We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need
a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but
running about half minute later?

ss wrote:

We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

No. Are you sure you were both watching it on the same site? If so, the
only likely place for such a delay would be the browser rendering the
stream, and that doesn't sound very likely.



Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need
a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but
running about half minute later?

Given the delay in digital channels, no. Anyway it is when it is being
transmitted that counts, not when it is being watched. But I think the
definition of 'live' includes a *nearly" or similar caveat.


--

Roger Hayter

No cos the delay is not at issue, its being able to see the content that
matters.
I've seen and heard these days bigger gaps, I'd imagine that it very much
depends on the server you are on and how many ports its serving.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"ss" wrote in message
...
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need a
licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but running
about half minute later?

Actually, if both were using the same stream then they do agree. I have two
echo devices here. If I set them on the same channel their can be a huge
delay, but if I say to one play whatever, everywhere, then all my echo
devices use the same stream and they are all working together and there is
no delay, so the delay is when the actual server end sends it out, nothing
to do with your local set up at all. The possible way around it is to use a
media server at your end and then chuck it out to as many other devices as
you like, I'm guessing that this is what Echo does, one device acts as the
receiver and merely echoes it to all the others through the local wifi.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
ss wrote:

We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

No. Are you sure you were both watching it on the same site? If so, the
only likely place for such a delay would be the browser rendering the
stream, and that doesn't sound very likely.



Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need
a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but
running about half minute later?

Given the delay in digital channels, no. Anyway it is when it is being
transmitted that counts, not when it is being watched. But I think the
definition of 'live' includes a *nearly" or similar caveat.


--

Roger Hayter

On 26/09/2019 00:00, ss wrote:
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection,Â* laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

It could be..

are you running the same resolution on both?
there is a big difference between HD and SD streams.


Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need
a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but
running about half minute later?

You can try but I doubt if you would win.

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 00:00:51 +0100, ss wrote:

Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need
a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but
running about half minute later?

How fine do you make the distinction?

Not "live" because of all the cumulative processing and distribution
delays, your 30 seconds?

Not "live" because of the time it takes the light from the actual
event to reach the camera's sensor?

--
Cheers
Dave.

WiFi certainly causes delays. We have a Sky Q box and a couple of mini Q boxes, these communicate with each other over WiFi and the mini boxes have a distinct delay when watching the same programme, that delay can be several seconds.

Richard

"ss" wrote in message
...
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need a
licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but running
about half minute later?

Bloody DIGITAL hate that bring back analogue........

On 26/09/2019 10:01, Tricky Dicky wrote:
WiFi certainly causes delays. We have a Sky Q box and a couple of
mini Q boxes, these communicate with each other over WiFi and the
mini boxes have a distinct delay when watching the same programme,
that delay can be several seconds.

Richard

Shouldn't be an issue with wifi: more an issue with the software drivers
in the cards.



But that cannot be. People play real time games over wifi.
No its buffering in the players. I suspect they do quality probes and
bufer depoending on link qiality aor speed.


--
€œThere are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isnt true; the
other is to refuse to believe what is true.€�

€”Soren Kierkegaard

In article ,
says...

Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need
a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but
running about half minute later?

No.

In the last couple of days this has been dicussed at length on
uk.tech.digital-tv in the thread 'CRT TV sets as used by the
poor'

In this case it was why someone using a VCR with a black and
white TV was required to buy a colour TV licence.

This was, presumably, because a colour recording might be
replayed at a later date on a colour TV.

The time difference between transmission and viewing (in
colour) would be many times longer than your half minute!


--

Terry


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

In article ,
ss wrote:
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

And your own computer will introduce even more delay in the chain.

--
*OK, who stopped payment on my reality check?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
No cos the delay is not at issue, its being able to see the content that
matters.
I've seen and heard these days bigger gaps, I'd imagine that it very much
depends on the server you are on and how many ports its serving.

If I feed the same source to the amp and speakers in this room, and also
to the audio input of the PC and listen to it on the PC speakers at the
same time, there is a very obvious delay between them.

--
*If I worked as much as others, I would do as little as they *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 26/09/2019 11:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ss wrote:
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

All other settings the same?

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Where I live we struggle to get a single channel of video streaming
without "buffering" warnings. I am surprised that wired was beaten by
wifi though (unless you have a really bad cable). Normally it is the
other way around with wifi being slower due to retransmits.

Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

And the higher the resolution the longer the time difference.

If you switch between SD and HD on the same nominal channel you will
often get the same second of output played again in HD.

And your own computer will introduce even more delay in the chain.

ISTR the internet radio streams run ~30s behind realtime as well.

I also recall that even officially "live" outside broadcasts are about
10s behind true realtime so that if an atrocity occurs on camera the
editors can pull the plug before it is ever broadcast to air.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 26/09/2019 11:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ss wrote:
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

There is no such thing as analogue the charge on electrons is discrete
ie. digital.

Its the same with photons used for transmission they can't be subdivided
so are also digital.

On Thursday, 26 September 2019 11:12:47 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ss wrote:
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

well it does depend on what you mean by 'live' as with most things.
Most of us know what we mean when it's said that we go live to...
and I doubt you'd get very far complaining to the advertising authorities.

So you need some clue as to what a person meant by saying live.
My HD channels seem to be slightly less 'live' than the SD channels, when switching they appear to be about 1 word behind, but that could also be the media box or the TV.

It;s like any subject unless yuo understand the context you get confused about the terms and terminology, simialr to so many things including IDing a duck, it not always as simple as it seems.


And your own computer will introduce even more delay in the chain.

and the further you sit from the screen the longer the delay too :-)

On Thursday, 26 September 2019 12:34:21 UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 26/09/2019 11:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ss wrote:
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

There is no such thing as analogue the charge on electrons is discrete
ie. digital.

Yes pretty much everything is digital, even analogue windup watches with anaologue faces are digital ... tick... tok I knoew a couple in a band that went by that name.


Its the same with photons used for transmission they can't be subdivided
so are also digital.

but light also exists as a wave which I think is classed as analogue.

In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
I also recall that even officially "live" outside broadcasts are about
10s behind true realtime so that if an atrocity occurs on camera the
editors can pull the plug before it is ever broadcast to air.

Not on any I ever worked on.

Used to be common on radio phone-ins, though.

--
*Stable Relationships Are For Horses.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

There is no such thing as analogue the charge on electrons is discrete
ie. digital.

Its the same with photons used for transmission they can't be subdivided
so are also digital.

Now tell us how you measure the true delay at home. With anything known as
digital, you can. Don't need to be in a lab to do so.

--
*A fool and his money are soon partying *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 26/09/2019 11:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ss wrote:
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

There is no such thing as analogue the charge on electrons is discrete
ie. digital.

Its the same with photons used for transmission they can't be subdivided
so are also digital.

I follow your quantum argument, but on another level you could argue
that anything described as digital must actually be analogue unless
the rise and fall times are zero.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...

"ss" wrote in message
...
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont need
a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live but
running about half minute later?

Bloody DIGITAL hate that bring back analogue........

Time for you to go back to pen and paper, stupid.

Dave Liquorice wrote:

ss wrote:

I argue I dont need a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is
not accurately live but running about half minute later?

How fine do you make the distinction?

AFAIK there is no longer a distinction, if you're watching a BBC
programme live or on catchup, you need a licence.

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 03:28:03 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


Bloody DIGITAL hate that bring back analogue........

Time for you to go back to pen and paper, stupid.

Time for you to get euthanized, you useless trolling senile pest!

--
Website (from 2007) dedicated to the 85-year-old trolling senile
cretin from Oz:
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On 26/09/2019 18:28, Rod Speed wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...

"ss" wrote in message
...
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection,* laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont
need a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live
but running about half minute later?

Bloody DIGITAL hate that bring back analogue........

Time for you to go back to pen and paper, stupid.

That's digital, ink or no ink.

On 26/09/2019 16:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

There is no such thing as analogue the charge on electrons is discrete
ie. digital.

Its the same with photons used for transmission they can't be subdivided
so are also digital.

Now tell us how you measure the true delay at home. With anything known as
digital, you can. Don't need to be in a lab to do so.


Well you can't.
You can approximate it if that digital thing is detectable by something
you have.

On 26/09/2019 18:27, Graham. wrote:
On 26/09/2019 11:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ss wrote:
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

There is no such thing as analogue the charge on electrons is discrete
ie. digital.

Its the same with photons used for transmission they can't be subdivided
so are also digital.

I follow your quantum argument, but on another level you could argue
that anything described as digital must actually be analogue unless
the rise and fall times are zero.


Which they are zero.

The detector may have a rise and fall time but that doesn't mean what
they are detecting has a rise and fall time.

dennis@home wrote:
There is no such thing as analogue the charge on electrons
is discrete ie. digital.

The properties of an electron consist of much more than it's
charge; a free electron can have any momentum, for example;
or electrons might be in correlated states with each other,
where the correlation parameters are both uncountable and
continuous.

Its the same with photons used for transmission they can't be
subdivided so are also digital.

You can split photons, and you can place them in correlated states
that are parameterized by real (or complex numbers); they can also
have a continuous range of frequencies.

So no, everying is not digital. However, lots of digital technology
confines electrons and/or photons in ways that make the natural
states for them discrete, i.e. digital; although sometimes their
states might be part discrete, part continuous (electrons in a 2D
quantum well, for example).


#Paul

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 26/09/2019 18:28, Rod Speed wrote:


"Jim GM4DHJ ..." wrote in message
...

"ss" wrote in message
...
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont
need a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live
but running about half minute later?

Bloody DIGITAL hate that bring back analogue........

Time for you to go back to pen and paper, stupid.

That's digital, ink or no ink.

Nope, it’s the ink is laid out on the paper that matters.

Using your mindlessly silly line, analog sound from say
a voice is digital because the sound may be there or not.

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 13:20:49 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

That's digital, ink or no ink.

Nope

LOL

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing senile Rot:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:

On Thursday, 26 September 2019 19:50:02 UTC+1, dennis@home wrote:
On 26/09/2019 18:27, Graham. wrote:
On 26/09/2019 11:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ss wrote:
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Nothing digital is ever 'live'. You could argue that analogue ain't either
since the best it can manage is approaching the speed of light.

There is no such thing as analogue the charge on electrons is discrete
ie. digital.

Its the same with photons used for transmission they can't be subdivided
so are also digital.

I follow your quantum argument, but on another level you could argue
that anything described as digital must actually be analogue unless
the rise and fall times are zero.


Which they are zero.

The detector may have a rise and fall time but that doesn't mean what
they are detecting has a rise and fall time.

what if it's someone jumping on a trampoline ?

On 27/09/2019 04:20, Rod Speed wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message

8

Bloody DIGITAL hate that bring back analogue........

Time for you to go back to pen and paper, stupid.

That's digital, ink or no ink.

Nope, it’s the ink is laid out on the paper that matters.

Using your mindlessly silly line, analog sound from say
a voice is digital because the sound may be there or not.

No rod its digital because a molecule may hit the eardrum or not, so
that's digital.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 27/09/2019 04:20, Rod Speed wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message

8

Bloody DIGITAL hate that bring back analogue........

Time for you to go back to pen and paper, stupid.

That's digital, ink or no ink.

Nope, it’s the ink is laid out on the paper that matters.

Using your mindlessly silly line, analog sound from say
a voice is digital because the sound may be there or not.

No rod its digital because a molecule may hit the eardrum or not, so
that's digital.

Completely off with the ****ing fairys, as always.

On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 05:30:11 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


No rod its digital because a molecule may hit the eardrum or not, so
that's digital.

Completely off with the ****ing fairys, as always.

Listen, senile asshole, you'll get here what people think fit for you!
Nothing more and nothing less! If you don't like it, you can **** off to
your Australian ngs!

--
about senile Rot Speed:
"This is like having a conversation with someone with brain damage."
MID:

In article , ss
writes
We were both watching PM question time tonight (wed)
Me on my desktop and she on laptop.
Desktop has cable connection, laptop wifi.
The desktop was running about half minute behind the laptop.

How come, I would have thought both would be running at the same time.

Is this normal?

Now to take this a stage further(which I wont) could I argue I dont
need a licence to watch it on my desktop as it is not accurately live
but running about half minute later?
Try listening to cricket commentary on a) phone over internet, b) DAB
radio, c ) analogue radio.
It's like listening to 3 different games. They are about 3 deliveries
apart.
--
bert

On 27/09/2019 13:44, dennis@home wrote:
No rod its digital because a molecule may hit the eardrum or not, so
that's digital.

No Dennis, it's analogue because that molecule may hit at any speed.

The pressure on the eardrum is the result of the analogue change of
velocity of a digital number of molecules.

Andy