I think the reason you mention is a pretty good one… who wants to solely rely on adapters?
Comment on Why won’t Steam Machine support HDMI 2.1? Digging in on the display standard drama.
piccolo@sh.itjust.works 3 days agoExcept 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.
dogs0n@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
piccolo@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
They can just bundle them? What is the issue here?
ramble81@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
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.
dogs0n@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
I don’t think it’s the best user experience when you get a new product neither do I think they are foolproof.
piccolo@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
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.
Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
there is, HDMI Arc, which is why all the home theater companies do not want to weaken its hold.
piccolo@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
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.
Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
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)
xep@discuss.online 3 days ago
If I could buy a 48" monitor I would.