Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quality of Service Versus Quality of Experience

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Quality of Experience

Part of the book series: T-Labs Series in Telecommunication Services ((TLABS))

Abstract

It is often the case that in the current literature, the term “QoE” is used in contexts where “QoS” would be more appropriate. This is likely due to several reasons, one of which being the current popularity of all things related with QoE, but more fundamentally it is due to the boundaries between QoS and QoE not being clearly defined—and indeed, sometimes hard to define clearly. QoE is an intrinsically multi-disciplinary field, and practitioners from different backgrounds see it, quite naturally, from different perspectives colored by their own expertise. For networking people, in particular, QoE is sometimes seen as a simple extension, or even a re-branding, of the well-established concept of QoS. In this chapter we will delve into the differences and commonalities between the two, with the goal of easing and encouraging their proper use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This definition was also used more recently in the third amendment to ITU-T P.10/G.100 [21].

  2. 2.

    The reader will note that this ordering is rather arbitrary. Researchers with a background in network performance evaluation will probably have a different view than those with a background in traffic engineering, etc.

References

  1. Agboma F, Liotta A (2008) QoE-aware QoS management. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on advances in mobile computing and multimedia, ACM, pp 111–116

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ameigeiras P, Ramos-Munoz JJ, Navarro-Ortiz J, Mogensen P, Lopez-Soler JM (2010) QoE oriented cross-layer design of a resource allocation algorithm in beyond-3G systems. Comput Commun 33(5):571–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aristomenopoulos G, Kastrinogiannis T, Kaldanis V, Karantonis G, Papavassiliou S (2010) A novel framework for dynamic utility-based QoE provisioning in wireless networks. In: Global telecommunications conference (GLOBECOM 2010), IEEE, pp 1–6

    Google Scholar 

  4. Batteram H, Damm G, Mukhopadhyay A, Philippart L, Odysseos R, Urrutia-Valdés C (2010) Delivering quality of experience in multimedia networks. Bell Labs Tech J 15(1):175–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bouch A, Sasse MA, DeMeer H (2000) Of packets and people: a user-centered approach to quality of service. In: Eighth international workshop on quality of service, 2000. IWQOS, IEEE, pp 189–197

    Google Scholar 

  6. Crawley E, Sandick H, Nair R, Rajagopalan B (1998) A framework for QoS-based routing in the internet. IETF RFC 2386

    Google Scholar 

  7. Egger S, Reichl P, Hoßfeld T, Schatz R (2012) Time is bandwidth? Narrowing the gap between subjective time perception and quality of experience. In: IEEE international conference on communications (ICC 2012), Ottawa, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  8. ETSI: ETR 003 (1994) Network aspects (NA); general aspects of quality of service (QoS) and network performance (NP)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fiedler M, Hoßfeld T (2010) Quality of experience-related differential equations and provisioning-delivery hysteresis. In: 21st ITC specialist seminar on multimedia applications-traffic, performance and QoE, Miyazaki, Japan

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fiedler M, Hoßfeld T, Tran-Gia P (2010) A generic quantitative relationship between quality of experience and quality of service. IEEE Netw 24(2):36–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gozdecki J, Jajszczyk A, Stankiewicz R (2003) Quality of service terminology in IP networks. IEEE Commun Mag 41(3):153–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. ITU-T: Recommendation G.1000 (2001) Communications quality of service: a framework and definitions

    Google Scholar 

  13. ITU-T: Recommendation G.1010 (2001) End-user multimedia QoS categories

    Google Scholar 

  14. ITU-T: Recommendation P.862 (2001) Perceptual evaluation of speech quality (PESQ), an objective method for end-to-end speech quality assessment of narrowband telephone networks and speech codecs

    Google Scholar 

  15. ITU-T: Recommendation P.863 (2001) Perceptual objective listening quality assessment

    Google Scholar 

  16. ITU-T: Recommendation H.360 (2004) An architecture for end-to-end QoS control and signalling

    Google Scholar 

  17. ITU-T: Recommendation G.1030 (2005) Estimating end-to-end performance in IP networks for data applications

    Google Scholar 

  18. ITU-T: Recommendation E.800 (2008) Definitions of terms related to quality of service

    Google Scholar 

  19. ITU-T: Recommendation Y.1540 (2011) Internet protocol data communication service G IP packet transfer and availability performance parameters

    Google Scholar 

  20. ITU-T: Recommendation Y.1541 (2011) Network performance objectives for IP-based services

    Google Scholar 

  21. ITU-T: Recommendation P.10/G.100 Amendment 3 (2012) New definitions for inclusion in recommendation ITU-T P.10/G.100

    Google Scholar 

  22. ITU-T: Recommendation P.1201 (2012) Parametric non-intrusive assessment of audiovisual media streaming quality

    Google Scholar 

  23. ITU-T: Recommendation G.1011 (2013) Reference guide to quality of experience assessment methodologies

    Google Scholar 

  24. Jammeh E, Mkwawa I, Khan A, Goudarzi M, Sun L, Ifeachor E (2012) Quality of experience (QoE) driven adaptation scheme for voice/video over IP. Telecommun Syst 49(1):99–111

    Google Scholar 

  25. Jin J, Nahrstedt K (2004) QoS specification languages for distributed multimedia applications: a survey and taxonomy. IEEE Trans Multimedia 11(3):74–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lazzara S, Roella A, Moschetti L (2012) Deliverable 8.2: live test report. Technical report, FP7 Optiband project

    Google Scholar 

  27. Le Callet P, Möller S, Perkis A (eds) (2012) Qualinet white paper on definitions of quality of experience

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lewcio B, Belmudez B, Enghardt T, Möller S (2011) On the way to high-quality video calls in future mobile networks. In: Third international workshop on quality of multimedia experience (QoMEX), 2011, pp 43–48

    Google Scholar 

  29. Martini MG, Chen CW, Chen Z, Dagiuklas T, Sun L, Zhu X (2012) Guest editorial: QoE-aware wireless multimedia systems. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 30(7):1153–1156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Möller S, Schmidt S, Beyer J (2013) Gaming taxonomy: an overview of concepts and evaluation methods for computer gaming QoE. In: International workshop on quality of multimedia experience, QoMEX, pp 1–6

    Google Scholar 

  31. Möller S et al (2009) A taxonomy of quality of service and quality of experience of multimodal human-machine interaction. In: International workshop on quality of multimedia experience, QoMEX, pp 7–12

    Google Scholar 

  32. Picovici D, Denieffe D, Kastrati Z (2013) Enhanced network based model for measuring online games quality of experience. Dev Appl Syst 13

    Google Scholar 

  33. Raake A, Gustafsson J, Argyropoulos S, Garcia M, Lindegren D, Heikkila G, Pettersson M, List P, Feiten B (2011) IP-based mobile and fixed network audiovisual media services. IEEE Signal Process Mag 28(6):68–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Reichl P, Egger S, Schatz R, D’Alconzo A (2010) The logarithmic nature of QoE and the role of the Weber-Fechner law in QoE assessment. In: IEEE international conference on communications (ICC), 2010, IEEE, pp 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ries M, Svoboda P, Rupp M (2008) Empirical study of subjective quality for massive multiplayer games. In: 15th International conference on systems, signals and image processing. IWSSIP 2008, IEEE, pp 181–184

    Google Scholar 

  36. Rubino G, Varela M (2004) A new approach for the prediction of end-to-end performance of multimedia streams. In: First international conference on quantitative evaluation of systems (QEST’04)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Schatz R, Hoßfeld T, Janowski L, Egger S (2013) From packets to people: quality of experience as a new measurement challenge. In: Biersack E, Callegari C, Matijasevic M (eds) Data traffic monitoring and analysis. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 7754. Springer, Berlin, pp 219–263

    Google Scholar 

  38. Seppänen J, Varela M (2013) QoE-driven network management for real-time over-the-top multimedia services. In: IEEE wireless communications and networking conference 2013, Shanghai, China

    Google Scholar 

  39. Shaikh J, Fiedler M, Collange D (2010) Quality of Experience from User and Network Perspectives. Annales des télécommunications (Ann Telecommun) 65(1–2):47–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Staehle B, Hirth M, Pries R, Wamser F, Staehle D (2011) Aquarema in action: improving the YouTube QoE in wireless mesh networks. In: Internet communications (BCFIC Riga), 2011 Baltic congress on future, IEEE, pp 33–40

    Google Scholar 

  41. Thakolsri S, Kellerer W, Steinbach E (2011) QoE-based cross-layer optimization of wireless video with unperceivable temporal video quality fluctuation. In: IEEE international conference on communications (ICC), 2011, IEEE, pp 1–6

    Google Scholar 

  42. Varela M, Laulajainen JP (2011) QoE-driven mobility management—integrating the users’ quality perception into network-level decision making. In: Third international workshop on quality of multimedia experience (QoMEX), 2011, pp 19–24

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The ideas presented in this chapter are partially based on the concepts presented in Chap. 7 of [27]; the contributions of the co-authors of that chapter are gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Oulu, Finland

    Martín Varela

  2. Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

    Lea Skorin-Kapov

  3. École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Touradj Ebrahimi

Authors
  1. Martín Varela
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lea Skorin-Kapov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Touradj Ebrahimi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martín Varela .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Quality and Usability Lab Telekom Innovation Laboratories, TU Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Sebastian Möller

  2. Assessment of IP-based Applications Telekom Innovation Laboratories, TU Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Alexander Raake

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Varela, M., Skorin-Kapov, L., Ebrahimi, T. (2014). Quality of Service Versus Quality of Experience. In: Möller, S., Raake, A. (eds) Quality of Experience. T-Labs Series in Telecommunication Services. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02681-7_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02681-7_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-02680-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-02681-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation