Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mcvax!ukc!its63b!gdmr
From: gdmr@its63b.ed.ac.uk (G Ross)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.misc
Subject: Re: The problem with standards committees
Message-ID: <478@its63b.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 17-Jun-87 04:43:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: its63b.478
Posted: Wed Jun 17 04:43:52 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 21-Jun-87 14:43:58 EDT
References: <637@faline.bellcore.com>
Reply-To: gdmr@its63b.ed.ac.uk (G Ross)
Organization: I.T. School, Univ. of Edinburgh, U.K.
Lines: 34

This really has nothing to do with protocols, but I can't let it pass for
a second time...

In article <637@faline.bellcore.com> karn@faline.UUCP writes:
>Since the TCP-vs-ISO controversy has come up again, I offer this item I
>originally posted on the ARPA TCP-IP mailing list several months ago.
>It was recently reprinted in the Connexions newsletter..
>--------
>I think there are other, darker forces at play here. Recent developments
>(or, more precisely, the lack of same) in the high definition TV standards
>game illustrate what I think is going on in our own field.  It seems that
>over the past few years, certain Japanese companies have led the way by
>developing a complete line of compatible, working, high quality video
>components. You can buy their stuff off the shelf right now.  At a recent
>international standards convention in Europe, the Americans and the
>Canadians enthusiastically supported the Japanese standard. After all, it
>works and it's available now. "Can't have that", the Europeans replied. "It'd
>be too hard to scan-convert back to our existing 625-line 50-Hz formats".
>And everybody went home without an international standard.

I can only assume that either that you have never watched scan-converted
broadcasts, or that you are not prone to attacks of sea-sickness.  The effect
is that moving objects (or worse, entire backgrounds) jerk across the screen,
losing all clarity while they "move", but regaining definition when they stop.
The result is extremely disconcerting to the viewer.  It's only to be expected
that the European broadcasting authorities would reject any system which caused
such a gross degradation in quality of service -- indeed, we, as viewers, would
be entitled to feel upset if such a system were ever foisted on us!  625/50
may not be perfect, but it's considerably better than scan-converted HD/60
would be.

[I believe that it is much easier to scan-convert from 50Hz to 60Hz, so that
European material shown in 60Hz areas would look quite reasonable.  However,
this would give a totally erroneous impression of scan-conversion in general.]