To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (14251 ) 11/18/1997 8:22:00 PM From: Charles Hughes Respond to of 24154
>>>but I don't think the TV guys want interlaced just out of spite. There's a cost problem, but I think it's based on other things. Particularly the cost of all that old videotape being reformatted, de-interlaced, and sharpened. Also, new cameras and so on. However, its not that much more expensive. Witness the various firewire cameras Sony (among others) sells retail now. They have a better picture than the most expensive ntsc Ikegami, for $2000 instead of 20,000. And they work directly with DVD editing and computer systems. The Japanese system was indeed analog, but high res. It also was satellite based. It is indeed very expensive. All part of the old "screw the early adopters out of the development money while they beta test your product" financing scheme we all know and love now. >>>DBS satellite systems are based on MPEG video, at standard NTSC resolution. That's right, but since it's just a (compressed) digital stream, they can do more than standard NTSC resolution (or PAL or SECAM.) I think what is going to happen here is that if the local stations don't move on this, satellite systems will put them out of business. Maybe they think that is inevitable anyway (could be, why should local news be anything other than a channel on a system), so they are just trying to squeeze the business dry in advance of that. That would also explain the government reluctance to enforce the contracts. Maybe that's why cable systems are moving to provide internet and interactive TV instead of more channels. All those thousands of low earth orbit jobs that we have been reading about. Cheers, Chaz P.S. You are always the acknowledged leader of the Cheers Ilk, Dan. We just don't like to acknowledge leaders, so it's a ceremonial position.