18 ms·

Valve: HDMI Forum Continues to Block HDMI 2.1 for Linux

902 points by OsrsNeedsf2P 11mo ago

VerifiedReports 11mo ago
Ugh. It's sad we're still saddled with HDMI at all, when DisplayPort has always been better.
freeopinion 11mo ago
I always choose DP. I didn't even know there was this issue with HDMI.
jrepinc 11mo ago
Looks like Valve also needs to start making SteamTV, just a TV without any "smart" spyware/adware OS. Until then.. this blackfriday I ordered a TV that by miracle even has a DisplayPort input (Hisense 65U8Q). Unfortunately still "smart" TV but at least it does not have US-based OS but European made VIDAA which hopefully provides much less spyware than the US-alternatives, if it properly respects the EU GDPR laws. Hopefully Hisense starts/inspires a bigger movement towards DisplayPort and this HDMI mafia dies as soon as possible.
- jsheard 11mo ago
  They could also potentially sidestep the issue by designing a discrete DisplayPort to HDMI chip into the system, so the HDMI 2.1+ implementation is firewalled from the open source stack. Maybe next time, if the HDMI Forum still hasn't budged by then.
  - mizzack 11mo ago
    Intel did this with the ARC A750/770 https://community.intel.com/t5/Graphics/HDMI-2-1-UHD-144Hz-Arc-A750-A770/m-p/1452946 https://community.intel.com/t5/Graphics/HDMI-2-1-UHD-144Hz-A...
    - jsheard 11mo ago
      Yeah, the chip they used isn't ideal though because it converts DP1.4 (32Gbit) to HDMI 2.1 (48Gbit), so the bandwidth is bottlenecked on the input side. Ideally you'd want a chip which takes DP2.1, which I'm not sure exists yet, and the upcoming Steam Machine only supports DP1.4 so it wouldn't have helped in that case anyway.
- aydyn 11mo ago
  Does it really matter that much? Get a $20 roku or google tv stick or whatever you're comfortable with and don't connect the TV OS.
  - kotaKat 11mo ago
    The TV manufacturers still make it highly annoying to avoid their integrated bullshit now. The setting to launch an LG WebOS TV into its last input on power-on is buried under 'advanced settings' several menus deep. They would rather launch you into their home hub full of preinstalled apps even if it's not online... ... and the thing came with Microsoft Copilot installed, and you couldn't uninstall it, either. The future!
    - amarant 11mo ago
      The trick is to not buy a "TV". Get a really big computer monitor/screen, and put it where you'd normally put your TV.
      - forbiddenlake 11mo ago
        This trick unfortunately falls down above a certain size, especially if you want to game at a good fps, and stay in the consumer space (price) rather than the commercial display space. That gigabyte 45 inch is too small to use above your fireplace and view across the living room. In my case I compromised on needing 4k, and got an lg 65 inch with only HDMI.
        intrasight 11mo ago
        Are projectors the alternative?
        zamadatix 11mo ago
        Projectors can be an option but the price point to get anything comparably good in terms of picture quality puts you squarely back in commercial TV pricing.
- ZeroCool2u 11mo ago
  Imagine a Steam TV with the Steam Box simply built-in. That would be incredibly nice. The worst part of my brand new LG G5 OLED TV is the software itself. I'd pay a good deal more to have Valve responsible for the software running on my TV.
  - jrepinc 11mo ago
    And even better make it as open as Steam Deck/Machine and allow to install any GNU/Linux distribution onto it maybe even something with KDE Plasma Bigscreen or something similar if desired.
  - undersuit 11mo ago
    You can get TVs with a "PC slot" like the Sharp M431-2. Just need a Steam Slot.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
      Is this an actual thing people can buy, or only companies?
      - undersuit 11mo ago
        I see one for sale at B&H Photo Video.
    - kaelwd 11mo ago
      That's only 60Hz though. Are there any dumb TVs with 120+ Hz VRR and HDR?
  - cosmic_cheese 11mo ago
    It might be nice for a little while, but the PC component is going to age much more poorly than the display will. I think the better move would be for Valve to make a really nice gamer-oriented dumb TV that's essentially a 50"+ monitor. Kind of like those BFGDs (Big Format Gaming Displays) sans the exorbitant prices. The size of a Steam Box is in comparison quite diminutive, so finding a place to put it shouldn't be too much of an issue and the ability to swap it out for a newer model with the same screen 5+ years down the road would be nice.
- unethical_ban 11mo ago
  If Steam could find a good OEM to partner with, I would buy it in a heartbeat. I don't know if any of the monitor manufacturers have an incentive to help Steam produce an ad-free, open-spec monitor/television.
cxr 11mo ago
Dupe: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46153479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46153479>
tclancy 11mo ago
Am I understanding correctly that the underlying issue is asking exorbitant prices to see the HDMI Forum’s specs? Feels like you shouldn’t be able to define an industry spec if you want to get paid for it, but maybe that would suppress smaller-scale, niche development.
- jsheard 11mo ago
  No, the issue here is that the HDMI 2.1 NDA is so strict that releasing an open source implementation is forbidden no matter how much you pay them. AMD has access to the specs, they've implemented it in hardware and in their closed source Windows driver, but they're not allowed to add it to their open source Linux driver. Nvidia does support HDMI 2.1 on Linux since their driver is closed source (but that causes its own problems). Maybe AMD could compromise by releasing a minimal binary blob which only exposes the HDMI 2.1 implementation and nothing else.
  - cedws 11mo ago
    Why on earth is a connector standard secret?
    - TheChaplain 11mo ago
      How else will you charge people from implementing support for it?
      - pipo234 11mo ago
        Well, in video land there is patent pools. For example, you pay nominal fee to download specs from iso/ice 14496-12 to learn the details about BMFF and then pay mpeg-la a couple of dollars per device of it uses an AVC / h264 decoder. These are open standards, but mpeg-la tries to recoup some of the research costs from "freeloaders". Open source implementations like ffmpeg are a bit of a grey area,here
        littlestymaar 11mo ago
xvilka 11mo ago
Just promote DisplayPort and boycott HDMI.
- jacobgkau 11mo ago
  That would be easier if both GPU and display manufacturers weren't eschewing newer DisplayPort versions for older versions with DSC (which is not lossless despite its subjective claims of being "visually lossless"), while building in newer HDMI versions with greater performance.
  - jsheard 11mo ago
    To be fair, the DisplayPort 2.0/2.1 standardisation process was riddled with delays and they ended up landing years after HDMI 2.1 did. It stands to reason that hardware manufacturers picked up the earlier spec first.
  - AshamedCaptain 11mo ago
    what resolution is it that you can drive with "newer HDMI versions" but you cannot drive with DisplayPort 1.4 w/o DSC? The bandwidth difference is not really that much in practice, and "newer HDMI versions" also rely on DSC, or worse, chroma subsampling (objectively and subjectively worse). I mean, one has been able to drive 5K, 4K@120Hz, etc. for almost over a decade with DP1.4, for the same res you need literally the latest version of HDMI (the "non" TDMS one). It's no wonder that display screens _have_ to use the latest version of HDMI, because otherwise they cannot be driven from a single HDMI port at all. Having monitors that supported its native resolution through DP but not HDMI used to be a thing until very recently.
    - korhojoa 11mo ago
      I understand that this is not a common case, but 7680x2160@240 (not to mention using hdr and to be fair, DP 2.1 also requires DSC then). You can use this to check: https://trychen.com/feature/video-bandwidth https://trychen.com/feature/video-bandwidth
    - 11mo ago
oompydoompy74 11mo ago
I’ve been looking for a DisplayPort to HDMI cable to get around this on our household couch gaming computer. I have been unable to find one sketchy or otherwise that can handle high refresh rate and 4:4:4 color.
- bsimpson 11mo ago
  FWIW, most USB docks are effectively this. DP goes in via USB-C and HDMI comes out the other end. I bought one from UGREEN on Amazon. I think it's called the 9 in 1. It does 4k@60 with HDR, coming out of SteamOS.
  - oompydoompy74 11mo ago
    I’ve never thought about trying a dock. Thanks!
  - usrusr 11mo ago
    But are there any that don't overheat when you try to funnel dual screens through the USB-C/TB4? The only setup I have that doesn't is a super minimal one that has a single DP out that feeds a daisy-chain (and a single USB out that feeds a simple hub for low bandwidth peripherals, and a PD in). Unfortunately, most of the screen pairs that I run don't do daisy-chain. Every other hub I tried eventually got me to give up and connect one of the screens through direct HDMI.
    - eqvinox 11mo ago
      The key is to not use TB4; that's far more energy intensive to handle than DP1.4 alt mode (+ MST for 2 displays). Basically the dock needs to be a little shitty and not have too many features...
  - d3Xt3r 11mo ago
    But does it support VRR?
- eqvinox 11mo ago
  https://www.club-3d.com/shop/cac-1088-1223 https://www.club-3d.com/shop/cac-1088-1223 (https://geizhals.eu/club-3d-aktiver-adapter-cac-1088-a3310041.html https://geizhals.eu/club-3d-aktiver-adapter-cac-1088-a331004...) https://www.club-3d.com/shop/cac-1087-1128 https://www.club-3d.com/shop/cac-1087-1128 (3m cable version) DP 1.4 → HDMI 2.1. Apparently they're no longer being manufactured (?? - not sure that's correct), so get one while it's still possible... [Ed.: accidentally linked another adapter that is the other direction. Added 3m & direct manufacturer links.]
TechSquidTV 11mo ago
No one wants HDMI. No one.
- bee_rider 11mo ago
  Other than the TV, although its opinion carries a lot of weight in this discussion unfortunately.
  - PunchyHamster 11mo ago
    I think that's more forced to by inertia, and the HDMI push for mandatory DRM
- efreak 11mo ago
  My monitor works fine with HDMI It worked fine with VGA and DVI as well (it has all four, but my current PC doesn't have DVI or VGA outputs). It works fine with Displayport...until I turn it off, and then it won't go back on. I could solve this by connecting the monitor with HDMI, but this is my secondary monitor; my primary is an older but nicer (16:10, brighter, etc) monitor that only has DVI and VGA, while my PC only has DP and HDMI outputs, and the only adapter I've found that works with them is the HDMI-DVI adapter I use, leaving me only DP to connect my secondary. This is the process I have to go through to get my monitor working after turning it off when connected through displayport: 1. Turn off the computer (I'm not clear if fast shutdown or hibernate has any effect here) 2. Unplug the computer (or switch off the PSU) 3. Press the power button (to speed up the next step slightly) 4. Wait for residual power to drain from the motherboard (30s-3 minutes) 5. Reconnect computer to power 6. Turn PC back on If I don't fully shut down the computer, such that it reinitializes the displays completely, it never recognizes that there's a monitor attached to displayport. My understanding is that this is because the DID (or equivalent) is powered by the monitor itself, and not by the computer, and when you turn off the monitor (as I do at night to keep the bright-af led off; this also prevents Windows from waking the display every few hours but that can be done by disabling the monitor with Win+P), somewhere between the OS and the motherboard the logical port gets completely shut down until a full reset.
ethin 11mo ago
We really need to just force all standards organizations to release their standards for free. No making you pay $300 or whatever for a standard. (The PCI SIG makes you pay like $5000 for access to the PCIe standard...)
- mahkoh 11mo ago
  VESA makes you pay $5000 to get legal access to the DisplayPort standard. That is not the issue here.
  - ethin 11mo ago
    It is part of the issue here. This specific post is about the HDMI forum having an insanely restrictive NDA, but the broader problem of SDOs charging obscene amounts of money for what amounts to trivially reproduceable digital documents (or taking other measures to do everything they can to seal the standards from the public unless your willing to pay the obscene fees or <insert other absurd measure here>) is relevant to this post, and this comment, since the HDMI forum is doing exactly this kind of gatekeeping; it only differs in form, but not function.
    - jrepinc 11mo ago
      Yeah HDMI Forum shameful behavior in a way reminds me of those evil greedy scientific publishing houses. Standards and science should be open and free as in freedom to access AND implement and not gated behind some obscene monetary or other forms of restrictions, like patents. In this day and age these restrictions have no place and should be abolished.
      - BlueTemplar 11mo ago
        So should HDCP. And DMCA. And platforms. And DRM in general. But this is basically asking for the USA to give up on their soft power (Hollywood, and over the Internet). It's something to aim for, but is still going to take decades. And you have to be careful about what might fill the power void (China, Russia...)
jonny_eh 11mo ago
Is the a USB-C/Thunderbolt to HDMI 2.1 dongle? Send Displayport and audio over USB-C and then let that hardware handle the HDMI handshaking.
- klipklop 11mo ago
  There isn't one that supports VRR/Gsync/Freesync well. What gamers want is chroma/RGB 4:4:4 + HDR + VRR/Freesync + 4k,120hz for their Linux PC on a TV. This is not possible with any DP --> HDMI 2.1 dongle on the market. They need support at the driver level to make this work. This is what the idiots at the HDMI forum are blocking. The only way to have high quality visuals on a PC/TV setup is to run Windows. That really sucks.
  - Fire-Dragon-DoL 11mo ago
    This is terrible. Aren't there on the market big "pc monitors" instead of tvs?
    - raggi 11mo ago
      Not with good measured performance no. There are some which advertise good numbers (such as high refresh rates) but are unable to drive the panels to visibly change pixels at anywhere near the refresh rate.
  - klipklop 11mo ago
    I can't edit now, but it seems that there is a new dongle on the market that might be able to do this with some changes (whitelists?) to the AMDGPU driver in Linux.
  - sunshowers 11mo ago
    I do actually have this setup going with a Cable Matters adapter [1] + a custom firmware I found [2] and > chroma/RGB 4:4:4 + HDR + VRR/Freesync + 4k,120hz for their Linux PC on a TV works great now on my LG C4 TV with Bazzite's gaming mode, though: * 144Hz is unstable * 12-bit color is unstable (10-bit works fine), and gamescope doesn't have a way to limit color depth (kwin does), so I had to put in place an EDID override * in the EDID, limiting the FreeSync range to 60-120Hz (which should still allow frame doubling/tripling) seemed to be better -- the default 40Hz caused a bit of flickering because the AMD driver would drop the refresh rate down to 38.5Hz or so. Should write about this in more detail. [1] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B094XR43M5 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B094XR43M5 [2] https://forum.level1techs.com/t/it-is-possible-to-4k-120-hdr-vrr-444-chroma-on-linux-bazzite-with-amd-9070xt-with-this-dp-to-hdmi-cable-but-it-may-not-work-for-everything/227748/46 https://forum.level1techs.com/t/it-is-possible-to-4k-120-hdr...
modeless 11mo ago
This is fundamentally about DRM, isn't it? There is a working open source implementation already, but the HDMI cartel won't allow an open source implementation to have the encryption keys required to interface with the DRM in existing devices?
- jsheard 11mo ago
  Source devices aren't required to output a DRM'ed signal though, are they? I think the DRM is only required on the receiver side. In that case a compliant source wouldn't need any keys, and besides, that wasn't a blocker for the previous HDMI versions which supported DRM too.
  - modeless 11mo ago
    IIUC they're required to do a handshake involving encryption. Which is a form of DRM to enforce centralized control over the device ecosystem even if the subsequent video signals are not encrypted.
    - janc_ 11mo ago
      That sounds like an anti-competitive action by a near-monopoly player…
klipklop 11mo ago
It's about time somebody does some reverse engineering and just uploads the needed stuff online to make HDMI 2.1 work in Linux. It's getting absurd at this point. TV's need to start including Displayport, HDMI is a giant pain in the ass for gamers.
- sounds 11mo ago
  I'm switching to DisplayPort
  - jauntywundrkind 11mo ago
    That HDMI Forum does not allow TVs to be sold with DisplayPort is a massive reason I think they deserve to have their building surrounded by angry people with pitchforks and torches. Anti-competitive abusers, doing awful things to prevent a better world. DisplayPort actually makes sense as a digital protocol, where-as HDMI inherits all the insane baggage of the analog past & just sucks. HDMI is so awful.
    - somat 11mo ago
      Oh wow, that explains a lot, I sort of always figured it was just market momentum that meant you never see tv's with a display port. sort of like ... we need a digital video link VESA develops DVI ... market gap for tv's identified hdmif develops HDMI which is DVI with an audio channel ... while technically a minor feature that audio link was the killer feature for digital tv's and led to hdmi being the popular choice for tv's VESA develops displayport a packet(vs streaming for DVI and hdmi) based digital link, it's packet nature allows for several interesting features including sending audio, and multiple screens. ... no tv's use it, while display port is better than hdmi it is not better enough to make a difference to the end user and so hdmi remains normal for tv's, you can find a few computer monitor with DP but you have to seek them out. I will have to see if there is some sort of stupid "additional licensing cost" if a tv is produced with displayport, that would explain so much. I don't claim that there are no tv's with DP but I certainly have never seen one.
    - noname120 11mo ago
blastersyndrome 11mo ago
Legally speaking, what is stopping someone from just reverse-engineering the specification and publishing it online somewhere?
- superxpro12 11mo ago
  Probably a lawyer with little legal standing that is however funded by a very large checkbook.
- Avamander 11mo ago
  I suspect there isn't anything really stopping them (especially in the EU) except threats.
shmerl 11mo ago
HDMI forum is a frontend for the cartel that profits from HDMI patents. Everyone should use USB 4 / DisplayPort instead and HDMI should go into the dustbin of history, but TV industry is slowing things down due this cartel.
Trung0246 11mo ago
Standard link to download: https://dokumen.pub/download/hdmi-specification-21-high-definition-multimedia-interface-specification-v21-v21nbsped.html https://dokumen.pub/download/hdmi-specification-21-high-defi... Alternative: https://annas-archive.org/md5/4dd395c749519a36cb755e6ebbe48847 https://annas-archive.org/md5/4dd395c749519a36cb755e6ebbe488... Alternative (incomplete, only couple first page): https://device.report/m/91235972e8cbf6d6ce84f7cf84ca0ac12623463530d1f80560f22b47b9ba9858 https://device.report/m/91235972e8cbf6d6ce84f7cf84ca0ac12623... Other HDMI stuff: https://pdfhost.io/v/YidEvBDkS_EP92A7E_EP91A7E_DS_V04 https://pdfhost.io/v/YidEvBDkS_EP92A7E_EP91A7E_DS_V04 Older available here: https://glenwing.github.io/docs/ https://glenwing.github.io/docs/
- jsheard 11mo ago
  AIUI the spec being leaked ironically makes things worse, because for an unofficial implementation to be legally kosher it would have to be clean-room reverse engineered anyway, and since the official spec is out there the integrity of such an effort would be called into doubt. You'd somehow have to prove you didn't look at it, ever, or at least be trusted enough for people to take your word for it. (I'm not a lawyer, please correct me if I'm wrong)
  - brokenmachine 11mo ago
    Reading a standards spec to understand what the device you paid for does? Straight to jail! Pirating the entire internet to train your AI? That's fair use.
    - xg15 11mo ago
      Can we just train an AI with the spec and then vibe code an implementation?
      - J_Shelby_J 11mo ago
        Depends on if you can fund a defense all the way to the Supreme Court.
agoodusername63 11mo ago
I just use a DisplayPort to hdmi cable. Works well on my 4k@120 TV
evolve2k 11mo ago
Here’s their social media presence if anyone is feeling like they’d like to drop them a message: https://www.facebook.com/HDMIForum/ https://www.facebook.com/HDMIForum/ https://twitter.com/HDMIForum/ https://twitter.com/HDMIForum/ https://www.instagram.com/hdmiforum/ https://www.instagram.com/hdmiforum/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/8553802 https://www.linkedin.com/groups/8553802
- anonymars 11mo ago
  I assume I'm not the only one with a true WTF reaction to "HDMI has a facebook and an instagram?" (I was quite a bit less surprised that there was no real content in them)
  - jasomill 11mo ago
    No, but now that you mention it, I'm curious about the five posts to the official US Federal Bureau of Prisons Instagram[1], which, unlike their Facebook and Twitter accounts, is private. (No relation, just the first thing that came to mind when I tried to think of an organization that I wouldn't expect to have much of a social media presence.) [1] https://www.instagram.com/bureauofprisons/ https://www.instagram.com/bureauofprisons/
    - deleted 11mo ago
      [deleted]
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
PunchyHamster 11mo ago
Need VDMI that is suspiciously similar and compatible with HDMI standard.
seemaze 11mo ago
more like HDM-Bye!
Asmod4n 11mo ago
Couldn’t AMD just release that as firmware/binary blob and call that from the open source driver to circumvent the issue?
pseudosavant 11mo ago
The funny thing of course is that the Steam Machine has DisplayPort, and you can easily get a DisplayPort to HDMI 2.1 dongle for $20 retail. But they are targeting this being a console, and those are hooked to TVs over HDMI so it seems lame to not have a built-in HDMI port. This is mostly an academic exercise though. HDMI 2.0 does 4K @ 60hz, and Valve have 4K @ 120hz (with 4:2:0 chroma subsampling) working over it too. Given the CPU/GPU in this machine, it won't be able to push higher than those limits anyway.
- jsheard 11mo ago
  The more pertinent issue is that many TVs will only do VRR over HDMI 2.1, and many active DP to HDMI 2.1 adapters won't pass VRR through either. That's also why the Switch 2 supports VRR on its internal display but not when connected to a TV - the dock can't encode a HDMI 2.1 signal. That's just Nintendo being Nintendo though, they could support it if they wanted to.
- TitaRusell 11mo ago
  I have my high end PC connected to a TV so it ruins my chances of ever switching to Linux. But yes for the Steam box this doesn't matter.
  - chazeon 11mo ago
    Nvidia's private driver seems to deliver 4k@120Hz just fine.
- tart-lemonade 11mo ago
  Only if the adapter is active; passive ones just tell the GPU to switch protocols to HDMI or whatever, so those are still kneecapped by driver limitations. Edit: I just checked Amazon and active adapters are a lot cheaper (and less niche) than they used to be, though there are still some annoying results like a passive adapter which has an LED to indicate the connection is "active" being the first result for "DP to HDMI 2.1 active".
- ThatPlayer 11mo ago
  For some reason that DisplayPort is only 1.4. That's only ~26 Gigabit/s. While HDMI 2.1 is ~48 Gigabit/s. You can make up some difference with DSC, but I think that requires the display to support it: dongles won't decode it.
molave 11mo ago
I'm tired, boss. The winning move is not to play. The HDMI Forum (and other orgs that behave similarly) prey on our desire for the most/best/(insert superlative here). I get that there's no free lunch. It is also true you see a lot of initiatives and projects do a lot of collective good while demanding much less.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
hedora 11mo ago
Summarizing this thread: - I paid for a device with a properly licensed hdmi port. It runs linux. So patent exhaustion applies, at least in the US. I can say ignore the patents to make my property work. - I have no relationship to the HDMI people. (Never entered into a contract with them.) - The links to the spec are here. (Trade secrets/nda no longer apply. This is the problem with using trade secrets to protect your stuff.) - If I point a coding assistant (assume open weights/source) at this thread, and a copy of linux main, it can probably just fix the damn driver. - I could probably publish my patch with a big fat “only for use with licensed hdmi hardware, not for resale” disclaimer on it. At that point, what law would I have broken?
- aoeusnth1 11mo ago
  Maybe nothing, but can you afford to prove that in court?
  - userbinator 11mo ago
    If you take the effort to anonymise your contributions, can they afford to try to find you?
    - firesteelrain 11mo ago
      It’s not about individual users. It’s about Valve redistributing it.
      - hedora 11mo ago
        This affects 100% of linux boxes with an hdmi port, so valve is making a tiny fraction of the impacted hardware.
        firesteelrain 11mo ago
        My point was that the HDMI Foundation/Org isn’t going after hobbyists at home. But if a hobbyist were to sell an unlicensed HDMI 2.1 box then the IP holder would likely go after them. In their eyes, in that case, the IP is being pirated. This is very similar to h.264 however however in that case the standard is public, commercial use requires paying a fee. Licensing of the HDMI 2.1 specification requires an NDA for specification testing that Valve is not able to perform in order to say that it is a HDMI 2.1 compliant system. They would be running afoul of the HDMI org’s licensing terms.
aryonoco 11mo ago
Great news. HDMI can just go and die. If the HdMI Forum really thinks it’s bigger than Linux, it’s wrong. While category of devices in this space are just Linux only. Eventually, they’ll add a DP port, eventually (10 years later)
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
Ecko123 11mo ago
[dead]
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
rock_artist 11mo ago
Looking at recent AV1 submits on HN. It feels it’s all politics waiting for enough interests to burst. It might take some years. But it’s not far fetch especially if big players would get into it. Let’s say Netflix interest in games gets them to buy company such as Valve and it aligns with their interests of getting some standard. They can get TV and displays manufactures support it and end up changing the market. But for such to happen there needs to be enough interests and incentives.
thewtf 11mo ago
[dead]
drnick1 11mo ago
Someone should just leak the driver anonymously for everyone to use, and Valve can always claim HDMI compatibility without actually saying it's "HDMI compliant."
Aachen 11mo ago
Article without GDPR-noncompliant consent wall: https://archive.is/8ED2m https://archive.is/8ED2m
waysa 11mo ago
Adapting DP to HDMI using the Synaptics VMM7100 chip is apparently the best (most feature complete) workaround for now. It's the same one that Intel uses in their Arc GPUs.
- preisschild 11mo ago
  Is this the one in the Cable Matters 102101-BLK DP->HDMI adapter?
irusensei 11mo ago
For PCs I go for DisplayPort or USB-C on devices nowadays. The DisplayPort connector has the advantage of being good with a clipping mechanism.
utf_8x 11mo ago
Can we just give up on HDMI and start putting DisplayPort on TVs already?
henearkr 11mo ago
What is preventing the emergence of an open source project providing the HDMI 2.1 bytecode ready to be downloaded into a FPGA, giving any Linux user the possibility to very easily DIY an adapter? Or even sell and ship the hardware without any loaded bytecode, and then users load it beforehand?
ho_schi 11mo ago
Kill HDMI, a bad standard from entertainment industry (Sony). Use DisplayPort (VESA), integrated into USB Type-C (USB-IF). Anyway better, a flawless with HiDPI and FreeSync.
Velocifyer 11mo ago
This website seems to have “pay for privacy” because you have to pay to not have trackers.
tkuraku 11mo ago
I have had nothing but issues with HDMI. Doing development and trying to integrate HDMI into a hardware design. Everything should just be Display Port. No question. It is a racket.
khaelenmore 11mo ago
60FPS ought to be enough for anyone *I'm joking. 30 is enough

902 points by OsrsNeedsf2P 11mo ago

VerifiedReports 11mo ago

Ugh. It's sad we're still saddled with HDMI at all, when DisplayPort has always been better.

freeopinion 11mo ago

I always choose DP. I didn't even know there was this issue with HDMI.

jrepinc 11mo ago

Looks like Valve also needs to start making SteamTV, just a TV without any "smart" spyware/adware OS. Until then.. this blackfriday I ordered a TV that by miracle even has a DisplayPort input (Hisense 65U8Q). Unfortunately still "smart" TV but at least it does not have US-based OS but European made VIDAA which hopefully provides much less spyware than the US-alternatives, if it properly respects the EU GDPR laws. Hopefully Hisense starts/inspires a bigger movement towards DisplayPort and this HDMI mafia dies as soon as possible.

jsheard 11mo ago
They could also potentially sidestep the issue by designing a discrete DisplayPort to HDMI chip into the system, so the HDMI 2.1+ implementation is firewalled from the open source stack. Maybe next time, if the HDMI Forum still hasn't budged by then.
- mizzack 11mo ago
  Intel did this with the ARC A750/770 https://community.intel.com/t5/Graphics/HDMI-2-1-UHD-144Hz-Arc-A750-A770/m-p/1452946 https://community.intel.com/t5/Graphics/HDMI-2-1-UHD-144Hz-A...
  - jsheard 11mo ago
    Yeah, the chip they used isn't ideal though because it converts DP1.4 (32Gbit) to HDMI 2.1 (48Gbit), so the bandwidth is bottlenecked on the input side. Ideally you'd want a chip which takes DP2.1, which I'm not sure exists yet, and the upcoming Steam Machine only supports DP1.4 so it wouldn't have helped in that case anyway.
aydyn 11mo ago
Does it really matter that much? Get a $20 roku or google tv stick or whatever you're comfortable with and don't connect the TV OS.
- kotaKat 11mo ago
  The TV manufacturers still make it highly annoying to avoid their integrated bullshit now. The setting to launch an LG WebOS TV into its last input on power-on is buried under 'advanced settings' several menus deep. They would rather launch you into their home hub full of preinstalled apps even if it's not online... ... and the thing came with Microsoft Copilot installed, and you couldn't uninstall it, either. The future!
  - amarant 11mo ago
    The trick is to not buy a "TV". Get a really big computer monitor/screen, and put it where you'd normally put your TV.
    - forbiddenlake 11mo ago
      This trick unfortunately falls down above a certain size, especially if you want to game at a good fps, and stay in the consumer space (price) rather than the commercial display space. That gigabyte 45 inch is too small to use above your fireplace and view across the living room. In my case I compromised on needing 4k, and got an lg 65 inch with only HDMI.
      - intrasight 11mo ago
        Are projectors the alternative?
        zamadatix 11mo ago
        Projectors can be an option but the price point to get anything comparably good in terms of picture quality puts you squarely back in commercial TV pricing.
ZeroCool2u 11mo ago
Imagine a Steam TV with the Steam Box simply built-in. That would be incredibly nice. The worst part of my brand new LG G5 OLED TV is the software itself. I'd pay a good deal more to have Valve responsible for the software running on my TV.
- jrepinc 11mo ago
  And even better make it as open as Steam Deck/Machine and allow to install any GNU/Linux distribution onto it maybe even something with KDE Plasma Bigscreen or something similar if desired.
- undersuit 11mo ago
  You can get TVs with a "PC slot" like the Sharp M431-2. Just need a Steam Slot.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 11mo ago
    Is this an actual thing people can buy, or only companies?
    - undersuit 11mo ago
      I see one for sale at B&H Photo Video.
  - kaelwd 11mo ago
    That's only 60Hz though. Are there any dumb TVs with 120+ Hz VRR and HDR?
- cosmic_cheese 11mo ago
  It might be nice for a little while, but the PC component is going to age much more poorly than the display will. I think the better move would be for Valve to make a really nice gamer-oriented dumb TV that's essentially a 50"+ monitor. Kind of like those BFGDs (Big Format Gaming Displays) sans the exorbitant prices. The size of a Steam Box is in comparison quite diminutive, so finding a place to put it shouldn't be too much of an issue and the ability to swap it out for a newer model with the same screen 5+ years down the road would be nice.
unethical_ban 11mo ago
If Steam could find a good OEM to partner with, I would buy it in a heartbeat. I don't know if any of the monitor manufacturers have an incentive to help Steam produce an ad-free, open-spec monitor/television.

cxr 11mo ago

Dupe: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46153479 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46153479>

tclancy 11mo ago

Am I understanding correctly that the underlying issue is asking exorbitant prices to see the HDMI Forum’s specs? Feels like you shouldn’t be able to define an industry spec if you want to get paid for it, but maybe that would suppress smaller-scale, niche development.

jsheard 11mo ago
No, the issue here is that the HDMI 2.1 NDA is so strict that releasing an open source implementation is forbidden no matter how much you pay them. AMD has access to the specs, they've implemented it in hardware and in their closed source Windows driver, but they're not allowed to add it to their open source Linux driver. Nvidia does support HDMI 2.1 on Linux since their driver is closed source (but that causes its own problems). Maybe AMD could compromise by releasing a minimal binary blob which only exposes the HDMI 2.1 implementation and nothing else.
- cedws 11mo ago
  Why on earth is a connector standard secret?
  - TheChaplain 11mo ago
    How else will you charge people from implementing support for it?
    - pipo234 11mo ago
      Well, in video land there is patent pools. For example, you pay nominal fee to download specs from iso/ice 14496-12 to learn the details about BMFF and then pay mpeg-la a couple of dollars per device of it uses an AVC / h264 decoder. These are open standards, but mpeg-la tries to recoup some of the research costs from "freeloaders". Open source implementations like ffmpeg are a bit of a grey area,here
      - littlestymaar 11mo ago

xvilka 11mo ago

Just promote DisplayPort and boycott HDMI.

jacobgkau 11mo ago
That would be easier if both GPU and display manufacturers weren't eschewing newer DisplayPort versions for older versions with DSC (which is not lossless despite its subjective claims of being "visually lossless"), while building in newer HDMI versions with greater performance.
- jsheard 11mo ago
  To be fair, the DisplayPort 2.0/2.1 standardisation process was riddled with delays and they ended up landing years after HDMI 2.1 did. It stands to reason that hardware manufacturers picked up the earlier spec first.
- AshamedCaptain 11mo ago
  what resolution is it that you can drive with "newer HDMI versions" but you cannot drive with DisplayPort 1.4 w/o DSC? The bandwidth difference is not really that much in practice, and "newer HDMI versions" also rely on DSC, or worse, chroma subsampling (objectively and subjectively worse). I mean, one has been able to drive 5K, 4K@120Hz, etc. for almost over a decade with DP1.4, for the same res you need literally the latest version of HDMI (the "non" TDMS one). It's no wonder that display screens _have_ to use the latest version of HDMI, because otherwise they cannot be driven from a single HDMI port at all. Having monitors that supported its native resolution through DP but not HDMI used to be a thing until very recently.
  - korhojoa 11mo ago
    I understand that this is not a common case, but 7680x2160@240 (not to mention using hdr and to be fair, DP 2.1 also requires DSC then). You can use this to check: https://trychen.com/feature/video-bandwidth https://trychen.com/feature/video-bandwidth
  - 11mo ago

oompydoompy74 11mo ago

I’ve been looking for a DisplayPort to HDMI cable to get around this on our household couch gaming computer. I have been unable to find one sketchy or otherwise that can handle high refresh rate and 4:4:4 color.

bsimpson 11mo ago
FWIW, most USB docks are effectively this. DP goes in via USB-C and HDMI comes out the other end. I bought one from UGREEN on Amazon. I think it's called the 9 in 1. It does 4k@60 with HDR, coming out of SteamOS.
- oompydoompy74 11mo ago
  I’ve never thought about trying a dock. Thanks!
- usrusr 11mo ago
  But are there any that don't overheat when you try to funnel dual screens through the USB-C/TB4? The only setup I have that doesn't is a super minimal one that has a single DP out that feeds a daisy-chain (and a single USB out that feeds a simple hub for low bandwidth peripherals, and a PD in). Unfortunately, most of the screen pairs that I run don't do daisy-chain. Every other hub I tried eventually got me to give up and connect one of the screens through direct HDMI.
  - eqvinox 11mo ago
    The key is to not use TB4; that's far more energy intensive to handle than DP1.4 alt mode (+ MST for 2 displays). Basically the dock needs to be a little shitty and not have too many features...
- d3Xt3r 11mo ago
  But does it support VRR?
eqvinox 11mo ago
https://www.club-3d.com/shop/cac-1088-1223 https://www.club-3d.com/shop/cac-1088-1223 (https://geizhals.eu/club-3d-aktiver-adapter-cac-1088-a3310041.html https://geizhals.eu/club-3d-aktiver-adapter-cac-1088-a331004...) https://www.club-3d.com/shop/cac-1087-1128 https://www.club-3d.com/shop/cac-1087-1128 (3m cable version) DP 1.4 → HDMI 2.1. Apparently they're no longer being manufactured (?? - not sure that's correct), so get one while it's still possible... [Ed.: accidentally linked another adapter that is the other direction. Added 3m & direct manufacturer links.]

TechSquidTV 11mo ago

No one wants HDMI. No one.

bee_rider 11mo ago
Other than the TV, although its opinion carries a lot of weight in this discussion unfortunately.
- PunchyHamster 11mo ago
  I think that's more forced to by inertia, and the HDMI push for mandatory DRM
efreak 11mo ago
My monitor works fine with HDMI It worked fine with VGA and DVI as well (it has all four, but my current PC doesn't have DVI or VGA outputs). It works fine with Displayport...until I turn it off, and then it won't go back on. I could solve this by connecting the monitor with HDMI, but this is my secondary monitor; my primary is an older but nicer (16:10, brighter, etc) monitor that only has DVI and VGA, while my PC only has DP and HDMI outputs, and the only adapter I've found that works with them is the HDMI-DVI adapter I use, leaving me only DP to connect my secondary. This is the process I have to go through to get my monitor working after turning it off when connected through displayport: 1. Turn off the computer (I'm not clear if fast shutdown or hibernate has any effect here) 2. Unplug the computer (or switch off the PSU) 3. Press the power button (to speed up the next step slightly) 4. Wait for residual power to drain from the motherboard (30s-3 minutes) 5. Reconnect computer to power 6. Turn PC back on If I don't fully shut down the computer, such that it reinitializes the displays completely, it never recognizes that there's a monitor attached to displayport. My understanding is that this is because the DID (or equivalent) is powered by the monitor itself, and not by the computer, and when you turn off the monitor (as I do at night to keep the bright-af led off; this also prevents Windows from waking the display every few hours but that can be done by disabling the monitor with Win+P), somewhere between the OS and the motherboard the logical port gets completely shut down until a full reset.

ethin 11mo ago

We really need to just force all standards organizations to release their standards for free. No making you pay $300 or whatever for a standard. (The PCI SIG makes you pay like $5000 for access to the PCIe standard...)

mahkoh 11mo ago
VESA makes you pay $5000 to get legal access to the DisplayPort standard. That is not the issue here.
- ethin 11mo ago
  It is part of the issue here. This specific post is about the HDMI forum having an insanely restrictive NDA, but the broader problem of SDOs charging obscene amounts of money for what amounts to trivially reproduceable digital documents (or taking other measures to do everything they can to seal the standards from the public unless your willing to pay the obscene fees or <insert other absurd measure here>) is relevant to this post, and this comment, since the HDMI forum is doing exactly this kind of gatekeeping; it only differs in form, but not function.
  - jrepinc 11mo ago
    Yeah HDMI Forum shameful behavior in a way reminds me of those evil greedy scientific publishing houses. Standards and science should be open and free as in freedom to access AND implement and not gated behind some obscene monetary or other forms of restrictions, like patents. In this day and age these restrictions have no place and should be abolished.
    - BlueTemplar 11mo ago
      So should HDCP. And DMCA. And platforms. And DRM in general. But this is basically asking for the USA to give up on their soft power (Hollywood, and over the Internet). It's something to aim for, but is still going to take decades. And you have to be careful about what might fill the power void (China, Russia...)

jonny_eh 11mo ago

Is the a USB-C/Thunderbolt to HDMI 2.1 dongle? Send Displayport and audio over USB-C and then let that hardware handle the HDMI handshaking.

klipklop 11mo ago
There isn't one that supports VRR/Gsync/Freesync well. What gamers want is chroma/RGB 4:4:4 + HDR + VRR/Freesync + 4k,120hz for their Linux PC on a TV. This is not possible with any DP --> HDMI 2.1 dongle on the market. They need support at the driver level to make this work. This is what the idiots at the HDMI forum are blocking. The only way to have high quality visuals on a PC/TV setup is to run Windows. That really sucks.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 11mo ago
  This is terrible. Aren't there on the market big "pc monitors" instead of tvs?
  - raggi 11mo ago
    Not with good measured performance no. There are some which advertise good numbers (such as high refresh rates) but are unable to drive the panels to visibly change pixels at anywhere near the refresh rate.
- klipklop 11mo ago
  I can't edit now, but it seems that there is a new dongle on the market that might be able to do this with some changes (whitelists?) to the AMDGPU driver in Linux.
- sunshowers 11mo ago
  I do actually have this setup going with a Cable Matters adapter [1] + a custom firmware I found [2] and > chroma/RGB 4:4:4 + HDR + VRR/Freesync + 4k,120hz for their Linux PC on a TV works great now on my LG C4 TV with Bazzite's gaming mode, though: * 144Hz is unstable * 12-bit color is unstable (10-bit works fine), and gamescope doesn't have a way to limit color depth (kwin does), so I had to put in place an EDID override * in the EDID, limiting the FreeSync range to 60-120Hz (which should still allow frame doubling/tripling) seemed to be better -- the default 40Hz caused a bit of flickering because the AMD driver would drop the refresh rate down to 38.5Hz or so. Should write about this in more detail. [1] https://www.amazon.com/dp/B094XR43M5 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B094XR43M5 [2] https://forum.level1techs.com/t/it-is-possible-to-4k-120-hdr-vrr-444-chroma-on-linux-bazzite-with-amd-9070xt-with-this-dp-to-hdmi-cable-but-it-may-not-work-for-everything/227748/46 https://forum.level1techs.com/t/it-is-possible-to-4k-120-hdr...

modeless 11mo ago

This is fundamentally about DRM, isn't it? There is a working open source implementation already, but the HDMI cartel won't allow an open source implementation to have the encryption keys required to interface with the DRM in existing devices?

jsheard 11mo ago
Source devices aren't required to output a DRM'ed signal though, are they? I think the DRM is only required on the receiver side. In that case a compliant source wouldn't need any keys, and besides, that wasn't a blocker for the previous HDMI versions which supported DRM too.
- modeless 11mo ago
  IIUC they're required to do a handshake involving encryption. Which is a form of DRM to enforce centralized control over the device ecosystem even if the subsequent video signals are not encrypted.
  - janc_ 11mo ago
    That sounds like an anti-competitive action by a near-monopoly player…

klipklop 11mo ago

It's about time somebody does some reverse engineering and just uploads the needed stuff online to make HDMI 2.1 work in Linux. It's getting absurd at this point. TV's need to start including Displayport, HDMI is a giant pain in the ass for gamers.

sounds 11mo ago
I'm switching to DisplayPort
- jauntywundrkind 11mo ago
  That HDMI Forum does not allow TVs to be sold with DisplayPort is a massive reason I think they deserve to have their building surrounded by angry people with pitchforks and torches. Anti-competitive abusers, doing awful things to prevent a better world. DisplayPort actually makes sense as a digital protocol, where-as HDMI inherits all the insane baggage of the analog past & just sucks. HDMI is so awful.
  - somat 11mo ago
    Oh wow, that explains a lot, I sort of always figured it was just market momentum that meant you never see tv's with a display port. sort of like ... we need a digital video link VESA develops DVI ... market gap for tv's identified hdmif develops HDMI which is DVI with an audio channel ... while technically a minor feature that audio link was the killer feature for digital tv's and led to hdmi being the popular choice for tv's VESA develops displayport a packet(vs streaming for DVI and hdmi) based digital link, it's packet nature allows for several interesting features including sending audio, and multiple screens. ... no tv's use it, while display port is better than hdmi it is not better enough to make a difference to the end user and so hdmi remains normal for tv's, you can find a few computer monitor with DP but you have to seek them out. I will have to see if there is some sort of stupid "additional licensing cost" if a tv is produced with displayport, that would explain so much. I don't claim that there are no tv's with DP but I certainly have never seen one.
  - noname120 11mo ago

blastersyndrome 11mo ago

Legally speaking, what is stopping someone from just reverse-engineering the specification and publishing it online somewhere?

superxpro12 11mo ago
Probably a lawyer with little legal standing that is however funded by a very large checkbook.
Avamander 11mo ago
I suspect there isn't anything really stopping them (especially in the EU) except threats.

shmerl 11mo ago

HDMI forum is a frontend for the cartel that profits from HDMI patents. Everyone should use USB 4 / DisplayPort instead and HDMI should go into the dustbin of history, but TV industry is slowing things down due this cartel.

Trung0246 11mo ago

Standard link to download: https://dokumen.pub/download/hdmi-specification-21-high-definition-multimedia-interface-specification-v21-v21nbsped.html https://dokumen.pub/download/hdmi-specification-21-high-defi... Alternative: https://annas-archive.org/md5/4dd395c749519a36cb755e6ebbe48847 https://annas-archive.org/md5/4dd395c749519a36cb755e6ebbe488... Alternative (incomplete, only couple first page): https://device.report/m/91235972e8cbf6d6ce84f7cf84ca0ac12623463530d1f80560f22b47b9ba9858 https://device.report/m/91235972e8cbf6d6ce84f7cf84ca0ac12623... Other HDMI stuff: https://pdfhost.io/v/YidEvBDkS_EP92A7E_EP91A7E_DS_V04 https://pdfhost.io/v/YidEvBDkS_EP92A7E_EP91A7E_DS_V04 Older available here: https://glenwing.github.io/docs/ https://glenwing.github.io/docs/

jsheard 11mo ago
AIUI the spec being leaked ironically makes things worse, because for an unofficial implementation to be legally kosher it would have to be clean-room reverse engineered anyway, and since the official spec is out there the integrity of such an effort would be called into doubt. You'd somehow have to prove you didn't look at it, ever, or at least be trusted enough for people to take your word for it. (I'm not a lawyer, please correct me if I'm wrong)
- brokenmachine 11mo ago
  Reading a standards spec to understand what the device you paid for does? Straight to jail! Pirating the entire internet to train your AI? That's fair use.
  - xg15 11mo ago
    Can we just train an AI with the spec and then vibe code an implementation?
    - J_Shelby_J 11mo ago
      Depends on if you can fund a defense all the way to the Supreme Court.

agoodusername63 11mo ago

I just use a DisplayPort to hdmi cable. Works well on my 4k@120 TV

evolve2k 11mo ago

Here’s their social media presence if anyone is feeling like they’d like to drop them a message: https://www.facebook.com/HDMIForum/ https://www.facebook.com/HDMIForum/ https://twitter.com/HDMIForum/ https://twitter.com/HDMIForum/ https://www.instagram.com/hdmiforum/ https://www.instagram.com/hdmiforum/ https://www.linkedin.com/groups/8553802 https://www.linkedin.com/groups/8553802

anonymars 11mo ago
I assume I'm not the only one with a true WTF reaction to "HDMI has a facebook and an instagram?" (I was quite a bit less surprised that there was no real content in them)
- jasomill 11mo ago
  No, but now that you mention it, I'm curious about the five posts to the official US Federal Bureau of Prisons Instagram[1], which, unlike their Facebook and Twitter accounts, is private. (No relation, just the first thing that came to mind when I tried to think of an organization that I wouldn't expect to have much of a social media presence.) [1] https://www.instagram.com/bureauofprisons/ https://www.instagram.com/bureauofprisons/
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]

PunchyHamster 11mo ago

Need VDMI that is suspiciously similar and compatible with HDMI standard.

seemaze 11mo ago

more like HDM-Bye!

Asmod4n 11mo ago

Couldn’t AMD just release that as firmware/binary blob and call that from the open source driver to circumvent the issue?

pseudosavant 11mo ago

The funny thing of course is that the Steam Machine has DisplayPort, and you can easily get a DisplayPort to HDMI 2.1 dongle for $20 retail. But they are targeting this being a console, and those are hooked to TVs over HDMI so it seems lame to not have a built-in HDMI port. This is mostly an academic exercise though. HDMI 2.0 does 4K @ 60hz, and Valve have 4K @ 120hz (with 4:2:0 chroma subsampling) working over it too. Given the CPU/GPU in this machine, it won't be able to push higher than those limits anyway.

jsheard 11mo ago
The more pertinent issue is that many TVs will only do VRR over HDMI 2.1, and many active DP to HDMI 2.1 adapters won't pass VRR through either. That's also why the Switch 2 supports VRR on its internal display but not when connected to a TV - the dock can't encode a HDMI 2.1 signal. That's just Nintendo being Nintendo though, they could support it if they wanted to.
TitaRusell 11mo ago
I have my high end PC connected to a TV so it ruins my chances of ever switching to Linux. But yes for the Steam box this doesn't matter.
- chazeon 11mo ago
  Nvidia's private driver seems to deliver 4k@120Hz just fine.
tart-lemonade 11mo ago
Only if the adapter is active; passive ones just tell the GPU to switch protocols to HDMI or whatever, so those are still kneecapped by driver limitations. Edit: I just checked Amazon and active adapters are a lot cheaper (and less niche) than they used to be, though there are still some annoying results like a passive adapter which has an LED to indicate the connection is "active" being the first result for "DP to HDMI 2.1 active".
ThatPlayer 11mo ago
For some reason that DisplayPort is only 1.4. That's only ~26 Gigabit/s. While HDMI 2.1 is ~48 Gigabit/s. You can make up some difference with DSC, but I think that requires the display to support it: dongles won't decode it.

molave 11mo ago

I'm tired, boss. The winning move is not to play. The HDMI Forum (and other orgs that behave similarly) prey on our desire for the most/best/(insert superlative here). I get that there's no free lunch. It is also true you see a lot of initiatives and projects do a lot of collective good while demanding much less.

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

hedora 11mo ago

Summarizing this thread: - I paid for a device with a properly licensed hdmi port. It runs linux. So patent exhaustion applies, at least in the US. I can say ignore the patents to make my property work. - I have no relationship to the HDMI people. (Never entered into a contract with them.) - The links to the spec are here. (Trade secrets/nda no longer apply. This is the problem with using trade secrets to protect your stuff.) - If I point a coding assistant (assume open weights/source) at this thread, and a copy of linux main, it can probably just fix the damn driver. - I could probably publish my patch with a big fat “only for use with licensed hdmi hardware, not for resale” disclaimer on it. At that point, what law would I have broken?

aoeusnth1 11mo ago
Maybe nothing, but can you afford to prove that in court?
- userbinator 11mo ago
  If you take the effort to anonymise your contributions, can they afford to try to find you?
  - firesteelrain 11mo ago
    It’s not about individual users. It’s about Valve redistributing it.
    - hedora 11mo ago
      This affects 100% of linux boxes with an hdmi port, so valve is making a tiny fraction of the impacted hardware.
      - firesteelrain 11mo ago
        My point was that the HDMI Foundation/Org isn’t going after hobbyists at home. But if a hobbyist were to sell an unlicensed HDMI 2.1 box then the IP holder would likely go after them. In their eyes, in that case, the IP is being pirated. This is very similar to h.264 however however in that case the standard is public, commercial use requires paying a fee. Licensing of the HDMI 2.1 specification requires an NDA for specification testing that Valve is not able to perform in order to say that it is a HDMI 2.1 compliant system. They would be running afoul of the HDMI org’s licensing terms.

aryonoco 11mo ago

Great news. HDMI can just go and die. If the HdMI Forum really thinks it’s bigger than Linux, it’s wrong. While category of devices in this space are just Linux only. Eventually, they’ll add a DP port, eventually (10 years later)

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

Ecko123 11mo ago

[dead]

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

rock_artist 11mo ago

Looking at recent AV1 submits on HN. It feels it’s all politics waiting for enough interests to burst. It might take some years. But it’s not far fetch especially if big players would get into it. Let’s say Netflix interest in games gets them to buy company such as Valve and it aligns with their interests of getting some standard. They can get TV and displays manufactures support it and end up changing the market. But for such to happen there needs to be enough interests and incentives.

thewtf 11mo ago

[dead]

drnick1 11mo ago

Someone should just leak the driver anonymously for everyone to use, and Valve can always claim HDMI compatibility without actually saying it's "HDMI compliant."

Aachen 11mo ago

Article without GDPR-noncompliant consent wall: https://archive.is/8ED2m https://archive.is/8ED2m

waysa 11mo ago

Adapting DP to HDMI using the Synaptics VMM7100 chip is apparently the best (most feature complete) workaround for now. It's the same one that Intel uses in their Arc GPUs.

preisschild 11mo ago
Is this the one in the Cable Matters 102101-BLK DP->HDMI adapter?

irusensei 11mo ago

For PCs I go for DisplayPort or USB-C on devices nowadays. The DisplayPort connector has the advantage of being good with a clipping mechanism.

utf_8x 11mo ago

Can we just give up on HDMI and start putting DisplayPort on TVs already?

henearkr 11mo ago

What is preventing the emergence of an open source project providing the HDMI 2.1 bytecode ready to be downloaded into a FPGA, giving any Linux user the possibility to very easily DIY an adapter? Or even sell and ship the hardware without any loaded bytecode, and then users load it beforehand?

ho_schi 11mo ago

Kill HDMI, a bad standard from entertainment industry (Sony). Use DisplayPort (VESA), integrated into USB Type-C (USB-IF). Anyway better, a flawless with HiDPI and FreeSync.

Velocifyer 11mo ago

This website seems to have “pay for privacy” because you have to pay to not have trackers.

tkuraku 11mo ago

I have had nothing but issues with HDMI. Doing development and trying to integrate HDMI into a hardware design. Everything should just be Display Port. No question. It is a racket.

khaelenmore 11mo ago

60FPS ought to be enough for anyone *I'm joking. 30 is enough