when television goes beyond HDTV, make it ONE standard, please

in several decades when the industry moves to the next big thing,
beyond HDTV, please, for the love of GOD, make it ONE standard for
everyone in each region.

HDTV is very confusing for most people. there are too many standards
(1080i, 720p, 1080p) and not every set is compatible with each
standard.

when the industry moves to UHDV, 4320p (Ultra High Definition Video,
7680 × 4320 ) or whatever that evolves into, I hope there's just one
standard that everyone gets.

One standard for OTA broadcast, cable, satellite, downloadable
internet content, video games, movies on physical media, etc etc.


before I was born, when color television was introduced, I'm sure
there was only one standard.

I realize things are far more complex today compared to many decades
ago when color NTSC was introduced. but everyone got the same upgrade
from b&w. It would be nice if things were simple again, even in an
industry driven by massive amounts of complex technologies.

On Apr 5, 12:37 pm, "SpriteScaler"
wrote:
in several decades when the industry moves to the next big thing,
beyond HDTV, please, for the love of GOD, make it ONE standard for
everyone in each region.

HDTV is very confusing for most people. there are too many standards
(1080i, 720p, 1080p) and not every set is compatible with each
standard.

when the industry moves to UHDV, 4320p (Ultra High Definition Video,
7680 × 4320 ) or whatever that evolves into, I hope there's just one
standard that everyone gets.

One standard for OTA broadcast, cable, satellite, downloadable
internet content, video games, movies on physical media, etc etc.

before I was born, when color television was introduced, I'm sure
there was only one standard.

I realize things are far more complex today compared to many decades
ago when color NTSC was introduced. but everyone got the same upgrade
from b&w. It would be nice if things were simple again, even in an
industry driven by massive amounts of complex technologies.

NTSC is STILL with us, B/W for 60 years, color since 1953. There will
not likely ever be one standard, just as there never was for SD TV.
Forgetting PAL and SECAM ? What about the UK 405 line system? Those
are way more incompatible than the various flavors of HD. The video
gear we use will deal with all 18 flavors of ATSC video without a
glitch. So what's the problem?

GG

"SpriteScaler" wrote:

before I was born, when color television was introduced, I'm sure
there was only one standard.

There was, and it made every existing B&W set unusable when color was
broadcast. Then the government decided that was a bad idea (or maybe they
didn't like the massive whirling color wheel in front of the picture tube),
withdrew that standard, and then made NTSC the standard.

Every transition goes through a rough time. That's why early adopters have
so much fun.

In article "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" writes:
In message oups.com,
SpriteScaler sprach forth the following:

before I was born, when color television was introduced, I'm sure
there was only one standard.

Yes. NTSC. Oh, and PAL. And SECAM. Oops.

But, PAL and SECAM are color standards. NTSC (the original) was black
and white, and the second was a color system. He was talking about
*before* color was introduced (and presumably neglecting the CBS color
system in 1950, and the earlier experimental color systems in the 1930's).

Examples of prior B&W systems would include the British 405 line system,
the French 819 line system. Apparently abandoned before color came along
was the German 441 line system of the 1930's, and another French system
with 455 lines.

So, there were multiple standards in the world when NTSC became the first
of the current color systems in use, in 1954.


Aan

On Apr 5, 10:14 pm, (Alan) wrote:
In article "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" writes:

In ooglegroups.com,
SpriteScaler sprach forth the following:

before I was born, when color television was introduced, I'm sure
there was only one standard.

Yes. NTSC. Oh, and PAL. And SECAM. Oops.

But, PAL and SECAM are color standards. NTSC (the original) was
black
and white, and the second was a color system. He was talking about
*before* color was introduced (and presumably neglecting the CBS
color
system in 1950, and the earlier experimental color systems in the
1930's).

Examples of prior B&W systems would include the British 405 line
system,
the French 819 line system. Apparently abandoned before color came
along
was the German 441 line system of the 1930's, and another French
system
with 455 lines.

So, there were multiple standards in the world when NTSC became
the first
of the current color systems in use, in 1954.

Aan

You're implying that PAL and SECAM are the same as NTSC. In a way they
are similar what with sync, equalization and burst pulses but the line
count and frame rates are quite different - 625/50 for PAL and SECAM
vs 525/60 for NTSC. Nice history lesson though. As I said earlier,
there never was 'one standard' so why would there be at some later
time? Improvements happen incrementally, not in one massive change.

GG

"SpriteScaler" wrote

...HDTV is very confusing for most people. there are too many standards
(1080i, 720p, 1080p) and not every set is compatible with each standard.

? When I bought my 720p TV a year and a half ago I just hooked it up to my
1080i satellite receiver via a digital cable and it's worked great ever
since. No problem there.

"SpriteScaler" wrote in message
oups.com...
in several decades when the industry moves to the next big thing,
beyond HDTV, please, for the love of GOD, make it ONE standard for
everyone in each region.

HDTV is very confusing for most people. there are too many standards
(1080i, 720p, 1080p) and not every set is compatible with each
standard.
==========================
But ATSC receivers ARE!
There is no problem here.
===========================

when the industry moves to UHDV, 4320p (Ultra High Definition Video,
7680 × 4320 ) or whatever that evolves into, I hope there's just one
standard that everyone gets.
=========================
Unlikely, and unnecessary
===========================

One standard for OTA broadcast, cable, satellite, downloadable
internet content, video games, movies on physical media, etc etc.


before I was born, when color television was introduced, I'm sure
there was only one standard.

=========================
Why must everything be the same?
==========================

I realize things are far more complex today compared to many decades
ago when color NTSC was introduced. but everyone got the same upgrade
from b&w. It would be nice if things were simple again, even in an
industry driven by massive amounts of complex technologies.

"Kimba W. Lion" kimbawlion wrote in message
...
"SpriteScaler" wrote:

before I was born, when color television was introduced, I'm
sure
there was only one standard.

There was, and it made every existing B&W set unusable when
color was
broadcast. Then the government decided that was a bad idea (or
maybe they
didn't like the massive whirling color wheel in front of the
picture tube),


My family could not afford the whirling color wheel, we used a
gel sheet colored blue in the upper third, pinkish in the middle
third, and green in the lower third. It was equally effective,
and so much more entertaining, when applied upside down to our
circa 1950 12" Muntz TV screen;-0)

N.B. in 1980 I helped my mom move from NYC to southern Ca. She
brought the Muntz with her. It was another 10 years or so
before it gave out and she had to buy a color TV. The gel
really looked nowhere near as good on that new set!!!


withdrew that standard, and then made NTSC the standard.

Every transition goes through a rough time. That's why early
adopters have
so much fun.

It should have been about 700 scanning lines instead of 525, and the
ratio of 35mm movie film at 24 frames per second progressive. Just
like movie film. Instead they decided to make it like the old out of
date 16mm. Too cheap to add an extra oscilator circuit and too cheap
to make more phospher dots on the screen. Probly lobyer's from the film
industry was affraid it would take down on ticket sales. The same
thing delayed vcr's. What they don't seem to grasp, is the fact that no
matter what you have in your home, people will always want to go "out".
It is a cheap venue for a "date". Also, no matter what you have in
your home, I'm sure you don't have a screen 40 feet wide.
Duuugh factor of a thousand. mes.

On Apr 7, 10:46 am, (MES Jones) wrote:
It should have been about 700 scanning lines instead of 525, and
the
ratio of 35mm movie film at 24 frames per second progressive.
Just
like movie film. Instead they decided to make it like the old out
of
date 16mm. Too cheap to add an extra oscilator circuit and too
cheap
to make more phospher dots on the screen. Probly lobyer's from the
film
industry was affraid it would take down on ticket sales. The same
thing delayed vcr's. What they don't seem to grasp, is the fact
that no
matter what you have in your home, people will always want to go
"out".
It is a cheap venue for a "date". Also, no matter what you have
in
your home, I'm sure you don't have a screen 40 feet wide.
Duuugh factor of a thousand. mes.

You must be young. Too cheap to add an oscillator? Do you know what a
TV cost in 1947? You were talking 8-12 WEEKS of your GROSS pay to get
one. The industry did everything they could to keep consumer cost
down. You need faster scan to reduce flicker so there went your 24
frame idea. You got 30 frame and interlace. The system needs low
distortion in the video channel so the receiver equalization was done
at the transmitter. You need linear light output but the cathode of
the picture tube is non-linear so you predistort in the camera with
gamma correction. More scan lines means more bandwidth but the
hardware is barely up to the task in 1947. Plus you're trying to keep
everything backwards compatible - and doing a remarkable job of it.
That old 1947 TV would look the best it ever looked with today's
signal.

Stop thinking nefarious political motivation and look at technical
limitations.

GG