[opendtv] Re: New Sony COO bullish on Blu-ray
- From: "Kilroy Hughes" <Kilroy.Hughes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 18:17:55 -0700
Yes, 1394's probably the best solution for isochronous compressed video
streaming between CE devices, which I consider a problem that rarely
needs solving with STBs. Works great for capturing compressed video
from a digital tape camcorder to a PC for editing, for instance. Newer
camcorders that use recordable disc, disk, or flash can just do file
copies over USB.
I consider it a low ranking feature to be able to play a DVC tape or one
of the newer HD camcorder flavors through a settop box vs. uncompressed
video from the same camcorder, and I doubt capture and edit of those
codecs on a cable or satellite STB will be popular or practical.
As for video streaming in compressed format from an STB over 1394 to
other CE devices like recorders, I think that ship has already sailed
and sunk. Recorders (hard drives) are built into STBs, and video is
moved around the home IP network as files or RTP/IP streams.
+HDMI is mandatory for basic video STB functionality.
+Ethernet is the next most useful jack for both home network and
Internet connectivity.
+USB 2.0 is increasingly useful for plug and play devices.
+1394 is mostly for digital camcorders and has been mainly displaced by
the top 3 interfaces.
Shortly after ATSC was "launched" and content companies were first
consulted about letting their movies, etc. flow unprotected between
cable boxes and ATSC receivers, and the words "Hell no" echoed in the
halls of Congress and the FCC ... there was a hasty agreement to make
1394 the protected digital video interconnect for millions of alleged
STBs with PODs that were supposed to fill the shelves of Circuit City
years ago (and the analog spectrum was supposed to be auctioned this
year for 4 trillion dollars). It wasn't my idea that it should be the
one and (at the time) only required digital video output for OpenCable
STBs. I'm just quoting the old plan of record.
Kilroy Hughes
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ron Economos
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 4:12 AM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: New Sony COO bullish on Blu-ray
All true, but don't forget, it's a also a recording interface
(for which HDMI is not capable).
Ron
Kilroy Hughes wrote:
>1394 output from cable settop boxes never made any sense anyway.
>It was limited to compressed bandwidth for SD video, and it's still
>limited to compressed bandwidth for HD video. A compressed display
>connection is a non-starter in many ways.
>
>One reason is that most of the "value add" of cable (and satellite)
>services, like EPGs, PVR, VOD, VOIP, email, etc. are not provided in
the
>MPEG transport streams relayed from broadcast networks. They are
>uncompressed video/graphics rendered in the settop box. =3D20
>
>You could always add a realtime MPEG-2 MP@HL encoder and 1394 on the
>output of each settop box to take advantage of the piddling percentage
>of "digital" displays with ATSC tuner/decoders, but then you're limited
>to some arbitrary subset of image formats that might decode properly
>rather than an MPEG compliant decoder, and it would cost more than the
>STB and make ugly pictures worse. But, other than being a bad idea
both
>technically and from a business perspective, and obsolete before it's
>deployed ... it's a great idea.
>
>The best solution is for settop boxes to output uncompressed, and these
>days that means HDMI because of content protection. Displays with HDMI
>input will remain useful long after various broadcast modulation and
>encoding schemes are dead and gone (and same for audio).
>
>The current challenge with uncompressed connections is to do a good job
>with the bulk of movies and dramatic TV shot at 24 frames per second
and
>turn that back into 1080P in today's displays, which are progressive in
>nature (DLP, plasma, LCD, LCOS, SED, etc.). Raster scan displays are
>becoming an historical footnote for consumer HD displays, but live on
as
>1080i30 signal format delivering an unknown mix of 24P and 30i to the
>progressive display system. When displays throw away the repeat fields
>and leave the 24P images alone, 1080P24 (with whatever display update
>rate) looks great. Unfortunately, the images processors often
>"deinterlace" resample, filter, and even scale up and crop (to simulate
>the bezel of a cathode ray tube ... how stupid is that?). The result
>looks like twitter filtered 1080i, or worse. =3D20
>
>Kilroy Hughes
>
> =20
>
=20
=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org=20
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: