<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20281854</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:32:23 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:32:23 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20289703</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/550826"><b>Alphy</b></A> : I've seen you harass people in multiple threads now. Maybe I'm not taking a big enough sample size, but do you always do this? <br><br>Right or wrong, you're approach is really, really confrontational.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20289703</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2008 22:13:38 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283660</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : I wasn't around yesterday, but thank you for your concern. I've got plenty of material, but I think we've accomplished as much as we're going to be able to, so I'll say have a nice weekend to you as well.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283660</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:06:02 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283583</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><b>RadioDoc</b></A> : Where were you yesterday when I was talking about this re: Comcast?  Please keep up.<br><br>Since you've run out of material I'll just say enjoy your weekend.<br><small>--<br>Toolmaster of La Grange.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283583</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:48:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283541</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  RadioDoc <A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>I appear to be a post ahead of you, so while you go back and catch up I'll just reiterate what I said before...'done correctly' is rare.  Very rare.</div>Considering you had to post three times before you finally acknowledged that it's possible, I'd say you're behind a little. But hey, who's counting right? I' won't even reiterate what I said and let you figure it out for yourself.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283541</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:41:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283512</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><b>RadioDoc</b></A> : I appear to be a post ahead of you, so while you go back and catch up I'll just reiterate what I said before...'done correctly' is rare.  Very rare.<br><small>--<br>Toolmaster of La Grange.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283512</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:36:01 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283489</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  RadioDoc <A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Your example of SD up-converted to HD as being HD is what is irrelevant.  Having trouble following along?</div>I'm following along nicely, although I was questioning whether you were or not.<div class="bquote"><small>said by  RadioDoc <A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>You can fit three proper HD streams into one QAM256 channel if you are very careful, don't have high-motion or complex video on any of them, and make sure that your statistical multiplexing and rate shaping are adjusted for minimum damage to picture quality.</div>Thank you for finally confirming what I suggested. Placing more than two streams of some content in a single QAM channel is <b>possible if done correctly</b>. Now the second part of that is recognizing that it isn't a big deal <b> if it is done correctly</b>. You're almost there, just a little further now ;)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20283489</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:31:43 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282871</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><b>RadioDoc</b></A> : Your example of SD up-converted to HD as being HD is what is irrelevant.  Having trouble following along?<br><br>You can fit three proper HD streams into one QAM256 channel if you are very careful, don't have high-motion or complex video on any of them, and make sure that your statistical multiplexing and rate shaping are adjusted for minimum damage to picture quality.  But, just because it is possible to do properly doesn't mean it's done properly, and in the case of one Enlightened operator, "done properly" isn't in their vocabulary or operations manual.<br><small>--<br>Toolmaster of La Grange.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282871</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 14:49:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282665</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  RadioDoc <A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>I certainly didn't miss the point.  You brought up something irrelevant.<br>...<br>You might also want to look up how this is done.</div>It most certainly is relevant and I'm fairly comfortable with how it is done. I'm waiting for you to say why more than two of <b>some</b> "HD" channels can't comfortably fit in a single QAM channel.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282665</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 14:05:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282579</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1304890"><b>Sammer</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  OverModded <A HREF="/useremail/u/594412"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>   :</small><br><br><div class="bquote"><small>said by  DaveNJ <A HREF="/useremail/u/107980"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Who do they think there fooling selling HD in SD resolution. <br> </div>SD is packing 8 to 10 channels in 6Mhz. HD has 2 or 3 channels in 6Mhz. So, NO they are not selling HD with SD resolution. <br> </div>3 channels in 256 QAM MPEG-2 is at best ED. "fat-o-vision" eats up more than its share of precious bits too.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282579</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 13:52:19 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282467</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><b>RadioDoc</b></A> : I certainly didn't miss the point.  You brought up something irrelevant.  If TNT is running SD programming as HD, then it really isn't HD, is it?<br><br>You might also want to look up how this is done.<br><small>--<br>Toolmaster of La Grange.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282467</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 13:35:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282367</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/297537"><b>en102</b></A> : Personally, with all the watered down HD (macro blocking, compression, etc.) I'll take a "good" SD picture for at least another year.<br><small>--<br>Canada = Hollywood North</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282367</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 13:19:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282292</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/485926"><b>Laidback</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  DaveNJ <A HREF="/useremail/u/107980"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br> I think Dish/Direc should capitalize on this. <br> </div>Currently not legally available in Canada :huh:]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282292</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 13:07:52 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282109</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  RadioDoc <A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>There is no "smart" way to do it and call it HD.  Sorry.</div>You totally missed the point. If content providers such as TNT distribute their "HD" streams at low bitrates, why can't cablecos take advantage of that and throw three streams into a single QAM channel? Limit channels that actually distribute at 19.4 Mbps to two per QAM channel. No blood, no foul.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282109</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:30:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282079</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : I was mainly referring to channels such as "TNT HD". Cropped and stretched content is not necessarily HD, but the providers will broadcast it as such because the content distributors say it is. I wouldn't call 720p HD-lite either. I'll take quality 720p over 1080i any time.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282079</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:25:35 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282005</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><b>RadioDoc</b></A> : My wife calls it "fat-o-vision".  Yes it is a very big deal, and is very much not high definition.<br><br>One form of "HD Lite" is the practice of squeezing a 16:9, 1920x1080 picture into a 1280x1080 box, transmitting it at the lower bitrate, and then expanding it at the receiver having lost at least 33% of the horizontal picture information in the process.  My HDTV actually has a function for that built-in to record one tuner to a standard def 4:3 recorder while preserving the aspect ratio.  Of course the result is not HD, but it isn't supposed to be and we don't use that function.<br><br>There is no "smart" way to do it and call it HD.  Sorry.<br><small>--<br>Toolmaster of La Grange.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20282005</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:12:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281988</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/297537"><b>en102</b></A> : They _could_ push HD lite (don't they all?) at 720p.  I have yet to see any provider pushing 1080p<br><small>--<br>Canada = Hollywood North</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281988</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:08:48 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281968</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  en102 <A HREF="/useremail/u/297537"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>a)  The source is HD (i.e. was generated at 1920x1080)</div>Tell the content providers that.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281968</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:06:03 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281956</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/939879"><b>openbox9</b></A> : Is it really that big of a deal with some channels that are stretching the hell out of SD content and calling it HD? I guess I don't see the problem with cablecos doing this if it's done smartly.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281956</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:05:14 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281952</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/297537"><b>en102</b></A> : Exactly... just because the display resolution = 1920x1080, it shouldn't be called HD, unless<br><br>a)  The source is HD (i.e. was generated at 1920x1080)<br>b)  The quality of the picture hasn't been degraded to appear as if it was SD.<br><br>Sure, I can take a 480i image on my PC and put it to full screen (1600x1200), but the image isn't going to look all that great.<br><small>--<br>Canada = Hollywood North</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281952</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:04:33 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281854</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><b>RadioDoc</b></A> : Semantics.  I can set my 1920x1080 set to display 480i SD at full screen, using every pixel, but in no possible way is it HD.  Compressing the snot out of a video stream and calling it HD because it is still 720p is not much different.<br><br>Unfortunately, the definition of HD is very slippery and the marketing weasels have taken full advantage of that to sell decidedly inferior product.<br><small>--<br>Toolmaster of La Grange.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281854</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:47:28 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281765</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/594412"><b>OverModded</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  GlenQuagmire <A HREF="/useremail/u/954111"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>That and they could start moving the analog channels to digital. <br> </div>That process is well along the way in most areas. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281765</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:33:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281757</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/594412"><b>OverModded</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  DaveNJ <A HREF="/useremail/u/107980"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Who do they think there fooling selling HD in SD resolution. <br> </div>SD is packing 8 to 10 channels in 6Mhz. HD has 2 or 3 channels in 6Mhz. So, NO they are not selling HD with SD resolution. <br><small>--<br><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/bqv2h"><b>My BLOG ..</b></a><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/2a9xcb"><i> .. Internet News ..</i></a><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/yz8xto"><b> .. My Web Page</b></a></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281757</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:32:43 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281751</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><b>RadioDoc</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  DaveNJ <A HREF="/useremail/u/107980"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>I think Dish/Direc should capitalize on this.  </div>They are.  Both are implementing MPEG4 and expanding transponder space.  Why do you think Comcast (for example) is using so much marketing sleight-of-hand trying to sound like they have more HD channels when in reality they are behind and getting behinder.<br><br>DirecTV was spanked by their customers for pulling this same crap a couple of years ago.  You'd think that the cablecos would know better.  Of course, these are the same cablecos whose installers have been known to "install" HD boxes using S-video and call it a day.<br><small>--<br>Toolmaster of La Grange.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281751</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:31:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281750</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/954111"><b>GlenQuagmire</b></A> : That and they could start moving the analog channels to digital.  I would much rather have High Quality HD channels that analog channels any day. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281750</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:30:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281696</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/107980"><b>DaveNJ</b></A> : So is CC2, tru2way etc. The cablecos will never invest in mpeg4, unless they have too. Who do they think there fooling selling HD in SD resolution. They could implement SDV but just like tru2way we will never see it. I think Dish/Direc should capitalize on this. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281696</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:22:01 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281660</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/157889"><b>RadioDoc</b></A> : "Coming"?  Right now the only thing "coming" is the MSO accountants.<br><br>Until MPEG4 is implemented, the MSOs should shut their HD marketing yaps and quit selling a product they do not have.<br><small>--<br>Toolmaster of La Grange.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281660</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:14:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>MPEG4 will solve this</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281596</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/594412"><b>OverModded</b></A> : As the cable companies upgrade their STBs, the move to MPEG4 compression will resolve these <i>quality</i> problems.<br><br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4" >en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4</A><br><br>MPEG4 is coming:<br>&raquo;<A HREF="/shownews/When-Will-Cable-Embrace-MPEG4-90398">When Will Cable Embrace MPEG-4?</A>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20281596</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 11:03:48 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
