Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

HDBaseT Supporters Hope To Kiss HDMI Goodbye

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the rj-45-rocks dept.

Networking 336

arcticstoat writes "HDMI's short-lived reign over the TV cable racks could soon be over, thanks to a new usurper that combines several connections into a standard Cat5e/6 network cable with an RJ-45 connector. Designed by a coalition of consumer electronics manufacturers called the HDBaseT Alliance, which includes Sony, Samsung, LG and Valens, HDBaseT promises to not only carry video and audio signals, but also provide a network connection, a USB signal and even electricity using a single cable. The Alliance predicts that we'll start seeing the first HDBaseT equipment creeping into the shops later this year, but says the bigger wave of adoption will occur later in 2011."

cancel ×

336 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

One question (5, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763280)

Will Monster make a special gold-plated, oxygenated cable for it? Because the guy at Best Buy said that is only way to really hear the crispness of the digital audio.

Re:One question (1, Funny)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763300)

Will Monster make a special gold-plated, oxygenated cable for it?

Of course they will. So would I, if I could manage to get through the sales speech without breaking down in hysterical laughter. Some money just deserve to be taken.

Re:One question (5, Insightful)

Bakkster (1529253) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764204)

Will Monster make a special gold-plated, oxygenated cable for it?

Of course they will. So would I, if I could manage to get through the sales speech without breaking down in hysterical laughter. Some money just deserve to be taken.

Because they don't understand enough about the physics of digital electrical signals? I assume you expect to be taken advantage of by your mechanic/doctor/banker because you don't know enough about cars/biology/financial devices? Your money deserves to be taken, right?

I'm of the opinion that we should be spreading information, instead of being the assholes laughing in the corner and watching Monster get richer.

Re:One question (2, Funny)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763346)

I think his brother works over at The Good Guys.

Re:One question (1)

Fulcrum of Evil (560260) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764000)

Isn't that a strip bar over in DC?

Re:One question (2, Informative)

jimbolauski (882977) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763380)

You mean the cat 6m standard.

Re:One question (5, Funny)

FlynnMP3 (33498) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763514)

It's not known well, but temperature and altitude affect the clarity just as much, if not more, than the cable construction methods. The colder it is the less jitter is introduced in the signal path as the molecules are not moving around so much. Closer to sea level, the predictability of the air pressure reduces the effects of signal variance. Which you can hear if your listening space is 10 degrees Celsius or cooler.

All Best Buy audio employees know this but are bound to secrecy by Monster Cable. Probably for marketing reasons.

Re:One question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763716)

True enough. However, it is also crucial that you connect the cable the right way. A lot of people don't know about this effect, but many cables sound much crisper and punchier and more musical when you connect them the right way.

I don't know why this works, but i reckon it's probably a quantum alignment phenomenon that makes the signal clearer as it passes through the copper in the right direction.

Re:One question (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764040)

Don't forget audio. The crispness and clarity of the digital sound is directly affected by the color of the cloth covering the speakers. Lightwaves can travel in cloth is that is not pure pitch black, causing an ever-so-slight quantum disturbance in the sound waves, thereby increasing jitter. You can definitely hear the difference if your speaker cloth is dark grey instead of black.

Re:One question (4, Informative)

unix1 (1667411) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763700)

That would be funny if it wasn't true [denon.com] . You can get it [amazon.com] from Amazon too.

Re:One question (1)

Danse (1026) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764074)

That would be funny if it wasn't true [denon.com] . You can get it [amazon.com] from Amazon too.

Some pretty funny reviews there too :)

Re:One question (1)

smbarbour (893880) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763768)

Maybe not Monster, but Denon already does. [denon.com]

Re:One question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763956)

" Additionally, signal directional markings are provided for optimum signal transfer. "

What, they painted arrows on the cable so electrons know where to go?

Bwahahaha.

Re:One question (2, Informative)

acedotcom (998378) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763828)

uhhh...actually they already do [crutchfield.com] . I die a little inside thinking of people that buy that stuff.

Damn it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763284)

I just upgraded all of my cables to HDMI, and those Monster HDMI cables are expensive.

Re:Damn it (4, Funny)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763334)

Use them to tie stuff down in your truck.

Re:Damn it (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763482)

I just upgraded all of my cables to HDMI, and those Monster HDMI cables are expensive.

"Don't pay more for the same thing that way. Wait...what?" -Steve Jobs

Kiss HDCP bye too? (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763288)

Can we please kill HDCP? Please? There is no technical reason why my monitor should not be able to be connected to an HDMI-capable entertainment device by means of an HDMI-DVI adapter.

Re:Kiss HDCP bye too? (5, Informative)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763456)

Can we please kill HDCP?

Nope.
Searching for hdbaset + drm turns up little of use,
but searching for hdbaset + hdmi shows us DRM has already been included

Valens Semiconductor's HDBaseT Receives HDCP Certification From Intel's DCP LLC
updated 8:58 a.m. ET March 9, 2009,
http://www.valens-semi.com/media/1526/msnbc.pdf [valens-semi.com]

Re:Kiss HDCP bye too? (2, Interesting)

JoelWink (1846354) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763500)

I once spent an hour trying to figure out why the DVI output from my Time Warner Cable box would appear on my computer monitor for two seconds, then disappear. I finally realized it didn't "trust" my monitor and HDCP was the culprit.

Re:Kiss HDCP bye too? (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763618)

Well, obviously that's because you're a pirate--out to steal the money right from Tom Cruise's stylish pocket.

Re:Kiss HDCP bye too? (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763872)

Are you crazy? That guy dresses like a doofus. He looks like Steve Jobs half the time.

The reason you can't connect your monitor (1)

Burning1 (204959) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763568)

Can we please kill HDCP? Please? There is no technical reason why my monitor should not be able to be connected to an HDMI-capable entertainment device by means of an HDMI-DVI adapter.

Yes, there is a technical reason your monitor can't be connected to your entertainment device... Your monitor doesn't support HDCP decoding. Mine does. A HDMI > DVI adaptor works fine, and I've been using my computer monitor as a television for more than a year now.

With that said, the solution works best when your monitor supports native HD resolutions.

Re:The reason you can't connect your monitor (4, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763608)

Yes, there is a technical reason your monitor can't be connected to your entertainment device... Your monitor doesn't support HDCP decoding.

Then what's the technical reason to require HDCP in the first place?

Re:The reason you can't connect your monitor (1)

Burning1 (204959) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763740)

HDCP is a copy protection system. I'm all for getting rid of it, but I strongly doubt that doing so would earn any support from content creators.

If you want to know the reason for HDCP's existence, you need look no further than Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDCP [wikipedia.org]

Re:The reason you can't connect your monitor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32764016)

There's no valid reason at all for HDCP.

Re:The reason you can't connect your monitor (1)

serviscope_minor (664417) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763766)

Yes, there is a technical reason

You are confusing should with can. The statement is that "There is no technical reason why my monitor should not", not "There is no technical reason why my monitor cannot".

Just what I needed ... (0)

donstenk (74880) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763292)

... another cable.

Re:Just what I needed ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763448)

So the "standard" media type gets replaced by another "standard" media type (or rival "standard media" type). I am not sure if this is worse or better than phone charger "standards".

This is why I always remain behind on the tech race. Well, that and money.

Re:Just what I needed ... (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764032)

It is more like the standard HDMI and Power Cable and Network Connection AND USB connections are all replaced by one cable. This is a good change.

Re:Just what I needed ... (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764188)

How long until the first support call because some tool tries a regular network (or hell, even phone...) cable?

HDCP (2, Insightful)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763310)

What's going to deny me the right to watch my own stuff whenever I'm not allowed?

Re:HDCP (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763340)

HDCP ...
Ending up the butt of pedobear jokes forever.

Re:HDCP (5, Funny)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763478)

What on earth makes you think they're going to give up on encryption just because they're going with a connector that encourages senior citizens to plug 100W output cable boxes into their cable modems' ethernet port?

Re:HDCP (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763654)

What on earth makes you think they're going to give up on encryption

Nothing, because I don't. But I'm also not assuming it will still be HDCP.

Re:HDCP (4, Interesting)

jythie (914043) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763838)

This is why I need mod points.

Years ago I worked on jukeboxes that had RJ45 based audio connections.... oh the network cards we blew out when those cables got crossed.. and we were actually TRYING not to mix them up.

Re:HDCP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32764202)

The people making the nic's are doing it wrong.

Re:HDCP (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764212)

Color coding (or just putting tags on) can help with that...

Re:HDCP (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764024)

I doubt they will, they'll probably just chock it up to pirates, and demand that congress enact a statue making anybody that fails to pay there extor... er licensing fees a felon. Including the worst of all, the people that are too busy reading public domain books rather than watching movies. I mean, why on Earth should they be allowed to read Cervantes, Shakespeare and Mark Twain without paying for the privilege.

Re:HDCP (1)

stms (1132653) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763558)

Don't worry I'm sure they'll figure something out.

Wait... (4, Informative)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763366)

FTFS:

thanks to a new usurper that combines several connections into a standard Cat5e/6 network cable with an RJ-45 connector

Does that mean I can use one of the dozens of ethernet cables currently languishing in my closets?

Re:Wait... (4, Interesting)

ZERO1ZERO (948669) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763402)

And subsequently route the signal via patch panels / wall plates to various locations around your basement/home/place of work?*

Re:Wait... (2, Funny)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763434)

The possibilities are giving me a happy in my pants. Seriously. If this is the case, awesome things could be coming soon.

Side note: is it lame that I get happy in my pants over this kind of stuff? ::looks around:: nah.

Re:Wait... (1)

fabioalcor (1663783) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763786)

Side note: is it lame that I get happy in my pants over this kind of stuff? ::looks around:: nah.

If you use it to watch some hi-def pr0n, it's OK.

Re:Wait... (1)

RabidMoose (746680) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763900)

It is not lame, it is completely understandable.

What is lame, is that you call it "a happy in my pants". I feel ridiculous just typing that.

Re:Wait... (1)

PerfectionLost (1004287) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764258)

Let's be honest--this is slashdot. It's your parent's basement.

Re:Wait... (4, Interesting)

Walt Dismal (534799) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763692)

The short answer is I expect no, but here's the long answer why.

A Cat5/6 cable has multiple twisted pairs. To reduce inter-signal interference, the pairs are made with different twist rates per foot. This results in slight distance differences between pairs resulting in up to 50 foot length difference internally per 1000 feet. Now, since standard video such as VGA or component video is usually separated into RBG and (maybe) sync lines, the cable length differences result in delay of one or more of the analog video signals relative to each other and this shows up as actual and visible color fringing with a normal cable. (I've seen it.) The solution is that conventional video over Cat5/6 requires active electronics (some vendors use delay lines but those are hard to time-adjust and it locks you to a known cable vendor/mfg spec) to support clean video. This raises the cost. My basis for this is that I'm involved in video conferencing systems, some using long-run video cable in a building as well as packet-based video for external destinations. If HDBaseT involves manufacturers shifting to packet-based video, it's going to be a very interesting different world, because this will require devices on each end to use codecs and video to/from packets, raising costs for consumer electronics.

Re:Wait... (1)

Coren22 (1625475) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764020)

If HDBaseT involves manufacturers shifting to packet-based video, it's going to be a very interesting different world, because this will require devices on each end to use codecs and video to/from packets, raising costs for consumer electronics.

You mean like HDMI which is packet based?

Re:Wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32764242)

HDMI is absolutely NOT packet-based (at least the video signal). It's like a digitized version of VGA (complete with blanking intervals).

Re:Wait... (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764244)

It's a good thing that HD is a digital format then! (I don't think seperate sync lines are still used?)

There comes a point... (5, Insightful)

ICLKennyG (899257) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763374)

I would tag this as a sudden break out of common sense, but I am not sure that it is. Yes, it's better in that I will be able to terminate my own video cables again, but how many cable standards do we need? I fully welcome our new Cat5e overlords but I just want the madness to stop.

Re:There comes a point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763544)

But this follows a long line of standards, RJ-45 interfaces are internationally in use in business and home technology. It all sounds a bit too-good-to-be-true right now, ahh I see the 1.0 spec is capped at 100Mb/s for ethernet right now. Still, looks good.

Re:There comes a point... (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764270)

... but I just want the madness to stop.

It won't. That's how technology works these days, sorry.

Aaaarrg (4, Interesting)

Cylix (55374) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763416)

I'm rather divided on this particular bit of news.

I'm invested in the HDMI technology already and I don't really want to replace everything. With the HDMI 1.4 spec they will address most of the current issues with the technology and provide backward compatibility with the existing devices on the market. HDMI 1.3 kinda sucks if you have an AV receiver and 5.1 setup. (Long story short video processor creates delay and without an auto-sync setup there will be issues with video and audio). This is all made possible because of the requirement for a protected path and downgraded audio on analog ports!

In theory HDMI 1.4 provides a built in protected return audio path, networking, power and a kitchen sink. Regardless, it is rather unimportant to me at this juncture because I doubt I will be upgrading my television and receiver in the near future.

The entire HDBaseT looks like they did mostly the same offerings but in an entirely new cable
which has been around for ages. I get the feeling that actually plugging the cable into a switch won't do much good.

I'm going to assume that in the end they really just get around some royalties and introduce even further market fragmentation.

Good jorb!

Re:Aaaarrg (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763574)

Sucks for you to be an early adopter then doesn't it. My RCA cables work just fine, thanks.

Re:Aaaarrg (2, Funny)

Sporkinum (655143) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763810)

That's what I was going to say. I love watching TV/DVDs on my free craig's list acquired 60" non HD analogue TV. No encryption problems there!

Re:Aaaarrg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763674)

I'm divided as well. I'm also pretty deeply invested in HDMI, and this does feel a bit like just another "universal cable" in the vein of DisplayPort, LightPath, HDMI, and I can't remember all the rest. However, there are two pretty great things about this standard that actually make me hope it succeeds:

1. Cheap cables. Yea, you can get cheap HDMI cables, but they tend to use cheap, stiff insulation that breaks way too fast. They also tend to be short, even the cheapest 20' HDMI cable is miserably overprice.

2. 100m max distance. This one is the real dealbreaker, the distance limitations of HDMI flat out suck. Yea, you can buy longer cables that exceed the spec, but they're expensive as hell and they don't work with all devices. Was a real good time spending close to $100 on a 50' HDMI cable money can buy only to have my receiver balk at the signal.

The thought of being able to use my existing spool of CAT5e and run wires from one end of my apartment to the other makes me willing to replace all my equipment if this spec takes off at all.

Re:Aaaarrg (2, Informative)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763856)

You can do that now. They make wall plate adapters, amplifiers to run HDMI over 2 stands of Cat5/6 From Wikipedia: HDMI extenders that are based on dual Category 5/Category 6 cable can extend HDMI to 250 meters (820 ft.), while HDMI extenders based on optical fiber can extend HDMI to 300 meters (980 ft.).

Important details kept out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763446)

How will this help close the analogue hole and keep people from steeling my works?

It's all just a money grab... (1)

yogidog98 (1800862) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763458)

to change standards again to sell a new generation of TVs to a soon-to-be-saturated HDMI market. HDMI is good enough for now. If they're going to progress from HDMI, just take the extra effort to move to wireless. Can I be the first to patent/trademark HD.b/g/n and HD.Wi-Max?

Re:It's all just a money grab... (1)

quantumplacet (1195335) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763864)

Well, you can Trademark it, but you'll have to actually make use of that trademark or you'll lose it, and if you do trademark it, the actual inventor will just use a different name. You could patent it, but you'll have to actually invent something to do that, which would be pretty cool, but probably not that easy. Or you could just be another whiny 15 year old bitching about "imaginary property" on the internet without even the slightest concept of how patents, copyrights and trademarks work.

Re:It's all just a money grab... (2, Funny)

yogidog98 (1800862) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764098)

Not a whiny 15 year old;I have a good understanding of intellectual property law and a couple of patents to my name. What I lack is a sense of humor good enough to write a comment funny enough to be modded up.

Displayport v1.2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763462)

How is this different from Displayport v1.2?

  http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/01/19/1338205/Displayport-V12-To-Take-Giant-Leap-Over-HDMI

I don't like network connectors (4, Interesting)

hkmwbz (531650) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763516)

Maybe I've just had bad luck, but the little pin that is supposed to keep the network cable in place always breaks on me. And when it does, the cable never seems to sit as tightly as it should.

Am I doing something wrong, or does everyone else have similar experiences? If it's the latter, using it as the connector for this new thing sounds like a terrible idea.

Re:I don't like network connectors (2, Informative)

Paul Rose (771894) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763630)

>> Am I doing something wrong Maybe. For me these break when I'm too lazy to properly detangle a pile of wiring, and I resort to pulling the cable out of the pile. The connector goes through backwards and often damages the retainer. I've never had one get damaged any other way.

Re:I don't like network connectors (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763638)

In my experience, spending the extra 25 cents on a quality connector (or an extra couple of bucks on a quality "pre-made" cable) is worth it.

Re:I don't like network connectors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763652)

http://www.google.com/search?q=rj45+boot

Re:I don't like network connectors (3, Informative)

I'm not really here (1304615) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763686)

Get / make cables that have the "boots" on them. (Search for Cat5e booted ends [google.com] to see what I mean).

Re:I don't like network connectors (1)

twmcneil (942300) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764158)

I think you're supposed to depress the little pin before you yank it out of the jack, and I don't mean tell it a sad story.

Light Peak (4, Informative)

TempeNerd (410268) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763520)

And let the battle for a new standard begin.

I had thought Light Peak was the likely replacement technology.

10Gbps and backward compatible with USB.

"At 10Gb/s, you could transfer a full-length Blu-Ray movie in less than 30 seconds. Optical technology also allows for smaller connectors and longer, thinner, and more flexible cables than currently possible. Light Peak also has the ability to run multiple protocols simultaneously over a single cable, enabling the technology to connect devices such as peripherals, displays, disk drives, docking stations, and more."

http://techresearch.intel.com/articles/None/1813.htm [intel.com]

Re:Light Peak (2, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764286)

I still want to know what Intel has up their sleeve with light peak.

10Gb/s over fiber isn't new or all that interesting; but, in the networking world, it isn't all that cheap. What have they done to make the equivalent of shoving a 10GbE fiber interface into random bits of cheap consumer electronics remotely viable?

Second, while neither optical cables nor optical connectors are quite in "will die if you give them a funny look" territory, they definitely won't stand up to the kind of abuse that even ghastly quality copper will, never mind being rolled over by chairs and filled with pocket fuzz. What do they have in mind?

= Buy all new Tv's and Home Receivers! (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763548)

I'm guessing now this makes our hdtv's worthless, as well as our home receivers if we want to use these new features.

Exactly (1)

Chelmet (1273754) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763894)

That's what this game is all about. Normal tv replaced by HD TV replaced by 3D TV. They're shortening the upgrade time with each cycle, and people are happy to pay it. I'm currently still using a CRT with a scart cable - and while I would be upgrading in the near future, I suppose I'll have to wait until I see how this pans out.

I would at least have expected them to wait until 3D TVs have been slurped up - this connector change will disrupt the cydle and hurt sales.

On the other hand, I truly wish that this was all genuine. LAN sockets in the walls to pass my AV anywhere in the house is, in my opinion, about the perfect future situation, but something tells me that it'll not work here. And what an opportunity to drop drm - except that, with Sony on board, that'll never happen.

It'd be so easy for them to do this right and have it settled for the next 50 years, as all equipment could be made backwards compatible, but I seriously doubt this'll break the 3 year mark. Everyone's locked into HDMI with their AV receivers.

RJ45 bad idea (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763554)

Its -always- a bad idea to keep different cables with the same connector. Good luck getting the average person to know the difference between all of the cables with the same connectors.

Re:RJ45 bad idea (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763756)

"Good luck getting the average person to know the difference between all of the cables with the same connectors."

No, I don't think that's the architecture being described. It appears to me, if I read this http://www.hdbaset.org/files/HDBaseT_Comparison_Table_Nereus.pdf [hdbaset.org] chart correctly we'll be plugging everything in to one port in the media device (tv). We'll be getting our ac, ethernet, and video sigs from one cable. Kind makes me wonder what the amperage rating for 10baseT copper is...

Re:RJ45 bad idea (1)

thwack328 (1057700) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763818)

They'll learn the difference rather quickly when they plug the 100W powered cable into their laptop's NIC.

Re:RJ45 bad idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763854)

From the article this sounds like standard 100Mb/s ethernet with (I guess) standard PoE. Presumably the companies involved are defining higher level protocols (for DRM, simulating USB, etc.) rather than redefining ethernet.

If so, this should work over existing networking equipment. It seems to be a great idea, though it'll probably have enough paranoid restrictions in it to render it barely useful.

Re:RJ45 bad idea (1)

Aksimel (1347591) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763974)

The "average" person doesn't know the difference between DVI, HDMI, VGA etc. anyway. The only thing that will make it easier for John Q. Average is less wires period.

Why? (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763556)

/.ers who were crying for Ethernet instead of HDMI back when HDTVs were first coming out, were doing so for reasons of data sharing with PCs, cable range, price, and available peripherals (eg, switches).

If you're using some proprietary protocols, so you don't get the same range, and you can't use standard network switches to route and boost the signals, why bother? Why not use 9P9C jacks (like cheap UPSes)? All of 10 cents more expensive for a larger jack/connector, and then you wouldn't confuse the two and burn-out your equipment.

They missed again (1)

jvillain (546827) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763562)

The proper solution was to go to fiber. They could do long runs, it would have had better expandability and provides better electrical isolation between the components. The expandability may not seem important until you spend a boat load of money burring a cable in a wall or a ceiling only to have to rip it out again later.

MPAA doesn't want you doing long runs (3, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763684)

The proper solution was to go to fiber. They could do long runs

The major U.S. motion picture distributors don't want you to do long runs. You could be doing runs to a nonsubscriber's house or doing long runs through a building that is large enough for a commercial public performance. That's why HDCP requires proximity.

Re:They missed again (2, Informative)

cheesybagel (670288) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763966)

Like Light Peak [wikipedia.org] ? Maybe the video interface after this one.

Seriously, obsolescence is getting ridiculous. It used to be you could use the same video interface for a couple of decades. Heck a TV could easily last a decade or more.

Now everything gets obsolete quickly. Plasma? LCD? Perhaps OLED next? Crikey.

Will it Route, Switch, or Hub? (1)

OITLinebacker (1799770) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763598)

My biggest beef with HDMI is the various quirks you have to go through to make it work properly. Most of that is due to the HDCP handshake business. To me the real question is this: Can I buy something like an ethernet switch to connect all of my "magic" cat5 cabled devices together? Then I would be able to mix and match what I want displayed to where I want it displayed. All I want to do is watch any of my legal HD content on any of my legal HD displays without having to deal with severe cable length limitations or annoying signal routing/switching.

Interesting (1)

dasherjan (1485895) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763614)

If it doesn't have some sort of mandatory DRM built into the spec, I'm all for it.

Haven't we learned anything from PS/2 connectors? (4, Insightful)

Burning1 (204959) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763626)

Haven't we learned anything from PS/2 connectors? Installing ports that are physically, but not electronically compatible on consumer devices is a stupid solution.

Given that a lot of receivers and devices currently have built in Ethernet ports for network connectivity, I can't see this as being a particularly good idea... It's not as if hard wired Ethernet ports are common in residential walls...

Re:Haven't we learned anything from PS/2 connector (2, Insightful)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763914)

Hopefully anything using this connector will poll the other side of the cable for its capabilities before it starts dumping 100w of power out the other end. Similar occurs with current systems using PoE and detection of 10M, 100M or 1G network speeds.

This is actually something I am very much looking forwards to. It can cut down on the expense and hassle of a half dozen different cable types. Cat5e/Cat6 is fairly cheap compared to a lot of cable types and can be custom fit.

Imagine a monitor with this and the following features:
1 cable to the computer, 0 cables to the outlet.
A built in USB hub for your memory stick/mouse/keyboard/webcam/etc.

Think of how much clutter you can save and how much more freedom you have in placing your workstation in relation to your cpu.

Re:Haven't we learned anything from PS/2 connector (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763940)

It's not as if hard wired Ethernet ports are common in residential walls...

You didn't see the home I wired in Allen, TX circa 2001.

There's about a kilometer of cable (RJ-45 and quad-shielded RG-6) in them walls.

for those wondering when (3, Insightful)

nimbius (983462) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763672)

this madness will end with new standards, it wont. The connector standard has become as much a marketing phenomenon as it has a control of the customers choice of provider and repeat purchase options. Just take a look at cellphone power connectors as a prime example. or for us old farts, i can simply whisper betamax and we're all sent running for cover. The easiest thing to do in light of all these changes is wait a few years for the price to drop substantially, and upgrade components as needed. yeah, i still have VGA for my monitor, and composite or svid for my video. things that need to go a long distance get baluns or repeaters.

at the risk of getting the troll stamp, you could go so far as to say the entire HDMI standard and its accompanying 720p/i 1080p/i standards are complete poppycock. computer monitors have had resolution superior to these standards for years before their inception.

A long as cable and sat boxes don't have this it w (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763880)

A long as cable and sat boxes don't have this it will not take off and it can take 1-2 years for new boxes to roll out.

Sony PICTURES, NOT "Sony" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763882)

Despite the article's claims that manufacturer Sony is part of the alliance, the HDBaseT page itself states that "Sony Pictures Entertainment" is part of the alliance. That is NOT the same thing. Last I checked, the Sony Pictures sub-set of Sony didn't make TVs, which seems to me to be a very important distinction.

This makes sense (2, Insightful)

steveha (103154) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763930)

Remember how parallel ATA was replaced by serial ATA? Despite fewer wires, it can handle more data, because it's easier to push a serial protocol at a very high clock rate than to get a bunch of wires to synchronize perfectly at a high clock rate. And crosstalk between signal wires is a serious issue; check a parallel ATA cable sometime and notice how many ground wires it has. (To use the fastest parallel ATA modes, you must use an 80-wire cable, and over half of those 80 wires are ground wires, just to guard against crosstalk.)

So I found it surprising that HDMI was a parallel cable spec! And I do not find it surprising at all that this new standard will be a very high clock rate serial protocol over standard Ethernet cabling.

Note that this came out of industry, and not out of an ivory-tower standards group.

steveha

Fffffffff (1)

shish (588640) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763932)

I've only just finished spending ~$600 refitting my flat from a rat's nest of VGA / component / coax / SCART cables to all-HDMI in the hopes that it would last ~25 years like VGA has :(

Dear audio / video companies, can you please stop raping us with new "standards" several times per year?

Re:Fffffffff (1)

speedlaw (878924) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764278)

You must be new here.....

10 gb/s? That's got to be expensive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32763946)

This HDBaseT claims to offer comparable bandwidth to Displayport (>10 gb/s). 10 gb/s ethernet costs a few hundred dollars per port on a switch. Why would such an expensive tech be used for cheap monitor/video card communication?

Plugable reviever bays? (1)

RightwingNutjob (1302813) | more than 4 years ago | (#32763964)

Given how much digital horsepower you have to put in a flat panel screen anyway, at some point the TV will turn into something that looks like your desktop PC, where instead of having external scsi cards for your external CD burner, and a firewire port for your external TV tuner, you'll have internal CD bays and internal tuner cards. My prediction is that the final word in the standard might be an internal PCI-like bus in the TV that accepts standard devices like DVD drives, cable TV cards, etc that have a standard interface amount manufactures, so that you only need one cable for power instead of a bunch for different media converters.

Drop the power part to much that can go wrong (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764072)

Drop the power part to much that can go wrong and 100w may be pushing it for thin e-net cables.

Just way for the day that the cable plugs this into the cable box Ethernet port that is hooked to the built in modem the blows the cable line out and not the tv out rj-45 port.

Why not media over IP (over 10GBASE-T)? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32764260)

10GBASE-T will eventually become commodity technology, and one can fit quite sufficiently high-definition bitstream on it, even entirely uncompressed. If wanted, proper encryption and authentication could be implemented on it. Hell, even multiple sources could be multiplexed on the same display device (or multiple displays) without much effort. IP traffic could be naturally bridged and routed, given sufficient equipment. Buses such as USB could be run on the side. "Display adapters" could become just co-operation of GPGPUs and offloading Ethernet adapters, and on dedicated devices this all could be implemented in reasonably easy fashion even with an FPGA off the shelf these days, not to mention ASICs.

Only problem that I can see in this is currently prohibitive extra cost and power use, but these will go down in five years, yet nobody can really claim they need single-display refresh pixel rates beyond 300 megapixels per second.

Well, of course: universal video over IP would cut margins of AV cable manufacturers.

All this stems from the desperation of pushing my computing equipment far from my display equipment; like most apartments, mine has ample cat 6A wiring and several single mode fiber pairs to the basement, but there just don't seem to be "natural" products to solve this: uncompressed over-1080p video over ethernet/IP...

Go with a protocol standard rather than a cable (1)

submain (856941) | more than 4 years ago | (#32764288)

IMHO, it would be better to start defining media protocols to stream hi def audio through TCP/IP. This way we would get rid of cable standards, and be able to tune in different devices on the tv just by changing which server it connects to (goodbye A/V switchers and the like).

Of course, giving an IP address to your TV may cause people to go nuts about security issues, but in a world where your printer, your router, and your computer are constantly on-line, this could be worked out.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>