Those IPTV providers work better with a half decent Android Box. If you decide to buy a £25 Chinese box with 1GB RAM and a crap processor, it's no wonder when you try and stream a 1080p stream that it buffers.
I used a French provider during the World Cup and they had a proper 4K stream of TF1's World Cup matches which was clearly a re-stream of a 'Free' (Google Freebox) stream, which worked surprisingly well, along with another 4K stream from Turkey. (FYI, I also have a legal sub with Molotov.tv which is 10x better than any pirate)
UK pirates tend to be SD and largely 720p down-conversions of 1080i streams from Sky and Virgin or from Now TV boxes, although there are some 1080i's doing the rounds now, particularly with sports and movies.
JM
JamesM0984
I've got an Enigma zGemma. Works like any other box, EPG the works and with a USB HD one can even record. Doubles up as a Freesat box as well for the one working LNB feed I have. Not going into further detail here obviously but it does the job.
As I say, downside is the 25p "filmic" look - fine on movies but a ballache on sports but sticking the telly into Smooth mode sorts than out.
Still worth remembering something like 87% of TV is still watched "live", though not sure if that includes those watching live online.
To me as things stand there are two major issues with cutting the cord. The first is I can't watch content all through one app or even one device - you have to switch players or systems to browse your viewing.
The second and biggest issue for me is there is still a significant delay when it comes to live streaming online. I always thought it was bad enough that digital TV was a couple of seconds behind analogue, but internet streaming, specifically via Now TV, can be a minute or two behind broadcast. Twenty years ago, even ten years ago, it wouldn't have mattered, but with social media and for sport in play betting the delay just needs to be significantly reduced.
The second and biggest issue for me is there is still a significant delay when it comes to live streaming online. I always thought it was bad enough that digital TV was a couple of seconds behind analogue, but internet streaming, specifically via Now TV, can be a minute or two behind broadcast. Twenty years ago, even ten years ago, it wouldn't have mattered, but with social media and for sport in play betting the delay just needs to be significantly reduced.
For this - as ever - multicast is a solution, but it will need ISP buy-in as they have to peer the multicast sources. (So it won't be a solution for 'hooky' sources)
Unicast OTT is a pretty terrible solution for low-latency live streaming as multiple elements of the protocols used require buffering.
A multicast-peered DVB transport stream carried over IP is far lower-latency (not much more than the encoder delay - which is the same as other DVB platforms etc. - and your routing delay (not hugely dissimilar to your 'ping' time to the source).
I'd imagine that BT Sport UHD via BT Vision multicast is reasonably undelayed, compared to BBC UHD iPlayer?
Just waiting for the 'new' multicast on 5G that's alleged to be better than sliced bread with jam and cream on it. Supposedly being delivered on a series of internal muxes with very very large capacities. HD as base format, UHD HDR as the standard. Enhanced 8K for OB production delivered via 5G closed multicast being worked on, which if proved should translate across to Customer Delivery easily.
I am assuming that a 5G sim and the gubbins needed will be included in new receivers and add on boxes and plugins not unlike Apple TV, Amazon Fire or Roku Streaming Sticks will be available for the then existing receiver range, once analysis of the tests and a decision to proceed is given.
Does that mean that TVs could come with a a 5G tuner to get TV channels?? Could it be used like DTT is used today??
Imagine a TV that searches the frequency band for TV networks in the same way mobiles and dongles look for mobile networks.
TV could be delivered either via a mobile network or broadcasters could be given an allotment of frequencies (e.g. a chunk of the UHF band) to run their own free-to-access 5G-based network
Through the allocated bandwidth, the TV network could offer live streams of TV services as well as on-demand and catch-up TV, like you can already do via the allocated bandwidth of your chosen mobile service provider. Crucially, these new networks could be free-to-air, i.e. you wouldn't have to worry about downloads and costs. Secondly, you would always be presented with the best possible picture resolution, thirdly, the 5G-TV network could be accessed via mobiles, tablets as well as TVs - one way of distributing content over the air to every device.
The regulatory landscape for 5G TV will need to be dramatically different. A much greater availability of 'Spectrum' and the considerably cheaper 'broadcast' costs with putting a video channel on 5G, especially if multicast or a new version of is used, will enable new and temporary channels to appear and disappear almost at will. I'd hope Ofcom are already on the case with this.
City dwellers real can't seem to grasp the poor BB speeds even in many towns never mind rural locations. We get no more than about 10Mb which is not satisfactory for viewing its forever buffering. The infrastructure just isn't there most of where I live is copper wires, street after street
City dwellers real can't seem to grasp the poor BB speeds even in many towns never mind rural locations. We get no more than about 10Mb which is not satisfactory for viewing its forever buffering. The infrastructure just isn't there most of where I live is copper wires, street after street
Copper is a LOT better than Aluminium. That's the reason a lot of 60s and 70s housing developments struggle with decent connectivity. Aluminium cabling was used when copper became very expensive, but doesn't carry ADSL2 (used for high-speed ADSL) or VDSL (used for fibre-to-the-cabinet) at all well and is responsible for slower speeds than copper would deliver.
City dwellers real can't seem to grasp the poor BB speeds even in many towns never mind rural locations. We get no more than about 10Mb which is not satisfactory for viewing its forever buffering. The infrastructure just isn't there most of where I live is copper wires, street after street
Being a city dweller, I wish I could get 10Mb, we only get 5Mb, and that's on a good day. It's a treat to visit my parents in their tiny little Norfolk village miles away from any notable population which gets 28Mb.