 
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | Cox probably does this. On my calibrated TV the quality for FoodHD just isn't that impressive. | |
|
 | BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
 ·Comcast
·Comcast Formerly ..
| Re: Cox probably does this. said by inteller  :On my calibrated TV the quality for FoodHD just isn't that impressive. I Had my brother tune mine thinking it was something going bad with my tv ! This explains why. My brother tuned it well. It looks good but not as good as it did before and I thought my tv was getting old and the backlight fading or something.
Great that this came out I was looking at tv's online.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| 
NeedstospendCash
@comcast.net
| Comcasts problem is they need to stop running on the cheep and upgrade the bandwidth to the CMTS's. They want to run DOCSIS 3.0 and offer more channels but most CMTS's can't handle it. Nobody is going to see ANY upgrades to their home until the infrastructure is upgraded! | |
|
| 
Nerdtalker
Working Hard, Or Hardly Working?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-02-18
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
·Comcast
| FoodTV used to be my favorite channel not just because I liked the content (who can refuse seeing food, seriously, it's the healthy alternative to eating), but because of the content quality. Honestly, the stuff used to pop on my 60" Samsung plasma.
I have indeed noticed a rather significant reduction in quality on all the HD channels. They seem to be increasing compression even more so on less-than-prime channels. Interestingly enough, they added SciFi channel in my area and promptly crippled it with compression so much that action in Stargate Atlantis was laughable with the artifacts. My jaw literally dropped when I saw the tiling. Unacceptable Comcast, unacceptable.
Bad choice of channels to compress, BTW, especially considering the viewership.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn
I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB. | |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA | How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this? DOCSIS 3.0 will increase internet speeds but unless Comcast goes to MPEG-4 the problem with over-compressed HD remains. | |
|
| |
| | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this? They need to use switched digital video to save up on capacity or go complete fiber (not likely to happen)
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
| | | 
snipper_cr
join:2002-01-22
Wheaton, IL
clubs:
| Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this? I am actually curious about that idea. When ever techs came out to work on a problem, I would follow them around and talk with them. They said that fiber basically comes right up to the green box in our backyard and that coaxial cable just runs from that to our house. To me that looks like fiber is pretty darn close. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | 
jjsk8r85
join:2005-02-17
Belleville, MI | Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this? it is fiber, from the cmts, up the pole, down the road to the node. | |
|
| jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·ViaTalk
| Sorry, the point of Karl's posting of article is to bash Comcast, not actually highlight anything about the comparison between FIOS and Comcast HD television. He'll take any shot he can at Comcast; I'm just surprised he didn't work in something about throttling and invisible caps.
The AVSForums thread is pretty interesting -- that site is a good resource. | |
|
| | 
Dogfather
Altitude is your friend
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this? Yes, God forbid anyone point out anything Comcast does without kissing Brian Roberts' ass. | |
|
| | 
Nightshade
sic semper tyrannis
Premium
join:2002-05-26
Salem, OR
edit:
March 25th, @02:50PM
| said by jester121 :Sorry, the point of Karl's posting of article is to bash Comcast, not actually highlight anything about the comparison between FIOS and Comcast HD television. Uhh hate to break it to you but Karl did not have to highlight anything about the comparison between FIOS and Comcast HD. The link that he cited as his source in his article has comparison pictures that pretty much says it all.
I could tell the difference between FTTH and Comcast HD pictures and suffice to say, the comcast pictures were of lower quality than FTTH. | |
|
| Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
 ·SONIC.NET
| said by Sammer :DOCSIS 3.0 will increase internet speeds but unless Comcast goes to MPEG-4 the problem with over-compressed HD remains. That's pretty obvious. I've been complaining about that for a long time.
I wonder how good DirectTV HD is. Obviously they went MPEG4 (which until now I didn't know), but did they overcompress that too? | |
|
| | 
tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Kansas City, MO
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this? said by Ulmo :said by Sammer :DOCSIS 3.0 will increase internet speeds but unless Comcast goes to MPEG-4 the problem with over-compressed HD remains. That's pretty obvious. I've been complaining about that for a long time. I wonder how good DirectTV HD is. Obviously they went MPEG4 (which until now I didn't know), but did they overcompress that too? DirecTV's image quality is really good. Probably better than my TWC HD feed.
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara | |
|
| | | 
MisterMarcus
join:2001-11-10
San Diego, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: How does DOCSIS 3.0 Fix this? DirecTV's is OKAY. Channels like TNTHD and Spike HD look really good. Sci Fi HD looks good, but not as good as Spike HD. USA HD also looks okay, but again, not nearly as good as Sci Fi HD. Additionally, Direct TV still does not have CW HD (at least not in my area) nor any of the other "sitcom" channels. Not that I watch those, mind you. It's the principle of the thing. What I do note, and this is the case with every HD channel I've noticed except for TNT HD, is the artifacts in fast motion. It's particularly prevalent on Sci Fi.
One thing's for sure - DirecTV's HD PPV quality is stellar. | |
|
| | | 
toadlife
Premium
join:2004-05-03
Coalinga, CA
·AT&T Yahoo
| said by tiger72 :said by Ulmo :said by Sammer :DOCSIS 3.0 will increase internet speeds but unless Comcast goes to MPEG-4 the problem with over-compressed HD remains. That's pretty obvious. I've been complaining about that for a long time. I wonder how good DirectTV HD is. Obviously they went MPEG4 (which until now I didn't know), but did they overcompress that too? DirecTV's image quality is really good. Probably better than my TWC HD feed. I've had DTV HD for a year now. I've noticed that the quality really varies from station to station. My NBC station looks terrible in HD while the local Fox station looks pretty good. I noticed the difference when there was a football game on both stations at the same time and I was switching back and forth.
Even with the good stations I still notice "blockiness" from time to time.  | |
|
|
| rahvin112
join:2002-05-24
Sandy, UT
| Re: What I don't quite get... Streamed into the house they have the same capacity, but at the fiber terminal on the house they theoretically have unlimited capacity, in essence the ability to have 100 cable systems that can turn on or off based on channel number. In theory they could run their in home system with 10 or more full cables systems on each fiber, then dynamically switch between different full cable systems carried on the single fiber based on channel.
Although FIOS uses cable standards they aren't limited to what comes off the head end because the head end is on each customers home. They can deliver on the RG6 anything they want as they should with hacks even be able to dynamically change what's coming down the RG-6. The other cable companies are limited to what's comes off the node where they switch from fiber to copper, everyone connected to the node gets the same thing. FIOS doesn't have that limit and could in theory deliver a completely different cable system to every customer. | |
|
| jmallory
join:2005-11-02
Clawson, MI
| said by djrobx : quote:
Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH network,
Isn't Verizon using off-the shelf MPEG-2 Motorola cable DVRs? The same ones the cable companies are using? Even CableCARD TiVos work on FiOS. While that "compatibility" is great, it also means Verizon must funnel their TV service to fit in the exact same spectrum range that cable uses. The only thing different is they don't need to allocate any space for internet usage, which is a very small chunk of that spectrum anyway. I realize that FiOS has the potential to do and be much more, but given its current implementation, from a technical standpoint can someone explain why what Verizon is delivering is any better than Cable, given that they are pretty much sharing the same limitations with regards to their TV delivery? You are correct, Verizon FIOS TV is using standard Cable Television technology. It is the same as a standard 860 Mhz cable plant with one exception, data and voice are not carried within that 860 Mhz system. This does free up a few channels (depending on Node size) that provides some additional capacity. Cable 1Ghz systems can also do this...standard TV on 54-860 Mhz and data / voice about 860 Mhz....but there are very few 1 Ghz systems (statistically speaking) out there. Most are 860 Mhz and below. | |
|
| afiggatt
join:2007-07-12
Sterling, VA
| said by djrobx : quote:
Verizon obviously has ample capacity thanks to their FTTH network,
I realize that FiOS has the potential to do and be much more, but given its current implementation, from a technical standpoint can someone explain why what Verizon is delivering is any better than Cable, given that they are pretty much sharing the same limitations with regards to their TV delivery? Verizon is using IPTV for VOD, so that saves QAM channels that the cable companies use for VOD. Verizon is also in the process of shutting down it's limited set of 40 analog channels and replacing with digital QAM 256 channels. (Oregon and Western PA markets which started up in later 2007 are all digital). All of the analog channels were digitally simulcast from the start, so only people hooking up analog NTSC tuners ever used them. Yes, Verizon uses QAM-256 and Mpeg-2 for the live digital TV channels which is convenient for clear QAM tuners and HD Tivos. By the end of 2008, Verizon is supposed to have installed equipment to provide 135 QAM channels throughout the system. The Motorola STB and DVRs that have been issued from the start support 135 QAM channels (860 MHz system) and IP interface for VOD & Guide data.
With no legacy analog channels to hog bandwidth, 135 QAM channels is enough for > 150 full bandwidth HD channels and hundreds of SD channels. Verizon will be ramping up the IPTV part, so the future is probably a mix of QAM for the locals & most widely watched channels and IPTV for VOD & niche channels. | |
|
| 
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL | Verizon is evidently not raping the video before stuffing it into the pipe. These artifacts are introduced at the headend, and Comcast just plain doesn't give a crap how it looks. Verizon, evidently, takes some pride in video quality. | |
|
| | 
N3OGH
Will it all be Obama's fault now?
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: What I don't quite get... said by RadioDoc :Verizon is evidently not raping the video before stuffing it into the pipe. These artifacts are introduced at the headend, and Comcast just plain doesn't give a crap how it looks. Verizon, evidently, takes some pride in video quality. Pretty much sums it up IMHO.
I routinely have issues with the HD on my Comcast service. Of particular issue is Phillies games on Comcast SportsNet.
Issues include dropped frames, serious artifacts and pixelisation.
Any time I'm watching Comcast, whether it's SD or HD, and something explodes or catches fire, the distortion is unacceptable.
Especially since I enjoy watching things catch fire and explode in movies 
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
|
| | | lew_jean
join:2005-05-13
Marietta, GA
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: What I don't quite get... Thats why I drop Comcast and went with U-Verse, I got tired of the poor SD picture, The picture I have now Comcast can only dream of giving. I may only have 4 video streams and 1 HD, but the picture quality is well worth it
so is the cost $114.00 for 4 TVs 1 DVR, plus 6/1M Internet sure beats the $96.00 for Comcast digital Plus
Just my 2 cents | |
|
| | | |
N3OGH
Will it all be Obama's fault now?
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs | Re: What I don't quite get... I'm paying comcast $86/mo for expanded digital, one HD box and DVR.
I presently get my internet from Verizon DSL.....
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
|
| | jmallory
join:2005-11-02
Clawson, MI
| said by RadioDoc :Verizon is evidently not raping the video before stuffing it into the pipe. These artifacts are introduced at the headend, and Comcast just plain doesn't give a crap how it looks. Verizon, evidently, takes some pride in video quality. VZ also has the luxury of a new system and is not expected/required to provide 50 to 60 channels of analog service to subscribers. I am sure if you asked anyone at Comcast they would love to wake up to their installed base being on all-digital 1Ghz systems and not having to compromise on video quality to stay competitive until they can either a.) Get all the systems upgraded or b.) not having to provide analog service but neither one of those are going to happen overnight. | |
|
| | |
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: What I don't quite get... I'm not giving Comcast any slack with this. They've shifted the analogs into the noisiest channel positions and if they can't figure out how to get clean HD to their customers then they should quit advertising it. The bottom line is doing it right and delivering what they advertise is incompatible with their bottom line.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. | |
|
| | | |
| | | | 
kpfx
join:2005-10-28
Kerrville, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: What I don't quite get... Digital/Analog converter? Comcast is already working on that.
The article below (found here on BBR) shows the RFP they've put out for a low-cost digital converter so they could go to a 100% digital plant without leaving out the millions of people still using their analog television tuners.
»Comcast's $35 Digital Conversion Dongle
Over the next year or two the analog channels will get scaled back and things move to a digital format (unencrypted QAM).... that will ultimately save them the most bandwidth. | |
|
| | | | | BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs: | Re: What I don't quite get... Must have missed that , bad geek I am I missed it.
These should be given out by comcast with a sub to basic cable.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
| | | Ztp1112
join:2005-03-18
Springfield, VA
| what are you talking about THE ANALOG CHANNELS ARE ALL MANDATED BUY THE FRANCHISE verizon has analog channels not as many as the cable company because they chose not to get back to me in 2009 we we all are all digital
a analog channel takes up 6x as much space as a digital one | |
|
| |
| |
kpfx
join:2005-10-28
Kerrville, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: What I don't quite get... Sadly MPEG4 is only a viable option with satellite and IPTV services (Uverse) where the provider has 100% control over their set-tops.
In order for MPEG4 to be deployed in the cable world (and this includes FIOS) it would first have to become a standard built into all the digital-ready television sets. That's a much more painful and drawn-out process than just requiring your users swapping out & upgrading their Satellite/IPTV boxes. | |
|
| | afiggatt
join:2007-07-12
Sterling, VA
| said by BosstonesOwn :Fios is good also because it doesn't require you to change anything heavy to upgrade. If they choose to go mpeg4 it's as easy as changing the main feed compressor at Fios down link centers. And change the boxes on the user premises if a upgraded firmware couldn't be hacked to add mpeg4. From what I have read, the current Motorola QIP STB and DVRs provided by Verizon do not support mpeg-4. They will have to swap them all out to incorporate mpeq-4. Remember, Verizon started the TV service over 2.5 years ago and probably picked the STBs a year or two before that. Fios TV is now approaching or will soon be over 1 million subscribers. Verizon will run into the same legacy issues facing cable with the huge costs of replacing existing equipment that is only a few years old. Verizon has reportedly put out specs & asked for bids for a new generation of STBs, but those reportedly won't begin to be deployed until well into 2009. By then, Fios TV could have > 2 million subscribers. Figure an average of 2 (?) STB/DVRs per house, that is a lot of deployed STBs to replace at great expense.
No, mpeg-4 is some years off for Fios. But 135 QAM channels with no channel bandwidth used for analog, VOD or internet will give Verizon a lot of bandwidth for HD and SD channels. | |
|
| | | BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
·Comcast
·Comcast Formerly ..
| Re: What I don't quite get... Yeah , thats why I said they need to replace the boxes at the customers homes.
I have heard that there are unofficial patches to add mpeg4 to the 64xx series of moto boxes. But they fall flat on their face.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | Well, what kind of compression are they using?q 38.8Mbps is more than enough for three 720p feeds using 12mbit CBR h.264. On the other hand, if they're trying to cram 720p MPEG-2 in there, or worse yet, 1080p MPEG-2... Yeah, that's a problem. | |
|
|
See 9 replies to this post |
|
hescominsoon
join:2003-02-18
Brunswick, MD
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| This is the primary reason I have yet to go HD I have yet to see an HD feed that isn't compressed. Why would i want to view compressed, reduced image quality, mislabeled as HD stuff? I don't care what the resolution says..if it's compressed it's not truly HD since you loose detail in the compression. | |
|
|
RadioDoc
Sortofadog
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
Chicago, IL
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: This is the primary reason I have yet to go HD Once you find a raw HD video stream that your TV accepts, report back. They are all compressed. Heavily. Even Blu-ray DVD.
The difference is in the implementation. Comcast is notoriously bad. The difference between OTA and Comcast HD in my area (I get all of the Chicago OTAs perfectly) is astounding. Comcast shouldn't be able to call their crappy over-compressed, erratic video "HD". On this system it looks worse than what my $79 upconverting DVD player puts out.
And then there are the installers who "install" HD using composite or S-video connections because they forgot to bring the proper HD cables.  | |
|
| | Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA
·Comcast
·SONIC.NET
| Re: This is the primary reason I have yet to go HD said by RadioDoc :The difference is in the implementation. Comcast is notoriously bad. The difference between OTA and Comcast HD in my area (I get all of the Chicago OTAs perfectly) is astounding. Comcast shouldn't be able to call their crappy over-compressed, erratic video "HD". On this system it looks worse than what my $79 upconverting DVD player puts out. Finally some evidence about that. That means the ATSC-to-NTSC digital boxes will display crisp images to those old grannies on their old sets, and a few poor people too. Then when they get that "HD" service from Comcast, they'll be like, what, it's worse?!
And then there are the installers who "install" HD using composite or S-video connections because they forgot to bring the proper HD cables. | |
|
| | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| Re: This is the primary reason I have yet to go HD Over the Air is the best quality you will find period.
Even on DirecTV they constantly change the bit stream (compression) on their movies. I had a website book marked that showed you which channels are being delivered at what stream but lost it in a drive crash. | |
|
| | | | 
jeffjs
join:2000-12-11
Philadelphia, PA
edit:
March 26th, @01:57PM
| Re: This is the primary reason I have yet to go HD My HD shows look good. | |
|
| zed260
join:2007-09-30
Cleveland, TN | actuly you wont likely ever see fully uncompressed hd it just takes to much bandwidth its about 622 mbps
so if you were to send hd fully uncompressed you could only fit around 3 channels on coaxial cable | |
|
|
neufuse
join:2006-12-06
Indiana, PA
·Comcast
·Verizon Online DSL
| better codec's... we need better codec's... heck Microsoft's WMV codec preserves great picture quality in HD and uses less space then MPEG-2... and MPEG-4 would be the best if you wanted a largely used standard... why in the world are we still using MPEG2? There are much better codec's out there for vidoe compression... DirectTV has the right idea, cable should follow for digital channels. | |
|
| jmallory
join:2005-11-02
Clawson, MI
edit:
March 25th, @01:14PM
| Re: better codec's... said by neufuse :we need better codec's... heck Microsoft's WMV codec preserves great picture quality in HD and uses less space then MPEG-2... and MPEG-4 would be the best if you wanted a largely used standard... why in the world are we still using MPEG2? There are much better codec's out there for vidoe compression... DirectTV has the right idea, cable should follow for digital channels. Because MPEG-4 isn't part of the ATSC or Digital Cable Ready (DCR) standards. | |
|
| | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA | Re: better codec's... Not only is it not currently the standard but it's also incompatible with most existing cable boxes. | |
|
| 
jsz0
join:2008-01-23
Jewett City, CT
·Comcast
| We're still using MPEG2 because of legacy equipment. Motorola just recently announced their first STB to fully support MPEG4 video and the ability to tune all the way up to 1GHZ. Also, the feed feeds coming off the satellites are MPEG2 still (for the most part) Transcoding from MPEG2 to MPEG4 would cause its own share of compression artefacts. I think we'll see a lot of providers using the 860Mhz-1ghz spectrum for MPEG4 video until all the set tops are capable of doing MPEG4. That could take a while.
Unfortunately Microsoft's WMV codec is very heavily ridden with license fee's and requires very proprietary equipment. Everyone will move to MPE4 instead. | |
|
| | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA
| Re: better codec's... said by jsz0 :I think we'll see a lot of providers using the 860Mhz-1ghz spectrum for MPEG4 video until all the set tops are capable of doing MPEG4. That could take a while. My guess is the 750MHz-1GHz spectrum. Systems that don't have more than 750 MHz are more more likely to be upgraded sooner. The approximately 450 MHz used for analog will also be nearly cut in half. | |
|
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | Re: better codec's... System with less than 750mhz will probably never be upgraded, they are probably 1-way too, with you having to call a telephone number for PPV. | |
|
pathfinda
Premium
join:2002-09-11
Chicago, IL | Comcast HD Image Quality .. And i thought it was me.
Image Quality has been terrible for about a week. On Demand was unwatchable for a moment yesterday.
DirecTV is looking better and better. | |
|
| ebubman
join:2002-01-17
Enola, PA
·Vonage
·Comcast
| Re: Comcast HD Image Quality agree strongly. we've had comcast hd for several years. currently for 2 hd/dvr boxes we're pay $102 (not including internet). it appears that direct tv can give me more channels, far more hd channels w/ 2 regular boxes (tube tvs) and 2 hd/dvr boxes for $76/month for 12 mos. i'll keep the comcast isp thing (with basic cable they say it's cheaper) but i think it's time to put a direct tv dish on our house. bub | |
|
Somnambul33t
L33t.
Premium
join:2002-12-05
Mullica Hill, NJ
clubs: | duh? dunno where that "survey"'s results came from but Comcast's had the worst HD picture quality for 2+ years. DTV's always had superior picture, and now FIOS is basically just as good.
that being said i have Comcast... | |
|
| bnceo
join:2007-10-11
West Orange, NJ | Re: duh? My condolences on having comcast. =(
Seriously, they need to get their act together. Not to mention I hate the way they have their channel lineup all over the place. Fios is so much easier. | |
|
Rothan Tik
Destroyer of worlds
Premium
join:2000-11-07
Danvers, MA | Forget HD... Comcast has enough trouble sometimes delivering normal TV, lagged images for moving objects, etc. It's not like its there more than a second, but it never happened with Cablevision in this area before Comcast came to town. | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | Re: Forget HD... Cablevision in MA? Huh? Comcast bought Cablevision? Your profile says "Danvers, MA" BTW. | |
|
| ebubman
join:2002-01-17
Enola, PA | you know, i was beginning to think this delay sh-t was the fault of our hdtvs. it would appear that more of the blame would lie with comcast than our hardware. bub | |
|
|
Comcast HD Image Quality Vs. FiOS
