- cross-posted to:
- hardware@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- hardware@lemmy.world
Valve tells Ars its “trying to unblock” limits caused by open source driver issues.
You must log in or register to comment.
Is display port better in this regard?
Yes, as the standard is more or less open source. There are no barriers to entry.
Except it’s not on any TVs.
Not entirely true, but the enough yes.
I thought you can connect DP to HDMI with a simple cable, no adapters needed?
That’s what I suspected. So rather than fighting HDMI, we need to buy display port instead.
Have you looked at the HDMI Forum member list and board of directors?
It includes pretty much every manufacturer who makes decisions which ports to include on their devices. They have no interest in DisplayPort adoption.
I had a little scroll through yeah. They may not be interested in display port, but they’re sure interested in money. That’s why I suggested people by stuff with display port, rather that try to fight to have HDMI more open.
I appreciate AMD trying to improve HDMI openness, they’ve always been more open. That’s why I’ve bought AMD oven Intel and nvidia for the last 10 years or so.
All we can do as consumers is vote with our wallets. That’s all these companies care about.
Greed.
Wonder if they can ship a proprietary HDMI part of the driver or if there’s going to be an unofficial 2.1 driver patch that can be installed down the line.
Valve tells Ars its “trying to unblock” limits caused by
open source driverclosed source corporate megalomania issues.FTFthem. Open Source is not the problem here. The problem is the HDMI Forum being evil.
Surprised they didn’t take the opportunity to push DisplayPort a little more.
the problem is although its a pc, valve wants it to sort of appeal to console users. and the problem is that the HDMI forum members are also TV manufacturers. they are very unlikely to ever support displayport.
as long as TVs are more popular than monitors, that trend of HDMI holding control will never cease.
Except there is no reason to ever put hdmi on the hardware. Displayport is superior to hdmi in every way, and when you need to step down to peasant land… a simple passive DP to hdmi cable/adapter will do the job. To even drive the point how shit hdmi is, you cant use a passive adapter from hdmi to dp, you’ll need a very expensive active adapter to do it.
I think the reason you mention is a pretty good one… who wants to solely rely on adapters?
They can just bundle them? It still be cheaper than paying for the licensing. What is the issue here?
It still be cheaper than paying for the licensing.
Except it’s not. HDMI licensing (for high volume) is a $10,000 flat fee, plus $0.04 per unit if you use HDCP. So if you were to sell 100,000 units that would be $14,000 ($10K base plus $0.04 x 100K).
Based on those numbers you would have to find a way to include a physical adapter for $0.14/unit. I don’t think you’re gonna find anything that cheap with any amount of quality.
I don’t think it’s the best user experience when you get a new product neither do I think they are foolproof.
I mean… if someone can’t figure out which end goes where. Theres gonna struggle with a standard hdmi cable. I guess they could custom print big text on the cable ends to make it clear which end goes where. They’ll certainly have the volume to make such customization.
there is, HDMI Arc, which is why all the home theater companies do not want to weaken its hold.
Its a collaboration of tv manufacturers, home audio and the movie productions who want to keep HDMI propietary as fuck, to prevent piracy and to make their theater setup locked to themselves.
There is no technical reason DP doesnt have ARC. Its more of the industry is strangled by the HDMI forum. So you’ll never find an AV receiver with DP… thus no reasons for vesa to waste bandwidth for a feature that the industry will never adopt.
hence, nothing will happen, unless monitors get more popular than TVs. because tvs are the majority bought display device period. The reason is because more people are willing to both spend more on tvs, and often are more willing to replace them, while people who use monitors hold onto them for extended periods of time. Thats why monitor tech is always a step behind both mobile and TV when it comes to the screen quality (e.g Monitors didn’t get OLED till LG released its gen 2 WOLED, and Samsung decided to drop QDOLED gen 1, while phones of course had oled/amoled for a long time, and OLED tvs have existed for years before it touched hte monitor space)
Yes, theres no technial reason why display port CANT do it, but the problem is HDMI forum has the market. the market doesnt suddenly shift unless you give it a good reason to, which would basically require the VESA foundation producing a featureset so significantly better than HDMI, that it invalidates TVs to the consumer mind.
If I could buy a 48" monitor I would.
I’m a little disappointed, but not surprised. This thing is designed to be used in the living room hooked up to the TV, after all.
The fact of A/V consumer electronics standardizing on HDMI instead of DisplayPort is kinda not Valve’s problem to solve, as much as I’d like it to try.
Is it licensing fees? I bet it is.
Is it licensing fees? I bet it is.
From the article:
the HDMI Forum (which manages the official specifications for HDMI standards) has officially blocked any open source implementation of HDMI 2.1. That means the open source AMD drivers used by SteamOS can’t fully implement certain features that are specific to the updated output standard.
And that’s why HDMI can fuck right off. Display Port is new bae.
