On Jan 18, 2007, at 10:31 PM, Jim Juhas wrote:
>
> Does all of this mean that as the streaming data is delayed, then what
> you hear gets more and more delayed in real time from the source? And
> that it can never catch up, because you have to listen to the entire
> content on the receiving end????
Correct. For fun, tune in to a local radio station on your radio and
on the intenet and you can hear the delay.
>
> Or do you end up somewhere with a "skip" of no content so that the
> program at the receiving end doesn't get overly delayed relative to
> the
> source?
With audio and video or other things that people expect at a certain
rate, there (usually) isn't a catch-up. Playback at a constant
expected rate is vastly more important than no delay. Though I have
seen real IP feeds, like from a web cam, that will play backed-up
data at a faster rate than real-time so it looks like someone hit the
fast-forward button for a second. It's pretty rare though.
>
> Certainly not an issue if you're listening/watching an episode of
> "Desperate Housewives" but a huge issue if you're listening to a
> horse race.
By the time any delay gets large enough to matter, something in the
path between the source and your brain will have checked out, usually
the player (but often your brain). Some players will allow you to
pause the playback so the buffer fills and you can watch/listen when
it's full enough, but if you try and watch/listen in real time it'll
give up. This is at the whim of the developers and the protocol used
at the source, i.e. streaming vs. file downloads.
jim
|