Slashdot Mirror

Oldschool HDMI was 4.2 Gbit. The newer 2.0 spec is 18 GBit, which are almost certainly the most common now.

But you are correct (in spirit - we're talking Gbit, not GB) that the next gen, 2.1, claims to be 48Gbit, but a) they're not in wide enough use to test this argument (I don't know that any consumer gear has 2.1 yet), and b) you'd need to actually use that bandwidth (e.g. 4K/120, 8K), which again is not going to be common for some time.

It does look like HDMI 2.1 cables are thick enough to have decent shielding.

A few problems though. First, no one makes 48Gbps HDMI stuff. No transmitters, no receivers, heck, the certification tests don't exist yet. (And most of HDMI2.1 tests don't exist). The only tests that do exist are those that can be implemented right now - eARC, VRR (Variable Refresh Rate), etc. (And HDMI org doesn't want people referring to HDMI by revision number, but by feature support, because 48Gbps isn't needed yet while certain features of 2.1 already are (like the aforementioned eARC and VRR).

Second problem is that cable isn't certified - HDMI 2.0 cables are hard enough to make that the HDMI org now puts them under certification tests, and every passing cable puts on a special logo and sticker that shows it with a QR code to verify the results. (This is a good way to see who OEMs cables from whom, because the big players don't re-test, they just slap on the sticker from the company that makes the cables).

More info and example - https://www.hdmi.org/manufactu...

Though the label has changed - they added a manufacturer name to the text part of the sticker.

And it's on every cable, not on every shelf of cables or on the peg - every certified cable carries it so you can't cheat by mis-hanging cables or other things.

Did you mess up your units or just fail math horribly?

Crazily enough it's accurate enough for purposes of demonstrating relative bandwidth. People naturally have trouble believing it at first because the eyes move so fast without much conscious thought and mind does a great job of tricking itself.

The best way I know of to dispel the illusion human eyesight is focus on this text with your eyes and then try and read something else on the screen without moving your eyeballs. For myself and setup of my display anything more than 6 lines down is illegible without cheating.

https://www.newscientist.com/a...
Human optic nerve is about 10 mbit/s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Wired ethernet is generally 1000 mbit/s
1000 / 10 = 100

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Actual usable 5ghz wireless people actually get at reasonable distance is something like 100mbit/s.
100 / 10 = 10

https://www.hdmi.org/manufactu...
HDMI 2.0 is 18 gbit/s (18000 mbit/s)
18000 / 10 = 1800

Here are links to the actual HDMI Forum press release on the HDMI 2.1 specification, and high-level presentation discussing the new features in the 2.1 spec.

Press release: https://www.hdmi.org/press/pre...

High-level presentation: https://www.hdmi.org/download/...>

Here are links to the actual HDMI Forum press release on the HDMI 2.1 specification, and high-level presentation discussing the new features in the 2.1 spec.

Press release: https://www.hdmi.org/press/pre...

High-level presentation: https://www.hdmi.org/download/...>

HDMI 1.1 and on can contain an ethernet channel. I don't know if compute sticks will use it, though.

I recently bought a TV as well, and mine can also do so quite well. Two unfortunate things though. 1. All of my devices go through a receiver for audio and when I light up the TV with a cast, it doesn't pipe audio through the receiver, instead using the comparatively crappy TV speakers. Sure I could run a SPDIF cable to the receiver for that but then that brings us to point

You should look into the HDMI Audio Return Channel function. This is exactly the scenario it was designed for.

From HDMI.org (not certain that's the official standards site...)
http://www.hdmi.org/installers...

  Like all HDMI-enabled components, cables must be tested to meet the Compliance Test Standards set by the HDMI Licensing, LLC. Cables must successfully pass a signal of a certain strength (Standard cable must deliver a signal of 17Mhz; High Speed must deliver a signal of 340Mhz) to pass compliance.

The HDMI specification does not dictate cable length requirements.

The HDMI 2.0 spec was released in 2013. Products that support are beginning to become available. HDMI 2.0 supports 4K@60Hz, color depth up to 16 bits, and improved color subsampling. (The supported formats depend on refresh rate and color depth.) Reference: http://www.hdmi.org/manufactur...

And with the DisplayPort connection, it's capable of 60Hz vertical refresh at full resolution, something HDMI can't do until the new HDMI spec is finalized.

It's already finalized: HDMI 2.0

The return is completely disproportionate to the initial investment. How much do you think it cost to come up with the standard for the HDMI cable? How much do you think is being made worldwide if even $1.00 US is going for license fees?

But what if $0.05 is the fee per cable/unit?
Because that is the actual license fee for HCMI.
Why make up numbers when the actual numbers are available through a simple search? http://www.hdmi.org/manufactur...

You really don't like to be wrong, do you?
DVI-D and HDMI both use Transition-Minimized Differential Signalling as their electrical protocol. Past that, HDMI added HDCP to protect the [MP|RI]AA's "valuable" content. After the HDMI specification was published and became common on PCs, many/most PC graphics chips added HDCP capability to their DVI-D implementations, so that with a passive adapter that only changes which pins go where, everything works. As far as what is transmitted on those pins, it is the same.

From Wikipedia's article on HDMI "Because HDMI is electrically compatible with the CEA-861 signals used by digital visual interface (DVI), no signal conversion is necessary, nor is there a loss of video quality when a DVI-to-HDMI adapter is used." Citing the HDMI 1.3a specification at http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/specification.aspx (they make you sign up to download it, but it's free)

Changing the pins around does not make it electrically incompatible, that's what is called physical incompatibility, and that's what passive adapters do.

There really isn't any more proof to offer than the HDMI specification itself, unless you think that is wrong...

http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/faq.aspx#117

Officially HDMI supports closed captioning by deferring it to the set to box creating the HDMI signal. So HDMI supports it by not supporting it.

4K TV? I guess that's covered under the HDMI supported resolutions.

There is no agreed-upon standard for displaying 4K content in consumer electronics (DCI handles pro equipment), although the HDMI specification theoretically supports two different resolutions at 24-30Hz. I am not looking forward to my clients buying all these amazing [sic] 1st-gen 4K TVs that won't be compatible with any of the source devices coming out in the next couple years.

"Good grief. How many pins, exactly, would you say are needed for a serial connection?"

One, if you're operating an old telegraph. Eleven, if you're doing HDMI. Four twisted pairs for differential serial, plus three that are used for control information. Monitor resolution detection, that sort of thing.

http://www.hdmi.org/installers/insidehdmicable.aspx

Some devices appear to do it with less, but they are actually using MHL, not HDMI.

If you put MHL signals on a bigger, proprietary connector, you're dumb, because you could just add enough pins to do HDMI in the first place. Then you wouldn't need active MHL->HDMI bridge silicon on the other end.

Hmm... Well, there's the issue of trademark infringement (PDF WARNING) if you use HDMI over a non-approved port (and call it HDMI anywhere on the product or in the documentation).

Say what you want about MicroUSB, but I have a self-made charging dock that has supported my last 3 phones by just the micro-USB connector that sticks out of it. I've never broken a phone or had to replace the cable (though I've had to replace the cradle itself whenever I've gotten a new phone). My last 2 phones have also had car docks, to which the phone attached only by the micro-USB port. Both the previous and current docks were situated such that the port was on top, holding the full weight of the phone; I've not once had the phone fall out of the dock, nor have I broken a connector, and I drive on some bumpy roads.

Your AppleTV argument is laughable, at best, but I'll give you credit for coming up with something better than the "dock connector's analog connections allow for cheaper accessories" that I've already debunked a few times here (see my comment history, it's not hard to find). If I'm at home and, indeed, am trying to pipe A/V to my AppleTV-connected (using a cable, mind you) TV, then yes, wireless is great, until every one of my neighbors has a wireless router blasting away at full-tilt and I can't get shit for transfer speed. But then, let's assume I'm at a friend's house, or trying to present something at my office, where AppleTV may not be an option. Solution?

Personally, I prefer separate (but physically adjacent) USB and HDMI ports. I'm waiting for a standard configuration of that, with a specific orientation and distance between the ports, which would allow for a single cable with both connectors on each end. It would also provide the ability to use one or the other, over a standard connection. The connectors have proven themselves sturdy enough if you're not doing stupid things with them and they're damn ubiquitous. You also have the advantage of a trie HDMI connection; as for wireless A/V, there's DLNA, which is supported by PS3, a lot of blu-ray players, most networked media players, a growing number of TVs, and a nontrivial number of Android devices, and it works damn well in my experience.

http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/4K.aspx

HDMI tops out much higher than 1920x1200.

VGA, being analog, theoretically has NO limitation.

http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/4K.aspx

HDMI does HIGHER than 2560x1600. Try to keep up.

Directly from HDMI.org : http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/finding_right_cable.aspx http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/trademark_logo_pub.aspx

Since 1.4, there are only 5 differentes cables and correctly labelling them is REQUIRED by HDMI (there is a grace period until the end of 2011).

It's simple : 2 speeds (Normal or HighSpeed) and a feature (with or without Ethernet). Basically, Normal supports up to 1080i and HighSpeed supports above.

The last category is about automative cabling so we can forget about it.

At last, it is FORBIDDEN to make reference to a HDMI version number for cables ("upgrade your 1.3 cables to 1.4" : those are the same - except for Ethernet but your pre-1.4 devices did not support it).

There's a difference, though, between specs and build quality. You can get a cable made in China for $1 if you don't care about build quality. While it may meet the HDMI specs, its durability and life span could be questionable. You don't want a cable whose end connector comes off the first time you unplug it or corrodes over time.

That said, there's a price point where all you are paying for is hype - an at the consumer end of the spectrum I'd guess it somewhere around the $10 - 20 dollar range (depending on length). For a professional setup where the cable cost is less important than absolute repeatable performance it may be more simply do to the QA requirements to ensure the cable works as needed.

Directly from HDMI.org : http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/finding_right_cable.aspx http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/trademark_logo_pub.aspx

Since 1.4, there are only 5 differentes cables and correctly labelling them is REQUIRED by HDMI (there is a grace period until the end of 2011).

It's simple : 2 speeds (Normal or HighSpeed) and a feature (with or without Ethernet). Basically, Normal supports up to 1080i and HighSpeed supports above.

The last category is about automative cabling so we can forget about it.

At last, it is FORBIDDEN to make reference to a HDMI version number for cables ("upgrade your 1.3 cables to 1.4" : those are the same - except for Ethernet but your pre-1.4 devices did not support it).

There's a difference, though, between specs and build quality. You can get a cable made in China for $1 if you don't care about build quality. While it may meet the HDMI specs, its durability and life span could be questionable. You don't want a cable whose end connector comes off the first time you unplug it or corrodes over time.

That said, there's a price point where all you are paying for is hype - an at the consumer end of the spectrum I'd guess it somewhere around the $10 - 20 dollar range (depending on length). For a professional setup where the cable cost is less important than absolute repeatable performance it may be more simply do to the QA requirements to ensure the cable works as needed.

Directly from HDMI.org :
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/finding_right_cable.aspx
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/trademark_logo_pub.aspx

Since 1.4, there are only 5 differentes cables and correctly labelling them is REQUIRED by HDMI (there is a grace period until the end of 2011).

It's simple : 2 speeds (Normal or HighSpeed) and a feature (with or without Ethernet).
Basically, Normal supports up to 1080i and HighSpeed supports above.

The last category is about automative cabling so we can forget about it.

At last, it is FORBIDDEN to make reference to a HDMI version number for cables ("upgrade your 1.3 cables to 1.4" : those are the same - except for Ethernet but your pre-1.4 devices did not support it).
And for products, if you want to use a version number, the manufacturer have to specifically list the feature added in this version supported by its product.

Directly from HDMI.org :
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/finding_right_cable.aspx
http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/trademark_logo_pub.aspx

Since 1.4, there are only 5 differentes cables and correctly labelling them is REQUIRED by HDMI (there is a grace period until the end of 2011).

It's simple : 2 speeds (Normal or HighSpeed) and a feature (with or without Ethernet).
Basically, Normal supports up to 1080i and HighSpeed supports above.

The last category is about automative cabling so we can forget about it.

At last, it is FORBIDDEN to make reference to a HDMI version number for cables ("upgrade your 1.3 cables to 1.4" : those are the same - except for Ethernet but your pre-1.4 devices did not support it).
And for products, if you want to use a version number, the manufacturer have to specifically list the feature added in this version supported by its product.

None of that mentions error correction. If you look further down that Wikipedia page you'll see:

Both HDMI and DVI use TMDS to send 10-bit characters that are encoded using 8b/10b encoding for the Video Data Period and 2b/10b encoding for the Control Period. HDMI adds the ability to send audio and auxiliary data using 4b/10b encoding for the Data Island Period.[75] Each Data Island Period is 32 pixels in size and contains a 32-bit Packet Header, which includes 8 bits of BCH ECC parity data for error correction.

It explicitly mentions error correction for the Data Island Period (which, among other things transfers audio), but not for the Video Data Period. If you check the actual spec, you'll see that there is indeed no error correction for the video data.

I can live with confusing names if they get around to supporting closed captioning data like they are supposed to. They misinterpreted the legal requirements for closed captioning as it being something which is handled by set-top boxes rather than TVs and elected to not transmit the data. HDMI's own FAQ makes this position clear. However, the law is quite clear that the TVs are required to render captions. Unfortunately, people use devices other than set-top boxes to push content to the TV. If you need captioning, you can't use HDMI with Blu-ray disc players or other devices.

HDMI 1.4 has specs for an optional locking connector. http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/automotive_connection.aspx

Someone should tell hdmi.org that they're not in "the industry" then, because they clearly refer to 4k as four times the resolution of 2k:

http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/4K.aspx

Who do you work for, so we can all make sure NOT to hire you?

The cable costs more than a dollar because it's the equivalent of several CAT-6a cables. It's designed to transmit raw video data at 1920x1080p30. That's roughly 1.4Gbps. The standard even defines faster rates. You'd need 2-3 CAT6a cables to transfer video at that rate and still cover everything else HDMI takes care of.

When you've spit the hdmi cartel's collective junk out of your mouth for a minute, try reading about
SDI. Nice, cheap run of co-ax, dozens of meters, no problem. No pointless crypto handshaking. HDMI is a fucking scam.

You weren't complaining when region free DVD players stopped honoring the "intellectual property" of the DVD content "owners".

Excellent point!

I for one applaud these hardware makers, particularly in Asia, for cutting this twisted Gordian knot and just loading up their devices will all the features they can download. [...] If anyone wants to complain, they can just go ahead and make their own, real physical devices and bring them to market.

You are inviting honest people to compete with the dishonest on the price... That's simply not possible — the stuff that "fell from the back of a truck" will always be cheaper. The Intellectual Property regime does not prevent hardware makers from using other people's property. It is only illegal for them to use it without permission — and such permission is almost always granted, when sufficient monies are paid or promised. For example, the widely-used HDMI technology costs adopters from 5 to 15 cents per item.

In other words, the alternative to manufacturers "cutting this twisted Gordian knot" is not absence of products, but rather the slightly higher prices, so that the patent-holders get paid...

If the Adopter implements HDCP content protection as set forth in the HDMI Specification, then the royalty rate is further reduced by one cent (US $.01) per unit sold, for a lowest rate of four cents (.04) per unit. Adopters must license HDCP separately from Digital Content Protection, LLC, an Intel subsidiary. Please see www.digital-cp.com for details.

Q. What has the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) mandated for HDMI usage in HDTVs?

In the United States, the FCC has mandated that beginning July 1, 2005, all HDTVs 36 inches and larger labeled "Digital Cable Ready" must include either a DVI/HDCP or HDMI/HDCP interface. In addition, either a DVI/HDCP or HDMI/HDCP interface is required for:

Models with screen sizes 25 to 35 inches: 50% of a manufacturer's or importer's models manufactured or imported after July 1, 2005; 100% of such models manufactured or imported after July 1, 2006.
Models with screen sizes 13 to 24 inches: 100% of a manufacturer's or importer's models manufactured or imported after July 1, 2007. [Source: Code of Federal Regulations, Section 15.123]

It is unclear but before the Sony fanbots pile on- the PS3 doesn't have a 1.3 HDMI port either. It's actually a 1.2A that Sony says will be "just as good" sometime in the future (maybe) with a firmware update. I mean, it's not like Sony hasn't downgraded their announced specs before (e.g. dual hdmi, dual ethernet ports, rumble, FULL backwards compatability, 1080P on games more graphically impressive than Sodoku...).

Huh? It's HDMI 1.3 and even HDMI Licensing, LLC states PS3 is the first product to feature HDMI 1.3. Stop stupid FUD.

http://www.hdmi.org/press/pr/pr_20061026.asp

HDMI LICENSING LAUNCHES HDMI 1.3 WORLD TOUR, AS FIRST PRODUCTS WITH HDMI 1.3 FEATURES HIT THE MARKET

SUNNYVALE, Calif., Oct. 26, 2006 -- HDMI Licensing, LLC, the agent responsible for licensing the High-Definition Multimedia Interface(TM) (HDMI(TM)) specification, next week will kick off a series of briefings and technology demonstrations for media in Asia, the United States and Europe, previewing key technologies enabled by HDMI 1.3.

The demonstrations will preview high-definition (HD) video and audio technology that will begin hitting the consumer market in November and continue rolling out in 2007. According to announcements by manufacturers, among the first consumer products with HDMI 1.3 features to reach the market will be the PLAYSTATION®3 (PS3) from Sony Computer Entertainment Inc. in November, the HD-XA2 HD DVD player from Toshiba America Consumer Products, LLC in December, and the EMP-TW1000, a 3LCD 1080p projector from Epson in December.

"Reports from manufacturers indicate that most Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD players, and a substantial proportion of conventional DVD players, will include HDMI 1.3 capabilities in 2007," said Leslie Chard, president of HDMI Licensing, LLC. "During the first half of 2007 we expect to see HDTVs with HDMI 1.3 functionality, allowing them to display Deep Color(TM)TM content. We also expect the introduction during 2007 of HDMI 1.3 technology for PCs, audio-visual receivers and a range of other source and display devices."

In June 2006, the HDMI Founders announced the HDMI 1.3 specification, the most significant upgrade yet in the interface that has become the de facto standard interface for high-definition devices. HDMI 1.3 more than doubles HDMI's bandwidth and adds support for Deep Color(TM) technology, a broader color space, new digital audio formats, automatic audio/video synching capability ("lip sync"), and an optional smaller connector for use with portable devices such as digital still cameras and camcorders.

HDMI specifications include both mandatory and optional components. As a result, HDMI Licensing encourages consumers to look for the functionality they want the device to support (Deep Color(TM), specific audio formats, etc.), referring to the manufacturer's product information.

The HDMI 1.3 World Tour will offer the first glimpse of key HDMI 1.3 technologies, including Deep Color(TM) and support for new lossless audio formats.

I would love to see a standard that would allow 100 ft cables for both video & USB.

Since the max USB cable length is 5 meters, that's a bit tricky. You'll need to string it along between 5 USB hubs -- that's 30m of cable, or about 98 feet. Each hub would need to be powered somehow (i.e., wall wart), which would ruin most of the convenience.

If you just want to hook up a DVD drive, try Firewire. You can have Firewire cable runs of 100 meters using cat-5.

Of course a simpler solution would be to just get a quieter computer, or try to silence the one you have.

HDMI claims cables of 15 meters, with longer cables to come. If you get a Firewire drive, HDMI is going to be the limiting factor.

HDMI provides 5 Gbps of bandwidth, and the recent 1.3 spec of HDMI ups that to 10.2 Gbps. I don't know of any 802.11_ standard that even comes close to streaming HDMI over the air, unless you consider Apple's 320x200 widescreen TV shows to be "HD."

On the other hand, every HDMI set can handle HDCP.

The Tv you are referring to is actually called an "SXRD" tv and it is in Sony's "XBR" line of TV's. The model number for this TV is kdsr60xbr1. This TV currently only supports 1080p through firewire. There are not any TV's as of yet that are on the market that will support 1080p through HDMI. The new version of HDMI is now out and there are some new TV's coming out that will have the upgrade allowing them to support 1080p material through HDMI. Sony's current SXRD model will soon be replaced (Early-Mid July) by their new model with the upgraded HDMI inputs. Mitsubishi also has a DLP on the market right now that supports 1080p through firewire only as well. They have plans to release a new model in early August that will support the new HDMI standards allowing for 1080p. If you want anymore information on 1080p through HDMI check out this site... http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/specification.asp where you can download the latest specs on HDMI 1.2a. Hope this helps!

From http://www.hdmi.org/consumer/faq.asp:
"HDMI has the capacity to support existing high-definition video formats (720p, 1080i, and 1080p/60)."

HDMI compliance is not required, you just need a DVI to HDMI is just a rework of the DVI cable to allow for easier consumer connections and include audio.
from http://www.ramelectronics.net/ "HDMI - Digital connection for Video and 8-channels of Digital Audio as well as device control features. Electronically better potential for supporting longer cable lengths than DVI for digital video.
Specification supports up to 12 bit Y-Pr-Pb video (rarely implemented on equipment) as opposed to 8 bit limit of DVI RGB."
I've used them before for other AV media conversion products and they make pretty good stuff.

also see the HDMI FAQ at http://www.hdmi.org/about/faq.asp
which states "Is HDMI backward-compatible with DVI (Digital Visual Interface)?
Yes, HDMI is fully backward-compatible with DVI using the CEA-861 profile for DTVs. HDMI DTVs will display video received from existing DVI-equipped products, and DVI-equipped TVs will display video from HDMI sources."

Firstly, HDMI is not "a proprietary version of DVI created by Sony". See http://www.hdmi.org/

I just looked at the web site, and Sony is a founder of the HDMI group. Created (in part) by Sony: Check.

In addition, HDMI involves HDCP, parts of which are patented and parts of which are trade-secreted. Proprietary: Check.

Firstly, HDMI is not "a proprietary version of DVI created by Sony". See http://www.hdmi.org/

I just looked at the web site, and Sony is a founder of the HDMI group. Created (in part) by Sony: Check.

In addition, HDMI involves HDCP, parts of which are patented and parts of which are trade-secreted. Proprietary: Check.

Here's a few clues for you, since you don't seem to have any:

Firstly, HDMI is not "a proprietary version of DVI created by Sony". See http://www.hdmi.org/

Secondly, all "HD Ready" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_ready) HDTVs sold here in Europe have HDMI.

Thirdly DVI to HDMI adapters are not expensive. You can get one for about $7 on Ebay, including postage.

Fourthly, HDMI is not a form of DRM. HDCP is DRM, but HDCP can be implemented on DVI as well as HDMI.

"The server rejected one or more recipient addresses. The server response was: 550 unknown user (contact@hdmi.org)".

Clever am I to notice that the pages are .asp... okay.... I (shuddering with self loathing) use... MSIE . Same error ;-) I notice that this is the same page that you are directed to when you select "Contact".

Checking further (with directory assistance) there is no listing for a phone contact for HDMI.org in beautiful Sunnyvale, CA....

Okay, so maybe their server is being slashdotted(dededed), so I try DIRECTLY emailing those shy fellows and get (drum roll please):

"Hi. This is the qmail-send program at yahoo.com.
I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses.
This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
:
72.32.30.237 does not like recipient.
Remote host said: 550 unknown user
Giving up on 72.32.30.237."

It just keeps getting more funny...

A day or two after this information was revealed, HDMI.org went completely password protected...

What does this mean? I just went to HDMI.org and the site appears to work just fine.

This was partly modded Funny, but I see little funny about this. I rely on financial aid for tuition. I should NOT have to relinquish that to pay for licensing fees and royalties that would diminish my freedom. That's why I got a non-HDCP-equipped, China-made monitor now, and will not pay for HDCP-equipped ones the company(ies) make(s) in the future (I got back much of its cost from my old screen and other things; money is not too much of a prob there). I've lost a lot (but not all) of faith in American tech business. Or something like that.

The point of Blu-Ray is High Definition. So your analog video and audio outputs are not going to get you HD. You are not going to plug your HDTV to your DVD player using analog if you want HiDef.

So is this intending to rival the HDMI connector? VESA's will have to support encryption and DRM protocols for it to be taken up by the consumer digital video and television developers. It think they will have a hard ride.

One of the biggest reasons that many companies want a standard outside of DVI and HDMI is the fact that Silicon Image and Intel basically control the show when it comes to digital interfaces. Intel needs to be mentioned because, although Silicon Image appears to spearhead the standards and controls key patents (e.g. TMDS), Intel exerts a high level of influence due to partial ownership of Silicon Image and DCP LLC. In fact, if you look at DCP LLC's address at the bottom of its web page, it resides inside Intel!

When DVI first came out, it was in a camp that was separate from VESA, the independent standards body responsible for the video signalling standards for PCs. VESA had been looking for a digital alternative for years but the Digital Display Working Group promoted DVI through some of the bigger manufacturers of both computer displays and manufacturers of electronics of those displays. DVI was ok but it was plagued with problems like a poor quality connector, limited cable length and very poor standards compliance. This largely limited DVI's adoption in the market for a number of years. The copy protection standard, HDCP, was added in the usual fashion of trying to "protect" the content providers. As for the standards compliance, Silicon Image knew it had screwed up and so created a compliance test center. The irony here is that Silicon Image's own first generation receivers don't even work with some of its own transmitters!

Though most consumer electronics manufacturers were included in the DDWG, at least one was conspicuously absent during the formation of HDMI, which is backwards compatible with DVI but has a smaller and more robust connector and more geared for consumer electronics rather than PC applications. That absent company was Samsung, and Ian Miller of Samsung was quite important in the VESA organization. VESA had continued during the time of HDMI's creation and ramp-up of making a new standard, the latest one being NAVI that died on the vine. Having been excluded, and knowing Samsung's growing presence in many markets and the stranglehold of Silicon Image and Intel with respect to patents and copyright protection control with limp alternatives, I believe that the current companies within DisplayPort led by Ian Miller decided to take the initiative and move forward with an independent DisplayPort standard and independent copy protection mechanism. The new copy protection scheme, called DPCP, is administered by Philips rather than Intel.

The physical layer of DisplayPort is largely based on PCI Express in order to leverage the intellectual property already within these companies and avoid licensing and royalties associated with Silicon Image's TMDS and Intel's HDCP. One very interesting point for all /.ers - the interface standard is optionally encrypted with DPCP, but it can apply to every single link both outside and inside the display! This means that you may not be able to crack your panel open and hack the hardware inside without a hacked encryption key (which is heavily guarded at all points within its acquisition and programming into devices). Even with HDCP, it would be a simple matter in a flat panel to take the unencrypted LVDS output and fabricate a small board with an unencrypted DVI digital output for HDTV. Therefore, don't look at DisplayPort as anyone's savior. It also remains to be seen if people will accept yet another display connector for their PCs and the resultant fragmentation, though both ATI and Nvidia are on board DisplayPort.

In short, don't expect a whole lot of advantages for the end user here. The politics of the display industry are significant and the average consumer will continue to suffer as these politics play out in the grander scheme of business.

You mean like DVI? The HDMI folks claim backwards compatibility.

Is HDMI backward-compatible with DVI (Digital Visual Interface)?
Yes, HDMI is fully backward-compatible with DVI using the CEA-861 profile for DTVs. HDMI DTVs will display video received from existing DVI-equipped products, and DVI-equipped TVs will display video from HDMI sources.

Are there HDTVs with analog-only inputs? What's the point? Sounds like you would be screwed already. Those with DVI ports should be okay unless everyone is fibbing.

Content protection capability is recommended for all HDMI compliant devices. An HDMI compliant Source should protect all of the protected audiovisual data. Amongst adequate copy protection technologies that are compatible with HDMI, HDCP is available.

Sadly, most new TVs have HDMI, not DVI. Basically, HDMI is digital video and audio through one connector, along with some DRM to make the entertainment industry happy.

Well, being that in the US (the current largest gaming market) all TV sets will be required by law to include HDTV capabilities starting in 2006, and the Xbox2 is most likely coming out this fall...it sounds like perfect timing to me. Most people are going to be buying new televisions over the next couple years, and getting a new console to show it off will definitely be a selling point. I do agree that all 3 systems will most likely have the same standards for HD resolutions though. And it's not a surprise to see a DVI port on the back of one of the new systems since most new DVD players already come with them, if not a HDMI port. HDMI will probably be standard on all 3 systems as well.

I recently bought a Sony projection TV and had the same problem. Reading up on things I doscovered that Type A HDMI is backwards-compatible with the single-link Digital Visual Interface (DVI). The cables for it are expensive (about $150 USD) but it works just fine for me. You still have to feed audio over a separate wire however.

Also, from the HDMI website, the faq says:
Is HDMI backward-compatible with DVI (Digital Visual Interface)?
Yes, HDMI is fully backward-compatible with DVI using the CEA-861 profile for DTVs. HDMI DTVs will display video received from existing DVI-equipped products, and DVI-equipped TVs will display video from HDMI sources.

However, to answer the question of the original story "HDMI and What it Will Do for You" I have to say absolutely nothing! This effort is really for the media companies to introduce DRM without the average consumer knowing.

HDMI.org doesn't mention any encryption, except for a fee (in the manufacturer faq) for licensing. I'm sure you could encrypt over HDMI, but I do not believe it's part of the standard. Soooo, as I see it:
HDMI = DVI + Sound