Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → HDMI Cables
12
HDMI Cables
2010-07-02, 1:12 PM #41
Originally posted by x25064:
Ragna, seriously I don't appreciate being called names dude.


Oh, now I feel bad. Sorry dude.
2010-07-02, 1:32 PM #42
Originally posted by x25064:
Ragna, seriously I don't appreciate being called names dude.


don't worry ragna has already proven he's not right... go see the date: fail thread or some of his posts in camhoez (specifically after one of Mirthy's posts)
eat right, exercise, die anyway
2010-07-02, 2:10 PM #43
Sorry all I don't mean to be an ass.
2010-07-02, 3:43 PM #44
Originally posted by DrkJedi82:
don't worry ragna has already proven he's not right... go see the date: fail thread or some of his posts in camhoez (specifically after one of Mirthy's posts)


You pitiful ****face. Go back to buying ****ty music.
2010-07-02, 4:01 PM #45
don't throw insults at me because you have serious problems communicating with women on the internet
eat right, exercise, die anyway
2010-07-02, 4:07 PM #46
Originally posted by ragna:
You pitiful ****face. Go back to buying ****ty music.

I don't think Jim is the pitiful one.

Well, not this time anyway. :P
nope.
2010-07-02, 4:54 PM #47
If you take either of them srsly ur dum.

I have a 120hz tv and it's pretty much useless. I don't have a bluray player and xbox games all run at 60 or 30 fps. And AFAIK the HD tv signals are all still at the tv standard of 30.

I guess it does a little better because it can replace the picture faster, but it does that ugly halo thing around fast moving high-contrast edges.
2010-07-02, 4:59 PM #48
Originally posted by JM:
And AFAIK the HD tv signals are all still at the tv standard of 30.


Depends on the content. Your average TV show's going to be in 720p30 or 1080i30. A lot of sports are 720p60 though, cause sports (and high motion stuff in general) look a lot better at 60 Hz.
2010-07-02, 7:30 PM #49
nothing is broadcast at 1080i30 1080p30 yes but never 1080i30

instead it's 1080i60 that is used now you may have seen it referred to as 1080i/30 which is another way of saying 1080i60

yeah i know... nitpicking...
eat right, exercise, die anyway
2010-07-02, 7:45 PM #50
http://www.dailytech.com/So%20Long%20HDMI%20New%20Standard%20for%20AV%20Uses%20Ethernet%20Cables/article18902.htm
2010-07-02, 9:11 PM #51
This thread sucks.
error; function{getsig} returns 'null'
2010-07-02, 9:13 PM #52
Originally posted by DrkJedi82:
nothing is broadcast at 1080i30 1080p30 yes but never 1080i30

instead it's 1080i60 that is used now you may have seen it referred to as 1080i/30 which is another way of saying 1080i60

yeah i know... nitpicking...


30 FPS, 60 fields. What it's called doesnt really matter. I've seen it referred to as both 1080i30 and 1080i60.
2010-07-02, 11:47 PM #53
Originally posted by IRG SithLord:
http://www.dailytech.com/So%20Long%20HDMI%20New%20Standard%20for%20AV%20Uses%20Ethernet%20Cables/article18902.htm

This seems so obvious, why has it not been done before?
2010-07-02, 11:51 PM #54
It has been done for a long time already. Just not in typical consumer applications. Or maybe that's what you mean.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2010-07-03, 1:31 AM #55
Originally posted by ragna:
You pitiful ****face. Go back to buying ****ty music.


:omg: - **** just got real.
Author of the JK levels:
Sand Trap & Sand Trap (Night)
2010-07-03, 2:40 AM #56
Originally posted by Wookie06:
It has been done for a long time already. Just not in typical consumer applications. Or maybe that's what you mean.

Well I'm thinking, we've had these ethernet cables with pretty high throughput for a long, long time now. Why haven't we been using them for everything from flash data transfer, to USB esque external drives?
2010-07-03, 4:55 AM #57
HDMI cables have things built-in that ethernet cables don't, such as a pin dedicated to detecting when the cable is plugged in. HDMI cables also have 19 pins, while cat5 only has 8. I can see them deciding instead to use a 10-pin ethernet cable and then charging us to go buy them.
2010-07-03, 5:36 AM #58
I would just like to add that this thread was a major buzz killer last night. Thanks a lot *******s.
? :)
2010-07-03, 5:51 AM #59
Gentlemen, our work here is done
You can't judge a book by it's file size
2010-07-03, 8:30 AM #60
Originally posted by Tibby:
Well I'm thinking, we've had these ethernet cables with pretty high throughput for a long, long time now. Why haven't we been using them for everything from flash data transfer, to USB esque external drives?


Well, it's not a very convenient connector, for one, but it kind of has been used for many of those things as well. There are external hard drives that you can connect via ethernet. I have a printer that if I want to connect via ethernet, I can. Of course these devices work differently when connected that way, though. I know what you're asking but I, certainly on the computer side, when practically everything is universally USB, why would you want it to be ethernet cable instead?
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2010-07-03, 9:00 AM #61
because it's faster
You can't judge a book by it's file size
2010-07-03, 9:17 AM #62
The maximum throughput of ethernet is said to be, what, 1000 Mbps. So that's about double USB 2.0 and about a third to a quarter of USB 3.0 whenever that rolls out. And successive USB standards have the benefit of backwards compatibility. Even if ethernet is always going to be faster, would you really prefer fragile plastic tips on you flash drive or relatively rugged USB-type connectors? I can see using them in A/V setups though.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2010-07-03, 9:26 AM #63
Cat6 != ethernet.
2010-07-03, 11:04 AM #64
Originally posted by Wookie06:
The maximum throughput of ethernet is said to be, what, 1000 Mbps. So that's about double USB 2.0 and about a third to a quarter of USB 3.0 whenever that rolls out. And successive USB standards have the benefit of backwards compatibility. Even if ethernet is always going to be faster, would you really prefer fragile plastic tips on you flash drive or relatively rugged USB-type connectors? I can see using them in A/V setups though.




I'll take option 3: ethernet cable with a better connector.
Also, I've seen first-hand that the standard USB connector isn't all that rugged =p


Also, an Ethernet cable can go about 100 yards without degrading the signal quality, while a USB cable usually can't go more than ten feet.

Ethernet cables are also ridiculously cheaper (care to try and buy usb cables at a per foot rate?)

Fact is, if they (yes, 'they') had put their minds to it, they could've standardised ethernet long, long ago.

And I see your USB3 speeds and raise you 10 gigabit, welcome to 2002
You can't judge a book by it's file size
2010-07-03, 5:31 PM #65
Just to note that 1.4 HDMI cables are the newest version, but this won't matter too much unless you're going to be looking into 3D technology in the future.
12

↑ Up to the top!