HD-DVD coming next year.. at DVinfo.net

Christopher C. Murphy · July 26th, 2004, 03:45 PM

Pretty cool! I can't wait until 2014, so we can watch Star Wars and Indiana Jones on HD-DVD!!

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/07/26/hddvd/

Ok, I'm still glad it's coming. But, the best DVD's took years to come out!

Murph

Giroud Francois · July 26th, 2004, 03:55 PM

so why to wait ? buy an D-VHS, you can record on your own and find many D-VHS prerecorded tapes with nice movies...
and it cost already half of the price annouced for HD-DVD.

Oh, i forget, mac users always want the tomorrow technology...
;-)

Christopher C. Murphy · July 26th, 2004, 04:26 PM

D-VHS ain't my cup of tea...I hate tape, even HD tape. I've been dealing with tape for my whole career, so I want digital files! No more rewinding of tapes and drop outs!

The other reason I want HD-DVD is my library...I've got 1000 DVD's now. The format is backwards compatible...

Also, I HATE the stupid Mac/PC thing...so, don't even go there! My Mac is great and if your PC is great then we're both winners.

Murph

Giroud Francois · July 26th, 2004, 04:33 PM

you are right, tape is silly,but actually it is the same digital stuff you get for your sony and JVC cams. (i got the same ones).
You would find a great advantage with d-vhs, being able to transfer from/to sony or the jvc (even in HD) or even from your mac to the d-vhs , directly from/to the firewire plug.

Anhar Miah · July 26th, 2004, 06:28 PM

What about us UK peoples??

Heck HD aint even mentioned in the UK, AND HD-DVD is gonna comming out...

That means we will get the HD-DVD here in the UK hmmm by say next time theres a Blue moon!

Oh well....

i hope someone will do some HD awareness in UK type thing

Jesse Bekas · July 26th, 2004, 10:48 PM

You know what Anhar, much of the fuss over HD in the US is pretty ridiculous. HD is worthwhile to get worked up about, but it's still so pricey. I don't know about the rest of the wold, but we Americans go crazy for buzzwords and concepts like HiDef (anything that's better than what we have now), but in reality not many people actually have Big-Screen HD sets, and even the small HD sets are still way over priced (and what's the point of a small HD set).

Most everybody I know uses a TV until it dies (my Sony Trinitron still rocks and is 20 years old!). HD won't be widely adopted by the mass market until we all get forced to D-TV, and even then it will probably be slow.

The funniest thing I've noticed about HD, are all the people clamoring for HDV camcorders, and don't/won't even have sets to watch the footage on. Of course I'd love an HDV cam too, but we won't get cheap HDV models worth a damn (JVC - great ideas, poor implementation) until "Joe Consumer" has a TV set to watch it on (he is the guy the world's companies really care about).

Now that Canon has passed up on releasing a prosumer HDV model, everyone else can rest easy. This either means Pana will come out with an HDV DVX100 to really take down the Canon giant (and hurt their own pro division...unlikely), or everybody will sit back and wait around awhile to release prosumer HDV models.

So don't feel bad if HD isn't catching on in the UK. It really is more buzzword than reality here.

Giroud Francois · July 27th, 2004, 02:26 AM

I am from switzerland and jumping now into this HD stuff.
what prevents you to do the same ?
After all the american HD is same resolution than the the future european one.
And what the heck about 30fps ?
People are not so shy when they play zone 1 , ntsc DVD on their multistandard TV ?
You will purchase a several thousand HD big screen that is able to display probably all of the 18 HD specifications, so where is the problem ? your spectator will not see that.
for 2300$ you can get the HD JVC on B&H site in less than a week
On onecall.com you can get the D-VHS , latest model for less than 600$. compared to the price of a DVX100 or PD170, it is cheap.
And you can get easily some prerecorded D-VHS tape with good & recent hollywood movies for almost the saome price of the DVD.
And anyway until you get HD DVD ready, you will become a master in HD, get taped all the stuff you need, ready for HD-DVD (that will start too with 30fps probably).
and if you need to distribute HD now, just use microsoft codec WMV9 HD version , so it can be read on any powerful PC with an 1280 resolution screen or projector (easy to find).

George Ellis · July 27th, 2004, 03:51 AM

Just to note that there is one flaw in that article on digital rights. 24% of internet users have not downloaded movies. The study that came up with that was seriously flawed and their conclusion was designed so that they could alarm folks unjustly. They are trying to reverse fair use.

Christopher C. Murphy · July 27th, 2004, 06:12 AM

Hey Guys...

Facts are facts. I worked at WMUR-TV in the US in 1997 when it was one of the first stations that went HD. We are less than 2 years away from the mandated changeover to HD from NTSC. Yes, there have been problems along the way. However, it's happening no matter what...because most broadcasters are HD now. (when i say most, i'm talking ABC/NBC/CBS and big cable channels etc.)

Also, another fact you can't avoid is that ALL NTSC television will need a HD converter in 2006 to display content from any FCC liscensed source. That's every single channel going over the air.

Now, another quick fact - the price difference for all "small" (30 inches or under) is LESS than $200 almost everywhere in the US. I was in Best Buy the other day and it's a fact - they only had 3 NTSC televisions in their entire store on display and like 20 HDTV's!!!! All sizes and prices....and it's only 2004 and not 2006. In the year 2006...every single person out to get a new television will buy an HDTV. (ok, i know...some will buy cheap $50 tv's and get a $25 converter box because they are STUPID!)

Sooo..I'm not trying to be hardnose here. But, in the US...we are living in an HDTV worrld now and anyone who isn't will be in a very, very short time....it's not only inevitable it's the LAW! :)

Now...all of us are complaining about little facts here and there. But, the overall situation is that I have an HDTV and have had one for 2 years and every month or so they add a new HDTV channel....they just added "Discovery HD" last week! I don't have to pay for it...it's free with my HD cable box and will remain free because the FCC mandated that broadcasts are free way back in the 1950's - that's not changing. There is also a Discovery NTSC channel in my lineup and I never watch it because it's fuzzy as heck! In the next 1 1/2 years the HD lineup will fill up because the LAW mandated it...and the NTSC channels will dissappear at some point in 2006. (Ok, the broadcasters have complained like crazy about it...but, ain't no stopping it and the only thing that MIGHT happen is a short delay on when the NTSC channels will disappear.)

What we're talking about here is $$ - the FCC and everyone else need this transistion because it's going to take us into the next few decades. NTSC ain't cutting it to the new generation of whiz-kids...and there are more pressing issues than HD channels like Internet videos that look BETTER than NTSC channels!! I've downloaded HD footage online and that's somehthing no one can regulate. We're heading towards some very interesting times because people will be downloading HD movies and television shows for free on P2P. It's really not that hard to encode MPEG 2 HD compliant broadcasts and send them up just like NTSC programs. The Gov in the US has so much work to do!

Here's a fun question: What happens when some unknown company releases an AMAZING codec that allow better than HD footage to be squeezed into a streaming file smaller than the smallest files online now? That's when the whole world of captured media goes into overdrive. It's going to happen sooner or later...we've already got this far with codecs and it's only going to continue...HD streaming online? Definately possible!

EDIT:

After writing this post I came across this article!

http://bth.broadcastengineering.com/...ting/index.htm

Murph

Harrison Murchison · July 27th, 2004, 11:37 AM

Great point Chris

HDTV is not that expensive. There are HDTV sets from 499 on up and as you say in 2 years you should be able to by an HDTV 30" or above for the same price.

HDTV isn't just about resolution, the color fidelity and richness are unmistakable. Even with a small HDTV tube you can see this.

I applaud the FCC mandates. Broadcasters can be lazy and sometimes you have to push them into the future.

I will not buy another NTSC TV. And while I like HDV I think it's a rather poor choice for consumer HD recording. I'm hoping that Panny is holding out for something a bit better for those of us that need better editing functions.

Microsoft has backed HD-DVD for Longhorn. This will put pressure on Sony to add VC-9 support to Blu Ray and to make sure they are compatible with computers. I'm glad HD-DVD and its forum members are being more agressive. Bring on the pre-recorded content!! I'll be ready.

Christopher C. Murphy · July 27th, 2004, 12:45 PM

Hey, you actually made a good point after my good point. ;)

The best viewing experience I've had with HDTV has been on those $600 HDTV's at Best Buy. It looks to me that the best HDTV's will be the ones smaller than 30 inches! That's actually great news overall because the adoption will be that much faster for middle of road America.

The reason, I think, that the resolution on the 30 inches or less is so awsome is that the image isn't being stretched so far. The original resolution is so damn good that keeping it small is only going to give it a better overall look. Plus, there is less reflection to deal with on a smaller screen...you're generally closer to the tv too. I've got a 46" HDTV and the image is great, but it's TO big!

Anyone want to trade a 46" HDTV for a 40" or less??

Murph

Jesse Bekas · July 27th, 2004, 03:14 PM

Misconceptions About HDTV

Digital Cable is the Same As DTV False. Digital Cable is in fact digital, meaning it is transmitted as ones and zeros, but that does not make it DTV or HDTV. It is true that you can get DTV from a Digital Cable subscription, but just because you are getting Digital Cable does not mean you can get DTV and/or HDTV signals.

DTV is the Same As HDTV False. Digital Television, DTV, is a set of 18 different formats for broadcasting televison in a digital format put out by the ATSC. High Defintion Television, HDTV, is six of those 18 DTV formats that has a resolution of at least 720p and has an aspect ratio of 16x9.

All Television Will Be HDTV in 2006 False. The FCC has mandated that by May 2006 that all broadcasters broadcast DTV signals. This pertains to Over The Air transmissions and does not mean anything about DTV through Cable or Satellite companies. HDTV takes up a lot of bandwidth and it is up to the Cable and Satellite companies to move from sending you regular Analog to true DTV signals. This also means that broadcasters can send DTV signals that are of lower resolution then that of true HDTV. FOX, for instance, is currently broadcasting 480p in many areas and this meets the FCCs regulations.

...this is an excerpt from http://www.hdtv.net/
HD is not coming to the masses, but DTV is. HDTV is very expensive, DTV's are not.

Anhar Miah · July 29th, 2004, 09:13 AM

Well, well, after some researching it seems US folks "over the pond" might be getting HDTV after all.

It seems that the current Digital TV wether cable, satelite, or terrestial (over the Air) implements the European DVB standard......ie Digital Video Broadcast and has more specific off-springs known as DVB-S (for satelite), DVB-C (for cable) and also DVB-T (for terrestial),. and also DAB (Digital Audio Broadcast, or digital radio, its starting to cacth on slowly)

Anyway DVB was kicked off from 1994 and is now mainstream.

AND GUESS what they are already working on DVB -S2
its much; much better than the existing DVB-S

and surprise surprise they will be geared for HDTV! (they will even allow WMV 9)

check it out :

http://www.dvb.org/

and also : the White Paper:

http://www.dvb.org/documents/white-p...B-S2.final.pdf

cheers!

Jesse Bekas · July 29th, 2004, 10:19 AM

excerpt from DVB...
"Many countries have already implemented DVB-T or have decided to use it for future digital terrestrial television deployment."

So are you saying that you have had a Digital TV broadcast system since 1994, which is now completely mainstream, and you are already getting an improved Digital TV format? I think your country (apparently mine as well) may have accepted the DVB system for future use, but it does not mean it is currently being implemented. I know it isn't being used here right now, but the US is noted as having the system as well. Unless you and almost everybody you know are using Digital Television and/or Digital receivers, it is not the mainstream.

Again, even though they are preparing for DigitalTV, it doesn't mean they have it now, nor does it mean that when they do, HDTV will become very prominent. One HD channel sucks up enough bandwith to run many SD channels, and broadcaster rather save their bandwith than give the best looking programs. I hate to keep being the harbinger of bad news, but HDTV as the mainstream is still well a ways off.

On a better note, it's good that they are going to put WM9 to use. It seems to be a strong HD codec.

Anhar Miah · July 30th, 2004, 07:43 AM

When i say mainstream, i stand corrected i meant common place,

Yes most people i know in the UK either have Satelite (Sky OR Sky plus) or they have cable and those that do not have these can use the FreeView digitbox that connects to your existing antenna and recieve FTA (Free To Air) digital Terrestial Channels (DVB-T, and most newer TV's come with a digibox inside ready to recieve these channels, there are even PCI cards for PC that will recieve these channels and even record them includeing EPG recording) from a set top box that costs less than £50 (and getting cheaper) you can pick one of these from almost any high street electrical shops.

basically to get digital TV in the UK is easy its already up and running,

now to clarify although the DVB was standaised in 1994, we havnt seen the applictions (or noticed it) untill about late 1998/9(at least from my experiance, i'm sure you can find the actual dates from searching)

I agree with you on the HD thing being a while away yet.

July 26th, 2004, 03:45 PM	#1
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	HD-DVD coming next year.. Pretty cool! I can't wait until 2014, so we can watch Star Wars and Indiana Jones on HD-DVD!! http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/07/26/hddvd/ Ok, I'm still glad it's coming. But, the best DVD's took years to come out! Murph __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

July 26th, 2004, 04:26 PM	#3
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	D-VHS ain't my cup of tea...I hate tape, even HD tape. I've been dealing with tape for my whole career, so I want digital files! No more rewinding of tapes and drop outs! The other reason I want HD-DVD is my library...I've got 1000 DVD's now. The format is backwards compatible... Also, I HATE the stupid Mac/PC thing...so, don't even go there! My Mac is great and if your PC is great then we're both winners. Murph __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

July 26th, 2004, 06:28 PM	#5
Anhar Miah Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: United Kindom, England Posts: 290	NOT FAIR What about us UK peoples?? Heck HD aint even mentioned in the UK, AND HD-DVD is gonna comming out... That means we will get the HD-DVD here in the UK hmmm by say next time theres a Blue moon! Oh well.... i hope someone will do some HD awareness in UK type thing

July 27th, 2004, 06:12 AM	#9
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	Hey Guys... Facts are facts. I worked at WMUR-TV in the US in 1997 when it was one of the first stations that went HD. We are less than 2 years away from the mandated changeover to HD from NTSC. Yes, there have been problems along the way. However, it's happening no matter what...because most broadcasters are HD now. (when i say most, i'm talking ABC/NBC/CBS and big cable channels etc.) Also, another fact you can't avoid is that ALL NTSC television will need a HD converter in 2006 to display content from any FCC liscensed source. That's every single channel going over the air. Now, another quick fact - the price difference for all "small" (30 inches or under) is LESS than $200 almost everywhere in the US. I was in Best Buy the other day and it's a fact - they only had 3 NTSC televisions in their entire store on display and like 20 HDTV's!!!! All sizes and prices....and it's only 2004 and not 2006. In the year 2006...every single person out to get a new television will buy an HDTV. (ok, i know...some will buy cheap $50 tv's and get a $25 converter box because they are STUPID!) Sooo..I'm not trying to be hardnose here. But, in the US...we are living in an HDTV worrld now and anyone who isn't will be in a very, very short time....it's not only inevitable it's the LAW! :) Now...all of us are complaining about little facts here and there. But, the overall situation is that I have an HDTV and have had one for 2 years and every month or so they add a new HDTV channel....they just added "Discovery HD" last week! I don't have to pay for it...it's free with my HD cable box and will remain free because the FCC mandated that broadcasts are free way back in the 1950's - that's not changing. There is also a Discovery NTSC channel in my lineup and I never watch it because it's fuzzy as heck! In the next 1 1/2 years the HD lineup will fill up because the LAW mandated it...and the NTSC channels will dissappear at some point in 2006. (Ok, the broadcasters have complained like crazy about it...but, ain't no stopping it and the only thing that MIGHT happen is a short delay on when the NTSC channels will disappear.) What we're talking about here is $$ - the FCC and everyone else need this transistion because it's going to take us into the next few decades. NTSC ain't cutting it to the new generation of whiz-kids...and there are more pressing issues than HD channels like Internet videos that look BETTER than NTSC channels!! I've downloaded HD footage online and that's somehthing no one can regulate. We're heading towards some very interesting times because people will be downloading HD movies and television shows for free on P2P. It's really not that hard to encode MPEG 2 HD compliant broadcasts and send them up just like NTSC programs. The Gov in the US has so much work to do! Here's a fun question: What happens when some unknown company releases an AMAZING codec that allow better than HD footage to be squeezed into a streaming file smaller than the smallest files online now? That's when the whole world of captured media goes into overdrive. It's going to happen sooner or later...we've already got this far with codecs and it's only going to continue...HD streaming online? Definately possible! EDIT: After writing this post I came across this article! http://bth.broadcastengineering.com/...ting/index.htm Murph __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

July 27th, 2004, 12:45 PM	#11
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	Hey, you actually made a good point after my good point. ;) The best viewing experience I've had with HDTV has been on those $600 HDTV's at Best Buy. It looks to me that the best HDTV's will be the ones smaller than 30 inches! That's actually great news overall because the adoption will be that much faster for middle of road America. The reason, I think, that the resolution on the 30 inches or less is so awsome is that the image isn't being stretched so far. The original resolution is so damn good that keeping it small is only going to give it a better overall look. Plus, there is less reflection to deal with on a smaller screen...you're generally closer to the tv too. I've got a 46" HDTV and the image is great, but it's TO big! Anyone want to trade a 46" HDTV for a 40" or less?? Murph __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

July 26th, 2004, 03:55 PM	#2
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	so why to wait ? buy an D-VHS, you can record on your own and find many D-VHS prerecorded tapes with nice movies... and it cost already half of the price annouced for HD-DVD. Oh, i forget, mac users always want the tomorrow technology... ;-)

July 26th, 2004, 04:33 PM	#4
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	you are right, tape is silly,but actually it is the same digital stuff you get for your sony and JVC cams. (i got the same ones). You would find a great advantage with d-vhs, being able to transfer from/to sony or the jvc (even in HD) or even from your mac to the d-vhs , directly from/to the firewire plug.

July 26th, 2004, 10:48 PM	#6
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	You know what Anhar, much of the fuss over HD in the US is pretty ridiculous. HD is worthwhile to get worked up about, but it's still so pricey. I don't know about the rest of the wold, but we Americans go crazy for buzzwords and concepts like HiDef (anything that's better than what we have now), but in reality not many people actually have Big-Screen HD sets, and even the small HD sets are still way over priced (and what's the point of a small HD set). Most everybody I know uses a TV until it dies (my Sony Trinitron still rocks and is 20 years old!). HD won't be widely adopted by the mass market until we all get forced to D-TV, and even then it will probably be slow. The funniest thing I've noticed about HD, are all the people clamoring for HDV camcorders, and don't/won't even have sets to watch the footage on. Of course I'd love an HDV cam too, but we won't get cheap HDV models worth a damn (JVC - great ideas, poor implementation) until "Joe Consumer" has a TV set to watch it on (he is the guy the world's companies really care about). Now that Canon has passed up on releasing a prosumer HDV model, everyone else can rest easy. This either means Pana will come out with an HDV DVX100 to really take down the Canon giant (and hurt their own pro division...unlikely), or everybody will sit back and wait around awhile to release prosumer HDV models. So don't feel bad if HD isn't catching on in the UK. It really is more buzzword than reality here.

July 27th, 2004, 02:26 AM	#7
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	I am from switzerland and jumping now into this HD stuff. what prevents you to do the same ? After all the american HD is same resolution than the the future european one. And what the heck about 30fps ? People are not so shy when they play zone 1 , ntsc DVD on their multistandard TV ? You will purchase a several thousand HD big screen that is able to display probably all of the 18 HD specifications, so where is the problem ? your spectator will not see that. for 2300$ you can get the HD JVC on B&H site in less than a week On onecall.com you can get the D-VHS , latest model for less than 600$. compared to the price of a DVX100 or PD170, it is cheap. And you can get easily some prerecorded D-VHS tape with good & recent hollywood movies for almost the saome price of the DVD. And anyway until you get HD DVD ready, you will become a master in HD, get taped all the stuff you need, ready for HD-DVD (that will start too with 30fps probably). and if you need to distribute HD now, just use microsoft codec WMV9 HD version , so it can be read on any powerful PC with an 1280 resolution screen or projector (easy to find).

July 27th, 2004, 03:51 AM	#8
George Ellis Trustee Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Suwanee, GA Posts: 1,241	Just to note that there is one flaw in that article on digital rights. 24% of internet users have not downloaded movies. The study that came up with that was seriously flawed and their conclusion was designed so that they could alarm folks unjustly. They are trying to reverse fair use.

July 27th, 2004, 11:37 AM	#10
Harrison Murchison Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 243	Great point Chris HDTV is not that expensive. There are HDTV sets from 499 on up and as you say in 2 years you should be able to by an HDTV 30" or above for the same price. HDTV isn't just about resolution, the color fidelity and richness are unmistakable. Even with a small HDTV tube you can see this. I applaud the FCC mandates. Broadcasters can be lazy and sometimes you have to push them into the future. I will not buy another NTSC TV. And while I like HDV I think it's a rather poor choice for consumer HD recording. I'm hoping that Panny is holding out for something a bit better for those of us that need better editing functions. Microsoft has backed HD-DVD for Longhorn. This will put pressure on Sony to add VC-9 support to Blu Ray and to make sure they are compatible with computers. I'm glad HD-DVD and its forum members are being more agressive. Bring on the pre-recorded content!! I'll be ready.

July 27th, 2004, 03:14 PM	#12
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	Misconceptions About HDTV Digital Cable is the Same As DTV False. Digital Cable is in fact digital, meaning it is transmitted as ones and zeros, but that does not make it DTV or HDTV. It is true that you can get DTV from a Digital Cable subscription, but just because you are getting Digital Cable does not mean you can get DTV and/or HDTV signals. DTV is the Same As HDTV False. Digital Television, DTV, is a set of 18 different formats for broadcasting televison in a digital format put out by the ATSC. High Defintion Television, HDTV, is six of those 18 DTV formats that has a resolution of at least 720p and has an aspect ratio of 16x9. All Television Will Be HDTV in 2006 False. The FCC has mandated that by May 2006 that all broadcasters broadcast DTV signals. This pertains to Over The Air transmissions and does not mean anything about DTV through Cable or Satellite companies. HDTV takes up a lot of bandwidth and it is up to the Cable and Satellite companies to move from sending you regular Analog to true DTV signals. This also means that broadcasters can send DTV signals that are of lower resolution then that of true HDTV. FOX, for instance, is currently broadcasting 480p in many areas and this meets the FCCs regulations. ...this is an excerpt from http://www.hdtv.net/ HD is not coming to the masses, but DTV is. HDTV is very expensive, DTV's are not.

July 29th, 2004, 09:13 AM	#13
Anhar Miah Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: United Kindom, England Posts: 290	HDTV WILL COME to Europe! Well, well, after some researching it seems US folks "over the pond" might be getting HDTV after all. It seems that the current Digital TV wether cable, satelite, or terrestial (over the Air) implements the European DVB standard......ie Digital Video Broadcast and has more specific off-springs known as DVB-S (for satelite), DVB-C (for cable) and also DVB-T (for terrestial),. and also DAB (Digital Audio Broadcast, or digital radio, its starting to cacth on slowly) Anyway DVB was kicked off from 1994 and is now mainstream. AND GUESS what they are already working on DVB -S2 its much; much better than the existing DVB-S and surprise surprise they will be geared for HDTV! (they will even allow WMV 9) check it out : http://www.dvb.org/ and also : the White Paper: http://www.dvb.org/documents/white-p...B-S2.final.pdf cheers!

July 29th, 2004, 10:19 AM	#14
Jesse Bekas Major Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, USA Posts: 572	excerpt from DVB... "Many countries have already implemented DVB-T or have decided to use it for future digital terrestrial television deployment." So are you saying that you have had a Digital TV broadcast system since 1994, which is now completely mainstream, and you are already getting an improved Digital TV format? I think your country (apparently mine as well) may have accepted the DVB system for future use, but it does not mean it is currently being implemented. I know it isn't being used here right now, but the US is noted as having the system as well. Unless you and almost everybody you know are using Digital Television and/or Digital receivers, it is not the mainstream. Again, even though they are preparing for DigitalTV, it doesn't mean they have it now, nor does it mean that when they do, HDTV will become very prominent. One HD channel sucks up enough bandwith to run many SD channels, and broadcaster rather save their bandwith than give the best looking programs. I hate to keep being the harbinger of bad news, but HDTV as the mainstream is still well a ways off. On a better note, it's good that they are going to put WM9 to use. It seems to be a strong HD codec.

July 30th, 2004, 07:43 AM	#15
Anhar Miah Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: United Kindom, England Posts: 290	When i say mainstream, i stand corrected i meant common place, Yes most people i know in the UK either have Satelite (Sky OR Sky plus) or they have cable and those that do not have these can use the FreeView digitbox that connects to your existing antenna and recieve FTA (Free To Air) digital Terrestial Channels (DVB-T, and most newer TV's come with a digibox inside ready to recieve these channels, there are even PCI cards for PC that will recieve these channels and even record them includeing EPG recording) from a set top box that costs less than £50 (and getting cheaper) you can pick one of these from almost any high street electrical shops. basically to get digital TV in the UK is easy its already up and running, now to clarify although the DVB was standaised in 1994, we havnt seen the applictions (or noticed it) untill about late 1998/9(at least from my experiance, i'm sure you can find the actual dates from searching) I agree with you on the HD thing being a while away yet.