Freeview and HDTV - will it ever happen?

wrote in message
oups.com...
Paul Schofield wrote:
"Brian McIlwrath" wrote in message
...
: With 64QAM and H264 we could fit 3 HDTV channels per multiplex,
they'd
: probably squeeze 4 in there. With 8k we could move to a SFN and (if
we
: got rid of regional variations and France didn't exist) use all 48
: channels, giving a maximum of 192 HDTV channels on freeview.

Don't get too excited too early! There are NO plans to go to SFN.
There
are,
indeed, no plans *AT ALL* for DTT HDTV in the foreseeable future!

Well why were the BBC demonstrating a system for sending HD over DTT at
the
recent Mediacast show?

Because BBC R&D are working on HD projects. However, that doesn't mean
that it's "BBC policy" to deliver HD broadcasts - quite the opposite,
if you talk to them.


....snip...

Well I'd say demonstrating at a media show means that they at least have
some plans, not "no plans AT ALL". If it was only R&D I don't suppose they'd
be allowed out of the lab - but even that would imply some planning going
on. Of course they're probably just kite flying to test the reaction from
informed public and set-top box manufacturers, but in any case it still
flies in the face of Brian's assertion.


--
Paul Schofield

Time flies like an arrow
Fruit flies like a banana

In article , Andy Dee wrote:
The system uses a low data rate overnight, or during the day to slowly
send a HD program of film to a set top box equipped with a hard disk
recorder.
When received, the prog is played out at HD.

In that case it is only useful if a small percentage of the broadcasting is
HD, with the rest as SD?

Paul Schofield wrote:

Well I'd say demonstrating at a media show means that they at least have
some plans, not "no plans AT ALL". If it was only R&D I don't suppose they'd
be allowed out of the lab - but even that would imply some planning going
on. Of course they're probably just kite flying to test the reaction from
informed public and set-top box manufacturers, but in any case it still
flies in the face of Brian's assertion.

There may well be things going on in the background, but let me quote
what was said in a public HD forum at Mediacast last year in response
to my question about HDTV "Officially the BBC has no plans to broadcast
in HD, and officially we see HD as a distraction until after analogue
switch off".

So there you have the official (party?) line.

Think for a second about what the BBC have demoed. A trickle feed HD
system - that's about on the level of an MSc project. MPEG-2 HD -
that's off the shelf and already running in several countries. H.264 HD
- that's just off the shelf and already testing on Astra. Dirac -
that's novel and useful, but not necesarily a commitment to HD (as it
works at SD and even CIF!). 1080p50 via 1080i25 studio links - that is
useful.

It seems apparent that R&D are showing as much interest in HD as
they're allowed to. But this is the same R&D department that delivered
DAB, giving CD quality sound in 1995. What they want or do does not
always reflect the reality of what happens in the real world!

My hunch is that, in the present BBC climate, R&D have little choice
but to let Sky steal a march on the BBC, and wait for the BBC top brass
to get worried that they're being left out, and decide that maybe
they'd better talk to these engineering types to see what Aunty can do
WRT HD.

It's a far cry from the days where engineering said "this is the next
big step", R&D worked on it, and UK broadcasting lead the world in it -
but it's the situation various parties have been daft enough to push
the BBC and its managers into, so what can R&D do?

If you think about it, it's quite depressing. I hope they'll bring
something good out of it (a bit like waiting for PAL, rather than
adopting NTSC, helped in the long run) - but just like that left us
with an extra decade or so of B&W while others had colour, it's leaving
us with an extra decade of SD, while others have HD. Being first isn't
always an advantage (think of DAB, or MPEG-2 HD requiring 20Mbps), but
having no apparent plan to catch up isn't great either!

Cheers,
David.

Mat Overton wrote:
Will the Freeview bandwidth ever be able to handle HDTV? I would
imagine it would mean cutting down the number of channels
drastically. But then again surely they will have to go HD at some
point to be able to compete with Sky.
Yes.

8K system...... More bandwidth..... Single Frequency networks.......
64QAM....... Government realises it can't sell off analogue bandwidth
as no-one wants it


No-one wants it? There's mobile phone networks slavering over the chance
to use it for DVB-H to provide mobile TV.




--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm

Ben wrote:
Mat Overton wrote:
Will the Freeview bandwidth ever be able to handle HDTV? I would
imagine it would mean cutting down the number of channels
drastically. But then again surely they will have to go HD at some
point to be able to compete with Sky.

Yes.


8K system...... More bandwidth..... Single Frequency networks.......
64QAM....... Government realises it can't sell off analogue
bandwidth as no-one wants it / needed for HDTV via Freeview. Room
for the major channels to go HD.

With 64QAM and H264 we could fit 3 HDTV channels per multiplex, they'd
probably squeeze 4 in there. With 8k we could move to a SFN and (if we
got rid of regional variations and France didn't exist) use all 48
channels,


The multiplexes that carry BBC1 and ITV1 have to be planned as an MFN
because they carry regional content, so that would consume quite a lot
of channels.

Also, from what someone told me via email it seems that they're not
planning to deploy SFNs much, and we're only going to get maybe a couple
extra muxes in total. Pretty ****e really.

Another thing to remember is that the transmitter networks need to be
funded to be built, and it's the broadcasters that need to foot the bill
for that so it might be them that don't want to build many more national
multiplexes, and the likes of ITV will want as little extra competition
as possible.



--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm

wrote:
Paul Schofield wrote:

Well I'd say demonstrating at a media show means that they at least
have some plans, not "no plans AT ALL". If it was only R&D I don't
suppose they'd be allowed out of the lab - but even that would imply
some planning going on. Of course they're probably just kite flying
to test the reaction from informed public and set-top box
manufacturers, but in any case it still flies in the face of Brian's
assertion.

There may well be things going on in the background, but let me quote
what was said in a public HD forum at Mediacast last year in response
to my question about HDTV "Officially the BBC has no plans to
broadcast in HD, and officially we see HD as a distraction until
after analogue switch off".

So there you have the official (party?) line.


I can remember reading an interview with the BBC's "HD man" who said
something along the lines of "we will launch HDTV when we feel the time
is right blah blah". Putting that together with the response you heard
then they'll probably wait until after digital switchover. They might
also want to avoid launching HD before digital switchover to avoid
confusing the public, because HD requires new set-top boxes, and the
public seem to have enough difficulties understanding things as it is.


It seems apparent that R&D are showing as much interest in HD as
they're allowed to. But this is the same R&D department that delivered
DAB, giving CD quality sound in 1995. What they want or do does not
always reflect the reality of what happens in the real world!


Amen to that. And given Ofcom's method of "regulation" then I'd bet that
when we do see HDTV on DTT the bit rates that'll be used will be
significantly lower than the 8 - 10 Mbps figures that you usually see
using H.264.


It's a far cry from the days where engineering said "this is the next
big step", R&D worked on it, and UK broadcasting lead the world in it


What, are you not including the BBC leading the world with DAB? ;-)


If you think about it, it's quite depressing. I hope they'll bring
something good out of it (a bit like waiting for PAL, rather than
adopting NTSC, helped in the long run) - but just like that left us
with an extra decade or so of B&W while others had colour, it's
leaving us with an extra decade of SD, while others have HD. Being
first isn't always an advantage (think of DAB, or MPEG-2 HD requiring
20Mbps), but having no apparent plan to catch up isn't great either!


I think the best way to do things is to avoid being one of the first
(and avoid like the plague actually being first, e.g. DAB) and to avoid
being one of the last.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm

DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
Ben wrote:

Mat Overton wrote:

Will the Freeview bandwidth ever be able to handle HDTV? I would
imagine it would mean cutting down the number of channels
drastically. But then again surely they will have to go HD at some
point to be able to compete with Sky.

Yes.


8K system...... More bandwidth..... Single Frequency networks.......
64QAM....... Government realises it can't sell off analogue
bandwidth as no-one wants it / needed for HDTV via Freeview. Room
for the major channels to go HD.

With 64QAM and H264 we could fit 3 HDTV channels per multiplex, they'd
probably squeeze 4 in there. With 8k we could move to a SFN and (if we
got rid of regional variations and France didn't exist) use all 48
channels,



The multiplexes that carry BBC1 and ITV1 have to be planned as an MFN
because they carry regional content, so that would consume quite a lot
of channels.

Well, yes, I did say *if* we got rid of regional variations - obviously
people would rather have their crappy regional news than a decent range
of quality channels.

Also, from what someone told me via email it seems that they're not
planning to deploy SFNs much, and we're only going to get maybe a couple
extra muxes in total. Pretty ****e really.

Another thing to remember is that the transmitter networks need to be
funded to be built, and it's the broadcasters that need to foot the bill
for that so it might be them that don't want to build many more national
multiplexes

You know, I think it might ultimately be this more than anything else
that means we slowly migrate away from DTT towards DSat or IPTV. From a
spectrum planning point of view there's no reason at all why we couldn't
have a huge number of multiplexes if we wanted them enough, but with the
cost of commissioning transmitters specified per muliplex, it ain't
going to happen.

Ben wrote:
DAB sounds worse than FM wrote:
Ben wrote:

Mat Overton wrote:

Will the Freeview bandwidth ever be able to handle HDTV? I would
imagine it would mean cutting down the number of channels
drastically. But then again surely they will have to go HD at
some point to be able to compete with Sky.

Yes.


8K system...... More bandwidth..... Single Frequency
networks....... 64QAM....... Government realises it can't sell off
analogue bandwidth as no-one wants it / needed for HDTV via
Freeview. Room for the major channels to go HD.

With 64QAM and H264 we could fit 3 HDTV channels per multiplex,
they'd probably squeeze 4 in there. With 8k we could move to a SFN
and (if we got rid of regional variations and France didn't exist)
use all 48 channels,



The multiplexes that carry BBC1 and ITV1 have to be planned as an MFN
because they carry regional content, so that would consume quite a
lot of channels.

Well, yes, I did say *if* we got rid of regional variations


Right, I didn't notice you'd said that.


- obviously people would rather have their crappy regional news than a
decent range of quality channels.


Yeah, I can't say I'd miss them but there'd be outrage if anybody
suggested getting rid of all local TV news.


Also, from what someone told me via email it seems that they're not
planning to deploy SFNs much, and we're only going to get maybe a
couple extra muxes in total. Pretty ****e really.

Another thing to remember is that the transmitter networks need to be
funded to be built, and it's the broadcasters that need to foot the
bill for that so it might be them that don't want to build many more
national multiplexes

You know, I think it might ultimately be this more than anything else
that means we slowly migrate away from DTT towards DSat or IPTV.


Could be, and Murdoch's son thinks that Freeview is just an interim step
that'll give people the taste for multi-channel TV but they'll end up
getting pay-TV.


From a spectrum planning point of view there's no reason at all why we
couldn't have a huge number of multiplexes if we wanted them enough,
but with the cost of commissioning transmitters specified per
muliplex, it ain't going to happen.


If we have to wait until 2012 before we have HDTV on DTT then Sky will
have a 6 year head-start, and assuming that people are impressed by it
then they could gain a hell of a lot of people that want it but aren't
getting it on DTT.

Any idea what plans cable and IPTV have for HDTV?


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview, DAB & MP3 Player Prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/da...tal_radios.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...rs_1GB-5GB.htm
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/mp...e_capacity.htm

"BonzaiMaster" wrote in message
...
Will the Freeview bandwidth ever be able to handle HDTV?

If enough bandwidth is chucked at DTT and new decoders are made available,
then it should be possible, I suppose.

This is unlikely to happen until analogue switchoff.

I would imagine it
would mean cutting down the number of channels drastically.

Not if more spectrum were given over to DTT, such as might happen on
analogue switchoff.


But then again
surely they will have to go HD at some point to be able to compete with
Sky.

Why compete with Sky? On-Digital/ITV D did and it did not pay off!


--
MESSAGE ENDS.
John Porcella

Mat Overton wrote:
Government realises it can't sell off analogue bandwidth as
no-one wants it

Ha ha ha ha.

wipes tear from eye

200MHz of spectrum at 650-850MHz? Won't be able to sell it off?

Ha ha ha. Ha.