On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:53:46AM +0100, Rudy Zijlstra wrote:
Still do not understand why US had too choose 8VSB for ATSC. Check the
testing the australians did when choosing there system. In the end ATSC
because of the infamous HD table (thus forcing a number of HD
capabilities), and
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 22:38:37 -0800, nate s [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nah, here in the US we are far too arrogant to adopt other countries
standards :)
Arrogant or not, the fact that your government pushes HDTV does mean
that you will be able to enjoy it by next year. Here in Europe there
is no
On Friday 10 December 2004 08:41, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, I have to ask a stupid question...
Anyway, the pcHDTV card we are all talking about is rumoured to
have QAM support in development, so it could tune your cable and
you would not need an antenna. As to when, who knows?
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 10:29:35AM -0500, Joseph A. Caputo wrote:
This is how I understand it (from one layman to another):
If you have digital cable, the digital channels (typically channels
125 are still analog NTSC, even if you have a digital subscription) use
QAM. I'm not clear on
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 11:52:51AM -0800, Brad Templeton wrote:
On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 10:29:35AM -0500, Joseph A. Caputo wrote:
This is how I understand it (from one layman to another):
If you have digital cable, the digital channels (typically channels
125 are still analog NTSC,
nate s wrote:
Nah, here in the US we are far too arrogant to adopt other countries
standards :)
I thought that QAM was only good over cable. I didn't know it could
work OTA as well.
-Nate
And satellite uses QPSK (also called QAM-4).
Still do not understand why US had too choose 8VSB for ATSC.
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 11:54:42PM -0800, Brad Templeton wrote:
ATSC is in fact the only reason people are putting up new antennas. If
you get satellite, you must use an antenna to get your local stations.
The satellite companies don't have the bandwidth to feed all the locals
in HD, not yet.
Nah, here in the US we are far too arrogant to adopt other countries
standards :)
I thought that QAM was only good over cable. I didn't know it could
work OTA as well.
-Nate
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 00:08:58 +1100, Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 11:54:42PM -0800,
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 12:56:42AM -0500, Randy Carpenter wrote:
What are the chances of us being able to get a card that will accept ATSC
over cable (using a cablecard) ? That, along with satellite, have to be
the vast majority of the market. Do many people really use OTA antennas
for
On Monday 06 December 2004 02:54, Brad Templeton wrote:
Sadly, the protocols include copy protection, so no open source
decoding of the firewire stream. In theory, if they do
non-protected firewire on the broadcast shows you could get that.
I thought they were required to provide access to
Quoting Brad Templeton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 08:42:02AM -0600, Kevin Hulse wrote:
e) You wish to archive some of what you are recording on your Tivo
f) You wish your Tivo were better organized (like, by series then episode)
g) You want a DVD jukebox.
h) You want an
Title: Re: New MythTV Hardware Review
It
will be too late. 6 months from now, sale of tuner cards for
HDTV
that
could be used in an open source environment will be banned. So
while
you
may not get your HDTV display, you will be wanting to get your
tuner
card
before June, and once you have it,
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 02:20:26PM -0800, Brad wrote:
Its also worth noting that this law is only in the US (and very
stupid, IMHO). So it is possible, if you live outside the US, that
you will be able to buy the cards and record HDTV content - which
Problem is the ATSC standard is for
Problem is the ATSC standard is for just a few nations. USA, Canada,
Mexico, South Korea and some smaller places, all under pressure from
the USA to adopt the broadcast flag.
So you will have to hunt to get your card. More to the point, if
you can't sell cards into the USA and Canadian
Thanks to all for the feedback -- Brad, appreciate you bringing up the
HDTV option. Buying the HD card before June was indeed on my plate,
but I didn't want to put it in at the same time as the rest of this
setup (just to keep the complexity down).
However, my understanding is that HD requires a
On Sun, Dec 05, 2004 at 11:10:41PM -0800, Doug Heimburger wrote:
However, my understanding is that HD requires a decent amount of CPU
to decompress, right? My G4 Powerbook struggles to decompress the
MPEG-2 stream in software; I shudder to think about how it would do on
an HD stream.
Most
16 matches
Mail list logo
