🚀 go-pugleaf

<Nittaku> wrote in message news:<3fc1395c$0$28292$ba620e4c@reader1.news.skynet.be>...
> "ECM" <ecmcdougall@iname.com> wrote in message
> news:232689b7.0311221855.62889dfc@posting.google.com...
> > <Nittaku> wrote in message
>  news:<3fbe483e$0$21196$ba620e4c@reader3.news.skynet.be>...
> > >
> > > I found this in a Hauppage FAQ:
> > >
> > > http://www.hauppauge.com/html/stream.htm
> > >
> > > Comments on this? Will it work? Possible problems?
> >
> > I think this might (as long as it's stable software) work fine to help
> > encode your captures to Windows Media format, but you'd still need to
> > publish them to your intranet. This software from Hauppage doesn't
> > encode then stream at the same time - I'm getting the feeling that
> > this is really what you want.... it IS tempting - watching TV on your
> > WiFi Tablet or laptop PC anywhere in the house you want to. The
> > technology isn't up to the challenge yet, though. We'll need
> > gigabit(or at least 100 Mbit async) WiFi, and some serious software
> > and hardware development before this'll happen.
> 
> This I don't understand.
> 
> Encoding a TV signal in real time is possible, the hauppage card does it.
> Sending data across a 100Mb network should be enough too. I don't see why
> technology isn't up to the challenge yet.

Well, I think you could stream VCR quality (352X240, 30fps) across a
wired 100 mbit network - that's about SVCD quality. My comment was
that a wireless network, even 802.11g (or .11a), would not be adequate
for that kind of bitrate.

I think we'll have to see what the next 5 years holds for wireless LAN
- I'm not sure we'll see much of an increase in data transfer rates.
Remember that a lot of the bitrate increases we saw in the 90's (for
instance with modems) was due to better hardware compression BEFORE
transmission, not to more raw data being transmitted through the same
pipe. Video is already pretty optimally compressed - try "zip"ing an
MPEG file sometime - and it won't respond to this strategy. We need a
quantum shift in technology to be able to effectively stream high
quality video wirelessly, not tweaking of the current stuff.

And as for software, it usually is developed in response to available
hardware. The hardware is not really up to the task yet, so very
little software is available to do what you want. Even the "bleeding
edge" types wouldn't spend a lot of money on technology that would
allow them a small blocky picture with lots of pauses on $2000+ worth
of equipment, when they can turn on a sub-$100 TV and get a far
superior image.....

Anyways, an interesting thread!
Good Luck!
ECM