Sounds like hdmi Forum are a bunch of twats. Time for a new format.
this post was submitted on 29 Feb 2024
851 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
59039 readers
3763 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
DisplayPort already exists
We cannot have two standards, that's ridiculous! We need to develop one universal standard that covers everyone's use cases.
I know what you are referencing, but displayport already covers everybody's use cases
load more comments
(3 replies)
Yes, I agree. And it needs to be open bloody source!!
Hi, my name is USB-C!
And what does that use? That's right it's Displayport Alternate Mode! Oh you've got Thunderbolt? Guess what, also Displayport!
load more comments
(1 replies)
Hard to find on non-pc gear, but that’s a fair point
It's usually easy enough to adapt it as needed. It can typically send signals compatible with HDMI and DVI-D just fine.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
And also USB c
USB-C display output uses the Display Port protocol
Can it use others, and is there a benefit? USB C makes a lot of sense; lower material usage, small, carries data, power and connects to almost everything now.
I believe USB-C is the only connector supported for carrying DisplayPort signals other than DisplayPort itself.
The biggest issue with USB-C for display in my opinion is that cable specs vary so much. A cable with a type c end could carry anywhere from 60-10000MB/s and deliver anywhere from 5-240W. What's worse is that most aren't labeled, so even if you know what spec you need you're going to have a hell of a time finding it in a pile of identical black cables.
Not that I dislike USB-C. It's a great connector, but the branding of USB has always been a mess.
would be neat to somehow have a standard color coding. kinda how USB 3 is (usually) blue, maybe there could be thin bands of color on the connector?
better yet, maybe some raised bumps so visually impaired people could feel what type it was. for example one dot is USB 2, two could be USB 3, etc
Have you looked at the naming of the usb standards? No you havn't otherwise you wouldn't make this sensible suggestion.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
USB C is just a connector, you might be referring to Displayport over USB C which is basically just the same standard with a different connector at the end. That or Thunderbolt I guess
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
More people should try DP.
As already mentioned, DisplayPort exists. The problem is adoption. Even getting DisplayPort adopted as the de facto standard for PC monitors hasn't done anything to get it built into TVs.
load more comments
(3 replies)
DisplayPort for life!
Is there a reason or way to prevent display port from having so many connection issues specifically on port replicators (docking stations)?
In corporate environments I find so many times that you plug them up over and over, unplug over and over and check the connection a million times before turning everything off one final time, holding the power button on everything (kind of like an smc reset) and then booting up everything like you originally did and they come up. Is this a result of the devices trying to remember a previous setup or is their an easy way to avoid it?
I've hooked up dozens of them and still ran into issues when a family member brought a setup home to work when they were sick last week.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
This is really frustrating. This is the only thing holding Linux gaming back for me, as someone who games with a AMD GPU and an OLED TV. On Windows 4k120 works fine, but on Linux I can only get 4k60. I've been trying to use an adapter, but it crashes a lot.
AMD seemed to be really trying to bring this feature to Linux, too. Really tragic that they were trying to support us, and some anti-open source goons shot them down.
ive found that the issue in my experience is that X11 only supports a max of 4k60, but Wayland supports 4k120 and beyond. I dont think the cable matters as the same cable im using works on windows with 4k160.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(11 replies)
So why is it rejected?
Just because they're still trying to use HDMI to prevent piracy? Who in fuck's name is using HDMI capture for piracy? On a 24fps movie, that's 237MB of data to process every second just for the video. A 2 hour movie would be 1.6TB. Plus the audio would likely be over 2TB.
I've got a Jellyfin server packed with 4K Blu-ray rips that suggest there are easier ways to get at that data.
The CEO's of the media companies are all fucking dinosaurs who still think VCRs should have been made illegal. You will never convince them that built in copy protection is a dumb idea and a waste of time.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(18 replies)
This sucks as all new TVs use HDMI2.1 for modern features and modern games consoles rely on those for 4k 60Hz HDR, etc.
So now Valve can't just make their own home console with Steam OS for TVs directly (and support high-end features at least).
load more comments
(1 replies)
What's the over/under that this was about preventing people getting around HDCP using a modified driver?
load more comments
(2 replies)
Alright, from now on I will never again buy any electronics with HDMI.
No disrespect meant towards GamingOnLinux, but this article from Tom's Hardware has a much better description of what's going on, including quotes.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
If you were hoping at some point to see HDMI 2.1+ on Linux with AMD + Mesa, you're out of luck right now as it's simply not going to be happening.
There's been a bug report on the Mesa GitLab of "4k@120hz unavailable via HDMI 2.1" that's been open for a few years now, with lots of comments and chatter about the issue.
In an update on the bug report, AMD engineer Alex Deucher commented: "The HDMI Forum has rejected our proposal unfortunately.
So if you're on Linux, it's going to continue to be best to buy hardware that uses DisplayPort.
On the NVIDIA side though, it seems like it may not be an issue, as developer Karol Herbst wrote on Mastodon: "Even though AMD might not be able to add support for HDMI 2.1, nouveau certainly will as Nvidia's open source driver also supports HDMI 2.1 so there is no reason to believe that at least some drivers can't support HDMI 2.1
It's quite backwards, but apparently having all the logic inside firmware (like Nvidia does) will probably help us implementing support for HDMI 2.1"
The original article contains 244 words, the summary contains 183 words. Saved 25%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Boo! Get off the stage HDMI Forum!
Eli5, what are the security risks of my HDMI cable?
Piracy being easier is the only risk. Once again ruining the experience of legitimate customers to try and stop a thing that they have had no success at even slowing down.
Even further, it made it more expensive to buy products from all the dumb licensing fees that all the middlemen try to shoehorn in.
The security of mega Corp IP.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Always thought that display port is better anyways lol. Anything that HDMI does or have that display port doesnt?
load more comments
(10 replies)
view more: next ›