FDM80
join:2001-07-16
Silver Spring, MD | Reference Numbers Just for reference:
Analog broadcast = about 4mbps
Digital broadcast = 19.4mbps (up to the station if they use all of that bandwith or not)
All digital broadcasts are in MPEG2, so throwing numbers of 3Gbps of uncompressed data around is pretty irrelevant.
When it comes to my experience with HDTV and having people over, I've watched some stuff with my buddies who appreciate the technology and they always immidiately see the difference. These are the type of people who have a relatively good understanding of lots of the jargon thrown around.
I've also had people who are the least bit tech savvy come over and watch (the biggest shocks always come from the women). Who when they sit down, it takes about 30 seconds for them to realize something is different. Then they make the comment that the picture is exceptionally sharp, and that's when I tell them it's because it's an HD broadcast.
I've seen women who:
1)NEVER watch sports and
2)who find the game of golf to be the most irrelevant thing on the face of the earth, but.....
3)sat and watched The Masters for 5 straight hours
and the only reason they did it, was because it was in HD
Yeah, it's more expensive, just means you have to have the foresight to save up for it. When 2006 comes around and the government takes back the analog frequencies, I have a feeling digital tv's still won't be as cheap as analog ones. Plan ahead!
I haven't had a single person walk out of my house after watching some HD broadcast say that it was "unnecessary" or "a waste". If anything, they've all left feeling excited about the future of TV. |
|
| 1080P the Holy Grail of HDTV There is a simple way to get all the advantages of progressive 1080P pic quality and fit 3 channels into one 1080i bandwidth space it is called WMV-HD codec from Micorosoft . Comcast will be left holding the proverbial bag as competitor Voom and other cable co's are looking into STB's with WMV-HD decoding . This will allow them to survive using bandwidth intelligently something the networking world has known for years. |
|
| It's true. As much as the Microsoft naysayers will hate it, WM9 is much more efficient than MPEG4. The licensing fees are drastically less expensive and the quality is higher per Mbps. |
|
 pipdipchip8 Megabits A SecondPremium
join:2003-12-04
Hanover, MN | reply to bithead
Microsoft put up a few demos of 1080p using the WMV-HD (on Microsoft.com) and I'll say it looked really good. It took a lot of power to run it. It was running a little jerky on my 2.6Ghz, 1GB RAM. It won't even play on a 533Mhz Celeron. Is 1080p going to require a lot of power on whatever is decoding it? |
|
| reply to FDM80
Re: Reference Numbers Ok. I'm a bit confused here. Is that 19.4 mbps of mpeg2 video? If so, are the cable companies transmitting the full 19.4 mbps or are they compressing it further? |
|
| Dish Network is the only provider that I'm aware of streaming >19Mbps. DirecTV and Voom have slightly less bandwidth/channel. The cable MSO's could vary by system, depending on bandwidth constraints. |
|
| reply to hailinfantry
Re: 1080P the Holy Grail of HDTV Why not use a much better codec and save ourselves from having to join the collective of the mindless masses.
»www.on2.com/ has a much better codec, or they can stop all the foreplay and simply use MPEG4. |
|
|
|
| said by anonymousjay:
Why not use a much better codec and save ourselves from having to join the collective of the mindless masses.
»www.on2.com/ has a much better codec, or they can stop all the foreplay and simply use MPEG4.
The "mindless masses" seem to be doing pretty well. Meanwhile an anonymous troll believes he/she will be taken seriously. News at 11. |
|
FDM80
join:2001-07-16
Silver Spring, MD | reply to biochemistry
Re: Reference Numbers The 19.4mbps is the amount of data that each Over The Air channel has, as stipulated by the government (FCC). What cable/sat providers do I don't know.
19.4mbps of MPEG2 and AC3 (dolby digital 5.1) audio. Also, broadcasting in AC3 is another choice that is handled by the local station on whether they want to buy the encoder or not. If not everything pretty much comes in stereo, or Pro Logic. |
|
| Dish Network is currently broadcasting HD at the full ATSC rate (19.4Mbps). This is likely to change if they add additional channels without adding additional bandwidth.
DirecTV is broadcasting HD between 15 and 17Mbps (Bichon posted the exact bitrate at one point).
Voom is broadcasting HD at around the same rate as DirecTV.
Bandwidth constraints won't be as much of an issue with HD as they are today once we bring WM9 and MPEG4 to the table. Unfortunately the "standards group" that developed the MPEG specification wants tons of licensing fees for the implementation of their product. This is fine and dandy--but the providers have a higher-quality choice that is also MUCH less expensive to license: Windows Media 9 (If only it wasn't called Windows Media 9 it would sound like a much better product). |
|
| reply to bithead
Re: 1080P the Holy Grail of HDTV I just can't stop drooling when I think of digital cable having hundreds of channels of 1080p hdtv thanks to wmv-hd. Is anyone aware of a cable company that is currently trying to implement this? |
|
| said by biochemistry:
I just can't stop drooling when I think of digital cable having hundreds of channels of 1080p hdtv thanks to wmv-hd. Is anyone aware of a cable company that is currently trying to implement this?
I'm not sure what the WM9 (not WMV) codec will allow per analog channel. I'm not familiar with any cableco's currently looking at implementing the technology, since it would mean major upgrades in the headend and at the customer premesis. Voom has IRD's that are already compatible with the technology, or will be with a small PC Card upgrade. They initially intended to move to MPEG4, but decided WM9 was superior due to the higher quality in the full motion video and MUCH cheaper licensing. |
|
