As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Stadia: Don’t cross the streams.

13468994

Posts

  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    Wow yeah 20GB/hour is pretty shockingly high. Netflix is apparently 6-7gb for 4k. I guess Stadia can't compress as well because it's live.

  • Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Once an Asshole. Trying to be better. Registered User regular
    Nosf wrote: »
    I mean if Google wants to have a showdown with ISPs in a Godzilla vs. Mothra kind of fight I’m down for that!

    They already did, and lost actually. 20GB an hour has to be a typo or some misexplanation; 1080p HD content is ~2.3GB an hour via Netflix IIRC. Why would this ever be that high?

    4K is 7gb a hours so maybe 8k is 20gb/hr?

  • SniperGuySniperGuy SniperGuyGaming Registered User regular
    Nosf wrote: »
    I mean if Google wants to have a showdown with ISPs in a Godzilla vs. Mothra kind of fight I’m down for that!

    They already did, and lost actually. 20GB an hour has to be a typo or some misexplanation; 1080p HD content is ~2.3GB an hour via Netflix IIRC. Why would this ever be that high?

    4k 60fps is quite a bit more data than 1080p video. Plus inputs.

    Twitch Streaming basically all week
    SniperGuyGaming on PSN / SniperGuy710 on Xbone Live
    KetBraPreacherShadowfiredispatch.oTubularLuggageGennenalyse RuebenTransporter
  • OremLKOremLK Registered User regular
    Yeah, that sounds about right for 4k60hz with low compression?

    My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
    KetBra
  • rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    Netflix is 24-30 FPS. That's already half the difference right there.

  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    If you guys have ever watched a Twitch stream before at HD setting, even with that the video can sometimes blur / pixelate a ton because of all the noise going on in the video feed. So to get this 4k feed to work seemlessly, yeah, that's a ton of data.

    Also I mentioned the 20GB/hr thing and nobody took a bite before it showed up in tweet form I guess. I TOLD YOU SO. <_<

    JragghenStormwatcherGeneral_ArmchairBrodydipuc4lifeGennenalyse Ruebenkime
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    I doubt they're padding the data, or optimising poorly to get that 20gb/hr number.

    It's not really Google's fault that most ISPs can't handle that load, but it is their fault for putting out an all-streaming gaming system, knowing the current state of the infrastructure they will be relying on.

  • General_ArmchairGeneral_Armchair Registered User regular
    Jragghen wrote: »

    I can't say "dead on arrival" in large enough or bold enough text.

    3DS Friend Code:
    Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
    LilnoobsPreacherdispatch.oCruorQanamilGennenalyse RuebenJeep-Eep
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    Edit - I didn't finish reading, I just saw something before a comma and was like WTF. sorry.

    Henroid on
  • LilnoobsLilnoobs Alpha Queue Registered User regular
    Hopefully the Scatia will scare away others from trying to do something similar with this streaming nonsense.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Yeah 20gbs an hour? Are you fucking joking? My home internet caps at 1024 gbs and then I go over. so if I played AC for 10 hours that would be around 2 tenths of my internet for a month.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    Comcast will remember that

    aeNqQM9.jpg
    DodgeBlanfinnithJragghenRMS OceanicGennenalyse RuebenJeep-Eep
  • Marty81Marty81 Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah 20gbs an hour? Are you fucking joking? My home internet caps at 1024 gbs and then I go over. so if I played AC for 10 hours that would be around 2 tenths of my internet for a month.

    I get 250 GB per month.

    Sucks to be me, I guess.

  • Who-PsydWho-Psyd Registered User regular
    Javen wrote: »
    I doubt they're padding the data, or optimising poorly to get that 20gb/hr number.

    It's not really Google's fault that most ISPs can't handle that load, but it is their fault for putting out an all-streaming gaming system, knowing the current state of the infrastructure they will be relying on.

    That is what makes this whole thing stupid, it can work flawlessly on either end but that little part in the middle is going to make it worthless and that part is like Hurdle Number One for this kind of system.

    Preacherdipuc4lifeJeep-Eep
  • ShadowfireShadowfire Vermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah 20gbs an hour? Are you fucking joking? My home internet caps at 1024 gbs and then I go over. so if I played AC for 10 hours that would be around 2 tenths of my internet for a month.

    Comcast doesn't have data caps up here. Nice to have some competition keeping them "honest."

    The rest of the country is boned.

    WiiU: Windrunner ; Guild Wars 2: Shadowfire.3940 ; PSN: Bradcopter
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Shadowfire wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah 20gbs an hour? Are you fucking joking? My home internet caps at 1024 gbs and then I go over. so if I played AC for 10 hours that would be around 2 tenths of my internet for a month.

    Comcast doesn't have data caps up here. Nice to have some competition keeping them "honest."

    The rest of the country is boned.

    Must be nice, in western washington they do, and the alternative is shit frontier fios.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
    EriktheVikingGamerdispatch.oWildali
  • StormwatcherStormwatcher Blegh BlughRegistered User regular
    i got 100/100 fiber with no caps ever forever
    that's totally irrelevant, I just wanted to rub that and be a jerk

    sorry

    Steam: Stormwatcher | PSN: Stormwatcher33 | Switch: 5961-4777-3491
    camo_sig2.png
    Shadowfiredipuc4lifeBrodyThe Deliveratorkime
  • General_ArmchairGeneral_Armchair Registered User regular
    Who-Psyd wrote: »
    Javen wrote: »
    I doubt they're padding the data, or optimising poorly to get that 20gb/hr number.

    It's not really Google's fault that most ISPs can't handle that load, but it is their fault for putting out an all-streaming gaming system, knowing the current state of the infrastructure they will be relying on.

    That is what makes this whole thing stupid, it can work flawlessly on either end but that little part in the middle is going to make it worthless and that part is like Hurdle Number One for this kind of system.

    The little part in the middle is the problem, and it will still be a problem no matter how much our network infrastructure is beefed up and how much data throughput the average joe can pump into his home. Even if 20 GB per hour was chump change, this will still be a failure because the speed of light is staying constant and input latency to a datacenter off in the 'cloud' will NEVER compare to latency to a machine in your living room.

    Some games can be made to work with latency like that, such as turn based strategy games. However outside of that narrow niche of gaming, a game streaming service will never be successful until your home modem is connected to the data center not through copper or fiber but instead through quantum entanglement or some kind of tachyon pulse sci-fi wizardry.

    3DS Friend Code:
    Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    Anyway if that is indeed the 4k/60fps number, then I think that's a pretty niche use case - has a 4k display, cares about high FPS, but is playing on Stadia and not an XB1X or whatever. I'm not sure who that user really is.

  • ShadowfireShadowfire Vermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Shadowfire wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah 20gbs an hour? Are you fucking joking? My home internet caps at 1024 gbs and then I go over. so if I played AC for 10 hours that would be around 2 tenths of my internet for a month.

    Comcast doesn't have data caps up here. Nice to have some competition keeping them "honest."

    The rest of the country is boned.

    Must be nice, in western washington they do, and the alternative is shit frontier fios.

    Oh yeah. Comcast in most places can eat a dick. But up here they have two local gigabit fiber providers to compete with, and that's just in this section of rural Vermont. Other parts of the northeast they have a ton of competition. That's why Comcast doesn't enforce data caps in New England.

    WiiU: Windrunner ; Guild Wars 2: Shadowfire.3940 ; PSN: Bradcopter
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    Who-Psyd wrote: »
    Javen wrote: »
    I doubt they're padding the data, or optimising poorly to get that 20gb/hr number.

    It's not really Google's fault that most ISPs can't handle that load, but it is their fault for putting out an all-streaming gaming system, knowing the current state of the infrastructure they will be relying on.

    That is what makes this whole thing stupid, it can work flawlessly on either end but that little part in the middle is going to make it worthless and that part is like Hurdle Number One for this kind of system.

    The little part in the middle is the problem, and it will still be a problem no matter how much our network infrastructure is beefed up and how much data throughput the average joe can pump into his home. Even if 20 GB per hour was chump change, this will still be a failure because the speed of light is staying constant and input latency to a datacenter off in the 'cloud' will NEVER compare to latency to a machine in your living room.

    Some games can be made to work with latency like that, such as turn based strategy games. However outside of that narrow niche of gaming, a game streaming service will never be successful until your home modem is connected to the data center not through copper or fiber but instead through quantum entanglement or some kind of tachyon pulse sci-fi wizardry.

    I think you're making a lot of big assumptions about how big a dealbreaker 150-200ms of input lag is for most people. Yes it's there, no it doesn't guarantee failure. For one thing Project Stream was publicly available last year with Assassin's Creed Odyssey, and I heard a lot of people saying it ran perfectly. In reality there was input lag of course but they couldn't tell. Even for a fighting game, most people aren't that great at fighting games and would be fine with it.

    Zek on
    GhlinnBrodyShadowfire
  • rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    Zek wrote: »
    Anyway if that is indeed the 4k/60fps number, then I think that's a pretty niche use case - has a 4k display, cares about high FPS, but is playing on Stadia and not an XB1X or whatever. I'm not sure who that user really is.

    This is next gen hardware coming out a year early, a Stadia instance is far ahead of an XB1X and should be able to stay locked at 4k/60, which Doom 2016 does not and Eternal probably won't either.. Of course there's massive compression artifacts, and you could always get a PC to do it, and I'm not sure what 3rd party wants to release legit next-gen software in 2019...

  • AthenorAthenor Battle Hardened Optimist The Skies of HiigaraRegistered User regular
    I'm having huge flashbacks to the original vision for the Xbox One.

    The Stadia is essentially a console in a datacenter box, so Google will need to invest in a LOT of them (whereas most datacenters get scale by splitting up their hardware virtually). I'm intrigued, but I'm also not sure they are ready for even this.

    He/Him | "A boat is always safest in the harbor, but that’s not why we build boats." | "If you run, you gain one. If you move forward, you gain two." - Suletta Mercury, G-Witch
  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    I mean you would need a high bitrate to make this service look good enough to be useful at all.

    And it can’t be too effectively compressed since it has to both encode and decode in what feels like a live response time. That’s a machine operation that doesn’t take 0 time to perform.

    PSN: Honkalot
    Wildali
  • BeezelBeezel There was no agreement little morsel..Registered User regular
    The only thing I can see this as is just another push towards making sure you own nothing. I'm also kind of bothered with the built in concession of telling people that live with poor internet and data caps to kinda go pound sand.

    PSN: Waybackkidd
    "...only mights and maybes."
    King RiptorPreacherdipuc4lifeLilnoobsJragghenJeep-Eep
  • ChaosHatChaosHat Hop, hop, hop, HA! Trick of the lightRegistered User regular
    I'm not sure why people with worse internet connections are owed anything or why it shouldn't exist or is bad simply because said people are unable to interact with it. There are lots of things that people who live out in the sticks can't do as easily.

    Yes, it does lessen the consumer base but I'm going to assume Google isn't completely stupid and factored in how many people can reliably use this thing before deciding if it was a good idea to invest probably a lot of money.

    As I said earlier, my hesitation is not really if it works or not, but if it works awesome and Google just quits after a few years.

  • Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Once an Asshole. Trying to be better. Registered User regular
    Man, there’s people who doesn’t live near lakes! Why would a company spend time making and selling boats when there’s people who don’t live near lakes!

    ChaosHatThe Deliverator
  • King RiptorKing Riptor Registered User regular
    Man, there’s people who doesn’t live near lakes! Why would a company spend time making and selling boats when there’s people who don’t live near lakes!

    Personal boats are a luxury item and fast internet is up there with water and heat as a service most people need to live their lives now

    I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
    Stormwatcher
  • ChaosHatChaosHat Hop, hop, hop, HA! Trick of the lightRegistered User regular
    Man, there’s people who doesn’t live near lakes! Why would a company spend time making and selling boats when there’s people who don’t live near lakes!

    Personal boats are a luxury item and fast internet is up there with water and heat as a service most people need to live their lives now

    I totally agree. So why are people in the thread mad at the existence of Stadia? Half of the naysayers seem to say "I can't use this. Fuck this thing."

    Go get mad at your ISP. Not Google.

    kime
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Fuck Warren Ellis Registered User regular
    I wouldn't be surprised if Google just works in partnership with various ISP to whitelist Stadia traffic. In fact, I'll be shocked if that's not the case - perhaps even with some commitment from them to provide some degree of infrastructure.

    There's no way that Google hasn't done their homework with this. They'll tackle the easy markets first (ie: areas without data caps like most of Canada and highly populated metro areas in the States). While that's being done they'll be signing partnerships with ISPs for the secondary push.

    And that's only the consumer end.

    ChaosHatHahnsoo1
  • The WolfmanThe Wolfman Registered User regular
    Generally speaking the ideal business strategy is to reach as large a group of consumers as possible. And from an armchair's glance, this thing... won't.

    Now if Google is totally fine with the numbers they get from this, then bully for them. But although you say Google is smart, the news I've been seeing lately is painting them as a group who, when the going gets tough, they fold and run away. With a side order of that Silicon Valley ego that thinks they just found the ingenious new upgrade to the wheel, and ignore all those people going "Uh, hold on a sec here...". No way they haven't done their homework? They're starting to look like the kid who brags they don't have to do their homework, because they're just that smart.

    So I dunno, I think the big worry is that this won't be the smash success that Google wants, and then they'll just up and quit and leave the people who did buy into this economy in the lurch.

    Like, they apparently think in the future they'll have 8k and 120 fps streaming? I'd love to know what future that is, 'cuz it sure ain't the foreseeable one.

    "The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
    General_ArmchairNightslyrPreacherLilnoobsJeep-Eepdispatch.o
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Fuck Warren Ellis Registered User regular
    Generally speaking the ideal business strategy is to reach as large a group of consumers as possible. And from an armchair's glance, this thing... won't.

    Now if Google is totally fine with the numbers they get from this, then bully for them. But although you say Google is smart, the news I've been seeing lately is painting them as a group who, when the going gets tough, they fold and run away. With a side order of that Silicon Valley ego that thinks they just found the ingenious new upgrade to the wheel, and ignore all those people going "Uh, hold on a sec here...". No way they haven't done their homework? They're starting to look like the kid who brags they don't have to do their homework, because they're just that smart.

    So I dunno, I think the big worry is that this won't be the smash success that Google wants, and then they'll just up and quit and leave the people who did buy into this economy in the lurch.

    Like, they apparently think in the future they'll have 8k and 120 fps streaming? I'd love to know what future that is, 'cuz it sure ain't the foreseeable one.

    Can you substantiate that because I've not seen any instance of that beyond Google+.

    I'd also argue that what you're painting as "ideal business strategy" doesn't always hold true - especially when you're trying to disrupt an existing market.

  • The WolfmanThe Wolfman Registered User regular
    Generally speaking the ideal business strategy is to reach as large a group of consumers as possible. And from an armchair's glance, this thing... won't.

    Now if Google is totally fine with the numbers they get from this, then bully for them. But although you say Google is smart, the news I've been seeing lately is painting them as a group who, when the going gets tough, they fold and run away. With a side order of that Silicon Valley ego that thinks they just found the ingenious new upgrade to the wheel, and ignore all those people going "Uh, hold on a sec here...". No way they haven't done their homework? They're starting to look like the kid who brags they don't have to do their homework, because they're just that smart.

    So I dunno, I think the big worry is that this won't be the smash success that Google wants, and then they'll just up and quit and leave the people who did buy into this economy in the lurch.

    Like, they apparently think in the future they'll have 8k and 120 fps streaming? I'd love to know what future that is, 'cuz it sure ain't the foreseeable one.

    Can you substantiate that because I've not seen any instance of that beyond Google+.

    I'd also argue that what you're painting as "ideal business strategy" doesn't always hold true - especially when you're trying to disrupt an existing market.

    I'm reading up on their utter failure at rolling out Google Fiber in Louisville. Involving their idea to bury wire just 2 inches under the road and cover it with sub par epoxy. I know nothing about the greater dealings of roads and asphalt, and even I'm thinking "Isn't 2 inches way too damn short for roads that obviously degrade with use, and also making damn sure you don't nick the wire when doing repairs?". And sure enough it's failing spectacularly. So Google has just walked away from the whole thing.

    "The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
  • ChaosHatChaosHat Hop, hop, hop, HA! Trick of the lightRegistered User regular
    edited March 2019
    Generally speaking the ideal business strategy is to reach as large a group of consumers as possible. And from an armchair's glance, this thing... won't.

    Now if Google is totally fine with the numbers they get from this, then bully for them. But although you say Google is smart, the news I've been seeing lately is painting them as a group who, when the going gets tough, they fold and run away. With a side order of that Silicon Valley ego that thinks they just found the ingenious new upgrade to the wheel, and ignore all those people going "Uh, hold on a sec here...". No way they haven't done their homework? They're starting to look like the kid who brags they don't have to do their homework, because they're just that smart.

    So I dunno, I think the big worry is that this won't be the smash success that Google wants, and then they'll just up and quit and leave the people who did buy into this economy in the lurch.

    Like, they apparently think in the future they'll have 8k and 120 fps streaming? I'd love to know what future that is, 'cuz it sure ain't the foreseeable one.

    The universe of customers that can be reached are the people that have the internet streaming capabilities to use the service. Should Google be concerned that this won't be of use to Inuit tribes or something? Should convenience store owners be concerned that people outside of a 15 minute radius won't buy shit from them?

    The thought that Google abandons everything is hilarious. They dabble in a lot of things and they cut the shit that doesn't work for them. Am I extremely frustrated with how Android handles chat apps (Allo, Hangouts, Messages, et al)? YES. On the other hand 65% of web browsers are Chrome, 80% of smartphones run Android, Google runs 93% of web searches, and it's hard to find information on this but they probably have a plurality of email accounts. How many people use Office anymore instead of Drive (supposing nobody is paying for you to have Office)? They've sold millions of Chromecasts and are heavily invested in smart home tech to the point where they're one of two major players in it.

    If Google wants to put the time and effort into it, they'll probably make it work.

    ChaosHat on
  • The WolfmanThe Wolfman Registered User regular
    ChaosHat wrote: »
    Generally speaking the ideal business strategy is to reach as large a group of consumers as possible. And from an armchair's glance, this thing... won't.

    Now if Google is totally fine with the numbers they get from this, then bully for them. But although you say Google is smart, the news I've been seeing lately is painting them as a group who, when the going gets tough, they fold and run away. With a side order of that Silicon Valley ego that thinks they just found the ingenious new upgrade to the wheel, and ignore all those people going "Uh, hold on a sec here...". No way they haven't done their homework? They're starting to look like the kid who brags they don't have to do their homework, because they're just that smart.

    So I dunno, I think the big worry is that this won't be the smash success that Google wants, and then they'll just up and quit and leave the people who did buy into this economy in the lurch.

    Like, they apparently think in the future they'll have 8k and 120 fps streaming? I'd love to know what future that is, 'cuz it sure ain't the foreseeable one.

    The universe of customers that can be reached are the people that have the internet streaming capabilities to use the service. Should Google be concerned that this won't be of use to Inuit tribes or something? Should convenience store owners be concerned that people outside of a 15 minute radius won't buy shit from them?

    The thought that Google abandons everything is hilarious. They dabble in a lot of things and they cut the shit that doesn't work for them. Am I extremely frustrated with how Android handles chat apps (Allo, Hangouts, Messages, et al)? YES. On the other hand 65% of web browsers are Chrome, 80% of smartphones run Android, Google runs 93% of web searches, and it's hard to find information on this but they probably have a plurality of email accounts. How many people use Office anymore instead of Drive (supposing nobody is paying for you to have Office)? They've sold millions of Chromecasts and are heavily invested in smart home tech to the point where they're one of two major players in it.

    If Google wants to put the time and effort into it, they'll probably make it work.

    Just to be clear here, I'm not pissed off at anything here. I really don't care one way or the other. I took one look at this thing and said "Haha, yeah I have pretty good internet and no data cap and even I don't think that'll work for me". I tried the free Playstation Now trial and... well I didn't sign up for it, to put it shortly.

    The number of people who are going to be able to really use this (fast enough speed AND either no data cap or one high enough to handle 20 gigs/hour) is going to be above average at best. And I hope Google is A-OK with that.

    The idea itself is not admittedly terrible in a vacuum. It just assumes internet infrastructure is 50 years ahead of what it really is.

    "The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Fuck Warren Ellis Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    Generally speaking the ideal business strategy is to reach as large a group of consumers as possible. And from an armchair's glance, this thing... won't.

    Now if Google is totally fine with the numbers they get from this, then bully for them. But although you say Google is smart, the news I've been seeing lately is painting them as a group who, when the going gets tough, they fold and run away. With a side order of that Silicon Valley ego that thinks they just found the ingenious new upgrade to the wheel, and ignore all those people going "Uh, hold on a sec here...". No way they haven't done their homework? They're starting to look like the kid who brags they don't have to do their homework, because they're just that smart.

    So I dunno, I think the big worry is that this won't be the smash success that Google wants, and then they'll just up and quit and leave the people who did buy into this economy in the lurch.

    Like, they apparently think in the future they'll have 8k and 120 fps streaming? I'd love to know what future that is, 'cuz it sure ain't the foreseeable one.

    Can you substantiate that because I've not seen any instance of that beyond Google+.

    I'd also argue that what you're painting as "ideal business strategy" doesn't always hold true - especially when you're trying to disrupt an existing market.

    I'm reading up on their utter failure at rolling out Google Fiber in Louisville. Involving their idea to bury wire just 2 inches under the road and cover it with sub par epoxy. I know nothing about the greater dealings of roads and asphalt, and even I'm thinking "Isn't 2 inches way too damn short for roads that obviously degrade with use, and also making damn sure you don't nick the wire when doing repairs?". And sure enough it's failing spectacularly. So Google has just walked away from the whole thing.

    I mean, you don't think Google was actually the one putting the fiber into the ground there right?

    edit: also not to mention the more than a dozen successful deploys of Google Fiber across the US. I also think that the issue in Louisville was one of general infrastructure - not because of putting the lines underground (which they did in an effort to bypass the existing, dated infrastructure).

    SatanIsMyMotor on
  • CruorCruor Registered User regular
    The levels of "I get what I want so fuck everyone else" in this thread have reached critical mass.
    ChaosHat wrote: »
    Should Google be concerned that this won't be of use to Inuit tribes or something?

    First of all, yikes. Second of all, it's not just Inuit tribes, it's people in rural New York who live only 30 minutes away from a metropolitan area and still can only get satellite internet as their sole "high speed" option.

    NightslyrPreacherKnight_JragghenHahnsoo1QanamilGennenalyse RuebenJeep-Eepkimedispatch.o
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Fuck Warren Ellis Registered User regular
    Cruor wrote: »
    The levels of "I get what I want so fuck everyone else" in this thread have reached critical mass.
    ChaosHat wrote: »
    Should Google be concerned that this won't be of use to Inuit tribes or something?

    First of all, yikes. Second of all, it's not just Inuit tribes, it's people in rural New York who live only 30 minutes away from a metropolitan area and still can only get satellite internet as their sole "high speed" option.

    This is a luxury service and not even remotely meant to be an option for everybody upon launch. Many people are acting like this is a pipe dream for everybody but that's not the reality. There's a huge potential actionable market out there for them for Stadia.

    ChaosHatThe Deliverator
  • NightslyrNightslyr Registered User regular
    Generally speaking the ideal business strategy is to reach as large a group of consumers as possible. And from an armchair's glance, this thing... won't.

    Now if Google is totally fine with the numbers they get from this, then bully for them. But although you say Google is smart, the news I've been seeing lately is painting them as a group who, when the going gets tough, they fold and run away. With a side order of that Silicon Valley ego that thinks they just found the ingenious new upgrade to the wheel, and ignore all those people going "Uh, hold on a sec here...". No way they haven't done their homework? They're starting to look like the kid who brags they don't have to do their homework, because they're just that smart.

    So I dunno, I think the big worry is that this won't be the smash success that Google wants, and then they'll just up and quit and leave the people who did buy into this economy in the lurch.

    Like, they apparently think in the future they'll have 8k and 120 fps streaming? I'd love to know what future that is, 'cuz it sure ain't the foreseeable one.

    Can you substantiate that because I've not seen any instance of that beyond Google+.

    I'd also argue that what you're painting as "ideal business strategy" doesn't always hold true - especially when you're trying to disrupt an existing market.

    I'm reading up on their utter failure at rolling out Google Fiber in Louisville. Involving their idea to bury wire just 2 inches under the road and cover it with sub par epoxy. I know nothing about the greater dealings of roads and asphalt, and even I'm thinking "Isn't 2 inches way too damn short for roads that obviously degrade with use, and also making damn sure you don't nick the wire when doing repairs?". And sure enough it's failing spectacularly. So Google has just walked away from the whole thing.

    Remember Google Glass and Google Wave and Google Reader and the Nexus Q and Project Ara and Orkut and Allo and...? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

    King RiptorGeneral_Armchairdipuc4lifeJragghenGennenalyse RuebenThe Deliveratorhanzodispatch.o
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Fuck Warren Ellis Registered User regular
    Call me stupid but I applaud attempts at innovation - even when they fail. I'd also be willing to bet that none of those failures are abject failures and that the technology used in those products is in use elsewhere. That's definitely the case for Glass.

    ChaosHat
Sign In or Register to comment.