> Fortunately I can count on one hand the applications that don't work with +100ms latency (not counting gaming).
Pardon my ignorance, but what are some exampes of applications that wouldn’t work with +100 latency?
Pardon my ignorance, but what are some exampes of applications that wouldn’t work with +100 latency?
I think Adobe been one of the worst companies I've dealt with personally, as many of the endpoints have ridiculously low timeouts (for someone with really shitty latency).
< 100ms is usually the "minimum", > 150ms is often "unusable", and for a smooth experience you might need < 30ms depending on the application (e.g. depending on the game you might need < 90ms or <60ms or <30ms).
The other two things on your list are both gaming.
But if your calls normally have lively discussion where someone different jumps in any time there's a pause, the higher the latency the more likely people will say "meeting in person is much better"
Likewise, with things like remote desktop, 100ms of latency isn't a dealbreaker but it'll certainly leave some of your users saying "things that run locally just feel snappier"
Up to 100ms is kind of ok-ish barely-sluggish, but over 100ms latency, it becomes extremely annoying to maintain a conversation.
Video conferencing often makes this worse, because it is what people use for meetings, etc. and that involves more than 2 people maintaining a conversation, so latency becomes even more important there.
Otherwise 3-4 people start talking over each other, and none of them notices until they receive what the others are saying. Which is extremely annoying.
Around about 100ms things stop appearing instantaneous, beyond the scope that everything starts to suck if you're not a patient person.