New HDMI 1.4 standard offers just five confusing options

jerwin

#1 – 9:28 AM May 28, 2009

Why aren't they supporting Gigabit ethernet? I know that domestic broadband connections capable of saturating Fast Ethernet are very rare, but it seems shortsighted.

Thaddeus Smith

#2 – 9:29 AM May 28, 2009

"So I just buy the most expensive one, right?"

no, you shop at monoprice and let the egomaniacs buy their expensive cables.

Anonymous Anonymous

#3 – 10:39 AM May 28, 2009

Shouldn't even the Standard HDMI cable support 1080p/60?

zuzu

#4 – 10:57 AM May 28, 2009

Isn't HDMI just a video cable? (Ok, it includes audio too if you're actually going to use the built-in speakers on your HDTV.)

What's the ethernet for again?

These descriptions are sounding like the technobabble from Star Trek: Voyager.

lovemoose

#5 – 1:15 PM May 28, 2009

That's techno-cockery of the highest order.

jerwin

#6 – 3:13 PM May 28, 2009

>Isn't HDMI just a video cable? (Ok, it includes audio too if you're actually going to use the built-in speakers on your HDTV.)

Plenty of receivers will decode the audio from an hdmi signal. (However, the bargain/entry-level receivers just switch the video).

>What's the ethernet for again?

It simplifies cabling. Your reciever needs ethernet for internet radio. Your TV needs ethernet for hulu. Your Bluray player needs ethernet for the downloadable content. Your XBox 360 needs ethernet for XBox Live. And so on. With the new hdmi standards, you could use a minimum number of cables.

And if the receiver could talk to the things connected to it, you'd only need one remote. Yes, existing universal remotes can control any number of devices and macros can switch inputs and turn on peripherals at the appropriate times, but it's kludgy.

Anonymous Anonymous

#7 – 3:14 PM May 28, 2009

#3 or at least 1080p/30. Which, by definition is still 1080p!

zuzu

#8 – 4:46 PM May 28, 2009

I think part of why I'm befuddled is that for the past 4 years I've been using a Mac Mini as my "receiver". So the HDTV tuner isn't in my display, and my display doesn't play Hulu or Boxee or whatever the fad is this week. (I have all my movies and television backed up onto hard drives as standard .avi or .mkv files which are played with VideoLAN.)

(Obviously my Mac Mini included gigabit ethernet using standard CAT-6 cable. It uses DVI for video output and Toslink optical for audio output.)

Your Bluray player needs ethernet for the downloadable content.

Blu-Ray might as well be a dead format because 720p "backups" are easier and hassle-free. Has been for the entirety of the "format war" with HD-DVD.

Your reciever needs ethernet for internet radio.

Is that a popular demand by consumers now? I don't even pay attention to the 200 free "radio" channels provided over Clear QAM. I keep an archive of my own MP3s ala iTunes, and I'll play a playlist if I'm in the mood. iTunes can also play Icecast streaming MP3 if I really want to.

And if the receiver could talk to the things connected to it, you'd only need one remote.

One Bluetooth remote is all I need. I do like the Sony PS3 one better than the Wiimote. RemoteBuddy helps.

So, yeah, the idea of a standalone "receiver" seems so 90s. Remember how "convergence" was all the talk in the 1990s? Well, it already happened somewhere around 2003.

Just get a Mac Mini, or an AppleTV, or a Playstation3.

jerwin

#9 – 5:45 PM May 28, 2009

No receiver? What powers your speakers?

The Mac Min, out of the box, only has a stereo connection. Oh sure, you can connect it something capable of decoding Dolby Surround Sound, but that would be something akin to a Receiver....

Where are you getting your 720p rips? Are you paying for them? Or is that left for someone else's budget? And why are you limiting yourself to 720p anyway? The newest TV sets support resolutions of 1080*1920.

Sure, a massive computer monitor may use resolutions beyond that, but so will HDMI 1.4. Nothing wrong with updating your standards, right?

I guess that the consumer electronics view the receiver of the future as "a mac mini with really nice audio" and need a new hdmi standard to help them achieve that. If it doesn't sell, it doesn't sell.

jerwin

#10 – 7:39 PM May 28, 2009

>Obviously my Mac Mini included gigabit ethernet using standard CAT-6 cable. It uses DVI for video output and Toslink optical for audio output.

Three cables. If your devices used HDMI 1.4, you'd only need one.

zuzu

#11 – 7:56 PM May 28, 2009

Three cables. If your devices used HDMI 1.4, you'd only need one.

How's that? Since the Toslink connects to speakers, the DVI to a display, and the CAT-6 to a router. How would one cable plug into three separate devices?

zuzu

#12 – 8:06 PM May 28, 2009

No receiver? What powers your speakers?

The speakers include an amplifier (with inputs) affixed to the subwoofer enclosure.

The Mac Mini, out of the box, only has a stereo connection.

Incorrect. It also includes a Toslink 3.5mm optical output (using the same port). It'll output as many audio channels over fiber optic cable as you like.

Oh sure, you can connect it something capable of decoding Dolby Surround Sound, but that would be something akin to a Receiver

The speakers include a chip for decoding AC3, DTS, etc. I suppose this is like a receiver, for audio exclusively.

And why are you limiting yourself to 720p anyway?

That's what's commonly available as MKV files. Most "backups" aren't 1080p yet.

Nothing wrong with updating your standards, right?

Looks like someday I'll have to update to DisplayPort. Any support for HDCP makes my skin crawl, though.

jerwin

#13 – 8:42 PM May 28, 2009

>It'll output as many audio channels over fiber optic cable as you like.

7 max (dts-es). And they're compressed. Bluray allows for uncompressed and lossless audio. No compression artifacts. However, to listen to it, you have to use either analog connections, which arn't always available, or hdmi.

That's what's commonly available as MKV files. Most "backups" aren't 1080p yet.

Ah, blessed piracy. Do you put aside payments to the publishers in escrow? Or do you figure that one purchase (by the initial torrent seeder) suffices?

The speakers include an amplifier (with inputs) affixed to the subwoofer enclosure.

Ah. Low fidelity audio. No wonder you don't much care about CDs. SACDs or lossless audio...

Anonymous Anonymous

#14 – 7:58 AM May 29, 2009

Never mind the lag introduced by the constant 'authentication protocols' of HDMI -- some TVs have a 'game mode' to get around it -- thereby defeating the point.

bhupinder

#15 – 1:02 AM September 1, 2009

Incorrect. It also includes a Toslink 3.5mm optical output. It'll output as many audio channels over fiber optic cable as you like.

bhupinder

#16 – 1:11 AM September 1, 2009

aah!!! thats not easy that Standard HDMI cable support 1080p/60...anyways i'll try...
if u want 2 know about skull rings then visit
http://www.anxietyspinnerrings.com/images/sr129large.jpg

Jeremy Benthum

#17 – 1:40 PM September 3, 2009

I just cant believe how darned expensive all HDMI cables are!!! Especially Monter cables, talk about a total rip off!!! I found a website where they offer pretty much the exact same cable as Monster (I checked their spec sheets) for like a 10th of the cost. CableWholesale.com. My buddy bought some of their cables, so I know they arent some cheap crappy cable...wonder why they are able to offer them so cheap...maybe its just that monster is way over-priced! haha =)

I think they do bulk orders, so they are able to offer them way cheaper then everyone else...Ill put their url in the URL field... Hope this helps some of you guys out!