Question for the masses

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jimbo

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
66,430
5,554
NW Ohio - Buckeye Country
Q's. 1. Would you all rather have the HD LITE situation squared away so we have full bandwidth (or close to it) and crystal clear HD (the channels that are currently available) or to have all the SD channels cleared up so they all look presentable ?

I know some one will say BOTH, and evenually that will happen.

2. Which is more important ?

3. Do you watch MORE HD or SD overall ???

Jimbo
 

charper1

Bourbon Tester
Supporting Founder
May 18, 2004
18,442
6
I'm Nationwide
From what I have read, aren't the issues somewhat the same or at least inter-twined?

Thus my vote of both. I mean doesn't the lowered bitrate and resolution lowering, lead to the somewhat the same things overall even though two separate issues? I say right now having perfect SD would be the overwhelming quantity need, but the HD numbers are coming soon; maybe within 18 - 24 months.

I agree with another thread's comments that says it should be illegal to lower the HD resolution from what the programmer sends to you as the retransmission provider, especially when that results in an output lower than the ATSC standards.

As far as minimum bitrates, are there even any documented standard minimums set? I couldn't determine from this light reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC
 
Last edited:

JAG72

SatelliteGuys Master
Feb 16, 2006
8,524
58
Earth
Both.

I would think that D* would be able to make it happen sooner than later. If it is true what was said last year in some threads then D* would be able to convert some of their spot beams to cover 1/2 of the US. I would like to see them do this if possible to allow more HD to be broadcast to us. I know that this would only be available via MPEG4 but that is OK. At least it gives us some options. Once they get the other SAT's up next year they could move the channels over to their final resting place. They could broadcast all of the HD via MPEG4 for the ones with the equipment and then clear up the HD-Lite issue and allow for more channels. This would only but them behind a few more months with Locals but that is alright with me.
 

Jimbo

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
66,430
5,554
NW Ohio - Buckeye Country
charper1 said:
From what I have read, aren't the issues somewhat the same or at least inter-twined?

Thus my vote of both. I mean doesn't the lowered bitrate and resolution lowering, lead to the somewhat the same things overall even though two separate issues? I say right now having perfect SD would be the overwhelming quantity need, but the HD numbers are coming soon; maybe within 18 - 24 months.

I agree with another thread's comments that says it should be illegal to lower the HD resolution from what the programmer sends to you as the retransmission provider, especially when that results in an output lower than the ATSC standards.

As far as minimum bitrates, are there even any documented standard minimums set? I couldn't determine from this light reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATSC

=========================================================
See I think the SD will improve as well as the HD when it's all said and done....
But no one is willing to wait.
Except for those of us that appear to understand what they are trying to accomplish and what we see that SHOULD be possible.

Of course D* has not mentioned any of this.

Jimbo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Top