MPEG2 vs MPEG4 DTT

reslfj · 21-04-2009 6:43pm

watty wrote: »

1080p makes no sense,

I do not care if I can see any difference! I reportet that Ofcom wanted to have the option to receive 1080p in all new DTT HD receivers - just in case someone in the future would broadcast 1080p. And even if the present receivers would just downscale the resulting video - they would not prevent such broadcasts.
But Ofcom was forced a few monts ago to agree to the MPEG-4 HP @ L4.0 (720p (and yes 1080i)) in the new D-Book HD chapter.

watty wrote:

I'm not sure what you are talking about as the MPEG4 decoder part is same for DTT/DVB-t, DVB-c, DVB-s, DVB-s2, DVB-t2. It's only the tuner DSP that is different.

But MPEG-4 and DVB-x1/2 chips are welded together in almost every STB's and IDTV's that people buy - that why the UK D-Book specify the minimum levels for both standards, that every receiver must be able to process.

watty wrote:

Current MPEG4 standards for MPEG4 AVC H.264 cover 1080i. I'm not sure which version of MPEG covers 1080p

Current MPEG-4 H.264/AVC has a number of profiles and levels.
As I wrote MPEG-4 High Profile Level 4.2 can process 1080p, while MPEG-4 HP @ L4.0 can 'only' process 720p (and 1080i).

Currently 1080p cannot be compressed to anything like DTT bitrates with an acceptable result - but that may change in the future.

Lars

watty · 21-04-2009 7:03pm

Yet again, lars, you are misleading suggesting in previous post that UK DTT HD would only be 720p.

In fact it is 1080i, and the 1080p is little or no advantange this side of Atlantic. All Satellite HD in Europe is 1080i. The fact that Ofcom was interested in 1080p is misleading and unimportant.

We never had 576p, only 576i. it's only at rare moments in Europe you would notice the difference between interlace and progressive, unlike Telecine in USA.

reslfj · 21-04-2009 7:51pm

watty wrote: »

Yet again, lars, you are misleading suggesting in previous post that UK DTT HD would only be 720p.

No intension to mislead, but the EBU recommends 720p over 1080i for broadcast after much testing. 720p was in the original Ofcom HD plan.
The current UK plan is to prefere 720p, but allow 1080i at least for now, as there may not be enough 720p material, yet.
Ofcom did write somewhere that 1080i compression has improved recently in quality and was much closer to 720p quality at the same bitrate.

I reported - and even gave a link - that a requirement for 1080p (HP L4.2) support was not in the new D-Book. I did not write it was important - here and now - I just reported facts.

The fact that Ofcom was interested in 1080p is misleading and unimportant.

I fail to see your point - 'misleading' how ? 'unimportant' to what. Again I reported facts and gave references to (some of) my sources.

Lars

KrisW · 21-04-2009 8:45pm

Using MPEG4 is the right choice. Okay, it'll annoy someone who got a "great" deal at Curry's last week, and it is going to keep Joe Duffy's producer busy early next year, but it is the right choice.

I saw the DTT test signal last night for the first time, and I was seriously impressed.. the best digital SD picture I've seen.

For comparison, the best MPEG2 streams I've seen are the BBC streams on Astra. To reach their quality levels, however, those BBC channels regularly exceed 16Mbit/sec, a bandwidth you will never see given to one channel on DTT. The SD broadcasts by RTÉ, at a far lower bit-rate still look better - less blocking, better slow motion, less banding.

MPEG2 boxes are cheaper at the moment, but the prices of MPEG4 chipsets will fall to the point where you won't be able to buy MPEG2-only chips. By analogue switch-off in three years, we could easily have a HD service in place: because we're making the right choice of codec, and we're specifying HD capable STBs, enabling HD will only involve sending a different stream of bits over the network. As for getting those bits in, RTÉ have the ability to produce HD content and most US (and soon British) imports are available in HD.

Hoping that a bit of decent STB software would make HD less of a mess than it is at the moment. HD shouldn't be a separate "channel", the way Sky do it. If your TV supports it, it should just be there, like stereo sound, widescreen, or (stretch your memory) colour.

GiftGrub100 · 21-04-2009 9:00pm

the picture quality issue is important, however i watched the BBC masters coverage in Wexford on the Uk Freeview signal and the picture quality was very good, much better than I thought it would be.

Unless RTE are going HD in the near future I don't see how our Irish system will be much better. As for all those getting bargains in Currys - what about all the TV's bought in the North and South for the last two years, thats a lot of UK freeview tvs, whoever makes them compatible with Irish DTT will make a lot of money.

21-04-2009 9:09pm

Am I right in saying that Eircom and Arqiva were pushing for MPEG-2 to be used? I'd just wonder what the situation will be if One Vision decided to go ahead? However since the spec has already been finalised they'd probably be obliged to use MPEG-4.

watty · 21-04-2009 9:22pm

Only because Arquiva has a bunch of unwanted MPEg2 stuff as everyone installing is doing MPEG4

GiftGrub100 wrote: »

the picture quality issue is important, however i watched the BBC masters coverage in Wexford on the Uk Freeview signal and the picture quality was very good, much better than I thought it would be.

MPEG2 or MPEG4 or even Digital, the quality is not the issue. Bitrate sets quality, MPEG4 simply lets you have about 2x as many channels or only 2.5x as much for MPEG4 HD compared to MPEG2 SD.

HD at same codec and quality needs x5 the bitrate.

We don't need a new thread. Just infract people that are determined to live in past and hanker after obsolete MPEG2.

Maybe we should bring MW RTE1 back too.

tretle · 21-04-2009 9:28pm

A new thread needs to be started about mpeg4 vs mpeg2, I'm sick of hearing the same crap about mpeg2 on every freaking thread, every secod or third post irrespective of the topic.
Britain are already transitioning to mpeg4, they are transitioning because they started on mpeg2 and already have a huge user base... Its going to be a pain in the ass for them.
So no, don't broadcast with an inferior system for the sake of it and thus make it more acceptable to sell more mpeg4 incompatible hardware to more consumers. And thus make for a bigger problem transitioning to mpeg4 down the line.
This is the government stepping in and stopping it from getting out of hand and having 90% of the people have issues rather than a relatively small percentage.

emaherx · 21-04-2009 10:22pm

watty wrote: »

Maybe we should bring MW RTE1 back too.

could we? radio in my old VW Beetle only has AM bands. Damned infernal new technology just doesn't match the dash!

MPEG2 · 22-04-2009 1:09am

watty wrote: »

We don't need a new thread. Just infract people that are determined to live in past and hanker after obsolete MPEG2.

I'm sorry to disagree with you Watty, as you've made so many excellent posts, but MPEG2 is a mature technology and MPEG4 is not quite there yet. Yes, I'm sure the broadcast encoders are adequate at this stage and there are some decoders out there, but, as is usually the case, the bleeding edge stuff needs more work. This is particularly true of relatively cheap consumer electronics like STBs and mobile phones. The product lifecycles are so short that they often don't bother fixing bugs and they just move on to the next new product.

The product volumes are not there yet either to reach consumer's falling price-point. Consumers don't see the need for the switch over, all they know is that they have less money these days.

The objective here is to reclaim the radio spectrum so we can better exploit this natural resource for an economic benefit. The context is that we need economies of scale and Ireland is insignificant in size and is almost (if not indeed) bankrupt. (Nationalism doesn't come into it.) 20 years ago the Irish retail sector was the same size as the greater Manchester area. It hasn't grown to anything like the size of Spain or the UK in the mean time.

Boxer is gone. One vision would be crazy to take on commercial DTT in the current environment. That leaves the last option which includes RTE. RTE (or should I say the tax payer) have to pay for the network anyway, so the pragmatic thing to do is to give them the commercial DTT MUXes also and leave the time-line for delivery open ended, keeping a few MUXes in reserve. In this way they may be able to off-set the cost of PSB somewhat in the future.

What we've got is a network that's well under way and hundreds of thousands of MPEG2 receivers are in place. The obvious thing to do is to give a MUX over to MPEG2 PBS and wait for Ireland to become solvent again. In the mean time, make dual MPEG2/4 STBs and iDTVs (only) available in the shops, reclaim the radio spectrum and launch HDTV and new channels when advertising revenues return. By that stage, there will already be an existing install base of decoders to exploit.

I realise that there will be newer technology by then, but consumers won't care, nor should we, prior to knowing what we are going to use all the extra bandwidth for. (Most people can't tell the difference between mono or stereo and they don't care.)

As for the feasibility of commercial DTT. Let's just say I won't be surprised if UPC are the next to go. The Chorus/NTL/UPC deal was consolidation of the market and to my knowledge they've failed to launch a HD product. Bad omens.

A possible Eircom broadband based TV offering, Web based TV on demand and FreeSat are all undermining the feasibilty of comercial DTT as a stand-alone service.

The Cush · 22-04-2009 1:58am

tretle wrote: »

Lets assume that the RTE Mux capacity is six also, This will bring Irish Free To Air unencrypted tv to 12 channels.

What I hope to find more information on now is how many mux's will be free after the analog switchoff and how many will be used for comercial and how many will be used for fta.

There are currently 42 channels being broadcast over fta(freeview) in britain. Although I think it will be unlikely that irish fta will reach this number in the next few years I hope we will make it to at least 32.
If anyone has any info on how many mux's will be available after the switchoff please let me know so we can discuss who should get what and how many mux's can be realistly assigned to fta.

All in all I dont think I would be disapointed if onevision got the liscence. They seem like a more realistic candidate than boxer. The meare thought that we could have 12 FTA channels before the analog switchoff and the possibility of more afterwards is a great one and everyone here that fought the idea of boxer controlling this by sending emails to newspapers, regulatory authorities and even the minister for communications should pat themselves on the back. If you simply disagreed in the confines of this forum you are also responsible for this outcome as for the mails I sent I always advised the review of these threads on the public view on boxer and the current scheme.

The initial multiplex model of the of the RTÉ Mux consists of 8 Standard Definition television services, up to 8 radio services, 1 MHEG-5 data service for digital teletext, provision for PSI/SI data and EPG data and System Software Updates (see attached).
In Sweden they plan 10 SD television channels on their MPEG-4 mux. In France MPEG-4 muxes carry 3 HD channels or 1 HD channel and 4/5 SD channels.

Initally 4 muxes are available - 1 FTA & 3 Commercial, following ASO 1 further mux will be gifted to RTÉ for PSB services incl HD and 1 mux to be awarded by the BAI (BCI). The number of available muxes is regulated by the Broadcasting Acts (Part 8 of the new Broadcasting Bill).
Two further national UHF muxes are also available for new distribution and communications technologies, such as DVB-H for example. 1 VHF DVB-T mux is also available but may be used for services other than television.

Karsini wrote: »

Am I right in saying that Eircom and Arqiva were pushing for MPEG-2 to be used? I'd just wonder what the situation will be if One Vision decided to go ahead? However since the spec has already been finalised they'd probably be obliged to use MPEG-4.

No, in their application they said "OneVision welcomes the fact that the BCI are selecting a more future-proof solution in choosing MPEG4"

watty wrote: »

It's not likely there would ever be more Muxes as the plan has always been to re-purpose 120MHz to 200MHz for Internet/Data/Mobile/Other not TV. That is what is meant as the "Digital Dividend" and the real reason for a Pan Europe ASO. Not to give More channels or HD.

108 to 137 MHz are allocated worldwide to aeronautical navigation and communications (incl Emergency Freq. 121.5), they will not be reallocted. Imagine the cost of upgrading the worldwide airfleet with new nav and comms equipment let alone the ground element, where would you reallocate aeronautical VHF comms and nav?

The Digital Dividend as we know it today applies to the Broadcasting bands.

What is the Digital Dividend ?

“Spectrum capacity over and above frequencies necessary to continue all existing TV programmes”

Band I (VHF) 21 MHz
Band III (VHF) 56 MHz
Bands IV, V (UHF) 392 MHz

Source: 13th CEPT Conference "European dimension of the digital dividend" 12/10/2006

“Digital Dividend” is, according to the RSPG, to be understood as the spectrum made available over and above that required to accommodate the existing analogue television services in a digital form in VHF (Band III: 174 - 230 MHz) and UHF (Bands IV and V: 470 - 862 MHz). It should be noted however that existing analogue television also makes use of Band I (47 - 68 MHz) and, after digital switchover, Band I spectrum could be considered as digital dividend too. Furthermore, Band III is also planned for T-DAB and many existing T-DAB services already make use of Band III. In addition, in a number of countries, non-broadcasting services make use of Bands III, IV and V.

Source: EBU Jan 2007

snaps · 22-04-2009 8:25am

Why cant the SD channels start up in MPEG2 then have any HD channels come along in MPEG4 then switch over.

What really is so bad using a proved system (MPEG2) which 1000's of people could in theory already receive?

With Irelands track record of consummer pricing, Can you really see MPEG stb's being sold cheap off the shelves here?

Look at the price of sat4free receivers when they came out here, I dont know anyone that actually has one?

Perhaps someone could start up a poll regarding MPEG2 or MPEG4

Scottish paddy · 22-04-2009 9:02am

I presume all the all the MPEG 4 transmission equipment, or most of it has been bought by RTÉNL. I cannot see them now buying additional MPEG 2 equipment as well in the present climate. The government are going to have to ensure that there is a supply of cheap MPEG 4 STB's before they can sanction ASO. These could even be subsidised from the "digital dividend" Whatever happens ATT cannot be switched off without any economically viable means of the public receiving the national channels............could you imagin the outcry!!! So if the government (Dept. Comms.) decided on Ireland going MPEG 4 then they have to ensure it is available at a reasonably afordable cost.

Fat_Fingers · 22-04-2009 10:26am

bk wrote: »

I completely disagree, try telling my retired parents that they have to spend between €400 and €500 for STB's for the 4 TV's and 1 VCR just so they can get the exact same channels again that they are already happy with.

Anyone with 4 TV's in the house probably can afford STB's. Most people i know have only one TV, Hey, maybe i'm underprivileged!! I better contact David Beggs pronto!!!

Jokes aside, I think you made a very good point here. There will be as usual complains from pensioners but you can't keep whole country to ransom because old dog wont learn a new trick.

Pensioners will want a "sweetener" , they are well used to free medical, free travel, supplement here, supplement there... so anything that has to be changed they will want taxpayer to "help vulnerable in the society" . Government will do a deal to keep geriatrics off the streets. It will be some sort of "butter vouchers" for STB, sort of voucher that will be presented at the shops when purchasing STB so that taxpayer will cover maybe 50% of the cost of the STB.

watty · 22-04-2009 11:35am

The stb MUST be MPEG4. That's not a problem

Each extra Mux is a lot more money just for the transmistter electricity.

The UK channels such as BBC, C4, ITV *DO* have to be paid for. However if you only have BBC1 NI, BBC2 NI, UTV, C4 and Five it could be less than the electricity cost. However it would raise no money and cost millions every year.
RTE nor RTENL can pay. TV3 would object.
TV3 would have to pay a lot more for TV3e content FTA nationwide and have to pay for carriage.

As well as the electric each extra mux is more bandwidth to be paid for to each site. Could be Millions nationwide per Mux.

The next stage of rollout beyond the 80% to 85% of main sites doubles the distribution costs and adds maybe over 40% to electricity costs for only 5% to 10% more viewers. Each extra 5% to get to 99% is almost a doubling of costs. EVERY YEAR.

Maybe the way there used to be B&W and Colour licences, there could be regular and HD licence as HD simulcast will cost twice the cost EVERY YEAR of the inital PSB free mux.

If you nearly fill the PSB Mux you need about 2 extra mux for the same content in HD. There would have to be SD & HD simulcast for maybe 10 years, unless all setboxes /TVs do HD reception and downconversion from day1. That's not going to happen.

The only non-subscription Irish TV is RTE1, RTE2, TV3 and TG4. The 3e and Setanta Ireland are PayTV only.

bk · 22-04-2009 1:29pm

Scottish paddy wrote: »

I presume all the all the MPEG 4 transmission equipment, or most of it has been bought by RTÉNL. I cannot see them now buying additional MPEG 2 equipment as well in the present climate.

MPEG4 broadcasting equipment is fully backwards compatible with MPEG2, so RTE could switch to MPEG2 over night if they wanted to, at no extra cost.

Fat_Fingers wrote: »

Anyone with 4 TV's in the house probably can afford STB's. Most people i know have only one TV, Hey, maybe i'm underprivileged!! I better contact David Beggs pronto!!!

In fairness, they've been collecting them over a very long time, they never throw anything out! Two are over 20 years old, one maybe almost 30 years old (they don't make tech like this anymore), another is a monitor off an old Amstrad CPC 6128 computer I had as a kid, with the external tuner attached and the siblings and I chipped in to buy them a newer, but still relatively cheap TV, two Christmas ago.

No fancy HD or LCD TV's, all old CRT monsters.

So no, they wouldn't really be able to afford 4 STB's + PVR to go MPEG4. If they don't get help from the government, then my siblings and I will need to pay for it.

Elmo · 22-04-2009 3:33pm

Lets face it by the time DTT happens Mpeg4 stbs AND tv will at the 12euro point

mjsmyth · 22-04-2009 4:56pm

As it happens, a DVB-T Mpeg 4 Tuner can be got for just under 110 euro here:
http://www.dipolnet.com/hd_dvb-t_tuner_t-501_mpeg-4__A99078.htm

I take your point though, it could be costly to upgrade all the TV's in a B&B or small hotel for the DSO. It could be that a distributed system might offer better value in the long term.

You talk about hearing the fan blowing away on your Sky box. On my Bush Freesat HD, there is no fan and whilst the box can get warm to touch, it is by no means dangerously hot. I would offer that perhaps it is not just the chip in the Sky HD Box that creates the heat, it is a combination of dual tuners, hard drive and the chip.

As Elmo says, by the time analogue is switched off here, the prices of the receivers will have dropped dramatically. For example, a Freesat HD box can be bought for under £100 now, at launch, they were £150 minimum.

We have at least 2.5 years to go before analogue gets switched off. That,s another 2.5 years for prices to drop and that would be another 2.5 years on to the age of Mpeg2.

In my opinion and it is only my opinion, over the coming years I would imagine mpeg2 chips will fade from the market and be replaced with mpeg4 chips which are capable of decoding mpeg2.

What that would mean is that in 3 years when we are all hopefully settling down to watch our DTT, regardless of even if we had chosen mpeg2, the chip inside the receiver would be mpeg4 compatible.

MJ

watty · 22-04-2009 5:53pm

In reality there could be FOUR years or FIVE years before an Analogue TV HAS to get a SetBox.

A Hotel or Guest house can use analogue modulators and pipe 10 Satellite receiver and 4 DTT channels via one coax. Many already do the UK channels that way, So even if they have 50 TVs they only need one DTT box per channel.

MPEG2 only chipsets are obsolete now. New models will all be MPEG4/MPEG2 from now on. No more expensive for new designs.

Andy454 wrote: »

I

Watty, why don't we have a poll to end this war of the formats - Those who can already recieve mpeg 2 signals and those who would be willing to shell out for an mpeg4 reciever?

You confusing HD and MPEG4.

MPEG4/MPEG2 chips *NOW* are similar price to MPEG2 only chips.

MPEG2 is HISTORY. That is a fact. ANY new rollout is going to be MPEG4[/B]

ynotdu · 22-04-2009 8:14pm

watty wrote: »

You confusing HD and MPEG4.

MPEG4/MPEG2 chips *NOW* are similar price to MPEG2 only chips.

MPEG2 is HISTORY. That is a fact. ANY new rollout is going to be MPEG4

or do i need mpeg2 on my radiogramme?

BigMoose · 22-04-2009 8:51pm

I've read this forum all the way though and have found it interesting, but the threat of a yellow card for having an opinion is more than I can resist. You are all completely ignoring the fact that there will not be more channels than fit in mpeg2 and yet there are thousands/hundreds of thousands of mpeg2 only built in TVs already sold. Like it or not, most of the electrical retailers here are UK owned so economies of scale state that UK popular equipment will be cheaper here than whatever they use in France or anywhere else. What is the point of DTT in Ireland? To replace the 4 analog channels with at least 4 digital ones. Anyone who wants multi channel TV either has Sky or UPC or increasingly FTA Sat of some description. So you have all already proved there's little commercial ground for a pay DTT service and no one has come up with a channel who's likely to want to pay to go on the FTA DTT platform. The UK channels do not care. C4 is so short of cash there's talk of forcing it to merge with someone else so they aren't going to be interested in such a small population area. So again, what is the point of this roll out? I am as big a techno geek as the next guy and have built my own PVR that decodes the mpeg4 DTT just fine BUT given the whole point of the thing and the small market share it will have, I think mpeg2 and the 1000s of receivers out there is just ridiculous to ignore. To compare old folk not wanting to buy a STB with their ability to embrace new technology such as mobiles is also irrelevant as no one took away their fixed line and insisted they pay for a mobile to replace it. But they had a free choice to buy a mobile. Here people who are happy with analog are being force to buy something else to replace it - they will not care one bit about mpeg2v4 but will want it as cheap as poss and resent even 20 quid at Argos, but for sure if they have a built in tuner will be happy to use it.....

That said, if we accept the service wont be generally usable for 4 years then maybe all of the above is irrelevant - that said if I have to replace my LCD TV with mpeg2 encoder within 5 years I'll be very annoyed. I do think the choice of mpeg4 will decrease converts rather than encourage them in the short term.

tretle · 22-04-2009 9:35pm

The heavy moderation is being put in place because people are spamming every thread with mpeg2 arguments.
And do you honestly believe its going to be easier to move to mpeg 4 later on if mpeg 2 is used at launch?
Its becoming harder and harder to actually read content that you want to read on this set of threads on boards.ie because people are placing any old old old old old old old argument on mpeg2 everywhere disregarding what the topic of the thread actually is.
This thread would have been a hell of alot easier for me and alot of others to read if I and others didn't get frustrated with that stupid argument spawning up again and again.
Our dtt service is in early stages so we can bypass some of the problems the british service will have in changing to mpeg4 because it will be the standard from the start.
I would rather its done correctly to begin with so that we don't have a huge mess on our hands later on in which we will be forced to subsidise people becuase of a later switch to mpeg4, I and many others would prefer that money to be spent on the broadcast content, education and health systems.

BigMoose · 22-04-2009 9:55pm

malman wrote:

The decision to move from analogue to DTT here in Ireland is not soly an Irish decision; it is encouraged by Europe. I think you are ignoring the wider picture. The benifits of digitisation lie beyond our viewing pleasure.

I am well aware of that and am not ignoring it at all. None of that is even slightly relevant in an Irish context to weather mpeg2 or 4 should have been used. Mpeg4 provides better use of spectrum however there simply aren't the channels now and no sign in the near future yet there are a lot of mpeg2 only tuners out there. So why not an mpeg2 mux now (in addition to an mpeg4 if people are that bothered) and phase it out in 5 years+ if/when maybe there are more channels wanting the bandwidth, fewer people with mpeg2 only TVs etc and cheaper mpeg4 TVs/STBs....

BigMoose · 22-04-2009 10:19pm

tretle wrote:

Its becoming harder and harder to actually read content that you want to read on this set of threads on boards.ie because people are placing any old old old old old old old argument on mpeg2 everywhere disregarding what the topic of the thread actually is.

I appreciate that and actually perhaps shouldn't have posted an old argument... Just that most people on these boards are not typical users of the system and presumably the success or otherwise of DTT will be if anyone uses it (not just us geeks). And I think it would have a far wider audience in the short term if it used mpeg2. The decision is made, mpeg4, for better or for worse - regarding take up before people are forced to with ASO. I just wonder if in this case the best technical solution was not actually the best solution given the problem/issue we are trying to solve with DTT - given the market and size of population etc. Anyway, I'll leave it at that as it's a done deal and yes, the threads are full of enough crap without mine adding to it!

watty · 22-04-2009 10:21pm

Because the WHOLE point of Digital Terrestrial TV is to turn off analogue TV and have a lot of spectrum to recycle for Mobile and Fixed Internet/Broadband.

If we abandon the payTV element we can do that before complete ASO and be synced with Europe

ANY MPEG2 launch would be a disaster in increasing MPEG2 gear by x 5 and put off MPEG4 by 10 years. It would be the stupidest thing since deciding to use Mobile phone for NBS.

tretle · 22-04-2009 10:22pm

Where are the yellow cards watty?

I appreciate that and actually perhaps shouldn't have posted an old argument... Just that most people on these boards are not typical users of the system and presumably the success or otherwise of DTT will be if anyone uses it (not just us geeks). And I think it would have a far wider audience in the short term if it used mpeg2. The decision is made, mpeg4, for better or for worse - regarding take up before people are forced to with ASO. I just wonder if in this case the best technical solution was not actually the best solution given the problem/issue we are trying to solve with DTT - given the market and size of population etc. Anyway, I'll leave it at that as it's a done deal and yes, the threads are full of enough crap without mine adding to it!

Yes it would increase it in the short term but it would also create more pissed off people when it gets switched over to mpeg4 at a later date, rather than the situation we have now where some foolish techies bought equipment before waiting for the standard and thus started bitching when its not compatible.

watty · 22-04-2009 10:22pm

BigMoose wrote: »

I appreciate that and actually perhaps shouldn't have posted an old argument...

.... Anyway, I'll leave it at that as it's a done deal and yes, the threads are full of enough crap without mine adding to it!

You just cancelled getting a yellow card. I was about to click when I saw your 2nd post

ynotdu · 22-04-2009 10:23pm

BigMoose wrote: »

I am well aware of that and am not ignoring it at all. None of that is even slightly relevant in an Irish context to weather mpeg2 or 4 should have been used. Mpeg4 provides better use of spectrum however there simply aren't the channels now and no sign in the near future yet there are a lot of mpeg2 only tuners out there. So why not an mpeg2 mux now (in addition to an mpeg4 if people are that bothered) and phase it out in 5 years+ if/when maybe there are more channels wanting the bandwidth, fewer people with mpeg2 only TVs etc and cheaper mpeg4 TVs/STBs....

the powers that be allowed the sale of mpeg2 equipment long after they knew mpeg4 was to be the ROI,s standard,
ffs what is wrong with govt and consumor agencies that they gave us joe soaps no warnings that mpeg2 was wasting money?
want to save public sector paybill?get rid of the useless consumor agencys/advice services sitting on their fat ass,s doing nothing and covering up the fact products meant for the uk were allowed to be sold here for the vat receipts.
even when i wanted advice a few years ago about upc i was told no agency regulates them:mad:

watty · 22-04-2009 10:26pm

@ ynotdu
They did send out a letter and the Association knows.

ynotdu · 22-04-2009 10:38pm

watty wrote: »

@ ynotdu
They did send out a letter and the Association knows.

watty thank you for reply,i see you are having a busy time so want to assure you this is a genuine question.what association do you mean?after that i can google/wiki it to learn more.

thanks in advance.

MPEG2 vs MPEG4 DTT

Comments