back to article BT Sport takes Elemental step of software encoding

BT has been as bold over distribution technology as the content itself for its sport channels, but then it had to be given Sky’s entrenched position in sports rights in the UK. BT Sport succeeded in at least ruffling Sky’s feathers and arguably making serious inroads firstly by biting into the English Premier League pie and …

  1. John Sanders
    Trollface

    Translation to plain english:

    ""The chief problem with dedicated hardware is that it is cast in stone, so that even if it out performs generic processors at the time of implementation, it tends to get left behind after a few years and then needs renewal at cost.

    The software approach allows successive generations of commodity hardware to be slipped in and deliver incremental improvements in performance and functionality, getting away from the big-bang approach which has characterized TV through all its history.

    The software approach allows the broadcasting industry to join enterprise IT in being able to enjoy the benefits of Moore’s Law.""

    TRANSLATION: We have decided to use FFMPEG for encoding using servers like everybody else has been doing now for a couple of years.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Is this entire article an advert?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      It was EUFA - Empty, Uninformative Fuck All

    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Pretty much, yes. And sadly typical of Faultline's stuff. A pity in this case as it does indeed sound like the company has done some interesting stuff.

      I can't remember the full details of stuff but I think UHD with HEVC wasn't really available on hardware until very recently. When the hardware can do it then you definitely do want to use the hardware. I'd like to think there is some custom hardware in the editing suite.

      Broadcasting football matches in high resolution is a challenge but you are still largely working with fixed camera positions and a studio setup. Presumably the cameras aren't encoding on the fly and you probably don't want a mobile server farm to do it for you so you need fibre back to the NOC where you can then transcode in relative peace and scale up as and when needed – presumably this is the core of the "software-defined" approach.

      It's also easier for newcomers to leapfrog incumbents technologically. And, expensive as the kit may be, it's a lot less than the money spent on the broadcasting rights. I seem to remember an article on The Register not too long ago making pretty much this point with the shift to HD production as standard for broadcasters.

      Still the odd UHD broadcast isn't as challenging as doing the whole channel in it which is what we'll see with the European Football Championships next month and the Rio Olympics. Those will be the real showcases for full-stack UHD designed to entice consumers into buying the necessary kit, connections and subscriptions. Like HD in its time, UHD is likely to remain niche for a couple of years so the whole chain can do everything in hardware.

      1. Complicated Disaster

        >>Presumably the cameras aren't encoding on the fly and you probably don't want a mobile server farm to do it for you so you need fibre back to the NOC where you can then transcode in relative peace and scale up as and when needed<<

        Nope. The advantage of FPGA based hardware encoders is that they are much smaller, lighter and faster than software based encoders and are already available for wireless camera applications.

      2. Vic

        I can't remember the full details of stuff but I think UHD with HEVC wasn't really available on hardware until very recently

        The hardware has been available for some years. It just takes a while to get it sold into broadcasters...

        Presumably the cameras aren't encoding on the fly

        The camera will be plugged into a content encoder, so encoding occurs on-site. It'll be a higher bitrate than used for transmission - meaning transcoding is required later on.

        Disclosure: I've worked in this field for quite a few years...

        Vic.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    > The chief problem with dedicated hardware is that it is cast in stone, so that even if it out performs generic processors at the time of implementation, it tends to get left behind after a few years

    Umm, that was true 10 years ago. But now single-threaded performance of "generic processors" has hit a wall. Yes one can go parallel - especially in video encoding - but then development costs rise because the project complexity is higher and developer skill-set rarer.

    And I can't see any TV encoding firm using ASICs for encoding - FPGAs much more likely, and these are reprogrammable & field-upgradeable.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "Umm, that was true 10 years ago. But now single-threaded performance of "generic processors" has hit a wall."

      If the hardware needs upgrading in your TV or STB whether a generic CPU or ASIC it still means a new box. Really this is about them saving a few pennies using a commodity CPU rather than an ASIC, its nothing to do with saving on the number upgrades or providing a better service for the consumer.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        " its nothing to do with saving on the number upgrades or providing a better service for the consumer."

        Well, it's BT so that's par for the course, isn't it.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    If they could offload the Virgin Media UI & processing software and present it at a decent speed using just a dumb box to display the result would be most welcome.

    The VM system is like treacle and would benefit from exactly this approach where the consumer hardware (and software) is not up to the job.

  5. Gomez Adams

    Is this why their app no long runs on my Android tablet? :(

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Best thing about BT and Sky squabbling over football rights...

    ... is that there is no longer hours and hours of that tedious chavs game on terrestrial TV which can show programs that require more than a single digit IQ instead. I remember as a kid most of saturday being a TV wasteland as both the BBC and ITV showed endless football seemingly as an alternative to the test card though slightly less interesting.

    1. graeme leggett Silver badge

      Re: Best thing about BT and Sky squabbling over football rights...

      I remember , as a kid, "World of Sport" (with Dickie Davies) which included a variety of sports, well...wrestling and horse racing ("ITV 7" is probably a channel name now)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Best thing about BT and Sky squabbling over football rights...

        "I remember , as a kid, "World of Sport" (with Dickie Davies) which included a variety of sports, well...wrestling and horse racing ("ITV 7" is probably a channel name now)"

        Yeah, fair point , but it still was mainly Football. In the same way that the "sport" on the talkSport radio station is 99% football. Someone should do them under the trades descriptions act and force them to rename it talkFootball.

    2. jonathan keith

      Re: Best thing about BT and Sky squabbling over football rights...

      But the Grandstand theme tune was both aces and skill.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    WTF is...

    Software Defined Video?

    Is it similar to Stainless Defined Steel? Red Defined Apples? Redundant Defined Statement? Defined Defined "Defined Defined"?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: WTF is...

      It's obvious I'd have thought.

      Instead of buying proprietary hardware to manage and compress video it can now be done on standard server farm kit using software.

      It's roughly akin to NFV, where network functions are taken away from proprietary routers and switches and again handled as software resources on x86 boxes.

  8. Cynic_999

    Personally ...

    If they ever decide to use something remotely interesting rather than sport to showcase the shiny new tech, I might take an interest. I have no interest in watching paint dry either, no matter how high the definition of the wall ...

    1. BongoJoe

      Re: Personally ...

      I hope we can get this BT Sport stuff over the airwaves because BT won't upgrade the lines here.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Personally ...

        "I hope we can get this BT Sport stuff over the airwaves because BT won't upgrade the lines here."

        It'll just turn into VNOD (Video Nearly On Demand). You choose what you want to watch, then wait a day or so for it to buffer and then you can watch the new "live" in super-dooper 16K on your 20 foot 16K SuperUltimateRealyReallyExtremeHighDefinition TV set. After you build the extension onto the back of the house to contain it.

  9. Starting

    Information wants to be free

    Stuff their pay wall. How do we hack it on our iPhones!

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    still not getting a 4K tv

    ... this is fine for live content, but having worked for one of the big cable channels (Discovery) during the advent of HD and 3D, I remember well seeing just how slow it was for the content producers (in Discovery's case, small production houses that sell them entire shows/series) to even move from shooting in SD.

    I expect there will be no worthwhile content for 4k for this generation of TVs. Maybe in 5 years plus, but honestly, how much 3D content is going on? yeah that 3d TV was a real investment!

  11. Visionman

    3D is dead. Glass to Glass 4K is here to stay. In the last 12 months in the UK the sales of 4K Ultra HD TVs have increased by 125% and are continuing to rise.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon