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
| 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. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | They need to use switched digital video to save up on capacity or go complete fiber (not likely to happen)
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·surpasshosting
·ViaTalk
| reply to Sammer
Sorry, the point of Karl's posting of article is to bash Comcast, not actually highlight anything about the comparison between FIOS and Comcast HD television. He'll take any shot he can at Comcast; I'm just surprised he didn't work in something about throttling and invisible caps.
The AVSForums thread is pretty interesting -- that site is a good resource. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Yes, God forbid anyone point out anything Comcast does without kissing Brian Roberts' ass. |
|
Nightshade
sic semper tyrannis
Premium
join:2002-05-26
Salem, OR
1 edit | reply to jester121
said by jester121  :Sorry, the point of Karl's posting of article is to bash Comcast, not actually highlight anything about the comparison between FIOS and Comcast HD television. Uhh hate to break it to you but Karl did not have to highlight anything about the comparison between FIOS and Comcast HD. The link that he cited as his source in his article has comparison pictures that pretty much says it all.
I could tell the difference between FTTH and Comcast HD pictures and suffice to say, the comcast pictures were of lower quality than FTTH. |
|
snipper_cr
join:2002-01-22
Wheaton, IL
clubs:
| reply to en102
I am actually curious about that idea. When ever techs came out to work on a problem, I would follow them around and talk with them. They said that fiber basically comes right up to the green box in our backyard and that coaxial cable just runs from that to our house. To me that looks like fiber is pretty darn close. |
|
Mike
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
clubs:  | reply to en102
Oh man but I thought the advertisements for comcast says the largest amd most advanced fiber network in the usa.
So does this mean they're lying? |
|
Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
 ·SONIC.NET
| reply to Sammer
said by Sammer :DOCSIS 3.0 will increase internet speeds but unless Comcast goes to MPEG-4 the problem with over-compressed HD remains. That's pretty obvious. I've been complaining about that for a long time.
I wonder how good DirectTV HD is. Obviously they went MPEG4 (which until now I didn't know), but did they overcompress that too? |
|
jjsk8r85
join:2005-02-17
Belleville, MI | reply to Mike
it is fiber, from the cmts, up the pole, down the road to the node. |
|
tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
clubs:
 ·T-Mobile US
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Ulmo
said by Ulmo :said by Sammer :DOCSIS 3.0 will increase internet speeds but unless Comcast goes to MPEG-4 the problem with over-compressed HD remains. That's pretty obvious. I've been complaining about that for a long time. I wonder how good DirectTV HD is. Obviously they went MPEG4 (which until now I didn't know), but did they overcompress that too? DirecTV's image quality is really good. Probably better than my TWC HD feed.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara |
|
ReVeLaTeD
Premium
join:2001-11-10
San Diego, CA
| DirecTV's is OKAY. Channels like TNTHD and Spike HD look really good. Sci Fi HD looks good, but not as good as Spike HD. USA HD also looks okay, but again, not nearly as good as Sci Fi HD. Additionally, Direct TV still does not have CW HD (at least not in my area) nor any of the other "sitcom" channels. Not that I watch those, mind you. It's the principle of the thing. What I do note, and this is the case with every HD channel I've noticed except for TNT HD, is the artifacts in fast motion. It's particularly prevalent on Sci Fi.
One thing's for sure - DirecTV's HD PPV quality is stellar. |
|
toadlife
Premium
join:2004-05-03
Lemoore, CA
·AT&T Yahoo
| reply to tiger72
said by tiger72 :said by Ulmo :said by Sammer :DOCSIS 3.0 will increase internet speeds but unless Comcast goes to MPEG-4 the problem with over-compressed HD remains. That's pretty obvious. I've been complaining about that for a long time. I wonder how good DirectTV HD is. Obviously they went MPEG4 (which until now I didn't know), but did they overcompress that too? DirecTV's image quality is really good. Probably better than my TWC HD feed. I've had DTV HD for a year now. I've noticed that the quality really varies from station to station. My NBC station looks terrible in HD while the local Fox station looks pretty good. I noticed the difference when there was a football game on both stations at the same time and I was switching back and forth.
Even with the good stations I still notice "blockiness" from time to time.  |
|
