Latest situation

ronan.michael@g

Having being keeping my eye on the ball recently - whats the latest on the Irish mpeg2 versus mpeg4 decision - has it been made yet? Regards Michael r.

byrnefm

Nothing yet - until the trial starts in March (hopefully), we won't know what standard(s) are going to be used.

snaps

is it just dublin for the trials?

byrnefm

Dublin and the North East (Claremont Carn and Three Rock are both DTT-enabled).

Ice_Box

Irish terrestrial digital TV service to offer HD

Even as the UK prepares to turn its back on terrestrial high definition, Ireland is gearing up to launch a free-to-view high definition service via standard TV aerials. Plans for the Irish digital terrestrial service are currently entering a key trial phase, with 1000 households expected to receive experimental transmissions over the coming month.
Although all the upcoming trial transmissions will be in MPEG-2 standard definition, a spokesman is quoted in trade magazine ERT as saying that the service will be launched with an expectation of MPEG-4 high definition content becoming available shortly after its 2008 introduction. High definition is seen as a key feature to popularise the service, claimed the source.
The situation appears to be in stark contrast to the UK, where industry watchdog Ofcom has stated that it intends to auction off all available spectrum space to the highest bidder when analogue TV shuts down in 2012, rather than set aside channels for HD, citing a lack of public interest in high definition technology.
Manufacturers and broadcasters have united to condemn Ofcom’s decision, via the newly launched HDforall website campaign.


http://avzombie.com/blog/2007/02/08/irish-terrestrial-digital-tv-service-to-offer-hd/

Mossy Monk

Ice_Box wrote:

an expectation of MPEG-4 high definition content becoming available shortly after its 2008 introduction

what content and how long is shortly

i would be happy if HD was included

BigMoose

I appologies that this isn't really the right place to ask this, but here goes! I dont see the big deal with HD. I'm normally a gadget freak (built my own PVR and that kind of geeky thing) and will have a go at most new technologies early on, but I dont get HD. I sit far enough away from my 32inch telly not to care what definition it is. I can see the picture clearly and have no pixelation. I have a projector for watching films in a larger form than any existing TV which granted isn't as good as HD definition but it aint bad either. Certainly not worth spending any money on HD equiement! Am I missing something vital here?!

While I understand the manufacturers hoping everyone will buy new equipment I am not surprised by Ofcoms views cause I think in general they are spot on. The population at large doesn't see the point.

SPDUB

BigMoose wrote:

While I understand the manufacturers hoping everyone will buy new equipment I am not surprised by Ofcoms views cause I think in general they are spot on. The population at large doesn't see the point.

I agree BigMoose .Out of my immediate family (5 other people ) I'm the only one vaguely interested in HD and I'm even not that interested .Indeed at times some members of my family have put up with what anyone would consider a bad picture and getting them at times to consider current AV technology is sometimes a struggle

Foggy43

I think you need 40 inch LCD/Plasma and bigger to get any benefit from HD.

What about MPEG 1? I know it is still used but never read anything about it here.

byrnefm

MPEG-1 is very low compression - suitable for use even on slow computers (eg 386's!). Low compression = LARGE file sizes in this case. MPEG-2 was the next step up and for some reason, there wasn't an MPEG-3 (at least not that I know about).

watty

CDi & VCD use MPEG1 at bit rate and resolution such that a GOOD VHS can be better.
SVCD uses MPEG2 at 4:3 quality that can equal 16:9 quality on DVD. 4:3 on DVD is about 30% higher quality.

MPEG4 not used for extra quality at all. Used to make SD or HD be about 1/2 the size as it would be if it was MPEG2.

xVid /DixX and WMA are mostly varients of MPEG4 way of doing things.

ronan.michael@g

BigMoose wrote:

I appologies that this isn't really the right place to ask this, but here goes! I dont see the big deal with HD. I'm normally a gadget freak (built my own PVR and that kind of geeky thing) and will have a go at most new technologies early on, but I dont get HD. I sit far enough away from my 32inch telly not to care what definition it is. I can see the picture clearly and have no pixelation. I have a projector for watching films in a larger form than any existing TV which granted isn't as good as HD definition but it aint bad either. Certainly not worth spending any money on HD equiement! Am I missing something vital here?!

While I understand the manufacturers hoping everyone will buy new equipment I am not surprised by Ofcoms views cause I think in general they are spot on. The population at large doesn't see the point.

. I agree wholeheartedly. Spent most of my tv viewing life (Worked in RTE in an outside engineering capacity - ie tv reception problems) trying to get away from the technical end of watching a prog. as opposed to viewing the programme itself. Tormented by perfectionism! I, too, have 36square feet of projector screen and its the bees knees -- sport/wild life programmes are outstanding - wife cancelled all rugby tickets in lieu of the big screen! 10/12 neighbours in for the big match and the noise is just great! My 42 inch plasma is marvellous but , as you say , at 15feet what more can I expect to see? Do I want HD? I suppose the answer is a reluctant "Yes". Do I need HD? Definitely NOT. Regards Michael .r ps Sorry for delay in following up my own thread - got distracted by carpets and fireplaces and **** -- God protect me from household chores!

DMC

Ice_Box wrote:

Although all the upcoming trial transmissions will be in MPEG-2 standard definition, a spokesman is quoted in trade magazine ERT as saying that the service will be launched with an expectation of MPEG-4 high definition content becoming available shortly after its 2008 introduction. High definition is seen as a key feature to popularise the service, claimed the source.

Somehow, I cant see this happening. Launch a new service, and then supersede it with another so soon after launch?

Its a prediction which I don't think will occur.

L1011

byrnefm wrote:

MPEG-1 is very low compression - suitable for use even on slow computers (eg 386's!). Low compression = LARGE file sizes in this case. MPEG-2 was the next step up and for some reason, there wasn't an MPEG-3 (at least not that I know about).

MPEG3 was drafted, never used. Was a HDTV capable adaption of MPEG2, didn't save any bandwidth over just using MPEG2 for HDTV basically.

John Dough

BigMoose wrote:

I appologies that this isn't really the right place to ask this, but here goes! I dont see the big deal with HD. I'm normally a gadget freak (built my own PVR and that kind of geeky thing) and will have a go at most new technologies early on, but I dont get HD. I sit far enough away from my 32inch telly not to care what definition it is. I can see the picture clearly and have no pixelation. I have a projector for watching films in a larger form than any existing TV which granted isn't as good as HD definition but it aint bad either. Certainly not worth spending any money on HD equiement! Am I missing something vital here?!

While I understand the manufacturers hoping everyone will buy new equipment I am not surprised by Ofcoms views cause I think in general they are spot on. The population at large doesn't see the point.

Well said my friend I agree with most of your sentiments on this but if you had a 50" Plasmas 1080P screen and a bluray recorder/player would you still feel the same????:D