O-O

O-O

Looks like MPEG-4 is much more efficient than MPEG-2 which is probably why the Mobile DTV industry is deciding to use it. Still have yet to find anything on how interactive MPEG-4 is or will be. Chime in if any of you get a chance.

Piggie

I know very little of the technical details. But it begs one question and answers yours.

MPEG4 was introduced 1998 and is more efficient than MPEG2. If for no other reason to use it , it saves bandwidth. So more information can be compressed into a smaller amount of data and return the same picture quality as MPEG2.

Hence it was a natural considering it has been around for 10 years to use it in any new standard. I actually expect that MPH will have a pretty nice picture on such a small screen.

The question is begs is why does ATSC use MPEG2 ? ATSC was standardized in 1996, and two years later MPEG4 was standardized. There was plenty of time even in the early predicted transition dates for DTV, the ATSC standard could have been upgraded to MPEG4. In 1998 few stations were on the air, and virtually no receivers were available. Now we are stuck with an OTA standard that is 11 years old. Why I constantly say OTA DTV is not state of the art, just a 13 year old standard that took forever to implement.

__________________
The more I understand, the less I know.

HTNut

Probably would have taken longer had congress not allowed (or had cell phone companies not lobbied) for cell companies to bid on the analog airwaves.

Piggie

I don't know enough history to know why there were so many years of delays. I know bit and pieces from specific eras of the transition.

But unless I read your post wrong I believe the cell companies pushing to bid on the 700 MHz auctions did delay the transition.

__________________
The more I understand, the less I know.