 moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD | Any you pay extra for what? HD is extra and they now want to degrade the signal.
Do you get a discount since the signal is not true HD now?  | |
|
Skeedatl
Ah, push it - push it real good
Premium
join:2007-12-26
The Cloud | Which is why "all digital" doesn't mean crap They just overcompress the crap out of it or use HD-Lite and the quality is worse that ever. | |
|
 | 
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX
| Re: Which is why "all digital" doesn't mean crap I remember when I was a kid and they came to convert the house from analog to digital. I took one look at the picture (I did a lot of web page stuff so I knew about compression artifacts) and said I'd rather have the analog back. The tech tried to tell me this was a superior picture so I showed him what happens to pictures when you digitize them.
Needless to say he was ruined after that lol. | |
|
| | 
Quentin
Xeno-Wolf
Premium
join:2001-09-12
AB, Canada
clubs:
| Re: Which is why "all digital" doesn't mean crap One good thing I like about Digital, is after going from a 10 foot Analog Satellite (the kind that used to skew side to side to switch satellites) to our Mini-Dish, there was no more static.
I'd rather have the occasional blocky pixelization artifacts than to have to hear that static hissing "SHHHHHHHHH" sound and have static all over the screen. 
--
~There is no Normal or Abnormal... Just Diversity.
Member of Team Helix - Join Us? | |
|
|
| 
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL | Re: MPEG4 will solve this "Coming"? Right now the only thing "coming" is the MSO accountants.
Until MPEG4 is implemented, the MSOs should shut their HD marketing yaps and quit selling a product they do not have.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| |
| |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T Midwest
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this said by DaveNJ  :I think Dish/Direc should capitalize on this. 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.
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.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | |
| | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this 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.
Unfortunately, the definition of HD is very slippery and the marketing weasels have taken full advantage of that to sell decidedly inferior product.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
 ·Mediacom
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this said by en102 :a) The source is HD (i.e. was generated at 1920x1080) Tell the content providers that. | |
|
| | | | | | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: MPEG4 will solve this They _could_ push HD lite (don't they all?) at 720p. I have yet to see any provider pushing 1080p
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this 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. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: MPEG4 will solve this Personally, with all the watered down HD (macro blocking, compression, etc.) I'll take a "good" SD picture for at least another year.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL | 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. | |
|
| | | | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this My wife calls it "fat-o-vision". Yes it is a very big deal, and is very much not high definition.
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.
There is no "smart" way to do it and call it HD. Sorry.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this said by RadioDoc :There is no "smart" way to do it and call it HD. Sorry. 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. | |
|
| | | | | | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this 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?
You might also want to look up how this is done.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this said by RadioDoc :I certainly didn't miss the point. You brought up something irrelevant. ... You might also want to look up how this is done. 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 some "HD" channels can't comfortably fit in a single QAM channel. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this Your example of SD up-converted to HD as being HD is what is irrelevant. Having trouble following along?
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.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this said by RadioDoc :Your example of SD up-converted to HD as being HD is what is irrelevant. Having trouble following along? I'm following along nicely, although I was questioning whether you were or not.said by RadioDoc :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. Thank you for finally confirming what I suggested. Placing more than two streams of some content in a single QAM channel is possible if done correctly. Now the second part of that is recognizing that it isn't a big deal if it is done correctly. You're almost there, just a little further now | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL | Re: MPEG4 will solve this 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.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this said by RadioDoc :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. 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. | |
|
| | | | | | | | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL | Re: MPEG4 will solve this Where were you yesterday when I was talking about this re: Comcast? Please keep up.
Since you've run out of material I'll just say enjoy your weekend.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL | Re: MPEG4 will solve this 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. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Alphy
join:2001-12-31
Troy, MI | 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?
Right or wrong, you're approach is really, really confrontational. | |
|
| | | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA
edit:
April 4th, @02:00PM
| said by TK Junk Mail :said by DaveNJ :Who do they think there fooling selling HD in SD resolution. 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. 3 channels in 256 QAM MPEG-2 is at best ED. "fat-o-vision" eats up more than its share of precious bits too. | |
|
| | Laidback
join:2001-09-30
Woodstock, ON
·PrimusDSL
| said by DaveNJ : I think Dish/Direc should capitalize on this. Currently not legally available in Canada  | |
|
| 
GlenQuagmire
Giggidy Giggidy Giggidy Goo
Premium
join:2004-02-16
Grand Rapids, MI | 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. | |
|
| | 
TK Junk Mail
Go ahead, make my day
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Margate City, NJ
clubs:
·Comcast
| Re: MPEG4 will solve this said by GlenQuagmire :That and they could start moving the analog channels to digital. That process is well along the way in most areas. | |
|
verolom
join:2002-03-23
Eatontown, NJ
·Comcast
edit:
April 4th, @11:36AM
| American Phenomenon Last time I checked Canada is in America, unless they somehow detached and floated north to become part of the Arctic. Not cold enough, eh? 
This is more of a monopolistic phenomenon combined with uneducated or uncaring consumers, none of which is restricted or unique to the US (or Canada). | |
|
|
See 8 replies to this post |
|
DirecTV
@rr.com | Directv If my cable company starts degrading the HD channels just so they can add more, I'll just move BACK to DirecTV.
And also, what is the difference between a compressed HD channel and a standard digital signal? I can't imagine it's much of one. | |
|
Ex_Bell_Tech
join:2008-03-16
Trois-Rivieres, QC
·Cogeco Cable
| having a solution to that Just buy a HD cam like the new sony, record the screen of your tv while watching your movie, then playback your record on your HDTV so it's sure you'll have a full HD image.
Hahaha lol it's very funny. My example is very clear. It's like they said they offer full HD channels but recorded on a simply VHS. | |
|
Leathal
Premium
join:2002-02-09
Toronto, ON
| Bell ExpressVU FTW! I use to have Rogers digital cable may years ago and I can tell you it wasn't fully digital as I could see it in the image qualty, so I sent and got Bell ExpressVU and I haven't gone back, after 4 years of ExpressVU I can say I am still really happy, even their HD is far better than Rogers' HD for some reason. (shrug)
Leathal | |
|
|
anonnotreally
@grouptelecom.net | Re: Bell ExpressVU FTW! Looks like I'm more likely now to move everything back to Bell, it seems like the lesser evil lol | |
|
|
Poake
@velcom.ca | ExpressVu shamelessly compresses most of their HD as well. Except for CBC and a couple others, they're sending 30-60% less data out and it shows. | |
|
simon726
join:2006-12-21
Ajax, ON
edit:
April 4th, @01:11PM
| my view I'm currently with Rogers (for my digital cable, landline telephone and for their internet) and I couldn't say how neutral I felt about HD quality - to make matters worse, I don't currently own an HDTV, but I plan to get one in the medium to long term.
Might as well consider switching to Bell Expressvu or Star Choice. As for Look - it's too iffy. | |
|
funchords
Robb
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Hillsboro, OR
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
·Comcast
| CANADA: Our Jealous Neighbors ... Okay, Canada -- this game of oneupmanship is pretty dumb.
Yes, Comcast got the big press for Network Neutrality violations. That didn't mean that Bell Canada should try to steal THAT headline?
And now, with Comcast on the frying pan for poor HD compression, Rogers Canada wants that headline, too!??!
SHEEEEEESH!! Please, Butt Oooot.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
FCC Public Hearing on the Future of the Internet - Thursday, April 17th - Stanford Univ., Calif. | |
|
| |
| | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA
| Re: CANADA: Our Jealous Neighbors ... said by sbrook :An There's one advantage for y'all down thar ... If we fight it out up here and succeed, it gives some nice precedents for you to take to the FCC We probably should change the ICC and FCC to Federal Commerce Commission and Incumbents Communications Commission | |
|
|
Ex_Bell_Tech
join:2008-03-16
Trois-Rivieres, QC
·Cogeco Cable
| STAR CHOICE Think about StarChoice, I think he's the best SAT TV Provider of the world.... With unbeatable prices and very good image quality.
Obiviously, Starchoice is only concerned with Tv and the service in #1,
What do you think about it ? My mother and his boyfriend have starchoice and I'll be always happy with. | |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| Many Consumers are Delusional It bewilders me how so many consumers can expect suppliers to conform to the consumers' wishes, while consumers continue to maniacally focus on price. The only way to get suppliers to do what you want them to is to reward them for doing so. Anything else is just puffed-up bravado. They don't owe you anything other than what they explicitly promise, and your personal enthusiast's definition of what is and isn't HD is self-centered and invalid. HD is defined, very clearly, as any broadcast with 720 lines of horizontal resolution. Live with it. If you want bit rate to be a consideration, then make up a new standard that actually SPECIFIES bit rate, and then convince some suppliers that they can make more profit promoting their compliance to your pet standard. If you are unsuccessful, then accept your failure. | |
|
| 
root9
join:2005-04-08
Kitchener, ON
·Bell Sympatico
edit:
April 6th, @05:40AM
| Re: Many Consumers are Delusional What are you talking about?
First and foremost HDTV is ment to go on a SEPARATE wire or Sat. Putting it on Cable or phone lines and or being shared with Internet, phone, regular cable or anything else just doesn't work properly due to high bandwidth needed for transmission of HD.
An HDTV program of 1 hour is 2.5 to 4 GB at DVD quality. Therefore you need 3 to 7 Mbps to get it to customer in time. Any interruption or slowdown of transfer will cause problems.
So, the problem is companies are pushing HDTV on existing wire which is a BIG No No! | |
|
| | bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| Re: Many Consumers are Delusional What are you talking about? I'll tell you: Your personal preference. Not the law. Not what you were promised. Not what you're entitled to.
What services a company provides using its facilities is up to them, not you. Your only power in this situation is to do without, if you do not like what is offered.
So, the problem, if there must be a "problem", is that some consumers are unwilling to accept reality and do without something they don't like. | |
|
| | |
root9
join:2005-04-08
Kitchener, ON
·Bell Sympatico
| Re: Many Consumers are Delusional HAHAHA ,, BULL! ... Canadian laws take precedent over any crap that any ISP might put out.
Read an learn: »www.p2pnet.net/story/15479
and this one: »www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/2811/125/ ... because Rogers and Verizon are next!
Like it or not this is Canada so please get with the program or move to another country.
As a matter of fact many are about to charge Rogers with just this kind of problem  | |
|
dr3yec
join:2002-12-19
00000
·CableOne
·Comcast
| Time to service! If I had a choice between rogers and nothing. I would take nothing. They are a shatty company. Internet is not that important. With all the restrictions isp's are trying to do these days. I am really considering or asking, is the internet really worth it? I say NO! | |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | Voom It would have been a way different situation if »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voom was still around. HD from the ground up. No capacity wasted on non HD channels. | |
|
|
|
|
Rogers To Degrade HD Signal Quality
MPEG4 will solve this
·
Time for Canadians to Strike!
