I just read this today, and didn't see it reported here. But it looks like in an attempt to raise broadband speed/bandwidth to compete with FIOS, Comcast is going to have to compress some of its HD content. As I read on electronista.com today :

The cable firm warns that its launch will require that a few analog stations be taken off-air and compression added to HD channels to make room for DOCSIS 3, whose channel bonding consumes much more bandwidth than earlier single-channel services.

Story is here: http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/04/03/comcast.docsis.3.access/

Now I guess it will be sometime before they migrate throughout the country, this is bad news since it looks like many areas are short of bandwidth now, until more analog is removed.

A

They started compressing HD channels last month, wish they would have gotten rid of more analogs instead.

Any idea how many 6mhz slots they need to have? I've noticed we have 1 free here, right next to the cable modem upstream frequency, wonder if they will leave that one open for future internet upgrades...

They started compressing HD channels last month

They were compressed day one, just like every other form of HD outside of theatrical presentations.

Number # 15080550 reason why i hate COMCAST

They really have no choice. They have to compete with DirecTV, Dish, and FIOS, who all compress the crap out of HD.

Outside of us HT Geeks, QUANTITY beats QUALITY.

There is still OTA and Blu-Ray...

They really have no choice. They have to compete with DirecTV, Dish, and FIOS, who all compress the crap out of HD.

Outside of us HT Geeks, QUANITY beats QUALITY.

There is still OTA and Blu-Ray...

PLease provide some proof of your statements regarding D* and Fios compressing their HD. Besides D*'s legacy MPEG2 hds which are compressed, there is no proof that either D* or FIOS compress anything.

Hell FIOS has started an ad blitz that states they provide uncompressed HD (even through that is incorrect, they provide full bandwidth MPEG2 HD).

Dish has stated they compress mpeg4 hd down to 1440x1080 and have 6 hds/tp

All HD is "compressed"

There's two kinds of compression.

One that has little to no loss of video quality.
And another has compression with loss of PQ.

Similar to lossy and lossless compression in surround audio.

The Cable industry has decided to over-compress just about everything to make up for their lack of long-term thinking over the last 5 years.

But we can create "nearly" useless internet speed tiers at excessive prices.
As a Twin Cities Comcast customer, the 50MB tier is about as exciting as stale bread.
I hope those 10 people enjoy it.

No wonder cable is so hated by it's own customers.
Always fixing the wrong problem and leaving us hanging.

All HD is "compressed"

There's two kinds of compression.

One that has little to no loss of video quality.
And another has compression with loss of PQ.

Similar to lossy and lossless compression in surround audio.

I agree, that is fact, however his statement implied that all providers are doing the same thing that Comcast is to fit HD channels.

They started compressing HD channels last month, wish they would have gotten rid of more analogs instead.

Any idea how many 6mhz slots they need to have? I've noticed we have 1 free here, right next to the cable modem upstream frequency, wonder if they will leave that one open for future internet upgrades...

AIUI, it will take at least two 6MHz slots, 2 analog channels or room for 4 HD channels at 2 per 256QAM.

sorry guys, quantity needs to be more important than quality provided the stations being added actually serve HD.

If we want to see the end of SD, this is the only way. As technology progresses, the new battle will go from number of stations to best looking stations (much like what we have been with digital cable now)

Many of the empty channels on Comcast are reserved for On-Demand.

Terrible, there are probably 100 channels that average 5 users at a time. use some of their bandwitdh. What is the point of offering HD if you are just going to degrade it. They should change is to WS instead of HD. This pisses me off so much!

Many of the empty channels on Comcast are reserved for On-Demand.

There are only two channels (maximum of three) dedicated to On-Demand on my system.

There are five channels on my system which I have seen nothing but other people's On-Demand features on. I live in a dense neighborhood with lots of apartment buildings in the area.

What's the point of higher download speeds anyway? I have 6MB/s download, and I don't think I've ever downloaded anything from any server that even comes close to maxing out my DL speed. All this talk about over compressing, I am starting to agree with the poster who wrote that the Golden Age of HD is already over. It's all downhill from here!

What's the point of higher download speeds anyway? I have 6MB/s download, and I don't think I've ever downloaded anything from any server that even comes close to maxing out my DL speed.I have 16 Mbit download, measured at 34 Mbit with power boost, and there are servers that use all that bandwidth (downloads over 4000 KB/sec). Most servers will max out a 6 Mbit connection very easily unless they're heavily loaded. Not to mention, the extra upload speed is always important.

There is most certainly a point to these higher speeds, and beyond.

I have 16 Mbit download, measured at 34 Mbit with power boost, and there are servers that use all that bandwidth (downloads over 4000 KB/sec). Most servers will max out a 6 Mbit connection very easily unless they're heavily loaded. Not to mention, the extra upload speed is always important.

There is most certainly a point to these higher speeds, and beyond.
Except if any provider actually gave you 3Mb/s on a 3Mb/s connection, you wouldn't need 6Mb/s in order to max out at 3MB/s. The problem is, most of the time, you're lucky to get half the speed advertised.

Also, "most servers" will not max out even a 1.5Mb/s connection. Most servers not providing streaming media nearly always limits users to no more than a couple hundred Kb/s - even when not under load. Diagnostic and speed testing sites are some of the few places where bandwidth isn't throttled that way, for obvious reasons.

This is just another way to collect more money from customers while making sure bandwidth throttling doesn't look as bad.

What's the point of higher download speeds anyway? I have 6MB/s download, and I don't think I've ever downloaded anything from any server that even comes close to maxing out my DL speed. All this talk about over compressing, I am starting to agree with the poster who wrote that the Golden Age of HD is already over. It's all downhill from here!

Well whats the point of 1920x1080 when some of the source material has already been compressed to 1440x1080 in production (Sony HDCAM format). On the science and learning channels they use a lot of HDV material as their budgets are so small.

Point is numbers sell. They can generate more money selling internet speeds that don't really matter versus selling HD resolutions that most cannot see anyway. The average Joe may see more value in faster internet speeds than less compression of HD. They are simply getting the most bang for the buck.

I have a 5 Mb/s connection, and routinely max it out. But I'm on Fios.

And Fios HD PQ is the same as OTA. Same bits AFAIK.

But we can create "nearly" useless internet speed tiers at excessive prices.

And the interesting this is that for the most part, this additional bandwidth will be used by the bandwidth hogs that the cablecos hate anyway. Just a way to get more money from them.

Except if any provider actually gave you 3Mb/s on a 3Mb/s connection, you wouldn't need 6Mb/s in order to max out at 3MB/s. The problem is, most of the time, you're lucky to get half the speed advertised.Most of the time I get exactly what I paid for: 16 Mbit down (actual, measured download from a fast server, after TCP overhead) and double that with power boost (for the first 50 Mb of a file). Measured upload is 1.5/3 (again, first 50 Mb), consistently.Also, "most servers" will not max out even a 1.5Mb/s connection. Most servers not providing streaming media nearly always limits users to no more than a couple hundred Kb/s - even when not under load.Then why do I usually get download speeds ranging from 1500 to 4000 KB/s from typical commercial servers? If 1.5 were the max, according to you, I'd never even see 200 KB/s.

Most of the time I get exactly what I paid for: 16 Mbit down (actual, measured download from a fast server, after TCP overhead) and double that with power boost (for the first 50 Mb of a file). Measured upload is 1.5/3 (again, first 50 Mb), consistently.Then why do I usually get download speeds ranging from 1500 to 4000 KB/s from typical commercial servers? If 1.5 were the max, according to you, I'd never even see 200 KB/s.
Servers that actually measure this sort of thing are not throttled. That's why you would see good performance there. Most other servers, including the one serving this forum, throttle everyone for maximum server performance.

Most web sites don't need more than a couple hundred kb/s to serve up a page in a timely manner. It's a very common practice to throttle everyone the same amount to avoid major difference in page load times between visits.

I am seriously thinking of switching to FIOS. The only drawbacks at this point would be missing the Celtics on comcast sportsnet (of course the playoffs are coming and I can watch those games on other HD channels) and no archiving to DVHS given the lack of firewire on the FIOS STB.

Servers that actually measure this sort of thing are not throttled. That's why you would see good performance there. Most other servers, including the one serving this forum, throttle everyone for maximum server performance.I'm talking about normal downloads from various commercial servers, not speed tests. When I download software, manuals, videos, etc., I get 1500 to 4000 KB/s.

When just browsing the web, there is HUGE difference in load time between what I have now and the 3 Mbit DSL I had before. Even AVS, one of slowest sites I visit, is much faster.

Wideband is here to stay, and yes, we do need it.

There is still OTA ...Not where I live. That's going down the tubes rapidly, too.

Maybe they should just get rid of all the cable channels ramp up the download speeds then offer everything as internet streaming.

I am seriously thinking of switching to FIOS. The only drawbacks at this point would be missing the Celtics on comcast sportsnet (of course the playoffs are coming and I can watch those games on other HD channels) and no archiving to DVHS given the lack of firewire on the FIOS STB.

I'm considering it.


This despite the fact that Comcast's SpeedBoost frequently pushes 34MbPS down the pipe, and sucks up over 3 MbPS on the return path 9which is mighty impressive) and eminently noticeable with remote desktop, XServers and whatnot.

Comcast's HD has just gone down the drain over the last few weeks.

I think I can live without BSG in HD on SciFi HD (that Comcast carries but seems to overcompress anyway).

I'd save money (at least for the first year) and have a few less HD channels (initially) with FIOS. But owning an HD TiVo (S3) means I won't be hurting for good HD shows to watch - and with FIOS, at least it'll be as clear as it possibly can, unlike Comcast.

I just switched to Comcast from DTV, and I am somewhat disappointed by teh quality of the HD compared to DTV. I wouldn't have switched, but I was just having too many signal issues and picture and audio breakups and bad recordings, I just couldn't take it any longer.

The difference is noticeable - DTV Mpeg 4 channels were much better. Hopefully Comcast will start using that and provide a DVR that can handle it along with more storage space.

It is a shame that the standard is quantity vs quality. DTV has way more HD channels, but I didn't watch them all anyway. I"m sure most people don't, it seems we all have a group of favorites and that's it.

I also don't agree that Average Joe can't tell the difference. I've heard it from many newbies who fire up the new panel and HD box and say that it's just not what they were expecting, what they saw in the store. The difference is, they blame the panel and may or may not start tweaking.

LCD panels are optimized for full res 1080, and when that's what they're getting, they really shouldn't need that much tweaking - it's only when they're getting some over compressed or upscaled signal that they don't look so good.

If anyone hears of a petition or drive to get Comast to offer a package with fewer channels and higher quality, let me know, I'm in. I'd even pay more.

I just switched to Comcast from DTV...

DTV = Digital TV, as in over the air.

D* = DirecTV

I'm considering it.


This despite the fact that Comcast's SpeedBoost frequently pushes 34MbPS down the pipe, and sucks up over 3 MbPS on the return path 9which is mighty impressive) and eminently noticeable with remote desktop, XServers and whatnot.

Comcast's HD has just gone down the drain over the last few weeks.

I think I can live without BSG in HD on SciFi HD (that Comcast carries but seems to overcompress anyway).

I'd save money (at least for the first year) and have a few less HD channels (initially) with FIOS. But owning an HD TiVo (S3) means I won't be hurting for good HD shows to watch - and with FIOS, at least it'll be as clear as it possibly can, unlike Comcast.

I've had it for about a year and a half, and I'd go for it if I were you. I had D* (tv) and Comcast (internet), and was looking at going from SD to HD.

I currently have the 20/20 internet service, I get a consistent 20/20 when I measure it, whether I'm running HD VOD or not (VOD is IP based, so it shares the pipe). I never got the advertized speed when I was on comcast.

The TV side is just plain amazing. The HD comes in at OTA quality, since they don't compress source material, and have a massive pipe to handle it. They are rolling out technology which will quadruple the bandwidth (GPON), so I can't see the quality going down. They also are getting rid of the analog channels, so that will free up something on the order of 40-60 QAM pipes. All in all, no reason to compromise on the PQ. SD also comes in great (I hadn't noticed how bad D* SD is).

I also saved a bunch of money, since the service as packaged is less expensive. I'm in Mass, so I also want to see the Celtics, Comcast Sportnet is carried by FIOS.

FIOS also uses Tivo by way of cable cards, so archiving, etc. is possible.

I dont think they started compressing in Pittsburgh yet -- it looks fine here

I dont think they started compressing in Pittsburgh yet -- it looks fine here

Surely you're kidding.