One thing users understand is slow web access. Perhaps translating the
latency measurement into 'a typical web page will take X seconds longer to
load', or even stating the impact as 'this latency causes a typical web
page to load slower, as if your connection was only YY% of the measured speed.'
Simon
Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com
On April 19, 2015 1:54:19 PM Jonathan Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Frequency readouts are probably more accessible to the latter.
>>>
>>> The frequency domain more accessible to laypersons? I have my doubts ;)
>>
>> Gamers, at least, are familiar with “frames per second” and how that
corresponds to their monitor’s refresh rate.
>
> I am sure they can easily transform back into time domain to get the
frame period ;) . I am partly kidding, I think your idea is great in that
it is a truly positive value which could lend itself to being used in
ISP/router manufacturer advertising, and hence might work in the real work;
on the other hand I like to keep data as “raw” as possible (not that ^(-1)
is a transformation worthy of being called data massage).
>
>> The desirable range of latencies, when converted to Hz, happens to be
roughly the same as the range of desirable frame rates.
>
> Just to play devils advocate, the interesting part is time or saving
time so seconds or milliseconds are also intuitively understandable and can
be easily added ;)
Such readouts are certainly interesting to people like us. I have no
objection to them being reported alongside a frequency readout. But I
think most people are not interested in “time savings” measured in
milliseconds; they’re much more aware of the minute- and hour-level time
savings associated with greater bandwidth.
- Jonathan Morton
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
