We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed) Me on my desktop and she on laptop. Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi. The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.
How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.
Is this normal?
Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but running about half minute later?
No. Are you sure you were both watching it on the same site? If so, the only likely place for such a delay would be the browser rendering the stream, and that doesn't sound very likely.
Given the delay in digital channels, no. Anyway it is when it is being transmitted that counts, not when it is being watched. But I think the definition of 'live' includes a *nearly" or similar caveat.
No cos the delay is not at issue, its being able to see the content that matters. I've seen and heard these days bigger gaps, I'd imagine that it very much depends on the server you are on and how many ports its serving. Brian
Actually, if both were using the same stream then they do agree. I have two echo devices here. If I set them on the same channel their can be a huge delay, but if I say to one play whatever, everywhere, then all my echo devices use the same stream and they are all working together and there is no delay, so the delay is when the actual server end sends it out, nothing to do with your local set up at all. The possible way around it is to use a media server at your end and then chuck it out to as many other devices as you like, I'm guessing that this is what Echo does, one device acts as the receiver and merely echoes it to all the others through the local wifi. Brian
It could be..
are you running the same resolution on both? there is a big difference between HD and SD streams.
You can try but I doubt if you would win.
How fine do you make the distinction?
Not "live" because of all the cumulative processing and distribution delays, your 30 seconds?
Not "live" because of the time it takes the light from the actual event to reach the camera's sensor?
WiFi certainly causes delays. We have a Sky Q box and a couple of mini Q boxes, these communicate with each other over WiFi and the mini boxes have a distinct delay when watching the same programme, that delay can be several seconds.
Richard
Shouldn't be an issue with wifi: more an issue with the software drivers in the cards.
But that cannot be. People play real time games over wifi. No its buffering in the players. I suspect they do quality probes and bufer depoending on link qiality aor speed.
No.
In the last couple of days this has been dicussed at length on uk.tech.digital-tv in the thread 'CRT TV sets as used by the poor'
In this case it was why someone using a VCR with a black and white TV was required to buy a colour TV licence.
This was, presumably, because a colour recording might be replayed at a later date on a colour TV.
The time difference between transmission and viewing (in colour) would be many times longer than your half minute!
Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.
And your own computer will introduce even more delay in the chain.
If I feed the same source to the amp and speakers in this room, and also to the audio input of the PC and listen to it on the PC speakers at the same time, there is a very obvious delay between them.
All other settings the same?
Where I live we struggle to get a single channel of video streaming without "buffering" warnings. I am surprised that wired was beaten by wifi though (unless you have a really bad cable). Normally it is the other way around with wifi being slower due to retransmits.
And the higher the resolution the longer the time difference.
If you switch between SD and HD on the same nominal channel you will often get the same second of output played again in HD.
ISTR the internet radio streams run ~30s behind realtime as well.
I also recall that even officially "live" outside broadcasts are about
10s behind true realtime so that if an atrocity occurs on camera the editors can pull the plug before it is ever broadcast to air.
There is no such thing as analogue the charge on electrons is discrete ie. digital.
Its the same with photons used for transmission they can't be subdivided so are also digital.
well it does depend on what you mean by 'live' as with most things. Most of us know what we mean when it's said that we go live to... and I doubt you'd get very far complaining to the advertising authorities.
So you need some clue as to what a person meant by saying live. My HD channels seem to be slightly less 'live' than the SD channels, when switching they appear to be about 1 word behind, but that could also be the media box or the TV.
It;s like any subject unless yuo understand the context you get confused about the terms and terminology, simialr to so many things including IDing a duck, it not always as simple as it seems.
and the further you sit from the screen the longer the delay too :-)
Yes pretty much everything is digital, even analogue windup watches with anaologue faces are digital ... tick... tok I knoew a couple in a band that went by that name.
but light also exists as a wave which I think is classed as analogue.
Not on any I ever worked on.
Used to be common on radio phone-ins, though.
Now tell us how you measure the true delay at home. With anything known as digital, you can. Don't need to be in a lab to do so.
I follow your quantum argument, but on another level you could argue that anything described as digital must actually be analogue unless the rise and fall times are zero.
AFAIK there is no longer a distinction, if you're watching a BBC programme live or on catchup, you need a licence.
Well you can't. You can approximate it if that digital thing is detectable by something you have.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.