[opendtv] Re: Pros/Cons of DSP processor based MPEG software decoder or hardware based MPEG decoder
- From: "Donald Koeleman" <donald.koeleman@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 19:34:53 +0100
Ralph, the standardisation to product argument you mention part is in my
response, albeit not explicitly. Used phrases such as 'anything newer' and
'Codecs are still under development, so generations of capability sets
replace eachother quite rapidly, so no time to design and build a hardware
implementation'.
Let's not confuse the original poster with IP licensing arguments for a
particular technology, be it MPEG 4 AVC or VC1 or WM10. As the arguments for
going with a software codec are the same for all compression platforms
mentioned. So, if you choose anything over mpeg2 or perhaps mpeg4 main
profile, so'll be opting for a software codec for some time to come.
For many operators there is no other choice than going with newer
compression technology, for instance hd-tv over satellite (considering SES
Astra still demands around 5 million euro per annum for a transponder on
their prime orbital position satellite around 19.2 degrees east, or the
local into local requirements placed upon directv and dish). Or ADSL or
DVB-T ops. Basically any-body interested in doing HD.
Ralph, may I ask which standardisation commitee or Industry forum you are
refering to?
What alternatives are you considering (may I suggest object-based
compression;-)).
Donald
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ralph P. Manfredo" <rmanfredo@xxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 6:22 PM
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Pros/Cons of DSP processor based MPEG software
decoder or hardware based MPEG decoder
Donald:
Donald:
That is a good and quick response to the question. However, I believe you
left out a couple of very important reasons as to the why the H.264 has not
been implemented in chip form yet. One has to do with the time it takes to
go from standard release to a released chip. That is why the software
versions are out now I believe. Second and I believe is more important is
the cost to deliver and view a program that is MPEG-4 H.264 compliant due to
the total licensing costs. These costs are a significant factor I believe
and MPEG-LA and their outrageous licensing scheme may kill MPEG-4. I don't
believe consumers in general will accept the higher costs to watch a MPEG-4
program vs. an MPEG-2 program. This of course is my opinion, but I am part
of a next generation entertainment system standards committee, and we are
seriously considering scrapping MPEG-4 due to the high licensing costs to
view a program. These costs presently outweigh the advantage saved by
storage requirements as disc drive costs are coming down and capacity is
going up and this is a one time cost.
Ralph
Ralph P. Manfredo
President & CEO
rmanfredo@xxxxxxxx
************************************************************************
BroadBand Networks Corporation
2530 Berryessa Road, No. 237
San Jose, CA 95050
Phone: 408.988.2060
Fax: 408.988.2188
www.bbnc.com
Leaders in MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 video over ATM and IP Networks
************************************************************************
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
