<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0"
 xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule"
>

<channel>
<title>Keyword: hdlite</title>
<link>https://freerepublic.com/tag/hdlite/</link>
<description></description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 3 Jul 2009 09:00:28 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<generator>Focus Forum</generator>
<ttl>15</ttl>

<item>
<title>Broadcasters&#x26;#x27; HD Squeeze Play (Stations weigh picture quality versus multicasting opportunities)</title>
<link>https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2284697/posts</link>
<description>For years, broadcasters have told consumers seeking the best high-definition picture quality to use an antenna to receive signals over-the-air, instead of relying on a cable or satellite operator to deliver the programming. That&#x26;#x27;s because many multichannel operators have recompressed, or &#x26;#x201C;rate-shaped,&#x26;#x201D; broadcasters&#x26;#x27; HD video to reduce the bandwidth needed to pass along the signal. For example, a cable operator might receive an 18 megabit-per-second HD stream at the headend and recompress it to 15 Mbps before passing it down the pipe. So, receiving the signal directly over-the-air would ensure that the viewer got exactly what the station transmitted. But...</description>
<author>broadcastingcable.com</author>
<comments>https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2284697/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 3 Jul 2009 09:00:28 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>