HDBaseT Supporters Hope To Kiss HDMI Goodbye 336
arcticstoat writes "HDMI's short-lived reign over the TV cable racks could soon be over, thanks to a new usurper that combines several connections into a standard Cat5e/6 network cable with an RJ-45 connector. Designed by a coalition of consumer electronics manufacturers called the HDBaseT Alliance, which includes Sony, Samsung, LG and Valens, HDBaseT promises to not only carry video and audio signals, but also provide a network connection, a USB signal and even electricity using a single cable. The Alliance predicts that we'll start seeing the first HDBaseT equipment creeping into the shops later this year, but says the bigger wave of adoption will occur later in 2011."
Wait... (Score:5, Informative)
FTFS:
thanks to a new usurper that combines several connections into a standard Cat5e/6 network cable with an RJ-45 connector
Does that mean I can use one of the dozens of ethernet cables currently languishing in my closets?
Re:One question (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Kiss HDCP bye too? (Score:5, Informative)
Can we please kill HDCP?
Nope.
Searching for hdbaset + drm turns up little of use,
but searching for hdbaset + hdmi shows us DRM has already been included
Valens Semiconductor's HDBaseT Receives HDCP Certification From Intel's DCP LLC
updated 8:58 a.m. ET March 9, 2009,
http://www.valens-semi.com/media/1526/msnbc.pdf [valens-semi.com]
Light Peak (Score:4, Informative)
And let the battle for a new standard begin.
I had thought Light Peak was the likely replacement technology.
10Gbps and backward compatible with USB.
"At 10Gb/s, you could transfer a full-length Blu-Ray movie in less than 30 seconds. Optical technology also allows for smaller connectors and longer, thinner, and more flexible cables than currently possible. Light Peak also has the ability to run multiple protocols simultaneously over a single cable, enabling the technology to connect devices such as peripherals, displays, disk drives, docking stations, and more."
http://techresearch.intel.com/articles/None/1813.htm [intel.com]
Re:I don't like network connectors (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I don't like network connectors (Score:4, Informative)
Get / make cables that have the "boots" on them. (Search for Cat5e booted ends [google.com] to see what I mean).
Re:One question (Score:5, Informative)
That would be funny if it wasn't true [denon.com]. You can get it [amazon.com] from Amazon too.
Re:One question (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Aaaarrg (Score:3, Informative)
Re:They missed again (Score:3, Informative)
Like Light Peak [wikipedia.org]? Maybe the video interface after this one.
Seriously, obsolescence is getting ridiculous. It used to be you could use the same video interface for a couple of decades. Heck a TV could easily last a decade or more.
Now everything gets obsolete quickly. Plasma? LCD? Perhaps OLED next? Crikey.
Re:Light Peak (Score:3, Informative)
10Gb/s over fiber isn't new or all that interesting; but, in the networking world, it isn't all that cheap. What have they done to make the equivalent of shoving a 10GbE fiber interface into random bits of cheap consumer electronics remotely viable?
Second, while neither optical cables nor optical connectors are quite in "will die if you give them a funny look" territory, they definitely won't stand up to the kind of abuse that even ghastly quality copper will, never mind being rolled over by chairs and filled with pocket fuzz. What do they have in mind?
10.2 Gb/s? (Score:4, Informative)
The spec claims that this approach can pump 10.2Gb/s over unshielded twisted pair. So this is really 10Gb/s "Ethernet" technology. [hdbaset.org]
But only in one direction. [valens-semi.com] Like ADSL, it's high-bandwidth only from the "content source". Video travels only in one direction; the reverse direction is 100Mb/s Ethernet packets.
They don't propose to power displays via this cable. The idea is to power disk players, cable boxes and such from the big-screen display. Control them from there, too. "PC-based media servers are no longer required and CE devices are once again the emperors of the living room." If they can get the inter-device control issues figured out (something the consumer device people have a history of botching), that could accelerate acceptance.
No kidding (Score:5, Informative)
Because, here's a shocker for many smug "I know everything," geek types: Cable quality DOES make a difference! When you start talking extremely high bandwidth signals, like you are talking with HDMI especially the "beyond HD" stuff you are talking some tight tolerances that are needed. This is even more true when using smaller cable for longer runs (you can solve a number of problems simply by throwing copper at it and using larger cables). So you may well find that a cable that worked just fine for an old 720p TV doesn't work at all, or has sparkles and dropouts when you hook it up to a 1080p 120Hz connection. Suddenly your bandwidth is beyond its capabilities.
So you can't just say "Ha! Cables don't matter! Anything works fine!" because that's false. As we do higher and higher bandwidth stuff, cable tolerances become more and more important. That's why you can have Cat-3/5/5e/6/6a cables all of which look fundamentally the same, yet have drastically different performance. They are all 4 pairs of unshielded twisted wire. However Cat-3 is good for maybe 16MHz whereas Cat-6a is good to 500MHz. Why? Much, MUCH tighter tolerances and specs.
So cable quality DOES matter as people can find out, but then there are assholes like Monster that rip people off with it.
Re:No kidding (Score:4, Informative)
So cable quality DOES matter as people can find out, but then there are assholes like Monster that rip people off with it.
Right, but only to a point. Once worst-case noise and signal loss are below the threshold for proper reception at operating conditions, no further improvement can be gained (except perhaps to further shield from harsh environments not typically found in a living room).
There may be cables that fail to meet specifications, but vastly surpassing those specifications (which is the problem here) provides no improvement to signal integrity. As an Electrical Engineer by training and trade, one of the first things I learned is that surpassing specifications in digital systems (beyond the safety margin) gains nothing.
Re:HDCP (Score:3, Informative)
>>>Current cannot be "pushed". A device presents a load on an electrical circuit and will DRAW a certain amount of current depending on that load.
Hello. Electrical engineer here. What you just said is complete rubbish. A device does not "draw" current like a sucking vacuum. If devices could do that, we would not need power supplies or batteries. The devices would just draw the current from thin ain. The current is indeed "pushed" and the amount of push is called the voltage (measured across the terminals of the power supply or battery).
How you can have the audacity to correct someone who used the word "push", when said person was 100% correct is beyond me. What an anal-retentive asshole you must be. Like that guy Cliff Clavin on Cheers.
But at what level? (Score:4, Informative)
Depending on what you are doing, it takes more bandwidth. 720p video at 60fps takes much less bandwidth than 1080p video at 120fps. So a cable that works for the lower signal may not work for the more intense one.
Now for short runs, this is generally not a problem. At 2 meters pretty much any cable will do the trick. However longer runs this becomes a real consideration. It becomes even more of a problem if you want a thin cable. The nice thin HDMI cables are 28 AWG wire. However getting a high bandwidth signal over that at a distance can be a problem and require a cable of superior construction. Belden makes such a cable (sold through Bluejeans) that will get you more bandwdith at longer range over a smaller wire gauge.
As an analogy you might be more familiar with, take GigE over Cat-5. It works just fine for many people. There are plenty of NICs and switches that say Cat-5 is fine. However, according to the spec, it isn't. You need Cat-5e. So what's up? Well, with a short run, it just isn't such a big deal. The lower tolerances of Cat-5 are fine. However if you try and do a 100m run, and try and do it near a bunch of other cables and so on you may find that it no longer works. You may even have a situation where you sync at a gig, but it doesn't give you good speed because there are bit errors.
There are in fact certifiers for this purpose from people like JDSU and Fluke. They check the analogue response of the cable and do a bit error test to see if it really is up to spec, or if there are problems. When you run your own cables at a good length, as we do at work, you want one of those.
Same shit with HDMI but even worse, as there aren't any length specs. You can make an HDMI cable as long as you like. Question is, will it work for the kind of video you want? Also will it work for the kind of video you'll want later?
Quality DOES matter in some situations. However quality means "Tight tolerances," not "Brand name and shiny connectors." So you get people like Monster ripping folks off. It is actually fairly technical to learn about all the details, and forget about testing your cables, HDMI testers are off the charts expensive.
Re:One question (Score:3, Informative)
No, monster cables are just overpriced. They actually are quite well made. There was a time when their stuff was crap, but not any more. Any Monster product I've encountered in recent years has been well built and did what it promised quite well. It just cost way more than a just as well built and functional product from someone else.
My objection to Monster is the overcharging and marketing as though they sell you something special. Their product quality itself is fine.
Re:No kidding (Score:5, Informative)
There's one tiny detail that throws a monkey wrench into just about *everyone's* understanding: a disturbingly large percentage of recent-vintage low-cost cable from China has been made using "copper-coated steel" (CCS) and NOT pure copper.
CCS has been used for years as the center conductor in 75-ohm coax, but its appearance in things like network cable alleged to be "cat5e" is a VERY recent phenomenon (as in, even 2 or 3 years ago, it was basically unheard of). When you throw CCS into the cable equation, everything you know about cable based upon past experience and external observances goes to hell. For the most part, it's safe to say that CCS does absolutely nothing GOOD for applications like ethernet, and has plenty of potential to do really bad things to it. I'd be shocked if the CCS cable pawned off as "cat5e" on eBay (and quite a few discount vendors online) would meet official cat5e specifications at a HUNDRED feet, let alone a thousand or more. Worst of all, unless you're making a point of watching out for CCS network cable, it actually looks BETTER upon casual inspection than decent pure-copper cable, because the wires are thicker. The problem is, the steel core does nothing for the signal, so you're basically trading a hair-thin AWG26 copper wire for a micron-thick hollow tube of copper electroplated onto a strand of steel wire, and using it in a scenario where the conductivity difference really, truly DOES matter.
Don't believe me? Go to eBay and search for "cat5e CCS" (sans quotes), checking the box to search the description as well. You'll find at least a page of results, and when you read the descriptions, you'll see that they most certainly ARE "CCS".
I'm not 100% sure, but I think the reason it's halfway-legal to sell CCS UTP cable as "cat5e Cable" is because (in America, at least), "cat5e" only has specific legal meaning if you use it in conjunction with "TIA/EIA-568-B", or make specific claims about its suitability for network use at a given speed and/or length. As long as you claim nothing beyond "AWG24 Cat5e Cable", you could probably get away with just about anything capable of conducting electricity and 4 twisted pairs of wire.
Anyway, beware. CCS "cat5e" cable is real, and is a growing problem unless you make a point of trying to avoid buying it.
Re:for those wondering when (Score:4, Informative)
Re:The reason you can't connect your monitor (Score:2, Informative)
Re:One question (Score:4, Informative)
It may be an analog signal, but that analog signal is carrying digital data, which is usually checksummed and/or even encrypted and subsequently decrypted. It's much more of an all-or-nothing situation than with pure analog signals... if your HDMI cable works, you've got a pretty good chance that you're getting pristine 100% digital picture and sound quality...
Re:One question (Score:3, Informative)
"You're either being pedantic or wrong."
More like technical beyond your means.
In fact, *EVERYTHING* is based from analog waveforms. Including your very cells.