Would a complete transition to MPEG-4...

[s8ist]

provide more room for lots more HD channels?

I know not a lot of people would be happy about having to change their receivers, but it would be cool to see how many more channels we could get if we ditched the MPEG-2 standard to a more bandwidth-friendly solution.

 

[Smith P.]

We _did_ discuss the subj many times here.

 

[SmityWhity]

I know not a lot of people would be happy about having to change their receivers,

I guess that would depend on who is paying for it!

Dish has over 12 million customers, with at least a few of them having MPEG4 receivers, but a lot of those folks have MPEG2 receivers; and some MPEG4 customers also have additional receivers that are MPEG2.

 

[s8ist]

We _did_ discuss the subj many times here.

Yes, but I haven't.

 

[navychop]

It would about double the bandwidth on current MPEG-2 channels. This depends upon the real time MPEG-4 encoders available at the time. Plus, 8PSK alone would increase available bandwidth. Now, to replace those 10 million or so non compliant receivers.....

I don't look forward to losing my "no DVR fee" 508 & 721.

 

[Heavie]

provide more room for lots more HD channels?

I know not a lot of people would be happy about having to change their receivers, but it would be cool to see how many more channels we could get if we ditched the MPEG-2 standard to a more bandwidth-friendly solution.

From what I seen and heard. I think we should be a little careful on what we wish for. I don't think the mpeg4 compression look as good as mpeg2. I have a couple of programs that convert a mpeg2 and wmv files to mpeg4 and on the pc it's looks great. But, on a large tv it's not as good. I can tell the difference, when I have the same files burn to a dvd, which is mpeg2 and mpeg4 that I stored on a ps3 hard drive. I'm using the best mpeg4 compression and the movie looks compressed.

Also, read up on Scott Greczkowski AT&T U-VERSE review. He stated the HD channels is coming thru on those receiver as mpeg4 format and he was not impress. I also heard others saying the mpeg4 is not very good.

 

[navychop]

It's really a matter of waiting for better/faster real time MPEG-4 encoders.

 

[Poke]

Yeah I agree Chop.

 

[Hall]

From what I seen and heard. I think we should be a little careful on what we wish for. I don't think the mpeg4 compression look as good as mpeg2. I have a couple of programs that convert a mpeg2 and wmv files to mpeg4 and on the pc it's looks great.

Look around this site for some recent threads that are touching on this subject and some big changes Dish has made VERY recently.

 

[Tower Guy]

provide more room for lots more HD channels?

I know not a lot of people would be happy about having to change their receivers, but it would be cool to see how many more channels we could get if we ditched the MPEG-2 standard to a more bandwidth-friendly solution.

I assume that E* would like to update their receivers one time only. This means that MPEG4, 8PSK, and HD needs to be incorporated in a DVR box that allows for PPV movies that are cached on a portion of the hard drive. The income from the PPV sales may nearly pay for the receiver replacement. The logistics of the upgrades are more onerous than the cost of the box.

Note that the lack of a phone line prevents the extra PPV income. The solution is to charge $5/month extra for installations that can't do PPV.

Once all the receivers are swapped LiL in SD can be switched off. The satellite bandwidth for HD using MPEG4 and 8PSK is about the same as SD using MPEG2 and QPSK. It would be very interesting if a new LiL market went HD only, forcing all customers in that market to new HD receivers.

 

[Jeffro34tx]

Can you imagine the cost on just "Shipping" alone!

If they had to go and replace all of the Mpeg2 receivers out there, they would definitely have to increase production of the new Mpeg4 receivers.

That's a lot of receivers.

I don't think this would be anytime soon.


But...........

By offering the 622 for free, not only to new customers, but also existing customers for an upgrade would be a fantastic start. That would also be very expensive for DISH.

Also remember, it's a dual tuner, and might be better to have a customer with say 2 622's rather than a customer with 4 different set top boxes.

However, with that being said..... If DISH was to expand their capacity (double or triple) by producing more satellites, that would be expensive too.....not to mention time consuming! So why not? It's not going to be cheap either way!

DISH -- "It's About Time"

 

[pdxsam]

Dish has said in past chats that there will be a time when you'll be forced to go to mpeg4 it seems based on the successful HD tests that time will be real soon now. If they can pack 6 HD streams on a transponder, SD stuff in mpeg4 should realize 20 easily. That will free up a LOT of Conus space for other HD additions.

 

[VinceT3]

imaging the cost savings on software updates.. support.. etc.. by dropping the number of boxes they support..

 

[iKramerica]

Can you imagine the cost on just "Shipping" alone!

$240million, minimum just to ship them. $2.5 billion probably total cost of receivers and shipping them.

But, how much does an extra satellite cost to build and launch?

If they can save 3 satellites by swapping, is it cost effective?

 

[Jeffro34tx]

I agree! That was the point I was trying to make.

I think it would a be better solution, not to mention probably cheaper and quicker, to do an all Mpeg4 receiver swap out, rather than the alternative of building and launching up to 3 new satellites to equal the same amount of room created from Mpeg4. (That btw is in addition to the satellites they already have planned.)

Let's not forget, this is only the beginning, if they have gotten double capacity w/HD (Even more with SD) on the first run, imagine what they might be able to do within another year or two.

Besides, they will never see the full benefit of Mpeg4 until all Mpeg2 receivers are out of use.

The more I think about it, I think E* is going to be very aggressive with it's plans to go all Mpeg4. At least, I sure hope so!

 

[Smith P.]

"Besides, they will never see the full benefit of Mpeg4 until all Mpeg2 receivers are out of use."

Not true !
I'm totally disagree !
You're short in full picture what include manufacturing,logistics,control,content providers, etc - this is MUCH MORE complicate business.

Just try to recall VOOM fiasco.

 

[MikeD-C05]

As I have posted else where on this site, I remember they did talk about turning off the mpeg 2 stream for hd customers by the summer or end of this year and then transitioning the rest of the sd customers by 2009. THis makes sense now more than ever since they have gotten a 50 % increase in bandwith savings using the new mpeg 4 encoders. DISH needs bandwith for more hd and they can't do this till they get everything moved over to mpeg 4.

The savings in the number of new satellites alone would be cost effective. They could also offer free upgrades to the hd receivers for all customers in exchange for a commitment to Dish for a year or 18 months. THen they would have less need for all these competing receivers. IF they got it down to the newer mpeg 4 hd receivers alone they could save a ton of money in support and they could sell the older sd receivers and mpeg 2 hd receivers to Expressvu for their company since they still use mpeg 2.

They have everything to gain by doing full mpeg 4 and nothing to lose if they gain customer commitments from all customers and they could also turn them into lease customers at the same time which would change the way they account for them in their book keeping; they become assets on the books for lease customers. The old receivers could be sold off to Expressvu who use the same receivers under different numbers and names.

Both Directv and Dish are going to full mpeg4 in the near future. Can Dish afford to wait while Directv puts up a 100 hd channels by the end of this year because of the fear of the cost of upgrading their sd customers and the few hd ones that haven't upgraded yet? The new mpeg 4 encoders offer them at present a 50 % savings in bandwith and I read in the origional announcement about the new encoders ,that they can do up to 75 % savings if they can get them to work properly. I see them doing this and even getting a 100% savings in the next few years as each generation of meg 4 encoders improves. I think we see a light at the end of the tunnel in regards to the bandwith crunch for new hd channels.

 

[Jeffro34tx]

"Besides, they will never see the full benefit of Mpeg4 until all Mpeg2 receivers are out of use."

Not true !
I'm totally disagree !
You're short in full picture what include manufacturing,logistics,control,content providers, etc - this is MUCH MORE complicate business.

Just try to recall VOOM fiasco.

You can disagree...... that's the beauty of discussion. Like I said, those were just my thoughts!

I did not try to make the full picture of what all would have to be done to have them converted, obviously it would be very entailed and very expensive.

As for the VOOM fiasco, I'm not sure that is really the same scenario. I mean, that affected only HD subs, very limited percentage of subs at that time, where as this affects all available channels and all subs!

However, as far as the statement about not seeing the full benefit of MPeg4 until all Mpeg2 receivers are out of use, I still agree with what I said about that.

Sure, there will be some benefit, but the major benefit would not be seen until they no longer have to use Mpeg2. Any of the National signals being transmitted would have to be sent using Mpeg2 and Mpeg4, instead of Mpeg4 only.

No one really knows what their plans are, except for them! But it sure is nice to know what their possible options are.

 

[Bradtothebone]

The transition to all-MPEG4 will have to be thought out carefully. Obviously, anyone going to HD for the first time will now get a MPEG4 receiver, and that will help a lot as HD becomes more and more mainstream.

Beyond that, I suspect that E* will have to keep the lowest programming tier (now AT120) on MPEG2 for quite a long time. At some point, maybe you convert the premiums to MPEG4 SD (or HD!) and give those subs a deal to get a new MPEG4 box (which would also be HD, presumably). After that, you get the AT250 people, and then the AT200's converted.

As someone else mentioned, you could also convert by DMA, as the locals are put up in MPEG4. If you do this, you would probably switch over to HD locals for everyone, since the receivers would be HD anyway.

There will ultimately come a time when E* will not be able to entice the last MPEG2 holdouts to convert with a "deal," and then they will have to either just shut down the MPEG2's, or give everyone a box and move on.

It's gonna happen, and you can be sure the pain will be spread around.

Brad

 

[DishSubLA]

Yes, the savings on the massive Echostar satellite fleet would certainly justify the expense of a complete MPEG 4 swap-out for all subs. And all those satellites have to be replaced. How much more effiecient and cost effective it would be to only have to pay for about maybe 3 (or 4) DBS slots, no second dish (that costs Dish, too) keep the dish small, have to replace and have back-up for only 3 to 4 slots to name just a few advantages. I believe Echostar has been waiting for the technology to catch-up. Any large expense for a comprehensive MPEG4 swap-out can viewed as an infrastructure cost for the still growing DBS satellite industry. An MPEG4 swap-out would be one of the last steps to bringing DBS to maturity, and then Ergan can really count the money comin' in. An MPEG 4 swap makes perfect sense.