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

MPEG-4 on MPEG-2 receivers? (Not so much)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
54 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   SummitAdvantageRetailer

SummitAdvantageRetailer

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 422 posts
Joined: Feb 20, 2005

Posted 24 October 2005 - 11:14 AM

Means the existing receivers won't hiccup when they see Mpeg4 H.264 in the stream, not that the existing receivers will decode it and make a picture.


You'd think. Compatible certainly doesn't necessarly mean capable. But notice the use of words when he says "soon-to-be-deployed compression algorithm will be 'reverse-compatible' with DishNetwork's existing installed base of MPEG-2 receivers" and "launch a new product line with MPEG-4 capability and MPEG-2 reverse compatibility". If you take the first statement and apply it to the second statement, it means that the new MPEG4 signal will be READ by the current MPEG2 receivers. Perhaps the new MPEG4 compression algorithm is MPEG2-hardware friendly by software and requires a new piece of hardware for the MPEG4 receivers to read MPEG4 in full compression. I don't know, I'm not an EE so that's my guess on what's being said.

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

#22 OFFLINE   Mikey

Mikey

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,295 posts
Joined: Oct 26, 2004

Posted 24 October 2005 - 11:18 AM

So E* may have smarter engineers who have figured out how to "blend the fuels, rather than change out the engine in which it is used".

It would be immensely more valuable, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, for Dish to figure out a way to imbed a proprietary codec in the M-4 stream so that tens of millions of existing M-2 recevers could decode the signal, rather than to make new M-4 STB hardware "backward" compatible with an obsolete, soon-to-be-abandoned M-2 compression scheme.

The new MPEG-4 receivers WILL be backward-compatible with MPEG-2 because the chipset in the receiver will be backward-compatible. There is no downside to making the new receivers MPEG-2 compatible.
http://www.broadcom....7411-PB04-R.pdf

Your MPEG-2 chipset in the current receivers has no idea how to decode MPEG-4. What IS feasible is re-cycling the motherboards in the receivers, either with a pin-for-pin replacement of the MPEG-2 chips, or an entirely new motherboard that fits in the same chassis. That way E* could take the MPEG-2 trade-in receivers, retrofit, and send them out as MPEG-4 receivers.

You can't "blend the fuels" in this vehicle without swapping out the carburator.

#23 OFFLINE   rthomp03

rthomp03

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 44 posts
Joined: Sep 28, 2005

Posted 24 October 2005 - 11:55 AM

What Mikey said. :yesman:

#24 OFFLINE   Ron Barry

Ron Barry

    622 Tips & Trick Keeper

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 9,879 posts
Joined: Dec 10, 2002

Posted 24 October 2005 - 12:38 PM

Very interesting thread indeed. I am also skeptical that Dish could make a MPEG4 stream work on a MPEG-2 decoder. I am also very confident that the MPEG4 receviers will be MPEG2 compatible. This would have to be the case to make a MPEG2 to MPEG4 transition possible unless you plan on creating exact MPEG4 mirror copies of your MPEG2 stream. Huge waste of bandwidth and I am sure they do not plan to do it.

Nick was what the show on HDNET. I would like to record it and hear it from the source. If Dish has successfully done what you mention in your first post, this has huge ramifications for a number of subs hoping for a box swap with MPEG4.

I am sure there is a lot of skeptism here and I fully understand why. Very interesting indeed....
<strong class='bbc'>New Member of the 9K club & 922/612 User<br /></strong><span style='font-size: 8px;'>"A release is not a release until it is released." - Me. <br />"To the true believer, no proof is necessary. To the non believer, no proof is sufficient." - Peter James (Derived from a Stewert Chase Quote)</span>

#25 OFFLINE   Stewart Vernon

Stewart Vernon

    Excellent Adventurer

  • Moderators
  • 19,918 posts
  • LocationKittrell, NC
Joined: Jan 07, 2005

Posted 24 October 2005 - 01:40 PM

What I read here is...

When Dish starts broadcasting MPEG4, current customers with MPEG2-only receivers will not be cut off. They will continue to get all the channels they get today with no interruption.

New channels will be added in MPEG4, and the new receivers required to receive those channels will be both MPEG4 and MPEG2 so that once you are upgraded you will be able to receive all the new channels and all the old ones that are still in MPEG2.

What I didn't read, but have always assumed is...

Once they get all receivers in the field swapped by one method or another, they will eventually cut off all the MPEG2 and only be using MPEG4 across the board for all channels. But during the process of conversion they don't want to lose customers so they will keep both technologies active as long as they can.

Sometimes, telling people too much detailed information when they don't understand how things work anyway, just adds confusion where there didn't have to be any.

#26 OFFLINE   Michael P

Michael P

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,941 posts
Joined: Oct 27, 2004

Posted 24 October 2005 - 03:25 PM

What I read here is...

When Dish starts broadcasting MPEG4, current customers with MPEG2-only receivers will not be cut off. They will continue to get all the channels they get today with no interruption.

New channels will be added in MPEG4, and the new receivers required to receive those channels will be both MPEG4 and MPEG2 so that once you are upgraded you will be able to receive all the new channels and all the old ones that are still in MPEG2.

What I didn't read, but have always assumed is...

Once they get all receivers in the field swapped by one method or another, they will eventually cut off all the MPEG2 and only be using MPEG4 across the board for all channels. But during the process of conversion they don't want to lose customers so they will keep both technologies active as long as they can.

Sometimes, telling people too much detailed information when they don't understand how things work anyway, just adds confusion where there didn't have to be any.

Give that man a cigar! I believe you hit the nail on the head.

Thee is no way current MPEG-2 receivers can process MPEG-4 streams. E* would have to either duplicate programming in both formats (not likely) or offer to swap receivers for those who want to subscribe to the new programming (read: the rest of the "VOOM Originals"). I'm willing to bet that E* will have a special offer that goes something llike this: A free MPEG-4 upgrade with a 1 year comittment to the VOOM originals.
An E* subscriber continuously since February 1997.

#27 OFFLINE   rocatman

rocatman

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 815 posts
Joined: Nov 27, 2003

Posted 24 October 2005 - 03:40 PM

Let me throw another factor into this issue, QPSK versus 8PSK. I believe only the 311, 322, 522, 625, 811, 921 and 942 can deal with 8PSK.

#28 OFFLINE   digiblur

digiblur

    Guest

  • Registered
  • 106 posts
Joined: Jun 10, 2005

Posted 24 October 2005 - 03:42 PM

If the current receivers could do the MPEG4 they wouldn't have waited this long to crank up the MPEG4 nor would they have come out with the 411.

I bet the DishNet guys are reading this laughing their .........

#29 OFFLINE   olgeezer

olgeezer

    Guest

  • Registered
  • 1,833 posts
Joined: Dec 05, 2003

Posted 24 October 2005 - 03:43 PM

Let me throw another factor into this issue, QPSK versus 8PSK. I believe only the 311, 322, 522, 625, 811, 921 and 942 can deal with 8PSK.



And for non HD receivers, an OTA digital tuner would have to be added.

#30 Guest_gpflepsen_*

Guest_gpflepsen_*
  • Guests
Joined: --

Posted 24 October 2005 - 05:29 PM

And for non HD receivers, an OTA digital tuner would have to be added.


Why? They don't have them now. What is the motivation for E* to do that instead of selling the LiL package?

#31 OFFLINE   rasheed

rasheed

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 296 posts
Joined: Sep 12, 2005

Posted 24 October 2005 - 06:07 PM

Why? They don't have them now. What is the motivation for E* to do that instead of selling the LiL package?


Because, you get no OTA guide data without buying the LiL package anyway.

Rasheed

#32 OFFLINE   MikeW

MikeW

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,549 posts
Joined: May 16, 2002

Posted 24 October 2005 - 06:33 PM

The image obviously states that the "NEW PRODUCT LINE" will have MPEG-4 capability and MPEG-2 reverse compatibility. NOWHERE on the PPT image does it refer to existing receivers. How is this news and why is it being discussed. This was known since day 1 of MPEG 4 conversion. They wouldn't build a box that can only decode MPEG4. That would require a decision by the end user...a few HD chans or the SD pack...

#33 OFFLINE   juan ellitinez

juan ellitinez

    Icon/Supporter

  • Gold Members
  • 1,980 posts
Joined: Jan 31, 2003

Posted 24 October 2005 - 06:42 PM

Because, you get no OTA guide data without buying the LiL package anyway.

Rasheed

not on a 811 you get ota data without buying locals

#34 OFFLINE   unr1

unr1

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 245 posts
Joined: Jul 16, 2005

Posted 24 October 2005 - 08:37 PM

The image obviously states that the "NEW PRODUCT LINE" will have MPEG-4 capability and MPEG-2 reverse compatibility. NOWHERE on the PPT image does it refer to existing receivers. How is this news and why is it being discussed.

/thread

#35 OFFLINE   Jason Nipp

Jason Nipp

    Analog Geek in a Digital World

  • Super Moderators
  • 10,041 posts
  • LocationNorthern Illinois
Joined: Jun 10, 2004

Posted 25 October 2005 - 02:30 AM

Nick, all, sorry I am late chiming into this one, I am 7 hours ahead of you in Poland. I was sent an email by E* regarding this thread. I was asked if I could clarify a few things.

I was asked to clarify that the statement was that the new line of "receivers" introduced with MPEG4 capability would also be reverse compatible with MPEG2. It was not meant to say that the MPEG4 "transmissions" were reverse compatible with existing MPEG2 only receivers in the network. I am also under the impression that the segment was edited for content and length, but it is not known if this contributed to any misunderstandings.

Regards,
Jason

#36 OFFLINE   Antknee

Antknee

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 136 posts
Joined: Oct 13, 2005

Posted 25 October 2005 - 06:17 AM

I recently signed up with dish. I called them a few times before signing up to ask questions. Each time I asked if the 942 would be compatible with their new MPEG 4 encoding and I was told yes each time. If it isn't I'm going to be pissed.

#37 OFFLINE   Mikey

Mikey

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,295 posts
Joined: Oct 26, 2004

Posted 25 October 2005 - 06:49 AM

I recently signed up with dish. I called them a few times before signing up to ask questions. Each time I asked if the 942 would be compatible with their new MPEG 4 encoding and I was told yes each time. If it isn't I'm going to be pissed.

Well, your 942 won't DIE when it sees an MPEG-4 stream. It just won't decode it. :D

#38 OFFLINE   Antknee

Antknee

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 136 posts
Joined: Oct 13, 2005

Posted 25 October 2005 - 06:51 AM

Ok, I am preparing to be pissed. Thanks

#39 OFFLINE   LtMunst

LtMunst

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,261 posts
Joined: Aug 24, 2005

Posted 25 October 2005 - 06:59 AM

Ok, I am preparing to be pissed. Thanks



I think the CSR's are playing word games. When you ask if the 942 will be compatible with MPEG-4 they are saying yes because your 942 will still work. It won't get the new channels, but it will be usable (thus "compatible").

#40 OFFLINE   Geronimo

Geronimo

    Native American Potentate

  • Gold Members
  • 8,295 posts
Joined: Mar 23, 2002

Posted 25 October 2005 - 07:04 AM

It always pays to check things out before passing them on. In this case DISH madea rather confusing announcement.
I never cared for all the signatures that insult posters with other points of view.




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