[opendtv] Re: People DO watch LPTV
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 08:33:51 -0400
At 2:39 PM -0400 4/1/08, Manfredi, Albert E wrote:
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
and thanks to their patience, they are able to leapfrog most
of the early deploying countries with H.264.
I would have imposed H.264 too, in their place. But as we have seen,
it's not nearly as big an advantage as the hype has implied. In
practice, it probably means slightly less macroblocking, but no more
multicasts, going from the estimates they have announced for their
multiplexes.
Drop this Bert. You are wrong.
MPEG-2 has been fully exploited. There is no room for further improvement.
H.264 is only now starting to be widely deployed, and the benefits
are obvious. And the efficiency will improve as the tools are fully
exploited.
BUT...
This is not the point. It is unfortunate, but every compression
technology has been exploited in a rush to the bottom in terms of
image quality. Each new generation product has delivered more quality
for the same bit rate; and with each new generation the content
distributors have turned down the bit rate, maintaining the same poor
quality so they could squeeze more channels in. There are only a few
exceptions":
1. Standard Definition DVDs typically offer the best MPEG-2 quality
you can find in ANY commercial content.
2. A variety of Internet download services are employing H.264 to
deliver HIGH QUALITY rather than high quantity video.
H.264 is already demonstrating superior performance across MANY
applications. The AVC intra codec that Panasonic is using for
professional acquisition applications is a very good case in point.
Not to get too carried away here. H.264 will be fully exploited by
2012-15 and there will be another new codec that will offer a 2:1
advantage in compression efficiency.
You don't see this as lack of vision on the part of cable (especially)
and DBS? And also, you don't see that spectrum is much more precious for
OTA TV than it is for cable?
I see this as a market driven reality for cable and DBS. The vast
majority of consumers watch good old 4:3 SD and are in no rush to
upgrade to HD. In the end Bert it is not the picture quality, but the
content quality that drives this.
As for the precious nature of the broadcast spectrum, there is only
one important consideration here - to keep it precious:
1. Do not offer more program choice as this dilutes the OTA audience.
2. Do not use the spectrum to compete with the multi-channel services
(ala Freeview), as this would make it impossible to collect
re-transmission consent payments.
3. Vigourously oppose any use of the white spaces, as this proves
that the broadcasters are just protecting a valuable spectrum
resource in order to prop up a dying business.
Bottom line, We could have 40-50 channels of content in every U.S. TV
market. Obviously not all HD - see above.
Perhaps what you are viewing as complaints was really just
my opinion that we could have deployed a scalable system that
would support various levels of receiver complexity?
As I said, in New Zealand, they did the right thing and mandate HD
compatibility. They did not do the WRONG thing, mandating wasted OTA
spectrum for unnecessary simulcasts, as you once again suggest here.
I have NEVER advocated for simulcasts in ANY system. I have advocated
for scalable coding so that receivers can use the level of
information needed to provide high quality video at the native
display resolution. These ARE VERY DIFFERENT approaches.
And I have noted that it may not have been a bad thing to use a
phased approach to DTV as is happening in Europe - Start with good
SDTV, then migrate to HDTV when the technology has matured. Near as I
can tell, nobody in the U.K. has been harmed by this phased in
approach. If a consumer gets 5 years out of a Freeview box that cost
less than our NTIA convertors, and they do not pay a monthly
subscriber fee, I think they are getting a much better deal that we
are here in the U.S.
Furthermore, they fully accepted the initial much higher costs of their
STBs, to support H.264. Knowing full well that the price will soon come
down. Precisely the type of analysis that "someone" could not bring
himself to do wrt ATSC.
Can you quantify the MUCH higher cost for a STB that supports h.264.
Real numbers Bert...
And please remember you arguments about 8-VSB complexity and the cost
of ATSC STBs.
Regards
Craig
The guy who has a h.264 software decoder capable of SD and HD as a
standard feature of his dual core Intel processor laptop.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
