Originally posted by: TuxDave
[
What's stopping them from dividing up the stream in time so that if you need 3 data streams, just splice them together and send the data out 3x as fast.
My 2nd question is, so we say fiber optics can carry more than copper wire, but I guess they're comparing dense wavelength division multiplexing vs using multiple carrier frequencies (within its bandwidth spec) for copper. But assuming the cheapest of the cheap meaning only a single frequency demodulator so each of them are using only one frequency, which one would carry more data and by how much?
Cost.
Full HD stream bandwidth is 1.4Gbit/sec .
Thats for one channel , multiplexed.
The way it is now, you have each of the 3 data streams carrying 500Mbit/sec.
To do what you suggest you would need to use high end dsp in the tv, adding significant cost without any real benefit over copper. Also laser diodes add even more cost , as well as danger from people getting eye damage.
If they had really wanted to use fiber to connect HDTV devices, the way to do it would have been to send the raw data stream directly to the tv. Then they could use one fiber to carry everything. The problem is there is no standard for what the raw data stream format is like. Blu-ray may have one way, Satellite and cable another.
It would have added confusion to hdtv. Imagine shopping for a hdtv and having to find one that is HDTV type A signal, type B signal, type c signal. It was best to break down the signal into its components allowing the receiving device to assemble however it needed them.