BBC HD critised in The Independent

In article , David
scribeth thus


"Java Jive" wrote in message
.. .


It is plain that HD is going the same way as SD.

We desperately need a regulator with teeth who will uncompromisingly
set meaningful standards of minimum quality for UK broadcasting.


What comes to my mind is radio with the BBC DAB system with its CD quality!



A shame that the EU do not force us to be the same quality as Europe, E.G..
the German HD TV that I have moved my dish to this morning to have a look.


Yeabut they still have engineers ruling the roost there;!...

Regards
David


--
Tony Sayer

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:57:22 +0000, Mike Henry
wrote:

In , Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:09:42 +0000, Mark
wrote:

I seen quite a bit of code where the Y2K problem was not properly
fixed but just changed to push the problem into the future for someone
else to solve.

For example:
If year 79 then assume the date is 20xx
otherwise assume it is 19xx.

That technique was used as a quick fix in, I think, MS Excel. I assume a
longer term fix has been made in later releases.

And the same bodge is still present in Windows 95/98/2000/XP at least.
Control Panel/Regional and language options/Regional
options/Customise/Date/"When a two-digit year is entered, interpret it as
a year between:" - this shoves hundreds more problems into the year 2029.
Instead of raising an error which could have been done and dealt with a
decade ago.

The problem is that if an error were to be flagged MS Windows would have
been informing the end-user of an application that the application was
faulty. The users would have been very unimpressed, even if the message
was just a warning. I haven't seen any figures but I understand that
there are very many third-party applications running on Windows
computers that have been written by individuals or small organisations
which no longer support the software, in some cases because they are no
longer in the business or the individual is retired or dead. If MS were
to prevent that software from working they would be severely criticised.
Customers would not stand for it. They would be forced to introduce the
2-digit year workaround that currently exists.



--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

On 15 Dec, 21:23, Andy Champ wrote:
wrote:
On 14 Dec, 21:24, Andy Champ wrote:

Mike you may want to look at test signals on the actual screen as
broadcasts are usually 720 not 1080

They're not you know - all the UK-aimed HD broadcasts are 1080.

I'm surprised. *I don't often see HD - and TBH it doesn't look like it.
* But isn't that where we started?

On an unfamiliar display of unknown resolution with unknown
deinterlacing, I doubt you could spot 1080 vs 720, unless you compared
back-to-back.

Back-to-back is obvious enough on most displays: 720 is softer, 1080
sometimes has visible bobbing. This is even on 768 displays. Better
displays may suppress the bobbing.

However, with bitrate starvation, 720 may look better than 1080 - more
consistent quality, with fewer artefacts. That's what the EBU have
been trying to say for years - but no one has listened, and encoders
have improved to make this point less relevant.

Cheers,
David.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:56:00 +0000, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:57:22 +0000, Mike Henry
wrote:

In , Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:09:42 +0000, Mark
wrote:

I seen quite a bit of code where the Y2K problem was not properly
fixed but just changed to push the problem into the future for someone
else to solve.

For example:
If year 79 then assume the date is 20xx
otherwise assume it is 19xx.

That technique was used as a quick fix in, I think, MS Excel. I assume a
longer term fix has been made in later releases.

And the same bodge is still present in Windows 95/98/2000/XP at least.
Control Panel/Regional and language options/Regional
options/Customise/Date/"When a two-digit year is entered, interpret it as
a year between:" - this shoves hundreds more problems into the year 2029.
Instead of raising an error which could have been done and dealt with a
decade ago.

The problem is that if an error were to be flagged MS Windows would have
been informing the end-user of an application that the application was
faulty. The users would have been very unimpressed, even if the message
was just a warning. I haven't seen any figures but I understand that
there are very many third-party applications running on Windows
computers that have been written by individuals or small organisations
which no longer support the software, in some cases because they are no
longer in the business or the individual is retired or dead. If MS were
to prevent that software from working they would be severely criticised.
Customers would not stand for it. They would be forced to introduce the
2-digit year workaround that currently exists.

Some of the projects I have worked on in recent years still have data
(provided by third parties) with 2 digit years :-(
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:11:56 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:56:00 +0000, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:57:22 +0000, Mike Henry
wrote:

In , Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:09:42 +0000, Mark
wrote:

I seen quite a bit of code where the Y2K problem was not properly
fixed but just changed to push the problem into the future for someone
else to solve.

For example:
If year 79 then assume the date is 20xx
otherwise assume it is 19xx.

That technique was used as a quick fix in, I think, MS Excel. I assume a
longer term fix has been made in later releases.

And the same bodge is still present in Windows 95/98/2000/XP at least.
Control Panel/Regional and language options/Regional
options/Customise/Date/"When a two-digit year is entered, interpret it as
a year between:" - this shoves hundreds more problems into the year 2029.
Instead of raising an error which could have been done and dealt with a
decade ago.

The problem is that if an error were to be flagged MS Windows would have
been informing the end-user of an application that the application was
faulty. The users would have been very unimpressed, even if the message
was just a warning. I haven't seen any figures but I understand that
there are very many third-party applications running on Windows
computers that have been written by individuals or small organisations
which no longer support the software, in some cases because they are no
longer in the business or the individual is retired or dead. If MS were
to prevent that software from working they would be severely criticised.
Customers would not stand for it. They would be forced to introduce the
2-digit year workaround that currently exists.

Some of the projects I have worked on in recent years still have data
(provided by third parties) with 2 digit years :-(

Yes. A lot of hard work was done to modify software to handle dates from
2000 on, but there will still be a mass of unconverted data. It's fair
enough if the data is pre-2000 but not so good if it has been generated
since.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)