Next Generation GEOSATpro Satellite receiver
- Thread starter T4Runner
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 107
- Views 25K
- Status
He's been pretty clear about no 4:2:2.
Plus, it is getting more rare.
There are a few receivers which do 4:2:2, but they're considerably more expensive.
I guess the market will decide.
At least we have a choice.
Re: Next Generation MicroHD Satellite receiver
Yea rare makes it still desireable among fta ers. 4:2:2 still among everyones wish list.
Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2
He's been pretty clear about no 4:2:2.
Plus, it is getting more rare.
There are a few receivers which do 4:2:2, but they're considerably more expensive.
I guess the market will decide.
At least we have a choice.
Yea rare makes it still desireable among fta ers. 4:2:2 still among everyones wish list.
Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2
There will be no live 4:2:2 support. 4:2:2 transmissions can be recorded and played back if desired.
4:2:2 has a niche demand that is well served by existing devices.
4:2:2 has a niche demand that is well served by existing devices.
When an estimated ratio of over 2000:1 receivers are sold to non hobbyists who will never even be on a satellite carrying a 4:2:2 channel, one must question the $20 additional hardware required to support 4:2:2.
Last edited:
Yes but there used to be dealers that sold Chevys and Oldsmobiles.When an estimated ratio of over 2000:1 receivers are sold to non hobbyists who will never even be on a satellite carrying a 4:2:2 channel, one must question the $20 additional hardware required to support 4:2:2.
I'm sure most of you around here can figure it out.
Did Oldsmobile's do 4:2:2?
Several years ago, we were going to distribute AZBox for North America, but during the negotiation process they lost key development and almost imploded. The products have struggled ever since.
Glad that someone finally stepped up to give the North American support. It is a problematic platform due to Sigma's lackluster DVB support, but despite that, AZBox Canada seems to have good development and support..
Several years ago, we were going to distribute AZBox for North America, but during the negotiation process they lost key development and almost imploded. The products have struggled ever since.
Glad that someone finally stepped up to give the North American support. It is a problematic platform due to Sigma's lackluster DVB support, but despite that, AZBox Canada seems to have good development and support..
Last edited:
Just out of curiosity, what is it that makes 4:2:2 difficult to render -- is it the faster and more expensive processing power that's required?
4:2:2 is no more difficult to render than 4:2:0, just different. STB chipsets developed for the set-box market do not have native 4:2:2. Other chipsets which are developed for commercial applications have native 4:2:2 support. The chipset used for the AZBox was designed as a media processor and happened to have a support for DVBS (satellite). Major market for the direct to home user shapes chip development. Follow the $$$$$
End of March or beginning of April for Glorystar then for hobbyist shortly thereafter. $125 - $135??? Landed cost will determine...
What market is that? FTA or DTV/DN, Tivo, etc....
As I understand it 4:2:2 is widely used in professional sports broadcasting, for example this past Superbowl, NBA feeds, MLB feeds, etc....
Looks good, like that it has component out. But, it doesn't look like there is an on/off rocker switch.
The WDTV Live media players use the Sigma chip, and possibly some other similar devices.
There doesn't seem to be that much of a market either way, that's why I ask. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places.
Personally I'd pay $20 more for 4:2:2 playback ability which should more than make up for the increased manufacturing cost. I'm sure others would as well. It may be a "niche" item but it's nice to have.
As far as 4:2:2 being niche, as I've heard it referred to, I would venture to say that FTA is almost certainly a niche market.
4:2:2 was used more often in standard definition, to increase the chroma resolution of the picture. With high definition becoming more common, there is not as much need to increase the chroma resolution to get a good quality color image.
As HD feeds become more common, 4:2:2 is becoming less common. It was never part of the DVB standard; It was an add-on feature that some pro encoders and receivers were fitted with to provide superior color quality.
As HD feeds become more common, 4:2:2 is becoming less common. It was never part of the DVB standard; It was an add-on feature that some pro encoders and receivers were fitted with to provide superior color quality.
- Status
Similar threads
