more on The Digital TV Fiasco

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Tim Onosko <onosko () gmail com>
Date: June 10, 2005 2:32:51 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] more on The Digital TV Fiasco
Reply-To: tim () onosko com


Brad Templeton is absolutely right on this, but he doesn't mention  
the very real reason why digital TV must move from MPEG2 to MPEG4  
(specifically the new H.264 or "AVC" codec):  Picture quality.

Anyone who has watched digital cable or satellite signals can tell  
you that the quality is TERRIBLE.  MPEG2 cannot do the job when  
bandwidth is reduced to two megabits per second, as it is on most  
digital cable and satellite systems.   H.264/MPEG4 goes a long way  
toward solving the bandwidth problem with higher-effiency  
compression.  A safe estimate is that it is approximately 4 times  
more efficient than MPEG2, meaning a 2-3 megabit video channel is  
near-DVD quality.

The reason this is important is not to please a few whining  
videophiles, either.  New high-definition sets with larger screens  
amplify the distortions and artifacts of digital compression, and we  
need higher quality images just to match viewers expectations.

This issue is just beginning to be addressed, and, ironically, it is  
Rupert Murdoch's DirecTV that has so far led the way on it.  The  
broadcasters have not yet considered this because they feel secure,  
having been granted so much bandwidth, and the cable ops know they  
will have to swallow hard and write down much of their MPEG2-based  
infrastructure (settop boxes, mainly) investment to keep viewers from  
migrating to satellite.

This is still an incredibly messy and fluid situation, and to try to  
freeze it with deadlines, when so much work is unfinished, is simply  
foolhardy.



On 6/10/05, David Farber <dave () farber net> wrote:

Begin forwarded message:

From: Brad Templeton <btm () templetons com>
Date: June 10, 2005 1:24:33 PM EDT
To: David Farber < dave () farber net>
Cc: lauren () vortex com
Subject: Re: [IP] The Digital TV Fiasco


On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 02:44:19PM -0400, David Farber wrote:

> A really remarkable aspect of the FCC's continuing push to obsolete
> existing consumer televisions is how oblivious most people are
> to the entire process, particularly those persons who still depend
> on broadcast signals for all of their television viewing.
>

I could not help but remark on the comment about analog TVs becoming
obsolete that the latest digital TVs, only now coming to the market,
are already obsolete in some ways, or planned to be.

Digital HDTV in the USA is done over mpeg-2, at 720p or 1080i
resolution.  Mpeg-2 is already old hat in the computer world, most
people feel that mp4 is close to twice as good, and DirecTV plans to
move to MP4, obsoleting their old boxes.

Today most HDTVs on the shelf are LCD or DLP devices capable of 720p
but not 1080 lines, though the latter are coming.  1080p support is rare
but from an electronics standpoint, there's not reason it could not be
common.

Most people feed their HDTVs with analog component video.  DVI
connectors
(digital component video) are already vanished from TVs, being replaced
by HDCP, which is effectively a DVI cable with support for copy
protection.
The forces that be are working hard to have cable and sat boxes only
output
HDCP, first getting rid of DVI and then even analog, obsoleting many
of the
HDTVs out there.

The lesson is that this technology moves way too fast to be regulated.
It was a common lament that HDTV was slow to appear because everybody
was waiting for some solid standards to be mandated.   I think it was
the opposite.


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as onosko () gmail com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- 
people/


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/