Reefer123 said:
This crap just spreads like wildfire. 1280x1080i is not an HD standard. There are dozens of compression schemes classified by ATSC for digital television transmission - that has NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT IS HD.
MPEG-4 will initially be MPEG-2!
- Thread starter Juan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 155
- Views 19K
This crap just spreads like wildfire. 1280x1080i is not an HD standard. There are dozens of compression schemes classified by ATSC for digital television transmission - that has NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT IS HD.
Yes folks its true, I reported this on Sunday in our pub members area, a few of the folks at the Dish folks told me that the new channels would be broadcast in MPEG2 at launch however the datastream would have a MPEG4 header so that only MPEG4 receivers would see them.
The reason for this is the MPEG4 is not working well enough yet (they are only getting 4 channels per transponder in mpeg4 while they are getting 3 in MPEG2) and they are having encoder issues so you see lots of boxes and picture jumping.
They were hoping to have new encoders in place in time for the channels launch on February 1st but they don't think this will happen in time, so this is the plan they are going with for now.
Again while the channels are in MPEG2 only MPEG4 receivers will see them.
The reason for this is the MPEG4 is not working well enough yet (they are only getting 4 channels per transponder in mpeg4 while they are getting 3 in MPEG2) and they are having encoder issues so you see lots of boxes and picture jumping.
They were hoping to have new encoders in place in time for the channels launch on February 1st but they don't think this will happen in time, so this is the plan they are going with for now.
Again while the channels are in MPEG2 only MPEG4 receivers will see them.
It was my understanding that Dish will be broadcasting mpeg4 by Feb 1 this year. Am I misquoting Scott or isn't that what he said somewhere.
Scott Greczkowski said:
I'm not too savvy on this stuff, but I don't understand why, if mpeg4 is an issue, they can't broadcast the channels in mpeg 2 for everyone to see, start rolling outhe new receivers to existing customers, then switch to mpeg4 once everything is good. It seems that what they are doing is trying to forc eus all to go out buy these mpeg 4 receivers before they're of any use to us.
It's probably easier and convienent to launch the mpeg4 receivers and new packages now then wait.
ESPN2hd and universal HD will also be on 129/61.5 since they're not adding HD to 110 currently. So they couldn't really add to the exisiting HD package when most folks still only have a dish 500.
ESPN2hd and universal HD will also be on 129/61.5 since they're not adding HD to 110 currently. So they couldn't really add to the exisiting HD package when most folks still only have a dish 500.
Sorry, I don't see any logic in thisScott Greczkowski said:
Wouldn't it make more since to let all us current loyal HD subscribers enjoy the new channels, then at a later date make the change to MPG4? They might even be able to get us to sign on to the new HD packages that will be available - or maybe even let us preview them until we get the new receivers. This would actually make most customers happy.
The main reason I have the HD package now is to pick up the CBS HD from LA. I get NBC and ABC OTA most of the time but can't get CBS at all. I really enjoy the CBS programs and will feel screwed if I can't get it without interruption from Dish. If a reasonable upgrade package is available I hope they can make it happen QUICK - I am ready
:
FIREBIRD81 said:
For not being too savvy, you pretty much summed up the situation perfectly. Whether you get the signal via MPEG2 or MPEG4 or from the Tooth Fairy really isn't at issue - if you can receive and decode that signal. The problem is that nobody currently has the equipment to receive MPEG4 signals. The fact that they are actually in MPEG2 means that they could be supplied to everyone with their existing equipment - but they have chosen to force an upgrade of all hardware in order to receive them.
Which in my opinion, is not cool. Let's see what happens in about an hour. Hopefully they will shed some light on all this!
I think their reasoning is so that when they DO make them MPEG-4, they don't get a million calls from the MPEG-2 holdouts asking what happened.
I don't mind being forced to go to a MPEG4 receiver. But they could do that by stopping all shipments of 811s and substituting 211s. And they could state that a number of HD channels would be converted to MPEG4 by July 1, announce their receiver upgrade programs, and then manage the transition. Part of the plan would be that the $200 DVR rebate would only be good during the 4/1 to 6/30 period, so if you wanted it, you would need to upgrade during that period.
They say they will be adding more HD channels during the year. Announce that in order to add those channels, and to be ready for the future, that they have to begin the MPEG4 transition this summer.
In this way, Dish does not create a situation wherein their subs cannot view HD programming, solely due to Dish-imposed artificial reasons.
Their plan has it so that I, a sub to both their HD Pak and VOOM, and who has their top-of-the-line 942 DVR, will be unable to view 7 HD channels, for up to 3 months. And that they have taken steps to make sure that I can't get them, even though the channels are not really in MPEG4. As a person who is in sales, there is no way I would purposefully prevent my best customers from partaking of my top level services. Why on earth would I take a risk of irritating them?
They say they will be adding more HD channels during the year. Announce that in order to add those channels, and to be ready for the future, that they have to begin the MPEG4 transition this summer.
In this way, Dish does not create a situation wherein their subs cannot view HD programming, solely due to Dish-imposed artificial reasons.
Their plan has it so that I, a sub to both their HD Pak and VOOM, and who has their top-of-the-line 942 DVR, will be unable to view 7 HD channels, for up to 3 months. And that they have taken steps to make sure that I can't get them, even though the channels are not really in MPEG4. As a person who is in sales, there is no way I would purposefully prevent my best customers from partaking of my top level services. Why on earth would I take a risk of irritating them?
Last edited:
I see a glimmer of hope regarding the 1280x1080i "HDLite" issue: Dish had to go with 1280x1080i in order to fit four MPEG2 data streams on one xponder. Once they get better MPEG4 encoders they could rez-up the channels to 1440x1080i or 1920x1080i. I can imagine that someone who dropped $5K on an new Sony SXRD HDTV might be a bit miffed that they aren't getting their money's worth.Scott Greczkowski said:
Last edited:
they didn't go to 4 hd per tp with mpeg2 using 1280, it's still 3 hd per tp. The same 3 hd per tp that they have 3 1920 channels on 110 that are working just fine. For whatever reason once voom came around they got this crazy notion that they couldn't get 3 HD channels on a tp without it being 1280, which is false.
much like their HD lite, it seems mpeg4 is mpeg4 lite as it is really in mpeg2.. many of those channels are up there now mpeg2 im willing to bet. But they are using this to push mpeg4 on us.. Which when it all works i think is a great thing. I guess honesty and large business just dont go hand in hand! To get mpeg4 out there, they need to trick you somehow I guess! The same will happen with DSS over the next few years too. Charlie is just being more aggressive about it. He may lose a few in the process but regain more later on when he has a full mpeg4 solution around the board with more channel, better quality etc etc.
-Bounty
To get mpeg4 out there, they need to trick you somehow I guess! The same will happen with DSS over the next few years too. Charlie is just being more aggressive about it. He may lose a few in the process but regain more later on when he has a full mpeg4 solution around the board with more channel, better quality etc etc.-Bounty
They have to get the encoder issues worked out. D* is months ahead with rolling out mpeg-4 and they are still having encoder issues. Give it time. No reason to continue supplying mpeg-2 receivers when mpeg-4 is the future.
Or since our representatives have told Dish that we'd much rather have quantity than quality, they could fill up all that extra capacity with such thrilling content as the new PolkaHD channel, or one of the many soon-to-be-announced HD shopping channels (so you can clearly see the high quality of their merchandise). Don't forget about HD Bingo, and the HD clock channel. Or, on a more serious note, the hundreds of local HD channels that will need to be squeezed in over the next few years.Foxbat said:
If 1280x1080i is accepted by customers, you'll never see Dish increase the quality on there own. Just look at what has happened to SD quality over the years. Has anyone compared any SD content to DVD-quality lately?
Scott
Ah, I see I misread Scott's post. Ratz... Granted, more content has always beat quality content. That's why I was upset when the ATSC went with digital instead of analog HD transmission. Sure, it would have taken 12-18 MHz per TV channel, but imagine the picture quality! Zenith had better lobbiests, though.
I also blame the JPEG group that came up with breaking pictures up into rectangular areas to process, making the compression effects easily visible to the human eye. If they had gone with Wavelet compression, we'd still be having this arguement, but the image would be getting softer instead of blocky when it was overcompressed, which is much more acceptable to the eye. JPEG2000 uses wavelets, but I don't know if any MPEG decoder includes JPEG2000 decoding.
So much for Dish's new receivers being "future proof"... There's a phrase that should be outlawed. (Like "back in the day," instead of "why, when I was your age, I...")
I also blame the JPEG group that came up with breaking pictures up into rectangular areas to process, making the compression effects easily visible to the human eye. If they had gone with Wavelet compression, we'd still be having this arguement, but the image would be getting softer instead of blocky when it was overcompressed, which is much more acceptable to the eye. JPEG2000 uses wavelets, but I don't know if any MPEG decoder includes JPEG2000 decoding.
So much for Dish's new receivers being "future proof"... There's a phrase that should be outlawed. (Like "back in the day," instead of "why, when I was your age, I...")
