Video codecs and 4k
1. As GL1zdA already pointed out in blog comments 1992 Creative Video Blaster CT6000 was a single frame screen grabber and not a video encoding&#x2F;decoding accelerator. YT &quot;Creative Videoblaster CT6000 in action&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=5LrwSGRflPE" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=5LrwSGRflPE</a> shows what it does. <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20000829095056&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ctlsg.creaf.com&#x2F;support&#x2F;specs&#x2F;video&#x2F;ct6000.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20000829095056&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ctlsg.c...</a> &quot;converts a standard full-motion video image (composite video source) into a format for display on a computer graphics monitor&quot; emphasis on the _image_. &quot;It can position and scale the video image onto the output display and allows the video image to be merged with computer graphics for interactive multimedia applicaiton.&quot; means overlay analog video on VGA monitor.<p>The first true video decoding accelerator on PC market came out of David Sarnoff Research Center owned by RCA, later purchased by GE, then finally video tech carved out and sold to Intel. Called Digital Video Interactive <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Digital_Video_Interactive" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Digital_Video_Interactive</a> it did in fact &quot;real time audio and video decompression, 30 frames per second with a resolution of 320x240&quot;. Intel repackaged it into one chip i750 and called it Indeo. Creative released a product based on it in mid 1994 - Video Blaster RT300. PCI bus was already mainstream in 1994, as were Pentiums. You most likely blurred those two together into one product.<p>2. &quot;so the quality could be very high. Streams of 8 to 12 mbit of data for a single channel were no exception.&quot;<p>SD video DVD bitrate is 10Mbit, and here we have OTA stations pushing 720p&#x2F;1080i at same or lower bw using same codec (US mpeg2). Whole multiplexer in ATSC offers ~20Mbit, and then TV stations cram 3-4 signals in there. Lu Goughs &quot;DRW2022 – Pt5: Digital TV (DVB-T), Digital Radio (DAB+) &amp; FM Radio Analysis&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;goughlui.com&#x2F;2022&#x2F;06&#x2F;05&#x2F;drw2022-pt5-digital-tv-dvb-t-digital-radio-dab-fm-radio-analysis&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;goughlui.com&#x2F;2022&#x2F;06&#x2F;05&#x2F;drw2022-pt5-digital-tv-dvb-t...</a> blog post offers good overview of the OTA TV broadcasting shitshow as seen from Australian perspective. 3-4Mbit is the average. There is nothing &quot;very high quality&quot; about OTA HD TV broadcast.<p>&quot;‘gold standard’ of 4k 60 fps video, streaming services is where you’ll find it&quot;<p>you mean Netflix 4K 24 fps at 15Mbit? :-) That is the reality we are living in now. Apple is an outlier doing 25-40Mbit, everything else is bad.<p>3 &quot;CRT has some afterglow after the ray has scanned a given area, the even field was still visible somewhat as the odd field was drawn. So the two fields would blend somewhat together&quot;<p>This is simply not how TV works, there is no somewhat, there is no afterglow. CRT goes dark after about 10 lines have been scanned in.<p>&quot;An LCD screen does not have the same ‘afterglow’ that a CRT has&quot;<p>LCD does in fact retain whole picture until the next update, aka &quot;full afterglow&quot; as you would put it.<p>&quot;so there’s no natural ‘deinterlacing’ effect that blends the screens together.&quot;<p>The natural deinterlacing effect happens in viewers brain, not on the Screen. You got this entirely backwards. The whole reason interlaced picture doesnt work on LCD is because previous frame stays on the screen. I highly recommend &quot;How a TV Works in Slow Motion - The Slow Mo Guys&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=3BJU2drrtCM" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=3BJU2drrtCM</a><p>4. &quot;HD, another new standard was required, as DVD was limited to SD.&quot;<p>Sony used HD as an excuse to push new format with new licensing fees. Nothing, other than corporate greed, necessitated new storage medium. h.264 was already on the market, as were other efficient codecs. There were even failed attempts like Versatile Multilayer Disc using standard DVD with VC-1 coding.<p>5. 4K &quot;special kind of confusion&quot;<p>who? This is the first time I hear about people associating 4K with new video codecs.