Slashdot Mirror
New HDMI Mode Will Allow USB-C Connections (techhive.com)
An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes a report from TechHive:
On Friday, HDMI Licensing announced a new cable standard that connects USB-C and HDMI devices... The idea, naturally enough, is to to develop an HDMI-to-USB Type-C cable that ties together the most common cabling protocols in both the PC and consumer electronics industries, eliminating the need for an adapter or special silicon. Source devices like PCs, tablets, and smartphones will be able to output HDMI video and multi-channel audio from a USB-C port, just as they can now with DisplayPort.
"The USB Type-C connector is gaining traction in the mobile and PC markets," said HDMI Licensing, LLC president Rob Tobias. "Consumers expect to easily connect these devices to displays with a USB Type-C to HDMI cable and utilize the capabilities and features of native HDMI. This specification will also result in more source devices incorporating HDMI," which already total about 6 billion, he said.
HDMI Licensing expects to see products launching with this new technology "early next year".
"The USB Type-C connector is gaining traction in the mobile and PC markets," said HDMI Licensing, LLC president Rob Tobias. "Consumers expect to easily connect these devices to displays with a USB Type-C to HDMI cable and utilize the capabilities and features of native HDMI. This specification will also result in more source devices incorporating HDMI," which already total about 6 billion, he said.
HDMI Licensing expects to see products launching with this new technology "early next year".
and has abusive licensing fees. My company has been talking about adding this to future products, and they want more money for this than it costs us to add an HDMI port and our profit, combined.
Honestly the USB-IF should have come up with their own official display profile at this stage, this is becoming ridiculous. We now have Displayport, MHL and HDMI as Alt-modes as well as displayport over thunderbolt carried by type-c. Ugh.
Connector is great and all but the current implementation is trash.
My guess is only one gets used while rest will be ignored, most likely Displayport due to existing implementations as well as Thunderbolt requirements and more up-to-date versions (DP 1.3 vs HDMI 1.4 only). No manufacturer will want to pay additional money in order for all of them to be supported (increased licensing costs as well as more expensive chipsets).
Yeay, now we get to have DRM stuff on our USB chipsets!
Yeay!
I'm oh so happy!
Source devices like PCs, tablets, and smartphones will be able to output HDMI video and multi-channel audio from a USB-C port, just as they can now with DisplayPort.
Yes, and they can do 4K @ 120Hz over DisplayPort's USB-C implementation, or 4K @ 30Hz over ours! Just the same!
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Oh, great, now how many cables and connector types are we supposed to keep track of in order to correctly connect our devices? I've set aside an entire room for cable variants now.
E Proelio Veritas.
And yet, HDMI is on hundreds of millions of HD televisions that aren't going anywhere soon.
Actually, HDMI 2.0a is a much better solution for *most* devices - since most devices are TVs that already support it. 2160p @ 60Hz w/ HDR10 or 12 bit DolbyVision packed in 4:2:2 is WAY more than your eyes will ever perceive from a normal distance.
HDMI has nothing to do with IP. It does support HDCP - but HDCP is a separate standard. It's not a horrible idea because studios offering UHD movies are not going to magically stop caring about content protection/DRM - all HDMI over USB-C will do is make it easier to create devices that support the existing required protections.
Fix your ads yo
Ad Block... it is the only safe way to browse the web...
I can't wait until everything is routed over USB-C.
Displayport.
Thunderbolt.
HDMI.
USB.
Everything.
I especially can't wait until internal hard drives are using USB-C for data and power.
And yet, HDMI is on hundreds of millions of HD televisions that aren't going anywhere soon.
Which is readily solved with an inexpensive DP to HDMI adapter cable. The passive DP++ to HDMI cables are less than $10, and active DP to HDMI cables are less than $20. It seems rare to find a new computer that lacks a mini or full sized DP output. Assuming a USB-C connector has a DisplayPort alternate mode then a DP/USB-C to HDMI cable is trivial to produce, and produce cheaply.
Assuming the USB-C connector has a Thunderbolt alternate mode then one can connect any of a number of PCIe compatible video chips, allowing for HDMI or any other output to match whatever input that display might have. Price will vary based on desired output quality, of course. Given the many cheaper options I expect this to be used rarely, especially to connect to a 1080p or less TV that has nothing better than HDMI to drive it.
Assuming that the USB-C connector has a MHL alternate mode then HDMI support is included, if I'm reading the spec correctly. I found an adapter that has a micro-USB male connector on one side and female HDMI on the other and claims to use the MHL protocol for less than $10.
Assuming the USB-C connector has a, quite likely, USB mode then one can find a USB to HDMI adapter already for reasonable price. A quick search shows I can get one for less than $30, which also happens to be a USB-C to HDMI adapter. Adapters with USB-A connectors look to be almost double that but it may just be a matter of not finding the cheapest ones in my search.
I'm quite certain that the HDMI people are getting paid for the privilege of us using their connector and/or protocol on anything we buy. What they seem to be doing here is wanting us to pay for the privilege of the HDMI protocol on future USB-C devices even if we have no intention of ever using that capability.
Looks to me like a sneaky way to add a HDMI tax on a device for all for the benefit of the few that would actually use it. As they seem to tax per port then if I have a device that can output HDMI on DP and USB-C then I'm paying double for something I am unlikely to use. As the cost to me is likely less than the $10 I'd expect for an adapter that lacks this feature I can't complain much. What I do see though is a flood of money potentially going their way from the sale of devices with this feature.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
I especially can't wait until internal hard drives are using USB-C for data and power.
I remember when FireWire was supposed to come to internal hard drives for data and power. I still come across PCs at work with an internal FireWire port for this reason. Obviously it didn't happen. Lots of things killed it.
FireWire isn't dead yet though, I still see it on professional audio equipment.
Here's an idea, let's do FireWire over USB-C. Too much? Well, we passed "too much" on USB-C a long time ago.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
I'm not sure why you would want to really. You gain exactly zilch there.
The 80s called, they want to talk to you about daisy chaining and how stupid and annoying it was.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I can't wait until everything is routed over USB-C.
You don't get it. Everything will be routed through USB-C, but it will be only one protocol at a time. So you will have to carefully choose your port, cable and device that go together if you ever want Displayport, Thunderbolt, HDMI or whatever else which isn't plain USB working correctly.
After Anker recalled their USB-C cables the other day, there was an article on The Register about it, the comments section had a great bunch of comments in it including: "it's a design error An electrical specification which allows multiple, software-controlled supply voltages, but does not require connected devices to tolerate the highest available voltage. What could possibly go wrong?" I can see a lot of fried TVs when people push 20A at 5V into their TVs because of a bad cable. Anyway, comments section worth a read: http://forums.theregister.co.u...
Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
I've seen some but they cost way more money than a micro-B. Type-C is a complex standard, with active cables for devices that negotiate bus currents and there are lots of faulty cables and chargers out there. Perhaps that's why enthusiasm for USB type-C appears so underwhelming. It might be superior but micro-B is cheap and most people already have lots of devices, cables & chargers for that spec.
I don't know why I bother to reply to an AC but here is your citation:
http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadge...
Scroll down to the graphic where the pin out is shown.
The USB-C alt modes define how the 4 high speed lanes on the port are used. In USB 3.1 mode they are used for 2 pair of RX/TX lanes. In a 2-lane DP mode there is one RX/TX pair of lanes for USB 3.1 and 2 lanes for DP. In 4-lane DP mode all 4 lanes are used for DP data. In Thunderbolt mode all the USB-C high speed lanes are dedicated to PCIe and DP packets, USB 3.1 packets will not share these lanes. I have not seen the spec on how MHL or HDMI use these lanes, I can only assume it is similar to DP mode. In whatever mode the USB-C connector is in there will always be a bidirectional pair of data wires for USB 2.0.
The mode of the port will be defined by the first cable or device connected to it. Once in a certain mode it will stay there until every device is disconnected. Daisy chaining USB 3 and TB 3 devices will not be allowed. DP and TB devices can be daisy chained only if the DP devices are on the end of the chain. I assume daisy chaining USB and DP devices is allowed but then the USB devices would have to be at the end.
I imagine it possible to make a cable that converts one USB-C mode to another but it would have to be insanely expensive, convert only one mode to another (and only in one direction), and still be confusing for many users. Even if someone makes one of these magic cables that USB-C port will go to whatever mode that the peripheral, cable, and host all support. This might be DP, MHL, HDMI, USB3, or TB3. It may even be just USB2.0 since that is where they all have a common denominator. The exception is that DP can share the cable with either USB3 or TB3 but again every piece in the chain has to support it, and there are other limits that go with that.
I was torn with ignoring an AC that may just be trolling to helping to inform someone that was mistaken but was willing to learn. I hope I didn't choose poorly.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
The corporate office where I work has many meeting rooms with projectors or TV screens. Typically there are two connectors wireed to the meeting room table - VGA d-sub and HDMI. I will never get the time back which I have spent watching presenters faff around with getting their display working.
More generally, the problem for the device owner is to have a connecting cable which will work with any foreign display they need to present on. I'd rather use DisplayPort myself, but the most commonly available digital port is HDMI. The sad reality is that USB-C HDMI output is going to be the most frequently used display output from next generation devices.
MHL uses the same physical connector as HDMI (at the display end) and the average punter isn't going to know if a given display supports MHL. I forsee that in the future, people will have the same problem with USB-c connections. They same physical port supports so many display standards that people who don't read the manual are going to become frustrated figuring out which ones are suppoted on a given device.
Ideally, I would like to see some sort of wireless display standard that's easy to pair and widely adopted, but that's not happening any time soon.