Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
444 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 76


  Reply # 1997559 17-Apr-2018 09:34
Send private message quote this post

With regards to the people saying they will only consider this if its in 4K....

 

Do we have the equipment (cameras) to record the events in 4K? Wont matter whether or not we have the other infrastructure to broadcast it if we cant even capture it.  Had a quick browse at the OSB website and the cameras they listed seemed to only be 1080p.


Banana?
4425 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1052

Subscriber

  Reply # 1997567 17-Apr-2018 09:42
Send private message quote this post

nzkc:

 

With regards to the people saying they will only consider this if its in 4K....

 

Do we have the equipment (cameras) to record the events in 4K? Wont matter whether or not we have the other infrastructure to broadcast it if we cant even capture it.  Had a quick browse at the OSB website and the cameras they listed seemed to only be 1080p.

 

 

OSB won't be recording the RWC next year.

 

It will be a Japanese broadcaster I'd assume.


478 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 61


  Reply # 1997594 17-Apr-2018 10:01
Send private message quote this post

Hoping for a PS4 app like other streaming services have so I can easily get the content on my TV screen. Rather not have to buy new equipment aswell.

4952 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2009


  Reply # 1997597 17-Apr-2018 10:05
Send private message quote this post

NzBeagle:

 

Shouldn't be too hard to come up with a plug and play experience for the oldies/technophobes with everything pre-loaded on a puck.

 

And nothing to stop them selling $200 pass/puck bundles in Noel Leeming etc.

 

 

A solution that doesn't require purchase of a new component to watch on a decent sized screen would be preferable.  Ideally I would add an app to my SmartTV, or just use Lightbox.





Mike

17943 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5170

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1997598 17-Apr-2018 10:06
Send private message quote this post

tripp:

 

And this is the issue.  Splitting is good if you only like 1 sports and happy to pay x amount a year for that 1 sport.  Start wanting to watch more than 1 sport and this is when the prices start to increase fast.

 

Bag sky all you want but for sports people its a good deal.  You get a min of 6 sports channels plus pop ups (when they have them) for less than $30 a month (only talking sports package price).  Even with the added cost of the starter pack now the total is only $55 a month.  Less than $2 a day.

 

People always b***h about the price of sky but think nothing of paying $5 for a cup of coffee in the morning which in some examples is more than they are paying for sky per day.

 

 

This a great post. Agreed entirely. Not to mention it covers 95% of NZ which streaming is only what, 60% who can get a connection capable of a stream in HD rain or shine?

 

 


17943 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5170

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1997606 17-Apr-2018 10:09
Send private message quote this post

With Sky, we like to record and start watching with a 20 minute or so delay, all Rugby. This allows us to fast forward stoppages, get through half time etc. I would be unlikely to stream live, but I wonder if it will be possible to start watching the game on only a 20 minute delay? I doubt it. I will either have to watch live or wait for the game to end, wait for them to post it. Will I also be able to watch it "offline"? 

 

I am very concerned at how this is going to work. I forsee this being the worst coverage in recent history.

 

 


3658 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2178

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 1997618 17-Apr-2018 10:15
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

networkn:

 

tripp:

 

And this is the issue.  Splitting is good if you only like 1 sports and happy to pay x amount a year for that 1 sport.  Start wanting to watch more than 1 sport and this is when the prices start to increase fast.

 

Bag sky all you want but for sports people its a good deal.  You get a min of 6 sports channels plus pop ups (when they have them) for less than $30 a month (only talking sports package price).  Even with the added cost of the starter pack now the total is only $55 a month.  Less than $2 a day.

 

People always b***h about the price of sky but think nothing of paying $5 for a cup of coffee in the morning which in some examples is more than they are paying for sky per day.

 

 

This a great post. Agreed entirely. Not to mention it covers 95% of NZ which streaming is only what, 60% who can get a connection capable of a stream in HD rain or shine?

 

 

 

 

Actually, at the moment it's more like 92-95% of Spark customers can achieve HD playback, according to Youtube...https://www.google.com/get/videoqualityreport/... I expect that to improve over time.

 

This tallies with our internal testing as well as other metrics we monitor.

 

Certainly the RWC bitrates are going to be higher than Youtube, but there's 18 months of upgrades, preparation and product evolution to happen in the meantime.

 

Will 100% of BB customers be able to stream in flawless HD? No, of course not, and anyone that claims otherwise is overly optimistic or misinformed - however suggesting 60% is ANYTHING LIKE the real number is grossly wrong.

 

Cheers - N


3658 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2178

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 1997625 17-Apr-2018 10:19
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

And what's more, those Google numbers don't account for bad home wifi setups etc. The number of people with an ISP connection that is HD capable is higher than they report.

 

Cheers - N


'That VDSL Cat'
8423 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1814

Trusted
Spark
Subscriber

  Reply # 1997632 17-Apr-2018 10:26
Send private message quote this post

Talkiet:

 

And what's more, those Google numbers don't account for bad home wifi setups etc. The number of people with an ISP connection that is HD capable is higher than they report.

 

Cheers - N

 

 

You missed the  most fun part of those stats!

 

 

 

 

 

 

leaves you time to sort @sounddude ;)





#include <std_disclaimer>

 

Any comments made are personal opinion and do not reflect directly on the position my current or past employers may have.


2776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 291


  Reply # 1997633 17-Apr-2018 10:27
Send private message quote this post

trig42:

 

nzkc:

 

With regards to the people saying they will only consider this if its in 4K....

 

Do we have the equipment (cameras) to record the events in 4K? Wont matter whether or not we have the other infrastructure to broadcast it if we cant even capture it.  Had a quick browse at the OSB website and the cameras they listed seemed to only be 1080p.

 

 

OSB won't be recording the RWC next year.

 

It will be a Japanese broadcaster I'd assume.

 

 

Days like this I always feel inadequate and overlooked :(

 

https://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=176&topicid=233424&page_no=3#1996822 

 

I even later mention the Pub scenario which was bought up a 2nd time by someone else. Woe is me.


I fix stuff!
1678 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 341

Trusted
Vocus
Subscriber

  Reply # 1997638 17-Apr-2018 10:29
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

hio77:

 

leaves you time to sort @sounddude ;)

 

 

Those stats are a bit broken. Orcon looks at AS17746 which just has some rats and mice on it, soon to be gone. Slingshot and Orcon both share AS9790 which shows up as Slingshot in the google stats.

 

 

 

 


3658 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2178

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 1997639 17-Apr-2018 10:30
Send private message quote this post

hio77:

 

Talkiet:

 

And what's more, those Google numbers don't account for bad home wifi setups etc. The number of people with an ISP connection that is HD capable is higher than they report.

 

Cheers - N

 

 

You missed the  most fun part of those stats!

 

 

 

 

 

 

leaves you time to sort @sounddude ;)

 

 

Actually, to be fair, those youtube stats only make sense if the ISP keeps their prefix lists and access type mappings up to date. If they let things slide then the results can be badly misleading. I am responsible for the Spark CDNs and making sure our prefixes are (reasonably) accurately mapped to make the results as reliable as possible.

 

That Orcon graph looks to me like it's the result of an error in the mapping. I don't believe their performance is anything like that bad.

 

But yeah, definitely possible to improve that graph @sounddude :-)

 

Cheers - N


17943 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5170

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1997647 17-Apr-2018 10:38
Send private message quote this post

Talkiet:

 

Actually, at the moment it's more like 92-95% of Spark customers can achieve HD playback, according to Youtube...https://www.google.com/get/videoqualityreport/... I expect that to improve over time.

 

This tallies with our internal testing as well as other metrics we monitor.

 

Certainly the RWC bitrates are going to be higher than Youtube, but there's 18 months of upgrades, preparation and product evolution to happen in the meantime.

 

Will 100% of BB customers be able to stream in flawless HD? No, of course not, and anyone that claims otherwise is overly optimistic or misinformed - however suggesting 60% is ANYTHING LIKE the real number is grossly wrong.

 

Cheers - N

 

 

Well, I am happy to be corrected, but this will show ONLY those people who have used youtube in the past 30 days? That might make up a high percentage of Spark customers, but there would be plenty of households who don't go to youtube because speeds wouldn't allow for it or isn't reliable because of speeds? 92-95% seems very high compared to what I see every day supporting customers with internet connections.

 

I accept you have 18 months to improve things, but there are plenty of areas, like Whangamata where there are no plans to put in UFB before the RWC, and VDSL is thin on the ground and the ADSL is really poor. We have a place there where there are 18 apartments, serviced by a poor VDSL connection. I couldn't imagine a good experience in trying to stream whilst there. Even if I wanted to blow a huge percentage of my mobile data cap on watching a game, I would assume that if 500 others wanted to do the same, the mobile data pool of bandwidth would be stretched. (again happy to be corrected)

 

Maybe 60% was low, but I still think unless Spark/TVNZ are very careful, a lot of people aren't going to get to see the games they might want to.

 

Out of curiosity, and I know you probably can't answer this, but do you think TVNZ did a good job of coverage of the CWG? As someone who watched a lot of sport, I felt it was *abysmal*. It was the worst sports coverage I can recall. Ever. 

 

What is worse in my view, is that TVNZ don't seem to believe they did a poor job, which means they are unlikely to learn from it and do better next time. 

 

For what it's worth, and I know you have likely no say in this, but if you were to sublicense the RWC to Sky, I'd happily pay my $100-150 that Spark has indicated it would cost, to access games via Sky. 

 

I am not bagging on Spark or TVNZ specifically, I'd feel the same if any other providers had proposed the same thing. 

 

 


1349 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 185


  Reply # 1997662 17-Apr-2018 10:59
Send private message quote this post

dafman:

 

throbb:

 

dafman:

 

sonyxperiageek:

 

I hope people finally realise that paying potentially $100 to stream all 2019 RWC games live on Spark vs $54.81 a month for a full Sky Sports package which includes a lot more sports than just RWC if they had won the rights, means that Sky isn't exactly "price-rorting".

 

Just imagine if the ABs got knocked out in pool stages..

 

 

Correction:

 

$100 to stream all 2019 RWC live on Spark vs $328 for a minimum 6-month term contract to Sky sports package.

 

Just imagine if you signed up for six months if the ABs got knocked out in the pool stages!

 

 

Well if you only wanted the RWC you would have just bought the Fanpass(or what ever they call it) for the event from sky.

 

 

For a product with less flexibility than the Spark proposal and probably at a cost greater than the Spark offering as well (if 2015 Sky FanPass pricing is a guide).

 

 

You mean like the day pass and week pass option that were available at the last RWC on FanPass (that sort of flexibility you're referring too?).  I recall day passes at $15/day and week passes at $20/week.  Wouldnt it be spooky if those were the prices that Spark chose in 2019 - at this stage you;re still speculating.

 

But you have managed to prod me enough to point out the (as usual) critical flaw that Consumer magazine has it its RWC15 pricing analysis. 

 

If you were a hard-core rugby supporter then you would have already had Sky (and a 6 month subscription for a 6 week tourney would be ludicrious).  But we'll put common sense aside in the Consumer argument.

 

If you were a tightwad but a keen rugby supporter you would have paid for the pools (1 month of FanPass for $60 - yes $60 not $100) and watched the balance on FTA (given its schedule).  At most you would have stretched to 2 months of FanPass (thats $120 - not 7 weeks at $20/week - duh, why pay for 7 weeks when its cheaper to get 2 months???!).  Or 1 month and 2 weeks of FanPass for a more likely $60+20+20 = $100!  Wooo.  The same price that Spark are bandying around.  

 

Consumer was flawed.  It always is.  Thats why it makes no sense to subscribe to their content.  Its kinda sad that one has to spell it out for those who cant work it out themselves.  


1957 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 293

Subscriber

  Reply # 1997683 17-Apr-2018 11:29
Send private message quote this post

MikeAqua:

 

NzBeagle:

 

Shouldn't be too hard to come up with a plug and play experience for the oldies/technophobes with everything pre-loaded on a puck.

 

And nothing to stop them selling $200 pass/puck bundles in Noel Leeming etc.

 

 

A solution that doesn't require purchase of a new component to watch on a decent sized screen would be preferable.  Ideally I would add an app to my SmartTV, or just use Lightbox.

 

 

I heard Simon Moutter on the radio last night saying that no new hardware would be required - it would work on existing things like AppleTV.





Geek girl. Freelance copywriter and editor at Unmistakable.co.nz.

 

Currently using: Modified 2008 Mac Pro, HP M6-1017TX Laptop, iPad Pro, iPhone 7, iPhone 6S, AppleTV4.


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.