Tech Forum

superdave98 wrote:Is it saying that our existing satellite receivers might be capable of being connected to the network and function as streaming media receivers?

No. The network connection is just for status/control. They're wanting the receivers connected so they can monitor the progress of the removal. I know that seems backwards, but they have their reasons.

superdave98 wrote:Or are we going to need to request streaming media devices to replace all of our satellite receivers?

Correct

I as an STS in Europe have just received an email request asking, amongst other things, what concerns I would have if the satellite receivers were to be removed from our Stake Centre. My response is that it would be fine, provided alternative means of receiving General Conference is provided, to cover the three languages English, Portuguese and Spanish we use. This is looking like the powers that be, are looking towards reducing the total amount of satellite receivers worldwide.

Biggles wrote:This is looking like the powers that be, are looking towards reducing the total amount of satellite receivers worldwide.

In North America, C-band satellite frequencies are being rearranged and many are being removed. The same thing may be happening in Europe, as well.

I just checked and Europe is using a Ku-band satellite.

Is the church going to pay for better internet connections when we lose the satellite receivers? Most of our buildings are on slow DSL right now, and I suspect all church buildings are on residential internet connections that give you no guarantee of anything, as opposed to business connections where you have better bandwidth guarantees (but cost more).

mevans wrote:Is the church going to pay for better internet connections when we lose the satellite receivers?

From the letter sent to STS:

Use this Streaming Evaluation Guide to determine suitability for receiving online broadcasts. If a building does not have suitable bandwidth for streaming broadcasts, please complete the Request for Assistance form so that we can help you find an alternative solution.

The links have been left out as they appear to be connected to the STS's stake and not "general". Look for an email from "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" (not MHT) dated around Nov 13th.

I would take this as an opportunity to have your situation come to the attention of the higher-ups at the church.

Is the church ceasing broadcasts on both the C-band and Ku-band satellites (Galaxy 19 and Galaxy 28) or is it just the C-band? I'm inquiring mostly for personal usage. We like to do conference camping and grab the Ku feed off of Galaxy 28

Unsure. I'd image that Ku will continue, but not so sure about C band. However, if you can get BYU-TV, you can always get it that way.

We are being asked to use fast.com for the speed tests, but I am getting very strange readings when I use it. For example, on a 20M Down 1M Up service I am seeing 17M down (okay) and 250M up (say what?). Is the program having trouble with a decimal point (like before the 2)? Another test on the same service showed 24M Down and 4M Up. The first test was hardwired. The second test was using WiFi.

Other test sites give more expected readings, but dos not provide the loaded and unloaded latency numbers that have been requested.

lajackson wrote:We are being asked to use fast.com for the speed tests, but I am getting very strange readings when I use it. For example, on a 20M Down 1M Up service I am seeing 17M down (okay) and 250M up (say what?). Is the program having trouble with a decimal point (like before the 2)? Another test on the same service showed 24M Down and 4M Up. The first test was hardwired. The second test was using WiFi. Other test sites give more expected readings, but dos not provide the loaded and unloaded latency numbers that have been requested.

Who asked you to do that? Did you fill out the report and the church responded asking for more information?

We did a test with the First Presidency Christmas Devotional last Sunday. Two of us took laptops and tablets to the church and streamed the devotional over wifi to each device to try simulating running multiple languages. I don't know how scientific the test was, but we didn't see any buffering. Some of the streams had 30 seconds difference between them. I didn't do a lot of work trying to synchronize the streams. Now that you mention fast.com, I'm wondering if there are better tests that we should run.

Of course, what worked on one evening with a non-guaranteed bandwidth internet connection could completely fall apart on another day. With residential internet, your only guarantee is that you'll receive a monthly bill.