 bohratomJersey Shore will rise again
join:2011-07-07
Red Bank NJ | reply to jasontaylor
Re: [HD] Is Verizon lying about HD? This thread is starting to go way off topic....  |
|
batsonaMaryland
join:2004-04-17
Ellicott City, MD | reply to DrDrew
Re: [HD] Is Verizon lying about HD? I wonder what the holdup is on IPTV then.. I bet Verizon is afraid about having to deal with QOS all the way out to the IP-enabled STB. you need a rock-steady stream in order to make IPTV look like classical TV-via-RF... |
|
3 edits | reply to PhoenixDown
said by JackBauer:VZ was very brave ... The current packages are a good mix of price and performance.
Really? Fios don't even say how many hd channels they offer anymore. Comcast has 110. I counted. But, as you point out, it isn't JUST about that, since everyone bundles. And internet is important. And feel free to love Fios as much as you want. On face value, these sorts of pro-Fios comments seem innocuous enough. But consider the broader reality. Perhaps it is something you should look at. Perhaps you have not noticed it. I’m sure others have noticed, I guess some just don’t see it. And there are some caveats to it all, but, those disclaimers aside, what I'm about to show might change your opinion, since Muriel's comments did not. It's rather disturbing, actually. So, what is it? What are people missing? This:
[att=2]
Since the first commercial dialup ISP in the United States opened in 1989 (The World of Brookline, Massachusetts), the US has gone from being in the top 3% (97%+) to the bottom 18%! From 2007 to 2011 alone, one could argue the US dropped about 50%! The efficiency of transporting data of companies like vz is under 10% that of the best, broader competition.
Something else to consider....
Cheers,
Jason |
|
 DrDrewSo that others may surf.
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
kudos:8
4 edits | 
Personally I like this OECD stats graph better... |
Personally I like that the United States provides more than 27% of the top 34 countries broadband wireline service. We have more than twice as many wireline broadband subscribers (85.6 million) as the next country which is Japan (34.8 million). Wireless broadband is even higher than that. Data source: »www.oecd.org/internet/broadbanda···Ver1.xls The amount of infrastructure most other countries have built to serve their population broadband is miniscule compared to the U.S.
Either way it has zero to do with the original problems of this topic: "Why is OWN channel not in HD on FIOS?" or "Is Verizon Lying about HD?"
[edit] I looked up the source of the data used for your graph and your graph is misleading. The original data is titled "Range of broadband prices per megabit per second of advertised speed (Sept. 2011)" with nothing mentioned about "commercial data transport efficiency". The data was all about high/low/median pricing per mbps: »www.oecd.org/internet/broadbanda···4970.xls
Your graph just shows the minimum price per mbps, not even mentioning the median or high prices. So did you make up that title and graph or get it from someone else who did? Glancing at your Twitter feed it looks like you made it up. |
|
| reply to DrDrew
They really don't need unlimited funds. Have not had an SD box for about four years, but i think they were able to show the hd feeds letter boxed, and if that is an issue I am sure it wont be hard to have the box pan scan to fit fully on an SDTV. And if not, there are a lot less SD boxes out there than the 6XXX boxes that cant do mpeg4, so just switch them out with hd boxes. Either way, they get rid of all the sd channels that have HD feeds, and you could save a lot of space. Plus you can move all the channels to their normal places, so you don't have the issue of people watching channel 10 instead of 510 when they have an hd tv. My mother and sisters always do that lol, having just one version of the channel will fix that issue.
I also remember reading on cnet that it would be smart for cable companies to actually switch to 1080p/24 as its less bandwidth than 1080i/60. for tvs that can't handle it the box can just convert it like it does now since it does not have pass through, it converst any 720p to 1080i or vice versa. |
|
DrDrewSo that others may surf.
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
kudos:8
3 edits | Switching to all HDTV feed takes bandwidth that may not be available. Every 10 SD channels you remove only frees enough bandwidth for 2-3 HD channels. Beyond the bandwidth issues, contracts have to renegotiated and more money paid to content owners.
Switching to IPTV and/or mpeg4 may run into problems with FCC regulations concerning Cablecard devices. TWC, Cox, and Charter ran into such issues when they rolled out SDV, TV Everywhere, and/or mpeg4, some are still in court.
Really I think Verizon is sitting on their hands waiting for the industry as a whole to decide on expansion plans, be it IPTV (by way of TV Everywhere), mpeg4, or something else. Broadcasters are dragging their feet on allowing their channels to be distributed on IPTV. FCC and the CEA is uncommitted on the CableCARD replacements.
[edit] For those saying move to 1080p/24, most boxes including HD boxes can't handle that format. Most boxes not made in the last 2 years wouldn't work. Plus, SD boxes can't even handle any HD video. Besides, most broadcasters aren't distributing in that format so Verizon would have to muck with the video stream even more.
--
Two is one, one is none. If it's important, back it up... twice. Even 99.999% availability isn't enough sometimes. |
|
| reply to DrDrew
They really don't need unlimited funds. Have not had an SD box for about four years, but i think they were able to show the hd feeds letter boxed, and if that is an issue I am sure it wont be hard to have the box pan scan to fit fully on an SDTV. And if not, there are a lot less SD boxes out there than the 6XXX boxes that cant do mpeg4, so just switch them out with hd boxes. Either way, they get rid of all the sd channels that have HD feeds, and you could save a lot of space. Plus you can move all the channels to their normal places, so you don't have the issue of people watching channel 10 instead of 510 when they have an hd tv. My mother and sisters always do that lol, having just one version of the channel will fix that issue.
I also remember reading on cnet that it would be smart for cable companies to actually switch to 1080p/24 as its less bandwidth than 1080i/60. for tvs that can't handle it the box can just convert it like it does now since it does not have pass through, it converst any 720p to 1080i or vice versa. |
|
| reply to jonhern
I do concur that FiOS could get rid of all SD channels that have a HD equivalent channel. A lot of space could be freed up by doing so. A lot of SD chsnnels are downsampled HD no adays anyway. I know Fox does it, as well as the Discovery Networks, for example.
There are no more SD boxes our there , respectively , so let's dump those that do have HD equivalent channels, and get this ball rolling.
Hell, in 2 years , the HEVC STBs will be in mass production to support UHD feeds, so FiOS needs to put the gas pedal to the floor NOW! The first UHD channels are supposed to be active at the latest, Q1 of 2016. According to sources in that field. I have several articles about it. |
|
kes601
join:2007-04-14
Virginia Beach, VA
kudos:2 | reply to Jonhern3169
said by Jonhern3169 :They really don't need unlimited funds. Have not had an SD box for about four years, but i think they were able to show the hd feeds letter boxed.... No, the SD boxes will not show HD channels. HD boxes will show the HD channels letterboxed on SD television sets though. |
|
bsangs
join:2002-08-21
Montclair, NJ Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to jasontaylor
said by jasontaylor:said by JackBauer:VZ was very brave ... The current packages are a good mix of price and performance.
Really? Fios don't even say how many hd channels they offer anymore. Comcast has 110. I counted. For my package, FiOS has 127. I counted. Do I watch them all? No. |
|
| reply to jonhern
said by jonhern:I also remember reading on cnet that it would be smart for cable companies to actually switch to 1080p/24 as its less bandwidth than 1080i/60. for tvs that can't handle it the box can just convert it like it does now since it does not have pass through, it converst any 720p to 1080i or vice versa.
How exactly would that be "smart" since most television content is 1080i60? |
|
| reply to jasontaylor
said by MURICA:said by jonhern:I also remember reading on cnet that it would be smart for cable companies to actually switch to 1080p/24 as its less bandwidth than 1080i/60. for tvs that can't handle it the box can just convert it like it does now since it does not have pass through, it converst any 720p to 1080i or vice versa.
How exactly would that be "smart" since most television content is 1080i60? Most content is actually filmed at 24p either on film or 24p video in the USA. Some are filmed on video and then filmized, converted to 24p in post production. If TV shows were actually filmed at 60hz everything would look like soap operas. 3:2 pulldown is used to show it on the TV as it is broadcast in 1080i. That's also why blu rays of shows are 1080p/24 instead of 1080i as that's what the show was shot in. |
|
|
|
PJL
join:2008-07-24
Long Beach, CA
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| said by jonhern:said by MURICA:said by jonhern:I also remember reading on cnet that it would be smart for cable companies to actually switch to 1080p/24 as its less bandwidth than 1080i/60. for tvs that can't handle it the box can just convert it like it does now since it does not have pass through, it converst any 720p to 1080i or vice versa.
How exactly would that be "smart" since most television content is 1080i60? Most content is actually filmed at 24p either on film or 24p video in the USA. Some are filmed on video and then filmized, converted to 24p in post production. If TV shows were actually filmed at 60hz everything would look like soap operas. 3:2 pulldown is used to show it on the TV as it is broadcast in 1080i. That's also why blu rays of shows are 1080p/24 instead of 1080i as that's what the show was shot in. And how does this point apply to live programming, which is the majority of what I watch? |
|
| reply to jonhern
said by jonhern:said by MURICA:said by jonhern:I also remember reading on cnet that it would be smart for cable companies to actually switch to 1080p/24 as its less bandwidth than 1080i/60. for tvs that can't handle it the box can just convert it like it does now since it does not have pass through, it converst any 720p to 1080i or vice versa.
How exactly would that be "smart" since most television content is 1080i60? Most content is actually filmed at 24p either on film or 24p video in the USA. No, that's not true. Not for television programming.
The bulk of television programming is at a higher framerate than 24 fps.
Only higher budget scripted programming is shot at 24 fps.
All sports programming, all live programming (concerts, news, sports, awards shows, etc), most documentaries, all "reality" shows are at least 30 fps.
Most cable television these days does not consist of high budget scripted programming. |
|
