[LINK] Does NBN need a third satellite?

[Bernard Robertson-Dunn]

On 4/04/2016 2:04 PM, JanW wrote:
> At 01:53 PM 4/04/2016, Karl Auer wrote:
>
>> So I'm not knocking video "compression". But I do think people should
>> know what they are paying for. 
> Here's a different angle on chosen compression. The new 7Flix channel is using MPEG4. My HD tv doesn't do MPEG4, evidently just MPEG2. The racing channel also uses MPEG4, so I can't see that video either. I can hear both.
>
> My Kogan STB manages7Flix, so I can watch via that and/or record on it. But if I want to record some other channel and watch 7Flix on my TV, I can't.
>
> So why did 7 network choose this? I know I'm not alone. I found out that it wasn't by reading the Whirlpool thread on it.

This month's Silicon Chip (April) has an article on the subject. You
could possibly read it in your local newsagent (if you still have one)
or library.

<quote>:
MPEG-4 is not new; far from it. The MPEG-4 version 10 compression
standard was approved for worldwide use in 2005 and New Zealand has used
MPEG-4 for all of their TV broadcasts. In Australia, we have had digital
TV since 2001 but using the less efficient MPEG-2 compression.

The root of the chaos lies in Australian Standard AS 4933.1-2010 Digital
Television - requirements for receivers - VHF/UHF DVB-T Television
broadcasts.

This standard made MPEG-4 reception optional, saying that broadcasters
may use it and so importers and retailers do not have to comply. If the
standard had made MPEG-4 compulsory back in 2010, nearly all TVs,
personal video recorders and set top boxes would now have been able to
receive MPEG-4 signals.
<unquote>

-- 

Regards
brd

Bernard Robertson-Dunn
Sydney Australia
email: brd at iimetro.com.au
web:   www.drbrd.com
web:   www.problemsfirst.com
Blog:  www.problemsfirst.com/blog