backtop


Print 38 comment(s) - last by pjpizza.. on Oct 27 at 1:03 PM

HDMI Licensing, LLC introduces new Trademark and Logo Usage Guidelines for its display standard

For the common consumer, shopping for the latest in high-definition equipment can be a rather daunting task. Shoppers are constantly faced with tech-specific lingo such as 1080p, 24p, 120Hz, DVI, HDMI and others.

Even those in the know, such as DailyTech readers, may find some of the naming conventions of display standards to be a little convoluted. High-Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI) is the current high-definition connector standard for all new HDTVs, but unlike the analog HD component cable standard, not all HDMI standards are created equal.

The HDMI standard has undergone over a half-dozen revisions since its first release in December 2002, with each new version adding features and functionality. While updates to standards are common practice, some of the new features of each new HDMI version are optional, leaving even savvy consumers confused at what their latest gadget can do.

In hopes to end the confusion, HDMI Licensing, LLC, the agent responsible for licensing the HDMI specification, last week announced the release of new Trademark and Logo Usage Guidelines for manufacturers to describe the HDMI-enabled functionality of their products.

Along with the specification that a certain device supports a specific HDMI version, (e.g. as "HDMI 1.3"), manufacturers must specify which HDMI features are enabled when referencing the version such as "HDMI (V.1.3 with Deep Color, x.v.Color)."
"Our goal with the release of the HDMI Trademark and Logo Usage Guidelines is to provide the CE industry with a common language to explain HDMI functionality, and to ensure that the new terms will clearly describe the performance of each feature to the consumer," said Les Chard, president of HDMI Licensing. "To further support manufacturers, retailers and installers in helping consumers make better informed decisions; we have created a map of HDMI features with terminology that is easy to communicate. With the new guidelines, the industry now has the means to do that more effectively."

HDMI Adopters are required to implement the Trademark and Logo Usage Guidelines on all products that are initially shipping after October17, 2008, and are instructed to use "commercially reasonable efforts " to comply with the guidelines as of October 17, 2007.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Make it simple & easy
By crystal clear on 10/23/2007 10:54:02 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
For the common consumer, shopping for the latest in high-definition equipment can be a rather daunting task. Shoppers are constantly faced with tech-specific lingo such as 1080p, 24p, 120Hz, DVI, HDMI and others.


Very accurate analysis indeed.

Ask them whats HDMI -they will respond "Whats that" "anyway who cares".

They are more interested in a demonstration of the product & whats the price

quote:
In hopes to end the confusion, HDMI Licensing, LLC, the agent responsible for licensing the HDMI specification, last week announced the release of new Trademark and Logo Usage Guidelines for manufacturers to describe the HDMI-enabled functionality of their products.


Not enough,they should distibute free DVD discs explaining these terms with examples,namely clips/screen shots of some movie etc.

Seeing is believing.

Its educating the consumer/buyer instead of making things even worse for them with these new logos/trademarks/quidlines etc.

Do it the simple & strainght way.




RE: Make it simple & easy
By Targon on 10/23/2007 12:19:26 PM , Rating: 2
You should not expect that the average consumer will want to know the details of any product. As a result, the complexity found in most HD supporting devices is just too much. You have far too many inputs for the average consumer to want to deal with.

Most people do NOT have 5 different game consoles, so having all of the different sets of inputs on your average flat panel screen is going overboard, and is why there is so much confusion on the part of the consumers.

What they want is a clear place to plug in their stuff. Eliminate the old connector types, and things will be a LOT better. That may come in time, but if you look at a TV from only five years ago, all you had was power, and coax in, with possibly one to three sets of RCA inputs. You sure didn't need OUTPUTS from the damned TV(though some manufacturers put them in).

A key to this really will be that there are still too many devices that do not come with HDMI outputs. It doesn't matter if the device supports HD resolutions(like your average DVD player), to kill the old output types, HDMI needs to be present in every DVR, DVD player, HD(Blu-Ray or HD-DVD), and so on. Digital Audio should also become the standard to put an eventual end to the old RCA audio connectors just to clean things up. If an amplifier can handle 10.2 speaker configurations, there will less of a desire for analog audio connectors that will clutter the back of our devices.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By crystal clear on 10/23/2007 12:56:59 PM , Rating: 2
You have a valid point there & very practical.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2007 1:04:24 PM , Rating: 2
As a general comment I'd say that most of the folk posting so far think that TV's should just say "TV" on them and that be all. Anything more than that just confuses them or maybe confuses everybody but them (not clear from the statements). Okay, maybe have a price attached as well. I being an old fart (over half century old) want to see every bit of technical detail I can, so there seems to be a conceptual disconnect somewhere.

quote:
You sure didn't need OUTPUTS from the damned TV(though some manufacturers put them in).


You may never need it, but some configurations and for some accessories the outputs can be handy and useful. Think about it, consumer gear designers will remove every pico-cent from the unit's cost that they can. If they've got the connectors and interfaces there, there MUST be good reasons for it.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Fluppeteer on 10/23/2007 1:24:55 PM , Rating: 3
I'd be happy for a TV just to say "TV", *if* there was one HDTV resolution, one overscan standard, one input rate standard, one colour gamut, and one level of DRM compatibility.

For so long as the HDTV industry can't decide on a next gen disc format, takes several goes to decide whether to introduce DRM and get it working (even with a crackable system), can't decide on a single resolution (or frame rate) and then ensures that the majority of TVs don't meet *either* resolution (die, 1366x768, 1024x1024, and 960x1080 "wobbulation", die), and that the same is true of cameras (1440x1080, anyone?), fiddle the overscan so that consumers can't get 1:1 pixels even when they want them, decide not to allow 1080p input, then decide that "1080p" means "1080p/30" unless otherwise specified, keep diddling with the display gamut, make every plasma on the market flicker annoyingly and every LCD smear, and *still* claim it's the consumers who haven't bought into the concept because they "don't understand HDTV"... I'll have all the specs visible, please.

I'll buy an HDTV as soon as I can get one half as good as my (HDCP-less) computer monitors for a decent price. I'm saving up.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By pjpizza on 10/27/2007 1:03:15 PM , Rating: 2
GOD DAMN I couldn't agree with you more!

I was just thinking the same thing today; LCD is still to early in development, and plasma?!!? Why oh god, why... I wish the industry had sticked with CRT a little while longer. The only reason to get a new gen TV is 'cause you can hang it on the wall... (Makes me almost sad!)

My sorry ass has a 29" CRT 4:3, so I am kinda aching to get a larger widescreen, but everything I look at is inferior, or overpriced.

Oh well... TV sux anyway ;)


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Targon on 10/24/2007 8:40:43 AM , Rating: 2
If I had a need for outputs from the TV/screen, chances are I would be using a separate Amp(or pre-amp/power amp combo) to handle multiple sources. Honestly, who would use their screen to change inputs for external audio when external audio has so much higher quality to begin with?

A straight screen with a good quality digital video input really would be better for most people who use external tuners(cable box), which make up the majority of the people who buy flat panel screens. Drop the extra tuners in there, drop the price by a couple of hundred dollars, and flat panels will sell a bit faster as well. If you can't afford cable, then you can't afford a flat panel at this point.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By glennpratt on 10/24/2007 11:23:29 AM , Rating: 2
It actually makes more sense to me the switch via the TV. For most consumers, the TV is always on, so it should work without the receiver. Most people I know will watch TV with just the TV speakers and only switch on the receiver for movies or music.

I don't understand why people get upset over input flexibility, it's really stupid. If TV's only had HDMI and power, people would still be utterly inept and really pissed they couldn't plug there Wii/VCR/whatever in.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Oregonian2 on 10/24/2007 2:02:17 PM , Rating: 2
First of all, the options and I/O usually aren't designed so that every buyer uses every connector. But all connectors are expected to be used by some buyers.

If you were one that used the TV's switching capability (and nominally use their speakers) and wanted to add, say, an IR wireless headphone to it so that a single person can watch TV without bothering others (like for a bedroom TV, or perhaps even another room). Audio outputs from the TV itself is where it would connect. If you wanted to connect a wireless video box to the TV so that whatever is on that TV will also show up in the next room too -- a TV video output could be the perfect place to hook it. Even if every user doesn't use the feature and even if you don't want to use the feature, it doesn't mean the feature isn't useful to others and that the TV mfgr shouldn't provide it for them. How would you like it if they removed what you like because they think others don't use it? Wouldn't you just go buy some other brand that has the feature? What if you don't use the feature but like having the capability of adding that IR headphone (or whatever) in the future? Would that influence your TV purchase?


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Targon on 10/24/2007 3:11:06 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, I am not saying that SOME models should not have vast numbers of connectors, by having them on every model out there, it increases costs for everyone, even those who know what we need.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Oregonian2 on 10/25/2007 1:55:32 PM , Rating: 2
You're basically saying that they should have five versions of each model, each with a different subset of connectors -- that way each market segment can have their simple interface. That however brings up a couple issues. One is that each set will now cost more because of the increase of models and having them manufactured, sold, and inventoried in smaller numbers apiece. Secondly, some models won't be sold by Best Buy (etc) to cut their inventory, and "your" model may be one of those not sold. Third, it doesn't help the buyer too much because they STILL have to decide on the connectors and which ones they want and need in their system, only the study and decision making needs to be done BEFORE purchase rather than 'whenever' afterwards. I could see people returning their TV's because they needed the connectors on the OTHER model. Or a couple years later when one finally upgrades the associated audio system and needs to change the TV because they had selected the one with the needed backward compatibility. No, having a zillion connectors is by far the best overall solution for having systems that work and being the cheapest to implement. People still will need to know about what connections they have now are and what they'll be wanting later on. Only real exception are folk who are fresh out of school and buying their first setup -- having nothing to be compatible with. Those folk, statistically speaking, will be buying the lower end cheaper equipment -- which indeed tend to have fewer connector options by my observation.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Black69ta on 10/24/2007 9:42:53 AM , Rating: 2
I agree my Grandmother who is 90+ wouldn't buy a TV without wanting all the Specs. she wants to understand all the tech and justify why she has to spend more than she did in the 60's or when ever she bought her last TV. So I think this may help people like her that want that explanation in plain layman's terms. However there is also people like my Mother who only looks at size Vs. price for instance She bought her first new Car in over twenty years a '01 Focus and neither her nor my Dad even drove it the salesman drove them on a drive and they bought it. So I see it both ways. But I think that having the information there for those who want it is a very good thing.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Fluppeteer on 10/23/2007 1:13:43 PM , Rating: 2
Which, of course, is why adding DisplayPort as yet another connector type is such a bad idea (IMHO), unless its merits are very convincing.

On the other hand, I'm keen not to get rid of too many old connectors - you never know when you want to plug something ancient in.

I kind of agree about the outputs, though - I've started something recording over a SCART cable, only to find that I'd recorded nothing. Turned out that I was recording the output of the TV, which went away as soon as I turned the telly off. Grr.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Oregonian2 on 10/23/2007 1:15:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What they want is a clear place to plug in their stuff. Eliminate the old connector types, and things will be a LOT better.


This helps sales as well! Anybody buying the new TV has to replace ALL of their other old equipment at the same time too (including DirecTV receivers that only have s-video and older outputs)! Just hope some other manufacturer doesn't include the old connectors because the customer will probably just go and buy their equipment instead.

P.S. - It's been a lot more than five years since TV's had just a coax input (except for the very very bottom el-cheapo models). We had bought a set ten years ago that had a ton of inputs, including multiple S-video ones and multiple older "standard" video inputs. Not a bottom of the line set, though.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By mikeyD95125 on 10/23/2007 5:44:05 PM , Rating: 2
For some people the audio outputs are useful. Thats all I can think of though.


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Targon on 10/24/2007 4:41:32 PM , Rating: 2
"Some" is the key phrase here. There should be models that have all the inputs and outputs, and there should be models that have the same quality but have a fewer number of inputs for a lower cost.

If a decent flat panel screen(1080p) with ALL the inputs and outputs costs $1300 for a given size, then there should be models with only two HDMI inputs and no outputs that might only cost $1000(or less) and no tuner(cable box does the job). This provides the model with extra features who want/need the extras for the extra price, but does not penalize the consumer who doesn't want the extras. If you have a dish anyway, you know what I am talking about here, because you will probably NEVER use the built-in tuner.

There would probably be models in between these two extremes, such as ones with dual-link DVI connectors in addition to the HDMI connectors, and possibly ONE set of RCA inputs for older game consoles(or an old VCR/DVD player). The exact specs could be decided by the manufacturers, but why have every last connector in every single model sold, just because one tenth of one percent of the population might want that many?


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Awax on 10/23/2007 3:53:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not enough,they should distibute free DVD discs explaining these terms with examples,namely clips/screen shots of some movie etc.

Actually, this will be very tricky with the features added in 1.3.

* increased bandwith is for resolution BEYOND FullHD ... so you'll have an hard time finding a display
* DeepColor is for 30/36/48 bits colors ... while BlueRay and HD-DVD are limited to 24bit and current display, both plasma and LCD already have difficulties displaying those 24 bits so here both the display AND the source is a problem
* Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD : useless with decoding in the player (all HDMI versions can transport 8 96/24 uncompressed audio tracks) and with advanced audio tracks (all languages are sharing the surround and subwoofer channels and the player does the mixing with the center channel with the current language selected) totally useless (sound is sent uncompressed)


RE: Make it simple & easy
By Calin on 10/24/2007 5:13:32 AM , Rating: 2
How do you show advantages of advanced HDMI equipment on a DVD?
How do you show advantages of high resolution from a standard DVD disc? Or the advantages of 120Hz?


RE: Make it simple & easy
By crystal clear on 10/27/2007 9:42:59 AM , Rating: 1
This is for that ignorant fool who has nothing better to do or say but to vote me down.

I really dont care anyway !

I respond

just to let you know what you are.... FOOLISH


BS
By MPE on 10/23/2007 10:09:18 AM , Rating: 2
It is a PR move to expand HDMI adaption.




RE: BS
By TomZ on 10/23/2007 10:11:53 AM , Rating: 2
Obviously, yes.

But I don't think that listing the supported features will help much for the average consumer, since they still don't know the purpose of those features.


RE: BS
By MPE on 10/23/2007 10:37:46 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly.
Most consumers don't care about deep color and such. As long as it works with their cable/satellite provider - they will buy it.

those informed likely have done the research and informed about the intricacies of HDMI - thus the logo is not needed.

As I said, it is purely a PR move to give HDMI 'a face' - just like USB, DVD and FW did.


RE: BS
By GoodBytes on 10/23/2007 12:49:28 PM , Rating: 2
Come on DisplayPort! :)


RE: BS
By Rav3n on 10/23/2007 8:21:17 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think it's so much a PR move, as it is the first somewhat intelligible idea since the conception of the standard.

How is requiring some explanation a PR move? Instead of just HDMI, now a manufacturer will have to put HDMI 1.3. Hooray version support!

<Begin rant>
Unfortunately, the word "standard" seems to have weakened in definition. The current display standard is somewhere in between DVI-D, DVI-A, DVI-I, VGA, and then there is always the veritable USB display. Upcoming we have HDMI (version 1, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4...), DisplayPort, and maybe some form of DVI-abc, because it's fun.

Want to talk about wireless standards? Buy a Draft-N router and an N wireless connector, only to find out your pre-G wireless print server won't ever work again, and your wireless connector has a better connection to your local police station that it does to the router sitting 10 feet away.
</End rant>

Rather than complaining that manufacturers are being required to explain their product more fully, maybe we should consider applauding them for forcing them to be more forthcoming?


Just maybe this is part of the problem
By SmokeRngs on 10/23/2007 4:21:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
While updates to standards are common practice, some of the new features of each new HDMI version are optional, leaving even savvy consumers confused at what their latest gadget can do.


While I generally have no problem with updates to standards, shouldn't the standard actually be "standard"? I thought the reason for a standard was to eliminate compatibility problems between devices. A feature in a new standard being optional isn't exactly a standard in my opinion since it doesn't eliminate compatibility problems.

Maybe the HDMI group should put more time and effort into making all the features of the new revisions standard instead of wasting time, effort and money on something stupid like this. A look at the definition of standard would probably be a good start.

All devices and cables of the same revision should support all features of that revision. Otherwise, that's not a standard. This just seems like something simple to me.

If a company wants to release a product based on the 1.2 revision but with some 1.3 features, it should still be labeled as a revision 1.2 device. The company can indicate that it does more than than the 1.2 revision but can't claim standards compatibility with anything other than the 1.2 revision. This probably isn't the best example of this type of situation, but I think it gets the point across that the HDMI group is doing nothing but causing problems and confusion by eliminating the standards part of their "standards".




RE: Just maybe this is part of the problem
By Fritzr on 10/23/2007 9:39:25 PM , Rating: 2
Optional differences between implementations of the same standard have a long and venerable history. I still on occasion assemble RS-232C to RS-232C adapters since RS-232C is not always compatible with RS-232C (That's without adding in the complication of crossover cables {2<->3&3<->2 instead of 2<->2&3<->3})

Instead of opening the connector to see how the pins are connected you will now check the logo and select based on the options you desire ... you don't see the option you need, you leave it at the store and buy something else instead. The retiring standard required you to open the box and find the technical specs in the manual to see which HDMI features were added/deleted. This new standard requires omitted basic features be noted and added optional features be noted...no longer do you need to find the manual to see if your favorite feature is available. Ignore the features you don't recognize since it probably won't harm anything to have an unused extra feature.


RE: Just maybe this is part of the problem
By Scrogneugneu on 10/23/2007 10:14:10 PM , Rating: 2
Better yet than looking at logos and stuff :

HDMI 1.1
HDMI 1.2
HDMI 1.3
HDMI 1.4

The consumer sees 1.2 on his TV set, sees a new TV with 1.3, it must be better then.

This works, is simple and easy, so long as there are no optional requirements . You either follow the guidelines or you don't.


By Casper42 on 10/26/2007 2:51:15 AM , Rating: 2
You should read the PDF.

It specifically tells OEMs NOT to use the 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 numbering.

I guess its exactly what you said too. The 1.3 is a Specification and OEMs are NOT mandated to use all the features outlined in the Spec. So saying your device is 1.3 capable means you may only have feature A and not B C D and E that are also part of the 1.3 Spec.


this is pull****
By Xajel on 10/24/2007 3:26:48 AM , Rating: 2
I think DisplayPort is the future, and all Computers will go for it soon, CE will follow it later ( CE is much bigger & already started wil HDMI so they need more time to change this )




RE: this is pull****
By Fluppeteer on 10/24/2007 6:28:49 AM , Rating: 2
You're probably right. The computer industry has a history of randomly switching to competing standards with no significant benefits, and thereby inconveniencing consumers for no good reason. A move to DisplayPort would fit the pattern perfectly.

For so long as Vista is causing confusion, there's a next gen disc format war, and nobody can agree on basic HDTV features such as the resolution and frame rate of the device, the choice of connector being used was the one thing which was vaguely standard (at least if you see HDMI as a superset of DVI-D). Thank goodness for DisplayPort bringing the proper degree of indecision back into the market.

Do I sound bitter?

(Actually, I have nothing against DisplayPort, other than that it's not offering enough to be worth the impending confusion. A 360MHz pixel clock - vs 340-680MHz for HDMI and no strict limit for DVI - and a slightly improved connector that's still pretty flimsy do not, for me, compensate for another bout of incompatible hardware. Make it significantly better than HDMI, and I'll get right behind it. I just don't like people thinking that DisplayPort is going to be a huge step forward.)


RE: this is pull****
By feirstein on 10/24/2007 11:08:58 AM , Rating: 2
The consumer never needs to know what version of HDMI is in a device's chip set; never. It is just bull and confuses the sales force and the consumer.

The consumer wants to know if their DVD/CD player outputs DSD audio over HDMI. The consumer wants to know if ther receiver decodes DSD into multi-channel audio with their HDMI interconnect.

The focus on HDMI version and not on the features supported is and continues to be a huge mistake and the guys running the HDMI game know this. Why don't they educate the public that there is no such thing as an HDMI version 1.3 interconnect? They have failed in their task of promoting HDMI, in my opinion.


RE: this is pull****
By Targon on 10/24/2007 4:55:51 PM , Rating: 2
If Microsoft can learn from the mistake that is "optional features" in a standard, why can't the group behind HDMI? Microsoft has pretty much admitted that DirectX 10 has the mistake of saying that support for many feature is optional, so are making most of those optional features required in DX 10.1.

So, why should there be ANY confusion about what HDMI 1.3 features are present in a given screen model? Should these features even be a function of the connection standard in the first place vs. standards for flat panel screens in the first place? That is the real key, what is in the connection vs. what is in the screen.


Confusion X 2
By timmiser on 10/23/2007 2:00:55 PM , Rating: 5
OK, now I am even more confused. Shouldn't a press release announcing a new trademark and logo contain a picture of said trademark and logo? Maybe also a basic chart that breaks down the possible options trailing the HDMI version number and a short summary of what each option provides?




RE: Confusion X 2
By JonnyDough on 10/23/2007 7:33:55 PM , Rating: 1
Maybe it's a press release about a press release. Now if we only had a press release by the Board of Press Release Standards about press release standards we'd get this all cleared up.


Less confusing?
By mezman on 10/23/2007 2:54:15 PM , Rating: 3
"HDMI (V.1.3 with Deep Color, x.v.Color)."

How is that less confusing?




RE: Less confusing?
By randomlinh on 10/23/2007 3:01:42 PM , Rating: 3
I was thinking the same exact thing.


Whrere's the beef?
By Casper42 on 10/26/2007 2:42:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
we have created a map of HDMI features with terminology that is easy to communicate


Hey Marcus, how about a link next time??????

http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/trademark_logo_pu...




Whrere's the beef?
By Casper42 on 10/26/2007 2:48:09 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
we have created a map of HDMI features with terminology that is easy to communicate


Hey Marcus, how about a link next time??????

http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/trademark_logo_pu...

PS: If you read the PDF, you get a real taste for how much of a bunch of control freaks these guys over at HDMI.org are. They go into pages and pages of detail on what you can and cannot say as an OEM using HDMI in your product and even have pages of examples on things you should NOT do with thier logos. Crazy I tell you.




"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki