I was kidding about "sucks-less", and forgot the smiley in my initial note.
We do need a metric with an end-user-friendly name, though. Most people understand "lag", and understand that lower numbers are better. You could probably explain "lag-while-loaded" to most users (particularly people who care, like gamers) in a manner that got the point across. Bvs -----Original Message----- From: Jonathan Morton [mailto:chromati...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 4:26 PM To: Bill Ver Steeg (versteb) Cc: Rémi Cardona; bloat; cerowrt-de...@lists.bufferbloat.net Subject: Re: [Bloat] marketing #102 - giving netperf-wrapper a better name? > On 20 Mar, 2015, at 22:08, Bill Ver Steeg (versteb) <vers...@cisco.com> wrote: > > We should call the metric "sucks-less". As in "Box A sucks less than Box B", > or "Box C scored a 17 on the sucks less test". I suspect real marketing drones would get nervous at a negative-sounding name. My idea - which I’ve floated in the past, more than once - is that the metric should be “responsiveness”, measured in Hertz. The baseline standard would be 10Hz, corresponding to a dumb 100ms buffer. Get down into the single-digit millisecond range, as fq_codel does, and the Responsiveness goes up above 100Hz, approaching 1000Hz. Crucially, that’s a positive sort of term, as well as trending towards bigger numbers with actual improvements in performance, and is thus more potentially marketable. - Jonathan Morton _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
