is. But that's like an extra $50 a year for HD and $85 for UHD!

4 minutes ago, Marujan said:

choose 640*480 for streaming

?

Yearly 50 bux isn’t all that much. If we are talking a month, that is a big difference. On a had tv, standard definition has artifacts, extra shadows, etc that isn’t supposed to be there.  I mean it is ok but sacrifices are made.  Hd to 4K I can see the meh.  You really need a large tv to see the difference.   I don’t see it on a 55 inch.   Just like to appreciate 1080 you you need a 55”.  32-42” is good for 720p, hard to see the difference between that and 1080p.  But you certainly can see the difference, almost painful, going to 640x480/standard def. 

7 minutes ago, sc302 said:

Viewable difference from standard to hd yes. Depending on tv size upping to uhd, yes. 

Ok so I have a 40, 48, & 60 all 1080. Those should see a definite difference. Our living room is a 65 4K so that one wouldn't see much of a difference then?

Your telling me you can not tell the difference on a 65 inch tv between sd and hd?  Yeah you must be blind! ;)  I can not really tell the difference between 4k and 1080.. But the UHD package gets you more than just higher res.. You also can stream to more devices at a time.. And get the ability to download for offline viewing.

 

Basic plan only allows you to stream to 1 screen, UHD plan allows you to stream to 4 at a time..  With that many tv's your telling me netflix is only ever watched on 1 at a time?

 

HD plan is only 2... Its less than a cup of coffee difference per month, I spend more on a single beer stopping after work.. I don't see how someone with that many TVs is worried about the cup of coffee difference per month to actually watch ###### in 4k on their 4k tv ;)

 

5 minutes ago, sc302 said:

Your eyes are your eyes.  Try it and see for yourself.  I am not going to tell you what you can and can’t see.  I can see a difference, it is so bad I can’t watch standard def any more, it isn’t ok for me. 

Ok I can understand that. Yeah I might try the HD plan and "see" what the family thinks of the difference, if any to them. 

 

1 minute ago, BudMan said:

Your telling me you can not tell the difference on a 65 inch tv between sd and hd?  Yeah you must be blind! ;)  I can not really tell the difference between 4k and 1080.. But the UHD package gets you more than just higher res.. You also can stream to more devices at a time.. And get the ability to download for offline viewing.

 

Basic plan only allows you to stream to 1 screen, UHD plan allows you to stream to 4 at a time..  With that many tv's your telling me netflix is only ever watched on 1 at a time?

Maybe I can, just never paid attention. And I'm near sited (maybe that has something to do with it IDK lol) and don't watch a lot of TV either. YouTube gets the most viewing time on the TVs over everything else. And if someone wants to watch Netflix but can't because someone else is watching it they just watch Hulu, regular TV or again YouTube.

You mean the youtube tv subscription, or just videos?  Both of which can be 1080, The tv subscription is what 50$ a month and your worried about a few bucks extra on netflix?  Hulu isn't free - and while their whole library is not 1080 they do have lots of content at 1080..

 

Your saying you watch all these other things at SD as well?  Or maybe that is why they don't mind watching hulu or youtube when netflix is busy - because the picture is better ;)

 

Keep in mind with 4k its not always the diff in resolution that pretty sure is hard for the human eye to see... Its more the HDR features of 4k that make the picture better... This I can notice for sure!  But 4k non hdr, vs 1080 no you can not see much dif with.. Atleast I can not..

23 minutes ago, BudMan said:

You mean the youtube tv subscription, or just videos?  Both of which can be 1080, The tv subscription is what 50$ a month and your worried about a few bucks extra on netflix?  Hulu isn't free - and while their whole library is not 1080 they do have lots of content at 1080..

 

Your saying you watch all these other things at SD as well?  Or maybe that is why they don't mind watching hulu or youtube when netflix is busy - because the picture is better ;)

 

Keep in mind with 4k its not always the diff in resolution that pretty sure is hard for the human eye to see... Its more the HDR features of 4k that make the picture better... This I can notice for sure!  But 4k non hdr, vs 1080 no you can not see much dif with.. Atleast I can not..

@BudMan just regular YouTube not the TV subscription service. Yeah that could be why no one has complained or they just don't care meh.

 

I get Hulu free with my Sprint plan. Otherwise I wouldn't pay for it. 

Well what I would do it change your plan for 1 month on netflix, to the uhd.. So you can check out stuff in 4k with Dolby Vision or HDR10, if your tv does - I have to think your 65" 4k does - unless it was the like the lowest of lowest budget buy models?

 

See if you notice the difference vs your basic SD ;)

 

If you don't see the difference then change it back... Worse case your out the cost of a cup of coffee, or a decent beer ;)  ###### 1 of the craft beers had the other day was 10$ for the can.. Didn't include tax and then tip.. ###### that was the UHD plan right there pretty much... While the beer was Delicious!!!  I get way more enjoyment over the month that beer I enjoyed for a few minutes..

beer.thumb.jpg.5ab6378ec3deff026d38f7d871035db7.jpg

 

This is from my checkin on untapped.

 

11 hours ago, BudMan said:

Well what I would do it change your plan for 1 month on netflix, to the uhd.. So you can check out stuff in 4k with Dolby Vision or HDR10, if your tv does - I have to think your 65" 4k does - unless it was the like the lowest of lowest budget buy models?

 

See if you notice the difference vs your basic SD ;)

 

If you don't see the difference then change it back... Worse case your out the cost of a cup of coffee, or a decent beer ;)  ###### 1 of the craft beers had the other day was 10$ for the can.. Didn't include tax and then tip.. ###### that was the UHD plan right there pretty much... While the beer was Delicious!!!  I get way more enjoyment over the month that beer I enjoyed for a few minutes..

beer.thumb.jpg.5ab6378ec3deff026d38f7d871035db7.jpg

 

This is from my checkin on untapped.

 

I think tonight I am going to open up a bottle of Victory Golden Monkey, Twisted Monkey is nice for after a workout...Golden Monkey is nice after a hard day of work.  This week has been rough....might switch to an 18 year GlenFiddich.  

  • 2 weeks later...

So it's been a couple weeks and things have been great with 150 mbps. No streaming issues or lag when someone plays a game.

 

We tried the Ultra HD Netflix plan and really couldn't tell a difference between the HD plan. So we're sticking with the HD plan, noticeable difference between it and the standard. So thanks for all the advice on it guys!

22 minutes ago, thisdude said:

So it's been a couple weeks and things have been great with 150 mbps. No streaming issues or lag when someone plays a game.

 

We tried the Ultra HD Netflix plan and really couldn't tell a difference between the HD plan. So we're sticking with the HD plan, noticeable difference between it and the standard. So thanks for all the advice on it guys!

Wondering what your Upload speed was in the end now you can tell us?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Indeed. But note that this has Wifi7, HDMI 2.1, BlueTooth 5.4, and 5G Ethernet, so even in the additional features list this bundle blows the Steam Machine away. And, with the money saved, one could improve this dramatically.
    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
    • For me, the fundamental problems with these "smartglasses" is that they really don't work well for people with significant prescriptions and massively up the price if you use attached lenses if they have displays, and if they don't, then they're not actually "smart" anything, rather just connecting to your phone and relaying voice to an AI. In a few cases like this, they throw in small cameras to feed video to the AI. All around, these feel like both a solution looking for a problem, and the problems it tries to solve seem more easily solved by different approaches and designs. Oddly, if the rumours are true, Apple may actually have invented something for once and it kind of does this right: put cameras in ear buds and manage the interface to AI exactly as most of us do: tapping on an ear bud and saying "Hey Google" or "Hey Siri." That makes them compatible with almost everyone, can double up as a hearing assist device, an impaired vision assist device, a "smart" device... and answer your phone and play music. That just seems like a better solution all around.
    • Usually the bigger ones with many fixes/changes take a few, theyre an exception to the rule most likely
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      452
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!