shark2k
join:2008-06-01
West Orange, NJ | reply to bull3964
Re: [HD] Any New HD Channels scheduled in future? The problem is that is still a huge cost factor for Verizon (between the shipping to and from of the boxes). Also, if that hardward is good it could still get used since Verizon will send out refurbished boxes. This issue has been talked about before when talk about HD expansion comes up.
-Shark2k |
|
| said by shark2k:The problem is that is still a huge cost factor for Verizon (between the shipping to and from of the boxes). Also, if that hardward is good it could still get used since Verizon will send out refurbished boxes. This issue has been talked about before when talk about HD expansion comes up.
-Shark2k
I believe it's already been confirmed by a few sources that 6416's that make their way back to FIOS don't get redeployed. They are slowly removing them out of circulation.
The cross section of users that are still using 6416s AND subscribe to (let's say) the premium channels is probably not a huge percentage.
The cost of replacing field equipment will simply be factored into the cost of doing the MPEG4 upgrade. |
|
2 edits | reply to shark2k
said by shark2k:The problem is that is still a huge cost factor for Verizon (between the shipping to and from of the boxes). Also, if that hardward is good it could still get used since Verizon will send out refurbished boxes. This issue has been talked about before when talk about HD expansion comes up.
-Shark2k
Twitter Joe has previously said that everything below a 7 series is going to the junk pile. That covers the MPEG4 problem. And, as for the cost of reclamation, that's what the $40 fee is for. Maybe the reason for the slow rollout of 1.9 is to facilitate a high percentage of STB swaps?
But like others have said: if you start with a small number of channels, you just send out a notice that says if you aren't running a 7 series STB, you won't have access to the following X new channels. Previously it was suggested (or at least it was my interpretation based on how it was explained) that it was an all-or-nothing choice: either all MPEG4 or all MPEG2. If that's wrong, then there's no reason not to shift what's possible to MPEG4 and reclaim some QAM for more MPEG4 additions, and gradually switch over other channels as it becomes possible.
I believe a substantial percentage of channels are now MPEG4, including the ESPN networks, the Rainbow Media networks, and all the premium networks. All told, I think that could easily make space for "several dozen" new HD channels, particularly if the new channels are also MPEG4.
As has been discussed, if every HD channel were MPEG4, Verizon has capacity for well over 200 HD channels--more than is currently available.
I'll say this too. If you've got a 7232, once a majority of channels are MPEG4, file sizes will essentially drop between a third to a half from what they are now and your DVR will be close to bottomless. So Verizon can afford to absorb the cost to some degree now because the fact of the matter is the new crop of STBs are future-proof for a very long time to come. |
|
|
|
shark2k
join:2008-06-01
West Orange, NJ | I know how reliable Twitter Joe can be, but if that is true than you're right it does eliminate the MPEG-4 problem. Of course a lot of people on this forum have reported not paying the $40 upgrade fee, so that might not really help (not sure how many people actually paid in within the whole network).
As to the MPEG-4 or MPEG-2, I would think it can be a mix because I'm pretty sure the only reason (or at least my understanding) that Verizon transcoded the MPEG-4 channels to MPEG-2 was because of the fact that not all STBs could handle it (HBO I know comes in as MPEG-4). The tuners can handle MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 so I see no reason, aside from Verizon not being able to send both codecs, for mixed not be doable. The tuner should be able to easily determine the codec type and decode it from there.
As to the DVR, we don't have one just the 7100-P2 STBs, but I agree with you. Going MPEG-4 will definitely increase the amount of recordings that can be stored on the DVR almost acting like another hard drive increase.
All I know if this is indeed true, that is great news for us and hopefully contracts are being negotiated for us to be getting some of the national HD channels out there that we do not have. I for one would love to have Cartoon Network HD and DIY Network HD. If Verizon can get this change implemented it will give them more time for going IPTV (if that does indeed happen).
-Shark2k |
|
 dc
@verizon.net | If the new dvr holds about 70 hours HD now is there a guesstimate at what it would hold if everything was mpeg4 HD ? |
|
| said by dc :If the new dvr holds about 70 hours HD now is there a guesstimate at what it would hold if everything was mpeg4 HD ?
It's hard to say without knowing the bit rates, but if we use HBO's 8Mbps as an example, around 140 hours for all MPEG4 material. |
|
| reply to shark2k
said by shark2k:All I know if this is indeed true, that is great news for us and hopefully contracts are being negotiated for us to be getting some of the national HD channels out there that we do not have. I for one would love to have Cartoon Network HD and DIY Network HD. If Verizon can get this change implemented it will give them more time for going IPTV (if that does indeed happen). It's been suggested, though we can't know for sure, that--unlike the last time--contracts are not holding up additions now. It's technology.
Based on recent additions and some old promises, I would guess contracts are already in place for most of the remaining HD channels--certainly any premium channels not carried, and probably all the channels distributed by Comcast, Discovery (including BBC America), Disney, Time Warner, Fox, and Viacom.
I think this is why Twitter Joe is willing to tell us "what's in the pipeline" because the contracts are in place. |
|
jaw2012
join:2008-08-01
King Of Prussia, PA | reply to bull3964
Is that really 8Mbps for HBO HD? I always thought the conversion from Mpeg4 to Mpeg2 was a big reason for the lower PQ compared to the other HD's, but if the bitrate is really 8Mbps, then no wonder. |
|
| Yes, it was widely reported in 2007 that HBO's distribution would go fully MPEG4 with 8Mbps on all channels.
»hd.engadget.com/2007/06/22/hbo-t···it-rate/ |
|
| reply to jaw2012
An MPEG4 bitrate of 8Mbps is not bad at all. |
|
| reply to jaw2012
said by jaw2012:Is that really 8Mbps for HBO HD? I always thought the conversion from Mpeg4 to Mpeg2 was a big reason for the lower PQ compared to the other HD's, but if the bitrate is really 8Mbps, then no wonder.
8mbps in mpeg4 is equal to 16-19mbps in mpeg2. People here talk smack about something they don't know about. |
|
tnsprin
join:2003-07-23
Bradenton, FL
kudos:1 | reply to bull3964
At least initially HBO was offering both MPEG4 and MPEG2 distribution. And they were requiring those carrying not to degrade the signal from what they were sending by recoding to a different bit-rate. |
|
jaw2012
join:2008-08-01
King Of Prussia, PA | reply to Hboman
said by Hboman :said by jaw2012:Is that really 8Mbps for HBO HD? I always thought the conversion from Mpeg4 to Mpeg2 was a big reason for the lower PQ compared to the other HD's, but if the bitrate is really 8Mbps, then no wonder.
8mbps in mpeg4 is equal to 16-19mbps in mpeg2. People here talk smack about something they don't know about. The HBO feed VZ sends down to us is Mpeg2, so the original 8mbps bitrate means nothing, because the bitrate changes after the conversion from Mpeg4 to Mpeg2 which eventually lowers PQ. No way around that fact, any conversion will lower PQ. |
|
tnsprin
join:2003-07-23
Bradenton, FL
kudos:1
1 edit | |
|
