4 ms·

It's not the connector, it's the communication protocol. It's super lame though. It will be great to watch the downfall of HDMI Forum when their artificial dam

by clhodapp 10mo ago

It's not the connector, it's the communication protocol. It's super lame though. It will be great to watch the downfall of HDMI Forum when their artificial dam against DisplayPort in the living room finally breaks.

MBCook 10mo ago
Why would display port ever start taking over in the living room?
- bluGill 10mo ago
  Because the manufactures don't have to pay a license fee and so once someone start using it everyone will follow and then drop hdmi. However so far nobody has cared enough to be first.
- clhodapp 10mo ago
  It's cheaper to implement than HDMI. So if DisplayPort ports are common on displays, devices will start using it (cheapo devices first). If DisplayPort ports are common on devices, displays won't need HDMI anymore. Plus, industry-wide, it's wildly inefficient to have one high-bandwidth video connector for monitors and a different one for TV's when the technical distinction between those is pretty much non-existent and we could scale our engineering effort across a much wider set of devices. So, after a transition period, cost-saving will eventually lead to DisplayPort taking over.
  - mschuster91 10mo ago
    > when the technical distinction between those is pretty much non-existent I think CEC support is still spotty and ARC (audio return channel) isn't supported at all in DP.
    - 0x457 10mo ago
      Well, CEC is a huge mess and barely works[1]. You're right on ARC and eARC. I'd rather DP had a better version of both, but that wouldn't happen. [1]: If you have a stack that works, I'm happy for you, but trust you're just lucky to have a working combination.
- Clamchop 10mo ago
  USB C is at least one reason that will apply constant pressure.
- deathanatos 10mo ago
  Well, if this were a free market, b/c there would be demand for it? I want a more standardized protocol so I need less cabling and connectors, and I want features like 4k that HDMI effectively (see TFA) does not support. I would vote with my wallet … if I could. Like, why do we need two connectors, for the same thing? DP is clearly technically superior. Of course, there's a wide range of issues: there's a number of comments on this article stating how the HDMI forum is manipulating the market (e.g., by suppressing competitor connectors on the board, offering lower royalties for bugs, suppressing specifications), and then there's just getting out-competed by the litany of consumers who have no idea and do not care to know what they are buying, and marketplaces like Amazon that promote mystery-meat wares.
bee_rider 10mo ago
What is the dam against DisplayPort anyway? I never see it on TVs for whatever reason. Actually it’s a bit odd, in my mind DisplayPort is highly associated with quality. But I don’t actually know if it is the superior connector or if it just seems that way because monitors are usually better than TVs in every metric other than size and brightness.
- clhodapp 10mo ago
  HDMI Forum don't like TV SOC boards that have both kinds of ports and discourage them from being made. Also, HDMI Forum don't like converter boards that support every advanced feature at once (Variable Refresh Rate, HDR, etc.) and won't license them. DisplayPort and HDMI kind of leapfrog each other in terms of technical superiority, so neither is definitively technically superior in the long term.
- xattt 10mo ago
  Apparently, the Hisense U8QG has DP-over-USB-C support. This might be the Trojan horse for DP in the living room.
  - klausa 10mo ago
    The supported version of DisplayPort in that TV is on par (-ish) with HDMI 2.0; and not enough for HDR 4k120; which is one of the selling points of HDMI2.1.
- fullstop 10mo ago
  DRM, I believe
  - jsheard 10mo ago
    I don't think so, DisplayPort incorporates the same HDCP encryption standard that HDMI uses.
    - fullstop 10mo ago
jsheard 10mo ago
> It's not the connector, it's the communication protocol In particular the link training procedures needed to reliably push 48 Gbit/s over copper are probably very non-trivial, and could be considered "secret sauce".
- mschuster91 10mo ago
  That's done by the PHY layer, there's no need to implement that in software.
throawayonthe 10mo ago
tbh it'll probably be GPMI, not DisplayPort
- clhodapp 10mo ago
  GPMI isn't an open standard and it doesn't support HDCP. It might end up being very popular in China but it will be a hard sell in markets that aren't primarily consuming Chinese media.

MBCook 10mo ago

Why would display port ever start taking over in the living room?

bluGill 10mo ago
Because the manufactures don't have to pay a license fee and so once someone start using it everyone will follow and then drop hdmi. However so far nobody has cared enough to be first.
clhodapp 10mo ago
It's cheaper to implement than HDMI. So if DisplayPort ports are common on displays, devices will start using it (cheapo devices first). If DisplayPort ports are common on devices, displays won't need HDMI anymore. Plus, industry-wide, it's wildly inefficient to have one high-bandwidth video connector for monitors and a different one for TV's when the technical distinction between those is pretty much non-existent and we could scale our engineering effort across a much wider set of devices. So, after a transition period, cost-saving will eventually lead to DisplayPort taking over.
- mschuster91 10mo ago
  > when the technical distinction between those is pretty much non-existent I think CEC support is still spotty and ARC (audio return channel) isn't supported at all in DP.
  - 0x457 10mo ago
    Well, CEC is a huge mess and barely works[1]. You're right on ARC and eARC. I'd rather DP had a better version of both, but that wouldn't happen. [1]: If you have a stack that works, I'm happy for you, but trust you're just lucky to have a working combination.
Clamchop 10mo ago
USB C is at least one reason that will apply constant pressure.
deathanatos 10mo ago
Well, if this were a free market, b/c there would be demand for it? I want a more standardized protocol so I need less cabling and connectors, and I want features like 4k that HDMI effectively (see TFA) does not support. I would vote with my wallet … if I could. Like, why do we need two connectors, for the same thing? DP is clearly technically superior. Of course, there's a wide range of issues: there's a number of comments on this article stating how the HDMI forum is manipulating the market (e.g., by suppressing competitor connectors on the board, offering lower royalties for bugs, suppressing specifications), and then there's just getting out-competed by the litany of consumers who have no idea and do not care to know what they are buying, and marketplaces like Amazon that promote mystery-meat wares.

bee_rider 10mo ago

What is the dam against DisplayPort anyway? I never see it on TVs for whatever reason. Actually it’s a bit odd, in my mind DisplayPort is highly associated with quality. But I don’t actually know if it is the superior connector or if it just seems that way because monitors are usually better than TVs in every metric other than size and brightness.

clhodapp 10mo ago
HDMI Forum don't like TV SOC boards that have both kinds of ports and discourage them from being made. Also, HDMI Forum don't like converter boards that support every advanced feature at once (Variable Refresh Rate, HDR, etc.) and won't license them. DisplayPort and HDMI kind of leapfrog each other in terms of technical superiority, so neither is definitively technically superior in the long term.
xattt 10mo ago
Apparently, the Hisense U8QG has DP-over-USB-C support. This might be the Trojan horse for DP in the living room.
- klausa 10mo ago
  The supported version of DisplayPort in that TV is on par (-ish) with HDMI 2.0; and not enough for HDR 4k120; which is one of the selling points of HDMI2.1.
fullstop 10mo ago
DRM, I believe
- jsheard 10mo ago
  I don't think so, DisplayPort incorporates the same HDCP encryption standard that HDMI uses.
  - fullstop 10mo ago

jsheard 10mo ago

> It's not the connector, it's the communication protocol In particular the link training procedures needed to reliably push 48 Gbit/s over copper are probably very non-trivial, and could be considered "secret sauce".

mschuster91 10mo ago
That's done by the PHY layer, there's no need to implement that in software.

throawayonthe 10mo ago

tbh it'll probably be GPMI, not DisplayPort

clhodapp 10mo ago
GPMI isn't an open standard and it doesn't support HDCP. It might end up being very popular in China but it will be a hard sell in markets that aren't primarily consuming Chinese media.