I once have been able to download videos (the last one I downloaded was the "Monkeydance starring Steve ballmer and for some reason IE only gave me the option to watch on the internet or watch in Windows Media. Which sucks because now adays W Media
won't let you save videos if you have to connect to the internet to get them.
I agree that it's good to have them downloadable but with this reasoning (for "broadband" users):
I rather use 5 minutes to download 1 minute video with good quality than use 1:1 for quality for low speed connections.
Suppose bandwidth was less expensive for MS, they could create a video subscription that pushed the interviews in the subscribers download queue in an almost original quality. I would have no problem with that, as currently I am not viewing the interview videos
on the second they appear anyway. Using proper QoS the video download would not make applications which require low latency any less responsive.
Even if there is not much "true broadband" at homes, there should be services made for these speeds. Infrastructure is there, we just need something to utilize it in full. Most of the "broadband" I see sold here is something like <2 Mbit.
Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.