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

Another 1080p/1080i/720p discussion, pulled from D11 thread

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by morgantown, Jun 13, 2008.

  1. Aug 11, 2012 #61 of 111
    veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,683
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    The part you're not posting is the frame rates.
    1080p/60 isn't going to be a broadcast signal with the current bandwidth & MPEG-2 encoding.
    720p/60 simply has more frames for that 100 MPH fastball, but movies don't normally have 100 MPH fastballs, so the higher resolution is preferred, be it 1080i, de-interlaced to 1080p/30, or "true" 1080p/24.
     
  2. Aug 11, 2012 #62 of 111
    georule

    georule Hall Of Fame

    1,603
    5
    Mar 31, 2010
    Let me be clear. Anybody who prefers, on balance, 1080i over 720p, for their mix of content, I have no problem with. Taste is inarguable unless you're a glutton for punishment, in my book.

    I do object to the idea, that several people in the originating thread put forward, that 720p brings absolutely nothing to the party. There were people accusing ABC/ESPN/FOX of "being cheap", and that's why they held on to 720p.
     
  3. Aug 11, 2012 #63 of 111
    Carl Spock

    Carl Spock Superfly

    4,567
    0
    Sep 3, 2004
    Not to mention it isn't part of the HDTV standard that the Grand Alliance came up with in 1993 and refined in 1997 or 1998 (I can't remember which). It has been updated since then but the basic parameters of HDTV haven't changed. 1080p remains outside the standard.

    Beyond the practical ones mentioned by VOS, there are huge marketing considerations. We here are cutting edge folks. The general public isn't. Imagine the hue and cry from your next door neighbor who finally bought his first HDTV last year, spending $299 for a 32" Samsung that's only capable of 720p, when he finds out that his set can't receive ESPN because they just switched to broadcasting 1080p. There might be enough of an general outcry that even Congress would get involved. These are FCC standards, after all.

    As much as we might like greater definition in broadcast technology, 1080p isn't going to be a broadcast standard for at least a dozen years. People don't like change this rapidly. Widespread acceptance of Blu-ray has been slow. Lots of people still have a row of VHS tapes on a bookshelf at home and their DVDs look perfectly fine, thank you.

    The lack of consumer acceptance of 3D television isn't just because of the funky glasses you have to wear. It's because 95% of the folks out there are happy with the new HDTV they bought just a few years ago.

    You can't force feed new technology on the public. They will reject it and it will fail.
     
  4. Aug 11, 2012 #64 of 111
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,345
    578
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Good points, Carl, but would there really be a problem with 720p sets processing the higher resolution signal? Certainly DIRECTV® boxes would do it if necessary, so would other providers, presumably. A problem with OTA?
     
  5. Aug 11, 2012 #65 of 111
    Carl Spock

    Carl Spock Superfly

    4,567
    0
    Sep 3, 2004
    Yes, the problem would be that older sets couldn't understand it OTA. They never were designed to receive a 1080p signal. Certainly 1080p could be down-converted to 720p or whatever you want but first the microprocessor in the tuner needs to know how to receive it.

    I should have used NBC instead of ESPN as the station that might switch to 1080p. That gets to the heart of the matter. The built in ATSC tuners in HDTV sets can't decode 1080p. Adding 1080p as a broadcast standard would immediately outdate all current HDTV sets, except for those set up to receive 3D.

    The industry would also have a problem with a lot of set top boxes. There's the rub if it was ESPN which switched to 1080p. DirecTV's DVRs, with the exception of the HR20, could all receive 1080p but could all of the Motorola, Pace and Scientific Atlanta cable boxes out there handle 1080p, too? I'd be surprised if that was the case. There are tens of millions of those puppies in people's homes. Can you imagine the cost of replacing all of those? I'm sure we'd be talking about a billion dollar upgrade here. Is it worth a billion dollars just to receive a live broadcast in 1080p?
     
  6. Aug 11, 2012 #66 of 111
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,989
    178
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    Yes, it does, but final quality is depend on these chips and IP inside. Told yeah - it's big business.
     
  7. Aug 11, 2012 #67 of 111
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,989
    178
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    Well, you selected wrong part. Tuner is OK for anything new.

    Exactly tuner chip(s) (with its uP ? OK, we can count its small part/uP) is tolerable to OTA signal as long it's still 8VSB. Transport stream after tuner/demod combo (could be one chip) can carry anything, say 2048p120 also if someone would invent H.401 compressing algo, to fit it into 19.4 Mbps bitrate of each OTA transmitter.

    Perhaps you should look after tuner/demod - that chip what demuxing transport stream, collecting frames, parsing PES, etc for next step - decompress video/audio. That's where new algos would require !
     
  8. Aug 11, 2012 #68 of 111
    Carl Spock

    Carl Spock Superfly

    4,567
    0
    Sep 3, 2004
    ^ Thanks for the technical explanation.

    You know the old saying:

    Same chip, different day.



    :grin:
     
  9. Aug 11, 2012 #69 of 111
    georule

    georule Hall Of Fame

    1,603
    5
    Mar 31, 2010
    I doubt we'll ever see 1080p as a OTA standard. OTA is on its way out, under pressure from mobile. Yeah, not next week, but in the meanwhile I just don't see the powers that be allowing OTA to increase its BW requirements, or/and require another costly, major hardware upgrade cycle to consumers.
     
  10. Aug 11, 2012 #70 of 111
    richall01

    richall01 Godfather

    381
    7
    Sep 30, 2007
    South Georgia
    Don't forget 4k in the future.
     
  11. Aug 11, 2012 #71 of 111
    HoTat2

    HoTat2 Hall Of Fame

    7,267
    179
    Nov 16, 2005
    Los...
    The "rule-of-thumb" diagonal size seemingly accepted on this list years ago was greater than 42 in. I think on average before a noticeable difference in the quality of vertical resolution on a 1080p vs. a 720p set.

    And even then comparing both resolutions required a certain minimum viewing distance to detect the difference.
     
  12. Aug 11, 2012 #72 of 111
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,345
    578
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Yes, and I am sure no consensus was reached, nor will be reached. Also, as sets improve over time, differences may be reduced. Heck, manufacturers may discontinue manufacturing 720 sets before long.
     
  13. Aug 11, 2012 #73 of 111
    Carl Spock

    Carl Spock Superfly

    4,567
    0
    Sep 3, 2004
    Have you looked at the selection of sets in a Best Buy in a while? The majority of sets 32" and under are only 720p. Yes, eventually those will go away but I think their sales right now are being driven by hitting a price point. Cheap sells.
     
  14. Aug 11, 2012 #74 of 111
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,345
    578
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Haven't looked, and yes, pricing is very important. At some point, it may be cheaper to manufacture only 1080p sets even in small sizes, rather than two lines mfg. the same size.
    And it's also ca. 32" and below where it's hard to see the difference between 720p and 1080i or p.
     
  15. Aug 11, 2012 #75 of 111
    Carl Spock

    Carl Spock Superfly

    4,567
    0
    Sep 3, 2004
    Agreed.

    The only reason I know about Best Buy is I bought a 32" TV within the past 3 months and was shocked by the predominance of 720p sets. Heck, I bought a 15" set for my kitchen 3 years ago that was 1080i, and it wasn't that expensive. Since then the manufacturers have definitely set up a two tiered pricing structure with all the cheap sets 720p.
     
  16. Aug 11, 2012 #76 of 111
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,345
    578
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    And it wouldn't surprise me that the hardware is identical, but higher res. is disabled in order to maintain higher prices for the 1080 sets.
     
  17. Aug 11, 2012 #77 of 111
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,989
    178
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    FW selectable - if the mfg will use 1920x1080 panel instead of 1280x720 (there in no "i" panels !).
     
  18. Aug 11, 2012 #78 of 111
    veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,683
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    I really doubt the hardware [panels] are identical.

    When the manufacturing costs of the 1080 panels drop so much that it isn't economical to make 720s, then all the TVs will be 1080.
     
  19. Aug 11, 2012 #79 of 111
    P Smith

    P Smith Mr. FixAnything

    21,989
    178
    Jul 25, 2002
    W.Mdtrn Sea
    Have no doubt - they are DIFFERENT. I'm do repairs/fixing and know these ...
     
  20. Aug 11, 2012 #80 of 111
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,345
    578
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    Are you saying that one couldn't make a 1080 panel, and software limit it to 720??
    Note I am not saying it's being done currently, nor am I really saying it will be done, only that it's technological feasible. [And that there are marketing reasons why it might be done.]
     

Share This Page