HDMI and What it Will Do for You

CrzyP writes "AnandTech has whipped up a short but informative article on the new HDMI digital audio/video connection standard that is said to be the successor of DVI. Take a look at what this new standard is all about and what we can expect from it in the future!"

Comments

Could be a great technology.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd love to see this technology implemented in next-generation video game consoles. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if XboxNext had something like this, a way to easily transfer videos (M$'s DRM of course) from your computer onto the big screen.

"For Me"

[grub]

HDMI and What it Will Do for You

From what I read in the article, it will help the media companies to prevent fair use of the signal. Other than bundling audio, how will really benefit the consumer?

HDMI is cool, but do PC Vid cards have plug yet?

[piett134]

I use a Win MCE 2005 box, and hooking up to a TV via HDMI would be sweet, but the only video cards I have seen right now have DVI connectors. Anybody have a luck with using a DVI/HDMI converter cable for their TV? Hows the quality, does it suffer any?

HDMI seemed awesome but has problems

[the-pdm]

Between HD Tivo having numerous problems with its HDMI port and my new Samsung HD941 DVD player displaying "HDMI Audio not supported" on a great many DVDs I'm not sure if this stuff is 'ready' yet. On both of these devices I still had to resort to using a TOSlink cable for audio instead of using the HDMI audio.

Hooray

[stratjakt]

I'll save you the time of reading TFA:

It's line-compatible DVI with a pair of lines for digital audio, and a slimmer connector.

It can carry 5gbps over copper, more than enough for 1080p video and 8 192khz audio channels.

Upfront Costs...

[DaHat]

HDMI is a great technology... except for the costs involved.

The company I work for has been asked by many interested customers when we will be having HDMI addons for a number of our popular video playing products... because of the costs involved, we have had to hold back on any kind of rollout of these things.

In order to do licensed development of HDMI components (on the sending or receiving end), it runs about 30k... for the licensing alone! After that of course you have the joys of per unit costs, which we don't care about so much.

Chances are, we wont be doing HDMI until more customers are demanding it, shame though, I'd love to get my hands dirty with it.

Re:Upfront Costs...

[grub]

So other than bundling 8 channels of audio over the copper, what really makes it great for your company? The DRM and licensing costs? Seriously, I'm not trolling you: What makes this such a great thing for consumers.

I still can't believe it

[morcego]

I'm serious. Who come the people accept it ?
It stupidity to be a new way of life of something ?

I'm all for capitalism, but watermarking the sound my speaks produce ? Isn't that pushing things a bit too far ? Can't we sue the companies for it ? After all, the sound being produced it not the same sound we payed for.

And heck. It is MY computer. I can plug anything I want on it, not only "RIAA approved" devices. And I don't even live in USA, so why should I care if RIAA approved my devices or not ?

I'm still waiting for someone to show up and say: "Laugh! It was all a joke. Gotcha! April fools!"

Re:I still can't believe it

[dark_requiem]

I'm all for capitalism, but watermarking the sound my speaks produce ?

This isn't really the workings of capitalism. Under capitalism, schemes like this would fail, because they would be rejected by consumers, who hold a certain level of sovereignty in the marketplace, and any company basing its economic future on such foolishness would crumble accordingly. However, under the quasi-socialist state that is America, we have an unconstitutional governing body (the FCC) that can MANDATE the inclusion of DMR. Really the success of products and technologies such as this is fostered by government-created distortions in the market.

As to suing the companies, no, you can't, and shouldn't, be able to sue for that. So long as the company is up-front about the inclusion of such features, you had fair warning, and could choose to purchase a different system.

If you don't live in the US, then you might be OK. The FCC requirement to include HDCP technology in all products only applies, obviously, to products manufactured/distributed in the US. Foreign manufacturers can still develope and distribute technology effectively circumventing copy protections (depending on what country, of course. Some might actually cooperate with US law enforcement).

Legailty and workarounds

[CompSci101]

I read this article this morning and it really pissed me off (especially how rabidly positive the author was about the connector) -- now PC users will have to contend with all the DRM nonsense that the people who bought new HDTVs recently will soon be exposed to.

It brought to mind some questions though:

1. Is this LEGAL? The only broadcast flag implementation that the providers seem to want to want to endorse is HDCP, an Intel product. Now, the FCC can make all sorts of claims that they have not mandated an encryption/authentication standard, but if the only standard television and broadcasting manufacturers will support is HDCP, they've effectively given Intel a license to print money (just think of all the audio/video equipment manufacturers that must now become HDCP licensees or go out of business). If the FCC has gone so far as to mandate that copy protection must exist, they should mandate that interoperability must also exist.
2. Following on the legality question: is this creating a consumer electronics cartel that bars entry to the market and fair competition? A license for HDCP costs $15,000 and 1,000,000 keys costs an additional $5,000. This, of course, is a pittance to what consumer electronics manufacturers can come up with, but say you're an Open Source developer that wants to bring a software player to market (or Linux) that can play HDCP protected streams. You're SOL as this is clearly the same problem as DVD/CSS.
3. I'm sure this has been already asked, but would it be possible to establish a self-funded Open Source community that would become an HDCP licensee on the condition that it would only distribute the software it develops to members (like a small collective that would make the cost of a license small per developer). Naturally, the cost of a license would go down dramatically once more members signed on, but what's to stop Intel from revoking your license once you released the source to the product?

This is as big a problem as, if not bigger than, CSS.

C

So uh, what's the point?

[spitefulcrow]

I don't even use DVI yet. My card supports it, but I'm using an old analog LCD and the rest of my family still has CRTs. So is this just a way to force restriction of fair use onto consumers by selling it as an all-in-one cable run simplifier, with the nice side effect of making everyone upgrade to devices with the new standard and putting more money in home theatre companies' pockets?

Greed hinders greed?

[swb]

In order to do licensed development of HDMI components (on the sending or receiving end), it runs about 30k... for the licensing alone! After that of course you have the joys of per unit costs, which we don't care about so much.

Is Hollywood greed killing Hollywood greed?

Are they actually greedy enough to want to not only license their DRM technology to people who would actually implement it, thus stifling their ability to completely cripple fair use?

Or is this a subtle way that electronics companies accomplish this -- engage Hollywood in DRM technology, settle on standard, quietly charge big bucks to hardware developers knowing full well they won't adopt your does-nothing-other-technology-can't-but-DRM, continue using cheaper/easier/DRM-less technologies, continue selling tons of copy-enabled (at least somewhat) technology to eager consumers?

Or is this just one of those "barrier to entry" fees that keeps HDMI development kits out of the hands of small players and off eBay so that its secrets stay secret longer?

Re:Where is this headed?

[pe1chl]

I have a new LCD TV with HDMI input and HDCP support.
It also comes with schematics (on CD).

I studied the schematics and was astonished by what I found: the HDMI digital input is terminated at a special purpose chip that deserializes and deframes the data, decrypts the HDCP, and converts the R, G and B to ANALOG!

So on the output of this chip there is a normal RGB (plus sync) signal. This is fed to the switching matrix (where it is combined with all other inputs the TV supports) and then this analog RGB signal is again digitized and fed to the scaler that scales it up or down to drive the LCD panel.

This amazes me for two reasons:

1. I would have expected that the digital DVI or HDMI signal would go directly to the scaler without first being converted to analog and then back to digital. What point is there in using a digital input, this way?

2. It provides an accessible and decrypted version of the HDCP-protected stream. Assuming this special-purpose chip is commercially available, it will be trivial to build a HDCP-circumventing box, just like the anti-Macrovision boxes...

Good idea to have audio and video on same wire?

[good2pets]

regardless of the DRM that will be cracked within a month of release, how could I connect audio and video with one wire? Who has a 8 channel surround sound system built into their television? Stereo/speakers are on a different device than the video...but I do like the idea of not having to have a super thick shielded wire that will not be only like 6 ft long...my monitor wire is stretched to the limit right now.

Luckily, the encyption has already been broken

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of our "rock stars" have already broken HDCP, the encyption used for HDMI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Bandwidth_Digita l_Content_Protection

As the Wiki page states, HDCP was still approved despite its known weaknesses. If people want to, breaking HDCP is easier than the effort that was needed to deal with CSS for DVDs.

You just need to be able to capture & buffer data at 4Gbps...

Re:What WILL it do for you?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are so wrong.

The potential of this weapon lies far beyond preventing copyright infringement. It also has the potential of preventing the copying and PLAYBACK of non watermarked music.

Guess who would want that...

The record industry, of course. It would allow them to technically make it illegal for a band to release their own music on CD without being signed, because they can selectively allow watermarking only on CDs released by signed bands.

This has the potential to entirely destroy a whole fucking generation of bands because they would be locked out of music publishing.

Re:What WILL it do for you?

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn straight. People are just deluding themselves if they think it's just about piracy.

They have rampant piracy nowadays and they are making more money then ever.

Re:Get government out of the free market place.

[Grishnakh]

Which is EXACTLY why I want the government OUT of the free market place. We don't need government to patch the system when clearly they themselves are the cause.

Huh?

For one thing, there is no "free market place". A totally free market would be anarchy. Without government intervention, there would be no TV, radio, Wi-Fi, etc., because there would be no standards set and enforced. Every industrialized country has an equivalent to our FCC, for good reason.

Second, the broadcast flag and other DRM measures have little to do with the government. These are initiatives by private corporations, who want to maximize their profit. The only reason the FCC is agreeing to it is 1) because the content providers want it, and 2) the current FCC under Michael Powell is corrupt.

What effect do you think keeping the government out would have? At best, the corporations would immediately cut off analog TV, and require that everyone buy a new digital TV with lots of DRM built-in. At worst, everyone would push their own, different, digital TV broadcast standard and nothing would work.