新足迹

 找回密码
 注册

精华好帖回顾

· 更新:番外篇-租家具,选中介,拍卖技巧,SOLD。7个月老house里外翻新 (2020-4-18) gbdlg · 2011年的总结帖:护肤在第一页,60楼底妆篇,61楼腮红修容,91楼眉毛睫毛,94楼唇膏 (2011-12-17) wellye
· [面子产品大交流]之干皮儿版(填坑完毕) (2007-3-12) qianqian · 闭门造车三个月 (2014-8-7) daniello
Advertisement
Advertisement
楼主:ranger

澳洲收看电视指南 [复制链接]

退役斑竹

发表于 2008-7-30 21:25 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 大饼 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 大饼 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
原帖由 bulaohu 于 2008-7-30 21:15 发表
"数字的优点是可以运用数字技术增加加载的信息量"
I'll dispute that. The main point of using digital is that the signal quality does not deteriorate.


要么有要么无。
Advertisement
Advertisement

发表于 2008-7-30 21:29 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 ranger 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 ranger 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
原帖由 bulaohu 于 2008-7-30 21:15 发表 [url=https://www.oursteps.com.au
"天线当然是越高越好"

Every 10m on the vertic ...


In a populated area, I  would venture to guess the most likely cause of a bad reception will be the nearby buildings, trees, terrains etc. that are blocking the line of sight from the antenna to the broadcasting tower. In that sense, I would suggest everyone to get their antenna as high (but still safe) as possible to work around it. Do correct me if I am wrong, as you obviously are a professional in this area. Thanks.

发表于 2008-7-30 21:30 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 chu2008 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 chu2008 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整

谢谢分享。加分回报!

发表于 2008-7-30 21:32 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 bulaohu 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 bulaohu 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
原帖由 ranger 于 2008-7-30 21:20 发表


Quote from  this government site:
"What are the benefits of digital television?

Digital television has many significant advantages over traditional analog television including superior image,  ...


exactly. As you see, the first advantage they point out is superior image. This comes from the non-deteriorate nature of the digital signal. You either get crystal clear signal, or you get nothing.

发表于 2008-7-30 21:37 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 bulaohu 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 bulaohu 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
原帖由 ranger 于 2008-7-30 21:29 发表


In a populated area, I  would venture to guess the most likely cause of a bad reception will be the nearby buildings, trees, terrains etc. that are blocking the line of sight from the antenna to t ...


Reflections from nearby buildings etc is the cancer for analog signal and can result in really annoying ghosting, but for digital signal, signal strength is everything. Ghosting does not exist because reflected signals are filtered out completely. That's why I'd always prefer signal strength to other considerations with digital.

Sorry for appearing critical, if I am, that's because I believer this post is worth being added to the knowledge base. I thoroughly enjoyed your writing and I appreciate your contributions.

[ 本帖最后由 bulaohu 于 2008-7-30 21:42 编辑 ]

发表于 2008-7-30 21:40 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 ranger 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 ranger 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
原帖由 大饼 于 2008-7-30 21:25 发表


要么有要么无。


I will second that, as I can testify that there are still glitches from time to time when you are watching digital TV programs, which is indicating some loss of data, i.e. deteriorating is occurring. Besides, I believe unlike TCP/IP protocol, TV broadcasting is a one-way lane. That means even if you digital tuner detects a bad corrupted data, there is no way for it to ask the broadcaster to resend the packet, it can only choose to drop the packet (hence the glitch on the screen). So I don't believe digital TV broadcasting can guarantee no deteriorated data. Having said that, I do believe it delivers a better reception quality as with digital, you can always deploy some sort of self-correction algorithm (maybe a CRC) which may help the tuner to recover the data to some extent. That's just my guess though.

Do correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.
Advertisement
Advertisement

发表于 2008-7-30 22:02 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 ranger 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 ranger 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
原帖由 bulaohu 于 2008-7-30 21:32 发表


exactly. As you see, the first advantage they point out is superior image. This comes from the non-deteriorate nature of the digital signal. You either get crystal clear signal, or you get nothing ...


Um ... I would rather think the superior image comes from the bigger image (1920x1080), which is made possible by the capability of carrying more data thanks to the mpeg-2 compression standard. In future, with the deployment of more advanced mpeg-4 algorithm, I believe more data can be carried over same bandwidth and as a result more features will be come out.

Having said that, I absolutely agree with you on that either you get a perfect image or nothing. That is indeed the nature of digital signal.

Anyway, I guess my point is the loss/deterioration of data is unavoidable, unless a two-way conversation between the receiver and sender is possible. Actually that brings out an interesting question: I am wondering if that is the case with cable TV: for example, does Foxtel guarantee a flawless digital TV reception over their cable service? I can't tell as I don't have it installed. Maybe some one else here can come out and shed some lights.

Btw, I am by no means an expert in broadcasting industry, so feel absolutely free to correct me.

发表于 2008-7-30 22:06 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 ranger 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 ranger 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
原帖由 bulaohu 于 2008-7-30 21:37 发表


Reflections from nearby buildings etc is the cancer for analog signal and can result in really annoying ghosting, but for digital signal, signal strength is everything. Ghosting does not exist bec ...


I absolutely agree with everything you said here. As a matter of fact, I will update the article to reflect what you have pointed out.

Obviously you are knowledgeable in this area, if not an expert. I much appreciate your opinion and enjoy the discussion with you.

Cheers.

发表于 2008-7-30 22:07 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 hllihb 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 hllihb 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
留名关注一下

发表于 2008-7-30 22:14 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 胡桃夹子 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 胡桃夹子 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
专家呀...
原来电视也有这么多学问,汗一个。

发表于 2008-7-30 22:41 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 ranger 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 ranger 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
原帖由 大饼 于 2008-7-30 20:56 发表
好像7和9收视率第一第二
sbs和abc排名末尾
澳洲的电视电影行业可以说是连第三世界也不如。
多数台靠美英电视剧和电影过日子。
sbs和abc要是没有新闻、top gear和烧菜节目就没人看了。
sbs和abc因为没拿到奥运会 ...


技术太boring了,还是谈论一下节目吧。:-)

节目好坏各人喜好不同,难以评价,见仁见智吧。比如Big Brother和其他的很多Reality Show, 我觉得无聊到了极点,可很多人就是喜欢看。而很多人对Desaparate Housewives 嗤之以鼻,我却看得相当起劲(我承认有一部分是因为看美女去的,鄙视一下自己)。

澳洲人口稀少,崇尚室外活动,本地电视制作相对落后也是可以理解的。他们的重点也不在电视剧的制作上。君不见周末footy时收视率有多高吗?

个人对ABC和SBS上的纪录片节目比较欣赏,包括前段时间ABC播送的Planet Earth, Wild China, SBS上的The Wehrmacht, Pacific War In Color以及最近正在转播的Tour De France等等都相当不错。我统统照单全收,录下存档。

友情小声推荐:SBS每星期六晚8:30的Big Love相当的有意思,建议各位韦小宝的Fans留意。:-)
Advertisement
Advertisement

发表于 2008-7-30 22:42 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 lollyluo 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 lollyluo 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
恩,不错的帖子,学到好多东西啊

参与宝库编辑功臣

发表于 2008-7-30 22:43 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 bffbffbff 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 bffbffbff 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
好帖!

发表于 2008-7-30 22:43 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 windix 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 windix 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
多谢你的指南 :)
建议你还可以补充一些:

1. 关于HD Channel:
从去年中开始7, 9, 10的HD节目开始部分的有别于SD节目了(一般都是晚上9点以后以及周末), 提供一些专门的内容. 具体的可以参考Wikipedia上面的相关条目
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_HD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_HD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_HD

2. 关于收视率以及一些节目的预告,评价,推荐一个专门的blog:
http://www.tvtonight.com.au

发表于 2008-7-30 22:58 |显示全部楼层
此文章由 ranger 原创或转贴,不代表本站立场和观点,版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 ranger 所有!转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明,并保持内容完整
原帖由 windix 于 2008-7-30 22:43 发表
多谢你的指南 :)
建议你还可以补充一些:

1. 关于HD Channel:
从去年中开始7, 9, 10的HD节目开始部分的有别于SD节目了(一般都是晚上9点以后以及周末), 提供一些专门的内容. 具体的可以参考Wikipedia上面的相关条 ...


Oh, yes, you are right. I forgot that as well.

谢谢,已加入正文。That blog site is a nice one.