Cable: MPEG-4 set top boxes now being deployed

[morac]

Comcast and TimeWarner have started to deploy MPEG-4 compatible cable boxes (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Cable-Begins-To-Embrace-MPEG4-103439) in select areas. There's nothing being delivered via MPEG-4 as of yet, but it looks like the cable industry is getting ready to do so.

[moyekj]

Hopefully this means transition to mpeg4 ATSC broadcasting will happen sometime next decade in this country...

[wmcbrine]

I hope the Series 3 will be ready when they start actually pushing the content out.

[morac]

I hope the Series 3 will be ready when they start actually pushing the content out.

Depending on how it's implemented the Series 3 may not be able to work no matter what TiVo does.

From what I've read the new MPEG-4 boxes support frequencies up to 1 GHz. The Series 3 boxes only supports frequencies up to 850 MHz (I believe). If the cable companies decided to put MPEG-4 channels in the 850 Mhz to 1 GHz range, the Series 3 will never be able to get them.

[socrplyr]

Depending on how it's implemented the Series 3 may not be able to work no matter what TiVo does.

From what I've read the new MPEG-4 boxes support frequencies up to 1 GHz. The Series 3 boxes only supports frequencies up to 850 MHz (I believe). If the cable companies decided to put MPEG-4 channels in the 850 Mhz to 1 GHz range, the Series 3 will never be able to get them.

While I agree with you the 1GHz plant might be an issue, I just wanted to make sure that anyone reading this understand that it isn't a part of the MPEG-4 spec. They could just as easily put MPEG-2 channels up in those frequencies.

My Speculation
My bet is that the first MPEG-4 channels will all be used on SDV (no one-way device that i have seen can do MPEG-4), so it is a non issue there if you accept that Tivo+TA=two-way device (at least for SDV, clunky, but still two-way). Hopefully this means that the Tivo will be able to request it to tune the SDV channel on a frequency that it is capable of receiving.

[Videodrome]

Depending on how it's implemented the Series 3 may not be able to work no matter what TiVo does.

From what I've read the new MPEG-4 boxes support frequencies up to 1 GHz. The Series 3 boxes only supports frequencies up to 850 MHz (I believe). If the cable companies decided to put MPEG-4 channels in the 850 Mhz to 1 GHz range, the Series 3 will never be able to get them.

Well couldnt tivo, just to do a box upgrade ? So people could just send the box to tivo for repairs. Although if they were going to do then make it a series 4 in the process.

[parzec]

Well couldnt tivo, just to do a box upgrade ? So people could just send the box to tivo for repairs. Although if they were going to do then make it a series 4 in the process.


Sounds expensive and unlikely. Tivo would rather sell you a brand new Series 4 than retrofit an older unit. Just like the Series 1 and Series 2 units will never decode HD signals, such will probably be the case for Series 3 units regarding the 1Ghz band.

[parzec]

Hopefully this means transition to mpeg4 ATSC broadcasting will happen sometime next decade in this country...

Maybe I am missing something, but what would be the advantage? MPEG4 is of no higher quality than MPEG2 -- although it would allow for more subchannels on each frequency because of the increased bandwith from the added compression. Not sure there is enough content for OTA that would justify a switch in technology that would render all exisiting ATSC tuners unusable. Is there some other benefit I am not considering?

[fyodor]

Hopefully this means transition to mpeg4 ATSC broadcasting will happen sometime next decade in this country...

Given the speed and efficiency of our digital switchover, I think that your hopes are entirely justified.

[moyekj]

Maybe I am missing something, but what would be the advantage? MPEG4 is of no higher quality than MPEG2 -- although it would allow for more subchannels on each frequency because of the increased bandwith from the added compression. Not sure there is enough content for OTA that would justify a switch in technology that would render all exisiting ATSC tuners unusable. Is there some other benefit I am not considering? As you probably know the current OTA transmissions using 8VSB modulation are limited to 19.4 Mbps total. This already today is not enough to transmit high quality HD transmissions in some cases. For example ABC stations in all major TV markets are now cramming in Well HD as a second 720p sub-channel which has resulted in pretty significant degradation of their primary HD 720p transmission. There were big complaints about this during the NBA finals on ABC stations which looked terribly bit starved. ABC has since improved situation a little bit by devoting on average 10 Mbps for the primary HD channel at expense of other sub-channels, but it's still not as good as it used to be.
Anyway, point being is that assuming the modulation schemes don't improve to allow higher bandwidth transmissions then the much better compression schemes of mpeg4 means you can theoretically get much better quality transmissions using same bit rates. Of course it could well be that the stations would then take opportunity to cram even more sub-channels rather than beefing up the primary HD channels...

[socrplyr]

Maybe I am missing something, but what would be the advantage? MPEG4 is of no higher quality than MPEG2 -- although it would allow for more subchannels on each frequency because of the increased bandwith from the added compression. Not sure there is enough content for OTA that would justify a switch in technology that would render all exisiting ATSC tuners unusable. Is there some other benefit I am not considering?

Actually bandwidth is a huge problem in the cable industry. Although mostly because they refuse to shut off analog and go all digital. There are two ways in which you can do better. Use what bandwidth you have more efficiently (SDV and MPEG-4) or get more bandwidth (1GHz).

SDV better utilizes bandwidth and didn't really require new cable boxes (from the cable companies as theirs were already two-way). The gains believe it or not from SDV are huge and so it really was the best thing to implement first by the cable operators. Believe it or not it wasn't just to screw people. What did screw people was not having OCAP done when they first implemented it.

1GHz provides more bandwidth, so the results are obvious.

MPEG-4 allows the same PQ in less bandwidth, so that one is pretty obvious.

Now in general most of the major TV plants are using nearly all of their 850MHz bandwidth. You have to remember that it isn't just about TV channels. It is about phones services and more importantly internet services. I am doing this off the top of my head so forgive me if I misquote a number. Remember that each 6MHz channel provides roughly 40Mbps of data. Now most cable plants use the majority of their bandwidth for TV service (Think if your cable co has 70 analogs that is 420MHz already gone.) So in reality there isn't a whole lot of space there to give you your 100Mbps internet speed you might want, or any HD channels you might want. While HD channels make better use of bandwidth than analog for your 100 HD channels that takes up between 35-50 more channels depending on your provider which is another 210-300MHz. So clearly something has to give in order to provide all the services and they are definitely try to open up bandwidth to provide you with more services.

[moyekj]

Good points socrplyr as they related to cable companies and QAM 256 transmissions. But note that I think parzec's comments in particular were aimed specifically at ATSC transmissions, not cable QAM transmissions. But obviously the better utilization of limited bandwidth applies just as well to ATSC transmissions which was the point I was making related to ATSC.

[morac]

I wouldn't expect to see mpeg4 ATSC broadcasting any time soon. It's not like a station would be able to just switch over to mpeg4 ATSC any way. They'd have to broadcast in both mpeg2 and mpeg4 during the transition period (years). There's not enough room to broadcast in mpeg2, let alone both. The stations would either have to get rid of the mpeg2 sub-channels or use a different frequencies for the mpeg4 (which isn't going to happen since there aren't any extra frequencies).

The only way I see a switchover to mpeg4 ATSC working is if everyone had the capability to tune both mpeg4 and mpeg2 ATSC. Since there are no devices that support mpeg4 ATSC broadcasting and none in development that I'm aware of, it would be at least another 10 years before mpeg4 ATSC even became viable (in the US).

By that time there will probably be an mpeg8 video codec or somethings similar and the whole process will start over again.

[gastrof]

Hopefully this means transition to mpeg4 ATSC broadcasting will happen sometime next decade in this country...

What affect would this have on current equipment, including TVs, digital converter boxes, and DVRs?

[bkdtv]

What affect would this have on current equipment, including TVs, digital converter boxes, and DVRs?Current built-in ATSC tuners in TVs, converter boxes, etc do not support MPEG-4. They only support MPEG-2. The TivoHD and TiVo Series3 are among the few boxes that do support MPEG-4.

If and when broadcasters do transition to MPEG-4, they'll undoubtedly continue to provide some version of the network feed in MPEG-2 for older boxes, in addition to the MPEG-4 feed(s).

[parzec]

Thanks -- Good Answers -- I guess 1080p and beyond broadcasts would only be possible with the added bandwith gained from MPEG4.

[pdxsam]

Current built-in ATSC tuners in TVs, converter boxes, etc do not support MPEG-4. They only support MPEG-2. The TivoHD and TiVo Series3 are among the few boxes that do support MPEG-4.

If and when broadcasters do transition to MPEG-4, they'll undoubtedly continue to provide some version of the network feed in MPEG-2 for older boxes, in addition to the MPEG-4 feed(s).

My guess is if/when ATSC/mpeg4 ever happens there will be some kind of converter box, like there is now for the analog/digital. That's probably the only way a switch like that will be somewhat palatable to the masses.

[lrhorer]

Depending on how it's implemented the Series 3 may not be able to work no matter what TiVo does.

From what I've read the new MPEG-4 boxes support frequencies up to 1 GHz.
I'm sure they do. Some MPEG-2 STBs and DVRs do, as well. It's not really relevant. Relatively few CATV plants can handle 1000MHz. The cost of upgrading a 750 MHz plant to 1000MHz is hideous for any moderately large system. The amplifier spacing is different, so all the amplifiers must be not only replaced but also moved and increased in number. The number of nodes must also increase. If the company is going to increase the number of nodes, then a more aggressive SDV deployment makes much more sense than increasing the bandwidth. The company can get 100 or 1000 times the number of additional channels for the same cost as upgrading to 1000MHz, and the whole point of going to MPEG-4 is to increase the number of channels at low cost. No, I expect the most common deployment would be to replace a 2 HD + 1SD MPEG-2 QAM with a 4 HD SDV QAM. They can deliver many, many times more channels with improved quality for zero cost other than the cost of purchasing the STBs / DVRs.

[wmcbrine]

My guess is if/when ATSC/mpeg4 ever happens there will be some kind of converter box, like there is now for the analog/digital.If such a transition were to occur, one way to do it would be to devote a single subchannel per channel to SD MPEG-2, and give over the rest of the bandwidth to MPEG-4. I think that, legally -- if not practically -- this could be done immediately, and would meet FCC requirements.

Practically, I'd say: don't hold your breath.

[gastrof]

What affect would this have on current equipment, including TVs, digital converter boxes, and DVRs?

Current built-in ATSC tuners in TVs, converter boxes, etc do not support MPEG-4. They only support MPEG-2. The TivoHD and TiVo Series3 are among the few boxes that do support MPEG-4.

If and when broadcasters do transition to MPEG-4, they'll undoubtedly continue to provide some version of the network feed in MPEG-2 for older boxes, in addition to the MPEG-4 feed(s).

How typical.

They put everyone thru the mess of converting to digital, as a result even cable users face major changes, and now that the dust isn't even settled yet, they're planning another changeover which will again leave older equipment, JUST replaced, out of date. :rolleyes:

[morac]

How typical.

They put everyone thru the mess of converting to digital, as a result even cable users face major changes, and now that the dust isn't even settled yet, they're planning another changeover which will again leave older equipment, JUST replaced, out of date. :rolleyes:

I just want to point out that my original post was about cable switching to mpeg4, not OTA broadcasters. I don't think the broadcasters are all that eager to switch to mpeg4 after having just switched to digital.

[mattack]

Hopefully this means transition to mpeg4 ATSC broadcasting will happen sometime next decade in this country...

HAHAHAHA.. Wow, that's the funniest thing I've heard today.

With all of the delays to existing digital broadcasting.. I don't expect any kind of further changes anytime soon. Decade*s* possibly.

(Personally, I was *for* the OTA switch. I am still *against* the cable switch, since I had to buy an amplifier and get cablecards, thus paying more money for what I previously got.. Sure, I do get some more channels, but personally if I just got 'expanded basic' in analog forever, I wouldn't mind... Though even saying that, I still *might* get one more cablecard.)

[MickeS]

I'm sure they do. Some MPEG-2 STBs and DVRs do, as well. It's not really relevant. Relatively few CATV plants can handle 1000MHz. The cost of upgrading a 750 MHz plant to 1000MHz is hideous for any moderately large system.

I was just gonna ask about this. I know that just a couple of years ago our local cable franchise (Cox) upgraded to 850MHz as part of its licensing deal with the city, and that took a while and they didn't seem too thrilled to do it even. Based on that, I just don't know if there is a widespread desire to upgrade the system again... and I imagine our cable company can't be that unique when it comes to this.

[CharlesH]

Do the new DOCSIS 3.0 modems now being rolled out support 1GHz? If they do, wouldn't it make sense to use the 860-1000MHz range for Internet? To get the higher speeds (e.g., 50Mhz), the customer's modem has to be upgraded to ones that support DOCSIS 3.0 anyway.

[morac]

Since when has anything the cable industry done made any sense? :p

Of note, the new MPEG-4 cable boxes also have DOCSIS 3.0 modems in them, but like the modems in every other cable box, they are disabled.

[Videodrome]

This is why all new tv should have internet access, so they can be updated, to whatever new protocol is available. Tru2way may be part of this, but if the industry wants people to enjoy there offerings. Upgradable tvs via firmware, or internet should be mandatory..

[CharlesH]

This is why all new tv should have internet access, so they can be updated, to whatever new protocol is available. Tru2way may be part of this, but if the industry wants people to enjoy there offerings. Upgradable tvs via firmware, or internet should be mandatory..I think most TVs, at least the larger HD ones, already can have their firmware upgraded via USB flash drive, but at least on my two-year-old Samsung, this was clearly intended to be done by techs (or geeks who read AVS Forums :) ).

[ZeoTiVo]

I think most TVs, at least the larger HD ones, already can have their firmware upgraded via USB flash drive, but at least on my two-year-old Samsung, this was clearly intended to be done by techs (or geeks who read AVS Forums :) ).

Right, even TiVo which has an upgrade of anything possible and more hardware for such a thing than a TV has would find it a large project to do such an upgrade and would have to ship out hardware that hooked up via USB port to make a Series 3 tru2way workable.

This is far more than just a protocol we are talking about for tru2way.

[Dan203]

This is why all new tv should have internet access, so they can be updated, to whatever new protocol is available. Tru2way may be part of this, but if the industry wants people to enjoy there offerings. Upgradable tvs via firmware, or internet should be mandatory..

Wouldn't work. The video decoding in most CE devices is done by a dedicated chip designed specifically to support a certain format(s), not a general purpose CPU like you have in your PC that can be programmed to decode whatever. All the digital TVs and set top boxes sold to date have only been required to decode MPEG-2, so most of them only have chips capable of decoding MPEG-2 regardless of their firmware.

The only reason the S3/TiVoHDs are software upgradable is because they already contain a chip capable of decoding MPEG-4 video. (that's why they can do Netflix and YouTube and S2 units can't)

Dan

[Dan203]

Will the FCC even allow the cable companies to switch to MPEG-4? What about all the people out there with CableCARD TVs which do not support MPEG-4, will they just be left in the dark?

Dan

[ifly]

There is of course IP simulcast which is a possibility with the introduction of DOCSIS 3.0 bonded channels at a discrete frequency from your regular data services coupled with the STB's with integrated modems. This means you could also receive IP simulcast channels on your PC with the proper conditional access and codecs.

The biggest problem with moving from MPEG-2 to MPEG-4 is not bandwidth related but CAPEX related, there are plenty of bandwidth solutions already mentioned in previous posts! Try convincing Wall Street during these unusual times that you want to spend $50 Billion replacing all your STB's and headend equipment over the next 5 years and see what that does to your stock price!

Attrition is the easiest way until you hit the tipping point on your next gen STB's.

[MichaelK]

Will the FCC even allow the cable companies to switch to MPEG-4? What about all the people out there with CableCARD TVs which do not support MPEG-4, will they just be left in the dark?

Dan

sure.

just like they can implement sdv.

You could even use mpeg4 RIGHT NOW alongside mpeg2 for PPV, VOD, and to a lessor extent SDV. Box says "hey I need channel X". Headend says "fine, I'll send it on hannel 20-1. please reply that you can handle mpeg4 in the the next 10 milli-seconds or I will waste bandwidth and send it in mpeg2"- old boxes wont reply they can handle mpeg4 and they will take up more room with mpeg2. Newer boxes will say mpeg4 is fine and the server can send the lower bandwidth mpeg4 version.

The LAW and specifically say the FCC should not step in the way of new technologies with regulations. And mpeg4 would fit that bill I'm sure just like SDV did.

So likely the FCC would only ensure they update whatever standards (cablecard, tru2way, whatever) to inlude the specs for mpeg4. Of course if cable creates a defacto standard (like they did with sdv and the dongle and then true2way) then they get to create the standard before the FCC even gets around to acting...

Actually hopefully cable and the big CEA people are working on updating true2way to include MPEG4 so that there wont be too many suckers (er, early adopters) that buy into that mess before mpeg4 comes along. I am not sure but i think panasonic is supplying mpeg4 boxes to comcast- so they would likely be on board to add mpeg4 to any of their tv's with tru2way. Get Sony to buy in and make sure to play nice with tivo so the S3's so they can do it- and there you go you just made the new standard.

I think tivo is already on board becasue I seem to recall the sdv dongle (which tivo likley had much input into as they are the ONLY one using it)- already has some logic in it handshake that mpeg4 is ok to send instead of mpeg2.

[dswallow]

Hopefully this means transition to mpeg4 ATSC broadcasting will happen sometime next decade in this country...

Considering "next decade" could mean as early as 5 months from now, perhaps you should rephrase that as next next decade. Or, more realisitically if you're trying to base the estimate on how the ATSC/8VSB OTA migration went, next next next next decade.

[morac]

Wouldn't work. The video decoding in most CE devices is done by a dedicated chip designed specifically to support a certain format(s), not a general purpose CPU like you have in your PC that can be programmed to decode whatever. All the digital TVs and set top boxes sold to date have only been required to decode MPEG-2, so most of them only have chips capable of decoding MPEG-2 regardless of their firmware.

A number of Internet ready TVs currently sold can decode MPEG-4 (mainly to support things like Youtube, Netflix and Amazon). My older Sony Bravia can actually be upgraded to support this by adding an "Internet Video Link" (http://www.amazon.com/Sony-DMXNV1-Bravia-Internet-Video/dp/B000RFURG0) box (kind of like a Roku box, but it plugs directly into older Sony Bravia TVs and integrates into the GUI).

Whether or not these TVs can support decoding MPEG-4 via the cable in connection is the question, but since most of these TVs don't have cable card slots or tru2way communication the issue is moot anyway.

Actually if cable used the Internet (or WAN) for downloading encryption keys and the back-link channel, tru2way wouldn't even be needed.

[Dan203]

I was simply saying that forcing all CableCARD/Tru2Way devices to be firmware upgradeable would not fix the issue of supporting new codecs. As I pointed out most of these devices use hardware designed to decode specific formats and no firmware update would allow them to decode something the hardware was not capable of.

Basically there is no way to future proof these devices. If a new codec comes along and the cable companies decide to use it then you're going to have to buy a new box/TV to support it. Even if these devices started using general purpose CPUs that could be programmed to decode anything there is no guarantee it would be fast enough to work with the next codec to come along. There are computers sold today that are not fast enough to decode HD H.264 video.

Dan

[MichaelK]

I was simply saying that forcing all CableCARD/Tru2Way devices to be firmware upgradeable would not fix the issue of supporting new codecs. As I pointed out most of these devices use hardware designed to decode specific formats and no firmware update would allow them to decode something the hardware was not capable of.

Basically there is no way to future proof these devices. If a new codec comes along and the cable companies decide to use it then you're going to have to buy a new box/TV to support it. Even if these devices started using general purpose CPUs that could be programmed to decode anything there is no guarantee it would be fast enough to work with the next codec to come along. There are computers sold today that are not fast enough to decode HD H.264 video.

Dan


my vote is tv's should come with some universal expansion slot(s). You could buy the tuner of your choice (OTA, Cable, Sat, IPTV, whatever) and put it in the slot(s) and viola your tv would work.

Years ago i think directv argued that would be a better option then cablecard which locks you into cable'd garden.

But I know that's a pipedream.