techygeek
join:2008-04-30
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Optimum Online
4 edits | could 2160p SDV give FIOS the edge over cable & sat tv
I was thinking about it and where I don't know if satellite tv can do SDV (though I can be wrong) & I don't know if cable's technology is really ready for an investment to go to SDV; I feel Verizon really has a chance to make a jump ahead of the rest if they just come out with 2 2160p channels & have Motorola make them a 2160p passthrough settop box, maybe for yet another $5/month.
Whatever it can carry at first, the travel channel, to me, its all about the awe. My 52" don't look all that big anymore and any bigger, the picture just doesn't seem to have that razor sharp look I seek so much when watching HD. How about some high school or college sports games in 2160p; the point is, it busts the door open and gives other technology companies an incentive to make 2160p equipment.
I hear of DirecTV offering 130 HD channels or Dish offering 1080p, in either case, one setup in a store, the salesman said was DirecTV & the other Dish with both HD monitors priced at least $3000 or more and it looked (i'm just being honest)- awful.. mosquito effects, noise around letters, blocking effects - we are talking about expensive investments. I only know its source cause I arbitrarily I asked the salesman and in both cases they said it was DirecTV, I made it sound like I wanted to know cause I wanted to sign up but I really just wanted to know what their provider was.
Ok, in all fairness, maybe it wasn't set up correctly, maybe the salesman was wrong, the point is not to fault sat tv, the point is to state out loud to these providers, we don't just want plenty of channels, we wan't quality channels. If I go out and buy a 30" monitor or an 85" monitor, the picture should look just as pristine.
Does this put satellite out of the running, of course not, but unless there is a similar technology they can use, it might mean having to launch at least another satellite to be able to offer the same channels using the standard (send them all at once) approach. Yes, cable can likely do 2160p SDV & along with DOCSIS 3.0 using their existing coax if they do it right but I feel its going to take longer for them to upgrade all their network architecture cause Verizon doesn't need to change out all their splitters (or something like that) as I read somewhere, cable has to do. |
|
hobgoblin
Sortof Agoblin
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Orchard Park, NY
clubs: | I am a little confused with this post.
Hob |
|
dmodert66
join:2007-04-02
Ontario, CA
·Verizon FIOS
| said by hobgoblin  :I am a little confused with this post. Hob It's not confusing Hob. He thinks Verizon should broadcast a 2160p channel or 2. Never mind the fact that barely any (if any at all) currently broadcast in 1080p.
@ OP, I would think 1080p channels would come next (before any higher resolution), but that isn't up to Verizon. That would be up to the broadcasters. Once broadcasters start airing 1080p, then we can all chime in and tell Verizon we need boxes capable of 1080p (I don't think the current boxes can, but I could be wrong...) |
|
techygeek
join:2008-04-30
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
1 edit | reply to hobgoblin
I am making a point on what I feel Verizon should do and also asking what people feel about it. I think that HD is stuck in the middle of nowhere with more like a "lets squeeze down the bitrate as much as we can to offer as many channels as we can race" or at least thats the way it seems, rather than moving forward to even better technology & picture.
I wanted to ask what people are feeling & hoping Verizon thinks this is the way to go. |
|
dmodert66
join:2007-04-02
Ontario, CA
·Verizon FIOS
| said by techygeek :I am making a point on what I feel Verizon should do and also asking what people feel about it. I think that HD is stuck in the middle of nowhere with more like a "lets squeeze down the bitrate as much as we can to offer as many channels as we can race" or at least thats the way it seems, rather than moving forward to even better technology & picture. I wanted to ask what people are feeling & hoping Verizon thinks this is the way to go. Verizon does not "squeeze" down any channels (that I know of). They pass to the end user exactly what the broadcasters send. They do not alter the stream to my knowledge. As I said above, it's really not a decision for VZ to make right now, it's the broadcasters decision first... |
|
techygeek
join:2008-04-30
1 edit | Ok fine but as dmodert66 discussed, at least true 1080p with a good bitrate so we at least have the cleanest 1080p deliverable.
Even if we can't do 2160p yet, at least we should be aiming for the cleanest 1080p |
|
JonHB
join:2007-09-18
Huntington Beach, CA | reply to techygeek
Seriously, 2160p? Most people can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080i. Sure, I enjoy my 1080p content and I would like to see some of the channels going that direction, but I really don't see anyone going to 2160p any time soon. |
|
JUG831
join:2009-01-09
Plainfield, NJ
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to techygeek
Why stop at 2160P? They are already working on 4320 in Japan according to Wikipedia...only 4TB for a 20 minute video! 
But seriously, 1080P is the next logical step...someday. With broadcasters upgrading all equipment to handle current HD, it will take a while for the next leap to UHDTV. Need time to depreciate all those costs for the shareholders! 
And finally....how many seconds of UHDTV can the 160gb VZ DVR hold? Well, at least the upcoming rumored 320gb DVR will hold double...  |
|
JohnA
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Pittsburgh, PA | reply to hobgoblin
Hide and watch, Hob. We've got two of these guys that don't sleep at night, and beam in from the twilight zone periodically. |
|
icemannyr1
join:2001-04-11
Township Of Washington, NJ | reply to techygeek
Would FiOS going to switched digital video require new STBs? |
|
KenAF
join:2006-01-23
Arlington, VA
1 edit | quote:
Would FiOS going to switched digital video require new STBs?
Verizon's current infrastructure isn't compatible with SDV. When Verizon needs to expand capacity, it will move to MPEG-4 and IPTV.
No TVs can handle 2160p input so there'd be no point to support it. The next step is 1080p60; we could see that in several years from major network or two, such as ESPN. |
|
xer0derm
join:2007-07-27
·Verizon FIOS
| said by KenAF :No TVs can handle 2160p input so there'd be no point to support it. The next step is 1080p60; we could see that in several years from major network or two, such as ESPN. Why ESPN? Don't they still broadcast in only 720p?
In regards to 2160P, I think it's a little nuts. There's no point to go in that direction. The newer technology is going to be this 3d-TV. For one, I would much prefer it to be without glasses, but I don't expect that to become mainstream for at least another decade. |
|
KenAF
join:2006-01-23
Arlington, VA
| quote:
Why ESPN? Don't they still broadcast in only 720p?
They do, but they recently upgraded their facilities to support 1080p60. They are also one of the few providers that has talked about the possibility of a 1080p60 channel with MPEG-4. If this comes to pass, it would likely supplement, rather than replace, their 720p60 channel. |
|
aaronwt
Premium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
·Verizon FIOS
2 edits | said by KenAF : quote:
Why ESPN? Don't they still broadcast in only 720p?
They do, but they recently upgraded their facilities to support 1080p60. They are also one of the few providers that has talked about the possibility of a 1080p60 channel with MPEG-4. If this comes to pass, it would likely supplement, rather than replace, their 720p60 channel. The bandwidth required for 1080P60 is extremely high.
Even Blu-ray Disc is only 1080P24. |
|
KenAF
join:2006-01-23
Arlington, VA
4 edits | quote:
The bandwidth required for 1080P60 is extremely high.
Even Blu-ray Disc is only 1080P24.
Many of the older MPEG-2 Blu-ray titles used 35-45Mbps video. The typical ATSC 1080i MPEG-2 HD broadcast is probably 12-14Mbps. I doubt we'll ever see the same standard for quality even if certain channels are made available in 1080p60.
Motorola claims that its newest real-time encoders can do 1080p60 in MPEG-4 AVC @ 20Mbps. I doubt that number reflects the bandwidth requirements of a sports channel like ESPN, but I can see it done in 24-26Mbps. Consider that the satellite providers currently offer most of their 720p60 channels in MPEG-4 AVC @ 5-6Mbps, with ESPN-HD in 720p60 @ 8-12Mbps.
FiOS could probably fit a 25Mbps 1080p60 feed and two of HBO's 6-7Mbps MPEG-4 feeds into a single QAM. |
|
fishacura
join:2008-01-25
Phoenixville, PA
1 edit | reply to techygeek
said by techygeek :Even if we can't do 2160p yet, at least we should be aiming for the cleanest 1080p OK...but who is it again who's broadcasting in 1080p???
I for one am a proponent of 4320...Unless those pixels are 1/75 of an inch or smaller, what's the point
--
People who don't get good service on average tell 10 others while people who do get good service on average tell 1. |
|
danclan
join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA | this new standard is needed better quality porn
....im just sayen... |
|
Reaper_WA
join:2008-12-15
Lynnwood, WA | reply to techygeek
I think that 1080i is fine. I just want more HD programming choices. |
|
blue_trooper
join:2007-04-17
Exton, PA
| reply to aaronwt
said by aaronwt :Even Blu-ray Disc is only 1080P24. I think this is more a result of the souce material (film or HDTV which is 1080i60) rather than limitations of Blu-Ray. I think Blu-Ray can handle 1080p60. |
|
keyboards
join:2001-02-14
Doylestown, PA | I waiting for million 80p that the cable guys claimed in the DirecTV anti-cable commercial
--
REMEMBER: Stupidity should be painful !! |
|
