Talk:HDMI/Archive 2

Dead Links
http://www.hdmi.org/download/HDMISpecification13a.pdf and other specs are as dead as english fox. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Von Rostock (talk • contribs) 20:07, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately the direct link to the HDMI 1.3a specification no longer works though it can still be downloaded for free through the HDMI website. --GrandDrake (talk) 01:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Connector Sexes Backwards, Why?
Okay, I understand that the encyclopedia needs to describe things in a way that reflects the industry standards, so I'm not disputing this Wiki's use of which connector type is "male" vs. "female." But I am, however, still just curious about it. These are my questions:

1. With other cables I've seen, the MALE end is the one where there is a center pin or set of pins plugging into a jack where there's a receiving hole in the center, whether or not there's also a female-like sheathe of some kind around the connector pins. For examples: coaxial cables (F, RCA, etc.), DIN cables (S-video, some older rounded computer cable plugs, etc.), "D" plugs, and DVI. Of course there would be others, too. Okay, so the one with the pins has been male, while the one that the pins plug into is female, even if the one with the holes fits into an outer casing that the one with the pins is in.

Well, that's been true up until HDMI came out, apparently. Look at HDMI and what the industry is calling its "female" and "male" ends. They're calling the end with the pin row the female end, and the end with the slot that the row of pins plugs into the "male" end (and keep in mind that the end with the bar of pins is also the end with a female-like casing around it, just as I pointed out above, yet those above like that are still MALE; yes, the slotted end of HDMI sort-of plugs into the sheathed-like end, but then so do several of those others I mentioned above which were always called FEmale, because what really counts has been the PINS, not the edges. So why isn't HDMI's PIN end the one called MALE like the others?

2. Who is it in the industry that first insisted that this slotted end of HDMI should be called backwards of other kinds of plugs, the "male" end, and that the end with the pins in the middle should be called backwards of other connectors, the "female" end? Who from the industry started that and sort-of "dictated" to encyclopedias, etc. that this is "how it's supposed to be," and what made them the supposed "authority"?

Thanks, Mike Member "Maxx Fordham"


 * You are mistaken about which HDMI connector has pins and I would recommend reading section 4.1.9 of the HDMI 1.3 specifications. That section has connector drawings for the HDMI plug (marketed as male) and HDMI receptacle (marketed as female). Also the HDMI 1.3 specifications never uses the terms "male" or "female" and instead uses the terms "plug" and "receptacle." --GrandDrake (talk) 03:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

How am I supposedly "mistaken" about which connector has the pins, when I can see as plain as day that they're in a bar in the middle of the connector that the industry calls "female," which poke into the slot on the end that the industry is calling "male," the same way as the one pin in a coaxial cable (on the end appropriately named "MALE") pokes into the hole in the appropriately-named FEMALE end?

Where, exactly, on the web, would I find this drawing you're talking about?

Mike "Maxx Fordham"

In the distant past when I was writing instruction manuals, there was a specific reason for identifying the connectors at the ends of cables and on equipment. It generally related to where a connector had a voltage present when the two mating connectors were engaged, so as a consequence, in the home for example, a wall connector was designated as a socket or receptable and the connector on a device that was engaged into it was a plug. And often the pins on these connectors were identified as female and male respectively for obvious reasons. Reynardartique (talk) 18:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)Reynardartique 18:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, but what about cables that don't supply a plain kind of power--the signal-only cables such as coaxial ones like RCA and F? Their end with the pin that pokes into the hole is called male for an obvious reason, and their end with the hole that receives the pin is called female for the obvious reason, even though the sheath that the female end plugs into is on the male end, the same way as it is with DVI (male with pins, female with holes).

With any kind of electric-based cable, there's always some kind of voltage that comes across them, if only the signals themselves, so obviously many cables don't carry a supply of power, but most still refer to the end with the center that plugs into the middle of the other end as the male end. So it appears to me that what mattered more until HDMI and USB and perhaps FireWire came out, that's what mattered more for the designation--the middle part of one end plugging into the hole on the other end. So still, why not for HDMI and USB (since again, plenty of cables don't carry a supply of power but still went by that designation)?


 * I agree that the male/female naming in the article is counter-intuitive. At least some clarification in the article would be in order. (we just had a purchase recommendation on some forum for someone needing a DVI-HDMI adapter and he got the wrong version, since everyone agreed that the HDMI receptor on the TV is male) --Xerces8 (talk) 09:36, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

DRM??
Why is there no mention of DRM? I'm not an expert so I shouldn't contribute, but there are very strong claims of future implementation of DRM through a flag which degrades quality on untrusted hardware. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.79.38.235 (talk) 17:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The HDMI article has a section on HDCP and in the HDCP section it mentions that AACS is one of the DRM systems that requires HDCP for encrypted content. Also the flag you have heard about is the Image Constraint Token and it is a part of AACS. --GrandDrake (talk) 07:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the first comment. HDMI is not so much a cable as it is a philosophy of control. This article makes no mention of that philosophy. That flag does exist, I've seen degraded signals myself when playing a video on a laptop to a television over HDMI...switching to VGA provided a clear picture. There should be a criticisms section as there are in many articles about consumer technologies. This section should include information about the numerous and significant disadvantages of HDMI and HDCP. Without the inclusion of these criticisms this article reads like a promotional piece for HDMI. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wintermute11 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Personal computers and HDMI
I would like a table listing PC chip sets, graphics cards and other devices listing: I believe that such a list can be compiled based on open, reliable sources like manufacturer data. But I dont want to do the tedious work if such a list is considered bad practice. So what do you think? (Knutinh (talk) 23:01, 9 January 2009 (UTC))


 * The idea sounds good though it would have to go into its own Wikipedia article such as "List of HDMI computer devices". --GrandDrake (talk) 18:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

A list very similar to my idea can be found here: Factual & Unbiased HTPC HDMI HD Audio + Video Roundup Thread

Windows XP and Vista with current drivers

Key:

Y - Works Perfectly

! – Works Inconsistently (See note number below)

& - Works but disables other features (See note number below)


 * - Limited Functionality (See note number below)

X – Does not Work

U - Unknown

- Card does not exist yet

(1) The HD Formats can only be bitstreamed in the ASUS version of TMT that can be downloaded from the following website. The software is free but it can only be installed on machines with the Asus HDAV HDMI 1.3. ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/Audio...Xonar_HDAV1.3/

(2) The ATI cards do not support audio over HDMI for some HDMI inputs of some receivers. See this thread for a work around. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post15202002 The latest 9.1 ATI Drivers have also resolved this issue for Yamaha receivers.

(3) Users have experienced a DTS Bomb like noise when selecting 7.1 or 5.1 in the Asus version of TMT instead of the HDMI option. Warning it is so loud it can easily damage your speakers! http://vip.asus.com/forum/view.aspx?...age=1&count=11 Look at the very last post on page 1. The latest drivers and TMT software claim to have resolved this issue. I have not experienced it since I have upgraded.

(4) There are some reports of 24p stuttering http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...8#post15249118

(5) Some Nvidia video cards(ie: GTX 280) support SPDIF(Standard Dolby Digital, DTS, and 2 channel PCM) pass through over HDMI.

(6) All 2008 ASUS HDAV cards do not support 24 FPS. However, all 2009 cards do support 24 FPS. See the link below for details on how to tell what card you have. If you have a 2008 card you can RMA it for a 2009 card through your local ASUS supplier. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post15741239

(7) Supported on all 8 series and later GPUs, except for the Geforce 8800 Ultra, 8800 GTX, 8800 GTS (320/640MB). These cards do not support hardware AVC (h264) decoding.

(8) Supports un-downconverted 7.1 analog output only in the ASUS version of TMT.

Knutinh (talk) 12:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Cable subsection within Specifications section
Subsections within the "Specifications" section should expand on different areas of the specification. Thus a subsection called "Cable" should deal with the physical cable specifications. Repeating the type of data that the HDMI standard deals with is redundant in this section. Additionally, comments on the price of HDMI cables is not relevant for this article. I propose that this section be deleted for now; if anyone wants to add information on the physical specifications for the actual wire, shielding, and cladding, please feel free to do so. Isaac Lin (talk) 05:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * In accordance with my proposal, I plan to delete the subsection "Cable" from the "Specifications" section, as it does not contain specification information on the physical wire, shielding, cladding, and so forth. Also note that comments on the price of HDMI cables are not germane to this topic. Isaac Lin (talk) 23:28, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Micro HDMI
I've seen a couple Micro HDMI adaptors for mini and full size connectors. Is this a real HDMI spec interface? --70.167.58.6 (talk) 22:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * No, the HDMI Founders are currently working on another HDMI connector but currently there are only 3 types of HDMI connectors. Type A which is used on almost all HDMI devices, Type B which is a dual link version of HDMI, and Type C which is the mini HDMI connector for portable devices. --GrandDrake (talk) 16:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I've been looking into some micro HDMI connectors (version 1.4 type D), and it seems like the pinout is not the same as the Type A connectors. The main page was a little misleading. Maybe someone with access to the full 1.4 spec can update? For example, Molex p/n 68786-0007 converts from micro HDMI to normal HDMI and doesn't use the same pinouts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.53.39.126 (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Why Windows 7 video modes are relevant for an article on HDMI
I can understand the desire to make an Wikipedia article interesting but an encyclopedia it is supposed to contain clear and objective facts. Changing the video modes of Windows 7 from a list into a general statement makes it shorter but than you leave room for personal interpretation. After all if it simply says "from 16-bit sRGB to 48-bit scRGB" how would people know that scRGB is only supported at 48-bit or that there is an extended color gamut sRGB? Considering that it adds less than a dozen words simply to list the color depths in Windows 7 I would consider it worth while to list them especially since two of the capabilities added to HDMI 1.3 was Deep Color and xvYCC. --GrandDrake (talk) 16:18, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I disagree with your opinion. The only relevant part of the Windows 7 spec for someone reading about HDMI is the fact that Windows 7 (similar to Windows Vista) offers several formats in the rgb family with more precision and/or gamut than the common 24-bit sRGB. The point of an article should be to provide the reader with relevant information, and links if they want to dig into related information. Leaving out irrelevant, "noisy" information is nearly as important as including relevant information.


 * It is a undisputed that Windows 7 supports various color codings with deep color and/or extended gamut up to a maximum of 48 bits per pixel, and that the information of these formats (to an unknown degree?) can be relayed by HDMI. Why say anything more in an article about _HDMI_?


 * To keep this objective and unbiased, I suggest we try to get a third opinion.
 * Knutinh (talk) 12:00, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Here's my opinion: Information specific to Windows 7 should be detailed in the Windows 7 article series, not here. There shouldn't be more than a couple of sentences on that operating system in this article, as it is talking about one specific implementation amongst a great many that support HDMI. Also, more practically speaking, it avoids duplication.  Warren -talk- 14:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * There are only 2 sentences about Windows 7 in the HDMI article but since the consensus is that the specifics are not needed I will remove the sentence listing the video modes. --GrandDrake (talk) 22:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with User:Warren. If MS wishes to impair their software so be it. Electron9 (talk) 11:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

audio over DVI - how? pinout ?
AMD/ATi, nVidia, Intel - all them support sending audion via DVI to HDMI adapter. That means, audio channel is contained within DVI-I ocnnector. But how ? what is the pinout ? how does it not break compatibility - there seems to be no unused pins in DVI-I connector! At very least it is important for cross-compatibility of HDMI-DVI adapters between those computers and notebooks with different videocard chipmakers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.78.12.22 (talk) 19:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, but it looks like they use empty bytes (if they exist) in TMDS protocol. --82.32.201.229 (talk) 11:00, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * HDMI carries audio as part of the digital bitstream and other than the CDC pin (which is only used for some remote control stuff on high end gear afaict) the pins seem to have a direct correspondence with single link DVI. So given that HDMI and DVI are compatible HDMI over a DVI connector should be compatible with both and support audio when used in conjunction with HDMI. I suspect that is what these graphics cards are doing. 91.135.10.23 (talk) 02:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * HDMI audio is sent in the video blanking intervals of the video signal and the only difference in terms of pinout between single link HDMI and single link DVI is the CEC pin. --GrandDrake (talk) 20:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The basic answer is likely CEA-861. CEA-861 defines the actual waveforms, timing, and protocols that are used by both HDMI and DVI to transport data. The DVI distribution network (read copper wires) likely just passes on this data to the edge adapter, which interprets it for use on a HDMI distribution network. Int21h (talk) 00:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Maximum refresh rate?
The article gives the maximum resolution for the various HDMI versions, but is silent about refresh rates. I wanted to know what versions (if any) support 1920x1080p @ 120Hz.


 * HDMI 1.3 would support that refresh rate since even with CEA video blanking (which uses more video blanking than CVT-RB) 1080p60 requires 148.5 MHz bandwidth while the maximum for HDMI 1.3 is 340 MHz. I have yet to hear of any HDTVs that support 1080p120 input but with the upcoming release of 3D displays that could soon change. --GrandDrake (talk) 18:00, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


 * CEA-861-E supports 1080p120 and it requires 297 MHz of bandwidth (pixel rate) including blanking, so yes, in theory HDMI 1.3 should support it. In practive, most transmitters only support up to 225 MHz (1080p60 with 36-bit DeepColor). --Dmitry (talk •contibs ) 19:54, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

"Does not support PC Mode"
I've seen this on a few televisions and unfortunately advised someone hoping to use their monitor as a TV, and the LG model was advertised with that very purpose in mind, however in small text, in the instructions and nowhere else, "HDMI does not support PC mode" is listed, which sounds rather ridiculous, the article makes no mention of it.

Does anyone know anything about this? Revrant (talk) 09:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * HDMI supports the connection of computers to HDTVs but whether the display can do it well depends on the display. As for what that phrase might mean it would help to know the model number of the display you are referring to. --GrandDrake (talk) 23:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


 * PC mode is basically a DVI-compatible connection mode for HDMI, or an analog VGA connection, which uses a set of VESA standard DMT resolutions, as well as EDID with CEA-861 extensions with Display Data Channel. This replaces native CEA-861 support in HDMI mode selection mechanism, which does not use EDID. In you case, HDMI does not support DVI mode and PC resolutions, which probably means you are only able to use them through analog VGA. --Dmitry (talk •contibs ) 19:47, 3 July 2010 (UTC)


 * PC "mode" seems a wrong word for a problem that is not mentioned here:

PC Level is the full range ("extended") video level of 0 - 255 bit that is output by most PC video cards on DVI and HDMI connections. In home entertainment devices the HDMI connections want lower "normal" video level and will show crunched whites and blacks on their display if fed with PC Level signals. RGB for digital video is not full range. Instead, video RGB uses a convention with scaling and offsets such that (16, 16, 16) is black, (235, 235, 235) is white, etc. For example, these scalings and offsets are used for the digital RGB definition in CCIR 601. Klaus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.151.240.87 (talk) 17:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

HDMI vs. Display Port
I think this section needs expansion. On the surface HDMI would appear to be the better connection, but Display Port is releasing version 1.2 with multi monitor support, usb data transfer, and ethernet data transport. Also worth mention is Display Port has higher bandwidth than HDMI. Display Port 1.2 vs HDMI 1.4 --151.190.254.108 (talk) 21:21, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I have updated the "Relationship with DisplayPort" section with information on DisplayPort 1.2. --GrandDrake (talk) 01:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I've also updated this section with information on DVI/HDMI compatibility in the DisplayPort standard. --Dmitry (talk •contibs ) 19:52, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

IMHO This section sounds like an ad for Display Port —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.83.245 (talk) 15:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

HDMI is a highly controlled monopoly, my general understanding is that DisplayPort was created as an alternative to that monopoly. 71.217.8.167 (talk) 08:03, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

HDMI is over with the arrival of HDBaseT
Sony and other manufacturers will start using HDBaseT instead of HDMI from late 2010 and they say HDMI is 'dead' since HDBaseT is a much better alternative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.249.241.131 (talk) 11:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Only two of the companies that are listed on the HDBaseT website are consumer electronics (CE) companies (LG and Samsung) and neither of those companies have said anything about replacing HDMI. And though Sony Pictures Entertainment is a founding member of HDBaseT that is only a unit of Sony and a unit that doesn't sell consumer electronics. On the other hand Sony itself is a founding member of HDMI. At the moment there is very little CE support of the HDBaseT standard so the "TV business kisses HDMI goodbye" article you used makes way to many predictions. Here is what you added to the lead section:

"HDMI is becoming obsolete with the introduction of a new digital standard called HDBaseT which uses standard Cat5e/6 LAN cable and an RJ-45 connector. The HDBaseT Alliance has just finalised version 1.0 of the spec, and says it will be available for licensing within the second half of 2010."
 * Besides putting this information in the lead section (where it certainly should not have gone) stating that HDMI is becoming obsolete is making a huge prediction. Though there is a section on DisplayPort that is because it is a widely supported interface for computers. Since there is the possibility that HDBaseT could end up as another failed CE interface I am oppossed to adding it to the HDMI article until it is released. Even than whether it should be mentioned in the HDMI article will depend on the amount of CE support it has. --GrandDrake (talk) 03:22, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

HDMI Extender is Unclear
"Active HDMI cables use electronics within the cable to boost the signal and allow for HDMI cables of up to 30 meters (98 ft.).[65] HDMI extenders that are based on dual Category 5/Category 6 cable can extend HDMI to 250 meters (820 ft.), while HDMI extenders based on optical fiber can extend HDMI to 300 meters (980 ft.).[66][67]"

What is dual CAT5/6 and does that automatically imply active? Perhaps: "Active HDMI extenders based on dual ...."

Additionally, don't extenders usually have one female(socket?) connector and one male (plug?) whereas most HDMI cables are male/male? (As the pins get smaller and are recessed, "male/female" becomes ambigous.)

"Several companies offer amplifiers, equalizers, and repeaters that can string several standard HDMI cables together."

Are amplifiers, equalizers and repeaters the same thing -- or at least have the same functional effect? If not, does a simgle company typically or at least frequently offer all of them? Perhaps "and" should be "or" or perhaps some nouns moved inside parentheses?

The repeaters do not string cables together, although they may allow several cables to function when strung together.

I presume that just as some cables are High Speed or Standard, some extenders will link High Speed cables. "Standard" in this context should only be used to differentiate High Speed and non-High Speed cables, not extender versus regular(?). (If I could think of a better word than "regular", I'd offer it.) --108.28.33.175 (talk) 11:57, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:DisplayPort plus plus.svg
The image File:DisplayPort plus plus.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --03:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

3D is possible with HDMI 1.3, only not in full HD.
In the article is stated that HDMI 1.3 cables cannot pass 3D signal. This is not entirely true. http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Industry_Trends/HDMI/3D/HDMI_1.3_Will_Support_3D_After_All/400

"Like most things though, the 3D update for already existing HDMI 1.3 products comes with a catch, and it’s a catch in the form of reduced video quality. While HDMI 1.4 cables and devices will be capable of shooting out 3D pictures in full 1080p, HDMI 1.3 just can’t handle it. The problem is that for a 3D picture, two images have to be shown nearly simultaneously. Since HDMI 1.3 can’t handle two 1080p pictures at that speed, you’ll get two 1080i pictures. It’s not a huge downgrade when all is said and done. The real clincher comes with TV signals. Since cable boxes normally show a 1080i image, they’ll be stepped down to 540i to handle 3D. With HDMI 1.3 cable boxes, you’ll have the choice between HD and 3D, but not both." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cfjdaniels (talk • contribs) 07:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)


 * The highdefdigest article you quoted is wrong. The article says that full resolution 3D video couldn't be sent with HDMI 1.3 due to bandwidth but it actually was because there were not any defined protocols for sending full resolution 3D video until HDMI 1.4. Both HDMI 1.3 and HDMI 1.4 have the same maximum data bandwidth. As for HDMI 1.3 cables I checked the Wikipedia article and it looks good to me since it mentions that "High Speed HDMI 1.3 cables can support all HDMI 1.4 features except for the HDMI Ethernet Channel". --GrandDrake (talk) 18:12, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

First of all, as GrandDrake said, there's no such thing as 1.3 cables and 1.4 cables. It's either high speed or non-high speed, and any high speed cable can carry full HD 3D. That said, if you ever exceeded a cable's supported bandwidth, you'll have signal dropouts, but how would a cable decide to convert 1080p video to 1080i video? Or 1080i to 540i? HEAVY digital processing is needed to do such thing, you know? And in 3D pictures are not sent "nearly simultaneously". If you read how frame packed 3D works, you'll see each sent frame is the two images stitched together with a filler stripe of pixels in between. --uKER (talk) 19:10, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

HDMI version numbers on HDMI cables are no longer allowed
According to this article - the term HDMI 1.4 is no longer allowed in packaging. http://www.whathifi.com/news/from-today-the-hdmi-14-cable-is-dead — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.26.59 (talk) 04:58, 13 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Changed title to make it more accurate. Title was changed from "HDMI 1.4 is dead" to "HDMI version numbers on HDMI cables are no longer allowed". --GrandDrake (talk) 18:20, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

HDMI Protocol Analysis Software
Comprehensive MHL/HDMI Protocol Analysis Software The industry’s first Oscilloscope based TEK-PGY-MHL/HDMI Protocol Analysis software lets you see every event in the MHL/HDMI stream from MHL/HDMI frame to physical layer analog signals which conventional protocol analyzer can not show.

TEK-PGY-MHL/HDMI Protocol Analyzer software performs the MHL/HDMI protocol compliance tests as per MHL CTS 1.1 and HDMI CTS 1.4a. It provides unmatched flexibility in analyzing, debugging, and correlating the test results from MHL/HDMI Frame to physical layer analog waveforms to address the MHL/HDMI design challenges.

For efficient debugging, TEK-PGY-MHL/HDMI software provides unique multi viewer which comprises of frame summary viewer, frame viewer, bus viewer, Protocol viewer, Data Island viewer and Event and test results viewer. Automatic cross-linking between all these viewers enables you to see and correlate the data in different parts of the MHL/HDMI protocol stack

TEK-PGY-MHL/HDMI protocol analysis software along with Tektronix physical layer compliance test solutions and Industry leading Tektronix high performance oscilloscope offers a single box solution for physical and protocol layer testing.

Features

• Industry’s first MHL/HDMI Protocol analysis software offers in-depth visibility from physical layer to video frames with unmatched data    correlation between all the layers of MHL/HDMI protocol. • Transforms the general purpose oscilloscope into sophisticated MHL/HDMI Protocol Analyzer. • Debugging and troubleshooting made easy by cross-correlating the MHL/HDMI protocol data using frame summary viewer, frame viewer, Bus viewer, data packet and event viewers. • Frame summary view helps to quickly locate error frames for detailed analysis. • The Frame Viewer helps to view the transmitted frame with color coded MHL/HDMI operating modes as per the specification and eliminates the need of a Sink device in MHL/HDMI test setup by reproducing transmitted image in Oscilloscope display. • Bus viewer with the Physical layer analog waveforms offers unmatched flexibility in correlating protocol errors with physical layer. • The Protocol Viewer displays the tabular view of protocol information with decoded values • The Event Viewer lists detailed protocol errors and events in the MHL/HDMI compliance tests to quickly locate the protocol failures. • Raw and detailed packet information in the Data packet viewer helps to identify the problems in Data Island periods. • Supports 24, 30, 36, and 48 bits per video pixel for HDMI and 24 bits per pixel for MHL. • Oscilloscope setup assistant automatically sets up the oscilloscope to obtain accurate and reliable test results. • Performs the protocol Tests as per the MHL Compliance Test specification 1.1, HDMI Compliance Test specification 1.4a and displays quick Pass/Fail results. • Conforms to HDMI Specification 1.4a and MHL Specification 1.1. • Supports Oscilloscope live channels, Tektronix .wfm waveform files and .bin (P/A/V file format of HDMI Capture card) files. • Generates comprehensive and customizable reports. • Ability to export the analyzed data to .bmp, txt, csv, .bin (P/A/V File format) for advanced analysis.

Oscilloscopes Supported The following Tektronix oscilloscopes are supported: • Tektronix DPO/MSO/DSA 70000 Series Oscilloscope with Option 20XL

Ordering Information Options: •TEK-PGY-MHL-PA-SW - MHL Protocol Analysis and Compliance Testing Software •TEK-PGY-HDMI-PA-SW - HDMI Protocol Analysis and Compliance Testing Software. •TEK-PGY-MHL-HDMI-PA-SW - MHL and HDMI Protocol Analysis and Compliance Testing Software.

Reference from Prodigy Technovations — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itbhat (talk • contribs) 14:09, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Non-video use?
I ran across the fact that the stacking connectors on the Dell PowerConnect 5500 series have HDMI connectors on them that seem to be used to transport 10 Gigabit Ethernet (or higher?) over them, as "stacking connectors". See user manual. I am having trouble finding a source for what kind of signal this actually carries. That is, what gets mapped to what pins for this use. I suspect it is the XAUI signal but not sure. Has anyone else heard of such non-video use of them? W Nowicki (talk) 22:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Presumably it's just using an HDMI 1.4 port, which allows up to 100 Mbps Ethernet.  Alphathon  /'æɫfə.θɒn/ ( talk ) 01:09, 8 October 2011 (UTC)


 * HDMI "style" of connectors can and do get used to carry other things besides HDMI signals. The small size of the connector is very convenient and cheaply available, the cables are also readily available. Any connector can actually be used for any purpose, it is just by convention that it is used for a specific set of signals. For example DMX-512 often uses the standard 3 pin XLR connector, whihc is actually intended for audio signals.  The reason being the widespread availability of low cost cables for the 3 pin XLR.  The actual DMX standard calls for a 5 pin XLR "style" connector, but 5 pin cables are hard to come by.  I have not specifically looked at the Dell manual, but it is quite probable they decided to make use of an already existing high frequency infrastructure (cables & connectors) rather than trying to create a new one.   old codger 71.217.8.167 (talk) 08:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

HDMI 1.4b ?
This article needs to be updated to include a brief discussion of 1.4b. As I understand it, 1.4b includes additional standards for compatibility with SAT 3D signals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.72.95.50 (talk) 15:49, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Haven't found any information from reliable sources on HDMI 1.4b but added a sentence that it was released on October 11, 2011. --GrandDrake (talk) 21:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

The HDMI Monopoly
one thing that ought to be in the article is mention of the fact that HDMI is a tightly controlled monopoly, it is far more than a spec. Small companies are locked out of the market for HDMI products. Only big companies with high sales volumes can afford to make HDMI products. In order to produce an HDMI product, you have to pay a licensing fee of $10000 USD per year plus a royalty on each item sold. This means that as a company you have to sell many thousands of units of product per year, just to be able to justify the yearly license fee. Small companies generally do not achieve that kind of sales volume. This license is vigorously and boastfully enforced by the www.HDMI.org  73.169.8.167 (talk) 08:46, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You might want to look up the definition of the term monopoly. A thing (such as HDMI) cannot be a monopoly; the monopoly (if it exists) is held by whomever/whatever owns the exclusive rights to whatever is dominant. It is not a thing but a concept. It could be said that the IP holders hold a monopoly on HDMI products, but that is simply another way of saying it is a proprietary standard. Everything else you mentioned is already in the article.  Alphathon  /'æɫfə.θɒn/ ( talk ) 12:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Why are they allowed to gather money from HDMI production? It's not like they have invented something. It's just an ordinary audio+video in digital from going through one cable. Cheerz, Mike. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.252.64.209 (talk) 02:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Article could clarify the role of HDMI Licensing, LLC. - Rod57 (talk) 06:03, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Compatibility with DVI
Editorial: About halfway down this section there's a sentence "All HDMI devices must support sRGB encoding." It looks to me like it's out of context. If you remove it, the succeeding sentence then follows from the preceding one. I don't know where the intruding sentence belongs, because this is the first mention of sRGB in the article. If we remove the intruder, sRGB first turns up considerably further down, under "Version 1.0 to 1.2". Nowhere does it appear in blue text, so anyone not knowing or guessing what it means would be puzzled enough, even without its baldly (and badly?) appearing in the middle the DVI section.

Faute de mieux, the sentence could be placed at the start of the "Version 1.0 to 1.2" section. Or it could just be excised. Any arguments please? L0ngpar1sh (talk) 16:51, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I combined that sentence into the sentence about HDMI devices having to support sRGB video in the Audio/Video section. --GrandDrake (talk) 14:03, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

connector orientation
The photos and diagrams on this page show the connector in different orientations, /---\ and \---/. The article should show the standard horizontal and vertical orientations, and all images in the article should conform. I am using two small devices alternately with the same stiff cable. The orientation of the HDMI plug on the two devices differs, making the cable want to flip one of the devices over. Which device is correct, I wonder; one of the design teams got it wrong. Encyclopedant (talk) 05:05, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * In most devices I've seen, the narrow side goes up, but I don't know if this is a standard. --uKER (talk) 13:22, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Audio without video, possible?
Can HDMI carry audio without video? I haven't been able to find a conclusive answer be it in the article or the web, but I tend to think it can't be done. --uKER (talk) 18:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Royal We?
why is there in the bottom paragraph of the problems subsection references to 'we'?

e.g.

[On another note, if we change the Blu-ray player to a different brand the problem disappears.]

On top of the 'we', this sentence looks like it belongs more in a forum rather than a Wikipedia entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.52.179.108 (talk) 18:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The whole "problems" section is pretty clearly copy pasted from somewhere else. Maybe ehow. I say delete it. 129.237.215.10 (talk) 16:03, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Resolutions.
It may be useful to list the normal resolutions that HDHI supports for TV (as at Aug. 2012. 202.74.169.34 (talk) 06:25, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Gerry Lavell glavell@hotmail.com

HDMI 1.4v ??
I've seen a few HDMI cables on the internet advertising themselves as HDMI 1.4v. Cant find any information on this standard. Anyone know anything about it or how it relates to version 1.4a/b?
 * Did it ever occur to you that the V is just short for version? See also paragraph 2.3 of this wiki article. PizzaMan (talk) 15:42, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

HDMI 2.0
Since the existence of the HDMI 2.0 specification has been officially announced by the hdmi forum, i think it deserves to be mentioned, so i added it, with proper references. The details of the specification haven't been announced yet, but that doesnt take away from the fact that the specification is officially confirmed to exist. It exists, it's relevant to the general public, it should be on WP... PizzaMan (talk) 15:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)