HEVC has no present or future, it proved to be a catastrophe.

[Stears555]

HEVC has no present or future, it proved to be a catastrophe. It is the historic stumble of MPEG LA.

Read about it here:

http://www.streaminglearningcenter.com/articles/streaming-media-east-presentation-stat...hd-codecs.html

[El Heggunte]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_for_Open_Media

The intentions are good, granted, but...

¿will the implementations of the new video codec be WELL-designed?

"Configuration-wise", the ancient VP6 and VP7 made more sense to me than VP8 and VP9...

[usually_quiet]

HEVC is currently being used for terrestrial broadcast TV and for UHD Blu-ray, so HEVC has a present and probably a future, even if streaming video goes in a different direction.

[LigH.de]

I like Selur's signature.

[usually_quiet]

I like Selur's signature.

LOL One down. Only one to go. After that, maybe he'll want to change it.

[Stears555]

HEVC is currently being used for terrestrial broadcast TV and for UHD Blu-ray, so HEVC has a present and probably a future, even if streaming video goes in a different direction.

)))

Which countries have HEVC broadcast? 1 or 2 countries? UHD-Blu ray disk has no future, the largest movie distributor companies don't plan to manufacture them in high numbers in the future.

[pandy]

)))

Which countries have HEVC broadcast? 1 or 2 countries? UHD-Blu ray disk has no future, the largest movie distributor companies don't plan to manufacture them in high numbers in the future.

You seem to not understand what is industry standard. H.265 will be deployed as it is way better than any currently existing codec.
Whole Europe will accepted H.265 for terrestrial broadcast - FYI Germany decided to go for 8 bit H.265.
Royalties are not a problem as at the end customer will pay for it....

[usually_quiet]

HEVC is currently being used for terrestrial broadcast TV and for UHD Blu-ray, so HEVC has a present and probably a future, even if streaming video goes in a different direction.

)))

Which countries have HEVC broadcast? 1 or 2 countries? UHD-Blu ray disk has no future, the largest movie distributor companies don't plan to manufacture them in high numbers in the future.

HEVC is part of the DVB-T2 spec. Germany is currently using HEVC for DVB-T2. The rest of Europe is likely to follow as UHD TVs become more popular.

Japan is evaluating HEVC for UHD broadcasts. Other ISDB-T counties will follow their lead.

ATSC 3.0, which uses HEVC for HD and UHD broadcasts, is being field tested in the USA and S. Korea. ATSC 1.0 countries will eventually switch to ATSC 3.0 to reduce the amount of RF spectrum consumed by broadcast TV.

LOL So, nobody is currently using HEVC or planning to use HEVC?

UHD Blu-ray will be a niche product, but has a future. UHD streaming video is not good enough to satisfy some, and not available to others because of poor infrastructure. Neither of those things is likely to change quickly.

[El Heggunte]

FWIW — even the warez ppl have already switched to HEVC.



OMG, those Facebook "stickers" really suck big time

[_Al_]

Guys, c'mon,..., just do not panic. Use H.264 and relax , if you are concerned.

[Cornucopia]

No present/no future, huh? Tell that to Blackmagic Design who put out a realtime 4k60p h265 encoder & duplicator (for $1995...just saw it at InfoComm - awesome!). Seem to be selling like hotcakes.

So where are these competing encoder format products? If they were so much better/more attractive, wouldn't they also be available, hmmm?

Scott

[KarMa]

On a similar subject, it looks like VP9 will be the last in the VP codecs. As the proposed VP10 codec will be merged into the AV1 codec, according to Google. AV1 being developed by the Alliance for Open Media which Google is a part of.

http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Editorial/What-Is-.../What-Is-VP9-111334.aspx

[Stears555]

No present/no future, huh? Tell that to Blackmagic Design who put out a realtime 4k60p h265 encoder & duplicator (for $1995...just saw it at InfoComm - awesome!). Seem to be selling like hotcakes.

So where are these competing encoder format products? If they were so much better/more attractive, wouldn't they also be available, hmmm?

Scott

It's just typical. Bad quality HW encoders.

[Stears555]

HEVC is currently being used for terrestrial broadcast TV and for UHD Blu-ray, so HEVC has a present and probably a future, even if streaming video goes in a different direction.

)))

Which countries have HEVC broadcast? 1 or 2 countries? UHD-Blu ray disk has no future, the largest movie distributor companies don't plan to manufacture them in high numbers in the future.

HEVC is part of the DVB-T2 spec. Germany is currently using HEVC for DVB-T2. The rest of Europe is likely to follow as UHD TVs become more popular.

Japan is evaluating HEVC for UHD broadcasts. Other ISDB-T counties will follow their lead.

ATSC 3.0, which uses HEVC for HD and UHD broadcasts, is being field tested in the USA and S. Korea. ATSC 1.0 countries will eventually switch to ATSC 3.0 to reduce the amount of RF spectrum consumed by broadcast TV.

LOL So, nobody is currently using HEVC or planning to use HEVC?

UHD Blu-ray will be a niche product, but has a future. UHD streaming video is not good enough to satisfy some, and not available to others because of poor infrastructure. Neither of those things is likely to change quickly.

Television is not a good example. Both USA and Japan used traditionally backward TV broadcasting technology (like the laughable NTSC) than MPEG2 for digital TV (instead of MPEG 4), and even their digital system was backward if we compare it with the DVB standards...

[LigH.de]

Could you please stop feeding trolls?

[usually_quiet]

Television is not a good example. Both USA and Japan used traditionally backward TV broadcasting technology (like the laughable NTSC) than MPEG2 for digital TV (instead of MPEG 4), and even their digital system was backward if we compare it with the DVB standards...

Television is highly relevant to any discussions about the present and future of HEVC. You just want to ignore it because it doesn't support your ridiculous statement, but most people in the world watch some form of broadcast television, either terrestrial or satellite.

Both USA and Japan used traditionally backward TV broadcasting technology (like the laughable NTSC) than MPEG2 for digital TV (instead of MPEG 4), and even their digital system was backward if we compare it with the DVB standards...

Germany is using DVB-T2 and HEVC, and the other European counties eyeing HEVC will be using DVB-T2 as well.

The ATSC 1.0 spec was amended to include H.264 in 2008, but US broadcasters have declined to use it until recently. (There are now a small number of over-the-air paid services using H.264.) ATSC 3.0 uses ODFM modulation, like DVB. HEVC will be ATSC 3.0's core video format.

ISDB allows H.264 as well, but not all ISDB countries use it.

HEVC hardware decoders are already becoming common. Even my mother's inexpensive 2015 Samsung TV has a media player able to hardware decode HEVC. Intel Kaby Lake CPUs will have built-in HEVC hardware decoding.

Could you please stop feeding trolls?

OK, I'll stop now. I've had my fun.

[Cornucopia]

But it was just a goof.

Don't worry, he comes back with another hair-brained topic every few weeks/months, no matter what you do. Starve a cold, feed a fever - makes no difference.

****

"Bad quality encoders": from the demonstrated font of video wisdom.
Sour grapes!

Scott

[pandy]

It's just typical. Bad quality HW encoders.

How do you know such things? Product is just announced...
And seem you have no knowledge that all online enocders are HW - they use high speed raw video interface and they are designed to deliver compressed video in real time - if this means that they use 64 CPU's or 1024 CPU's - fine - they are considered as HW - most of encoders are designed with FPGA's i.e. HW that can be fully modified by replacing SW...

Television is not a good example. Both USA and Japan used traditionally backward TV broadcasting technology (like the laughable NTSC) than MPEG2 for digital TV (instead of MPEG 4), and even their digital system was backward if we compare it with the DVB standards...

Quite clear to me is that you have no knowledge why MPEG-2 was used for broadcast (FYI in 2000 there was no other codec capable to provide useful bitrate and computation technology was so limited that MPEG-2 was only one feasible coding technology - MPEG-2 decoders at second half of 90's was equipped in 4MB of RAM... first H.264 decoders with 32 - 64MB RAM - price of silicone was limiting factor, nowadays all this sounds like joke but in 90's it was state of the art).

World of video technology is something else than world of torrent downloads...

[Stears555]

It's just typical. Bad quality HW encoders.

How do you know such things? Product is just announced...
And seem you have no knowledge that all online enocders are HW - they use high speed raw video interface and they are designed to deliver compressed video in real time - if this means that they use 64 CPU's or 1024 CPU's - fine - they are considered as HW - most of encoders are designed with FPGA's i.e. HW that can be fully modified by replacing SW...

Television is not a good example. Both USA and Japan used traditionally backward TV broadcasting technology (like the laughable NTSC) than MPEG2 for digital TV (instead of MPEG 4), and even their digital system was backward if we compare it with the DVB standards...

Quite clear to me is that you have no knowledge why MPEG-2 was used for broadcast (FYI in 2000 there was no other codec capable to provide useful bitrate and computation technology was so limited that MPEG-2 was only one feasible coding technology - MPEG-2 decoders at second half of 90's was equipped in 4MB of RAM... first H.264 decoders with 32 - 64MB RAM - price of silicone was limiting factor, nowadays all this sounds like joke but in 90's it was state of the art).

World of video technology is something else than world of torrent downloads...

"How do you know such things? Product is just announced..."
Because it is fact. IT is technically impossible to make good HW encoders.

[Stears555]

But it was just a goof.

Don't worry, he comes back with another hair-brained topic every few weeks/months, no matter what you do. Starve a cold, feed a fever - makes no difference.

****

"Bad quality encoders": from the demonstrated font of video wisdom.
Sour grapes!

Scott

Yes of course, according to you (perhaps you are just an entrepreneur of a small scale business, the opinion of the professional specialized website for digital broadcasting and internet broadcasting/streaming is ridiculous.

[Stears555]

HEVC is currently being used for terrestrial broadcast TV and for UHD Blu-ray, so HEVC has a present and probably a future, even if streaming video goes in a different direction.

)))

Which countries have HEVC broadcast? 1 or 2 countries? UHD-Blu ray disk has no future, the largest movie distributor companies don't plan to manufacture them in high numbers in the future.

HEVC is part of the DVB-T2 spec. Germany is currently using HEVC for DVB-T2. The rest of Europe is likely to follow as UHD TVs become more popular.

Japan is evaluating HEVC for UHD broadcasts. Other ISDB-T counties will follow their lead.

ATSC 3.0, which uses HEVC for HD and UHD broadcasts, is being field tested in the USA and S. Korea. ATSC 1.0 countries will eventually switch to ATSC 3.0 to reduce the amount of RF spectrum consumed by broadcast TV.

LOL So, nobody is currently using HEVC or planning to use HEVC?

UHD Blu-ray will be a niche product, but has a future. UHD streaming video is not good enough to satisfy some, and not available to others because of poor infrastructure. Neither of those things is likely to change quickly.

Germany started to use backward mpeg2 like the USA, even in the era of mature MPEG4 codecs... IT is well known that NTSC was inferior to PAL system. Moreover USA later started to use the backward ATSC technology (which is inferior in every sense to the DVB-t) technology. The first mpeg 2 DVB-t tests were in the UK in 1997, Hungary started to used mpeg2 DVB-T tests in 1998, and switched to MPEG4 tests in 2005, and chose h264 for national broadcasting. (There were a laughable event: French And German experts tried to dissuade the Hungarians about the use of mpeg4, because it has no future...

Both Germany and France (similar to the USA) invested more and more in the backward mpeg2 technology... (WHY????)

Moreover, the development level of American Japan and German telecommunitaion is similar to many third world countries, average internet speed and mobile internet speed is generally low in this countries. Despite of the economic power of these countries, they don't spend/invest much money to develop their telecommunications infrastructure., so telecommunications remained a stepchild in this countries.

[Stears555]

Could you please stop feeding trolls?

You comment was written from a country (Germany), where telecommunication sector run on the technology level of the mid 2000s.. ))) (internet mobile telephony mobile internet etc...)





and again:

[KarMa]

Television is not a good example. Both USA and Japan used traditionally backward TV broadcasting technology (like the laughable NTSC)

NTSC is from 1941 and never had color in mind when it was first adopted. To maintain compatibility with the older models already sold they had to tack on a color subcarrier, along side the luma signal in 1953. A decade after NTSC added color, PAL was developed (1962). Which took all the benefits of NTSC and learned from its down falls, mostly having to do with hue shift. Even the name PAL (Phase Alternating Line) describes how it fixes the hue shift problem. PAL had the advantage of not having to be compatible with older equipment already sold, not to mention the benefit of a decade worth of hindsight provided by color NTSC.

than MPEG2 for digital TV (instead of MPEG 4)

I can only guess that you mean H.264, in which case it's not really interchangeable with MPEG 4. As you could be talking about ASP or AVC.

ATSC does support AVC/H.264, just no one sells TVs with H.264 decode capable tuners, and no one broadcasts with it. Since early HDTVs only had MPEG2 support only, no one wants to lose market share by broadcasting with H.264 (DuMont on UHF for example). And HDTV sellers don't want to waste money on H.264 decoders since no one broadcasts with it. So we are left with this chicken and egg crap.

and even their digital system was backward if we compare it with the DVB standards...

Mostly just comes down to 8VSB vs COFDM.

[Stears555]

Sorry guys, but your comments were funny. I did not want to offend the entrepreneurs of small scale business, because I am not classist (meaning: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/classist) so I do not despise the lower strata of society like small entrepreneurs.

I do not despise the Germans in general (I lived in Germany for 7years), there are many good people among them... but when we speak about the technological level of their telecommunication infrastructure is an other topic This is ture about the general telecommunication infrastructure of the superpower USA. Of course boys, personally you don't need to feel shame, because it was not based on your decisions, that the tel.com infrastructure of your countries became backward.

SO DO NOT FEEL OFFENDED.
OK?

[Stears555]

Television is not a good example. Both USA and Japan used traditionally backward TV broadcasting technology (like the laughable NTSC)

NTSC is from 1941 and never had color in mind when it was first adopted. To maintain compatibility with the older models already sold they had to tack on a color subcarrier, along side the luma signal in 1953. A decade after NTSC added color, PAL was developed (1962). Which took all the benefits of NTSC and learned from its down falls, mostly having to do with hue shift. Even the name PAL (Phase Alternating Line) describes how it fixes the hue shift problem. PAL had the advantage of not having to be compatible with older equipment already sold, not to mention the benefit of a decade worth of hindsight provided by color NTSC.

than MPEG2 for digital TV (instead of MPEG 4)

I can only guess that you mean H.264, in which case it's not really interchangeable with MPEG 4. As you could be talking about ASP or AVC.

ATSC does support AVC/H.264, just no one sells TVs with H.264 decode capable tuners, and no one broadcasts with it. Since early HDTVs only had MPEG2 support only, no one wants to lose market share by broadcasting with H.264 (DuMont on UHF for example). And HDTV sellers don't want to waste money on H.264 decoders since no one broadcasts with it. So we are left with this chicken and egg crap.

and even their digital system was backward if we compare it with the DVB standards...

Mostly just comes down to 8VSB vs COFDM.

UK proved to be more wise, they break with their old TV standards, and they chose the PAL system (at any price) Supported by Uk government.

"Since early HDTVs only had MPEG2 support only" Similar to Hungary, but the broadcaster firms said,: "we sorry, throw it in the trash, or buy a new decoder" And they supported it with a government decision and parliamentary act. IT is so simple. Yes this sounds a bit like a dictatorship, but it works ....


Everything based on the decision of the governments... If they governments enough strong leadership, it wouldn't be a problem. If they want, they can regulate or develop the tel.com market, by the power of law. But the tel.communication sector of USA Germany Japan are too autonomous, and they wanted to press the last cents even from old backward technologies in internet broadcasting and mobile communications)

[Stears555]

television is not a good example. Both usa and japan used traditionally backward tv broadcasting technology (like the laughable ntsc)

ntsc is from 1941 and never had color in mind when it was first adopted. To maintain compatibility with the older models already sold they had to tack on a color subcarrier, along side the luma signal in 1953. A decade after ntsc added color, pal was developed (1962). Which took all the benefits of ntsc and learned from its down falls, mostly having to do with hue shift. Even the name pal (phase alternating line) describes how it fixes the hue shift problem. Pal had the advantage of not having to be compatible with older equipment already sold, not to mention the benefit of a decade worth of hindsight provided by color ntsc.

than mpeg2 for digital tv (instead of mpeg 4)

i can only guess that you mean h.264, in which case it's not really interchangeable with mpeg 4. As you could be talking about asp or avc.

Atsc does support avc/h.264, just no one sells tvs with h.264 decode capable tuners, and no one broadcasts with it. Since early hdtvs only had mpeg2 support only, no one wants to lose market share by broadcasting with h.264 (dumont on uhf for example). And hdtv sellers don't want to waste money on h.264 decoders since no one broadcasts with it. So we are left with this chicken and egg crap.

and even their digital system was backward if we compare it with the dvb standards...

mostly just comes down to 8vsb vs cofdm.

MPEG4 avc

[Skiller]

Germany started to use backward mpeg2 like the USA, even in the era of mature MPEG4 codecs...

I cannot follow.
German broadcasters added DVB-S (digital satellite) broadcasting in 1997 (note "added", not "phased in", there was analog satellite until 2012). There was no MPEG4 at that time (1997).

DVB-T was first launched in Germany in 2003. AVC was just finished at that time and not ripe yet but MPEG2 had proved and so DVB-T uses MPEG2.

DVB-S2 launched in 2010 and uses AVC.

IPTV uses AVC.

DVB-T2 HD which just launched this month uses HEVC.

[Stears555]

Germany started to use backward mpeg2 like the USA, even in the era of mature MPEG4 codecs...

I cannot follow.
German broadcasters added DVB-S (digital satellite) broadcasting in 1997 (note "added", not "phased in", there was analog satellite until 2012). There was no MPEG4 at that time (1997).

DVB-T was first launched in Germany in 2003. AVC was just finished at that time and not ripe yet but MPEG2 had proved and so DVB-T uses MPEG2.

DVB-S2 launched in 2010 and uses AVC.

IPTV uses AVC.

DVB-T2 HD which just launched this month uses HEVC.

Wrong Wrong and again Wrong.

DVB-T Mpeg 2 tests were started already in 1997 in many European countries. (Except France and Germany)
Read about it: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:LvZEq9n-5tcJ:downloads.bbc.co.uk/...&ct=clnk&gl=en

I recorded small resolution mpeg2 videos in my primitive analog TV-Tuner card in 1997....


"DVB-T was first launched in Germany in 2003." 5-6 years after UK and Hungary... It is similar "Very modern" like the general internet infrastructure level of USA and Germany and Japan. ))))

"DVB-S2 launched in 2010 and uses AVC." Again 5-6 years later than in the UK and Hungary....


"IPTV uses AVC."
At the level of average American German or Japanese internet speed (hahaha), they can produce bad quality images.... They must provide TV channels in extremely low bitrate, because the backward infrastructure of the internet in these countries.

"DVB-T2 HD which just launched this month uses HEVC. "

When Germans or Americans decide to introduce a technology in national level, it is 100% sure that they made a bad decision. (Perhabs every other countries will use moderner AOmedia codec, and they can't switch because they chose the old HEVC technology..... Typical american german and japan decision making.... )))) Always many years lag behind the telecommunications technology level...

[MaverickTse]

Whether H265 has a good future very much depends on the availability of decoding hardware IMO.
I don't really like H265(and also VP9) because it is really heavy, much heavier than H264... so if it were to be popularized, consumer-level TV, recorder and set-top box need to have capable but economical hardware to do it(at least for decoding)

Is there anyone mass-producing H265 decoder chipset? I don't know

and there is the 4K TV factor.
if 4K gets pushed and get popular, there will be incentive to push HEVC also as that helps to keep data rate in check within available bandwidth. If 4K is not that popular, the need for HEVC will also reduce.

HEVC will find some use, but I don't think it will get a bright future as good as H264.

[LigH.de]

You can't convince a troll with facts. Stop feeding him already.