Holy crap, Stargate Atlantis looks AMAZING! Even better than OTA! Zero pixelation. Very little noise. The contrast is deep. Sharp as a tack video.

Frankly, it might even be approaching HD-DVD quality.

I'm completely blown away! :eek:

This is no HD-Lite!

I think the reason that you don't see a lot of non-anecdotal evidence that HD-Lite is gone is because no one feels the need to go out of their way to prove it.

The answer to the question is obvious to anyone who's seen a D* MPEG2 channel and a D* MPEG4 channel. And those folks are very happy.

There are no shortage of inane polls on this forum. Here we have a topic just begging for a poll, yet none exists. I'd create it, but I couldn't vote, as my D* service is in hibernation at the moment.
--The hits just keep on coming, with another invaluable contribution. It's always good to have long time members keep adding to our experiences here at AVS.

A poll it is.

Don't count on it. All of the previous information was gathered using the HR10-250, which was very hackable. The HR20 is completely different, and not hackable at all. I feel quite confident in saying that there will never be any hacks for it.
There's nothing that isn't hackable with sufficient motivation.

Usually, that motivation is someone saying it isn't possible.

HD-lite is a buzz term that was created in one of the DBS forums I think.
According to AVS member jmccorm:The first use of "HD-lite" on the Internet (and happens to be with the dash in the middle) that I could find is this posting on the Satellite Guys forum by one "Tyralak" on the thread "DirecTV: No More Locals" dated 12/26/2003.

Here is where it was nailed down at AVS:

http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=548228&page=1&pp=30

HD Lite
Noun
A 19.3mbps 1280x720p or 1920x1080i HDTV source, transmitted with either a lower bitrate, a lower resolution, or both. This is sometimes done by satellite or cable providers to save bandwidth, and by over-the-air broadcasters when multicasting. Typically the term is used when the reduced bitrate and/or resolution results in a noticeable degradation in picture quality

-- NO HD hockey games on CI by D*NHL CI now on D*.

-- NO definitive word on MSGHD and/or FSNYHD as well as other NYC locals (UPN, CW, PBS).MSG is up on D*in engineering mode. NO word on FSNNY. Other locals will be available on D*, date TBD.

If D* is not downward rate shaping, down rezzing, bit starving -- whatever the term to describe HD Lite -- the new MPEG4 channels, why would they have taken the steps they apparently have to make sure none of us can do any measuring???

I'm not an engineer and all I know is pretty much what I read on these forums. But it seems D* has gone to extraordinary purposeful lengths to prevent anyone from coming up with numbers. That doesn't give this D* sub a warm fuzzy feeling about their honesty, uprightness, and customer concern (but I still sincerely hope D* gets MPEG4 right, but am increasingly concerned).

You really should see some Mpeg 4 then your stance would be more credible. With so many people, including those who have been very critical of PQ in the past, saying it looks great. You are saying that they are all mistaken and it's probably bad?

You really should see some Mpeg 4 then your stance would be more credible. With so many people, including those who have been very critical of PQ in the past, saying it looks great. You are saying that they are all mistaken and it's probably bad?
For that matter, if it does look as good as people are saying, who cares if D* is rate shaping.

I like hot dogs. I could care less what goes into making them - and I probably don't want to know.

For that matter, if it does look as good as people are saying, who cares if D* is rate shaping.

I like hot dogs. I could care less what goes into making them - and I probably don't want to know.

Mpeg4=Ball Park franks

Mpeg2=Bar S

Both are hot dogs but one tastes a hell of allot better.

Mpeg4=Ball Park franks

Mpeg2=Bar S

Both are hot dogs but one tastes a hell of allot better.

You mustard up a good one and I relish your analogy :)

I can certainly see where people might consider posts like this to be bashing:



This not only assumes the worst, it jumps all over people for not bending to your personal need for an A-B comparision.

People post information, advice and screen shots to help others understand and make good descisions. They do this with no compensation on their own time. To get annoyed when your request goes unanswered certainly doesn't make people any quicker to help you out. The more you make bitter replies to people, the less they'll be likely to help.



You mustard up a good one and I relish your analogy :)
It's always good to have a frank discussion.

There's nothing that isn't hackable with sufficient motivation.

Usually, that motivation is someone saying it isn't possible.
I stand by my claim.

I stand by my claim.

As do I. One of use will be right, and one will be proven wrong.


I promise not to gloat when I the unit gets hacked, though...

;)

Never bet against the hacker.

True words.

Never bet against the hacker.
As someone who has been using computers for around 30 years (having mispent my younger years making 32KB of memory actually do something, and having seen time and again companies declare the next stage in encryption to be "hack-proof" about 6 months before it gets broken, I've learned never to doubt the tenacity of hackers.

Yeah, look at all of the success those hackers have had with DirecTV's new access cards. Oh wait, they haven't been able to do anything...

Yeah, look at all of the success those hackers have had with DirecTV's new access cards. Oh wait, they haven't been able to do anything...
Irrevelent. You're talking hardware vs. software security.

I've read all eight pages of this thread and what is "unbelievable" is your obsession with finding the answer your seeking.

This reminds me of the movie "Wargames" where Matthew Broderick (can't remember his character name in the movie) goes to talk to his computer programmer friend, "Jim" about finding a way to play a new computer game. Matthew is trying to break into the game makers computer, as "Jim" is reading some of the info Matthew has brought to him this really obnoxious guy IIRC his name was "Liteman" who is a high pitch nasal speaking nerd who grabs the paper out of Jim's hand and starts spouting off on a tangent finally Jim gets fed up and says, "Mr Potato Head! Mr Potato Head! Remember when you told me to tell you when you were starting to get obnoxious -" It was something to that effect anyway. Ultimately Jim suggests that Matthew needs to find a 'backdoor' or a way back that the original programmer may have put in place so that he could always have access to the game.

So Mr. Potato Head (Perilous)! Quit checking your big face G-force watch every 15 minutes expecting an update to whether D* is still broadcasting HD-lite or not!

IF you really want an answer or the "backdoor" to this question I suggest you try to figure a way to get inside and talk to the engineers at D* and let them give you the definitive and quantitative answers that you so eagerly and obsessively desire to know. However, be forewarned that if you take the same approach as you have exhibited here - you may here a 'click' at the other end of the line.

The bottom line is that the answer you seek has not been definitively available or someone would have given you the answer; if for no other reason so you would relax and move on with your life.

I actually got the answers I seek in another forum, see my previous post.

I have viewed same programs on MPEG2 channel and on MPEG4 channel and notice very little, if any, difference. To me, both offerings look very good. Then again, I have been pleased with HDNET thru the years. I just hope Travel Channel and NATGEO have been shooting their shows in HD for past few years.

:confused::confused: Not the observation by most others -- in fact, in another forum that actually DID do A/B comparisons and documented the results (somehow its difficult for people here ;) ) people have been so surprised by the difference they even realize how bad HD-Lite was/is!!!

The good news I received from a reliable source is that D*TV intends to upgrade all the Mpeg2 HD-Lite channels (the info I was seeking all along!!) -- but no definitive date.

NHL CI now on D*.

MSG is up on D*in engineering mode. NO word on FSNNY. Other locals will be available on D*, date TBD.

Thanks!! I DID see the mirrored channels on CI channels "indicating" HD, but no actual games yet....will check tonight!! (Looks real promising though!!! :))

Re: MSGHD -- that would be a real pleasant surprise!!! :D

It's always good to have a frank discussion.

:eek::eek:;) LOL!!

As the OP and official pain in the a** of this thread, I have to admit I am impressed by what D*TV has done and is apparently committed to doing...it appears Mpeg2 HD-Lite channels will go away, the PQ of new Mpeg4 (including my locals) is really good, HD hockey on CI may be coming soon and MSGHD from NYC is possible!!! :eek:

If all of this comes to be, I deserve to be shot (rhetorically of course!!) by all of you here if I complain again!!!

P.S. Can we get dual buffers on our DVR's anytime soon!! ;)

As the OP and official pain in the a** of this thread, I have to admit I am impressed by what D*TV has done and is apparently committed to doing...it appears Mpeg2 HD-Lite channels will go away, the PQ of new Mpeg4 (including my locals) is really good, HD hockey on CI may be coming soon and MSGHD from NYC is possible!!! :eek:

If all of this comes to be, I deserve to be shot (rhetorically of course!!) by all of you here if I complain again!!!

P.S. Can we get dual buffers on our DVR's anytime soon!! ;)

Ready ! Aim !

Irrevelent. You're talking hardware vs. software security.
The software is protected by the hardware, so it's not quite hardware vs. software.

You are saying that they are all mistaken and it's probably bad?
No, no, a thousand times no! Oh how I hope D* MPEG4 gives us outstanding HD PQ and that any of us burned by cable see no reason to go back!

What I am saying is I've seen cable in two different metro areas where the signal is passed on as received and D* MPEG2 HD PQ across the board is pretty bad in comparison!

And I'm saying I had hoped D* would say, here are the MPEG4 signals, we're not degrading them one iota, measure them all you want and see if we're not sending out what some of you fanatics call true HD!

And even though we can't measure D*'s new signals for whatever reason (and Ken H. indicates absolutely no sinister motives) I plan to stay as a sub thru next summer to hopefully see MPEG4 almost universally being praised.

Who else could give me, here in Virginia, the LA Fox station carrying my beloved Steelers today defeating the Seahawks, but only in SD on my DNS for some bizarre reason, even though the main Fox game ! But that's another story far OT!

What I find hilarious is all the people who are still asking if the MPEG-4 is good, from folks who have it from D*. Who cares about the measureable bit rate, etc. If you can't look at it and tell it's good or bad, HDLite vs. True HD...WHO CARES. If you can't tell, then it's all good, enjoy your TV.

For those looking for measurements. If you like it now, and you find out the bit rates are lower than what it should be, will you instantly think the PQ looks bad?

Tony makes a real good point here and I'll only kind of weakly quibble with it.

Compared to analog or SD, even HD Lite is much better on my 57" TV. So it takes some subjectiveness to go beyond such a great improvement in TV PQ and say "Well, this 75 or 80% improvement is not quite as much as I was looking for and with MPEG4 I want an extra 10 or 15% to bring it up to true HD"(or whatever the actual percentages may be).

So in that case, it helps us fanatics to have some numbers to back up what we think subjectively and marginally we may or may not be seeing.

Does this make any sense to anyone??

What I find hilarious is all the people who are still asking if the MPEG-4 is good, from folks who have it from D*. Who cares about the measureable bit rate, etc. If you can't look at it and tell it's good or bad, HDLite vs. True HD...WHO CARES. If you can't tell, then it's all good, enjoy your TV.

For those looking for measurements. If you like it now, and you find out the bit rates are lower than what it should be, will you instantly think the PQ looks bad?

Personally, if I don't see motion artifacts - my assumption is whatever bitrate they are using is sufficient. However, if I found out they were reducing the resolution from what they are getting, then I wouldn't all of a sudden say the PQ looks bad, but my assumption would be that it does not look as good as it could unless I could personally see a head-to-head comparison that suggests otherwise.

Tony makes a real good point here and I'll only kind of weakly quibble with it.

Compared to analog or SD, even HD Lite is much better on my 57" TV. So it takes some subjectiveness to go beyond such a great improvement in TV PQ and say "Well, this 75 or 80% improvement is not quite as much as I was looking for and with MPEG4 I want an extra 10 or 15% to bring it up to true HD"(or whatever the actual percentages may be).

So in that case, it helps us fanatics to have some numbers to back up what we think subjectively and marginally we may or may not be seeing.

Does this make any sense to anyone??

That makes sense and I can live with that response.

So ... has anyone detected any signs that the current(old) MPEG2 channels are going to be moved (or at least mirrored) in MPEG4? ... Or would that be too much of an admission of "guilt" on the part of D*?