Sign up with Google
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2003
- Messages
- 66,740
-
Ask a question and get free supportUnlock new privileges and see hidden discussionsWin prizes and earn reputation
-
Question of the day ~ How often do you braai?
-
Afristay giveaway.Win a 2-night stay for two people at an establishment of your choice with R1,000 in spending money. Enter here.
DSTV has no 1080p HD plans
- Thread starter rpm
- Start date
I can see it from there point of view, i.e. cost and bandwidth.
And 720p is more than enough currently, only a problem if you sit really close to the tv. Anyway has anyone been complaining of picture quality of dstvHD? no so why complain now.
And 720p is more than enough currently, only a problem if you sit really close to the tv. Anyway has anyone been complaining of picture quality of dstvHD? no so why complain now.
Silly people
No wonder I'll never get DSTv...
Such backwards thinking. Sure not many people would perceive the difference between 720p and 1080i on a small screen.
But that's not the point the world is moving forward. Next big push in 5 to 10 years will be Ultra High Def or Super Hi-Vision. Which is 7680 x 4320p at 60fps which is 16 times more than current HD. Not withstanding the questions of whether or not terrestrial broadcast technologies could ever transmit this format. The format is coming.
So what DSTv is saying is we'll wait and see and we won't upgrade our infrastructure until we know. Meanwhile cough up for the bad old tech...
Well I will not spend more money for HD if it's only baby HD. So they can go frak themselves and the premium.
-
No wonder I'll never get DSTv...
Such backwards thinking. Sure not many people would perceive the difference between 720p and 1080i on a small screen.
But that's not the point the world is moving forward. Next big push in 5 to 10 years will be Ultra High Def or Super Hi-Vision. Which is 7680 x 4320p at 60fps which is 16 times more than current HD. Not withstanding the questions of whether or not terrestrial broadcast technologies could ever transmit this format. The format is coming.
So what DSTv is saying is we'll wait and see and we won't upgrade our infrastructure until we know. Meanwhile cough up for the bad old tech...
Well I will not spend more money for HD if it's only baby HD. So they can go frak themselves and the premium.
-
The_Pumpkin_King
Jedi Master
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 21,225
why would they broadcast in 1080p if 80%?? of the lcd owners have HD ready tvs anyways
LOL You really don't have a clue, do you? There are so many aspects to video. Maybe you should rather try to understand that resolution is one of the least important aspects of video.
The whole 'small screen' thing isn't an acceptable excuse. If I'm viewing it even on a 24-inch from up close, I'll definitely still notice the difference just as well as someone viewing it on a 50" from a larger distance.
Saying there's a neglible difference between 1080i and 1080p would be somewhat more acceptable.
Saying there's a neglible difference between 1080i and 1080p would be somewhat more acceptable.
T3rminator
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2009
- Messages
- 169
Agreed, get more 720p or 1080i HD content rather than wasting time on 1080p. Even overseas 1080p broadcasts are not available, only to select VOD providers over the internet. It just uses SO much bandwidth and our current devices use the old MPEG2 standard. New decoder anyone?
Smurfatefrog
Expert Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2006
- Messages
- 2,750
Agree, would much rather have more 720p channels, Supersport HD will be added in December btw, and then a couple more first half of 2010
En dan gaan jy *** en betaal
Grouter
Executive Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 5,666
+1
I watched the Italian GP in HD in Australia, and the difference is very noticeable. The detail that HD reveals is amazing - you can see the sponsor decals on the cars peeling a bit at the edges, detail of stuff stuck to the tyres, scratches on the bodywork, and even the stitching on the drivers gloves and overalls. It's a totally different experience. Wish I was still there to see Singapore in HD under lights.
Maybe it is that I understand more than you do. My statement really had nothing to do with resolution. Ultra HD is ridiculous, the bandwidth and storage requirements for such a resolution would be crazy.
My point is rather this...
1. DSTv charges a premium for the privilege of getting HD vs. SD, yes?
2. But it's only baby HD (720p).
3. We are on a roller-coaster ride of technological advancement of which at any given moment we are already behind the latest and greatest. BTW 4k (4096 x 2160) is coming believe it or not, care about it or not. A friend of mine has been working on a compression codec for this resolution for the last 3 years at SHARP, in England.
4. Three years ago I was in Canada, and one of their Cable companies had many channels with 1080i content. In SA how many channels are running 1080i, or even 720p? Handful at most.
5. Given that the Japanese government is planning to have Ultra HD standardised by 2020. Implication is SA already doesn't know what it doesn't know, ignorance is bliss in Africa. We can't even get 1080i up and running and technology is marching past us.
On the point of resolution... while I'll agree with you that resolution isn't the only factor regarding video. To say it is the least important shows that either you're stupid (and I doubt that) or you're just expressing an opinion. Which means your comment is actually a flame.
FYI. Here is how resolution impacts video. 1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels which at 3 bytes per pixel is 6,220,800 bytes per frame. At 30 fps means 186,624,000 bytes per second (186MB/s) has to be processed and rendered on a PC or in the embedded processor (FPGA or micro-controller) of the TV. Wikipedia says 356Mbps, I'm not sure how they get to that value, they could be taking compression into account. But, regardless of the compression scheme used that is still the final output data rate that must be processed and achieved to render the image to the screen. That is a lot of data and it makes a huge difference to the cost of the hardware used to record, transmit, receive and display the HDTV.
Even if a good codec is used like H.264 the data rates are large (and set to get even larger).
So while we could subjectively argue the merits of 1080p over 720p in terms of perceivable quality, the resolution does make a huge difference to the underlying technology. Larger resolutions means more data, faster data rates and larger more powerful processors to process all that data.
BTW, cool photos on flickr.
ToxicBunny
Oi! Leave me out of this...
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2006
- Messages
- 113,503
1. Ok, MC actually doesn't charge a premium for HD, they charge a premium for PVR which happens to include HD.
2. Its not baby-HD... its a decent HD spec of 720p, which is MORE than acceptable on my 42" LCD.
3. Show me ANY satellite broadcaster who has active plans to support anything more than 1080i in the next 5 years... Not some pie in the sky random techie working on stuff, but actual concrete plans.
4. Cable has considerably MORE bandwidth than MC does on their satelites iirc. and I would rather have my stuff in 720p than 1080i. and the answer to your question regarding how many are running in HD... The answer is 1 atm.
5. You do know that HD as a "standard" is something like 15 or 20 years old already at least, so Japan standardising Ultra-HD by 2020 is meaningless because it will take anohter 15 or 20 years before the mass market starts to see it.
2. Its not baby-HD... its a decent HD spec of 720p, which is MORE than acceptable on my 42" LCD.
3. Show me ANY satellite broadcaster who has active plans to support anything more than 1080i in the next 5 years... Not some pie in the sky random techie working on stuff, but actual concrete plans.
4. Cable has considerably MORE bandwidth than MC does on their satelites iirc. and I would rather have my stuff in 720p than 1080i. and the answer to your question regarding how many are running in HD... The answer is 1 atm.
5. You do know that HD as a "standard" is something like 15 or 20 years old already at least, so Japan standardising Ultra-HD by 2020 is meaningless because it will take anohter 15 or 20 years before the mass market starts to see it.
LCBXX
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2006
- Messages
- 19,421
The bandwidth allocated to the one MC HD channel was about 7.8Mb last time I checked. If you browse some other satellites that carry HD channels for other countries, you get up so 22Mb for ONE channel (Discovery HD).
I think MC has a problem with the current IS7/10 satellites that do not offer adequate bandwidth capability. Hence the dropping of some interactive services and channels.
Perhaps some straight shooting from them will better explain their dilemma. Pity that if they do, they'll get blasted for charging R500(+R55) for a incapable payTV service...
I think MC has a problem with the current IS7/10 satellites that do not offer adequate bandwidth capability. Hence the dropping of some interactive services and channels.
Perhaps some straight shooting from them will better explain their dilemma. Pity that if they do, they'll get blasted for charging R500(+R55) for a incapable payTV service...
I have played the same show in 720p and 1080p formats on my Bravia 46 inch LCD and I only when stood really close to the screen (and probably because I knew there HAD to be a difference) I saw a difference. I'd take more DSTV channels in 720p any day over just 1 or 2 in 1080p.