Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by SledgeHammer, Jan 29, 2013.
skip it, it's too much for you
I was looking for a translator, not an explanation.
that was the point
Fios claims they do not do a damned thing to signals.
But, of course, I am sure you can make claims about other services you do not have.
Your posts are hard to understand, but not due to their substance.
Due to the mind-boggling complexity of the syntax of the Elbonian language, the Universal Translator produces only hairballs when processing P Smith's dialog.
I had to look it up, but I'm glad I did. Nice one.
move on ... get to the technical point of conversion H.263 to H.264 slices ...[it would be relevant part of discussion, as we talking about video compression, not stream conforming to MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 format]
When and where did they claim that?
Verizon continues to let the public believe that they are offering a modern IPTV service when they're actually using a conventional QAM system just as all the cable TV carriers do.
We also know that FIOS uses MoCA and that puts an upper limit on their available bandwidth so working backwards, we take 580 channels (150+ in HD) and pack it all into about 1.2GHz and the math doesn't add up. The HD channels alone would seem to consume the entire bandwidth budget.
I suspect that this "hands off" thing is another one of those items of lore that Verizon is willing to let the consumers believe even though it isn't true.
Ok, you guys are just arguing semantics now about my analogies. Point is, they compress the signal further beyond what they got originally from the network. They may or may not down rez it. I would be extremely surprised if FOX is putting out such a signal.
H.265 is not finalized yet.
DirecTV hasn't even finished the MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 transition. By its nature, large scale broadcast installations like DirecTV or Dish or the local cable company will always be behind the times. MPEG-4 hit at just the right time and DirecTV jumped on it. They could have waited, but they needed the improved bandwidth and there were dirt cheap decoder chips ready then. H.265 will take a long time to get finalized, rolled out, perfected, etc. By the time DirecTV is ready to do another transition there will be something better out there.
The Ku->Ka transition and the MPEG-4 transition, at a technical level, have nothing to do with one another. They could have easily (and I think do/have in the past) put MPEG-4 streams on the older Ku satellites. They just happened to have the satellites available (from the demise of the Spaceway internet plans) and just happened to be doing the MPEG-4 transition, so why not tie them together. It was a business decision, not a technical requirement to make MPEG-4 work. At any rate, the STBs and labor are the big cost drivers, not new dishes or LNBs. And they will always build new satellites no matter what, so the cost of a new satellite doesn't really factor into the equation (especially because the Ka birds probably weren't significantly more expensive than a Ku bird on a cost-per-bitrate basis)
DirecTV, at some point, is always doing some kind of transcoding or compression of the signals they're sending up. With locals, they have two options of receiving the signal--a direct fiber feed from the station or an off-air antenna. Either way, they're receiving an "uncompressed" signal (definitely ATSC if using an antenna, and I'd assume it's likely the fiber feeds contain whatever the station sends to the broadcast tower--an MPEG-2 stream).
Wrong. The provider always re-encodes it (except for analog channels on cable). The signal provided by the programmer is always very high resolution and high bandwidth, and the providers don't have the bandwidth to turn that directly around to you.
If Verizon is saying that, they're lying. FIOS is QAM cable, and then they use RF over Glass to convert it to fiber optics. It's not IPTV, and it is absolutely re-encoded because those signals from the programmers wouldn't be compatible with their set top boxes or your TV
That is not the case.
Well, I will grant you that those terms are subjective and my definition of "high" or "very high" may not be the same as yours. And, I probably shouldn't have included resolution (that wouldn't change). However, the signal provided by the programmer will be a higher quality than the signal coming from DirecTV
I agree. I guess my point was that it isn't sent to the provider at as high a quality as it was when the content was created. A poor way of describing it, but: created as lossless in all its original glory, reformatted to still high quality lossy version and sent to the provider, then degraded a bit more in delivery by the provider.
No one broadcasts 40Mb/s bitrate like you can find in higher bitrate sections of BD disks. Even OTA broadcasts, which are the least compressed broadcast tv you could get into your home currently, maxes out around 18Mb/s(I think, maybe its 13) and most/many are still in MPEG2 format, with stations that are using their full allocated bandwidth for 1 primary and no sub-channels. 18Mb/s mpeg2 is equivalent to maybe 10-ish or so mpeg4.
Heck, even Blu-Ray audio/video is compressed.
Quite true, but that is quite honestly the consumer in-home gold standard we have to go by currently.
And then DirecTV then reduces the bitrate further and seems to be trying to pack in more channels per transponder than they previously did. It is approaching Dish Network quality after some of the recent additions.