all hd channels are basically mirror images of their standard channels. When an HD channel comes, they should just remove the SD version of it and keep the HD version. People who dont have an HDTV can still watch it, they will just have to watch it 16x9. So what, most of the good shows are in 16x9 already on standard tv. This way they can have more channel space,but they seem to want to waste it.
Why Cable And Fios Is Stupid
- Thread starter tvwatchingdude
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 3
- Views 2K
-
WELCOME TO THE NEW SERVER!
If you are seeing this you are on our new server WELCOME HOME!
While the new server is online Scott is still working on the backend including the cachine. But the site is usable while the work is being completes!
Thank you for your patience and again WELCOME HOME!
CLICK THE X IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE BOX TO DISMISS THIS MESSAGE
Except for the fact that all SD customers would then need HD boxes on every TV, upping the cost to both company and customer. Also, since many TVs have no (or very few) input channels many would now need an RF adapter to connect the HD box to the TV (since I've never seen an HD STB that actually has an RF output), again increasing cost.
And doing this would gain what? Well, if you take FiOS as an example, you can fit 9 - 10 SD digital channels in a QAM, using standard MPEG-2 compression (without additional compression). And you can fit 2 HD channels in the same space. Get rid of 10 SD channels, and you create the room for 2 HD channels (the difference is even greater with some cable outfits who compress the hell out of their SD). Not that big of a pay-off in my opinion.
What's better is what Verizon is currently doing - getting rid of analogs. You get a big bang for your buck with that. By getting rid of their analogs, and upping their system to run at the full 860 MHz (135 QAMs), they'll have lots of room. If they reserve enough room for 150 HD channels, that will STILL leave enough room for 500 - 600 SD digital channels. All without the need to change over every piece of equipment from every one of your customers that have at least 1 SD TV.
And doing this would gain what? Well, if you take FiOS as an example, you can fit 9 - 10 SD digital channels in a QAM, using standard MPEG-2 compression (without additional compression). And you can fit 2 HD channels in the same space. Get rid of 10 SD channels, and you create the room for 2 HD channels (the difference is even greater with some cable outfits who compress the hell out of their SD). Not that big of a pay-off in my opinion.
What's better is what Verizon is currently doing - getting rid of analogs. You get a big bang for your buck with that. By getting rid of their analogs, and upping their system to run at the full 860 MHz (135 QAMs), they'll have lots of room. If they reserve enough room for 150 HD channels, that will STILL leave enough room for 500 - 600 SD digital channels. All without the need to change over every piece of equipment from every one of your customers that have at least 1 SD TV.
I agree completely JPL Getting rid of Analog is a far greater benefit then Getting rid of the digital simulcast.. But perhaps that was what the OP was referring to? Dumping the analog version of say FOx when you get FOX hd? But then all analog customers would then need a box instead of just plugging the tv in... That is where we are headed though.
btw its not 860 most gear is 870 (most systems though are 750).. Of course why do that when 1ghz is out?
btw its not 860 most gear is 870 (most systems though are 750).. Of course why do that when 1ghz is out?
I keep getting confused on the actual number. I read both 860 and 870MHz - depending on which site I'm getting information from. 1GHz is certainly an option, but, again based on my understanding, implementing it has its issues. For example, for regular cable anyway, there are lots of areas in the country which aren't even running at 750 yet (as you correctly point out, cable systems currently don't run at 870, and even if they do, they need to use some of that space for things like internet, voice, guide data, and vod - Verizon doesn't have that issue) - they're running at much lower frequency ranges. Second, rate of power loss increases with frequency. The higher the frequency, the faster the drop-off rate for the transmission of the signal. For cable that's a problem because they need to provide a mechanism for boosting the signal more often.
For FiOS that's not an issue since we all power our TV signal from our houses. And that ONT runs plenty hot. I have no doubt that Verizon could easily migrate to a 1GHz system if they wanted. But to be honest, I don't think their original plans ever included what they're doing now. I think they created a system with enough space to get them to full IP - they must have figured that they had enough space to get them there. Then DirecTV launched a new satellite, and with it a few dozen more HD channels, and the race was on. Now Verizon has to upgrade their system (get rid of analogs, and upgrade to use the full 870 MHz) to add all those HD channels. I think that will allow them to delay the migration to full IP for some time. When this transition is done, they'll have way more space than they'll need for some time to come - and more room than any other provider out there - for now. Their longer term solution has always been, however, to migrate to full IP. I just don't see them having a need to migrate to 1GHz service following this upgrade - their next big upgrade will be to IP.
For FiOS that's not an issue since we all power our TV signal from our houses. And that ONT runs plenty hot. I have no doubt that Verizon could easily migrate to a 1GHz system if they wanted. But to be honest, I don't think their original plans ever included what they're doing now. I think they created a system with enough space to get them to full IP - they must have figured that they had enough space to get them there. Then DirecTV launched a new satellite, and with it a few dozen more HD channels, and the race was on. Now Verizon has to upgrade their system (get rid of analogs, and upgrade to use the full 870 MHz) to add all those HD channels. I think that will allow them to delay the migration to full IP for some time. When this transition is done, they'll have way more space than they'll need for some time to come - and more room than any other provider out there - for now. Their longer term solution has always been, however, to migrate to full IP. I just don't see them having a need to migrate to 1GHz service following this upgrade - their next big upgrade will be to IP.
