RE: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?

["Bora Akyol" <bora () broadcom com>]

That's because most of these people are watching the stream
on their computer (Mac or PC).

Bring that box to the living room in an attractive package and
the stats will be very different.

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On 
> Behalf Of Marshall Eubanks
> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 7:45 AM
> To: colm () stdlib net
> Cc: Andrew Odlyzko; nanog () merit edu
> Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a 
> day, continuously?
>
>
>
> On Jan 6, 2007, at 10:19 AM, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 09:09:19AM -0600, Andrew Odlyzko wrote:
> > > 2.  The question I don't understand is, why stream?
> >
> > There are other good reasons, but fundamentally; because of live
> > telivision.
> >
> > > In these days, when a terabyte disk for consumer PCs is about to be
> > > introduced, why bother with streaming?  It is so much simpler to
> > > download (at faster than real-time rates, if possible), and play it
> > > back.
> >
> > That might be worse for download operators, because people may  
> > download
> > an hour of video, and only watch 5 minutes :/
>
> Our logs show that, for every 100 people who start to watch a 
> stream,  
> only 2 or 5 % watch over
> 30 minutes in one sitting, even for VOD where they presumably have  
> some interest in the movie up front, and
> more more than 9% will watch all of VOD movie, even over multiple  
> viewings. This is also very consistent
> with time, but I don't have any pretty plots handy. (Our cumulative  
> audience in 2006 was 2.74 million people, I have lots of statistics.)
>
> So, from that standpoint, making a video file available for download  
> is wasting order of 90% of the bandwidth used
> to download it.
>
> Regards
> Marshall
>
>
> > -- 
> > Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm 
> > +pgp () stdlib net