Thread: Neo900 - finally a successor of N900
View Single Post
mr_jrt is offline mr_jrt
2014-01-07 , 14:01
Posts: 249 | Thanked: 277 times | Joined on May 2010 @ Brighton, UK
#1592
Originally Posted by Estel View Post
Whoa, that was like a quoting BS from some HDMI consortium sales manager. First of all, HDM signal, even while digital, is *much* more prone to interference, due to strict timing requiments and high bandwidth transferred + dropping signal entirelly, in case of errors. It results in much shorter acceptable cable length (without active signal boosters), and/or ugly fat cables.
If you say so. All I can say is that VGA is much more prone to interference due to the signal being analogue. Quality drops noticeably over long cables and over connectors, and I've never had any quality issues with DVI/HDMI. Problems I've had with VGA include worlds of pain from blurryness to brightness, stupid timing issues trying to get my TV's native resolution out of my PC, and everything in between. Arguing VGA is superior to HDMI is like arguing we should all abandon SATA and go back to PATA.

Fact is, more devices are going to come with only HDMI ports from now on. Having VGA on your Neo900 is all fine and well, but it's useless if your monitor/TV doesn't have a VGA port.

Originally Posted by Estel View Post
In my real-life case, just placing N900 on standing leg of my monitor (~5 cm from HDMI cable), listening to FM radio *and* getting a call results in ~3 seconds of black screen. Never happens with VGA.
Fair enough. Probably want better HDMI cables then. Point is that it's more robust from interference as the signalling levels have to drop much further to interrupt a binary stream than an analogue one, where by default *any* interference will affect the signal quality.

Originally Posted by Estel View Post
Also, HDMI is *not* royalty-free:

In comparision, DisplayPort is semi-royalty-free - you can include it in your product for free, but some parts of specification are free *only* for consortium members.
Never said it was

Originally Posted by Estel View Post
This is academic problem, though, as we need neither. As stated in my previous post, VGA adds missing piece, that allows us to get practical results of *both* HDMI and DisplayPort (minus things really not needed by anyone, like digital rights management through HDCP), with only one drawback of using more cables (or cleverly made custom cable). I don't know for you, but I can perfectly live with that.
HDMI is just a physical connector, the signalling is just DVI. I don't know if that requires licensing, but the HDCP part isn't required, you can put HDCP over DVI just as you can have HDMI without it. You're essentially arguing for analogue over digital, and that battle is nearly always won by digital.
---

Originally Posted by Estel View Post
BTW, analog video is not going to phase-out, at all! They're just planning to slowly replace physical connector, but you will be perfectly able to connect your VGA output to DisplayPort input of your monitor/TV (in case VGA input lacking, which I seriously doubt to happen anytime soon, BTW), using semi-active (powered through cable, from monitor/TV), lossless adaptor.

/Estel
Again, if you say so. I see no advantage of VGA beyond backwards compatibility, and it's a damn sight more fiddly to set up display compatible high resolution modes, in my experience.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mr_jrt For This Useful Post: