OT: Composite/Component [was Re: [mythtv-users] Re: Image quality, what effects it?]

[Jay R. Ashworth]

On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 10:43:18PM +0200, Rudy Zijlstra wrote:
> Cory Papenfuss wrote:
> > I suspect that terrestrial cable will use encrypted QAM with cablecard 
> > anyway, so getting uncrypted QAM support is probably moot.
> >
> No such thing exists...

Um, no such *which*?

> terrestrial == over the air, which is in USA by ATSC 8-VSB, in normal 
> thinking countries by DVB-T.

Yes...?

> cable == by RF cable managed by a Cable Operator (Fox, UGC, ... )

Fine.  And the signal *transmitted* over that cable (can) conform to
the Society of Cable Television engineers/CableLabs standard number 40,
which is publicly available.

So your point is?

> P.S. ATSC is much later than DVB, and very much exists because the USA 
> wanted to define its own standard, even though both Cable as well as 
> Satellite in the USA were already very succesfully deploying DVB....

Of course.

> P.P.S. DVB supports what is historically called FTA or Free To Air 
> signals. Many Satellite signals are not encrypted. On cable the 
> situation is very much defined by the operator, and strongly dependent 
> on the business model.

Stipulated.  But if your carrier uses a standardized signal and
modulation (and there is one), why not try decoding it to see if the
channels you're not paying extra for are encrypted.

That is: what was the point of your reply, again?

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

	"You know: I'm a fan of photosynthesis as much as the next guy,
	but if God merely wanted us to smell the flowers, he wouldn't 
	have invented a 3GHz microprocessor and a 3D graphics board."
					-- Luke Girardi