Slashdot Mirror
New Display Interface Standard in the Works
virgil_disgr4ce writes "The VESA standards group is designing a new display interface standard to replace both VGA and DVI. The new standard promises better bandwidth and interoperability for a ' broad application within computer monitors, TV displays, projectors, PCs and other sources of image content.'"
... submarine patents.
I'll place money on the emergence of one or more patent claims on this, if it becomes a new standard.
My blog
I doubt it.
It's only been three years...
It's not too surprising, though. DRM has to extend to display hardware for it to be any use.
Right now I'm a Windows users and I have been for many years. I've stayed with W2K because I didn't much like the direction XP took. I'm pretty sure that there is going to come a point in the future where I move to Linux, because the control the Windows OS would have over my PC is unacceptable.
Unfortunately, the majority of PC users have no idea that this issue even exists.
--
Toby
Optional unless you want to be compatible with Microsoft's new edition of Windows Media Player.
Why do you think all the manufacturers are hellbent on pushing stuff like digital TV, new audio and video standards (BluRay and this)? Because of DRM, of course. Analog is being killed on purpose and DRM is coming. There's nothing you can do about it, so get ready for DRM'd computer hardware (goodbye home-built computers and open software), speakers, TVs, monitors and stereos.
Don't think that the customer's will allow this? Just wait and see. Analog TV broadcasts will end here in 2007 and you can bet that most of the stuff will be flagged with the broadcast flag.
The owls are not what they seem
"Optional" , but how long is it going to stay that way? I'm guessing this whole interface is setup so the monitor won't show media unless it is "authenticated". So if you pop in a Divx rip, and manage to hack windows vista bad enough that it will play media without connecting to a license server, the monitor will be the last measure available to the *AA. If the monitor drivers havent been cracked as well and cant connect to said license server, it will show only a black patch where the video is supposed to be. This interface is merely another way to take control of the machine out of the user's hands.
Ofcourse all the exteme DRM in vista is "optional" now, but it only takes one person to flip a switch at MS and the entire system is locked down like a maximum security prison.
/going to stick with SVGA
Disclaimer: On the other hand, I am kind of a psycho...
Booooooooring.
Because there aren't any Linux media hackers in the world who'll do a rip app to fool media apps into thinking it's outputting to a DRM-protected one-of-these and instead it just gets dumped to a data file for P2P.
I mean, what are the odds? DeCSS was just a fluke.
Or, to be less snide... yes, clearly this is an attempt to create a DRM-enabled display standard, the idea being to prevent people from intercepting the unencoded, unprotected signal coming out of your video card. But, as always, the client is in the hands of the enemy. All the information needed to snap this like a twig is already present on the box.
The only way DRM will ever work is government-enforced computer controls and white-listing of 'approved' software, with unapproved software being locked out (yes, there are ways even around that, but at that point it's too much trouble for John Doe to set up the whitewashing needed to run an unapproved box that looks clean to Big Brother). And even that will just force uncontrolled boxes off the Internet (as we know it) onto grey or black wireless networks outside the reach of governments.
From the article:
> A similar situation emerged in 1998 when consumers were initially hesitant
> to adopt a transition from CRT to LCD screens.
I don't think this was the reason for a hesitant transition of LCD,
which would work with existing interfaces. It was the price, which was
initially too high. For me, the prizes have only come down far enough
in 2001.
A new monitor interface will take longer to adapt to because it requires
both new graphics cards and new monitors and new computer projectors.
For me, an important transition was from VGA to DVI. Since my monitors
are feeded digitally, I have a much clearer picture. Still, I'm required
to use VGA, when using a video projector.
As others have pointed out, the better refresh rate or bandwidth is hardly the
reason for proposing a new standard. DRM implementations which promise to close
an analog hole, are the driving force. I doubt that encrypting the video signal
will do any good for the refresh rate. So, don't expect consumers to fall for it.
And it'll be a big surprise to the masses when it gets here. I can almost hear the calls now. "Hey, why won't this movie play? It ran alright on my old computer." Welcome to Windows World, buckwheat. They'll be offended, huffy for a little while, have a passive-aggressive little snit by complaining to people who can't do anything about it. But after a while they'll go on their grumbly way because they haven't been investing in any alternative, learning a different OS or trying out open source alternatives.
I see the same things in my business customers all the time. Except I get to remind them that I told them it was coming a year ago and they go, "Oh, right. But I thought they were going to extend support for that another year?" No, sorry. The next question is usually, "Well, how much is it going to cost?" Then I get to listen to their passive-aggressive snit aimed at me, like I have some command over what MSFT does.
If you want off the MSFT treadmill you have to plan it, start experimenting with alternatives and roll out the change in a controlled environment. Getting huffy when you plug your new PC in and something doesn't work anymore just annoys those of us in the business.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Assuming, of course, that you use a compliant player. If you use something like VLC, then it will simply not check that it is playing to an `authorised' monitor. Of course, this may result in more legal pressure being applied to VLC and similar projects...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
I won't get excited until someone develops an audio/video bus where you can connect multiple input devices and multiple output devices to the same bus.
I am disgusted at purchasing a TV where I can hookup one device via HDMI and one device via component video. So just what is one to do when they have two HDMI input devices and they want to view them both on their TV?
With a well designed A/V bus, I should be able to daisy chain several input and output devices to the bus. The streams on the bus should identify themselves descriptively. So, when I am changing the input source on my TV it says "Apex DVD player" or "Motorola DVR", etc. The TV shouldn't determine how many of which types of devices can be connected--rather the bandwidth of the bus should determine how many output devices can be active at once. Beyond that, if an output device has no input devices requesting the signal, why should it be using any bandwidth?
So my DVD player, DVR, Computer, TV, and audio receiver are all hooked up to the same bus. My DVD player is playing a DVD, but noone is watching it. The audio receiver is tuned into the audio channel of the DVD. In this case, only the DVD's audio channel would be on the bus. Simple bandwidth allocation based on demand. Devices can broadcast that a signal is available without actually broadcasting the signal. Then the TV is turned on and someone is watching the DVD. Now the DVD's audio and video are being broadcast. And even though the DVD audio is destined for two devices, it is only broadcast once on the bus. Combinations could be created where say you are watching the video of your computer on your TV and you are listening to the audio from a CD player, etc.
I also have no doubt the MPAA will be very willing to show their benevolence by making the fee for this service quite small, so that families can afford to to have a copy on both their main media player as well as the children's laptops.
What were you worried about again?