digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

The State of Wireless HDMI and WirelessHD... And It's Good News!!!

arstechnica.com — You know that rat's nest of cables around your pristine HDTV? Wireless HDMI and WirelessHD will soon help hi-def fans cut the cord, and Ars talks with industry insiders to find out where things are at and when products will (finally) ship.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jul 27, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

54 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • wildfire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19Just beam the porn directly into my head.
  • timusca, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12All those damn wires back there... a missing HDMI cable will barely make a difference. I guess I could get wireless speakers too, but there's still a slew of power cables for TV, Stereo, DVD player, TiVo, Satellite box, PS2, N64, and NES.

    Why is wireless HDMI important? 99% of home have the HDMI source right next to the TV.
  • LetsGoHawks, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10This will ROCK!! Eventually.
    I already share internet service with my neighbor (yes, they know... I pay them for it). After all, why should we each pay $50 a month when we can pay $25. It was just a matter of setting up a little router.

    So if I can do wireless HD, only one of us needs to have a cable or satelite subscription. Let's say it's them. We rent an extra box that is installed at their house and the picture comes over wirelessly. All I need is a repeater for the remote (they already exist). And presto, we each get all the channels for about half the price.
  • s1mph0ny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6FTA... only 33 feet range, lossy compression, 1080i max.

    Not really what you look for in a upcoming HD transport method.
  • PueSi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4It's stupid since we will always have a bunch of cables until they develop wireless power, 1 stupid cable doesn't change anything. It's as useless as a wireless SATA (patent pending...)
  • Error601, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Rat's nest? HDMI from DVD to receiver. DVI and optical from cable box to receiver. DVI from receiver to TV. Of course then there's the 6 pairs for speakers but this won't help that.
  • byronm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3HDMI is the easiest of cables to manage. I've tried wireless speakers and nothing but noise, static and interference. I'm all for less wires though but it would have to be something like bluetooth network or something that isn't line of site, capable of handling lots of house noise and whatnot (such as dishwashers, microwaves, blow dryers and crap like that)
  • thomashallock, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Fear not:
    WiHD is 60GHz @ 5GBPS
    WiHDMI is UWB (3.1–10.6 GHz) @ 300MBPS
  • mynona, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3oh noes! now, I have a buy a $400 gold plated wireless cable from Monster
  • uhhhh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Displayport should have been a wireless standard - THEN it would really be a step above HDMI.
  • jwolcott, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3WHEN AM I GOING TO HAVE A FULL HOME THEATER SETUP WITHOUT A SINGLE CABLE?

    Call me when that happens.
  • cliffzdude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2'Cause that $15 HDMI cable that runs 4 feet from my cable box to my HDTV is sooo yesterday!

    Give me a ***** break, a solution in search of a problem. Wireless receiver on one end, xmitter on the other, increased cost, increased RF interference, one more thing to break. Really, sometimes a wire isn't the worst thing in the world.
  • thomashallock, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2...or you could just do it old-skool and tap into their cable from the pole outside.
  • bradym80, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Here comes the cancer.
  • doshindude, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Now we just need wireless power and we're all set.
  • Daedalus17, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2TBWDKWRTFAM. Thanks Because We Didn't Know What RTFA Means.
  • augustwest30, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If you read the article, Monster is one of the companies developing this technology.
  • jftitan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If I count right... HDTV multiple HDMI inputs. (mine has three inputs) PS3 - HDMI to TV, (which is DVD, Blue-Ray & Game console), TV to 6.1 Receiver Optical. I have a DirecTV DVR Receiver with HDMI to TV.

    So lets say I get a XBOX360 with HDMI, and considering the HD-DVD addon, then I have two consoles using HDMI, and one Optical from the TV to my receiver. all the power cables are managed by a power strip. I only foresee 3 HDMI cables and one optical. My home theater receiver now is no longer the central connection hub, the TV is.

    But I can't wait to see what hacks come about with the WirelessHD or Wireless HDMI.
  • p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Because once HDMI goes wireless, then we can focus on your what have you's. Someone (or something) usually needs to step up, and set the bar, and when that happens, others fall suit.

    Basically, if I were to get Wireless HDMI, what would I be concentrated on getting next? Everything else wireless to match.
  • imjustsayin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1A wireless HD connection to my TV would be nice for me just because the genius who installed the cable outlet and the genius who put in my network port in my family room put them on opposite sides of the room. Having a wireless connection would allow me to use the network port for a hardwired connection to my file server. Of course, faster wireless data transfer would make this a moot point.
  • inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I wonder how the snake oil salesmen will make special de oxygenated, phase directional, negative capacitance, mithril silver cables for that.
  • s1mph0ny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Please tell me they aren't going to further crowd the 2.4ghz band!
  • inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The reason why is that in custom install situations a HDMI cable must be pull through the walls or over ceilings/under floors and in new construction this is not a problem but in old construction it is. Since the cables are not constructable in the field wireless HDMI makes such custom installations possible without having to pull wire anywhere.
  • byronm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thats terrible.. the only use of wireless hdmi would be in high bandwidth, distance based installs, otherwise a short 6 foot cable is easy to handle. The wireless hdmi would be awusome for projector installs mounted on the ceiling with 0 wires, but 1080i and loss compression.. no way
  • fliped, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I duno if that was sarcastic but they have actually almost if not already come up with a method to do that
  • s1mph0ny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1We already have wireless power! It's called batteries :)
  • inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Just so you know, Gefen has been showing this product at the last 2 CES's in Las Vegas and have been taking "preorders" on the for months. There is still no word on a street date for the product.
  • Alex.w, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Tesla
  • inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And the protocol only allows for 1 transmitter to be paired with 1 receiver, like a Bluetooth headset. It's the same as using a cable.
  • c2kris, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1dude, that ***** hilarious.
  • mrminty, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1So these transmitters and receivers are going to be carved out of a rare and pointless metal and cost 300+ for one that transmits 12 feet?
  • inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I hate that huge twisted and tangly ONE hdmi cable cluttering up my setup. Seriously, how much longer do we have to suffer with this ancient and archaic technology? Wires are so 92.
  • inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Cut the cord, does it run on batteries? If I have to route one cable up a wall, what's the difference if I have to route two? What about all the game systems and DVD players and everything else?
  • s1mph0ny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1thanks for that... I wasn't familiar with the Ultra Wide Band.
  • s1mph0ny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Maybe he hasn't fried his original PS2 dvd drive and wants to keep it that way?
  • robotvsmonkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I work at Gefen. Trust me, it's coming out. We're in the final stages of releasing it. Should be no more than a month from now.
  • timusca, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Maybe because the DVD player in the PS2 sucks... I don't want to have to press SELECT on my PS2 controller to rewind my DVDs.
  • Desimat0r, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1From the article:

    Gefen uses the word "replication" because it compresses the signal using lossy JPEG 2000 compression. The resulting image quality will be necessarily less than that of wired HDMI, but how much less won't be known until units are out in the wild and we can feast our eyes on them.

    In other words, you still need wires for high quality. No surprise.
  • StarDal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Right.. which is why LetsGoHawks suggested getting an extra box just for that reason ...
  • mrminty, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And it could be wireless!
  • LaughingDjinn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This is more meant for the plasma or LCD hanging on the wall with the components below, to the side, hidden away. Or for the projector on the ceiling. This is for aesthetics not to "get rid of the rats nest" In theory you could only need a power cord to your TV hanging on the wall, which would be very much worth it.
  • inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Monster cable are selling oxygen in a tank you put in between your equipment, this special air mixture will ensure a much better reception then using the standard air that comes in your window.
  • mrminty, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You can't be bothered to knock a hole in the wall? Grow some testicles.
  • Shambla, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Mmm...lossless gold plated radio waves
  • JeffDM, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0How about never? At the very minimum, you will have to have power cables, unless you want something that's ridiculously inefficient. I really don't see wireless video being worth what I expect it to cost, HDMI cables can be had for cheap.
  • inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0i am constantly suprised by the quality of ars technicas articles keep up the good work
  • paradigm1220, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0It's important because they have to start somewhere. If they weren't developing WiHD, but rather some other "cable eliminator" (ie. wireless power, better wireless audio, etc.), then people would still be bitching "Why wireless 'X' important? I still have a bundle of cables back there!" You gotta start somewhere!
  • skyshock1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Bad news for Monster cable.
  • jwolcott, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Patience, young Skywalker. Give it 30 years and you'll be plugging the porn directly into your head for an instant orgasm. The wireless versions should hit the shelves in 2053.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.