1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

622 and storage

Discussion in 'ViP612/622/722/722K DVR Support Forum' started by spaceopera, Jan 27, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. spaceopera

    spaceopera Cool Member

    12
    0
    Jul 29, 2005
    Can someone tell me why it is that the 622 is only going to have 30 hrs of hd when it is being stored as mpeg4. Why is there not about 75 hours? This is a big problem with the 942 imho and I just don't understand how there can only be 30 hr of hd if it stored in mpeg4

    -Gene
     
  2. Ron Barry

    Ron Barry 622 Tips & Trick Keeper

    9,881
    0
    Dec 10, 2002
    :welcome_s Gene

    Hard to say.. Some have speculated that the numbers released are based on MPEG2 compression. Hard to say at this point what you can except in terms of storage from MPEG4. Also, remember that a portion of the Hard Drive is reserved for VOD for the 622.

    I know cable HD DVRs that have 10 hours of HD so at this point the Dish HD receivers are definitely competitive in the market. When it come to storage, more is always better.
     
  3. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    182
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    You might recall that the current "on the fly" compression offered by MPEG4 is only about 30% better than MPEG2. Recall also that the bulk of the HD programming is still going to be MPEG2 and the receiver saves the stream in whatever format it was received in. At this point in time, 30 hours may be a little optimistic even if the hard drive is >300GB.

    I'd like to see an option where the receiver painstakingly transcodes everything to MPEG4 when it is idle. There may be some copyright issues involved though.
     
  4. spaceopera

    spaceopera Cool Member

    12
    0
    Jul 29, 2005
    Did not realize that it was on the fly encoding. If that is case then yeah they are not going to gain the huge benefits from mpeg4 encoded content. Though a 30% saves in bandwidth is still a lot considering how expensive it is for a satellite. They should have an option to free up the vod space because I for one would much rather have the additional space then vod which I will not use. And Ron I use to have a tivo and if you had a tivo you would know how painful it is using dish hardware and the total lack of space. I watch very little standard def on my 50” plasma. Well some day they might get it right.

    -Gene
     
  5. Ron Barry

    Ron Barry 622 Tips & Trick Keeper

    9,881
    0
    Dec 10, 2002
    Tivo HD? If I recall the original Tivo HD had the same disk as the 921. If we are talking SD, well the 721 also could store a lot more but that is SD. HD and SD are apples and oranges in terms of storage requirements and I stand behind my point that Dish's HD PVRs are competitive in terms of storage. I would welcome the option to free up the VOD for extra storage, but I doubt that will happen. One never knows and I also would like more storage but "total lack of space" compared to the market I disagree with this statement. However, as time goes on I expect this issue to improve.
     
  6. knealy

    knealy Legend

    120
    0
    Jul 5, 2002
    Can someone compare the hard disk size of the 622, 942, and 921?
     
  7. tnsprin

    tnsprin Hall Of Fame

    2,129
    0
    Mar 15, 2003
    320gb for the 622. 250gb for the other two.

    Interesting that the tech site says 30 hours hd on the 622. Previous spec sheet say 25hour. Speculation was that added 70g would be reserved for Dish on Demand.
     
  8. Mike D-CO5

    Mike D-CO5 Hall Of Fame

    3,099
    0
    Mar 11, 2003
    I sure hope that Dish can do something better with the 70 hours in regards to to the video on demand than what they do with it presently. Charging 4.99 a movie that is on the hard drive vs buying off of the guide for 3.99?

    Video on demand should be more like the cable companies do. Free video on demand for channels like Hgtv, Food channels , Diy etc and then free premium channel video on demand for Hbo, Showtime, Cinemax and Starz if you already subscribe to the premium channels.

    Then of course they could charge for the new pay per view movies but not higher than what you can get them for from the guide. And no more old movies from years ago unless they are going to be FREE. It is a sin to charge money for a twenty year old movie everyone has seen already a hundred times.
     
  9. Ron Barry

    Ron Barry 622 Tips & Trick Keeper

    9,881
    0
    Dec 10, 2002
    What do you mean by what they are doing presently Mike? Is dish doing VOD already on a receiver. I was not aware they they already supplied a VOD solution...
     
  10. Slordak

    Slordak Hall Of Fame

    1,476
    0
    Dec 17, 2003
    Aye, can someone post details on what the Dish VOD solution involves? Has this information been released? What channels or content are they making available "on demand" (presumably by downloading while idle and caching), and is any of it free?
     
  11. Rob Glasser

    Rob Glasser Hall Of Fame Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    3,055
    0
    Feb 22, 2005
    Sounds like they shrunk the amount of space allocated for VOD then. Guess we'll see for sure in a couple of days =)
     
  12. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,328
    915
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Either that or they changed their compression estimations. :)
    My 30 hr SD 501 records whatever I can squeeze on it.
     
  13. Rogueone

    Rogueone Hall Of Fame

    1,133
    0
    Jan 29, 2004
    a friend I have at Dish told me today that from what he's been told at work there is no record time difference for mpeg2 and 4, as the compression is for transmission, not for storage. so his usderstanding is that we would see no difference in space needed for what we record. will be interesting to verify that or not in the coming weeks.

    he also mentioned the 622 is now set as 30 hrs HD, and that they are looking to make VOD capable of being disabled since so many requests have come in for that :)
     
  14. LtMunst

    LtMunst Hall Of Fame

    1,267
    3
    Aug 24, 2005
    Your friend needs to think about this statement a little harder. ;)
     
  15. Ron Barry

    Ron Barry 622 Tips & Trick Keeper

    9,881
    0
    Dec 10, 2002
    What your friend might have heard is that currently the MPEG4 streams are being sent as MPEG2 with MPEG4 headers (if true and based on what I have read it is). MPEG4 is a different algorithm and thus will result in different storage requirements. MPEG4 is expected to result in a certain savings compared to MPEG2 for the same given input stream. I can assure you eventually there will be a recording saving since the streams will be stored on the drive as MPEG2 or MPEG4.

    There is also a savings that can be realized through transmission optimizations and that is where QSPK comes into play from my understanding.

    Over time.. I do believe users will get more storage out of the current drive the 622 has.
     
  16. BoisePaul

    BoisePaul Godfather

    322
    0
    Apr 26, 2005
    If I'm thinking correctly (yeah, right!) wouldn't 30 hours of uncompressed HD require something like 20TB of disk space?
     
  17. Rogueone

    Rogueone Hall Of Fame

    1,133
    0
    Jan 29, 2004
    are we sure the data is stored in mpeg2 format currently? could it be in a special unique encryption/compression so the data couldn't be pulled off the HD by any old computer? But the mpeg4 header might be right, as the way he stated it was the "transmission" would be mpeg4, but the data would be stored the same as it is now. So if it's currently in mpeg2 on the HD it'll still be in mpeg2 on the HD when we view, just mpeg4 during transmission to save space? does that make sense at all? I don't see why a station which is only broadcast in mpeg4 wouldn't also prepare the programming ahead of time in mpeg4 (excpet the network feeds since you'd be limited to whatever they send to Dish). The voom stuff in mpeg4 wouldn't make sense to do in mpeg2 unless there was some serious money issues involved, would it?
     
  18. BoisePaul

    BoisePaul Godfather

    322
    0
    Apr 26, 2005
    I'd say that we're not sure, but it's a pretty safe bet. I doubt that it would be stored in anything other than the format in which it is transmitted, with the exception that some form of encryption might be applied. I honestly can't imagine that E* would go to the expense of building a real-time encoder into a DVR when it's so much easier to record the native stream. For the same reasons, I'd think that anything transmitted in MPEG4 would be recorded as MPEG4 - why decode the stream and re-encode it?
     
  19. Rogueone

    Rogueone Hall Of Fame

    1,133
    0
    Jan 29, 2004
    which brings up the good question of is mpeg4 programming recorded or packaged in mpeg4 format before transmission, or is it just mpeg2 encapsuled in mpeg4 to get better compression then transmitted and unwrapped back to mpeg2 on the HD? I have to admit, it actually makes sense if this is how it will be for a time, as I'm not sure what differences to the studio doing the recording in mpeg2 versus 4 is. Is it simply how you save the file, or will there be equipment differences like a newer camera involved or such ?
     
  20. BoisePaul

    BoisePaul Godfather

    322
    0
    Apr 26, 2005
    I'm not a digital video expert, so somebody correct me if I'm wrong here... I don't believe that there is any way to "encapsulate" MPEG2 within MPEG4; they are two different compression schemes. Any transcoding process that I've seen has first decoded the MPEG2 to raw uncompressed video and then reencoded it as MPEG4. On the same note, I don't know of any way to convert MPEG4 to MPEG2 without uncompressing the video and recompressing.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page