Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.os.linux > #80982 > unrolled thread

So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference??

Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux

Contents

  So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-17 00:39 +1100
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-16 15:06 +0100
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2025-02-16 15:45 +0100
      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-18 19:37 +1100
        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-18 19:43 +1100
        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2025-02-18 12:01 +0000
        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-18 09:41 -0500
          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-18 20:32 +0100
            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-18 14:51 -0500
              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-18 21:59 +0100
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-16 09:59 -0500
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Herbert Kleebauer <klee@unibwm.de> - 2025-02-16 16:43 +0100
      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-16 16:21 +0000
        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Rick <rick@nospam.com> - 2025-02-16 11:33 -0500
          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-18 20:00 +1100
        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-18 19:56 +1100
          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-18 11:17 +0000
            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-21 18:02 +1100
              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-21 12:02 +0100
                Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-21 22:55 +1100
                  Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-21 14:16 +0100
                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-26 00:23 +1100
                      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-25 14:38 +0100
                      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-25 14:30 -0500
              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> - 2025-02-21 11:07 +0000
              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-21 15:19 +0000
                Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-26 16:04 +1100
                  Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-26 18:15 +1100
                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-26 07:08 -0500
                  Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-26 15:29 +0000
                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-27 19:00 +1100
                      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-27 03:52 -0500
                        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-27 11:24 +0100
                        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-27 13:57 +0000
                          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-27 09:53 -0500
                            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-27 15:31 +0000
                              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-27 13:27 -0500
                                Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-27 19:00 +0000
                                  Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-27 20:37 -0500
                                  Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-28 19:38 +1100
                                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-28 11:13 +0000
                                Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 02:36 +0000
                                  Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-02 00:51 -0500
                                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-03-02 18:59 +1100
                                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-03-04 23:32 +1100
                        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-01 22:13 +0000
                          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2025-03-01 22:27 +0000
                            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 00:41 +0000
                              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-03-02 01:06 -0500
                            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? TJ <TJ@noneofyour.business> - 2025-03-03 10:22 -0500
                              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-03-04 19:26 +1100
                      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-27 14:05 +0000
                        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-28 20:06 +1100
                          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-02-28 11:24 +0000
                            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-28 14:50 -0500
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-02-16 10:53 -0500
      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-16 14:04 -0500
        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-16 21:52 +0100
          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-02-17 19:40 +0000
        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-02-16 20:15 -0600
          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-17 21:05 +0100
            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2025-02-18 02:31 -0600
              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-18 13:29 +0100
                Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-18 20:29 +0100
              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-20 21:09 +1100
                Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-20 13:27 +0100
                  Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2025-02-20 17:46 -0800
                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-21 18:08 +1100
                      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-21 12:11 +0100
                        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-02-21 18:40 +0000
                          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2025-02-21 19:30 +0000
                            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> - 2025-02-22 04:02 +0000
                            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-02-22 19:54 +0000
                              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Peter 'Shaggy' Haywood <phaywood@alphalink.com.au> - 2025-02-25 12:28 +1100
                                Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-01 03:46 +0000
                          Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-21 22:37 +0100
                            Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-02-22 21:58 +0000
                              Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-25 14:19 +0100
                      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-02-21 18:36 +0000
                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-02-21 08:34 +0000
                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-02-21 18:31 +0000
                    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> - 2025-02-22 03:53 +0000
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Rick <rick@nospam.com> - 2025-02-16 10:54 -0500
      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Ed Cryer <ed@somewhere.in.the.uk> - 2025-02-16 17:01 +0000
        Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-18 09:57 -0500
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2025-02-16 10:34 -0800
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2025-02-17 08:52 +0000
      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-17 14:49 -0500
      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> - 2025-02-18 20:17 +1100
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> - 2025-02-21 10:35 +0000
      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-21 12:41 -0500
    Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? TJ <TJ@noneofyour.business> - 2025-02-26 18:53 -0500
      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-02-26 20:14 -0500
      Re: So far OT ..... DVD+R v DVD-R ... What's the difference?? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-03-02 02:39 +0000

Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next page →

#81068

Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
> On 28/02/2025 6:00 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]
> >    Thanks. So File Explorer is smart if a Transport Stream file is named
> > .ts, but dumb if it's named .mp4.
> > 
> >    But that still does not explain:
> > 
> > <me>
> >>>>>    So I don't understand why Daniel's vid000.mp4 file would say "Type of
> >>>>> file: TS file (.ts)" in Properties.
> > </me>
> > 
> >    Bottom line: We need more details/feedback from Daniel.
> 
> Sorry, Frank, what more information can I provide??
> 
> Just to get back to square ONE, when I finish recording Live T.V. onto 
> the PVR tonight, I'll copy a new file onto the USB Drive.

  We need:

1. The information from the 'Details' tab of 'Properties' in File
   Explorer.

2. The information from MediaInfo (see Paul's post). Preferably a
   screenshot.

3. And most importantly:
   If renaming the vid000.mp4 file to vid000.ts
   - Let's you play the video in any and all of the programs you tried?
   - Changes the information in 1. and 2.?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81079

On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 13:27:15 -0500, Paul wrote:

> I tried it. I named my sample file from the Internet
> 
>    Nine.mp4
> 
> and File Explorer says
> 
>    File Type:  MP4
> 
> That is because Windows "trusts" the file extension.
> 
> If I remove the extension entirely, File Explorer says
> 
>    File Type:  file
> 
> so it hasn't a clue what it is then.

I just tried a .ts file I happened to have handy, with the ffprobe command 
(part of the FFmpeg suite). Changing the extension to .mp4 made no 
difference, it was still able to show a summary of the streams (audio and 
video) in the file either way.

Moral: I wouldn’t trust Microsoft’s attempts at multimedia handling as far 
as I can throw them. Stick to something tried and true and developed by 
acknowledged experts, like FFmpeg.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81081

On Sat, 3/1/2025 9:36 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 13:27:15 -0500, Paul wrote:
> 
>> I tried it. I named my sample file from the Internet
>>
>>    Nine.mp4
>>
>> and File Explorer says
>>
>>    File Type:  MP4
>>
>> That is because Windows "trusts" the file extension.
>>
>> If I remove the extension entirely, File Explorer says
>>
>>    File Type:  file
>>
>> so it hasn't a clue what it is then.
> 
> I just tried a .ts file I happened to have handy, with the ffprobe command 
> (part of the FFmpeg suite). Changing the extension to .mp4 made no 
> difference, it was still able to show a summary of the streams (audio and 
> video) in the file either way.
> 
> Moral: I wouldn’t trust Microsoft’s attempts at multimedia handling as far 
> as I can throw them. Stick to something tried and true and developed by 
> acknowledged experts, like FFmpeg.
> 

You realize the gentleman is on limited bandwidth, and can't afford
to go crazy with the downloads. That's why we're giving a built-in,
in the machine, a try. The symptoms suggest, perhaps just the
packet payloads are encrypted, and some port of the materials
outside of that can be parsed.

I already made a post with details on the Gyan FFMPEG download
offering, so if the guy wants an FFMPEG.exe, it is available.

You can use ffprobe.exe and dump the interleaved frames of information
into a really big file, for examination. the compressibility of
the file, the entropy, might hint at encryption, but it's going to
be pretty close, because high quality video formats already
"look mostly random".

   nine.ts     180,179,388 bytes
   nine.ts.7z  160,030,696 bytes   88.8% of original, using 7Z Ultra

If the file sample does not compress that well,
it could be because it is encrypted. Only if the Transport Stream
was 100% encrypted, would it compress poorly enough to be noteworthy.
If just the payloads are encrypted, the file will still be compressible.
Just not down to 88.8% .

Dumping the .ts into a hex editor, there weren't a lot of landmarks
in there. The nine.ts sample had no 4CC codes. There was an occasional
burst of padding. And there was a tiny bit of text string suggesting
the short-form Guide Data for "what is up next on this channel".
That is all I could see in the sample I have here.

Our broadcast signals here (8VSB), don't use a lot of multiplexes.
I have one signal I can get on an antenna, which is a multiplex
of four, and the sub-channels would be SD. All the others are HD.
But I don't have a PVR, and I have a tuner card, and my tuner
card uses unencrypted .wtv for packaging (what is recorded to disk).

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81083

On 2/03/2025 4:51 pm, Paul wrote:
> On Sat, 3/1/2025 9:36 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 13:27:15 -0500, Paul wrote:
>> 
>>> I tried it. I named my sample file from the Internet
>>> 
>>> Nine.mp4
>>> 
>>> and File Explorer says
>>> 
>>> File Type:  MP4
>>> 
>>> That is because Windows "trusts" the file extension.
>>> 
>>> If I remove the extension entirely, File Explorer says
>>> 
>>> File Type:  file
>>> 
>>> so it hasn't a clue what it is then.
>> 
>> I just tried a .ts file I happened to have handy, with the ffprobe
>> command (part of the FFmpeg suite). Changing the extension to .mp4
>> made no difference, it was still able to show a summary of the
>> streams (audio and video) in the file either way.
>> 
>> Moral: I wouldn’t trust Microsoft’s attempts at multimedia handling
>> as far as I can throw them. Stick to something tried and true and
>> developed by acknowledged experts, like FFmpeg.
> 
> You realize the gentleman is on limited bandwidth,

Thank you, Paul, yes, I was .... but New Month, New Download limit!!

Hopefully this month I don't run out after only about one third of the
month! ;-P
-- 
Daniel70

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81086

On 2/03/2025 4:51 pm, Paul wrote:
> On Sat, 3/1/2025 9:36 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 13:27:15 -0500, Paul wrote:
>> 
>>> I tried it. I named my sample file from the Internet
>>> 
>>> Nine.mp4
>>> 
>>> and File Explorer says
>>> 
>>> File Type:  MP4
>>> 
>>> That is because Windows "trusts" the file extension.
>>> 
>>> If I remove the extension entirely, File Explorer says
>>> 
>>> File Type:  file
>>> 
>>> so it hasn't a clue what it is then.
>> 
>> I just tried a .ts file I happened to have handy, with the ffprobe 
>> command (part of the FFmpeg suite). Changing the extension to .mp4 
>> made no difference, it was still able to show a summary of the 
>> streams (audio and video) in the file either way.
>> 
>> Moral: I wouldn’t trust Microsoft’s attempts at multimedia
>> handling as far as I can throw them. Stick to something tried and
>> true and developed by acknowledged experts, like FFmpeg.
>> 
> 
> You realize the gentleman is on limited bandwidth,

"Gentleman"?? Who?? Me!! ;-P Thank you for that reference, Paul, but
that WAS the situation .... Seems my "month" goes from 20th to 20th,
roughly, so, for the interim, that limitation has disappeared!!

-- 
Daniel70

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81075

On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 03:52:34 -0500, Paul wrote:

> ... MPEG2 is how TV is transmitted over the airwaves ...

Not for HD, though. High-def is transmitted using MPEG-4 TS.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81076

In alt.comp.os.windows-11 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 03:52:34 -0500, Paul wrote:

> > ... MPEG2 is how TV is transmitted over the airwaves ...

> Not for HD, though. High-def is transmitted using MPEG-4 TS.

Isn't ATSC2 using MPEG2? Or was that ATSC1?
-- 
"Let the morning bring me word of your unfailing love, for I have put my trust in you. Show me the way I should go, for to you I lift up my soul." --Psalm 143:8. Crazy economic blackout Fri., & go .UA's Pres.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
  /\___/\   Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
 / /\ /\ \                      Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o   o| |
   \ _ /
    ( )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81078

On Sat, 01 Mar 2025 22:27:49 +0000, Ant wrote:

> In alt.comp.os.windows-11 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 03:52:34 -0500, Paul wrote:
> 
>> > ... MPEG2 is how TV is transmitted over the airwaves ...
> 
>> Not for HD, though. High-def is transmitted using MPEG-4 TS.
> 
> Isn't ATSC2 using MPEG2? Or was that ATSC1?

I wouldn’t know what they do in North Mexico.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81082

On Sat, 3/1/2025 7:41 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Mar 2025 22:27:49 +0000, Ant wrote:
> 
>> In alt.comp.os.windows-11 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 03:52:34 -0500, Paul wrote:
>>
>>>> ... MPEG2 is how TV is transmitted over the airwaves ...
>>
>>> Not for HD, though. High-def is transmitted using MPEG-4 TS.
>>
>> Isn't ATSC2 using MPEG2? Or was that ATSC1?
> 
> I wouldn’t know what they do in North Mexico.
> 

Considering where I live, there is no purpose served
by torturing terrestrial service (nobody gives a flying fuck
about the service), there is no reason to change standards.
There is plenty of OTA channel space left, even after
the channels where trimmed down as much as they are currently.
The bandwidth was auctioned off, and I don't know whether
the winners of the auction, ever used the bandwidth either.

Before the DTV transition, one broadcaster was available
practically everywhere in the country. Like running water,
it was one of the few things you could count on. It would be
one way to get an emergency alert to all citizens.

The Transition from NTSC to ATSC 8VSB, saw one major transmitter
(250kW) shut down, bringing darkness and despair to the rural
people in that area. They then had zero channels of OTA reception
on offer. Not even the nightly news. To get TV service,
they would need cable or telecom triple-play to get TV,
which is not always an option for extreme rural (in the woods)
people. If all you can get is ADSL at 3Mbit/sec, that's not
going to be good for TV carriage particularly.

No money was provided by the government, to construct new
DTV transmitters. A couple of the transmitters, somehow
used the analog transmitter (even on the same analog channel
on VHF) and fitted a new front end on it (at their own expense).
Other providers just shut down, if it meant spending money
on the service.

What you get on cable, is more highly multiplexed. and is going
to be somewhat different, quality wise, than the few OTA
channels we've got.

If you're in Toronto, you could see fifty channel codes on your
device, while sitting in your apartment on the 20th floor.
Whereas elsewhere in the country, put up an antenna, and
receive zero channels DTV. Then you go for satellite (a relative
uses that option). But while cable is available to a lot of
citizens, we couldn't get that at the cottage. And you would need
a 150 mile Yagi, to pick up the transmitter in the city
(after two bounces off the ocean).

These are the perils of living in a large country.

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81084

On 2025-03-01 17:27, Ant wrote:
> In alt.comp.os.windows-11 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 03:52:34 -0500, Paul wrote:
> 
>>> ... MPEG2 is how TV is transmitted over the airwaves ...
> 
>> Not for HD, though. High-def is transmitted using MPEG-4 TS.
> 
> Isn't ATSC2 using MPEG2? Or was that ATSC1?

Don't make the mistake of thinking that everybody is in a country that 
uses ATSC, Ant. Just because ATSC 1.0 uses mpeg2 compression doesn't 
mean other systems do, as well.

Somewhere up-thread Daniel posted some general information about a file 
that indicated the  PAL system. That's an indication that he is NOT in a 
country using ATSC, and indeed the same list of information said 
something about "Aussie."

                             *******

My only experience with a PVR is with an ATSC-NTSC converter box that 
has a PVR function through the USB port. When set to record, the ATSC 
stream is simply passed along to the storage device connected to that 
USB port, with no conversion whatsoever. It's a simple matter for me to 
then take that external device to my Linux box and play it with VLC, or 
if I want, use Handbrake to convert it to a smaller file using a better 
compression system.

I have no idea how difficult it is for Daniel to remove the hard drive 
from his PVR, so I suppose what I'm about to suggest may not be 
practical. But, if I were Daniel I suspect that if it was at all 
possible I'd have two hard drives for the PVR, one to use and the other 
switch in when it gets full, and I'd copy what I wanted to keep off the 
full one while the second one is in the PVR.

But that's just me. YMMV.

TJ

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81085

On 4/03/2025 2:22 am, TJ wrote:
> On 2025-03-01 17:27, Ant wrote:
>> In alt.comp.os.windows-11 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 03:52:34 -0500, Paul wrote:
>>
>>>> ... MPEG2 is how TV is transmitted over the airwaves ...
>>
>>> Not for HD, though. High-def is transmitted using MPEG-4 TS.
>>
>> Isn't ATSC2 using MPEG2? Or was that ATSC1?
> 
> Don't make the mistake of thinking that everybody is in a country that 
> uses ATSC, Ant. Just because ATSC 1.0 uses mpeg2 compression doesn't 
> mean other systems do, as well.
> 
> Somewhere up-thread Daniel posted some general information about a file 
> that indicated the  PAL system. That's an indication that he is NOT in a 
> country using ATSC, and indeed the same list of information said 
> something about "Aussie."

Aussie!! Aussie!! Aussie!! Oh! Oh! Oh!! ;-P
>                              *******
> 
> My only experience with a PVR is with an ATSC-NTSC converter box that 
> has a PVR function through the USB port. When set to record, the ATSC 
> stream is simply passed along to the storage device connected to that 
> USB port, with no conversion whatsoever. It's a simple matter for me to 
> then take that external device to my Linux box and play it with VLC, or 
> if I want, use Handbrake to convert it to a smaller file using a better 
> compression system.
> 
> I have no idea how difficult it is for Daniel to remove the hard drive 
> from his PVR, so I suppose what I'm about to suggest may not be 
> practical. But, if I were Daniel I suspect that if it was at all 
> possible I'd have two hard drives for the PVR, one to use and the other 
> switch in when it gets full, and I'd copy what I wanted to keep off the 
> full one while the second one is in the PVR.
> 
> But that's just me. YMMV.
> 
> TJ

Hardly worth the trouble, TJ. The problem (at this time, seems to be the 
Format that the PVR uses, which ever hard drive I'm working with!!
-- 
Daniel70

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81059

Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
> On 27/02/2025 2:29 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]
> >    Anyway, have you tried to just right-click the file in File Explorer,
> > select Properties and look at the 'Details' tab? For a normal video
> > file, File Explorer will mention the Length, Frame width and height,
> > Data rate, Total bitrate, Frame rate and Audio specs.
> 
> General Details
> vid000.mp4 (name changed as suggested by others)
> Type of file:   TS file (.ts)
> Open with:      Media Player (Button "Change" which gives option to use Media 
> Player, VLC Media Player, Windows Media Player Legacy, Firefox, Notepad, 
> Word)
> Location: On a sub-directory of my USB Drive
> Size:   113MB (118,876,060 bytes)
> Size on Disk:   113MB (118,882,304 bytes)
> Created: Last Friday
> Modified:       Last Friday
> Accessed:       Yesterday

  You say "General Details", but you mentioned info from the 'General'
tab, while I referred to the 'Details' tab.

  Also see my response to Paul about the discrepancy between the .mp4
extension of the file and you reporting "Type of file: TS file (.ts)"

> >    If that does not help, the MediaInfo utility mentioned by Paul is
> > probably your best bet.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81067

On 28/02/2025 1:05 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>> On 27/02/2025 2:29 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> [...]
>>>     Anyway, have you tried to just right-click the file in File Explorer,
>>> select Properties and look at the 'Details' tab? For a normal video
>>> file, File Explorer will mention the Length, Frame width and height,
>>> Data rate, Total bitrate, Frame rate and Audio specs.
>>
>> General Details
>> vid000.mp4 (name changed as suggested by others)
>> Type of file:   TS file (.ts)
>> Open with:      Media Player (Button "Change" which gives option to use Media
>> Player, VLC Media Player, Windows Media Player Legacy, Firefox, Notepad,
>> Word)
>> Location: On a sub-directory of my USB Drive
>> Size:   113MB (118,876,060 bytes)
>> Size on Disk:   113MB (118,882,304 bytes)
>> Created: Last Friday
>> Modified:       Last Friday
>> Accessed:       Yesterday
> 
>    You say "General Details", but you mentioned info from the 'General'
> tab, while I referred to the 'Details' tab.

Yes, you are quite correct, there are two tabs (Oh! My failing 
eyesight!!) 'General' and 'Details'

Listed above is the info as presented by the *General Tab* . The info on 
the 'Details' tab includes ....

Video
Length	00:00:00
Frame width	730
Frame height	576
Data rate	5000kbps
Total bitrate	5000kbps
Frame rate	25.00 frames/second

Audio
Bit rate
Channels	2 (stereo)
Audio sample rate	32.000kHz

Media .... Contributing artists, Year, Genre .... all empty

Origin ... Directors, Producers, Writers, Publishers, Content provider, 
Media created, Encoded by, Author URL, Promotion URL, Copyright .... all 
empty

Content .... Parental rating, Parental rating reason, Composers, 
Conductors, Period, Moon, Part of set, Initial key, Beats-per-minute, 
Protected .... all empty.

File
Name		Vid000.mp4.ts    <------
Item type	TS File
File location	My USB Drive
Size		113 MB
Date created	21/02/2025 5:16 PM
Date  modified	21/02/2025 5:16 PM
Attributes	A
Availability
Offline status
Shared with
Owner		Everyone
Computer	This one

(and underneath all this there is a link to 'Remove Properties and 
Personal Information')

>    Also see my response to Paul about the discrepancy between the .mp4
> extension of the file and you reporting "Type of file: TS file (.ts)"

Yeap, as I highlighted above, so does that mean that (really) NOTHING 
with-in the file changed??

>>>     If that does not help, the MediaInfo utility mentioned by Paul is
>>> probably your best bet.

Sorry for missing this second tab first time around!!
-- 
Daniel70

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81069

Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
> On 28/02/2025 1:05 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
> >> On 27/02/2025 2:29 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > [...]
> >>>     Anyway, have you tried to just right-click the file in File Explorer,
> >>> select Properties and look at the 'Details' tab? For a normal video
> >>> file, File Explorer will mention the Length, Frame width and height,
> >>> Data rate, Total bitrate, Frame rate and Audio specs.
> >>
> >> General Details
> >> vid000.mp4 (name changed as suggested by others)
> >> Type of file:   TS file (.ts)
> >> Open with:      Media Player (Button "Change" which gives option to use Media
> >> Player, VLC Media Player, Windows Media Player Legacy, Firefox, Notepad,
> >> Word)
> >> Location: On a sub-directory of my USB Drive
> >> Size:   113MB (118,876,060 bytes)
> >> Size on Disk:   113MB (118,882,304 bytes)
> >> Created: Last Friday
> >> Modified:       Last Friday
> >> Accessed:       Yesterday
> > 
> >    You say "General Details", but you mentioned info from the 'General'
> > tab, while I referred to the 'Details' tab.
> 
> Yes, you are quite correct, there are two tabs (Oh! My failing 
> eyesight!!) 'General' and 'Details'

  Sorry, I hadn't yet seen this post when I wrote my '1. ... 2. ... 3.
...' post. Your post answers part of item1..

> Listed above is the info as presented by the *General Tab* . The info on 
> the 'Details' tab includes ....
> 
> Video
> Length  00:00:00

  This is clearly wrong! If the length is zero, not wonder you don't
see/hear anything when you play the file.

  So you must find out why the length is zero (but the size is 113MB).

> Frame width     730
> Frame height    576
> Data rate       5000kbps
> Total bitrate   5000kbps
> Frame rate      25.00 frames/second
> 
> Audio
> Bit rate
> Channels        2 (stereo)
> Audio sample rate       32.000kHz
> 
> Media .... Contributing artists, Year, Genre .... all empty
> 
> Origin ... Directors, Producers, Writers, Publishers, Content provider, 
> Media created, Encoded by, Author URL, Promotion URL, Copyright .... all 
> empty
> 
> Content .... Parental rating, Parental rating reason, Composers, 
> Conductors, Period, Moon, Part of set, Initial key, Beats-per-minute, 
> Protected .... all empty.
> 
> File
> Name            Vid000.mp4.ts    <------

  That explains why the 'General' tab says "Type of file: TS file (.ts)",
because the name was not vid000.mp4, as you said, but Vid000.mp4.ts.

> Item type       TS File
> File location   My USB Drive
> Size            113 MB
> Date created    21/02/2025 5:16 PM
> Date  modified  21/02/2025 5:16 PM
> Attributes      A
> Availability
> Offline status
> Shared with
> Owner           Everyone
> Computer        This one
> 
> (and underneath all this there is a link to 'Remove Properties and 
> Personal Information')
> 
> >    Also see my response to Paul about the discrepancy between the .mp4
> > extension of the file and you reporting "Type of file: TS file (.ts)"
> 
> Yeap, as I highlighted above, so does that mean that (really) NOTHING 
> with-in the file changed??

  Changing the extension does indeed not change the content of the file,
but might (or might not) cause the player software to understand what
type of file it is.

> >>>     If that does not help, the MediaInfo utility mentioned by Paul is
> >>> probably your best bet.
> 
> Sorry for missing this second tab first time around!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#81073

On Fri, 2/28/2025 6:24 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>> On 28/02/2025 1:05 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>> Daniel70 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
>>>> On 27/02/2025 2:29 am, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>>     Anyway, have you tried to just right-click the file in File Explorer,
>>>>> select Properties and look at the 'Details' tab? For a normal video
>>>>> file, File Explorer will mention the Length, Frame width and height,
>>>>> Data rate, Total bitrate, Frame rate and Audio specs.
>>>>
>>>> General Details
>>>> vid000.mp4 (name changed as suggested by others)
>>>> Type of file:   TS file (.ts)
>>>> Open with:      Media Player (Button "Change" which gives option to use Media
>>>> Player, VLC Media Player, Windows Media Player Legacy, Firefox, Notepad,
>>>> Word)
>>>> Location: On a sub-directory of my USB Drive
>>>> Size:   113MB (118,876,060 bytes)
>>>> Size on Disk:   113MB (118,882,304 bytes)
>>>> Created: Last Friday
>>>> Modified:       Last Friday
>>>> Accessed:       Yesterday
>>>
>>>    You say "General Details", but you mentioned info from the 'General'
>>> tab, while I referred to the 'Details' tab.
>>
>> Yes, you are quite correct, there are two tabs (Oh! My failing 
>> eyesight!!) 'General' and 'Details'
> 
>   Sorry, I hadn't yet seen this post when I wrote my '1. ... 2. ... 3.
> ...' post. Your post answers part of item1..
> 
>> Listed above is the info as presented by the *General Tab* . The info on 
>> the 'Details' tab includes ....
>>
>> Video
>> Length  00:00:00
> 
>   This is clearly wrong! If the length is zero, not wonder you don't
> see/hear anything when you play the file.
> 
>   So you must find out why the length is zero (but the size is 113MB).
> 
>> Frame width     730
>> Frame height    576
>> Data rate       5000kbps
>> Total bitrate   5000kbps
>> Frame rate      25.00 frames/second
>>
>> Audio
>> Bit rate
>> Channels        2 (stereo)
>> Audio sample rate       32.000kHz
>>
>> Media .... Contributing artists, Year, Genre .... all empty
>>
>> Origin ... Directors, Producers, Writers, Publishers, Content provider, 
>> Media created, Encoded by, Author URL, Promotion URL, Copyright .... all 
>> empty
>>
>> Content .... Parental rating, Parental rating reason, Composers, 
>> Conductors, Period, Moon, Part of set, Initial key, Beats-per-minute, 
>> Protected .... all empty.
>>
>> File
>> Name            Vid000.mp4.ts    <------
> 
>   That explains why the 'General' tab says "Type of file: TS file (.ts)",
> because the name was not vid000.mp4, as you said, but Vid000.mp4.ts.
> 
>> Item type       TS File
>> File location   My USB Drive
>> Size            113 MB
>> Date created    21/02/2025 5:16 PM
>> Date  modified  21/02/2025 5:16 PM
>> Attributes      A
>> Availability
>> Offline status
>> Shared with
>> Owner           Everyone
>> Computer        This one
>>
>> (and underneath all this there is a link to 'Remove Properties and 
>> Personal Information')
>>
>>>    Also see my response to Paul about the discrepancy between the .mp4
>>> extension of the file and you reporting "Type of file: TS file (.ts)"
>>
>> Yeap, as I highlighted above, so does that mean that (really) NOTHING 
>> with-in the file changed??
> 
>   Changing the extension does indeed not change the content of the file,
> but might (or might not) cause the player software to understand what
> type of file it is.

The Windows Properties filter is picking up some info and not others.
This suggests "selective encryption" is at work, and it is a .ts file.

If you feed the .ts filter a file which is not .ts in any way,
the output is blank. The filter does not populate the fields, without
some evidence it is a Transport Stream.

Daniels file is populating the fields, but with suspicious or outright
wrong values. Which suggests the Microsoft filter or libAV is not able
to read everything it needs to read.

The duration of 0:00:00 means it cannot read the timestamps
inside the frames. Maybe it is scanning for the last intact
frame in the stream, and hopes to extract a timestamp from it.

The datarate of the file, is highly unlikely to be a "round" integer
number. That's bullshit right there.

If the filter had admitted the content was AAC encoded and had
a stardard bitrate, I might have believed it possible to play the
video. But I don't think enough info in that Properties is
correct, for any Windows tool [VLC, ffplay] to  play it.

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#80987

On 2/16/2025 8:39 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
> I've got a PVR who's HD is getting pretty full (90%+) with programs I'll 
> want to watch some day ... so I was thinking about coping some of the 
> 'Keeper' programs onto DVD which meant buying a spool of DVD's.... but 
> then needed to check if I needed DVD-R or DVD+R disks. (It is DVD-R)
> 
> Which got me thinking ...... What's the difference between DVD-R and 
> DVD+R??
> 

    I have no idea, but I've had trouble with + and never with -.
So I make sure to buy -. And I try to get Memorex. Once
again, I don't really have a good reason. It's just that I've never
had trouble with it. I once had a whole stack of Sony that were
useless. And I'm hesitant to try the bargain brands.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#80993

On Sun, 2/16/2025 10:53 AM, Newyana2 wrote:
> On 2/16/2025 8:39 AM, Daniel70 wrote:
>> I've got a PVR who's HD is getting pretty full (90%+) with programs I'll want to watch some day ... so I was thinking about coping some of the 'Keeper' programs onto DVD which meant buying a spool of DVD's.... but then needed to check if I needed DVD-R or DVD+R disks. (It is DVD-R)
>>
>> Which got me thinking ...... What's the difference between DVD-R and DVD+R??
>>
> 
>    I have no idea, but I've had trouble with + and never with -.
> So I make sure to buy -. And I try to get Memorex. Once
> again, I don't really have a good reason. It's just that I've never
> had trouble with it. I once had a whole stack of Sony that were
> useless. And I'm hesitant to try the bargain brands.

The brand on the disc, has nothing to do with the manufacturer.

For example, Maxell and Fujitsu, used to package Ritek discs
in a nice plastic cake box for you.

The actual companies, have names like CMC, Ritek, Tao Yuden.
Memorex buys lots of discs from a certain supplier, and
it's a different supplier than Maxell would buy from.

Philips doesn't make disks, and it buys whatever is available.

The media tag might make this clear, when you use your burning
software to read the tag. The tag is practically *never* going
to match the brand stamped on the cake box. The two layers of
the system are that isolated.

Now that the whole thing is collapsed, if I go to my computer
store, there are DVD R And DVD DL R left as media type. And
the quantity of media is so extensive, there were four cake
boxes under the cash, and I bought two of them. At first, the
staff didn't even know where the blank media had gone. But one of the
staff eventually figured out it was underneath
the cash register in the display case there.

That store used to have minimum of three cubic meters of media at one
time. They set up tables apart from the other display areas,
just so they could put more boxes of media under the table.
There was a wide selection of fake names for the branding back then.

The "cdfreaks" website is where you used to get information
on what was worth buying. They could tell you what was inside
the box, because a "Philips" cake box, did not say on the back
what brand of discs they were packaging. Someone had to buy a
sample so they could tell you what those are.

And "cdfreaks" had some pirates, and occasionally someone would
say "I burned 500 of those last week, very good". And occasionally
one of those people would tell you "I have seven drives set up in
parallel, burning away". That would give you some idea what
a pirate would do (make single layer media from a DL Hollywood pressing).
So what if the movie was blurry.

And if you think pirating is easy, that's a lot of work. There is
too much manual handling of materials to be a "success" at it.
It's more a state of mind, than a business.

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#80994

On 2025-02-16 20:04, Paul wrote:
> The actual companies, have names like CMC, Ritek, Tao Yuden.
> Memorex buys lots of discs from a certain supplier, and
> it's a different supplier than Maxell would buy from.
> 
> Philips doesn't make disks, and it buys whatever is available.
> 
> The media tag might make this clear, when you use your burning
> software to read the tag. The tag is practically*never* going
> to match the brand stamped on the cake box. The two layers of
> the system are that isolated.

There is a command in Linux that gives you the actual information on the 
disk, but I do not remember it an it is not in my notes under "DVD". Ah, 
it is "dvd+rw-mediainfo /dev/dvd".

And then there were tables that told the quality of the disk based on 
that result, possibly in the links I posted earlier.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#80997

Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote at 20:52 this Sunday (GMT):
> On 2025-02-16 20:04, Paul wrote:
>> The actual companies, have names like CMC, Ritek, Tao Yuden.
>> Memorex buys lots of discs from a certain supplier, and
>> it's a different supplier than Maxell would buy from.
>> 
>> Philips doesn't make disks, and it buys whatever is available.
>> 
>> The media tag might make this clear, when you use your burning
>> software to read the tag. The tag is practically*never* going
>> to match the brand stamped on the cake box. The two layers of
>> the system are that isolated.
>
> There is a command in Linux that gives you the actual information on the 
> disk, but I do not remember it an it is not in my notes under "DVD". Ah, 
> it is "dvd+rw-mediainfo /dev/dvd".
>
> And then there were tables that told the quality of the disk based on 
> that result, possibly in the links I posted earlier.


For the computers I've had, I think only /dev/sr0 shows up for the disk
file.
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#80995

On Sun, 16 Feb 2025 14:04:00 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

>The "cdfreaks" website is where you used to get information
>on what was worth buying. They could tell you what was inside
>the box, because a "Philips" cake box, did not say on the back
>what brand of discs they were packaging. Someone had to buy a
>sample so they could tell you what those are.
>
>And "cdfreaks" had some pirates, and occasionally someone would
>say "I burned 500 of those last week, very good". And occasionally
>one of those people would tell you "I have seven drives set up in
>parallel, burning away". That would give you some idea what
>a pirate would do (make single layer media from a DL Hollywood pressing).
>So what if the movie was blurry.
>
>And if you think pirating is easy, that's a lot of work. There is
>too much manual handling of materials to be a "success" at it.
>It's more a state of mind, than a business.

That approach to piracy pretty much ended more than 25 years ago. No one
burns media anymore, and no self-respecting group would put their name
on a release that was "blurry". That was a good flashback, though.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux

csiph-web