News HDMI 2.2 is set to debut at CES 2025 — the new standard brings higher resolutions, refresh rates, and bandwidth

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
DougMcC said:
If they aren't going to support 8k/240 uncompressed they are going to lose the port war. That is the absolute minimum viable next gen standard.
Click to expand...
Right, because you think a new 5090 is going to be able to do that (or any graphics card in the next 10 years?). Or perhaps you were planning on buying an 8K TV that supports that. Nah, those won't exist for 10 years either. Why the hell would anyone waste money on that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UnCertainty08 and SirStephenH
HDMI 2.1 ports are quite useless already as you cannot have open source driver. 2.2 would be on the same level in that regard.
 
subspruce said:
stronghold on TVs which is slowly being lost due to the reluctance to update (or even maintain)
Click to expand...
you have a source for this ? i have not seen any tvs or recievers here that have display port.

you keep claiming this.. but show no proof... so.. personal opinion maybe ?

i also just noticed you edited the post i quoted you... from losomg the port war, now to slow decline...

again.. where is your source....
 
  • Like
Reactions: subspruce
Ogotai said:
you have a source for this ? i have not seen any tvs or recievers here that have display port.

you keep claiming this.. but show no proof... so.. personal opinion maybe ?

i also just noticed you edited the post i quoted you... from losomg the port war, now to slow decline...

again.. where is your source....
Click to expand...
well there is no source, you're right, and I deleted the posts for being wrong
 
DougMcC said:
If they aren't going to support 8k/240 uncompressed they are going to lose the port war. That is the absolute minimum viable next gen standard.
Click to expand...
HDMI is a useless bogus port anyways. They only exist to limit the end-user (in the name of fighting piracy). It was never intended to be a good port nor to be better than DisplayPort. It should have been forgotten long ago.
 
tempaccount6942069 said:
HDMI is a useless bogus port anyways. They only exist to limit the end-user (in the name of fighting piracy). It was never intended to be a good port nor to be better than DisplayPort. It should have been forgotten long ago.
Click to expand...
ok.. if display port is so much better, why isnt it on TVs and home theater receivers ?

as i said to subspruce.. you have sources for these claims ???
 
txfeinbergs said:
Right, because you think a new 5090 is going to be able to do that (or any graphics card in the next 10 years?). Or perhaps you were planning on buying an 8K TV that supports that. Nah, those won't exist for 10 years either. Why the hell would anyone waste money on that?
Click to expand...
Just wanted to come back and say: called it. 8k/240 as I predicted.
 
spongiemaster said:
Why would you think the port would change? It's a universally used port across multiple industries that hasn't changed since it's original release over 20 years ago.
Click to expand...
The USB port did change (USB-C), the Thunderbolt port did change (going from mini-DP-shaped to USB-C-shaped), so it's not out of the question, but fortunately, it stays the same.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tempaccount6942069
LordVile said:
That was Apple forcing the USB forums arm though. They wanted a smaller connector for their laptops so they could go thinner.
Click to expand...
what was wrong with the lightning connector ??

and didnt the EU ( there at least ) force apple to switch to USB C due to all the apple proprietary cables ending up in the garbage because they arent that robust ? 3 people have iphones at work, with that lightning cable, 2 are on their 3rd cables, the other, has so much tape on it at the connector, its now twice as thick as it should be.
 
kurkosdr said:
The USB port did change (USB-C), the Thunderbolt port did change (going from mini-DP-shaped to USB-C-shaped), so it's not out of the question, but fortunately, it stays the same.
Click to expand...
There were multiple USB ports right from the start which basically led us to USB-C. The one we're most familiar with is A, but B has been common on PC peripherals, especially printers, and USB mini and micro also used to be common on smaller devices. USB-C was basically designed to replace all of them and add additional features. No such issue exists in the HDMI world.
 
Ogotai said:
what was wrong with the lightning connector ??

and didnt the EU ( there at least ) force apple to switch to USB C due to all the apple proprietary cables ending up in the garbage because they arent that robust ? 3 people have iphones at work, with that lightning cable, 2 are on their 3rd cables, the other, has so much tape on it at the connector, its now twice as thick as it should be.
Click to expand...
You can’t really use lighting on Mac when you want a replacement for TB2? The 11” MacBook was tiny and wouldn’t fit anything else bar TB3. As a connector for phones lighting is better than USBC. When you’re wanting to transfer 100W plus a 5K display signal not so much.
 
spongiemaster said:
There were multiple USB ports right from the start which basically led us to USB-C. The one we're most familiar with is A, but B has been common on PC peripherals, especially printers, and USB mini and micro also used to be common on smaller devices. USB-C was basically designed to replace all of them and add additional features. No such issue exists in the HDMI world.
Click to expand...
The end that connects to the computer was the same though (until USB-C).
 
tempaccount6942069 said:
HDMI is a useless bogus port anyways. They only exist to limit the end-user (in the name of fighting piracy). It was never intended to be a good port nor to be better than DisplayPort. It should have been forgotten long ago.
Click to expand...
FYI, HDCP (the "piracy fighting" thing) is supported by DisplayPort as an optional feature since DisplayPort 1.1 (released back in 2007), and most DisplayPort ports in TVs and monitors implement it, precisely because without it DRMed content will be downscaled to 480p by the sourced device.

Also, DisplayPort doesn't support ARC/eARC, which is the reason DisplayPort is pretty much non-existent in TVs. So, HDMI is better in at least that regard.
 
GeorgeLY said:
HDMI 2.1 ports are quite useless already as you cannot have open source driver. 2.2 would be on the same level in that regard.
Click to expand...
For the majority of people who don't rely on open-source drivers or have a PS5 (Pro), it's not useless.

Look, I understand that the HDMI people did you dirty, but saying things like "HDMI 2.1 ports are quite useless already as you cannot have open source driver" when they aren't for the 99% of people who don't rely on open-source drivers is absurd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom