Slashdot Mirror
HDMI 2.0 Officially Announced
jones_supa writes with news that HDMI 2.0 is out. From Engadget "The folks at HDMI Licensing are announcing HDMI 2.0 officially. Arriving just in time for the wide rollout of a new generation of Ultra HDTVs, it adds a few key capabilities to the standard. With a bandwidth capacity of up to 18Gbps, HDMI 2.0 has the ability to carry 3,840 x 2,160 resolution video at 60fps. It also has support for up to 32 audio channels, 'dynamic auto lipsync' and additional CEC extensions. The physical cables and connectors remain unchanged."
Just like HDMI 1.4, the specification is only available to HDMI Forum members.
!So we won't see a markup in price on 2.0 cables then. If only.
Waiting for an amusing sig.
of porn...
New features include new master key I presume.
The summary doesn't say...
Does HDMI 2.0 support new, improved, and even more delicious Digitally Restricted Media? Seems that it must.
I am selling platinum-tipped, lead-shielded, kevlar-reinforced Ultra Mega HDMI 2.0 cables for the low, low price of $200/ft.
Given that HDMI is all about DRM, how many new ways have they come up to limit what we're 'allowed' to do?
And as far as yet another HD 'standard', I can't say I'm in a big rush to get this. The media companies seem to think we'll replace all of our equipment every 2 years or so when they come out with the new hotness.
But replacing my TV, my Amp, my DVD player ... well, I'll get around to it eventually. Since my current stuff is only about 2 years old, I don't see caring about this new spec for some time.
Though, for a computer monitor, those resolutions sound pretty awesome.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
By switching to gold connectors how many more bits will magically teleport and ECC themselves over the standard bandwidth compared to 1.4 that the highly qualified GeekSquad HDMI experts at BestBuy keep telling me about for $120?
http://saveie6.com/
And yet displayport remains royalty free, and honestly, has a much nicer designed / fitting / stable connector.
Thats real reason why HDMI 2.0 was created. How soon will I have to buy a new TV and stereo because my new Blu ray player, or tablet only supports HDMI 2.0 to prevent piracy of content because the current HDMI spec has been cracked?
"Version 2.0 of the HDMI Specification, which is backward compatible with earlier versions of the Specification[...]"
It is what it is.
New TV/display
New DVR
New media
New wife
Maybe you can use the same cable, everything else must go to make room for the new stuff.
Only took HDMI four years, after all!
HMDI != HDCP.
(Posting as AC because this comment will need repeating a few thousand times in this thread, and I have no desire to karma-whore).
So, the whole reason for going with faux 4K (3820 x 2160 or just 2160p as it should be called) in the first place, was because existing HDMI couldn't quite hit 4096 to do the real thing. Now they come out with something that can do it, but they are sticking with 3840?
How soon will I have to buy a new TV and stereo because my new Blu ray player, or tablet only supports HDMI 2.0
I don't know how long you can wait at most, but I can say how long you can wait at least: until you buy a new cutting edge Blu Ray player or a tablet...
now all my hdmi equipment will be slathered with flash garbage and junky java applets
Just wondering because squeezing all that data at the same time leads to lip sync issues and gaming (audio and video) lag.
Have they fixed the lack of closed captioning in HDMI? I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere.
"I'm a Genius!"*
*Not an actual Genius
The engineers at Monster must be working their asses off trying to shoe-horn all that bandwidth into one cable. They're doing god's work.
HTPC + VGA/DVI compatible TV* + BD-ROM drive + AnyDVD driver
*Because HDMI sucks at displaying text. Unless they finlly fixed that in HDMI2 (which I doubt)
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Do any of those 32 channels give me singing without that damn Auto-Tune?
"Version 2.0 of the HDMI Specification, which is backward compatible with earlier versions of the Specification[...]"
I bought a Blu-Ray player. I returned it because the copy-protection scheme wasn't backwards compatible with my digital TV.
Screw it. I don't want Blu-Ray bad enough to replace a perfectly good TV. My legacy DVD player works with it just fine.
You needed one of these.
No new cable needed? Hurray! It cost $1000 per meter.
Now I just have to wait for these guys to come down in price. http://www.bestbuy.com/site/AudioQuest+-+Coffee+HDMI+Cable+16m/1307068564.p?id=mp1307068564&skuId=1307068564
I know at $2,700 US they are a steal and I was saving up so my tv picture would look really great but now I don't have to. They should cost 10$ in a few weeks!
Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
Still limited to 60Hz? Disappointing and annoying.
Sure, but I bought my crappy TV after 2006 and it is nice that even if my PS3 were to break I don't need to worry about the new standard. Now Cable-ready (or whatever it is called) is evil. The connection between the digibox/set top box is indeed HDMI, but most of the high resolution programs cannot be shown, because the machine doesn't support some kind of registration.
It is what it is.
...downstream device limits.
It's not a bad idea until some as*holes like Comcast limit the number to 2 instead of 8 or 16 like most other cable boxes.
This, of course, means Comcast thinks I'm stealing my own cable when it goes to my receiver (1 device) then my wireless HDMI transmitter (1 device) into my projector (1 device.) Bang, green "you're stealing this signal" screen.
Jerks...
Loading...
HDMI is video and audio transport. Closed captioning works fine over it, since it comes from the video source. Be it your cable, DVD, Blu-ray, whatever, the CC information is processed on the relevant device, and then sent out as part of the video.
Asking HDMI to do closed captioning is like asking Ethernet to do packet filtering: You are looking at the wrong area.
How, precisely, would you propose to build something backward compatible with the current spec that can push that kind of bandwidth, and be built for a reasonable cost?
The reason for these limits aren't arbitrary. It gets rather difficult and expensive to generate these real high bandwidth signals. Same reason why 10 gig ethernet costs so much more than gigE and needs better cabling to boot.
It isn't magic, as technology advances (particularly smaller lithography) it becomes possible to do higher clock rates at a lower cost and thus increase the bandwidth going over the cables. However it isn't something where we could just make it as fast as we wanted, easily and cheaply. If it were, well we'd have a lot higher interconnect speed.
So if you know some engineering voodoo that nobody else does that will allow for a 2-4x increase in bandwidth while still keeping cost low, well then off to the patent office with you You'll be able to make a mint. However if you are just whining that you can't have everything, without any actual understanding, then please stop.
Can anybody of the slashdot readers that works the graphics industry tell me: is there any reason not to go with the DisplayPort standard? It's open, free, and seems like a better protocol overall?
my blu rays play just fine on my TV. what exactly am i missing?
You're missing the ability to access the HDMI channel, more specifically the HDCP channel, that your Blu-Ray disc is playing across. Many would use this access to record/copy the video stream, possibly for piracy which is what the DRM is designed to prevent. But, many others would like to be able to access the video stream to do things like:
* Add our own news crawler, or pop-up alerts from our home automation systems.
* We'd like to pop-up caller ID from our PBX while the video is playing.
* Allow the home automation system to mute the Blu-Ray's audio and make an announcement.
* We'd like the ability to switch video feeds on a particular HDMI interface in software, so we don't have to use convoluted mechanical HDMI switchers and computer controlled IR blasters to control the HDMI switch.
* Similar to above; switch our security cameras/gate video on the fly.
All of these things were possible with previously unDRMed interfaces. But, using those interfaces now cause the Blu-Ray player to artificially and significantly reduce the playback resolution. Instead of watching 1080p, the Blu-Ray restricts the video down to 720p or less.
Windows 7 does nothing at all with Blu-ray content. It doesn't understand how to play it. All it does in relation to any of this is provide a method for programs to inquire to drivers if everything is (supposedly) secure. A Blu-ray player can inquire as to the encryption status of the links and make sure things aren't being captured and so on. For that matter, so can other programs. It isn't Blu-ray specific, however only the media companies give a shit so that's all that really does it. Games don't mind at all if their output is being captured.
Doesn't matter the interface. DVI, HDMI, and DP can all encrypt the signal. There's nothing special, on a computer at least, about HDMI.
It is then up to the software how it acts on that. However, due to licensing requirements, the software has to disable the video out if everything isn't encrypted. If it doesn't they won't be able to get a license for the keys to decode the media.
Same deal on any platform. It isn't like Windows is special in this way. If your chosen platform doesn't support the necessary "protection" then there won't be any licensed Blu-ray playback software.
This is a media industry thing, not an OS thing. The OS provides the ability to have verified driver paths, but it does nothing at related to changing anything. That is up to the software, and that is dictated by licensing.
Hopefully they dont change that so it stays broken.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
>>Because HDMI sucks at displaying text.
More likely to be your TV's calibration, color space conversion and/or motion compensating kerjigger. You can get the same effect on a gaming monitor by messing with the 'overdrive' setting..
I for one get perfectly decent 1:1 pixel mapping (and shadow-free text) using bog-standard HDMI from my old-ish ATI graphics card to my cheap-ish Panasonic HDTV..
When I replaced my TV with an HDMI-capable model I moved all my components that supported HDMI to HDMI, and have HDMI links between my TV (Sharp), Tivo, Receiver (Pioneer) and BluRay player (Panasonic) and AppleTV.
If I leave on the HDMI communication option on my components, turning on the TV is supposed to turn on the receiver. In theory without a smart remote, I turn on my TV and I'm watching TV with audio through my stereo.
But it doesn't work like this. Invariably when the TV comes fully on, it switches the input on my receiver to a dormant device (usually the Apple TV but sometimes it's the BluRay player). Never the Tivo input, although my Series 3 HD Tivo has some kind of HDMI bug and doesn't work with the receiver.
I leave the HDMI communication on because turning off the TV turns off the receiver, but it's almost not worth it.
http://www.hdfury.com/ Makes any DVD player 100% compatible with any TV. And it removes ALL of the useless encryption and DRM.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
How does HDMI suck at text? Other than the DRM crap, HDMI moves the exact same RGB TDMS signal (though with the potential for YCbCr signals) that DVI uses.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
The poor sap is probably chomping at the bit to buy all of his media again when a new format comes out.
Oh, to be a "consumer" instead of a...person.
Yeah, right.
HDMI doesn't display text, it carries a digitally encoded signal. If your TV mangles the signal that's the TVs fault and not the cables fault.
We're producing the finest interconnects which leave pure metals in the dust. They're made of high-temperature superconducting materials. Our package includes a rigid rack on which to mount your components (these interconnects are not flexible, so components must not move relative to each other), a dewar, and a discount on your first purchase of liquid nitrogen (necessary to keep the interconnects within their superconducting temperature). If you wish for the absolute best, we also offer oxygen-free AAAA liquid dinitrogen. Even Grade A liquid nitrogen contains .05% of inert gases (neon, argon, and helium). Our AAAA cryogenic liquid dinitrogen is produced by a patent-pending liquefaction process which begins with UHP (ultra high pure) dinitrogen gas. Following your purchase and installation of our HTS interconnects with liquefied UHP dinitrogen cryogenic cooling system, you'll be hearing audio voices that most can't even imagine!
3840x2160 ? the new generation of consoles are barely catching up with 1920x1080 after a decade
You obviously havent tried to do it.
For whatever reason, text over an HDMI from a computer doesnt display text clearly. text in pictures (so its a graphic) is fine. but actual text, like say notepad, or message/titles boxes, or in a browser, is fuzzy. its not sharp, or clean, or even a solid color.
this illustrates it nicely: http://www.neoscigen.com/Forums/DisplayComments.php?file=Hardware/HDMI_Port_vs._VGA_Port
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Nope. Known issue with HDMI. Has nothing to do with any of those things. Note that everything else is fine, including "text" that is a graphic (ie, in a jpg). It's only text from a font, such as in a web browser or notepad or word.
it can even be demonstrated using Paint:
-Make new image
-Use the Text Tool
-Text you enter is fuzzy in the entry box
-Once its become part of the picture it's no longer fuzzy
http://www.neoscigen.com/Forums/DisplayComments.php?file=Hardware/HDMI_Port_vs._VGA_Port
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Never said it was the cable. Where int eh hell did you get that from?
Nor is the Tv, because if the TV was mangling anything it should be present uniformly in the entire signal. Not just in text.
Its the HDMI encoder itself. And it's a known problem with displaying font text via HDMI (text thats been stored graphically is fine).
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
addendum on myself:
those images are rather zoomed in (And not mine), but when you actually see it, its very jarring. The text is wavering in color, the fonts lose all smoothness. No TV calibration or adjustment will correct it. it is 100% in the HDMI encoder and how it handles font text.
google HTPC HDMI text. ist quite common. there's various workarounds, of varying quality, depending on your equipment, but most of them end up breaking the DRM chain. which means bluerays wont play from the HTPC...which is kinda counterproductive.
thus using the DVI port + AnyDVD to ignore the DRM chain entirely becomes the easiest solution.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
That's nothing to do with HDMI. That's Cleartype at work. It's supposed to make text more readable under normal circumstances by boosting the luminance at the cost of colour accuracy, despite looking weird up close.
It's on by default in Windows Vista and later, but it can be disabled.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
i thought most movies and TV shows are shot at 24 or 30 frames per second? i'm confused. lol not sure why anyone would need 60 FPS.
never heard of watching television at 60 FPS before. then again, i don't pay too much to high definition TV.
HDMI is a pure digital signal, with error checking. But since there's no means of retransmitting a broken packet (and thus no valid reason for buffering) in actual practice it's less capable of error checking and bit regeneration than methods used by scribes in the ninth century. You can know you lost more bits than you can regenerate, but you can't do anything about it.
I think this is because HDMI is not really a method for clean digital signal transmission, but rather a way to stealthily carry HDCP into the consumer mainstream. The feature set is primarily aimed at preventing users from doing things (like making backups) rather than providing the maximum benefit to end users.
Two solutions suggest themselves. /DVI connection is active.
Your O/S may be using a subpixel antialiasing scheme that's only active when the HDMI
Your monitor may be using different default display settings for the VGA and HDMI connections. In particular, Sharpness may be the culprit.
From the screenshots it looks like ClearType is disabled with VGA and enabled with HDMI. Did you try disabling ClearType when using HDMI?
It came with a reliable screw or clip on connector for the ends.
The current situation with the slide in connectors doesn't work worth shee-it.
This is clearly either a misconfiguration on your TV, your computer, or a design flaw in the TV, or your computer based on the simple fact that many people who use HDMI to connect their TV to their computer don't experience this problem.
Someone explain to me again why 1920x1080 resolution is so horribly inadequate that we need 3840x2160 (4 times the resolution)? Are we all expected to have Jumbotron-sized televisions in our living rooms now?
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Gold connectors do in fact do provide benefits of low resistance connections without corrosion problems because of golds properties.
Gold plating is utterly pointless in 99.99% of applications. There really are only two circumstances where gold has any advantage. One is that it provides a lubrication advantages for mating of terminal. The other is that in some cases it can provide modest corrosion resistance in particularly harsh environments. They do not provide a meaningful benefit in reducing resistance as the terminal they plate is made of tin, brass or bronze phosphor. In typical household or business office use gold terminals have no measurable advantage of any kind unless you consider them bling.
It can also be applied in quite a thin layer so can also be fairly cheap too.
I run a company that makes wire harnesses. Gold terminals are approximately ten times the cost of tin, brass or bronze-phosphor terminals. If you consider a 10X markup "cheap" you must live in some alternate universe from me. If you are buying gold terminals you are paying a huge mark up for no measurable benefit whatsoever.
Put bluntly if you buy gold plated terminals of any kind you are almost certainly wasting money.
We're talking microns of gold plating on the surface of another metal. If you're paying more than a few dollars extra for that, it's not the gold that's driving up the price.
I run a company that makes wire harnesses. We crimp terminals all day long and I buy them in reels of 4000-8000 at a time including gold plated, tin, brass, bronze-phosphor and more.
Gold plated terminals are typically around 10X the cost of tin, brass or bronze-phosphor. A terminal that might cost $0.03 in tin will cost around $0.30 if gold plated. And that is before there are any profit or overhead markups which are usually on a percentage of cost. That's a 10X markup just on the materials. Gold plated terminals are also completely pointless in 99.99% of cases as they provide no electrical advantage you could measure. There are some highly specialized applications where gold plating is appropriate but they are quite rare.
I submit the near ubiquity of dvi in desktop applications as evidence that it isn't tmds digital video that is causing problems with text rendering in your setup.
its Windows 7. what its doing under the hood there, I dont know.
as for the other, again, sharpness would affect the entire image. i repeat, its only font text that is affected. Everything else, including graphic text, is fine.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
there is no config on teh tv to change,and again, those configs affect the entire image.
there is no config on the computer that affects it.
if it was software (Windows 7) it should affect all Win7 users driving an HDMI. if it was the Tv calirbation it should affect the entire image. if it was a config option, someone somewhere would have foudn the solution and posted it.
my best theory is, as i said, the specific encoder implementation being used on my computers hardware for the HDMI port.
again, not new to this, and my other computer works fine with its HDMI (but its not my home theater one, so its not terribly relvent, other than that i used a different brand motherbaord in it)
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Nope. Nothing to do with HDMI. Anyone who "knows this is an issue" has no idea what they're talking about. You don't actually think your computer is sending text over HDMI to your TV and letting your TV render the fonts, do you?
So if it is a known issue with HDMI, why doesn't it come up with any one using a computer monitor on a DVI-D connection that is the same signaling minus an audio stream?
well, hmm
try adjusting the sharpness anyway. Best not to discard an easy, reversible fix out of hand. But if that doesn't work, mess about with Cleartype tuner. In particular, subpixel rendering can give smoother results on digital displays, but if your display orders the subpixel stripes in the wrong order it doesn't work.
Its the HDMI encoder itself.
By the time the screen image gets encoded into an HDMI (or DVI) signal, the encoder is just working with an array of pixels and has no knowledge of any meaning behind them. The encoder would be reading from the same array of memory as a VGA encoder would, and there is no way for it to distinguish text from not text, etc. Any changes have to be in the code that renders the text, which is probably in the OS, and has nothing to do with the HDMI standard beyond your OS may default to different settings for different monitor outputs. Others have already pointed out what OS settings in particular are relevant to get images like you linked.
And I've used both HDMI to output text to TV screens in multiple different setups before with no problems...
There are countless, often hidden, configs on the TV, in Windows, and in graphics card drivers. Even if there exists no config that can solve your issue, that does not mean there is a problem in the HDMI spec. It is VERY LIKELY there is a design flaw in any one (or all) of the following: Your TV, your computer, your graphics card, windows, or your drivers.
The HDMI spec does not differentiate text signals. Text simply exacerbates a lower level filtering issue one of your components is experiencing. This is definitely not, as you originally stated, a problem with the HDMI spec.
I suppose that the HDMI spec might have explicitly disallowed overscan, sharpening filters, resampling, motion compensation, or any of many other filters that could cause these sorts of artifacts. In this regard, yes, the HDMI spec is at fault.
It is not a problem with HDMI. Apparently the author doesn't like cleartype. Just disable it if you don't like it. The fonts will come in razor sharp, unlike the pictures of how it looks over VGA, which is just blurry.
It is apparent that you don't understand what you are talking about. It is not HDMI. It is either Cleartype that you don't like, or your TV is messing with the image.
That's incorrect.
I have two Westinghouse monitors, had them for about 7 years, 1920x1200, computer monitors, but designed for video. So these have CVBS, Y/C, YPrPb, VGA, and HDMi inputs -- no DVI, no DisplayPort (well, that hadn't been invented yet). And they're every bit as sharp with computer video as my newer, DisplayPort monitors (lower resolution, but just as sharp).
If you have bad computer display on an HDMI monitor, it's because you bought a cheap monitor. Or because you're expecting a $100 TV to be built to the same standard as a $100 monitor -- it might not be. Or you have "contrast enhancement" turned on, which is screwing with your computer video. But it has nothing do with HDMI. And in fact, VGA is dramatically worse on these same monitors... crap analog video is never going to look as good when you examine closely. If you have a VGA/HDMI monitor that looks better with VGA input, you have a broken device. HDMi is dramatically better on any proper display.
For natural video rather than computer video, you tend to loose the impact of individual pixels... when I'm typing this, I'm looking at a tiny number of pixels on a 2Mpixel screen (yeah, I'm actually typing this on the HDM monitor, the other two have work on them). When I look at television, my attention is generally on the whole screen. Plus, if you have a cheaper TV, you probably have a lower physical resolution that's scaled up or down to the one you're trying to display (eg, TVs take 1920x1080 or 1280x720 inputs, but their screens don't always match).
If you need any more proof, look up the spec. HDMI was created as a superset of DVI -- it uses exactly the same protocol as DVI; you can take a DVI output and run it to HDMI with an adapter cable. HDM supports higher pixel rates, that's the main difference, originally. The two have diverged -- HDMI adding formats and specs, DVI pretty much just waiting for HDMI and DisplayPort to replace it.
-Dave Haynie
Nope. HDMI is electrically identical to DVI. Not a "known problem with HDMI". Just the usual incorrect crap you read on the internet.
-Dave Haynie
Interesting! Thanks for the details.
Visit the
Ugh. Please get the hell off Slashdot.
Second comment in your link: "You are looking at font anti-aliasing [aka Cleartype in Windows 7]. It is turned off on the VGA image. Presumably because, the OS thinks that it is connected to a CRT."
There are so may things wrong with how you came to the conclusion that HDMI has anything to do with it, I can't even begin enumerating them.
The HDMI spec does not differentiate text signals.
That bears repeating.
I'm sure Monster will still sell a new 2.0 cable at a slightly higher cost when this starts getting popular.
That's what is not listed in the summary of features: how much more locked down and consumer hostile is 2.0 versus 1.0?
My Linux HTPC gives very nice crisp text. Web browsing and the console look flawless.
1st comment in your link nails it. You have ClearType on. You didn't specify you are using Windows but I'd bet on it.
It is trying to do subpixel rendering and your TV has the pixels aligned differently to what it is expecting hence colour fringing.
Just because others mention the same problem just means they are as clueless as you are.
Unless my TV firmware upgrades to support it, not getting a TV that support it for at least 10 years more than likely.
I JUST bought me a new 3D TV 2 months ago, didn't even buy it for the 3D and don't use it. I bought it cause it was time to upgrade the dying Cathode Ray and it did 240 frames per second so no worries about ghosting and LED TVs are light and don't act as space heaters unlike plasma.
Not upgrading again till this dies (and if it dies within 10 years, I am just buying something similar to it, not some new thousand dollar plus device as it is for family as I don't even watch the thing for the most part). They come out with a TRUE 3D TV or a Star Trek style holodeck or even the Nervgear from Sword Art Online, THEN I might feel a desire to upgrade, but not paying all that money again for something so minor.
rofl. modded troll. thats hilarious.
i must be the first person in the entirety of /. history to ever see this extremely common issue.
https://www.google.com/search?q=htpc+fuzzy+text
https://www.google.com/search?q=htpc+hdmi+text
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Because I TOTALLY NEVER TRIED THAT.
Oh wait I did.
I also troubleshoot for a living. It's not hard to localize the issue. It's in the HDMI encoding. Most likely in the chip used by my motherboard.
You get the hell of /.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
does anyone know what the bandwidth for a 21:9 5120x2160 monitor would be? would hdmi 2.0 be able to run this at 60hz?
That's why theres thousands of google results without solutions for this exact thing?
https://www.google.com/search?q=htpc+fuzzy+text
https://www.google.com/search?q=htpc+hdmi+text
Also never said it was the tv. in fact pretty sure i stated that in the course of troubleshooting, the tv was eliminated as the source of the problem.
If its not the HDMI encoder how come... ...it happens on multiple tvs, including a friends who's works with HDMI ...doesnt happen with the other video outs ...doesnt happen with graphical text (and i know im not explaining that well, but if you read hte original post, it clearly illustrates where it happens with actual text, and not text in an image) ...doesnt go away with ClearType settings
etc etc etc. whatever. this is stupid. i am apparently the first person in the history of /. to encounter this common issue
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Ya, its totally all in my mind.
https://www.google.com/search?q=htpc+fuzzy+text
https://www.google.com/search?q=htpc+hdmi+text
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
tried the cleartype settings. they move it around, but it doesnt go away.
tried disabling too.
the only solution i havent tried yet after reading countless forums over the space about 3 weeks when i first built the htpc (year ago now) was getting into the TV's service menu. because no one seems to know how to do it for my model tv. thats when i said screw it, hooked up a DVI cable to the Tv's DVI port, and isntalled AnyDVD to get around the drm chain for bluerays.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
happens with it off too. tried that too.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
happens with cleartype disabled ...
doesnt happen with anything except HDMI.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
unfortunately i tried those. i spent nearly 3 weeks off and on before giving up on it.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Does it happen with DVI? Is it a samsung monitor/TV?
I also troubleshoot for a living. It's not hard to localize the issue. It's in the HDMI encoding. Most likely in the chip used by my motherboard.
Bahahahaha!
Alright, you successfully trolled me: I walked straight into it.
Well played, sir, well played.
Your TV is the issue. Actually, that's not accurate. Nearly all TVs are the problem. TV's are not monitors. They overscan. You output 1920x1080, your TV crops about 5% off each edge, and then rescales it back to 1920x1080. Don't ask me why, it never made sense to me either. Your computer is doing sub-pixel rendering of text to make things look better on LCD displays. Sub-pixel rendering only works if you're using a pixel-accurate display, but your TV goes and fucks everything up with overscan, making text look like shit.
Many TVs disable overscan when connected over DVI, assuming they're connected to a PC rather than a video component. If you use it, everything appears as you expect.
With VGA, your display is not pixel-accurate, and thus sub-pixel rendering is not an option. Your computer does not attempt it. As with DVI, everything appears as you expect.
So as mentioned, you have no idea what you're talking about. Amazingly, thousands of people found using Google search results are equally clueless.
I purposely bought a projector with all major video inputs (including HDMI, component and VGA).
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Google for it, your TV has lots of config options. I've never had text problems on my projector with HDMI -- everything's gorgeous and stable at 1080p.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
happens with cleartype disabled ...
doesnt happen with anything except HDMI.
Could be that the HDMI picture in your television is routed through a different way than other input signals, and there happens some image processing which ruins the image quality. The HDMI standard in general is able to deliver the picture as-is without any kind of distortion.
What we really need is a standard that requires separation of voice and non-voice audio channels, instead of just having large numbers of generic audio channels. Current multimedia content routinely has extremely loud non-voice audio, such as music and special effects (not to mention loud ads), mixed in with the voice portion of the audio stream. For those who are elderly or otherwise hearing impaired (including children that get illnesses that damage their hearing) and have to turn up the volume to be able to understand human voices, the loud non-voice audio causes pain, anger, and potentially further hearing damage. Separate channels would allow separate control of volume for these people (a group that potentially includes every human being, as we can expect to lose some our hearing with age, especially those living in industrial societies).
Video formats also need to be updated to provide for this.
http://www.hdfury.com/ Makes any DVD player 100% compatible with any TV. And it removes ALL of the useless encryption and DRM.
Kind of expensive
So is freedom.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I just saw your new sig and realized that you weren't actually trolling. I puked a little.
You are in good company, my friend: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/365266-33-hdmi-text-fuzzy-works-fine (1st hit on your sig-link)
"I suggest you use [CTRL-Shift-Print Screen] to capture the screen image, instead of taking a picture like you did. Then post them..."
"EDIT: Looking at your screenshots, my eyes cannot detect any fuzziness in HDMI connection. They look the same. Maybe I should use magnifying glass to see it."
The stupid. It burns.
Anyway, I realized I was way too harsh. There is no merit in being unkind to the mentally retarded.