🚀 go-pugleaf

>kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey) writes:
>>
>
>I find it hard to believe that the above paragraph applies to the
>future of HDTV.  I do not believe "they" would approve of a system that could
>randomly change the bandwith or the resolution.  My question was more
>of "Have they decided yet, and if so, what did they decide?"
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Christopher Wolf             Electrical Engineer                cmwolf@mtu.edu
>
>                             Quote of the hour:
>      Houghton, Michigan: Climate is what we expect, snow is what we get.
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"A dead telephone sanitizer?" "Best kind." "But what's he doing here?"
>"Not a lot."
>                              - The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Technology is so hard to nail down.  A year ago your remark would have been
reasonable.  Then the words scalable and extensible entered the HDTV digital
bit stream and all hell broke loose.  Virtually moment by moment the resolution
and color depth can be changed.  The MPEG adjusted scene by scene.  and every
unused bit given over to services you would rather not know existed.  The main
reason the FCC extended the Advanced TV study was to give time for the cresting
wave of compressability and interleaved services.
Bye...  Ted..