Slashdot Mirror

Strictly speaking, DVB-T defines only the transmission aspects. As such, DVB-T2 may introduce notable changes but it seems to still use the MPEG-2 transport stream and thus will likely refer to the same specifications as DVB-T. It is true that as far as codecs are concerned it was not until 2005 (publication date of ETSI TS 101 154 V1.6.1) that optional support for improved AV codecs was introduced (H.264/AVC and HE AAC, with VC-1 added in version 1.8.1). However, aside from the resulting chicken-or-egg problem, this does not preclude DVB-T stations from using the newer codecs, and some are already doing so.

I too feel that the deployment is somewhat shoddy, but the theory is that there is no need to wait for a big change because buying a new decoder is relatively inexpensive. I don't quite agree because apart from being wasteful it is consumer-unfriendly to discover that an HD TV set sold as DVB-capable doesn't support some (HD) content because of the codec (beside the fact that it might not support HD DVB-T streams at all depending on whether it is HD ready, HD TV, Full HD or whatever the current marketspeak is), and that after somehow upgrading to get over that deficiency one is bound to learn that the system still doesn't support MHP or whatever technology under the DVB umbrella gets highlighted in the following months.

I worked with MHP when it was in its 1.0.x versions, back then it was based on PJava. I just found out they switched to Java ME PBP in MHP 1.1.2 (slide 29).

The patent is for adding the flags, with plans to leverage existing devices supporting MHP.

I've not seen a discussion yet of which existing devices support this, though the article seems to imply most set top boxes.

From www.mhp.org it appears the US equivalent is GEM (globally executable MHP)
and the list of devices allowed to use their logo is here:
http://www.mhp.org/products_and_conformance/find_m hp_products/

• The profile is CDC/PBP, so desktop applications need some tweaks to run on top of it. AWT is available.
• Most of the APIs are borrowed from MHP, there is JMF, JavaTV and other APIs available for the Java app. MHP has been used in Europe's satellite receivers for a few years now, and it seems that US's cable operators are going to use similar APIs also (OCAP). Details of MHP at
  • http://www.interactivetvweb.org/ ,
  • http://linuxdevices.com/links/LK8509269876.html ,
  • http://www.mhp.org/
• The Java application can use HTTP/HTTPS to download new Java apps, movies, etc. Have a look at http://www.bluraydisc.com/assets/downloadablefile/ 2b_bdrom_audiovisualapplication_0305-12955.pdf chapter 5.2 for examples.

GEM also appears to be at the heart of the convergence efforts for iTV (DVB-MHP, OCAP, ACAP, and ARIB - otherwise known as the digital broadcast standards for Europe, North America, and Japan for over-the-air and cable TV).

One iTV standard would certainly simplify life for content developers, cable companies and broadcasters - but Microsoft and Toshiba are now pushing a Microsoft .NET based approach for HD DVD - and MS may be putting an HD DVD drives intothe Xbox 360 http://www.cooltechzone.com/index.php?option=conte nt&task=view&id=1473), coupled with MS's IPTV efforts - a unified iTV technology will be elusive.

That said, there may be a unified DRM technology between HD DVD and Blu Ray based on AACS. See this site http://www.aacsla.com/ for the specications. Apparently, we would be able to download and burn DRM'd content to HD media.

Fun fun fun.

Yes, you are correct, but I was thinking along the lines (no pun intended) of the relative blur of a TV screen compared with any PC screen along with contrast issues and interlacing.

I've been working the last 6 months on MHP applications. One of the things I did was convert a 800x600 website to an MHP application. You'd think you'd only lose a little screen estate (PAL is pretty close to 800x600), but when you factor in the minimum size of the fonts you have to use (and the "safe-area") because of those issues, the whole layout had to be reworked.

OpenCable uses MHP for its middleware, it's based on Java and all the specs are available from ETSI, open implementations should be possible, of course this is only part of OpenCable but if everything is encrypted to start with it doesn't matter if you can implement open versions, you're stuffed (until its broken).

This does not sound like a particularly good idea, when there are already existing standards for building interactive television applications. The current, open standard endorsed by Europe is of course MHP (Multimedia Home Platform), which is based on Java and a number of existing standards, such as JavaTV, HAVi and DAVIC.

I can understand some motivation towards building simpler standards (e.g. not requiring a Java VM), but fragmentation in this field will not be a good thing. We're talking about a mass market (television / STB manufacturers) and it needs volume, which calls for a single, common standard.

Of course, I suppose the US industry wants to create its own proprietary standards for interactive television just as for everything else they do.

Or of course you could move away from the idea that XML is "interactive" and look at MHP which covers alot more than this lot and has many more senior players.

Oh and of course... IS ALREADY RUNNING IN EUROPE.

That last being the reason why these people have come up with a braindead standard of their own. OpenCable in the US is based on MHP, and is supported by most of the cable companies. This is another wonderful case of the US deciding on 25 different standards while the rest of the world picks one.

Well we got excited about ATVEF, then MHEG, then MHP, somewhere in there OpenTV developed their own proprietary system, as did Liberate. And that's not even including the TV over ADSL guys...

iMagicTV, one of those TV over ADSL middleware providers uses HTML with 'tv in the browser' as does others like Minerva and Orca...

Don't forget about hardware vendors who are already shipping and this includes the big boys like Thomson/RCA

So why yet another dtv standard.. I'm getting dizzy...

Here is some MHP products, just to give an idea what it is concretely about. How concrete it is, is another question, there is not-so-little of chicken-egg dilemma.

There is already an open standard called DVB MHP (see www.mhp.org) for interactive television boxes. MHP stands for Multimedia Home Platform. MHP conformant products have already been launched in Finland and Germany and other european countries will follow over the next coming years.
MHP is gradually being adopted by other continents apart from europe (australia for instance) and in the US, CableLabs has announced that they will be using MHP in their OpenCable specification (see this press release)

There is already an open standard called DVB MHP (see www.mhp.org) for interactive television boxes. MHP stands for Multimedia Home Platform. MHP conformant products have already been launched in Finland and Germany and other european countries will follow over the next coming years.
MHP is gradually being adopted by other continents apart from europe (australia for instance) and in the US, CableLabs has announced that they will be using MHP in their OpenCable specification (see this press release)