A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

UK Government's "Digital" Advisor



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 6th 03, 12:17 PM posted to alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.broadcast,uk.tech.digital-tv
Stuart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default UK Government's "Digital" Advisor

Without some sort of driver, I can't see HDTV begin to reach a market;
however, there are a large number of plasma displays usually in the
high street windows of the more upmarket retailers (independents
mainly). Typically these will be playing a DVD. Is there a case
for a D-SAT delivered HDTV test transmission, essentially as a
marketing tool for the trade?



Maybe piracy could be a driver. It's a lot less convenient to share
high resolution video (at the moment). The next DVD format, could offer
superior HDTV quality, thus helping to drive the sales of HDTV. Then
the TV broadcasters will have to compete.

S.

Ads
  #12  
Old November 6th 03, 12:43 PM posted to alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.broadcast,uk.tech.digital-tv
Ivor Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default UK Government's "Digital" Advisor


"Stuart" wrote in message
...
Without some sort of driver, I can't see HDTV begin to reach a market;
however, there are a large number of plasma displays usually in the
high street windows of the more upmarket retailers (independents
mainly). Typically these will be playing a DVD. Is there a case
for a D-SAT delivered HDTV test transmission, essentially as a
marketing tool for the trade?



Maybe piracy could be a driver. It's a lot less convenient to share
high resolution video (at the moment). The next DVD format, could offer
superior HDTV quality, thus helping to drive the sales of HDTV. Then
the TV broadcasters will have to compete.


This is, at the moment, the major stumbling block with US HDTV, there is no
easy way to record it. My friend had to buy a 200GB drive for his PC and a
separate HDTV receiver card.

Ivor


  #14  
Old November 6th 03, 01:28 PM posted to alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.broadcast,uk.tech.digital-tv
Dave Liquorice
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default UK Government's "Digital" Advisor

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 13:55:21 +0000 (GMT), David G. Bell wrote:

So you have to persuade people to buy a new-format DVD player when
the current is convincingly better than VHS or broadcast...


Have you seen HDTV? The same applies, HDTV is a *huge* step up from
any 625/525 line based format.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail



  #15  
Old November 6th 03, 01:36 PM posted to alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.broadcast,uk.tech.digital-tv
Stuart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default UK Government's "Digital" Advisor

So you have to persuade people to buy a new-format DVD player when the
current is convincingly better than VHS or broadcast...


And HDTV is even better still.


And the media producers have to be willing to cut themselves off from
the huge current-format market...


Surly it would run in parallel, just as VHS and DVD does. Just think of
all that back-catalogue to resell in glorious HDTV!


And the pirates won't have systems that can convert the data?


Convert to what? You still have the storage and transmitation problems,
unless you down-convert to PAL/NTSC quality, in which case, what's the
point?


I don't think that it will be that easy.


"Maybe" (which is how I began the suggestion)

S.

  #16  
Old November 6th 03, 03:27 PM posted to alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.broadcast,uk.tech.digital-tv
DAB sounds worse than FM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 209
Default UK Government's "Digital" Advisor

Stuart wrote:
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
I watched Click Online on BBC News 24 a couple of days ago and there
was a short article about digital TV on, and on it they interviewed
Barry Cox who's the UK Government's digital TV advisor.

He said that apparently the US wants HDTV, whereas we're happy about
the picture quality we get.



Can't stand Barry Cox, but he is probably right... the majority of the
British public don't know what HDTV is, and having X number of more
channels sounds more sexy.



But the general public don't know about HDTV, so they haven't been given the
option of saying that they want it.

The forthcoming frequency planning conferences will allocate spectrum to
countries for DVB-T and DAB and these allocations are supposed to last for
decades, but HDTV will require a lot more spectrum, so if we don't get more
spectrum for DVB-T then we're basically looking at it being decades before
we see HDTV. That is not on, and that's just the Government and the
broadcasters screwing the public, yet again.

If you informed the general public what HDTV was, and then asked them if
they wanted it they'd say a resounding yes. Just look at the popularity of
DVDs, people bought that because the picture quality and audio quality is
much better than VHS, so the general public have shown that they want better
picture quality.

But the Government can make more money by auctioning off any spare spectrum
(he said to new mobile phones), and the broadcasters can avoid having to
invest in the technology required to broadcast HDTV.

As I said, broadcasting in this country is an utter joke.


--
Steve - http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/ - Digital Radio News & Info

DAB sounds worse than Freeview, digital satellite, cable, broadband
internet and FM


  #17  
Old November 6th 03, 03:34 PM posted to alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.broadcast,uk.tech.digital-tv
DAB sounds worse than FM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 209
Default UK Government's "Digital" Advisor

Java Jive wrote:
I take it that 'digital' in this context means ...

/'_/)
,/_ /
/ /
/'_'/' '/'_'7,
/'/ / / /"
('( ' ' _~/
\ '
'\' \ _7
\ (
\ \.

... to HDTV.



Looks like it.


--
Steve - http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/ - Digital Radio News & Info

DAB sounds worse than Freeview, digital satellite, cable, broadband
internet and FM


  #18  
Old November 6th 03, 04:26 PM posted to alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.broadcast,uk.tech.digital-tv
Clem Dye
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 236
Default UK Government's "Digital" Advisor

Ted Richardson wrote:
"Ivor Jones" wrote in message ...


Hmmph..! I've seen HDTV in the US and it knocks spots off anything I've ever
seen before. I'd rather have the 5 terrestrial channels in HDTV than any
numbe of satellite offerings in mediocre quality.



Agreed, it does. Forgive a few comments here, hopefully not a rant!

Strikes me that digital SDTV could well be a lot better, the
deficiencies that we see are largely a matter of choice in the
reaching of compromises by the broadcasters. Were a higher
bandwidth to be afforded to (say) the main BBC channels, then the DTV
version of a programme would be at least as good as a clear feed of
the analogue version. At the moment, it is not, we all know that the
compromises within the DTT (and D-SAT) transmission chains mean that
for instance, during a football match there are passages where on a
good analogue display with a clean signal you can see the blades of
grass, on the MPEG equivalent there's just a green(ish) blur.

The decisions on the constitution of DTV seem to have been driven by
historical perceived inadequacy in each territory. Hence in the US,
where there were a plentiful supply of channels, but often appalling
reception, this couples with he American's love of large TVs to
produce a requirement for HDTV. In the UK there's a perceived lack
of channels, and an acceptance that whilst we have the best broadcast
engineering standards in the World, the viewers will put up with
pretty lousy sub-VHS standard pictures most of the time - hence for
DTV - cram then in.

There seems to be a push from the broadcasters, particularly the BBC,
to make DTT match (D-SAT) in every aspect of its functionality, which
of course it can't. For DTT (and probably cable) the best, and
optimum, that could be achieved here would be decent standard
definition digital television (SDTV). That means expanding the
bandwidth available to individual services, and reducing the number of
channels, probably not by much. There still appears to be the
capacity for this to happen in each of the four demises within
Freeview (BBC, Digital¾, SDN, and CCI).

HDTV would be great here; if there were a large population of large
image displays, like gas plasma units amongst the viewers. At circa
£k4 these are unlikely to become family Christmas presents until at
least the year after next. HDTV in the UK, and probably Western
Europe could take the form of a separate D-SAT transmission (or a
helper) augmenting the SDTV broadcasts of the main terrestrial
channels and a few of the Premium and PPV channels. Perhaps these
broadcasts may even be intermittent, depending on the availability of
HDTV content, with reversion to the SDTV version of the programme at
other times. Presumably all HDTV will be D-SAT delivered using
streams of 16 to 18 Mb/s.

Without some sort of driver, I can't see HDTV begin to reach a market;
however, there are a large number of plasma displays usually in the
high street windows of the more upmarket retailers (independents
mainly). Typically these will be playing a DVD. Is there a case
for a D-SAT delivered HDTV test transmission, essentially as a
marketing tool for the trade?


From what I can make out, one of the drivers for HDTV in the US is that
NTSC looks ****e on the larger (60+ inch) plasma panels. The jump in
quality is significant (obviously) when HDTV is used. Personally, I'm
not so convinced about the jump from PAL. I saw an HDTV transmission at
an exhibition a while back and whilst it was very good, I didn't come
away thinking that it's HDTV or nothing. I do think that we (as a
country) should start to think about it though, but it won't be an easy
ride. What about recording stuff for instance, let alone the cost of any
other new kit? HDTV transmissions are heavy on the data front.

As for SDTV, well so many people put up with ****ty pictures that a jump
to digital would always look good. Personally, I think that the data
rates are way too low. A good digital transmission with plenty of
bandwidth looks fantastic, but I doubt that you'll ever see that here in
the UK either - too many other interests.

I'm sure that we'll get HDTV at some point. In fact, it may be worth
waiting to get all of the technical issues ironed out. We should be
looking to get better sound and pictures out of the digital technology
that we have as an interim though, beacuse HDTV is a looooong way off
for us here in Blighty .....


Clem

  #19  
Old November 6th 03, 04:47 PM posted to alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.broadcast,uk.tech.digital-tv
Ivor Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default UK Government's "Digital" Advisor


"Stuart" wrote in message
...
So you have to persuade people to buy a new-format DVD player when the
current is convincingly better than VHS or broadcast...


And HDTV is even better still.


And the media producers have to be willing to cut themselves off from
the huge current-format market...


Surly it would run in parallel, just as VHS and DVD does. Just think of
all that back-catalogue to resell in glorious HDTV!


That's exactly how it works in the States. For example my mate works for
Channel 7 so his station is "7" in normal format and "7A" in HDTV.

HD is only transmitted for some programmes at the moment, not all, but the
info on his site www.choisser.com/broadcst.html does give schedules of
what's on when, if anyone's interested.

And the pirates won't have systems that can convert the data?


Convert to what? You still have the storage and transmitation problems,
unless you down-convert to PAL/NTSC quality, in which case, what's the
point?


As I've said, that is the main stumbling block at present, recording off
HDTV isn't easy, it requires a receiver card in a PC and a very large hard
drive..!

Ivor


  #20  
Old November 6th 03, 05:41 PM posted to alt.radio.digital,uk.tech.broadcast,uk.tech.digital-tv
Simon Gardner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 346
Default UK Government's "Digital" Advisor

In article ,
"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote:

Just look at the popularity of
DVDs, people bought that because the picture quality and audio quality is
much better than VHS


Oh really?


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2019 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.