dslreports logo
 story category
Comcast HD Image Quality Vs. FiOS
Compression highlighted in user comparison
An interesting thread over in the AVSForums discusses how Comcast is sacrificing HD image quality as it faces competitive pressure on the HD front from both DirecTV and Verizon. Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH/coax network (with GPON upgrades and all-IP on the way), and DirecTV decided to dump broadband and focus their satellite capacity on MPEG-4 HD back in 2004. Comcast on the other hand, waiting for DOCSIS 3.0, has started cramming three HD channels into each 38.8Mbps QAM, reducing image quality:
quote:
Click for full size
For the most part, fine detail remains very good on static (non-moving) images with Comcast's added compression, but you do see reduced contrast, with more dithering artifacts (banding) between colors and objects. It looks a bit like Comcast is taking a 24-bit image and reducing it to 18-20 bit. This tends to reduce the 'pop' effect in some images. The difference in 'pop' was quite noticeable on Food HD, despite the relatively small bitrate reduction. The greatest differences are seen with movement. With slow movement on Comcast, the first thing you notice is added noise and a softer image, as fine detail is filtered from the picture signal. The greater the rate of movement, the more detail you lose and the more noise you see.
So much for that survey last year that claimed Comcast HD image superiority. Comcast plans to have 20% of their network wired for DOCSIS 3.0 by year's end, with broader deployment coming next year -- so this could all be a moot point in short order. Technologies like switched digital video will also free up capacity for additional broadband and HD bandwidth. Still, reduced image quality and a low HD channel count is truly annoying HD fans.
view:
topics flat nest 
page: 1 · 2 · next

inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK

inteller

Member

Cox probably does this.

On my calibrated TV the quality for FoodHD just isn't that impressive.
BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Wakefield, MA

BosstonesOwn

Member

Re: Cox probably does this.

said by inteller:

On my calibrated TV the quality for FoodHD just isn't that impressive.
I Had my brother tune mine thinking it was something going bad with my tv ! This explains why. My brother tuned it well. It looks good but not as good as it did before and I thought my tv was getting old and the backlight fading or something.

Great that this came out I was looking at tv's online.

NeedstospendCash
@comcast.net

NeedstospendCash to inteller

Anon

to inteller
Comcasts problem is they need to stop running on the cheep and upgrade the bandwidth to the CMTS's. They want to run DOCSIS 3.0 and offer more channels but most CMTS's can't handle it. Nobody is going to see ANY upgrades to their home until the infrastructure is upgraded!

Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
MVM
join:2003-02-18
San Jose, CA

Nerdtalker to inteller

MVM

to inteller
FoodTV used to be my favorite channel not just because I liked the content (who can refuse seeing food, seriously, it's the healthy alternative to eating), but because of the content quality. Honestly, the stuff used to pop on my 60" Samsung plasma.

I have indeed noticed a rather significant reduction in quality on all the HD channels. They seem to be increasing compression even more so on less-than-prime channels. Interestingly enough, they added SciFi channel in my area and promptly crippled it with compression so much that action in Stargate Atlantis was laughable with the artifacts. My jaw literally dropped when I saw the tiling. Unacceptable Comcast, unacceptable.

Bad choice of channels to compress, BTW, especially considering the viewership.
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

1 recommendation

Sammer

Member

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
Premium Member
join:2000-05-31
Reno, NV

1 recommendation

djrobx

Premium Member

Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?

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

en102

Member

Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?

They need to use switched digital video to save up on capacity or go complete fiber (not likely to happen)

snipper_cr
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Wheaton, IL

snipper_cr

Premium Member

Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?

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
Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA

Mike to en102

Mod

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?

jjsk8r85
join:2005-02-17
Belleville, MI

jjsk8r85

Member

Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?

it is fiber, from the cmts, up the pole, down the road to the node.

jester121
Premium Member
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL

jester121 to Sammer

Premium Member

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 Member
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA

Dogfather

Premium Member

Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?

Yes, God forbid anyone point out anything Comcast does without kissing Brian Roberts' ass.

Nightshade
Premium Member
join:2002-05-26
Salem, OR

1 edit

Nightshade to jester121

Premium Member

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.
Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
Aptos, CA

Ulmo to Sammer

Member

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?

tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium Member
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO

tiger72

Premium Member

Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?

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.

ReVeLaTeD
Premium Member
join:2001-11-10
San Diego, CA

ReVeLaTeD

Premium Member

Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this?

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.

asdfghjklzx5
Premium Member
join:2004-05-03

asdfghjklzx5 to tiger72

Premium Member

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.

djrobx
Premium Member
join:2000-05-31
Reno, NV

djrobx

Premium Member

What I don't quite get...

quote:
Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH network,
Isn't Verizon using off-the shelf MPEG-2 Motorola cable DVRs? The same ones the cable companies are using? Even CableCARD TiVos work on FiOS. While that "compatibility" is great, it also means Verizon must funnel their TV service to fit in the exact same spectrum range that cable uses. The only thing different is they don't need to allocate any space for internet usage, which is a very small chunk of that spectrum anyway.

I realize that FiOS has the potential to do and be much more, but given its current implementation, from a technical standpoint can someone explain why what Verizon is delivering is any better than Cable, given that they are pretty much sharing the same limitations with regards to their TV delivery?
rahvin112
join:2002-05-24
Sandy, UT

rahvin112

Member

Re: What I don't quite get...

Streamed into the house they have the same capacity, but at the fiber terminal on the house they theoretically have unlimited capacity, in essence the ability to have 100 cable systems that can turn on or off based on channel number. In theory they could run their in home system with 10 or more full cables systems on each fiber, then dynamically switch between different full cable systems carried on the single fiber based on channel.

Although FIOS uses cable standards they aren't limited to what comes off the head end because the head end is on each customers home. They can deliver on the RG6 anything they want as they should with hacks even be able to dynamically change what's coming down the RG-6. The other cable companies are limited to what's comes off the node where they switch from fiber to copper, everyone connected to the node gets the same thing. FIOS doesn't have that limit and could in theory deliver a completely different cable system to every customer.
jmallory
join:2005-11-02
Essexville, MI

jmallory to djrobx

Member

to djrobx
said by djrobx:

quote:
Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH network,
Isn't Verizon using off-the shelf MPEG-2 Motorola cable DVRs? The same ones the cable companies are using? Even CableCARD TiVos work on FiOS. While that "compatibility" is great, it also means Verizon must funnel their TV service to fit in the exact same spectrum range that cable uses. The only thing different is they don't need to allocate any space for internet usage, which is a very small chunk of that spectrum anyway.

I realize that FiOS has the potential to do and be much more, but given its current implementation, from a technical standpoint can someone explain why what Verizon is delivering is any better than Cable, given that they are pretty much sharing the same limitations with regards to their TV delivery?
You are correct, Verizon FIOS TV is using standard Cable Television technology. It is the same as a standard 860 Mhz cable plant with one exception, data and voice are not carried within that 860 Mhz system. This does free up a few channels (depending on Node size) that provides some additional capacity. Cable 1Ghz systems can also do this...standard TV on 54-860 Mhz and data / voice about 860 Mhz....but there are very few 1 Ghz systems (statistically speaking) out there. Most are 860 Mhz and below.
afiggatt
join:2007-07-12
Sterling, VA

afiggatt to djrobx

Member

to djrobx
said by djrobx:

quote:
Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH network,
I realize that FiOS has the potential to do and be much more, but given its current implementation, from a technical standpoint can someone explain why what Verizon is delivering is any better than Cable, given that they are pretty much sharing the same limitations with regards to their TV delivery?
Verizon is using IPTV for VOD, so that saves QAM channels that the cable companies use for VOD. Verizon is also in the process of shutting down it's limited set of 40 analog channels and replacing with digital QAM 256 channels. (Oregon and Western PA markets which started up in later 2007 are all digital). All of the analog channels were digitally simulcast from the start, so only people hooking up analog NTSC tuners ever used them. Yes, Verizon uses QAM-256 and Mpeg-2 for the live digital TV channels which is convenient for clear QAM tuners and HD Tivos. By the end of 2008, Verizon is supposed to have installed equipment to provide 135 QAM channels throughout the system. The Motorola STB and DVRs that have been issued from the start support 135 QAM channels (860 MHz system) and IP interface for VOD & Guide data.

With no legacy analog channels to hog bandwidth, 135 QAM channels is enough for > 150 full bandwidth HD channels and hundreds of SD channels. Verizon will be ramping up the IPTV part, so the future is probably a mix of QAM for the locals & most widely watched channels and IPTV for VOD & niche channels.

RadioDoc

join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL

RadioDoc to djrobx

to djrobx
Verizon is evidently not raping the video before stuffing it into the pipe. These artifacts are introduced at the headend, and Comcast just plain doesn't give a crap how it looks. Verizon, evidently, takes some pride in video quality.

N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium Member
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs

N3OGH

Premium Member

Re: What I don't quite get...

said by RadioDoc:

Verizon is evidently not raping the video before stuffing it into the pipe. These artifacts are introduced at the headend, and Comcast just plain doesn't give a crap how it looks. Verizon, evidently, takes some pride in video quality.
Pretty much sums it up IMHO.

I routinely have issues with the HD on my Comcast service. Of particular issue is Phillies games on Comcast SportsNet.

Issues include dropped frames, serious artifacts and pixelisation.

Any time I'm watching Comcast, whether it's SD or HD, and something explodes or catches fire, the distortion is unacceptable.

Especially since I enjoy watching things catch fire and explode in movies
lew_jean
join:2005-05-13
Marietta, GA

lew_jean

Member

Re: What I don't quite get...

Thats why I drop Comcast and went with U-Verse, I got tired of the poor SD picture, The picture I have now Comcast can only dream of giving. I may only have 4 video streams and 1 HD, but the picture quality is well worth it
so is the cost $114.00 for 4 TVs 1 DVR, plus 6/1M Internet sure beats the $96.00 for Comcast digital Plus

Just my 2 cents

N3OGH
Yo Soy Col. "Bat" Guano
Premium Member
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs

N3OGH

Premium Member

Re: What I don't quite get...

I'm paying comcast $86/mo for expanded digital, one HD box and DVR.

I presently get my internet from Verizon DSL.....
jmallory
join:2005-11-02
Essexville, MI

jmallory to RadioDoc

Member

to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc:

Verizon is evidently not raping the video before stuffing it into the pipe. These artifacts are introduced at the headend, and Comcast just plain doesn't give a crap how it looks. Verizon, evidently, takes some pride in video quality.
VZ also has the luxury of a new system and is not expected/required to provide 50 to 60 channels of analog service to subscribers. I am sure if you asked anyone at Comcast they would love to wake up to their installed base being on all-digital 1Ghz systems and not having to compromise on video quality to stay competitive until they can either a.) Get all the systems upgraded or b.) not having to provide analog service but neither one of those are going to happen overnight.

RadioDoc

join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL

RadioDoc

Re: What I don't quite get...

I'm not giving Comcast any slack with this. They've shifted the analogs into the noisiest channel positions and if they can't figure out how to get clean HD to their customers then they should quit advertising it. The bottom line is doing it right and delivering what they advertise is incompatible with their bottom line.
BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Wakefield, MA

BosstonesOwn to jmallory

Member

to jmallory
Bullshit.

VZ is trying to get digital to analog adapters made so that the digital channels will work on older tvs.

Comcast should take the same approach, either that or give free boxes to free up the spectrum.

I have a digital tuner in all my tvs , so I have no worries , but some folks just don't like to see that they rape us for cable boxes. And Verizon is not immune to that at this point.

kpfx
join:2005-10-28
San Antonio, TX

kpfx

Member

Re: What I don't quite get...

Digital/Analog converter? Comcast is already working on that.

The article below (found here on BBR) shows the RFP they've put out for a low-cost digital converter so they could go to a 100% digital plant without leaving out the millions of people still using their analog television tuners.

»Comcast's $35 Digital Conversion Dongle [71] comments

Over the next year or two the analog channels will get scaled back and things move to a digital format (unencrypted QAM).... that will ultimately save them the most bandwidth.
BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Wakefield, MA

BosstonesOwn

Member

Re: What I don't quite get...

Must have missed that , bad geek I am I missed it.

These should be given out by comcast with a sub to basic cable.
Ztp1112
join:2005-03-18
Springfield, VA

Ztp1112 to jmallory

Member

to jmallory
what are you talking about THE ANALOG CHANNELS ARE ALL MANDATED BUY THE FRANCHISE verizon has analog channels not as many as the cable company because they chose not to get back to me in 2009 we we all are all digital

a analog channel takes up 6x as much space as a digital one
BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Wakefield, MA

BosstonesOwn to djrobx

Member

to djrobx
From a technical point of view, it's this easy.

The ONT's on the side of the home are cheap now and scale to 1.2 ghz or at least that is the spec. before failure. Current cable co's are 860 , lucky if some are 1 gig.

Cable has data voice tv over that 860 mhz. Fios has just TV over 860 and capable of 1.2 ghz. The rest have their own dedicated spectrum on the fiber not on the cable.

VOD on Fios rides the ip side and uses it's own frequency on the network , not interfering with your cable. Fios is good also because it doesn't require you to change anything heavy to upgrade. If they choose to go mpeg4 it's as easy as changing the main feed compressor at Fios down link centers. And change the boxes on the user premises if a upgraded firmware couldn't be hacked to add mpeg4.

•••

Guspaz
Guspaz
MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC

Guspaz

MVM

Well, what kind of compression are they using?q

38.8Mbps is more than enough for three 720p feeds using 12mbit CBR h.264. On the other hand, if they're trying to cram 720p MPEG-2 in there, or worse yet, 1080p MPEG-2... Yeah, that's a problem.

•••••••••
hescominsoon
join:2003-02-18
Brunswick, MD

hescominsoon

Member

This is the primary reason I have yet to go HD

I have yet to see an HD feed that isn't compressed. Why would i want to view compressed, reduced image quality, mislabeled as HD stuff? I don't care what the resolution says..if it's compressed it's not truly HD since you loose detail in the compression.

•••••

cypherstream
MVM
join:2004-12-02
Reading, PA

cypherstream

MVM

Digg it

Dugg

»digg.com/tech_news/Dear_ ··· in_April
neufuse
join:2006-12-06
James Creek, PA

neufuse

Member

better codec's...

we need better codec's... heck Microsoft's WMV codec preserves great picture quality in HD and uses less space then MPEG-2... and MPEG-4 would be the best if you wanted a largely used standard... why in the world are we still using MPEG2? There are much better codec's out there for vidoe compression... DirectTV has the right idea, cable should follow for digital channels.

•••••
pathfinda
Premium Member
join:2002-09-11
Chicago, IL

pathfinda

Premium Member

Comcast HD Image Quality

.. And i thought it was me.

Image Quality has been terrible for about a week. On Demand was unwatchable for a moment yesterday.

DirecTV is looking better and better.
ebubman
join:2002-01-17
Mechanicsburg, PA

ebubman

Member

Re: Comcast HD Image Quality

agree strongly. we've had comcast hd for several years. currently for 2 hd/dvr boxes we're pay $102 (not including internet). it appears that direct tv can give me more channels, far more hd channels w/ 2 regular boxes (tube tvs) and 2 hd/dvr boxes for $76/month for 12 mos. i'll keep the comcast isp thing (with basic cable they say it's cheaper) but i think it's time to put a direct tv dish on our house. bub

Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium Member
join:2002-12-05
00000

Somnambul33t

Premium Member

duh?

dunno where that "survey"'s results came from but Comcast's had the worst HD picture quality for 2+ years. DTV's always had superior picture, and now FIOS is basically just as good.

that being said i have Comcast...
bnceo
join:2007-10-11
Bel Air, MD

bnceo

Member

Re: duh?

My condolences on having comcast. =(

Seriously, they need to get their act together. Not to mention I hate the way they have their channel lineup all over the place. Fios is so much easier.

rothan
Premium Member
join:2000-11-07
Rowley, MA

rothan

Premium Member

Forget HD...

Comcast has enough trouble sometimes delivering normal TV, lagged images for moving objects, etc. It's not like its there more than a second, but it never happened with Cablevision in this area before Comcast came to town.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

Re: Forget HD...

Cablevision in MA? Huh? Comcast bought Cablevision? Your profile says "Danvers, MA" BTW.
ebubman
join:2002-01-17
Mechanicsburg, PA

ebubman to rothan

Member

to rothan
you know, i was beginning to think this delay sh-t was the fault of our hdtvs. it would appear that more of the blame would lie with comcast than our hardware. bub

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT

ptrowski

Premium Member

One week challenge...

Could Comcast just for one week stay out of the spotlight about negative press? Are they trying to actively drive down their retention and subscription numbers?

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

••••••

gar187er
I DID this for a living
join:2006-06-24
Seattle, WA

gar187er

Member

suck for some

this is mainly in sub-750mhz areas....no need to do this company wide when the 750/860 plants have enough room....

im lucky to be in one of those 860's...so no compressed HD for me...
Chad473
join:2007-12-18
Lancaster, PA

Chad473

Member

Re: suck for some

sorry to inform you, comcast is sending out certain channels in 3:1 packages nationally from the CMC. Compressed HD for you.
jmallory
join:2005-11-02
Essexville, MI

jmallory

Member

And really the big problem is....

Is just how badly the analog to digital TV transition has been handled here in the US. This has been screwed up from the word go.

1.) The February 2009 cutover date should have been for all television, not just over the air. We could have spent the last ten years moving from a 100% analog system to at this date a 90% digital system with just Over The Air analog being the remaining analog on any cable system and that gets turned off in February.

2.) I still can't believe that it is less than a year before analog OTA is turned off and you can still purchase TVs with only analog tuners.

3.) FCC allowing VZ and AT&T to offer digital only systems while requiring that Cable support analog indefinitely.

4.) FCC allowing DirecTV and Dish to pick and chose what local channels they are going to cover in SD and HD while requiring cable to provide the HD digital version, the SD digital version, and a analog version.

•••••••••••••••••••

Jim Kirk
Premium Member
join:2005-12-09
49985

1 edit

Jim Kirk

Premium Member

Cable suxorz

I'm so glad I have DirecTV. Damn good looking HD (the MPEG4 channels anyway) and more HD channels than any cable system I know of.

If you can do it, dump cable.

kenn10
join:2003-09-10
Highlands, NC

kenn10

Member

Just Go DirectTV or DishNetwork

I'm also grateful that I have Dish Network instead of Comcast. I use Comcast as my internet provider but they have never been able to offer decent HDTV in my market. I have a 56" screen and Comcast so-called HD signals were pathetic on the big screen. Fuzzy pictures, jagged lines and dithering.

No, the satellite boys have the cable guys beat on video quality at this point. I suspect FIOS is equal or better but until something dramatic changes with Comcast (including lower prices), I'm loving my Dish Network.

odog
Minister of internet doohickies
Premium Member
join:2001-08-05
Atlanta, GA
Nokia BGW320-505

odog

Premium Member

verizon has a cable network...

quote:
Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH network
Verizon is just using a single wavelength to deliver a standard 54-860MHz cable signal. They have the same limitation in channel capacity as Comcast assuming Comcast has a 860MHz plant. The only real difference is the single channel Comcast now has allocated to DOCSIS and the variable size of their VOD service groups. Other than that... Verizon is a standard HFC cable system piggybacking on the PON.

••••••••••

cableties
Premium Member
join:2005-01-27

cableties

Premium Member

Compression, media limitations and greed, oh my!

Was Comcast's infrastructure ever meant for HDTV bandwidth?

They are doing what it takes to maximize (see DSL) what they can run over copper. And its showing (poorly).

amarryat
Verizon FiOS
join:2005-05-02
Marshfield, MA

amarryat

Member

2/3 of the bits

For those of you on Comcast who are now receiving 2/3 of the number of bits as before, maybe you should pay 2/3 of your bill.

KYL
join:2007-03-07
00000

KYL

Member

More HD

11 More HD Channels coming May 1st in the Oregon Market.

HD Channels Included:
Disney
ABC Family
TBS
Discovery
TLC
Food
Animal Planet
SciFi
CNN
AMC
Science Channel

ShopNBC is moving from Limited Basic to Digital Basic.

I know the compression ratio is now going to a 3:1 ratio per 6mhz channel from the previous 2:1.

Wonder how this will impact the quality after the article.

••••

anon101
@verizon.net

anon101

Anon

picture quality

Fios also allows each channel 8mhz opposed to cable 6mhz allotment for spacing, which is one of reason for a better picture on fios.

anonomous
@comcast.net

anonomous

Anon

My

HDTV service from Comcast is pretty good. When they first added the new HD channels, there were many problems like tiling, pixelation, skipping, etc. Around mid February, the problem almost Completely stopped. About a week later, we swapped out our old DCT3412 for the newer DCH3416, and it completely fixed all problems. Since then, picture quality for HD has been magnificent. Perhaps they could have reduced the compression for the channels here in my area, which fixed the problem. Overall, the picture is very good and the quality is as good as an HD movie or TV show downloaded from Xbox live marketplace. I have not been able to compare HD quality from other sources as we don't own an HD DVD or Bluray player, no one we know has DirecTV or Dishnetwork HD, and U-verse or FIOS are NOWHERE by us. So IMO, our Comcast HD service is excelent !

••••••
page: 1 · 2 · next