Reviews:
 ·Bright House
| Uhh, what an idiot... Notebaert confirms as much: "We’re more focused on fiber-to-the-node because our outside plant is in very good shape and we can get very high speeds out of it if our RTU (remote terminal unit) is in the right location and we feed the RTU with fiber." He also defends trying to shove high definition programming through VDSL. "If you take an HD (high definition) compressed circuit – MPEG-4 – and you really compress it in the lab today you can get a very good picture, I can't tell the difference, of a basketball game at about 6 megs," he argues. You've got to be kidding me. Well, then again, this comes from a telco's mouth. They wouldn't know a good HD picture if one hit them right between the eyes. This is the most idiotic comment I have seen about compressing HD video. Either the TV wasn't HD, or he needs his vision checked, because there will ALWAYS be a noticable difference between raw, and compressed HD pictures when you look at it on a true HD set. Why do they even advertise it as HD, when it's compressed. You can't re-broadcast a 15Mhz signal as anything less than 15Mhz, unless you plan on calling it something else other than HD. I just love the fact that someone will pay a few thousand, in some cases, on an HDTV, and then go out and get the crappiest HDTV provider and DVD player for it. I also love those folks who get an HDTV and don't get ANY HD channels for it. The guy talking in this article sounds like one of these people.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. |
| reply to phattieg
I don't know of any MSOs that are broadcast high-def in uncompressed form, but claiming that HD in MPEG-4 at 6 Mbps looks is unbelievable....the numbers I consistently hear are 8 to 10 Mbps.
Frank |
