Ladies and Gentlemen, will you please welcome HDMI 1.4, the latest incarnation of the all-digital hi-def interconnect. Due for publication by the end of June, the HDMI 1.4 spec's key elements are integrated networking, support for bigger screen sizes, 3D friendliness and a new, more compact connector. The addition of networking …
Reduce cable clutter?
If all this is about reducing cable clutter, why not get on and move all the devices over to wireless!
Even Paris knows this makes sense...
4096 x 2160 . . .
. . . is enough resolution for 4 pictures at 1920 x 1080, given that both dimensions have doubled in size.
Not that i'm a pedant or anything.
Reduced cable clutter
Does that mean HDMI 1.5 will have integrated power too? Not that running the mains right next to the data will cause any problems =p
Any chance we could have a connector that clicks home rather than relying on friction? The thought of the weight of a decent shielded cable hanging off an even smaller connector doesn't sound such a great idea to me. Unless they went with a fiber optic cable so you didn't need a stupidly thick and expensive cable to go more than a couple of metres.
HUH? I'm looking forward to you trying to use anything wireless once every single device under the sun starts using it... There's only so much bandwidth and transmitting 2 1080p video signals on top of your wireless network, bluetooth keyboard and mouse, dec phone, wireless door bell and garage door opener, tv sender all withing 20' of two or three neighbours who are trying to do the same thing... LOL
Of course the manufacturers could all get together and use a single wireless comms system like 802.11x or bluetooth... LOL
2 Squared = 4
thats FOUR images...
So they've not actually increased the bandwidth at all? You can do 3840x2160@30Hz within the 340MHz bandwidth limit of HDMI 1.3 (type A connector).
As someone with an elderly 3840x2400, 48Hz monitor, and since Microsoft messed up spanning in Vista, I've been waiting for someone to come up with a connection spec which would drive it at full refresh down a single head. A type B HDMI 1.3 connector would do it (dual link 340MHz->680MHz pixel clock), as would the proposed update to the otherwise pointless DisplayPort. A shame the HDMI consortium hasn't forced type B connector compatibility out there as a way of keeping up. It sounds like they've just made these resolutions (more) standard.
Gates of Hell, because a working spanning mode stops this from being a problem.
to A. Murphy
Have you done your homework to find out the bandwidth you'd need to have all that data go over wireless?
Re: 4096 x 2160 . . .
> ...is enough resolution for 4 pictures at 1920x1080, given that both dimensions have doubled in size.
Resolution, yes. Refresh, no. It's enough for 4x1080p/30 (or "just about okay for films but I wish they'd film in p/60 mode as I prefer to call it), but only for 2x1080p/60 (decent gaming refresh which might benefit from 3D).
Of course, exactly the same is true of dual-link DVI that's been around for years (to a greater or lesser extent), so this aspect of the spec isn't particularly interesting.
Thats not enough for a lot of people - my peripheral vision needs 70Hz+ so not there yet.
don't be so nit-picky
Nobody claimed that it's enough resolution to ONLY transmit 2 pictures.
So Times are changing
When will we have 3D projection TV's. I can't wait. "Help Me Obi Wan Kenobi, You're my only Hope" Style is what I'm talking about.
Tom - I doubt they're targetting HDMI 1.4 at CRTs. My peripheral vision, too, can detect flicker at 70Hz - but that's mostly irrelevant when it comes to the rate at which you can throw images at an LCD. Motion usually looks fairly smooth above ~30Hz (and cinemas prove that 24Hz is acceptable to most, although I'd prefer to see 60Hz). There's always interpolation in the TV, as with most 100Hz+ screens.
Of course, once everything starts using black frame insertion the flicker will come back. :-)
Why the big deal about refresh rates? Most things are filmed in 24p, so surely this would be enough? (my tv resolves to 24p when watching BD)
30Hz doesn't cut it for me due to the jerkiness. I don't even understand how anyone can watch the 24 Cinema stuff that's pushed. It's like watching old stop motion movies. I run stuff at 60Hz and my room mate can't see the difference. I was hoping 120Hz would be more of a standard for running 3D, but it looks like the lowest common denominator is being pursued.
Stop comparing DisplayPort and HDMI
"HDMI a feature rival display interconnect technology DisplayPort lacks."
Displayport has never be intended for use in home cinema and media applications so it not a rival for HDMI. This is an unnecessary and flawed comparison added to this article!
There are many reasons why DisplayPort is not redundant and is actually needed for PC and laptop display. This link saves me explaining them all here:
Just to join in, *NO* to sucking all the bandwidth out of the environment by trying to drive this resolution wirelessly. If you want a wireless display, use a projector. Otherwise, think of your neighbours (and, if you must, stream the compressed video not the uncompressed full-size image). The recent reports about TV extenders confirmed what I've been saying for ages, and I'm grateful that none of my neighbours seem to have been inconsiderate enough to get one of these abominations yet.
More wireless rant.
One thing that you can rely on with a cable is that you shove it in the hole and it bloody works.
See the recent travails on record of people trying to get DNLA certified piece of kit A to talk to DNLA certified piece of kit B.
At least with computer gear you can swear, bin the card or adaptor, buy a new one, tweak some drivers and make it work. With appliances you're reliant on the manufacturer deciding that actually, yes, it *is* worth producing a firmware update to make it work with Logisoftple's ArseWangler X2 turbodisplay.
Oh goody, another new connector shape. We don't have enough of those.