[lake393]

is there one out there?

[namuk]

No , hdmi 1.4 may be pushed first ..

[meansizzler]

Highly doubt they would make one as manufacturers won't have to pay a royalty for using it, and we can't have that can we..

[lake393]

meansizzler, just the opposite. HDMI charges companies about $10K per year just for the license to use it on their products. Also HDMI has a royalty fee of 4 cents per port.

DisplayPort is an open standard and it's royalty-free. It's also based on a packet architecture vs HDMI's old raster scan technology so it's technically better in many many ways. And the form factor is better imo

I already have a home theater setup using HDMI 1.3b but i hope in like 4-5 years when it's time to upgrade again, i can use DisplayPort

[mossym]

Originally Posted by lake393

meansizzler, just the opposite. HDMI charges companies about $10K per year just for the license to use it on their products. Also HDMI has a royalty fee of 4 cents per port.

DisplayPort is an open standard and it's royalty-free. It's also based on a packet architecture vs HDMI's old raster scan technology so it's technically better in many many ways. And the form factor is better imo

I already have a home theater setup using HDMI 1.3b but i hope in like 4-5 years when it's time to upgrade again, i can use DisplayPort

there was another thread on this a while ago. it's very unlikely you will ever see displayport on a receiver for a number of reason

1) it's mainly been developed by the pc market, vga has never made the transfer to HT gear and it's doubtful display port is.
2) As you said it's open source, too easy for it to be cracked, the movie studios will never go for that, one of the strengths of hdmi is that the hdcp, although causing problems, it does so what it was supposed to
3) market penetration of hdmi. everything is going hdmi, it's really changing everything over to one connection, like no other video connection ever has
4)it's too late to market without having a really big reason to change from hdmi

and finally, and what i consider to be the biggest reason not to adopt display port, is
5)being open source makes it almost impossible to ensure correct connectivity. part of the reason you pay so much fort hdmi is to make sure everything works together, so whean you plug your blu-ray player into your tv it works. it's a tightly controlled spec.with open source people do what they want, and you end up with lots of variations that just don't work


tbh, i doubt, and even more i hope, that displayport never makes the jump to home theatre gear

[lake393]

mossym, it may be an open standard, but it's still a standard. I don't believe that different vendors can "do what they want" with it, otherwise they could not brand it as the DisplayPort standard.

Also, DisplayPort does offer encrypted content protection similar to HDCP. Simply sending encrypted content over an open standard interconnect should not lessen the security of the encryption itself.

[meansizzler]

Originally Posted by lake393

mossym, it may be an open standard, but it's still a standard. I don't believe that different vendors can "do what they want" with it, otherwise they could not brand it as the DisplayPort standard.

Actually they do, display port support up to 8CH LPCM audio, yet on all apple devices, apple do not send the audio via displayport, pretty sad really, considering their High end LED display port only Cinema Display which has built in speakers, takes the audio over usb, pretty silly if you ask, me, why not just stick to DVI then?

You see them Mini Display port to HDMI adapters and see written supports 8CH LPCM audio on the packet but then you go plug it into your mac and no audio!!!