ulrichburke
New Around Here
Dear Anyone.
Hokay, this is the question I joined to ask. There must be a perfectly good reason why nobody else has thought of it, I don't know much, just had this Idea, so tell me why it's stoopid and I'll shurrup! Here goes.
If you're in a weak(ish) Internet signal area and you're trying to watch a video, you pause the video till it's buffered up THEN start watching it. Ditto with live TV - you wait till it's buffered up, THEN start watching it. What you're watching is ACTUALLY a few minutes behind reality but it's nice and steady and not jerky and you probably don't care that you're a few minutes behind!
Why couldn't you extend that idea to the Internet as a whole? Have a doohickey - I'd call it a 'buffer box' - that picks up WiFi signal and buffers it in a large lump of memory inside it. It's plugged into the wall, just buffering up signal in its solid memory-stick insides. You're working off the buffered-up memory, it's buffering up more as you're using the signal so it's always staying fully buffered. PROBABLY that would mean you'd be logging into the buffer box, not into the router, router picks up signal, delivers it to buffer box, buffer box stores up a backlog of signal and trickle-feeds it to you as you need it, rebuffering more signal.
I know that if you WEREN'T using the Internet it would fill up and not be able to store any more but that wouldn't matter to you, would it, you'd only want consistent signal while you're using it. So as long as there's a box full of buffered signal for you to feed off when you log into it, you'd have consistent signal. Like a massive memory stick-in-a-box, only when it's not being used the oldest bit of storage gets overwritten by new stuff so there's a constant - say - hour-long amount there (or whatever length, you get the idea!)
Why wouldn't the above idea work? Feel free to list all the reasons why, I'll learn then. Just got this idea while watching a movie buffer up in a place I go to where the Internet truly sucks!
Yours respectfully,
Chris.
Hokay, this is the question I joined to ask. There must be a perfectly good reason why nobody else has thought of it, I don't know much, just had this Idea, so tell me why it's stoopid and I'll shurrup! Here goes.
If you're in a weak(ish) Internet signal area and you're trying to watch a video, you pause the video till it's buffered up THEN start watching it. Ditto with live TV - you wait till it's buffered up, THEN start watching it. What you're watching is ACTUALLY a few minutes behind reality but it's nice and steady and not jerky and you probably don't care that you're a few minutes behind!
Why couldn't you extend that idea to the Internet as a whole? Have a doohickey - I'd call it a 'buffer box' - that picks up WiFi signal and buffers it in a large lump of memory inside it. It's plugged into the wall, just buffering up signal in its solid memory-stick insides. You're working off the buffered-up memory, it's buffering up more as you're using the signal so it's always staying fully buffered. PROBABLY that would mean you'd be logging into the buffer box, not into the router, router picks up signal, delivers it to buffer box, buffer box stores up a backlog of signal and trickle-feeds it to you as you need it, rebuffering more signal.
I know that if you WEREN'T using the Internet it would fill up and not be able to store any more but that wouldn't matter to you, would it, you'd only want consistent signal while you're using it. So as long as there's a box full of buffered signal for you to feed off when you log into it, you'd have consistent signal. Like a massive memory stick-in-a-box, only when it's not being used the oldest bit of storage gets overwritten by new stuff so there's a constant - say - hour-long amount there (or whatever length, you get the idea!)
Why wouldn't the above idea work? Feel free to list all the reasons why, I'll learn then. Just got this idea while watching a movie buffer up in a place I go to where the Internet truly sucks!
Yours respectfully,
Chris.
