HDMI to be replaced, good riddance

[Modelworks]

This is going to be great for integrators considering they already rely on cat5 for a multitude of uses.

Anyway, a fool and his money...

I think integrators are going to love it. Especially the power part. Being able to hang a tv and only have 1 cable going to it doing everything power, video, audio, ethernet, IR commands. The only downside I have seen is that some people will need to replace switches or hubs as some of those do not work because they only connect with the ethernet pairs and leave the other pairs not being used. So you get the video going to the switch but not being connected to any other cables on other ports.

If I were buying a switch now I would make sure it was POE compatible as those seem to be the ones that are working okay.

 

[Anubis]

only integrators of small LCDs are gonna love it, once you hit ~45 inches you are over the 100w limit, and plasmas lol yea

 

[Muse]

Geee....I would like to thank them for making HDMI short lived. How many peopel have bought HDTV's in the past 2 years?

eesh! This lappy I'm tapping on has HDMI connection and I bought a couple of HDMI cables but have never plugged one in or even used an HDMI connection in me life. My LCDs and video projector are DVI exclusively. My next displays will likely not need HDMI. I have most of a huge roll of Cat5 in my closet. :awe:

It will take awhile to really become mainstream. Figure 5 years or so before this really picks up steam.

What I don't get is how the OP can say they hated HDMI but like this. Maybe HDMI was not as good but it's a huge god send over component cables.

What does HDMI have over DVI? My projector supports component cables, and I have them hooked up but I never use them. I use the DVI connection instead. My impression of HDMI when it came out was that it was part of some industry push to curtail pirating, but I never got the specifics.

I was involved with some of the engineers that were coming up with the new cable format for HDTV. We wanted to just reuse DVI, it existed, it worked. Audio would be carried by optical and coax as it has always been. People could then route it however they liked without worrying about specialized audio gear. Marketing said that consumers wouldn't know how to make two connections and that putting it all in one was better.

We also did not like the HDMI connector itself. It puts a lot of stress on the connector because the cable has to be well shielded . Those connectors right now are a major part of repairs done in service centers. One engineer commented that it was like hanging from a ledge with one hand, it may work, but for how long ?

Marketing wanted something that looked like USB and was just plug in and use. We wanted DVI with a thumbscrew one each side so the cable wouldn't stress the connectors. Marketing decided that would be too complex for consumers.

At least with this the connector the cables are easier to use and it will cut down on repairs from damaged sockets. It also extends the range into the 100ft area without anything else but the cable.

This explains it pretty much. Thanks. Integrated video and audio in one cable. If I ever do use my HDMI cables, I'll be extra gentle with them.

 

[Gibson486]

It will take awhile to really become mainstream. Figure 5 years or so before this really picks up steam.

What I don't get is how the OP can say they hated HDMI but like this. Maybe HDMI was not as good but it's a huge god send over component cables.

I just never understood why HDMI ever came out. In the industrial world, cat5/6 is used for everything. It's used for communications, for video, for audio...everything. Then, when we get new TVs, we do not use cat 5/6. Infact, the company i work for has pretty much abandoned anything that does not use cat 5. It's just not worth the cost anymore since other cables are one trick ponies and there is no upgrade path. With ethernet you can use different protocols, other stuff you can't because no company wants to bother supporting it. I just do not understand why they would push HDMI when ethernet was there and ready. Looks like they finally got their head out of their ass, but guess what....HDMI is already being adopted. It's a little to late to do this without pissing off consumers.

 

[Muse]

I hate Cat5! The stupid plastic snap-latch things always break, but even when they're not broken, they can be hard as hell to get undone correctly.

I've had a big spool of Cat5 for years and a quality crimper. So far, I've not had problems with cables not working. Making your own Cat5 cables isn't hard at all, and it is cheap.

 

[Muse]

I think the marketing was at least partly right. How are thumbscrews a good thing for anyone? If a more secure attachment than friction is needed to prevent stress on the connectors, why not use a clip like RJ-45 has, but larger and sturdier, maybe two symmetrical clips? I can always plug in a RJ-45 blind to a difficult spot with no room to move the hand. A connector with more shape and tactile hints would be even easier. Not so with DVI or VGA and their thumbscrews.

I hate thumbscrews. They're a bitch. Half the time I'm looking in my desk for a special screwdriver for them and I need both hands, a good view, pheh! However, I understand that there's a good reason for them. My HTPC is connected to my projector or computer LCD by DVI, and I routinely switch between the displays. However, I do not bother with thumbscrews to make the switch, you better believe. It's held in by a bit of friction only. :hmm: The connections were not so designed, but I've jury rigged the system for my convenience. Of course, I could have bought a $100 switch to do the same thing but I didn't want to spend the money.

 

[CubanlB]

I think integrators are going to love it. Especially the power part. Being able to hang a tv and only have 1 cable going to it doing everything power, video, audio, ethernet, IR commands. The only downside I have seen is that some people will need to replace switches or hubs as some of those do not work because they only connect with the ethernet pairs and leave the other pairs not being used. So you get the video going to the switch but not being connected to any other cables on other ports.

If I were buying a switch now I would make sure it was POE compatible as those seem to be the ones that are working okay.

The funny thing is a lot of fairly good HDMI switching products are finally starting to come to market. HDMI matrix switches that can spoof edid information and can generate HDMI cec information from inputs from other control devices (RS-232 inputs) and selectively cache or pass information from devices. But most of these devices have built in baluns and output over cat5 anyway! and then have to be switched back to HDMI at the display.

Good run down on what features integrators are looking for in current HDMI matrix switches.

http://thedigitallifestyle.com/cs/T...-Matrix-Switchers-_2D00_-Installment-030.aspx

I'm sure most of these features should be a pretty smooth transition to HDbaseT, but in true AV fashion there will certainly be some bumps along the road. Lets just Hope the new specification isn't too locked down and actually is well though out enough to avoid all the handshake/compatibility/revision/etc. issues that were the hallmark of HDMI.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

HDMI has issues, but it did one thing well:

Made it simple for consumers to connect A/V stuff.

Is it a bulky cable? Yes. Are the connectors very weak for the cable they are designed for? Yes. Was it a clumsy protocol (regarding the complexity from a technical view)? Yes. Was it ideal? No.

It did however make home theater cabling much simpler, and was a huge success from the end users perspective. We are on a forum that is on a technical website, and this stuff interests us. We debate the pros/cons of shit that 95%+ of the population don't give a eff about. So, while we know that HDMI was poor from a connector/standard perspective, it was a success from the end consumer perspective. It was easy for people to understand how to do it. You connect one cable, and have audio AND video. Done. The worst you would have to do is know which source goes to which which HDMI port, but you didn't have to worry about making sure your audio and video selections were on the correct inputs.

Personally, I can't wait for Cat5 based cabling. HDMI was nice for it's simplicity, but CatX will beat it IMHO every day of the week.

My only concerns are going to be related to the power going over relatively thin cables, and just data rates. Now, the stuff shown in this thread make me hopeful that the CatX cable can support everything, but until it's released (in production products) I am holding judgement.

I won't be upgrading my stuff though just for the cable. When it's time to upgrade though, I will definitely make sure that it uses this connection (if it works as advertised).

 

[mv2devnull]

I've had a big spool of Cat5 for years and a quality crimper. So far, I've not had problems with cables not working. Making your own Cat5 cables isn't hard at all, and it is cheap.

Considering this you could re-value to cost of your time. :sneaky:

Well, it is not foolish to ask ...

 

[Modelworks]

My only concerns are going to be related to the power going over relatively thin cables, and just data rates. Now, the stuff shown in this thread make me hopeful that the CatX cable can support everything, but until it's released (in production products) I am holding judgement.

They did the power protocol sort of like USB where a device has to tell the host how much power it needs, how much it is receiving and the host can track how much it is outputting. So if someone used a thin cable and tried to run 100Watts for 300ft the result would be that the host would simply stop providing power.