Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

Is Google and the Internet a serious 'threat' to DirecTV?


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   Athlon646464

Athlon646464

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • News Hound
  • 2,510 posts
  • LocationUxbridge, MA
Joined: Feb 23, 2007

Posted 28 August 2013 - 04:09 PM

I would strongly disagree.  Please refer to my comment earlier in this thread.  I would use all of my monthly allotment  by watching one Netflix movie.  Not everyone lives in an area with DSL and/or fiber service with virtually unlimited Internet usage available.

 

I just found this on Comcast's (not who I use) support site:

 

Netflix Movies (HD): These guys are around 3.8Mbit, which means it's about 3600MB for a 2 hour HD movie.
Netflix Movies (SD): Each of these movies are around 500-700MB each, depending on the length of the movie.
Netflix TV Shows (HD): A 30-minute TV show will be about 1500MB.
Netflix TV Shows (SD): A 30-minute TV show will be about 400MB.

If you do the math, that means you can stream about 3 seasons of Entourage and 40 movies in HD. However, that's not to account for standard Internet usage, so with YouTube, Facebook, and all of the other things you and your household may use, that's looking to drop the number down to about 20 HD movies, which is still a substantial amount for most people.

 

Not even close to your claim.


1 HR34-700, 1 C31-700, 1 HR24-500
Original install on April 20, 2008 - HR34 & C31 installed on August 24, 2013 - HR24 installed on July 23, 2010

Press any key to continue, or any other key to cancel.


...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#22 OFFLINE   sdk009

sdk009

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 669 posts
  • LocationStanislaus County Farmland
Joined: Jan 19, 2007

Posted 28 August 2013 - 04:33 PM

I just found this on Comcast's (not who I use) support site:

 

Netflix Movies (HD): These guys are around 3.8Mbit, which means it's about 3600MB for a 2 hour HD movie.
Netflix Movies (SD): Each of these movies are around 500-700MB each, depending on the length of the movie.
Netflix TV Shows (HD): A 30-minute TV show will be about 1500MB.
Netflix TV Shows (SD): A 30-minute TV show will be about 400MB.

If you do the math, that means you can stream about 3 seasons of Entourage and 40 movies in HD. However, that's not to account for standard Internet usage, so with YouTube, Facebook, and all of the other things you and your household may use, that's looking to drop the number down to about 20 HD movies, which is still a substantial amount for most people.

 

Not even close to your claim.

I don't give a rat's behind what Comcast claims, I am using Hughesnet and I see the results for myself in real-time.  We have a 20gb monthly allotment, and two hours of Netflix uses about a third of that allotment.  You seem to forget, the consumption is based on download speed and through put.  Hughesnet slows way down in the evening, because of traffic.  We share the bird(s) with all the other subscribers, not just my neighbors as is the case with fiber or DSL.



#23 OFFLINE   Diana C

Diana C

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 1,795 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey
Joined: Mar 30, 2007

Posted 28 August 2013 - 05:25 PM

I just found this on Comcast's (not who I use) support site:

Netflix Movies (HD): These guys are around 3.8Mbit, which means it's about 3600MB for a 2 hour HD movie.Netflix Movies (SD): Each of these movies are around 500-700MB each, depending on the length of the movie.Netflix TV Shows (HD): A 30-minute TV show will be about 1500MB.Netflix TV Shows (SD): A 30-minute TV show will be about 400MB.
If you do the math, that means you can stream about 3 seasons of Entourage and 40 movies in HD. However, that's not to account for standard Internet usage, so with YouTube, Facebook, and all of the other things you and your household may use, that's looking to drop the number down to about 20 HD movies, which is still a substantial amount for most people.

Not even close to your claim.

Well, at 1.8 gigabytes per hour, and a 20GB cap, he'd only be able to watch about 11 hours of TV per month, assuming he did nothing else on the Internet at all...certainly not a viable option.

Dish Network Customer from 9/1998-11/2001
DirecTV Customer 10/2001 - 7/2014

FiOS TV/TiVo Customer since 6/2014
Moderator, DBSDish.com 1999-2000
Co-Founder and Administrator, DBSForums.com 2000-2006

Current setup:
DirecTV: HR34-700 (1TB) / HR24-100 (1TB) / HR24-500 (1TB) / HR21-700 (320GB) / HR21-100 (1TB) / 2 H25s / C41-500 / SWiM16 / Nomad / CCK

FiOS: 2 Tivo Roamio Pros (6 TB total) / 5 Tivo Minis attached via MOCA


#24 OFFLINE   KyL416

KyL416

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,862 posts
  • LocationTobyhanna, PA
Joined: Nov 10, 2005

Posted 28 August 2013 - 05:26 PM

I just found this on Comcast's (not who I use) support site:

Netflix Movies (HD): These guys are around 3.8Mbit, which means it's about 3600MB for a 2 hour HD movie.
Netflix Movies (SD): Each of these movies are around 500-700MB each, depending on the length of the movie.
Netflix TV Shows (HD): A 30-minute TV show will be about 1500MB.
Netflix TV Shows (SD): A 30-minute TV show will be about 400MB.
If you do the math, that means you can stream about 3 seasons of Entourage and 40 movies in HD. However, that's not to account for standard Internet usage, so with YouTube, Facebook, and all of the other things you and your household may use, that's looking to drop the number down to about 20 HD movies, which is still a substantial amount for most people.

Not even close to your claim.

Your math is off, that would put him way over a 20 GB allotment. At most he could do 5 HD movies which will put him at around 17.58 GB if you use 1 GB = 1024 MB. And even then, with VBR encoding the size isn't the same for every movie, an action movie with a lot of rapid movement and explosions will likely be larger.

Edited by KyL416, 28 August 2013 - 05:27 PM.


#25 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 2,223 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 28 August 2013 - 06:28 PM

Um... That doesn't happen now with NFL Sunday Ticket.  It's a 3/4-second hop up and down to a geosynchronous satellite.  And encoding the game into MPEG2/4 and decoding it on the other end isn't instantaneous either.  I remember talking to my parents on the phone and having them say, "Oh no!" and on my screen, the ball hadn't even been snapped yet.  3-5 seconds delay.  Google might be able to beat that with Internet-based delivery.

 

 

I realize it is a bit behind the people in the stadium now.  However, you're wildly off with your 3-4 second claim. Directv's hop up to and back down from the satellite only adds 0.25 seconds what Google would have (~45k miles round trip to the Directv bird and back down to your dish) because Google would have all the other delays for encoding, satellite transmission from the stadium identical to what Directv (or your local TV station) has.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#26 OFFLINE   SledgeHammer

SledgeHammer

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 955 posts
Joined: Dec 28, 2007

Posted 28 August 2013 - 11:53 PM

I don't give a rat's behind what Comcast claims, I am using Hughesnet and I see the results for myself in real-time.  We have a 20gb monthly allotment, and two hours of Netflix uses about a third of that allotment.  You seem to forget, the consumption is based on download speed and through put.  Hughesnet slows way down in the evening, because of traffic.  We share the bird(s) with all the other subscribers, not just my neighbors as is the case with fiber or DSL.

 

I don't mean this as an attack or anything personal, but the vast majority of the US has broadband. The latest study says 70%+. Yeah, so theres 30% of the US who chooses to live in remote areas. So obviously streaming is not an option for you. Do you get US Mail? Netflix sends out DVDs & Blurays too. Those would be unlimited for $8/mo (the price of one DTV PPV movie) -- well, 1 or 2 at a time or whatever. Not as convienient as PPV I'll admit. I'm willing to pay extra for my convienience, but not 800% more. Living in an actual town or city is a small price to pay for unlimited internet access I would think :).


Edited by SledgeHammer, 28 August 2013 - 11:55 PM.


#27 OFFLINE   sregener

sregener

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 588 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2012

Posted 29 August 2013 - 04:18 AM

How much of your 20gb does one Netflix movie use?  We're using Netflix & Amazon Prime more and more here and have yet to hit our 250gb cap.  I'm talking between the three of us at least 60 minutes per day, and usually more.  Also throw in at least 6 to 10 VOD's from D*.

 

Movies are compressed using optimal compression routines, which can't really be done in real-time.  But let's assume they could be.

 

Broadcast 1080i (CBS) really needs almost 19Mbps in MPEG2.  That works out to approximately 1.9MB/second.  Or 114MB/min.  Or 6.8GB/hour. So you can get 36 hours of that quality of video in if you do nothing else with your Internet.  MPEG4 is better, dropping the requirement to about 3.4GB/hour, and doubles the time to 72 hours under your cap.  720p is closer to 15Mbps, so you can watch more of Fox.

 

However, the real rates for Netflix and Amazon are closer to 8-10Mbps for HD, which is why you can watch over an hour a day and not hit your cap.



#28 OFFLINE   Athlon646464

Athlon646464

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • News Hound
  • 2,510 posts
  • LocationUxbridge, MA
Joined: Feb 23, 2007

Posted 29 August 2013 - 05:23 AM

Your math is off, that would put him way over a 20 GB allotment. At most he could do 5 HD movies which will put him at around 17.58 GB if you use 1 GB = 1024 MB. And even then, with VBR encoding the size isn't the same for every movie, an action movie with a lot of rapid movement and explosions will likely be larger.

 

Not my math at all - I clearly quoted Comcast in my post.  And in another post I gave you my experience with caps.


1 HR34-700, 1 C31-700, 1 HR24-500
Original install on April 20, 2008 - HR34 & C31 installed on August 24, 2013 - HR24 installed on July 23, 2010

Press any key to continue, or any other key to cancel.


#29 OFFLINE   JohnBoy

JohnBoy

    New Member

  • Registered
  • 253 posts
Joined: Sep 08, 2011

Posted 29 August 2013 - 06:27 AM

MLBTV streams @ 4.5 mbps on the PS3 with decent quality and they show thousands of games throughout the year.

 

So I dont see how the NFL would have any problems doing it how the mlb does it and they only show games once a week...

 

Its best to ask someone who has bandwidth caps restrictions and also has mlbtv on how they manage.


Mas Ultra Package + NFL ST MAX (Go Bills) MLB Xtra innings (Go Yankees)
1  Genie HR 44 - 700
3   Mini Genie C41 - 100
1 AM21 OTA Tuner

#30 OFFLINE   maartena

maartena

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,795 posts
Joined: Nov 01, 2010

Posted 29 August 2013 - 08:07 AM

The numbers are a bit blurry. Is the 0.5% counted towards traffic in the U.S., or traffic global? Youtube's traffic in the United States is only a portion of its global presence. Also, one needs to know that these kinds of contracts are going to be geographically based. A football lover in Canada is not likely to be able to subscribe to a Youtube NFL channel, and you are also not likely to be able to even watch it with your U.S. account if you are visiting other countries abroad.

 

I also think they will probably not reach the 0.5%, maybe not even 0.1%, for the simple reason that youtube is SO widely used world wide. I also think that most football lovers, will just want to plop down on the couch, and watch the game. And more importantly, switch to the OTHER game during commercial breaks and swap back and forth. They arent going to want to bother with streaming, and they sure as hell aren't going to be happy if the NFL watcher's three teenage daughters are all online during the game.... ;)

 

So, its a nice ADDITION for people frequently traveling inside the US, but not a REPLACEMENT.

 


[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

I am the Stig.

#31 OFFLINE   sregener

sregener

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 588 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2012

Posted 30 August 2013 - 03:43 AM

MLBTV streams @ 4.5 mbps on the PS3 with decent quality and they show thousands of games throughout the year.

 

So I dont see how the NFL would have any problems doing it how the mlb does it and they only show games once a week...

 

MLB.TV sends out about 1.1 million games a week.  I'm guessing an NFL regular season game would be vastly more popular, and they'd all be on one day of the week, over only 6 hours.



#32 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 2,223 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 30 August 2013 - 12:33 PM

MLB.TV sends out about 1.1 million games a week.  I'm guessing an NFL regular season game would be vastly more popular, and they'd all be on one day of the week, over only 6 hours.

 

 

Exactly. How many streams would be required for NFLST, when you have "fewer than 3 million" subscribers, and most watch more than one game, those with man caves have more than one game on at once, most sports bars have all the games on. That's probably 10 million simultaneous streams, maybe more.

 

How many simultaneous streams does mlb.tv deliver? If they're only doing 1.1 million games a week, they aren't doing even 1% of what would be required for NFLST. And at 4.5 Mbps they are cutting back on quality versus what Directv delivers for NFLST. The two are not even comparable.

 

Let's say they compressed it down to 4.5 Mbps like mlb.tv. For 10 million simultaneous streams that's 45 Tbps. I tried to find out what the peak bandwidth usage across all broadband subscribers in the US is to see how it compares, but couldn't find any numbers - only percentages of a whole in articles listing Netflix as using 1/3 to 1/2 of it during the evening peak. Best guess I could make based on Netflix reporting that it delivered 4 billion hours in Q1 2013 is that Netflix would be averaging 33 Tbps if all the streams were HD (which they aren't, so the real figure is much lower, but that would also be average and not their peak in the evening)


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#33 OFFLINE   photostudent

photostudent

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 291 posts
Joined: Nov 08, 2007

Posted 30 August 2013 - 04:37 PM

I hadn't thought about the commercial customers.  Think about the bandwidth they would have to have to run a day of NFL on all their screens!!
 
YIKES!!  :)

I do not see way it an issue. It is all coming through the same cable. It is all digital bits. Bits is bits, either Internet or cable. If I can watch five different shows at my home via cable then a bar can stream five different football games. Of course the simple answer is for Direct to also sell Sunday ticket to cable subscribers. Many people do not have access to satellite service.

#34 OFFLINE   Doug Brott

Doug Brott

    Lifetime Achiever

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 28,917 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles
Joined: Jul 12, 2006

Posted 30 August 2013 - 05:43 PM

I do not see way it an issue. It is all coming through the same cable. It is all digital bits. Bits is bits, either Internet or cable. If I can watch five different shows at my home via cable then a bar can stream five different football games. Of course the simple answer is for Direct to also sell Sunday ticket to cable subscribers. Many people do not have access to satellite service.


Cable TV charges by package while Cable Internet charges by bandwidth (and also places limits on capacity). Additionally, the Commercial establishment would need to get "Cable" Internet to go with the claim of "bits is bits" and I'm not sure that is necessarily available at every bar that would want to show NFL games on Sunday. In any event, infrastructure would have to change at bars for this to even work for them.
DIRECTV Firmware Monitor - iPhone - Android - HTML5

DIRECTV employee since August 2011.
All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

#35 OFFLINE   peds48

peds48

    🙈🙉🙊📡

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 10,129 posts
  • LocationLong Island, NY
Joined: Jan 10, 2008

Posted 30 August 2013 - 06:04 PM

I do not see way it an issue. It is all coming through the same cable. It is all digital bits. Bits is bits, either Internet or cable. If I can watch five different shows at my home via cable then a bar can stream five different football games. Of course the simple answer is for Direct to also sell Sunday ticket to cable subscribers. Many people do not have access to satellite service.

and even if bits are bits, what makes the difference is the encoding method


Here’s to the crazy ones.
The misfits. The rebels.
The the troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.

The ones who see things different.
They’re not fond of rules, and they have no respect for the status quo.


Think Differently 

#36 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 2,223 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 31 August 2013 - 08:51 AM

I do not see way it an issue. It is all coming through the same cable. It is all digital bits. Bits is bits, either Internet or cable. If I can watch five different shows at my home via cable then a bar can stream five different football games.

 

 

No, that is not true at all. Go learn the difference between broadcasting and point to point transmission.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#37 OFFLINE   1948GG

1948GG

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 888 posts
Joined: Aug 04, 2007

Posted 31 August 2013 - 03:35 PM

There are several things going on here, that would make/break such a proposal.  Many have brought up that the length and breath of internet access across the U.S. in general, is really pretty piss poor.  So even if we're talking DirecTV level of HD distribution (say 8-10Mb/s for a single channel) that is about double what even 50% of people have access to, either through DSL or cable.

 

And of course, there's all the 'caps' and such, and the cost of that access.  Which brings up the second big thing... cost.

 

Now, one can figure that the 'Wrath of Khan' pricing model will perhaps come into play.  And what, some are probably asking, what the **** is 'Wrath of Khan'?  Of course, the move (1982).  But before it was released on VHS, the 'typical' movie was selling at between $50-100 or thereabouts in the market.  Paramount decided that they wanted to 'goose' the sell-through, and priced 'Khan' at $29-35 or so (can't remember exactly what it was) but about 1/2 to 1/3'rd that of a typical VHS movie.

 

Folks came unglued.  It was 'sold out' across the country.  Paramount made a killing.  A light builb went off over their heads, 'hey if we drop the price we make up the amount we wanted to in VOLUME'.  No ****.  Marketing 101.

 

So, here we have NFL/ST, but no real way to market it in volume across the Internet 'as it exists today'.  Through DirecTV you have 100% (or close to it, obviously there are places in big cities with coverage problems just like there is way out west with those things called 'trees').  But it's pretty close to 100% coverage.  If folks want it today, they can pretty much get it anywhere.

 

Until Google wants to fiber-wire the whole of America (in lots of places they will be barred do to EXISTING laws and regulations in states and municipalities), and a few Trillion bucks later, they can do what satellite does.

 

Really, DirecTV is cost effective against most cabelcos anyway, so as I pointed out, it's already at 99+% (potential) penetration anyway.  And as to huge bandwidth folks like Google Fiber, FIOS (both Verizon and Frontier), I don't understand why they don't partner with DirecTV and forget about running their own 'TV' service, which they are at a distinct disadvantage to the huge cablecos (Comcast et. al.), and put the DirecTV bitstream on their fiber service.

 

DirecTV already has IP based DVR/Receivers running on large apartment/condo complexes around the country, it would be a minor bit of engineering to junk their current problematic 'tv service' and go with Direct.

 

But meanwhile, folks on internet service through other vendors, forget about it.  You think folks like Comcast are yelling now with the pitiful amount of bits flowing through their service because of Netflix?  This would really get them going at hyper levels.


  • Weaselboy likes this

#38 OFFLINE   Gocanes

Gocanes

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 67 posts
Joined: Jul 15, 2007

Posted 02 September 2013 - 09:19 AM

ST over the internet is just not practical today. Streaming live content that people want and expect to watch live is totally different than streaming movies or videos ala Netflix or Youtube. Football fans expect to watch the games live to the second. If it was even 30 seconds behind, think about all the "spoilers" there would be for your ST game(s) if you have a game on cable/sat/OTA at the same time, or are talking/texting with a friend who is at the game.

 

Netflix and Youtube work as well as they do because they buffer content ahead of where you're watching, so you don't see the minor and major hiccups that are a fact of life for the internet. If you're watching live, you can't buffer, so you'll be exposed to all those hiccups. When they happen you either have to miss some action or it has to pause and then you're no longer watching live.

 

No one has ever attempted to do something like this with live content, and there's no way the NFL is going to take the risk of being the first, no matter how much money Google dangles in front of them. It would do tremendous damage to the league if their most ardent football fans were forced off a solution that works pretty well for one that would work less well even for those with a 100Mb FIOS connection, let alone the people with poor or no broadband options.

 

I could see Google trying to make some deal where they have the rights to sell single games, but I doubt they'd be interested in selling the full ST package the NFL does over the Internet, or that if they are the NFL is willing risk the backlash if it doesn't work as well as Google might hope. It doesn't matter how many smart people Google gets to work on it, they can only control what happens up to the time the packets leave their control. Once it is out on the Internet, it may pass through a half dozen different providers on its way to your house. But the angry guy who is having problems watching his team is still going to blame the NFL for being greedy and making the deal. The NFL doesn't take risks like that.

 

ESPN3 does live games over the internet.  As far as delay goes, DirecTV is at least 10 seconds behind really live.  Watch a game on DirecTV and listen to the radio broadcast simultaneoulsy and you will see this easily.

 

The reason that high quality HD live broadcast over the internet isn't practical is because very few residential customers have an ISP that can provide the continuous 5+ Mbps bandwidth required for even 1 stream.  The oversubcription rate in the network design is too high.  Dedicated IPTV services like FIOS/Uverse stream the TV content on a dedicated closed network.  They don't stream it over the internet.  The TV content comes from servers which are networked to the home in a way that doesn't require crossing over into the internet backbone.



#39 OFFLINE   jacksonm30354

jacksonm30354

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 615 posts
  • LocationAtlanta
Joined: Mar 29, 2007

Posted 02 September 2013 - 12:43 PM

I don't mean this as an attack or anything personal, but the vast majority of the US has broadband. The latest study says 70%+. Yeah, so theres 30% of the US who chooses to live in remote areas. So obviously streaming is not an option for you. Do you get US Mail? Netflix sends out DVDs & Blurays too. Those would be unlimited for $8/mo (the price of one DTV PPV movie) -- well, 1 or 2 at a time or whatever. Not as convienient as PPV I'll admit. I'm willing to pay extra for my convienience, but not 800% more. Living in an actual town or city is a small price to pay for unlimited internet access I would think :).

While 70%+ might have "broadband".  All "broadband" is not created equal.  Many can't get more than 1MB-3MB service in their area. And that is not just in rural areas. That might be sufficient for 1 SD stream, but what about homes that have multiple tvs?  A large part of the 70% doesn't have access to the fast broadband necessary.  

 

Not my math at all - I clearly quoted Comcast in my post.  And in another post I gave you my experience with caps.

The OP does not have Comcast and it's 250GB limit.  He has HughesNet with a 20GB limit.  Your math works for Comcast, but not HughesNet.



#40 OFFLINE   Athlon646464

Athlon646464

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • News Hound
  • 2,510 posts
  • LocationUxbridge, MA
Joined: Feb 23, 2007

Posted 02 September 2013 - 02:04 PM

The OP does not have Comcast and it's 250GB limit.  He has HughesNet with a 20GB limit.  Your math works for Comcast, but not HughesNet.

 

You missed my point by taking the stats I quoted out of context.  I was using Comcast's stats to refute an earlier post claiming that 1 Netflix HD movie would put him over his limit.  

 

The math they use works for any connection, including AOL dial-up.


1 HR34-700, 1 C31-700, 1 HR24-500
Original install on April 20, 2008 - HR34 & C31 installed on August 24, 2013 - HR24 installed on July 23, 2010

Press any key to continue, or any other key to cancel.





spam firewall