The BBC is developing 100Hz high framerate TV (sorta)

[FordGT90Concept]

They choose MPEG-2 for two reasons:
1) it had broad use with DVD so ASIC decoders and encoders were already widely available.
2) it has a lot of error recovery capability (e.g. to recover from scratches on discs) which is an absolute necessity with terrestrial broadcasts.

ATSC 3.0 rollout is going to be very expensive for everyone (producers, distributors, broadcasters, and consumers). It's coming, but slowly.

As you pointed out, 20ish Mb/s isn't much. A single 4K channel is going to need at least 30 Mb/s with HEVC and that's interlaced at 25 fps. They need about 80 Mb/s for 29.97 fps 4:4:4 progressive scan 4K on HEVC. And how many devices can even handle decoding that?

 

[SoNic67]

Prices for ASIC hardware capable of playing 4K h265 dropped a lot. Heck, even Raspberry Pi 3+ (or a decent clone) can do it. Chromecast 4k, Amazon TV 4k, Roku 4k... That's similar with what is inside of a 4k TV now.
Encoding and editing the video in studio will be done on less compressed formats, like is done today.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

There's different profiles and tiers.

ATSC 3.0 does...

Name|Profile|Level|Tier|Max FPS|Color|4:2:0|4:2:2|4:4:4
Legacy SD|Main 10|3.1|Main|60|Rec. 709|10 Mb/s|15 Mb/s|20 Mb/s
Interlaced HD|Main 10|4.1|Main|60|Rec. 709|20 Mb/s|30 Mb/s|40 Mb/s
Progressive|Main 10|5.2|Main|120|Rec. 2020|60 Mb/s|90 Mb/s|120 Mb/s

Most devices already support decoding of Main 10, Level 4.1 which is partly why they selected it. Support for 5.2 is common on 4K devices. The huge expense is on the encoding side.

 

[AsRock]

Taxpayer money? This is weird really coming from BBC...

Probably want to add some thing to it so it phones home, as one thing the BBC is good for is abusing the law.

 

[Ferrum Master]

Probably want to add some thing to it so it phones home, as one thing the BBC is good for is abusing the law.

Looking at their FB page, they are abusing everything there... instead of doing things that they should not, could invest into more quality content.

Also... here the whole thing is done by carriers and telecom companies, all the programs and development, fight for the customer. They compete with each other, so better product develops. Why taxpayer money should be used to develop the obvious?

Is it DVB, cable, mobile network... that's not the problem, the content is... as some mentioned, sports is the only one needing high resolution, high FPS technology, you have to see the damn puck.

It's more like rubbish article with a meaning - you see we are working.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Isn't BBC a lot like RT? Russia keeps RT around because it is part of their propaganda machine. Which begs the question why has the BBC not been spun off into a private organization? Looking at the Wikipedia article on it, all I see is alarm bells. It's the Queen's propaganda machine.

The push to HD was motivated by clearing RF bandwidth that analog occupied. There's no overarching, inherent motivation to move to 4K like HD.

 

[qubit]

Isn't BBC a lot like RT? Russia keeps RT around because it is part of their propaganda machine. Which begs the question why has the BBC not been spun off into a private organization? Looking at the Wikipedia article on it, all I see is alarm bells. It's the Queen's propaganda machine.

The push to HD was motivated by clearing RF bandwidth that analog occupied. There's no overarching, inherent motivation to move to 4K like HD.

They’re certainly the government’s mouthpiece. Can’t say much more or we’ll stray into politics.

There are already 4K Freeview test transmissions if I remember correctly, but a commercial rollout isn’t anytime soon.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Yeah, a few stations in the USA are broadcasting ATSC 3.0 already for testing purposes but good luck finding an ATSC 3.0 tuner.