Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

DirecTV sees 4K TV having 'material impact' by 2016


  • Please log in to reply
169 replies to this topic

#26 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 17,547 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 10 November 2013 - 11:01 PM

I don't think they'll need new receiver hardware for DSWM, all or certainly most of the current SWM-capable receivers should work fine. HEVC decoder chips run hot and expensive today, but there are so few people with 4K TVs yet there isn't any rush to push out a 4K receiver. I wouldn't look for it until D15 is launched and in position.

 

There's no way they'll "standardize" on 4K capable hardware for a long time. They don't even standardize on HD capable hardware today! HD capable hardware is far more useful because almost all the channels anyone watches are available in HD. That may never be true for 4K, or at least not for a very very very long time.

 

4K will be a Directv advantage over cable, since it'll be difficult for cable to offer more than a few token channels unless they really go heavily in SDV. But the early adopters of 4K will have to be willing to pay for it, they aren't going to get it as a freebie offer like Genies and lifetime HD are handed out today. Why should Directv do that, when they'll be the only option to get 4K for a lot of people aside from Blu Ray?

 

The third generation in the patents might require new hardware for the dswim system should they go that far.  And really, at this point, any hardware they put in a next generation of receivers should be strong enough to be able to decode anything of high res, so that they can tweak it to work with whatever schemes come along for the foreseeable future.



...Ads Help To Support This Site...

#27 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 4,005 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 11 November 2013 - 12:12 AM

The third generation in the patents might require new hardware for the dswim system should they go that far.  And really, at this point, any hardware they put in a next generation of receivers should be strong enough to be able to decode anything of high res, so that they can tweak it to work with whatever schemes come along for the foreseeable future.

 

 

The more I've studied that patent and the original SWM patents to learn more about how it works, the more I think that current receivers will probably be compatible even with a third generation DSWM able to do perhaps 100+ channels. I can explain why if you want, but that probably belongs in the DSWM thread. Obviously the variations of the third generation DSWM which output IP would require a totally new receiver, but I think if they went that direction it would be because it allows them to eliminate receivers entirely, via some future RVU like protocol that sends compressed video directly to a TV. Directv may not even know what direction they'll be going with that. A second generation DSWM will provide enough channels for almost every residential scenario, so there's not going to be any reason to push beyond that in residential accounts - unless they can eliminate receivers, which would really help their customer acquisition costs.

 

Keep in mind they still make the D12, which can't even do MPEG4, so they'll be making receivers that only do HD/MPEG4 for many years after HEVC decoders are available. You can't make hardware that you can just "tweak" for different decoders. Well, you can, but it costs more and involves more power/heat than dedicated hardware. You also end up paying licensing costs for capability you aren't using, which adds up to real money when you're talking millions of receivers. My guess is they'll add a 'U' line of receivers/DVRs ('U' for UltraHD) similar to the 'H' line they added for HD. The H line won't go away...heck the D line shows no signs of going away anytime soon!

 

I agree it appears to us casual observers that it might be a good idea to future proof better than they do, but Directv doesn't seem to think that way, or maybe something about their future plans they haven't told anyone means they have a different idea about what future proofing involves.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#28 OFFLINE   hdtvfan0001

hdtvfan0001

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 32,402 posts
Joined: Jul 28, 2004

Posted 11 November 2013 - 05:26 AM

From all the evidence at retail stores and also at CES (manufacturer visibility and promotion), it appears 4K HDTV and corresponding Blu Ray, video cameras, and other equipment is already gaining more traction in a short time than 3D did over several years.

 

This appears to be real and coming. 2016 is a realistic expectation as costs come down in the interim. Another few years of aging of current generation HDTVs will help folks consider "upgrading".

 

Having seen stunning 4K content on 4K displays at CES this past January...it is a real leap in image enhancement (although most content shown at this past CES was 1080p on 4K demo units - only a few places used 4k content for demos)..

 

We'll see what gives this coming January at CES - I suspect 4K will be nearly commonplace in terms of presentations this time around.


DBSTalk CHAT ROOM MODERATOR
DirecTV Customer Since 1996

#29 OFFLINE   Steve

Steve

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 22,797 posts
  • LocationLower Westchester County, NY
Joined: Aug 22, 2006

Posted 11 November 2013 - 06:50 AM

The reason it is called 4K is because it has almost 4,000 pixels across. HD has almost 2,000 pixels across, so...

 

Yup. It's a "K", not an "x" after the 4.


/steve

#30 OFFLINE   Scott Kocourek

Scott Kocourek

    CUTTING EDGE

  • Super Moderators
  • 9,421 posts
  • LocationWisconsin
Joined: Jun 13, 2009

Posted 11 November 2013 - 03:00 PM

And after they get all the bandwidth, uplinks, production and mastering, satellites, receivers and displays all tickey boo on 4K, somebody, somewhere is going to want 4K3D . . . 

 

 

!rolling

Saw it last year at CES, no glasses.  :)


Opinions expressed by me are my own and do not necessarily reflect
those of DBSTalk.com, DIRECTV, Dish Network, or any other company.

Become a DBSTalk.com member or join the CE program HERE


#31 OFFLINE   SledgeHammer

SledgeHammer

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,371 posts
Joined: Dec 28, 2007

Posted 11 November 2013 - 03:15 PM

* 4K > 3D because you don't need glasses. Who the heck wants to watch TV / movies with glasses? Especially in the home. Wake me when HgTV (or whatever HolographicTV ends up being called) is ready :).

 

* Good point on needing an SD, HD and 4K stream. Does anybody know what % of customers are still SD only? If its a small enough amount, put a crawler on the SD channels saying its going away and you MUST upgrade your equipment.  DirecTV has shown they are not afraid of "upgrade or else" directives... they did that when they shut off MPEG2.

 

* If you are upgrading all equipment to support 4K, you only need a 4K stream and the box can down rez to 1080p to save on bandwidth. Down rezzing is a lot easier then up rezzing where you pretty much have to make up the missing info.



#32 OFFLINE   tonyd79

tonyd79

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 12,948 posts
  • LocationColumbia, MD
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Posted 11 November 2013 - 03:59 PM

Double the number of pixels in both directions= 4x the number of pixels. So 4K vs. 1K doesn't seem in any way 'silly'. I get you don't like that designation. 

 

As pointed out in other posts, the 4K refers to a linear number. If it were truly based upon both directions, then the 4K designation is incorrect. And 1K would be even more incorrect. if you were to use the two directions (x and y), then 4K should be more like 8M and HD should be 2M (for 1080, that is).

 

Edit to add: BTW, I have seen plenty of 4K. Typically near HD sets. The demo loops of cities and other landscapes are pretty amazing but do I really need to see individual taxi cab lights taken from the top of a NYC bridge in the distance? The PQ looks amazing compared to the HDs running near by in the Best Buy Magnolia area until you find out that the HD sets are running 480p rather than any real HD. Then you watch a "regular" program on 4K (like a concert) and say "Yes, that is nice but 4 times as nice? Not really."

 

I will be happy when the sets run the same prices as HD today, but paying even 50% more is not worth it to me. BluRay looks stunning on my 1080p set and can't really look that much better and broadcast will never get to 4K anyway.


Edited by tonyd79, 11 November 2013 - 04:04 PM.

LR: HR34-700, H24-200, Fios DVR, BD350 Blu Ray, Roku Netflix Player, Chromecast, Sony 65w850 TV
BR: HR21-200, Viso 32LX, DB350 Blu Ray
Dish: Slimline, SWM8
Other: genieGo

#33 OFFLINE   JosephB

JosephB

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,163 posts
  • LocationBirmingham, AL
Joined: Nov 14, 2005

Posted 11 November 2013 - 04:32 PM

* 4K > 3D because you don't need glasses. Who the heck wants to watch TV / movies with glasses? Especially in the home. Wake me when HgTV (or whatever HolographicTV ends up being called) is ready :).

 

* Good point on needing an SD, HD and 4K stream. Does anybody know what % of customers are still SD only? If its a small enough amount, put a crawler on the SD channels saying its going away and you MUST upgrade your equipment.  DirecTV has shown they are not afraid of "upgrade or else" directives... they did that when they shut off MPEG2.

 

* If you are upgrading all equipment to support 4K, you only need a 4K stream and the box can down rez to 1080p to save on bandwidth. Down rezzing is a lot easier then up rezzing where you pretty much have to make up the missing info.

 

MPEG 2 HD was much, much, MUCH smaller when they shut it down than SD is now. I'm a firm proponent of forcing everyone to MPEG-4 capable boxes and dumping all SD feeds for networks that offer HD, however doing so is immensely complex and there are several things to consider:

 

*Number of SD boxes out there: given how long and the gnashing of teeth that resulted from requiring the EPG/APG swapout, it stands to reason that there are a LOT of old boxes out there, and a LOT of SD boxes

 

*cost of an HD box vs. and SD box. Obviously an SD-only box is still much cheaper than an HD box, or they would have at least gone ahead and started installing them for new customers. Even without requiring swapouts and shutting down SD/MPEG2, the day that an H25 or equivalent is the same price as a D12, they will start doing this. They're not just still recycling used D12, but they're still pushing out new ones. This fact alone means that it's not on the horizon for quite a while, at least 4-5 years.

 

*Most SD only customers will need new dishes. This swapout will be even more complex and costlier, since it will require someone to come out and touch each house. 

 

one day all of those factors will shift and it'll be worth it for DirecTV to shut down SD and swap everyone out, but, don't hold your breath.



#34 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 4,005 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 11 November 2013 - 04:58 PM

The first step will be to stop installing SD dishes for new SD only installs. When there's a new DSWM LNB they might stop installing SD dishes and have one dish for all new installs. The D12 does SWM so they'd still be able to use less costly receivers for those customers, but no longer be adding more dishes that would need to be replaced someday.

 

The next step after that would be to no longer provide customers with SD receivers, but instead HD receivers that only provide SD output if you don't have HD enabled on your account.

 

At that point they'd still be many many years away from getting rid of SD, because of the huge installed base of SD only dishes and SD receivers. But at least they would no longer be making that job bigger every day that goes by, which they are still doing today.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#35 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 17,547 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 14 November 2013 - 09:28 PM

The more I've studied that patent and the original SWM patents to learn more about how it works, the more I think that current receivers will probably be compatible even with a third generation DSWM able to do perhaps 100+ channels. I can explain why if you want, but that probably belongs in the DSWM thread. Obviously the variations of the third generation DSWM which output IP would require a totally new receiver, but I think if they went that direction it would be because it allows them to eliminate receivers entirely, via some future RVU like protocol that sends compressed video directly to a TV. Directv may not even know what direction they'll be going with that. A second generation DSWM will provide enough channels for almost every residential scenario, so there's not going to be any reason to push beyond that in residential accounts - unless they can eliminate receivers, which would really help their customer acquisition costs.

 

Keep in mind they still make the D12, which can't even do MPEG4, so they'll be making receivers that only do HD/MPEG4 for many years after HEVC decoders are available. You can't make hardware that you can just "tweak" for different decoders. Well, you can, but it costs more and involves more power/heat than dedicated hardware. You also end up paying licensing costs for capability you aren't using, which adds up to real money when you're talking millions of receivers. My guess is they'll add a 'U' line of receivers/DVRs ('U' for UltraHD) similar to the 'H' line they added for HD. The H line won't go away...heck the D line shows no signs of going away anytime soon!

 

I agree it appears to us casual observers that it might be a good idea to future proof better than they do, but Directv doesn't seem to think that way, or maybe something about their future plans they haven't told anyone means they have a different idea about what future proofing involves.

 

 

My point is they will make sure tis all good to work with ultra, as well as dswim, and anything else coming in the next ten years, and i wouldn't be surprised if it didn't do mpeg2 at all..  an hd and ultra machine only.



#36 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 4,005 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 14 November 2013 - 09:57 PM

My point is they will make sure tis all good to work with ultra, as well as dswim, and anything else coming in the next ten years, and i wouldn't be surprised if it didn't do mpeg2 at all..  an hd and ultra machine only.

 

So you're suggesting Directv's top of the line receiver would be unable to tune any SD channels? Even those which are only offered in SD? That hardly seems likely. It will have to support MPEG2.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#37 OFFLINE   JoeTheDragon

JoeTheDragon

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,330 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2008

Posted 14 November 2013 - 10:11 PM

So you're suggesting Directv's top of the line receiver would be unable to tune any SD channels? Even those which are only offered in SD? That hardly seems likely. It will have to support MPEG2.

they can move sd to mpeg 4


I want CLTV / CLTV HD on direct tv.

#38 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 4,005 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 14 November 2013 - 10:26 PM

they can move sd to mpeg 4

 

Sure, if they replace every single SD receiver currently in service. There are what, 10 million SD only subscribers, with an average of what, probably two receivers each? More? Not to mention HD subscribers who might have an old SD receiver in a spare room or workout area. And all the businesses that have them - most hotels are still using SD only because HD distribution costs so much more.

 

Look how long it has taken them to replace the pre-2004 MPG receivers, and that isn't even complete yet! The savings in not having MPEG2 decoding in a receiver would be quite minimal. Maybe zero, if the patents have or soon will expire.


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#39 OFFLINE   JosephB

JosephB

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,163 posts
  • LocationBirmingham, AL
Joined: Nov 14, 2005

Posted 14 November 2013 - 10:31 PM

they can move sd to mpeg 4

 

They will never move SD to MPEG-4, unless it's a channel that doesn't offer an HD feed. By the time they get ready to move to all MPEG-4 distribution, they'll just give everyone a box capable of receiving HD and downconverting it to SD for an analog set.

 

Sure, if they replace every single SD receiver currently in service. There are what, 10 million SD only subscribers, with an average of what, probably two receivers each? More? Not to mention HD subscribers who might have an old SD receiver in a spare room or workout area. And all the businesses that have them - most hotels are still using SD only because HD distribution costs so much more.

 

Look how long it has taken them to replace the pre-2004 MPG receivers, and that isn't even complete yet! The savings in not having MPEG2 decoding in a receiver would be quite minimal. Maybe zero, if the patents have or soon will expire.

 

Yeah, it will be a very long time. If they move to MPEG-4 only, it will be for bandwidth on the satellites, not to save money on the boxes. The MPEG-4 hardware will always be at least as much if not more than the MPEG-2 hardware, so that's not where the cost is in the box. 



#40 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 17,547 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 16 November 2013 - 10:31 PM

At some point mpeg2 will go away. I suspect that By the time the first 4k receiver hits they will have all channels available in hd or moeg4 sd mirrors of moeg2sd (or could have, I doubt there will be more than a small small handful of channels by then without a hd version) So why wouldn't they begin preparing for that process when they launch an ultra Hi Definition box for the front line users of DIRECTV. They won't care about mpeg2 boxes and by then all channels in sd should also be available in Hi Definition or at least moeg4 sd. Heck, they may use bss space to launch the few sd mpeg4 mirros of channels they can't show in moeg4 Hi Definition. That would allow them to easy begin a very very long process (I suspect seven years to ten years) to get rid of all moeg2 broadcast. Natural attrition will help complete this process in general. And mpeg2 will cost more than MPEG 4 when mpeg4 is used more than mpeg2 but the real point was if you don't need to have any ability to do mpeg2 then its cheaper than having to have it in there too. Remember, 4k units will not be flying off the block and are going to be hooked up to tvs that can do Hi Definition. There's no reason to concern yourself with native sd on them if you have a Hi Definition signal or mpeg4 signal of a channel that can be converted to Hi Definition.

#41 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 42,155 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 17 November 2013 - 01:07 AM

There's no reason to concern yourself with native sd on them if you have a Hi Definition signal or mpeg4 signal of a channel that can be converted to Hi Definition.

I'm not ready to "buy this" yet.

The 4k TVs have a lot of video processing in them, and my experience has been even my old 2006 1080p did a better job with SD than any of the receivers I've had.

The 4ks also have internet functions and handle a lot more codex, so I suspect they will be superior for scaling/processing SD than anything DirecTV will be doing.


A.K.A VOS

#42 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 17,547 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 17 November 2013 - 02:55 AM

I should have said that a little better I think... I'm simply suggesting that they will have an MPEG 4 version of every channel they have an mpeg2 version for. So if the channel isn't in Hi Definition then itd be a sd version in MPEG 4 similar to how a couple channels are now. I think nasa is mpeg4 sd as I recall. They key IMHO is to be able to truly start removing duplicates of mpeg2 and mpeg4. Of course the first step IMHO for that is getting both versions of all channels regardless of the resolution. Once that's happened they can stop worrying about mpeg2 in boxes. ..... Maybe.... I did realize one thing. Over the air. If they can't build an atsc tuner that decodes mpeg2 in a AMxx then they won't be getting rid if mpeg2 for 30 years. Eventually they want to get rid of sat mpeg2 though im sure. So my idea of getting rid of mpeg2 decoding in boxes may hinge on over the air support. Either way vos, I'm simply speculating about a next gen box that won't be widely used for maybe four or five years and will be a niche product if it hits in maybe two. I am not suggesting that mpeg2 is going anytime soon but that it's days may be numbered for boxes. But by the time a next gen box is really widely used I think mpeg2 will finally be truly heading towards an end where we no longer see DIRECTV offering sd systems to new people in the first place. So don't worry about "buying it" yet, I'm suggest we are a couple years or more away anyway... :)

#43 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 4,005 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 17 November 2013 - 03:13 AM

I'm not ready to "buy this" yet.

The 4k TVs have a lot of video processing in them, and my experience has been even my old 2006 1080p did a better job with SD than any of the receivers I've had.

The 4ks also have internet functions and handle a lot more codex, so I suspect they will be superior for scaling/processing SD than anything DirecTV will be doing.

 

I completely agree. Directv receivers aren't exactly known for having powerful processors, so they're the last thing I'd want to have do the scaling for me!


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#44 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 4,005 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 17 November 2013 - 03:25 AM

Except I'm simply suggesting that they will have an MPEG 4 version of every channel they have an mpeg2 version for. So if the channel isn't in Hi Definition then itd be a sd version in MPEG 4 similar to how a couple channels are now.

They key is to be able to truly start removing duplicates of moeg2 and moeg4. Of course the first step IMHO is getting both versions of all channels regardless of the resolution. Once that's happened they can stop worrying about mpeg2 in boxes. .....

Maybe. I did realize one thing. Over the air. If they can't build a atsc tuner that decodes mpeg2 in a AMxx then they won't be getting rid if mpeg2 ever.

Eventually they want to get rid of sat mpeg2 though in sure.

Either way vos, this I'm simply speculating about a next gen box that won't be widely used for maybe four or five years and will be a niche product if it hits in maybe two. I am not suggesting that mpeg2 is going anytime soon but that it's days may be numbered for boxes.

 

 

I just don't understand why you think replicating all the SD channels in MPEG4 is a good idea. What's the end game here? It seems to extend the life of SD, which is the last thing Directv should want, and in the many years before they can drop MPEG2 SD it means they're spending an extra 50% bandwidth on SD channels!

 

Directv shouldn't care about getting rid of MPEG2, they should care about getting rid of SD duplicates of HD channels. There will always be some SD, because some subchannels will be in SD only, and a few networks that broadcast only old TV shows would have no incentive to upgrade to HD when the shows are SD, plus maybe some foreign channels that might only be available in SD. Once all MPEG2 only receivers are gone (every single D1x and R1x!) they could convert them to MPEG4, but the bandwidth savings by that point would be minor.

 

The problem with SD is not MPEG2, it is the 4:3 aspect ratio. When the day comes they can drop SD, they will also be able to drop MPEG2 (they care about it only for the bandwidth it uses, not for the decoder - by 2015 over 90% of the MPEG2 patents will have expired) So having MPEG2 reception via AM21 is not an issue. When they can drop SD life will be much simpler. If by let's say 2020 they decide they want to get rid of HD duplicates of 4K channels, all they'll have to do is phase out receivers that aren't capable of decoding HEVC and they can do that. The HEVC receivers will be able to receive 4K and downscale/output HD. Same aspect ratio, so no problem. They can't do this with HD unless they want to give all SD subscribers letterboxes of HD channels. Maybe someday, when the number of SD subscribers becomes so low they aren't worried about losing them (because every other provider will offer a similarly crappy SD experience)


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#45 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 17,547 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 17 November 2013 - 05:09 AM

You missed what I was saying. I am saying that for every sd mpeg2 channel they need some sort of mpeg4 version. Hi Definition if its possible, for ones that it isn't, give us an mpeg4 sd feed. So you have an mpeg4 version of every mpeg2 channel. Then you can get rid of moeg2 versions as you upgrade peoples equipment. You can't get a market to all mpeg4 if you don't offer all channels in mpeg4. This is going to be very important for lil. You can't have everyone change out all their equipment in one day and flip sd stations from moeg2 to mpeg4 also that same day. But since all moeg4 boxes can decode and display mpeg4 in any resolution from sd to Hi Definition, you only need one copy of every channel in mpeg4, either Hi Definition or if not possible then sd. Im Not suggesting simply duplicating all sd channels in mpeg4 at all. There is a reason DIRECTV stopped adding any lil markets in moeg2 years ago, and have only added new lil markets in moeg4 for several years now. I suspect we will see them turn off mpeg2 support to sports packages first, like nhl and NBA, etc, working their way up to MLs. Yes, I think that would be the last one to change. I'm sure they have the numbers, but I'd suspect they'd chose to change packages that have the fewest sd only customers first, working towards the ones with the most. Then they could start changing people, market by market. Remember, that's basically what they did with the move from mpeg2 Hi Definition to mpeg4 Hi Definition. Get it running in both version, then kill off the old version segment by segment, smallest to largest, then shut off the old segment.

#46 OFFLINE   slice1900

slice1900

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 4,005 posts
  • LocationIowa
Joined: Feb 14, 2013

Posted 17 November 2013 - 01:36 PM

Killing off MPEG2 HD was easy, because it was around for such a short time before MPEG4 HD came out, so there weren't many subscribers. More importantly, those subscribers were were all early adopters, who would be much easier to migrate than the laggards subscribing to SD only in late 2013.

 

I think understand what you're saying now, you would introduce MPEG4 versions of channels that are only available in SD. Those available in HD wouldn't get a MPEG4 version. I'm not sure so about that. Watching a 16:9 signal letterboxed or vertically stretched on a 4:3 TV is just as objectionable as watching a 4:3 signal on a 16:9 set with the same compromises in the other direction. They'd risk losing subscribers to other providers who provide proper 4:3 versions of the channels. As more providers offer only an HD signal (I think ESPN is already there?) this won't matter, but until then it will.

 

It seems you're suggesting that providing a MPEG4 version of a SD only channel should be done in advance of dropping the MPEG2 version. If so, I fail to see the point. All MPEG4 receivers can receive MPEG2, so as you upgrade people to MPEG4 capable equipment they can still watch the MPEG2 version. Only when you switch off the MPEG2 channel would you turn on the MPEG4 channel. What's the point of doing it earlier, except to waste bandwidth?

 

You say "You can't have everyone change out all their equipment in one day and flip sd stations from moeg2 to mpeg4 also that same day." That's a red herring, because you don't need to change out equipment in one day. Unless you are suggesting Directv should build equipment that cannot decode MPEG2 at all, which makes no sense, you can take years to switch out all the equipment in an area, then flip the switch on their locals in one day. When it has been done everywhere, the switch can be flipped for all the remaining MPEG2 SD only channels in one day.

 

Given how far Directv is from doing this, by the time they think about dumping MPEG2, the migration may happen not to MPEG4, but to HEVC :)


SL5, PI-6S, SA-6AL 3xSWM16, 21 H20-100, 1 H20-600, 7 H24-700/AM21


#47 OFFLINE   JosephB

JosephB

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,163 posts
  • LocationBirmingham, AL
Joined: Nov 14, 2005

Posted 17 November 2013 - 01:48 PM

The conversion to all-MPEG 4 won't result in an SD and HD feed of each channel. By the time they are ready to shut off all MPEG-2 channels, they'll just use HD equipment and downconvert. Putting up an SD duplicate in MPEG-4 would be wasteful, and there's no good reason to do it. 

 

The transition, whenever it happens, will be to simply stop producing and installing hardware incapable of receiving MPEG-4. As it stands now there are still receivers being built that are MPEG-2 only. First step will be for every box to be MPEG-4/HD capable. Then, they'll at whatever pace they deem necessary, start replacing SD/MPEG-2 only boxes with the HD/MPEG-4 capable boxes. All of the boxes would be capable of both MPEG 2 and MPEG 4. Making an MPEG 4-only box would not save any money over adding in the MPEG-2 hardware (if it's even a separate chip, which I doubt it is).

 

Moving to all-MPEG 4/HD will also require new dishes for people who have 101 only. Given the amount of bandwidth they're about to have when they launch their new satellites, and the pressure on new channels now being cost instead of bandwidth, I suspect they won't go down this road until MPEG-4 boxes cost at least exactly the same as the MPEG-2 only boxes.



#48 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 17,547 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 17 November 2013 - 03:31 PM

Killing off MPEG2 HD was easy, because it was around for such a short time before MPEG4 HD came out, so there weren't many subscribers. More importantly, those subscribers were were all early adopters, who would be much easier to migrate than the laggards subscribing to SD only in late 2013.

I think understand what you're saying now, you would introduce MPEG4 versions of channels that are only available in SD. Those available in HD wouldn't get a MPEG4 version. I'm not sure so about that. Watching a 16:9 signal letterboxed or vertically stretched on a 4:3 TV is just as objectionable as watching a 4:3 signal on a 16:9 set with the same compromises in the other direction. They'd risk losing subscribers to other providers who provide proper 4:3 versions of the channels. As more providers offer only an HD signal (I think ESPN is already there?) this won't matter, but until then it will.

It seems you're suggesting that providing a MPEG4 version of a SD only channel should be done in advance of dropping the MPEG2 version. If so, I fail to see the point. All MPEG4 receivers can receive MPEG2, so as you upgrade people to MPEG4 capable equipment they can still watch the MPEG2 version. Only when you switch off the MPEG2 channel would you turn on the MPEG4 channel. What's the point of doing it earlier, except to waste bandwidth?

You say "You can't have everyone change out all their equipment in one day and flip sd stations from moeg2 to mpeg4 also that same day." That's a red herring, because you don't need to change out equipment in one day. Unless you are suggesting Directv should build equipment that cannot decode MPEG2 at all, which makes no sense, you can take years to switch out all the equipment in an area, then flip the switch on their locals in one day. When it has been done everywhere, the switch can be flipped for all the remaining MPEG2 SD only channels in one day.

Given how far Directv is from doing this, by the time they think about dumping MPEG2, the migration may happen not to MPEG4, but to HEVC :)


My point is they will need an mpeg4 version running before they shut off the moeg2 version. And they will want them simultaneous for a little while for sure. I suspect they will slowly kill conus channels to force stragglers along before they kill lil mpeg2 and then just do a market or two at a time.

No reason an sd only channel can't be shown in mpeg4 native as that's what thy do with some now.

I fully expect the next ten boxes to do hvec and them not stopping new sd installs till that equipment is out. And I dont see any reason other than maybe over the air reception as to why DIRECTV would need to include mpeg2 decoding in their next gen boxes if they can get mpeg2 decoding for over the air into a new AM5x type box. That might save them lots if money per box so I would think they'd at least consider that.

#49 OFFLINE   JosephB

JosephB

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,163 posts
  • LocationBirmingham, AL
Joined: Nov 14, 2005

Posted 17 November 2013 - 03:33 PM

My point is they will need an mpeg4 version running before they shut off the moeg2 version. And they will want them simultaneous for a little while for sure. I suspect they will slowly kill conus channels to force stragglers along before they kill lil mpeg2 and then just do a market or two at a time.

No reason an sd only channel can't be shown in mpeg4 native as that's what thy do with some now.

I fully expect the next ten boxes to do hvec and them not stopping new sd installs till that equipment is out. And I dont see any reason other than maybe over the air reception as to why DIRECTV would need to include mpeg2 decoding in their next gen boxes if they can get mpeg2 decoding for over the air into a new AM5x type box. That might save them lots if money per box so I would think they'd at least consider that.

 

They won't have MPEG-4 versions of SD channels if those channels are available in HD. If and when they go to all MPEG-4, they'll simply go with the HD versions for all subscribers.



#50 OFFLINE   Diana C

Diana C

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 2,092 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey
Joined: Mar 30, 2007

Posted 17 November 2013 - 05:04 PM

I'll just point out that DirecTV thought 3D would have a material impact on their business too. We saw how that worked out.
  • Herdfan likes this

Dish Network Customer from 9/1998-11/2001
DirecTV Customer 10/2001 - 7/2014

FiOS TV/TiVo Customer since 6/2014
Moderator, DBSDish.com 1999-2000
Co-Founder and Administrator, DBSForums.com 2000-2006

Current setup:
DirecTV: HR34-700 (1TB) / HR24-100 (1TB) / HR24-500 (1TB) / HR21-700 (320GB) / HR21-100 (1TB) / 2 H25s / C41-500 / SWiM16 / Nomad / CCK

FiOS: 2 Tivo Roamio Pros (6 TB total) / 5 Tivo Minis attached via MOCA





Protected By... spam firewall...And...