Video Codec H.265 Has Been Approved

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
The International Telecommunications Union has approved the video format known as H.265. The video codec will enable the transmission of high quality streaming utilizing low quality bandwidth.

This should make HD streaming a reality for households where you don't have an ultra-fast Internet connection. Better yet, on mobile connections it'll be a godsend. Being able to stream HD or Full HD video over your mobile network in better quality, while using less bandwidth (and hence, data) will be great.
 
This is great. Now if all of America had access to broadband the content providers might actually make some money off this. But I guess they can make enough just reaching people in cities.
 
Just in time to make you buy another smart tv because your current smart tv can't (or won't) decode h.265.
 
Just in time to make you buy another smart tv because your current smart tv can't (or won't) decode h.265.

Broadcast will probably run in good old Mpeg-2 until they completely eliminate it. Cable boxes may eventually use it however. I doubt it will happen any time soon however as it's still is too processor intensive, like h.264 was this time 10 years ago.
 
Broadcast will probably run in good old Mpeg-2 until they completely eliminate it. Cable boxes may eventually use it however. I doubt it will happen any time soon however as it's still is too processor intensive, like h.264 was this time 10 years ago.

Exactly. If cable actually switched to H.264, they'd have even more bandwidth for Internet and more HD channels.

Of course, in exchange they'd have to buy more expensive cable boxes, which in turn would cause you to pay $30/month for a DVR instead of the current $20 or so they charge(if not bundling).
 
Pirates are always fast adopters.

33899331.jpg
 
Exactly. If cable actually switched to H.264, they'd have even more bandwidth for Internet and more HD channels.

Of course, in exchange they'd have to buy more expensive cable boxes, which in turn would cause you to pay $30/month for a DVR instead of the current $20 or so they charge(if not bundling).

If they can switch everybody to the new boxes and drop mpeg-2, they can save a bunch of money on licensing (mpeg-2 decoder license costs more than h.264 decoder and encoder license). I don't have any perspective on h.265 licensing costs, but hardware costs are probably too high right now.
 
So Netflix adopts it & & then ISP's can remove there caps right?
 
Sounds to me they just adopted a standard that degrades gracefully rather than stutters or goes blocky of the transmission rate isn't good enough.

Which defeats the entire purpose of doing digital broadcasting. The point is that you either have a good picture or you have a completely messed up or no picture. No middle ground.

Now they can throttle the transmission and you have to argue whether the picture is bad or not.
 
Sounds to me they just adopted a standard that degrades gracefully rather than stutters or goes blocky of the transmission rate isn't good enough.

Which defeats the entire purpose of doing digital broadcasting. The point is that you either have a good picture or you have a completely messed up or no picture. No middle ground.

Now they can throttle the transmission and you have to argue whether the picture is bad or not.

It's possible to do that now, it's just isn't usually done because it usually affects latency and some chipsets can't handle the transitions between codecs properly. The biggest benefit is size reduction. For example you should be able to do High Profile H.264 quality video at a 35% smaller size, or Mpeg-2 at 71% smaller. Basically instead of the 480p that you normally get streaming video to your tablet, they can do 720p or 1080p using the same bandwidth. It will become more important as we get more tablets that can natively display HD, but it's still is going to be a couple of years before chips get powerful enough to do it in a small formfactor.
 
Back
Top