inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | Cox probably does this.
On my calibrated TV the quality for FoodHD just isn't that impressive. |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?
DOCSIS 3.0 will increase internet speeds but unless Comcast goes to MPEG-4 the problem with over-compressed HD remains. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| What I don't quite get...
quote:
Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH network,
Isn't Verizon using off-the shelf MPEG-2 Motorola cable DVRs? The same ones the cable companies are using? Even CableCARD TiVos work on FiOS. While that "compatibility" is great, it also means Verizon must funnel their TV service to fit in the exact same spectrum range that cable uses. The only thing different is they don't need to allocate any space for internet usage, which is a very small chunk of that spectrum anyway.
I realize that FiOS has the potential to do and be much more, but given its current implementation, from a technical standpoint can someone explain why what Verizon is delivering is any better than Cable, given that they are pretty much sharing the same limitations with regards to their TV delivery?
--
Laser eye surgery rocks! I love frickin' laser beams. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
·PHONE POWER
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Sammer
Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?
DOCSIS 3 would actually be a detriment to TV picture quality. DOCSIS 3 is for data usage, and its big feature is that it allows channels to be combined for internet access. So, use of DOCSIS 3 implies that more spectrum is going to be used. More spectrum allocated to internet = less spectrum remaining for TV.
DOCSIS 3 can, however, utilize the space above the current 900mhz range currently being used by the cable boxes. I beleive this is one of the reasons Time Warner is reaplacing our gear with 1ghz capable equipment in our area.
I also wouldn't rule out cable going with MPEG-4 for HD. They could just retask their old 641x DVRs for standard def customers. Its been several years since those boxes debuted, we're about due for a technology upgrade anyway. |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | Well, what kind of compression are they using?q
38.8Mbps is more than enough for three 720p feeds using 12mbit CBR h.264. On the other hand, if they're trying to cram 720p MPEG-2 in there, or worse yet, 1080p MPEG-2... Yeah, that's a problem. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to djrobx
Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?
They need to use switched digital video to save up on capacity or go complete fiber (not likely to happen)
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
hescominsoon
join:2003-02-18
Brunswick, MD
·Comcast
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| This is the primary reason I have yet to go HD
I have yet to see an HD feed that isn't compressed. Why would i want to view compressed, reduced image quality, mislabeled as HD stuff? I don't care what the resolution says..if it's compressed it's not truly HD since you loose detail in the compression. |
|
rahvin112
join:2002-05-24
Sandy, UT
| reply to djrobx
Re: What I don't quite get...
Streamed into the house they have the same capacity, but at the fiber terminal on the house they theoretically have unlimited capacity, in essence the ability to have 100 cable systems that can turn on or off based on channel number. In theory they could run their in home system with 10 or more full cables systems on each fiber, then dynamically switch between different full cable systems carried on the single fiber based on channel.
Although FIOS uses cable standards they aren't limited to what comes off the head end because the head end is on each customers home. They can deliver on the RG6 anything they want as they should with hacks even be able to dynamically change what's coming down the RG-6. The other cable companies are limited to what's comes off the node where they switch from fiber to copper, everyone connected to the node gets the same thing. FIOS doesn't have that limit and could in theory deliver a completely different cable system to every customer. |
|
jmallory
join:2005-11-02
Essexville, MI
| reply to djrobx
said by djrobx  : quote:
Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH network,
Isn't Verizon using off-the shelf MPEG-2 Motorola cable DVRs? The same ones the cable companies are using? Even CableCARD TiVos work on FiOS. While that "compatibility" is great, it also means Verizon must funnel their TV service to fit in the exact same spectrum range that cable uses. The only thing different is they don't need to allocate any space for internet usage, which is a very small chunk of that spectrum anyway. I realize that FiOS has the potential to do and be much more, but given its current implementation, from a technical standpoint can someone explain why what Verizon is delivering is any better than Cable, given that they are pretty much sharing the same limitations with regards to their TV delivery? You are correct, Verizon FIOS TV is using standard Cable Television technology. It is the same as a standard 860 Mhz cable plant with one exception, data and voice are not carried within that 860 Mhz system. This does free up a few channels (depending on Node size) that provides some additional capacity. Cable 1Ghz systems can also do this...standard TV on 54-860 Mhz and data / voice about 860 Mhz....but there are very few 1 Ghz systems (statistically speaking) out there. Most are 860 Mhz and below. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to hescominsoon
Re: This is the primary reason I have yet to go HD
Once you find a raw HD video stream that your TV accepts, report back. They are all compressed. Heavily. Even Blu-ray DVD.
The difference is in the implementation. Comcast is notoriously bad. The difference between OTA and Comcast HD in my area (I get all of the Chicago OTAs perfectly) is astounding. Comcast shouldn't be able to call their crappy over-compressed, erratic video "HD". On this system it looks worse than what my $79 upconverting DVD player puts out.
And then there are the installers who "install" HD using composite or S-video connections because they forgot to bring the proper HD cables.  |
|
jmallory
join:2005-11-02
Essexville, MI
| reply to Guspaz
Re: Well, what kind of compression are they using?q
said by Guspaz :38.8Mbps is more than enough for three 720p feeds using 12mbit CBR h.264. On the other hand, if they're trying to cram 720p MPEG-2 in there, or worse yet, 1080p MPEG-2... Yeah, that's a problem. Well what they are doing is either 720p MPEG-2 or 1080i MPEG2, those are the relevant standards. 720p tends to peak out at about 15 Mbps, while 1080i can take the full 19 Mbps. Technically, you can get 3 720p stat muxed into a single 39 mbps QAM256 carrier as long as you are careful what kind of channels you are mixing together. IE, you probably shouldn't put ESPN HD, ESPN 2 HD, and FSN HD together as when they are showing live events they will all be needing a lot of bandwidth. Stat muxing is an art as much as a science. Comcast has also been doing tweeks the past couple of weeks and the picture does appear to be improving.
Of course the best way of solving bandwidth problems is getting rid of analog television which is of course the worst bandwidth waster of all. |
|
cypherstream
Looking forward to the future of things.
Premium,MVM
join:2004-12-02
Reading, PA
clubs: | Digg it
Dugg
»digg.com/tech_news/Dear_Comcast_···in_April |
|
neufuse
join:2006-12-06
Indiana, PA
·Comcast
| better codec's...
we need better codec's... heck Microsoft's WMV codec preserves great picture quality in HD and uses less space then MPEG-2... and MPEG-4 would be the best if you wanted a largely used standard... why in the world are we still using MPEG2? There are much better codec's out there for vidoe compression... DirectTV has the right idea, cable should follow for digital channels. |
|
zed260
join:2007-09-30
Cleveland, TN | reply to hescominsoon
Re: This is the primary reason I have yet to go HD
actuly you wont likely ever see fully uncompressed hd it just takes to much bandwidth its about 622 mbps
so if you were to send hd fully uncompressed you could only fit around 3 channels on coaxial cable |
|
afiggatt
join:2007-07-12
Sterling, VA
| reply to djrobx
Re: What I don't quite get...
said by djrobx : quote:
Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH network,
I realize that FiOS has the potential to do and be much more, but given its current implementation, from a technical standpoint can someone explain why what Verizon is delivering is any better than Cable, given that they are pretty much sharing the same limitations with regards to their TV delivery? Verizon is using IPTV for VOD, so that saves QAM channels that the cable companies use for VOD. Verizon is also in the process of shutting down it's limited set of 40 analog channels and replacing with digital QAM 256 channels. (Oregon and Western PA markets which started up in later 2007 are all digital). All of the analog channels were digitally simulcast from the start, so only people hooking up analog NTSC tuners ever used them. Yes, Verizon uses QAM-256 and Mpeg-2 for the live digital TV channels which is convenient for clear QAM tuners and HD Tivos. By the end of 2008, Verizon is supposed to have installed equipment to provide 135 QAM channels throughout the system. The Motorola STB and DVRs that have been issued from the start support 135 QAM channels (860 MHz system) and IP interface for VOD & Guide data.
With no legacy analog channels to hog bandwidth, 135 QAM channels is enough for > 150 full bandwidth HD channels and hundreds of SD channels. Verizon will be ramping up the IPTV part, so the future is probably a mix of QAM for the locals & most widely watched channels and IPTV for VOD & niche channels. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | reply to djrobx
Verizon is evidently not raping the video before stuffing it into the pipe. These artifacts are introduced at the headend, and Comcast just plain doesn't give a crap how it looks. Verizon, evidently, takes some pride in video quality. |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | reply to jmallory
Re: Well, what kind of compression are they using?q
That and abandon MPEG-2; it's a dying technology for a reason. It's at least two generations behind. |
|
jmallory
join:2005-11-02
Essexville, MI
1 edit | reply to neufuse
Re: better codec's...
said by neufuse :we need better codec's... heck Microsoft's WMV codec preserves great picture quality in HD and uses less space then MPEG-2... and MPEG-4 would be the best if you wanted a largely used standard... why in the world are we still using MPEG2? There are much better codec's out there for vidoe compression... DirectTV has the right idea, cable should follow for digital channels. Because MPEG-4 isn't part of the ATSC or Digital Cable Ready (DCR) standards. |
|
pathfinda
Premium
join:2002-09-11
Chicago, IL | Comcast HD Image Quality
.. And i thought it was me.
Image Quality has been terrible for about a week. On Demand was unwatchable for a moment yesterday.
DirecTV is looking better and better. |
|
Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium
join:2002-12-05
Mullica Hill, NJ
clubs: | duh?
dunno where that "survey"'s results came from but Comcast's had the worst HD picture quality for 2+ years. DTV's always had superior picture, and now FIOS is basically just as good.
that being said i have Comcast... |
|
