heffeque:

I don't think it is, I know it is. There's a huge amount of population that can only get a hold of a single ISP. On my family's side most of them get either Comcast (which has crappy upload speeds and is expensive), AT&T (which is expensive and has monthly caps) or DSL (no comments). Very few people I know from both Eastern and Western regions have access to FTTH (most have HFC or DSL).

Yes, and for most people who download streamed content, those connections tend to be fast enough. Upload speeds tend to be the more limiting factor.

In Spain most people just don't want to pay for more than 50/50 Mbps (which is around 33 €/month taxes included; 43 €/month for 300/300; 56 €/month for 1000/1000), and quite a few amount of people don't bother to transition from DSL to FTTH for pure apathy even though they have it available and the price for 50/50 is the same as DSL.

Doesn't change the fact that connections capable of decent-quality 4K uploading isn't as wide-spread as you make it out to be.

When did I say that the US's connections are superior? I said from the very beginning that precisely the US is very much behind most 1st world countries and that there's a huge amount of people that don't have access to FTTH.

Re-read what I wrote, because I didn't say that.

Most modern 4K webcams have integrated HW encoding capabilities. I'm pretty sure these new ones won't be an exception.

Yes, but that encoding is of decent quality. The reason you (or rather, Fox2232) brought up encoding was so the data stream could be compressed enough to be transmitted over slower connections. The encoding that cameras provide demands way too much bandwidth. Even 720p from a USB webcam can saturate most of an EHCI. Most "1st world" countries don't have a connection fast enough to transmit that.

schmidtbag:

Yes, and for most people who download streamed content, those connections tend to be fast enough. Upload speeds tend to be the more limiting factor.

Yes, so you do agree with me.

schmidtbag:

Doesn't change the fact that connections capable of decent-quality 4K uploading isn't as wide-spread as you make it out to be.

It isn't as wide-spread in the US, you are right. Other 1st world countries don't generally have that problem.

schmidtbag:

Re-read what I wrote, because I didn't say that.

Could you point me out to what you think I didn't read correctly? Please enlighten me.

schmidtbag:

Yes, but that encoding is of decent quality. The reason you (or rather, Fox2232) brought up encoding was so the data stream could be compressed enough to be transmitted over slower connections. The encoding that cameras provide demands way too much bandwidth. Even 720p from a USB webcam can saturate most of an EHCI. Most "1st world" countries don't have a connection fast enough to transmit that.

Yes and no.

heffeque:

Yes, so you do agree with me.

Depends on what you say is agreeing. I don't agree with you that it's as bad as you make it out to be, but I do agree the speeds overall aren't that impressive, particularly for uploads.

It isn't as wide-spread in the US, you are right. Other 1st world countries don't generally have that problem.

Again.... most people in 1st world countries outside of NA don't have fiber or fiber-like speeds. So other 1st world countries aren't as well-off as you're making them out to be.

Could you point me out to what you think I didn't read correctly? Please enlighten me.

I said "considering you seem to think your country's internet is so superior". So unless you identify as a US citizen, how exactly does that equate to me saying the US's connections are superior? Condescending as my comment may have been, it didn't imply that the US has superior connections, but rather the average European doesn't have impressive connection speeds (I'm sure the US average is still lower).

schmidtbag:

Again.... most people in 1st world countries outside of NA don't have fiber or fiber-like speeds. So other 1st world countries aren't as well-off as you're making them out to be.

Well... I have Spain's statistics at had, and it has 25 millions households (for around 40 million inhabitants), and over 20 million of those households have FTTH coverage available. That's 80% of Spain's households with FTTH availability, and Spain's not known for being the most developed country in Europe. How many households have FTTH coverage available back in the US?

schmidtbag:

I said "considering you seem to think your country's internet is so superior". So unless you identify as a US citizen, how exactly does that equate to me saying the US's connections are superior?

I am a US citizen (PA) 😕

schmidtbag:

Condescending as my comment may have been, it didn't imply that the US has superior connections, but rather the average European doesn't have impressive connection speeds (I'm sure the US average is still lower).

One thing is having good connections and another is having good connection availability. In Europe, if you aren't happy with your ISP, most times you have 2 or more high bandwidth alternatives. In 1st world eastern Asia they definitely have better connections than in the US and in Europe.

schmidtbag:

Depends on what you say is agreeing. I don't agree with you that it's as bad as you make it out to be, but I do agree the speeds overall aren't that impressive, particularly for uploads. Again.... most people in 1st world countries outside of NA don't have fiber or fiber-like speeds. So other 1st world countries aren't as well-off as you're making them out to be. I said "considering you seem to think your country's internet is so superior". So unless you identify as a US citizen, how exactly does that equate to me saying the US's connections are superior? Condescending as my comment may have been, it didn't imply that the US has superior connections, but rather the average European doesn't have impressive connection speeds (I'm sure the US average is still lower).

He's going to keep talking out both sides of his rear because he cannot admit to his original factual errors that blow his arguments away. We already concisely pointed them out. At this point for the Holidays, we should consider his entertainment a gift, and let his Silly Sleigh depart.

heffeque:

Well... I have Spain's statistics at had, and it has 25 millions households (for around 40 million inhabitants), and over 20 million of those households have FTTH coverage available. That's 80% of Spain's households with FTTH availability, and Spain's not known for being the most developed country in Europe. How many households have FTTH coverage available back in the US?

Source? Because this one begs to differ: http://point-topic.com/free-analysis/mapping-broadband-coverage-in-spain/ Granted, it seems to suggest Spain is ahead of most of Europe (and at that, this may be skewing your perspective) but it's not as far ahead as you make it out to be. Anyway, availability is irrelevant - what matters is what's actually in use. Not sure how FTTH coverage in the US is related to this. This discussion isn't a pissing contest.

I am a US citizen (PA) 😕

Not according to your profile. Why do you think I've been bringing up Spain so much?

One thing is having good connections and another is having good connection availability. In Europe, if you aren't happy with your ISP, most times you have 2 or more high bandwidth alternatives. In 1st world eastern Asia they definitely have better connections than in the US and in Europe.

I would agree with this, but that point doesn't change what the current reality is.

Just to finish, why on earth keep doing 1080 cam when people can and want 4k cam? (exept if you are amish and in this case why have you got a computer? 🙂 ). About bandwith i never have issue in Cyprus even near the Turk zone (only in GSM data there), neither in Moroco part of the Sahara ( great work with GSM covering desert ) ... Obviously there is still white zone ( there is one in France just after the frontier ) and some with low internet ( with still copper cable ), but the near future is definively with rising bandwith.

No lifers gimmick collectors need 4k video streaming to be honest. It is way too early. It is not only about upload bandwidth. Tons of people haven't the downstream capability of that signal, not mentioning 4k monitors/screens are a huge minority. In other words wasted money for any webcam. By the time everyone is 4k capable, there will be better cameras out.

schmidtbag:

Source? Because this one begs to differ: http://point-topic.com/free-analysis/mapping-broadband-coverage-in-spain/ Granted, it seems to suggest Spain is ahead of most of Europe (and at that, this may be skewing your perspective) but it's not as far ahead as you make it out to be. Anyway, availability is irrelevant - what matters is what's actually in use. Not sure how FTTH coverage in the US is related to this. This discussion isn't a pissing contest.

That report is from 2011. FTTH has advanced quite a bit since then. Right now Telefónica has coverage for 20.8 million homes (here, sorry I couldn't find any source in English), and Spain has around 25.6 million homes. Other companies have millions of homes passed too, but mostly where Telefónica already is, so adding it up wouldn't make sense. Anyway, it's definitely not a pissing contest, but data is important to put things into perspective. Just saying that the US isn't behind because speedtest's results aren't too bad is neglecting a lot of other important information. It's like judging a dolphin's intelligence by its ability to climb trees.

schmidtbag:

Not according to your profile. Why do you think I've been bringing up Spain so much?

My profile says that my location is Spain because that's where I live right now, thus I have 1st hand information about it and the reason I easily get info, but if you want I can get you information from other European countries, I travel to Norway, Sweden and Portugal fairly often due to work, so I can get 1st hand information from there too. My US citizenship doesn't just disappear when going abroad. I've also lived in Slovenia and Brazil, yet my US passport is still valid. Most of my family lives in the US, and I also visit every once in a while. So I'm not really sure where you're getting at with your comment. Do you mean that only people that currently live long-term in the US know about the status of the US's internet connections?

schmidtbag:

I would agree with this, but that point doesn't change what the current reality is.

The current reality is that in general whoever wants or needs more bandwidth can easily get it in Europe and especially in eastern Asia, so if you want to buy a 4K webcam and give it good use, you can just up your connection without problems and without braking your piggy bank. In the US and Canada it's not that easy because there are basically a lot of localized monopolies, so you if you aren't happy with your ISP you basically lump it... or go find somewhere else to live that has another ISP (which is a ridiculous decision unless your profesional life depends on internet bandwidth). That is the current situation. So to sum up again, unlike your first comment, the conclusion is that 4K video does make sense in most 1st world countries, where high speed down/up connections are easily available if needed.

heffeque:

That report is from 2011. FTTH has advanced quite a bit since then. Right now Telefónica has coverage for 20.8 million homes (here, sorry I couldn't find any source in English), and Spain has around 25.6 million homes. Other companies have millions of homes passed too, but mostly where Telefónica already is, so adding it up wouldn't make sense.

You may be right about how Spain has very recently seen great success with FTTH, but again, Spain's own success is skewing your judgment. That article mentions how France, a larger country with a larger population, is in 2nd place, and they're off by a wide margin. The amount of people who actually use FTTH in France is pretty small. It also mentions how countries like Germany, UK, and Italy (each of which also have larger populations than Spain) are far behind. So... you're still heavily exaggerating how up-to-date the "1st world" is, and only focusing on your own experiences. Spain is only recently an exception, and (at least in my perspective) it's purely coincidental that it be the country I focused on the most.

Anyway, it's definitely not a pissing contest, but data is important to put things into perspective. Just saying that the US isn't behind because speedtest's results aren't too bad is neglecting a lot of other important information. It's like judging a dolphin's intelligence by its ability to climb trees.

In this context, yes, you are treating it like a pissing contest, because we're talking about how far ahead you think Europe's connection speeds are; the US is irrelevant. Anyway, I never said the US wasn't behind. You have a knack for twisting my words. I said they're not as far behind as you make them out to be. That's a big difference.

So I'm not really sure where you're getting at with your comment.

If you read back a few posts, "what I'm getting at" referred to what you define as your country, because again, I said "you seem to think your country's internet is so superior". Since Spain is where you seem to identify, that's the country I was assuming in my statement.

So to sum up again, unlike your first comment, the conclusion is that 4K video does make sense in most 1st world countries, where high speed down/up connections are easily available if needed.

Can you seriously stop making up things I never said? Half the stuff you've been disagreeing with are things I never said or are hyperbolic.

schmidtbag:

You may be right about how Spain has very recently seen great success with FTTH, but again, Spain's own success is skewing your judgment. That article mentions how France, a larger country with a larger population, is in 2nd place, and they're off by a wide margin. The amount of people who actually use FTTH in France is pretty small. It also mentions how countries like Germany, UK, and Italy (each of which also have larger populations than Spain) are far behind. So... you're still heavily exaggerating how up-to-date the "1st world" is, and only focusing on your own experiences. Spain is only recently an exception, and (at least in my perspective) it's purely coincidental that it be the country I focused on the most.

Well... I stand corrected, but at least my experience with French and German connections has always been fairly good (minimum of 50 Mbps up, and quite a bit more down). I'm guessing that their HFC or other technology connections are working OK. I haven't been in the UK or Italy enough to have an on-hands opinion.

schmidtbag:

In this context, yes, you are treating it like a pissing contest, because we're talking about how far ahead you think Europe's connection speeds are; the US is irrelevant. Anyway, I never said the US wasn't behind. You have a knack for twisting my words. I said they're not as far behind as you make them out to be. That's a big difference.

I'm not exactly saying that they are far behind. Actually there are places where the internet connections are great. What I'm saying is that most of the US can't chose their ISP, and that there's a huge chunk of people that have sub-par connections (either low upload speeds, data caps, packet prioritization, etc.) probably due to the previous point: most people can't chose their ISP without changing location.

schmidtbag:

If you read back a few posts, "what I'm getting at" referred to what you define as your country, because again, I said "you seem to think your country's internet is so superior". Since Spain is where you seem to identify, that's the country I was assuming in my statement.

Spain is where I am currently located. I'm not sure about the "identify" part.

schmidtbag:

Can you seriously stop making up things I never said? Half the stuff you've been disagreeing with are things I never said or are hyperbolic.

I don't see where I'm making anything up.

I just want an official Microsoft fingerprint reader for Windows Hello.