Article on next-gen TV

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:57:23 -0800, CygnusX-1 wrote:


> has a huge lead and the Bells are forced to bet the farm on improving
> their infrastructure. If mp4 and/or WMV9 meet(s) the hype, 2K5 and 2K6
> could be breakthrough years for HD.

Companies that implement these compression schemes are doing it not to
increase quality but to save bandwidth and money. (I.E. the customer
looses) Look for the bells to bring higher bandwidth HD (>100Mbs) or
non-compressed HD video utilizing fiber to each home.

BTW, channel surfing with low datarate WMV9 and MP4 is VERY painfull.

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <09naq098pus3ud8sultbvhhv3epb8j77kb@4ax.com>,
fred <nus@tenretni.moc> wrote:

> >Companies that implement these compression schemes are doing it not to
> >increase quality but to save bandwidth and money. (I.E. the customer
> >looses) Look for the bells to bring higher bandwidth HD (>100Mbs) or
> >non-compressed HD video utilizing fiber to each home.
> >
> >BTW, channel surfing with low datarate WMV9 and MP4 is VERY painfull.
>
> I had a good look at WMV9 at Fry's in Concord. They have been running
> a demo in their "High End" Home theatere display room for some time
> now . IF thats the standard then you're right we all will be big
> loosers. On that giant screen, artifacts abound. HD sat from DirecTv
> and Dish as well as OTA are miles ahead of WMV9 and I am willing to
> guess that Blu Ray DVD and HDDVD will also be better looking.

What did they have over there? AFAIK, there are no WMV9 set top boxes
out yet. Is it a sure thing that the MS boxes SBC and Comcast signed up
for will use WMV9?

Guess it kind of makes sense, since SBC wants to save bandwidth.

Would video use bandwidth even if you don't have the TV on? Maybe
things are different with IP-based video than the current transport?

This is a likely scenario, of a household having a couple of HD DVRs
recording 2 or 3 HDTV streams while channel surfing on a third set.
Meanwhile, they could be using the high-speed data connection to
download stuff on computers and then they could get phone calls using
VOIP.

Seems like all of these services being used simultaneously could
cumulatively use up more than the 52 Mbps capacity of VDSL. And what
happens if a bandwidth hog in one neighborhood is maxing out this
connection? Does it cause congestion in the node?

SBC's Ed Whitacre gave an interview to the WSJ and said they aim to
provide high-speed data, VOIP (both local and long distance), video AND
wireless (through Cingular) for $100. Whitacre says he knows
separately, these services would add up to almost $200. But he wants
the cable TV business (where they raise prices by at least 5% every
year).

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <e5747637.0411260308.155619e3@posting.google.com>,
paul-NOZPAM@paulkienitz.net (Paul Kienitz) wrote:

> So I think a 50 Mbps connection could handle all one's TV
> needs just fine, since unlike a traditional cable connection, an IP
> feed only needs to carry the channel(s) you're actually using at the
> time.
>

This is what I wonder about. First of all SBC is not bringing fiber
into people's homes unless it's a new construction. So there was a
news.com article and they discussed ADSL2 (at 16 Mbps) and VDSL (at 52
Mbps).

What happens if a household has a couple of HD PVRs, each with dual
tuners, or you have 3 or 4 people watching in different rooms? Under
that scenario, the one household could be accessing 3 or 4 different
HDTV streams. Plus somebody could be downloading or streaming something
on the data connection while another person could be holding on VOIP
conversation.

What happens to the bandwidth needs of that household and the node?

> In the long term, IP television means you won't be restricted to just
> the channels your provider offers: given an internet address, you'll
> be able to watch any channel from anywhere. Like, you live in Boise
> and you want to watch the local weather forecast in Osaka? No
> problem.

Well local stations don't even like to give waivers for distant networks
on satellite. So my guess is they will pressure Congress to not allow
people to access content beyond the range of the local stations, unless
it's a cable channel.

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Paul Kienitz" <paul-NOZPAM@paulkienitz.net> wrote in message


> It's pretty hard to think of WMV9 as "very affordable" after the
> chumps at SBC paid $400,000,000 to use it. Are you saying that MPEG4
> is even more expensive? I guess I had a mistaken impression that it
> was a more open and public format than M$'s was...


I'd be willing to bet that the $400M covers STB operating systems, server
software, and applications too - soup to nuts.

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

paul-NOZPAM@paulkienitz.net (Paul Kienitz) wrote in message
> It's pretty hard to think of WMV9 as "very affordable" after the
> chumps at SBC paid $400,000,000 to use it. Are you saying that MPEG4
> is even more expensive? I guess I had a mistaken impression that it
> was a more open and public format than M$'s was...

Well from following streamined media arena, there were numerous issues
over the huge licensing costs of mp4, resulting with many hardware and
software companies preferring WMV9 over mp4. Hopefully the issues have
been resolved. Regarding SBC's payment for WMV9, that prob covered
full life cycle deployment: STB, OS, servers, encoding, etc.

> Ha -- it figures, cable broadband prices are jacked up because DSL
> can't undercut it yet.

Yeah, I got into a discussion with a knowledgable Comcast rep. He
finally admitted they are reaping huge benefits from cable net access.
Basically,
at $45, they are matching SBC's charge for basic phone and DSL
service,
e.g. my monthly phone/DSL charge is $44 ($26.95 of it for DSL,
remainder
for phone service).

> I hope
> the cable companies stay in the game as broadband providers, though,
> because it will definitely benefit consumers to have two competing
> ways to get a connection,

True, it will be further interesting when BPL (broadband over power
lines) is deployed. With BPL, everyone with electical power will have
broadband.

Cygnus
The Bringer of Balance