HDMI Labeling Requirements Promise a Stew of Confusion 396
An anonymous reader writes "In many ways HDMI has revolutionized the way we connect devices. By unifying video and audio into a single cable manufacturers have been able to make their products easier to set up than ever before. Until recently there hasn't actually been much difference in HDMI cables. But things are about to get confusing with the introduction of HDMI 1.4. By the 1st of January 2012 manufacturers of products with HDMI ports won't actually be able to call HDMI 1.4 by its real name. In fact, come November 18 this year those selling cables won't be able to use HDMI 1.4 or HDMI 1.3 to delineate between different products. Instead cables that support version 1.4 of the HDMI standard will have to use one of five different labels. The new labels? Well, as this story explains, they're going to cause a new level of confusion for anyone hooking up a home cinema. Add to this the fact that the HDMI organisation keeps the details of its specifications secret, and translation between version numbering and marketing-speak will be well nigh impossible."
My only question is... (Score:5, Funny)
Yes (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
and so will your coathanger.
and so will your coathanger.
You were probably joking, but since someone was clueless enough to mod you insightful instead of funny, let me make a quick little note here. HDMI cables transfer high frequency data, so impedance must be taken into account. Digital signals traveling a meter or two at ~200MHz are quite "versatile" and can handle being transferred over cheap wires, but if the impedance is grossly wrong, your signal will not make it to the other side in any decipherable form. Parallel non-insulated steel (lossy) wires probabl
Re:Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, I believe he was referring to this [consumerist.com], in which audiophiles couldn't tell the difference between monster cables and a coathanger.
Re:Yes (Score:4, Informative)
Impedence isn't going to degrade the signal at audio frequencies (ie. kHz). At most it will cause a tiny voltage drop at the other end. You can compensate for this by turning the volume knob one degree to the right.
I once took a decent-quality amplifier apart and looked at the speaker-protection fuses. You practically needed a magnifying glass to see the fuse wire it was so fine. Six inches later and you need big thick cable to carry the signal? I lost my cable-religion that day and have never looked back. My advice: Use cheap electrical wire and spend your money on better speakers (and spend more money on your speakers than on your amplifier...)
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Funny)
Why take the chance. Just buy the new $800 version and you'll be good to go!
8-)
Re:My only question is... (Score:4, Insightful)
>>>>>Will my $600 gold-plated monster superconductor cable support the new standards?
>>
>>Why take the chance. Just buy the new $800 version and you'll be good to go!
And...
I'm done. The HDTV and Bluray player is going on Ebay. I can't keep up (or afford) all these constantly changing standards. I'll get my entertainment an easier and cheaper way (dusts off the books & old black-and-white tv). Maybe it's time to learn some open source programming too. I work cheap (minimum wage).
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:My only question is... (Score:4, Insightful)
>>>Why? Will your tv and blu-ray player stop working when this new cable comes out?
Honestly I don't own either an HDTV or Bluray. I was being smartassed.
BUT I am starting to wonder if I want to waste my time upgrading to HD, if the Megacorps keep insisting upon changing the standards every year or two. And I'm not just talking about these cables, but also the recent FCC plnn to convert TV from MPEG2 to MPEG4 (which means I have to toss my less-than-a-year-old receiver in the trash), and companies like Comcast forcing people in my area to rent "converter boxes" at $5 per set. I'm perfectly happy to just stick with DVDa, plus books, plus whatever I can grab off the net.
I come from the old school where I had the same computer for ten years (Amiga and WinXP, each) and have no desire to hop on a yearly upgrade treadmill just because of planned obsolescence.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean the computer I have that has a $5 HDMI cable running between my computer and monitor?
Wait, how is HDMI irrelevant again?
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Interesting)
Or maybe just someone who actually knows what HDMI is?
Hint: It's got nothing to do with HDCP, which is what you're bitching about. HDCP is DRM on the video signal, and it works just as well over plain old DVI as HDMI.
So when I plug my laptop (with a FOSS OS and a decent p2p setup) into my external monitor, why should I deal with all the extra pins and thumb screws and sheer bulkiness of a DVI cable, compared with the convenience of HDMI? For me, HDMI is basically DVI in a better form factor.
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Interesting)
FTFA: By unifying video and audio into a single cable manufacturers have been able to make their products easier to set up than ever before.
And you HDMI is basically DVI in a better form factor.
I'm going to disagree with both of these statements. To the first, I almost had to toss the bullshit flag.
First, by tying the audio into the cable, it really ties my hands with how I want to design my system. Perhaps I want to run the audio to a receiver or processor first instead of to my television? Well, I'll have to have a receiver that handles HDMI, or I'll have to split the audio out of the HDMI cable and send that to the receiver.
My PC has horrid issues with HDMI, since most video cards did not support audio over HDMI, you could run DVI to a HDMI port on your TV, or straight HDMI... but then your television would tell your computer that it supported Audio over HDMI and your video card (NVIDIA in this case) would turn OFF your audio ports except over HDMI, of course, since my card didn't support audio over HDMI, it just output a 0 for the audio signal. I had to hack the drivers and EDID in order to trick my computer into thinking my display couldn't support HDMI audio. Every time I want to update my drivers, I have to edit the driver. This issue has been around for years, was fixed in some driver versions, reverted in others.
This is only a problem because of the convergence of audio into HDMI, and it is only the tip of the iceberg when you consider all of the potential issues that people can encounter.
As for the connector itself...
No, I much preferred DVI (Thumbscrews were great especially if you used a laptop) HDMI has a horrid connector that puts a lot of pressure in the wrong places and is easily dislodged.
Please give me my distinct audio and video cables back, I hate having a bottleneck.
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Informative)
If you want to split the audio from the picture you can still do what everyone else does with a home theater system (or those of us with surround sound). You use the old RCA ended plugs or optical sound out from the TV/satellite box/cable box/blue ray/DVD/whatever device into the sound device. My old CRT TV has audio out. This thing is from 1996. Most TVs today have a way to send the sound to a separate device. The exact setup will be determined by what equipment you have.
As for PC's video look at the video card driver and how it is supposed to be setup. Nvidia uses a connection from the sound card (on board or card) to the video card to send the sound through the HDMI cable. ATI does it through software (according to what I have read). DVI does not have sound, only video. If you use a VI to HDMI cable (or adapter) you will only get picture and no sound. If you do have a separate system for sound this should not be an issue. Send the picture to the TV and the sound directly to your sound system. Isn't that what you are looking for in the first place?
Also the combining of functions to have fewer cables makes one's wife/girl friend happier. Fewer cables usually means less clutter.
I thought that display port was taking over from HDMI? I see many devices not just video cards with display port as an option.
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Marrying audio and video to one cable is much like getting an all-in-one desktop.
If you want to upgrade a single component, you have to upgrade everything. This severely limits your options for future upgrades.
People are already being bit in the butt by what HDMI does or doesn't support on a particular piece of gear.
HDMI certainly beats component cables. It doesn't really beat VGA or DVI.
Changing things from how they've been done for decades will likely more than anything just confuse people.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For me, HDMI is basically DVI in a better form factor.
Actually it's a lot closer to DVI [wikipedia.org] then you might think.
A DVI signal is electrically compatible with an HDMI video signal; no signal conversion is required when an adapter or asymmetric cable is used, and consequently no loss in video quality occurs.[3] As such, HDMI is backward-compatible with Digital Visual Interface digital video (DVI-D or DVI-I, but not DVI-A) as used on modern computer monitors and graphics cards.
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Funny)
I think that Denon cable is even better than my now previous favorite, - Best buy sells a fiber optic patch cord with gold connectors to enhance signal quality. Wow.
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Informative)
I thought you were kidding so I went and looked:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Rocketfish%26%23153%3B+-+4'+Toslink+Optical+Cable/7832223.p?id=1142297086861&skuId=7832223 [bestbuy.com]
Damn...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Don't forget that you can buy the same cable for $2500 on Amazon [amazon.com](*), after all, the more expensive the better.
(*) Spoiler: Read the reviews. All of them.
Re:My only question is... (Score:5, Funny)
No. Using cables labeled "HDMI 1.3" instead of "Standard Speed" will result in rounded harmonics on the peak voicing pressures of cross-coupled sound space reproductions.
The new cables are made with labelling technology that accesses the uppermost reaches of gullibility distortion, ensuring that your credulous experience is the highest quality known to science.
The waiting list is open, and financing is available.
why not REALLY simple? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why not just name them HDMI 1 and HDMI 2?
(or HDMI 3, etc)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because people could actually understand it, and then buy just what they need.
Re:why not REALLY simple? (Score:5, Interesting)
You joke, but check this from TFA:
The specifics are outlined in a 38 page document on the HDMI website. At the most basic level cables are split into 'Standard' and 'High Speed' versions. Standard cables are tested to support video up to 720p/1080i. High Speed cables on the other hand are tested to 1080p resolution. Within these categories come the inevitable subcategories. Standard is split three ways into Standard HDMI Cable, Standard HDMI Cable with Ethernet and Standard Automotive HDMI cable. High Speed Cables come in two versions - High Speed HDMI Cable and High Speed HDMI Cable with Ethernet.
Oh noes, how are we possibly going to be able to tell which cable to buy? :0
With the exception of "Standard Automotive HDMI cable" they all seem rather good, self explanatory names to me. Much better names than just "HDMI 1.4 cable" anyway. Besides, the packaging probably will still say HDMI 1.4 somewhere..?
Re: (Score:2)
With the exception of "Standard Automotive HDMI cable" they all seem rather good, self explanatory names to me. Much better names than just "HDMI 1.4 cable" anyway. Besides, the packaging probably will still say HDMI 1.4 somewhere..?
I agree that the names are relatively self-explanatory... Even the automotive one seems pretty clear to me - if it isn't going in a car you probably don't want that cable.
But it seems like there's some redundancy and un-necessary detail. If "high speed" cables are tested up to 1080p resolution, they ought to work for lower resolutions as well, right? So why not just make that the new standard? If you make an HDMI cable, test it to that standard, and you know it'll work with pretty much anything.
The conf
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If "high speed" cables are tested up to 1080p resolution, they ought to work for lower resolutions as well, right? So why not just make that the new standard?
Five dollar unlabeled cables you find at the flea market work fine with 1080p, so you know it's not a very tough spec to hit. Has anyone ever seen an HDMI cable that couldn't?
It's about what it's always been about: selling essentially identical products under tiered pricing. "You want to do 1080p? You'll need the $75 cable. See, on the purple package it says 1080p. On the blue package it says 1080i. So you'll need the purple package unless you also need digital audio. That's the $100 cable."
Re:why not REALLY simple? (Score:4, Interesting)
Besides, the packaging probably will still say HDMI 1.4 somewhere..?
From the article:
In fact, come November 18 this year those selling cables won't be able to use HDMI 1.4 or HDMI 1.3 to delineate between different products.
Which sounds to me like the HDMI license terms won't allow it to appear on the packaging.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oh noes, how are we possibly going to be able to tell which cable to buy? :0
With the exception of "Standard Automotive HDMI cable" they all seem rather good, self explanatory names to me. Much better names than just "HDMI 1.4 cable" anyway. Besides, the packaging probably will still say HDMI 1.4 somewhere..?
Well, what happens at 1.5?
We get "Full Speed" which is going to be higher than "High Speed". Can anyone really remember which USB speed is "Full" and "High"?
It's all designed to sow confusion in the market, from which companies will profit.
"Oh, you have a standard cable. You really need a high speed cable."
$50 later,
"Did you say you have a high speed cable? Did you get the one with the integrated audio?"
$50 later,
"Did you say you have a high speed cable with integrated audio? You really need the standar
Forget 1.5 (Score:3, Funny)
HDMI Lineup:
1.4 - High Speed
1.5 - Full Speed
1.6 - "It goes to plaid."
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I bought the cheapest cables that Best Buy offered and haven't had any problems.
You spent $60 on an HDMI cable?
Good start - but needs a minor tweak. (Score:2)
HDMI.001 ...
HDMI.002
HDMI.999
There, you're good for 999 versions and the names easily sort.
Back to the topic, just buy whatever cable, cut the bag open and if it doesn't work ... RETURN IT TO THE STORE FOR A REFUND.
The store will try to re-sell it ... but which of the regular customers are going to buy a cable when it is obviously rejected by someone else.
So, eventually, the store will try to return them to the manufacture for a refund.
That's when the manufacturers can put pressure to get the label restricti
Re: (Score:2)
Which they probably won't accept as it's not in re-saleable condition! :o
Re: (Score:2)
999 model numbers aren't a bad start.
But don't forget to take a page out of the book of CPU manufacturers where a higher model number doesn't necessarily have to mean that it's better. Wouldn't want customers to make sense of what model they have to buy unless they've memorized the list of current versions and their background.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends what you mean by "work" -- for example, I want my HDMI cables to support 1080p, even if I only use it for a 1080i signal right now. I don't want to have to take it back years later, when I try to plug it into a different source.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably because the connectors haven't changed, only the functionality (and the internals of the cables)
Wow... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I don't know about IBM, but this reminds me why I've been treating all forms of HD as "in a constant state of change" since about 1999.
The fact of the matter is, it seems like every two years something comes along which becomes incompatible with all previous incarnations of HD.
Hell, as far as I recall, HDMI was the one that locked down everything with DRM and would no longer work with older devices.
The technologies are changing so fas
Re:Wow... (Score:5, Informative)
Hell, as far as I recall, HDMI was the one that locked down everything with DRM and would no longer work with older devices.
Please, please stop spreading this bullshit, and start correcting people when they repeat it.
How hard is it to tell the difference between HDMI and HDCP?
HDMI -- DVI plus audio, maybe plus ethernet, in a neater form factor.
HDCP -- encrypted video signal, which works over DVI just as well as over HDMI.
If you're currently using DVI instead of HDMI because you're afraid of the DRM, you're a moron. Again: It's just DVI which is easier to plug in. It doesn't do DRM unless your video card, OS, and monitor all agree to do so.
I'm sorry if I'm overreacting, but EVERY FUCKING SLASHDOT ARTICLE that mentions HDMI, there's at least two people who confuse it with HDCP. That's like refusing to buy a DVD burner for backup because you're afraid of DRM on DVDs.
Remember kids (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless you are doing a permanent wall installation, if you spend more than $10-$15 on an HDMI cable, you got Effed in the A!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
monoprice.com, the saver of dollars.
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Funny)
1) My Playstation3 was not going to look as good on the $20 cable, because all the colors could not go through the cheaper cable fast enough.
2) The more expensive cable uses a better conductor metal for "better frequency".
*I don't really fault an employee that's making $8 an hour with no commission for talking out his ass, I just thought this was funny.
Re: (Score:2)
I would have asked him how a passive cable knows which bits in the stream are the colors.
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Funny)
I would have asked him how a passive cable knows which bits in the stream are the colors.
A prism's also passive, and it knows how to separate colors. The wires just do the same thing, right?
Re:Remember kids (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't fault him, but as soon as one of them lies to me out of either ignorance or greed, that is when I tell them to leave me alone.
If you know it's a lie, get away from me. If you don't know it's a lie, you're not qualified to help me shop for it.
If you insist I buy the cables that give you the extra commission, I'll cancel the whole damned sale.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Don't forget the all important "playing games" category where retailers try to come up with the most outlandish explanations for the premium widgets and compare stories in the breakroom. I understand it stems from the unending boredom of the job.
I'm surprised more of these are not on YouTube.
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget the all important "playing games" category where retailers try to come up with the most outlandish explanations for the premium widgets and compare stories in the breakroom. I understand it stems from the unending boredom of the job.
Ha! I used to work part time at the electronics section of a big box retailer during college. Obviously we weren't individually commissioned, but our store manager would reward us with food and free crap if the department posted good sales numbers. We used to really enjoy pulling off outlandish justifications for fun and profit. We would even refer distrusting customers to our "cabling specialist" for more information. At the time, we felt like we needed to have fun with it to stay sane.
Now grown up me wants the chance to meet up with the smart-ass 19 year old me and punch me right in the face for trying to sell me junk.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't expect that many of them are talking out their ass. I expect that many of them are regurgitating the meta-rectal disgorgements of others.
And I don't let them continue behaving that way. I should probably bill Best Buy for training their lamers. Fry's droids I don't even ask questions; they know more about carpet samples than computers.
In my experience... (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps some day you will be able to apply that same intellect that allows you to detect snake oil in audio gear to the snake oil in sexual bigotry.
Re:Remember kids (Score:5, Funny)
isn't that the point? (Score:5, Insightful)
Confuse customers so the only guidance they have is the price. "Well, it's more expensive so it has to be better!" Once you get consumers thinking that, they're easy pickings. Oops. I should have sugar-coated that with some intellectual discourse to obscure that simple truth... Oh well.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if they get to the shop in the first place. Otherwise apathy will ensure this generation of connectors gets skipped.
Re:isn't that the point? (Score:5, Informative)
Once again a Slashdot summary designed to rage or amuse, yet the names are... wait for it....
Standard HDMI Cable
Standard HDMI Cable with Ethernet
Standard Automotive HDMI cable
High Speed HDMI Cable
High Speed HDMI Cable with Ethernet
Standard cables are tested to support video up to 720p/1080i.
High Speed are tested to 1080p resolution.
How can anyone complain about that? It isn't any more complicated than Standard vs HD, though admittedly some people won't know what ethernet means. I don't know what the difference with the automotive cable is either, but I assume that the High Speed with Ethernet would work for all needs.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And funnily enough, you pay more for a cable with the better wire gauge... (Not necessarily $900 more, but it's probably the difference between the $15 cable and the $30 cable on ebay.)
The really annoying part is that HDMI 1.3b introduced the distinction in cable testing between "works to original spec" and "works to newer spec with more bandwidth", but both types are "1.3b-certified", you have to look at the bandwidth to distinguish them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Version_comparison
How hard was it (Score:3, Informative)
> By unifying video and audio into a single cable manufacturers have been able to make their products easier to set up than ever before.
Seriously how hard was it to hook up the $2 three color coded RCA jacks?
Re:How hard was it (Score:4, Insightful)
That depends. If you're asking the "average" consumer, the answer would be "very!"
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The purpose of capitalism is to make you think you wanted something you never wanted, then to sell it to you.
Re: (Score:2)
As salespeople say: It isn't "selling" if you would have bought it anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously how hard was it to hook up the $2 three color coded RCA jacks?
My dog never got it quite right.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well clearly you didn't teach him to cock his head at the right angle. [wikimedia.org]
That's not a right angle. It's clearly obtuse.
Re: (Score:2)
When talking about just 1, maybe 2 things connecting to your tv or receiver composite video plus audio wasn't a big deal, once you had several it gets messy. With component video it gets even messier. Granted, they weren't difficult to work with, just ugly and messy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How hard was it (Score:4, Insightful)
Depends. Do you have a nice setup, or are you reaching your arm in back of your A/V equipment trying to do things by feel? Avoiding the need to pull out the components to actually look at them (since you can't do color by feel, obviously), is a reasonably nice benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
how easy is it to feel the direction of a HDMI connection? now try it with sata....
Re: (Score:2)
And if you accidentally plug the green cable into the red jack, the errors will show up in your video signal. Depending on how your equipment handles it, you may get strange colors, or a blue screen, or...
Re: (Score:2)
> By unifying video and audio into a single cable manufacturers have been able to make their products easier to set up than ever before.
Seriously how hard was it to hook up the $2 three color coded RCA jacks?
It's not hard to hook up three cables but wouldn't you agree it's easier to hook up a single cable instead?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And, really, that's the most important thing isn't it?
Which one will work - most expensive (Score:4, Insightful)
Welcome to marketing ploy 101.
There are a myrad of confusing options. The only real solution is the really high end that does everything costs the most. Anything else is "it might work". It can also be sold with the "you are going to get the 4K TV someday arn't you?" approach.
There is only one solution and it will cost the consumer. It was planed that way.
Are we surprised ?
Re:Which one will work - most expensive (Score:5, Insightful)
Every tool has three price points (hammers, cameras, AV equipment...)
The lowest is for the layman. The layman doesn't know the differences between the various hammers, ti the layman all hammers look the same. So why spend $20 or $100 if you can buy one for $5?
The highest is for the amateurs: the amateur understands that there are differences in quality and how they manifest and the amateur understands that the cheapest device doesn't exactly tend to be the best quality. That's why amateurs buy $100 hammers and $2000 cameras and $500 AV cables.
The middle price point is for the professional. The pro understands that he doesn't want the cheap crappy hammer that'll ruin his carpals in a day of framing, but he also understands that the laser guide and designer handle on the $100 hammer are just crap to bilk the amateur DYIer. So he buys the $20 hammer that does the job, is well balanced and skips on the frills. Because he's a pro and confident in his ability to pick a *good* $20 hammer.
Re:Which one will work - most expensive (Score:5, Insightful)
The middle price point is for the professional. The pro understands that he doesn't want the cheap crappy hammer that'll ruin his carpals in a day of framing, but he also understands that the laser guide and designer handle on the $100 hammer are just crap to bilk the amateur DYIer. So he buys the $20 hammer that does the job, is well balanced and skips on the frills. Because he's a pro and confident in his ability to pick a *good* $20 hammer.
That's pretty much wrong for all your examples, except perhaps for hammers. The amateur photographer buys the mid-priced camera, $1,000 to $2,000. The professional buys the $2,000 to $20,000 camera. The amateur in AV systems might buy a 2,000 to 10,000 home theater system. The professional buys a $100,000 to $500,000 Digital Cinema system.
It probably even applies to hammers. An amateur buys an expensive hammer, the professional buys an industrial-strength nail-gun system. (Disclaimer: I don't know that much about construction tools, so my example might be way off, but I know that professional builders use some pretty specialized equipment beyond the budget of non-professionals).
No problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Please, my cable is so good that it has it's own gold connector for the R,G, and B colors. You know they won't get mixed up on the way to the TV that way!
People will just buy what works ... (Score:2)
... and ignore the rest.
Negative word-of-mouth (and painful difficulties) will separate the wheat from the chaff. The solutions that work well will survive. So has it been, so shall it be. The invisible hand may not always work as we wish, but it can still slap down the business models that suck.
Re: (Score:2)
... and ignore the rest.
Negative word-of-mouth (and painful difficulties) will separate the wheat from the chaff. The solutions that work well will survive. So has it been, so shall it be. The invisible hand may not always work as we wish, but it can still slap down the business models that suck.
Really? So how come there's so many people on /. making a tidy living out of tidying up after software which should never have been conceived, let alone sold - and have been doing so for years?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> The invisible hand may not always work as we wish, but it can still slap
> down the business models that suck.
Unfortunately it is often handcuffed by government (with patents, in this case).
Somebody at Monster Cable... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, probably the CFO.
Re:Somebody at Monster Cable... (Score:5, Funny)
Monster doesn't have a CFO. CFOs are for companies that have a chance of a negative unit margin on a product. Monster just has a shovel and a vault.
We need... (Score:2)
There are differences in cables (Score:5, Informative)
Re:There are differences in cables (Score:5, Informative)
Blue Jeans Cable [bluejeanscable.com] is an excellent source of HDMI cables, and information. That link will actually lead to their slightly less than reverant overview on HDMI which is quite informative.
For less information and more cabling, go here instead [bluejeanscable.com].
I do not work for or have any association with the above except that they sent me excellent cables as ordered for a good price and had excellent pre-sales customer service via E-mail.
HDBaseT (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
That's odd (Score:2)
But that would be crazy.
I will continue using my standard approach (Score:2)
Why not just buy the cheapest one you can, see if it works, and move up only if necessary? Marketing fog will always try to wring more money out of you (in ANY consumer product area), but it only will if you let it. HDMI is no different; if the plug fits then it will almost always work, if not there is probably a special case, and a Google search will resolve your problem in less than 5 minutes.
Good idea with poor execution. (Score:5, Insightful)
The five grades listed make sense. Standard Speed and High Speed with and without Ethernet (total of 4 combos of those two) and the Automotive cable.
However the other stuff is poorly executed, like the "4K" rule. And do they have any rules on putting arbitrary meaningless bandwidth numbers on their cables like the example in the article and Monster? Any number that exceeds the bandwidth actually used by HDMI is meaningless, but manufacturers still stick crazy numbers on their cables anyway.
Manufacturers should be permitted:
To state which version of the HDMI spec they are compliant to, or very clearly defined capabilities (such as High Speed-No Ethernet)
To give specific physical properties of their cable's construction such as wire gauge and connector plating materials
They should NOT be permitted:
To advertise any electrical performance numbers that exceed the requirements of the defined HDMI specification, as these numbers are irrelevant to all users.
Closed captions, hello? (Score:5, Interesting)
And what will future versions be called? (Score:3, Insightful)
In a few years presumably some even higher bandwidth specification will come along - no problem if they used version-numbers, but once you have labelled the first generation "standard" and the current generation "High Speed" what're you going to be left with to use next and not end up looking stupid?
"new higher speed", "max speed", "ultimate speed", "super more ultimate than ultimate speed", "I Can't believe its not high speed... speed"?
Re:And what will future versions be called? (Score:5, Funny)
In a few years presumably some even higher bandwidth specification will come along - no problem if they used version-numbers, but once you have labelled the first generation "standard" and the current generation "High Speed" what're you going to be left with to use next and not end up looking stupid?
"new higher speed", "max speed", "ultimate speed", "super more ultimate than ultimate speed", "I Can't believe its not high speed... speed"?
Ludicrous Speed
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
hmm that sounds familiar... USB anyone?
USB High Speed vs Full speed all over again. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a good idea to learn from the mistakes of others who like adding confusing naming.
Revolutionized? (Score:3, Informative)
Those names are a mistake (Score:2)
Calling the currently higher-speed standard "High speed" is going to turn out to have been a mistake when a higher-speed standard appears in the future.
And, as the link referred to in TFA [pcauthority.com.au] points out, "high speed" and "standard speed" don't even come close to suggesting the true applicability space of the cables. Consumers would be far better off if the labelling was required to carry the standard name (HDMI 1.3 or HDMI 1.4 with whatever add-on) and a URI pointing to the standards documentation.
Why do stand
Neal Stephenson has a fictional word for this (Score:3, Informative)
Bulshytt [wikia.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So how do you like your 640x480 computer monitor?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm guessing you are too young to have any idea about this, but you do know that computer monitors have been exceeding the HD spec since years before there was an HD spec? Furthermore the GP is right, HD isn't a video spec. It's a marketing term.
Don't be too hard on the young ones. It's kinda fun watching them flame & down-mod me, as most young people go through that stage of knowing everything before they discover how smart the old people they ignored in their youth really were as they mature.
It's almo
Re: (Score:2)
If you had to go in and check some configs to see if it was doing 720p or 1080p, then why does it even matter?