Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Why is video inverted for transmission?

  • Thread starter Green Xenon [Radium]
  • Start date
D

Don Bowey

Jan 1, 1970
0
Standard DVDs are NOT he res either, idiot.

How much you want to bet the retard is too cheap to have either HD
format yet? Hell, I'd even bet that he doesn't even have an upscaling
DVD player for std DVDs for it either.

I'll bet this is the first he'll have even heard of it, and they are
sub-$100 products.

You're almost as big a fucking idiot as he is.

And yes, here in Usenet, the bullshit he spews is anyone's business,
dumbfuck.

Boring, very boring.
 
J

Jeff Liebermann

Jan 1, 1970
0
ChairmanOfTheBored said:
You're 2 years behind the times. Most have HDMI inputs and accept vid
card DVI out no problem, and now, they are even 1080p NOT 720p, so the
are no longer 1366x768 at the native level, and mine is that, and the
picture fills the screen. So you must have been pumping the one you saw
with a shit video card.

My HP ze2000 laptop would only do 1024x768. When that was displayed
on a Sony, Vizio, and Panasonic LCD TV's at local store (about a week
ago), it appeared as a big black border on the screen. I tried
various tweaks, tunes, modes, and adjustments to make it bigger, and
failed. The big suprise was that even though the vertical resolution
was advertised as 768 dots, the 1024x768 image only filled half the
vertical part of the screen. The rest was black. I would have
expected it to fill the vertical, but it didn't. However, you're
correct in that we may have been doing something wrong. Next time,
I'll try it with a wide screen laptop, but I don't expect that to fix
the vertical problem. I'll scribble down the model numbers this time.
Bullshit. Most 32" HDTV monitors of the past 3 years were that res
native, and being pumped by that res FILLED the screen entirely.

Want me to take a photograph? Big black border on 3 LCD monitors when
fed with 1024x768. I'll throw in the salesmen scratching their heads
for free.
Total bullshit on an HDMI display. Hell, my HDMI display also has a
VGA input, and it doesn't do it via that connection either.

Yep. That's what I expected, but didn't see. However, I will grant
that we may have done something wrong. I'm still waiting (2 weeks
later) for their support people to figure out what it will take to
make it work right.
That, I would go for. I should only have to pay for what I view anyway,
and that payment should be small.

Sure it would be nice. However, do the math. Assume your CATV
provider is not going to lose revenue and their total billing for all
customers (gross income) will be unchanged. If you subscribe to fewer
channels, then the price of those channels goes up to compensate. My
guess is your monthly bill will be about the same for getting fewer
channels.
Bullshit.

That's why I mentioned it. AT&T isn't really in favor of ala carte
programming. However, it does sound good on the news and makes great
press. Of course, nothing ever really happens.
They used to be virtually free (feeds to the cable companies), when
those channels were eager for exposure.

Some still are using FTA (free to air) service. Lot of stations want
free world wide distribution. Some even pay for it.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-to-air>

I don't recall that any of the cable companies I know ever offered
free distribution. When they got stuck with the must carry rule, they
rapidly ran out of channels, and used that excuse to jack up the rates
for any station that wanted distribution. I vaguely recall (not sure)
that the FCC threatened to regulate the must carry rates, which
convinced the cable companies to cease trying to circumvent the FCC
ruling by making it uneconomical for the smaller broadcasters.
Not if they fear losing said exposure... what comes around goes
around.

It wouldn't be a problem if the stations operating under the must
carry rule had anything useful to broadcast. In most cases, they
purchase canned programming and advertising, which are just clones of
what you can watch on any of the major networks. Sometimes, they're
even transmitted simultaneously with the major networks. If you've
ever notice the same junk on multiple stations, that's why. The big
draw for these stations is that they can proclaim that they have a
huge audience, primarily due to the cable audience. Drop the rule,
and their broadcast only audience will be comparatively zilch.
The next gen 120Hz displays are going to be all the rave. LCD
backlights... No more 3:2 pull down (5x24=120). The world is getting
better every day.

Interesting. That has nothing to do with 4DTV, but I hadn't heard
about 120Hz vertical displays. Thanks.
 
J

Jeff Liebermann

Jan 1, 1970
0
They have been beating this dead horse since the early '80s, when I
designed and built CATV headends.

Sorta. Kevin Martin seems to be the most vocal of the assorted FCC
commissars on the issue. His predecessor, Michael Powell avoided the
issue entirely. Before that, William Kennard seemed in favor, but
never really pushed it very hard. I don't recall what Reed Hundt
preferred and haven't followed the issue carefully. It's been
discussed since must-carry appeared in 1992. Note that must-carry
arrived from congressional action, not from the FCC.
Yes. The old "Must carry" regulations. They were a pain in the '80s
when the switching equipment wasn't versatile enough, and reliable
enough to block some programming, so some channels that people wanted
added to a system required someone to manually switch when something
actually started or stopped. Local ball games that weren't sold out had
be blocked, along with a lot of other crap.

Some of that is still with us. This year, we added digital
broadcasting to the must-carry rule. I don't know where the cable
companies are going to find all the channels to regurgitate the
digital must-carry content. Fortunately, it's only for 3 years after
the demise of analog date.
the same local advertisers who try to sell me overpriced furniture
and vehicles, I neither need, nor want. As far as the sports channels,
I wouldn't care if they ALL went bankrupt.

Do the math. The cable companies are not going to allow themselves to
lose revenue. Their total receipts (gross income) is going to remain
the same or they go out of business. So, ala carte programming allows
you to pay for fewer channels. Fine, but with penetration bordering
on saturation in most metro areas, the number of customers isn't going
to change much. So, the price of each channel goes up to compensate,
and your monthly bill remains the same.
 
M

Michael A. Terrell

Jan 1, 1970
0
Don said:
Boring, very boring.


He's startimg to make 'Radium' look brilliant. :(


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
 
M

Martin Thompson

Jan 1, 1970
0
Randy Yates said:
Your paradigm is so completely different than mine. I simply use one
text editor [1] for EVERYTHING. The spell checker is a tool available within
that text editor.

--RY

[1] XEmacs

How far is Emacs from being an OS though :)

Martin
(Another Emacs user)
 
M

Michael A. Terrell

Jan 1, 1970
0
Richard said:
Probably circa 1920. When he told me the stories I wasn't much
interested in dates.

In the mid-50's the AWA Museum had a operating permit for a spark gap
transmitter that allowed them to operate for up to 5 minutes with no
antenna attached. At that time nothing within 10 miles except farms.
Definitely impressed me as a teenager.


There was a radio museum near the now demolished Bethany VOA site,
and the WLW 500 kW transmitter site that I visited in either '69 or '70
that had a small spark transmitter, and I believe he was the one who had
the Alexanderson generator. They were run at reduced voltage, and fed
into dummy loads when he ran them for a few seconds.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
 
R

Randy Yates

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff Liebermann said:
Do the math.

Here's satellite math: Assume (very conservatively) 1 million
subscribers pay $50/month. That's $600 million/year.

Now tell me - who's going to go out of business?
--
% Randy Yates % "My Shangri-la has gone away, fading like
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % the Beatles on 'Hey Jude'"
%%% 919-577-9882 %
%%%% <[email protected]> % 'Shangri-La', *A New World Record*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
 
J

Jerry Avins

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff Liebermann wrote:

...
Do the math. The cable companies are not going to allow themselves to
lose revenue. Their total receipts (gross income) is going to remain
the same or they go out of business. So, ala carte programming allows
you to pay for fewer channels. Fine, but with penetration bordering
on saturation in most metro areas, the number of customers isn't going
to change much. So, the price of each channel goes up to compensate,
and your monthly bill remains the same.

Or buy an antenna and forgo the cable junk.

Jerry
 
J

Jeff Liebermann

Jan 1, 1970
0
Here's satellite math:

Satellite? We're talking CATV (cable tv) here. Satellite is
unaffected by the must-carry rule. Oddly, I don't recall anyone at
the FCC even suggesting a la carte programming for DBS (direct
broadcast satellite).

It's also interesting to note that promises of a ala cart programming
is being used by XM and Sirius to sell their merger proposal. Looking
at the deal, which starts 1 year from the merger, it's a minimum base
package, with fairly cheap add-ons. A minimum base package is not
exactly what I consider to be a la carte programming.
Assume (very conservatively) 1 million
subscribers pay $50/month. That's $600 million/year.

You're quite a bit off target. See:
<http://www.ncta.com/ContentView.aspx?contentId=3577>
65.6 million basic cable subscribers.

Average monthly billing is about $43.
<http://www.ncta.com/ContentView.aspx?contentId=65>

Annual gross revenue from subscribers:
Now tell me - who's going to go out of business?

Nobody is going out of business. You're just going to pay more to
maintain the present level of service. If a large part of the
customer base opts for cheaper service, to maintain constant revenue,
someone else is going to make up the difference. There's no free
lunch.

One of the nice features of democracy is that the voters can vote
themselves a discount, as California tried to do by demanding that the
auto insurance industry run at a loss. However, this is the FCC,
who's purpose is to protect the monopolies it has helped create.
They're also not beyond implimenting grand schemes with little benfit.
For example, the cable card mess, that will allow you to purchase your
set top box retail, but where there is no demand and none offered.
Also E911, which has some serious cost-benifit ratio issues.

Anyway, the FCC will probably apply ala carte rules simultaneously to
all cable companies. This implies major changes in the cable rate
structure, which will require congressional involvement. If there are
any financial effects, they're going to be wide spread, spectacular,
and very very political.
 
R

Randy Yates

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff Liebermann said:
Randy Yates writes:
[...]

65.6 million basic cable subscribers.

Average monthly billing is about $43.
Now tell me - who's going to go out of business?

Nobody is going out of business. You're just going to pay more to
maintain the present level of service. If a large part of the
customer base opts for cheaper service, to maintain constant revenue,
someone else is going to make up the difference. There's no free
lunch.

Yes there is: the cable executives get a free lunch, and a free house
on the golf course, and a free Mercedes/Lexus/whatever, and etc.

Since when does it cost ANYWHERE NEAR 12 * 43 * 65.6M = $33.8 BILLION
dollars per year to run the country's cable system? Holy copper, man!

Somebody is making a freaking HUGE profit somewhere.

And they will continue to do so until people start speaking with their
pocket-books by, e.g., watching OTA broadcasts instead of signing up
for cable (or satellite).
--
% Randy Yates % "I met someone who looks alot like you,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % she does the things you do,
%%% 919-577-9882 % but she is an IBM."
%%%% <[email protected]> % 'Yours Truly, 2095', *Time*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
 
E

Eric Jacobsen

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff Liebermann wrote:

...


Or buy an antenna and forgo the cable junk.

Jerry


I was just telling somebody recently that I've been disturbed by the
media and gov't officials acting like OTA no longer exists. The cute
blonde on CNBC was doing a piece on how consumers are confused about
buying HDTVs, since they won't really get HD unless they subscribe to
an HD option with a cable or satellite provider. GAH! How about
just paying $10 for a set of rabbit ears and watch the HD that the
gov't has forced the broadcasters to spend millions to provide?

Eric Jacobsen
Minister of Algorithms
Abineau Communications
http://www.ericjacobsen.org
 
C

Charles

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jeff Liebermann wrote:

...


Or buy an antenna and forgo the cable junk.

Jerry


Depends on where you live. At my place I can get good reception for
only one station, and it's a home shopping station.
 
J

Jerry Avins

Jan 1, 1970
0
Eric said:
I was just telling somebody recently that I've been disturbed by the
media and gov't officials acting like OTA no longer exists. The cute
blonde on CNBC was doing a piece on how consumers are confused about
buying HDTVs, since they won't really get HD unless they subscribe to
an HD option with a cable or satellite provider. GAH! How about
just paying $10 for a set of rabbit ears and watch the HD that the
gov't has forced the broadcasters to spend millions to provide?

I'm about 50 miles from most stations I might watch, so rabbit ears
won't work for me. Does anyone yet have knowledgeable antenna
suggestions? I guess digital TV has some DSP connection, but I recognize
that this is OT the OT.

Jerry
 
J

Jerry Avins

Jan 1, 1970
0
Charles said:
Depends on where you live. At my place I can get good reception for
only one station, and it's a home shopping station.


I'm lucky. I have no trouble with channels 3, 6, 10, and 12 from
Philadelphia, and 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13 from New York (There's a bit
of overlapped content). Some UHF channels are more local.

Jerry, between New Brunswick and Princeton, NJ
 
R

Randy Yates

Jan 1, 1970
0
Jerry Avins said:
[...]
Does anyone yet have knowledgeable antenna suggestions?

Jerry, try the folks (or scan the archives) over at alt.tv.tech.hdtv -
this question has been asked a lot over there.
--
% Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your
%%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow."
%%%% <[email protected]> % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
 
R

Richard Owlett

Jan 1, 1970
0
Randy said:
[snip]
Somebody is making a freaking HUGE profit somewhere.

And they will continue to do so until people start speaking with their
pocket-books by, e.g., watching OTA broadcasts instead of signing up
for cable (or satellite).

I've gone one better years ago.
Local cable company is on WRITTEN notice that coming on my property is
trespassing and will be prosecuted.

I got tired of their high pressure sales calls and questionable
advertising practices.
 
J

Jerry Avins

Jan 1, 1970
0
Randy said:
Jerry Avins said:
[...]
Does anyone yet have knowledgeable antenna suggestions?

Jerry, try the folks (or scan the archives) over at alt.tv.tech.hdtv -
this question has been asked a lot over there.

Thanks, I will. I have nothing to view it on yet, but something has to
come first.

Jerry
 
M

Michael A. Terrell

Jan 1, 1970
0
Randy said:
Yes there is: the cable executives get a free lunch


There are no free lunches, except for the homeless.

and a free house


The man who owned United Video was a millionaire before he bought his
first run down CATV system to rebuild.

on the golf course,


It wasn't on a golf course. It had been in his family for several
generations.


and a free Mercedes/Lexus/whatever, and etc.


The company car was a Honda. The pickup trucks were Ford and the
vans were Dodge.

Since when does it cost ANYWHERE NEAR 12 * 43 * 65.6M = $33.8 BILLION
dollars per year to run the country's cable system? Holy copper, man!


It's not one system.


Somebody is making a freaking HUGE profit somewhere.


Yeah, the local governments. Have you ever heard of a 'Franchise
Fee'?

And they will continue to do so until people start speaking with their
pocket-books by, e.g., watching OTA broadcasts instead of signing up
for cable (or satellite).



That shows that you know absolutely nothing about CATV. The typical
break even point on a new system is ten years, unless you have enough
cash to build out of pocket. A headend was in the $1,000,000 range in
the early '80s, and almost $20,000 a mile for trunkline (.75"). You had
toe add the feed lines (.50") bridger amp for the trunk housings, line
extender amplifiers and directional taps before you could connect the
first customer. You have to do an exhaustive 'Proof of Performance' to
get permission from the FCC to operate the system.

Even then, by the time the first build is paid off there are system
extensions and upgrades to finance, lots of other operating expenses,
and morons damaging your physical plant with construction equipment,
acts of God, and drunk drivers. Don't forget mommy's little assholes
who destroy pedestals, just for the hell of it.


Would you care to discuss any other subject that you know nothing
about?


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
 
S

Steve Underwood

Jan 1, 1970
0
Michael said:
There are no free lunches, except for the homeless.
The man who owned United Video was a millionaire before he bought his
first run down CATV system to rebuild.
It wasn't on a golf course. It had been in his family for several
generations.
and a free Mercedes/Lexus/whatever, and etc.
The company car was a Honda. The pickup trucks were Ford and the
vans were Dodge.
Yeah, the local governments. Have you ever heard of a 'Franchise
Fee'?

That shows that you know absolutely nothing about CATV. The typical
break even point on a new system is ten years, unless you have enough
cash to build out of pocket. A headend was in the $1,000,000 range in
the early '80s, and almost $20,000 a mile for trunkline (.75"). You had
toe add the feed lines (.50") bridger amp for the trunk housings, line
extender amplifiers and directional taps before you could connect the
first customer. You have to do an exhaustive 'Proof of Performance' to
get permission from the FCC to operate the system.

Even then, by the time the first build is paid off there are system
extensions and upgrades to finance, lots of other operating expenses,
and morons damaging your physical plant with construction equipment,
acts of God, and drunk drivers. Don't forget mommy's little assholes
who destroy pedestals, just for the hell of it.

Backhoe, backhoe, its off to work we go....

I expect the cable infrastructure costs end up something like
telephones. For telephones, estimates are usually that >80% of
investment is in copper under the street. They don't call the last mile
problem a problem for no reason.

Steve
 
J

JosephKK

Jan 1, 1970
0
Allen [email protected] posted to sci.electronics.design:
I really have to disagree, Jerry. I think that operating systems
should be as universal as possible. By putting a spell check in at
that level would mean, for instance, a US operating system couldn't
be used in England. Now a stand-alone checker that any application
could access would be quite desirable. I wish that we could come up
with a checker that is context-sensitive, but I'm afraid that would
be asking too much. Allen

In the *nix world there is a program called ispell, one interface,
works for any application, has multiple dictionaries and languages,
is fully internationalized, learns new words on the fly, and has
dictionary editing. Does that sound like what your asking for?
 
Top