3 ms·

Anything running over Ethernet has packets with checksums. Yes, noise will cause packets to drop, and that results in lower overall throughput, while connectiv

by pak 17y ago

Anything running over Ethernet has packets with checksums. Yes, noise will cause packets to drop, and that results in lower overall throughput, while connectivity still remains possible. The signal running over HDMI is not packet-based. You don't have any mechanism like with TCP where packets can get dropped and resent later. So if interference causes bits to flip on an HDMI connection, you will immediately see the interference on your TV, and it won't be pretty; it would probably look something like an HDTV antenna signal that loses reception--missing or discolored chunks of the screen or sparkly pixels. The effect is immediate and disruptive. The end result is that Monster Cable might do a better job of keeping your picture intact during a freak electrical storm, but there is no practical difference otherwise. If you are able to see a picture with HDMI, and you don't expect any wildly varying levels of RF interference in your environment, your cable is as good as anything else.

tel 17y ago
Again, nobody is disagreeing. This isn't a defense of Monster, it's a typical It's More Complicated Than That jibe. Don't buy Monster unless that flowchart checks out, but also realize that it's not impossible to see signal degradation on those cheaper digital cables. It's just a lot less likely.
- electromagnetic 17y ago
  A $10 cable should fail before a $250 cable, however the frequency of failures for an infrequently moved or manipulated cable should still give it a longevity of a few years. A $10 cable wont fail 25 times within the lifespan of the technology it's attached to. HDMI won't exist before you get 25 failures, unless you enjoy hammering nails into you cables or some other bizarre behaviour.
  - rys 17y ago
    I think most people will gladly pay more for a better cable, but they'd like to pay something comensurate to the engineering effort, and production and material costs. The markup is insane (nearly $200 apparently). One has to wonder if Monster and their retail partners would make just as much money selling them at $50, due to higher volume, with the added bonus of people not totally misleading everyone with the value proposition.
    - electromagnetic 17y ago
      I spent about $5 more on my HDMI cables than I would have to get ones with a heavy-duty rubberised outside instead of the cheap and tacky bendy-plastic that breaks easily from over-manipulation. You are right, people will pay more for better quality but misleading people into believing something is better quality by outright lies actually violates most consumer protection laws. I've seen no $250 monster cables at best buy here in ontario, the most expensive I saw was a $60 10ft cable by monster, however the consumer protection act is very strong and very strict here. Best Buy has screwed me over before and the mention of the CPA to a manager gets the problem resolved quickly. It appears they know they're in the wrong in many cases, but people let them get away with it - this is usually on their extended warranties from my experience.

by pak 17y ago

tel 17y ago

Again, nobody is disagreeing. This isn't a defense of Monster, it's a typical It's More Complicated Than That jibe. Don't buy Monster unless that flowchart checks out, but also realize that it's not impossible to see signal degradation on those cheaper digital cables. It's just a lot less likely.

electromagnetic 17y ago
A $10 cable should fail before a $250 cable, however the frequency of failures for an infrequently moved or manipulated cable should still give it a longevity of a few years. A $10 cable wont fail 25 times within the lifespan of the technology it's attached to. HDMI won't exist before you get 25 failures, unless you enjoy hammering nails into you cables or some other bizarre behaviour.
- rys 17y ago
  I think most people will gladly pay more for a better cable, but they'd like to pay something comensurate to the engineering effort, and production and material costs. The markup is insane (nearly $200 apparently). One has to wonder if Monster and their retail partners would make just as much money selling them at $50, due to higher volume, with the added bonus of people not totally misleading everyone with the value proposition.
  - electromagnetic 17y ago
    I spent about $5 more on my HDMI cables than I would have to get ones with a heavy-duty rubberised outside instead of the cheap and tacky bendy-plastic that breaks easily from over-manipulation. You are right, people will pay more for better quality but misleading people into believing something is better quality by outright lies actually violates most consumer protection laws. I've seen no $250 monster cables at best buy here in ontario, the most expensive I saw was a $60 10ft cable by monster, however the consumer protection act is very strong and very strict here. Best Buy has screwed me over before and the mention of the CPA to a manager gets the problem resolved quickly. It appears they know they're in the wrong in many cases, but people let them get away with it - this is usually on their extended warranties from my experience.