Wednesday, May 31, 2006

More about Starhub HDCP - Starhub has good people!

We've reached a stage where ... sigh ... the slightest glimmer of brilliance elicits a big response. This does not belittle a staffer in Starhub called Justin Cheng though. He is VERY good. I don't know whether he's management level or just some grunt, but he's good. See this email:

----------------------------

From: Michael Tan
Mailed-By: gmail.com
To: customerservice@starhub.com
Date: May 23, 2006 1:43 PM
Subject: HD TV trial programme enquiry

Starhub and MDA definition of HD is different!

Please click on the links for details

Starhub has released HD trials. Great! BUT, Starhub does not mention HDCP at all, but MDA states that you must have HDCP in order to have HD-compliance. So how now? Well, I think Starhub will not broadcast HDCP content in the trials, but eventually they will do so. But once they implement HDCP, if our monitor do not have HDCP, the content will be degraded to 480P from 720P. Starhub should clarify! -- ____________________________________________
Michael Tan

----------------------------

And Justin Cheng answered:

----------------------------

From: customerservice@starhub.com
Mailed-By: starhub.com
To: michaeltanyk@gmail.com
Date: May 30, 2006 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: HD TV trial programme enquiry

Dear Michael

Thank you for your email.

We apologise for the late reply.

With regard to your enquiry, we would like to inform you that ourset-top box is HDMI/HDCP and it should be fully comply to TV withHDMI or DVI/HDCP.

At present, the HDCP is not triggered till there's a need, so most of the TV will not be affected. However, if it comes to a time that this is triggered, then those TV's without HDMI/HDCP should see the warning message below. Also, the viewer still can switch over to component or composite output for viewing, as they are analog transmission to the HDTV.

HDCP Warning
This material is copyrighted and your display is unable to handle its protection properly. Therefore, you will not be able to watch the program using HDMI. To watch this material, please use analternative type of video output connection from your set-top box, e.g. YPbPr

For other reference about HDMI/HDCP, please visit http://tv.about.com/od/hdtv/a/hdmidvihdcp.htm

If you have any questions on StarHub Digital Cable and MaxOnline services, please call us on our Customer Care hotline at 1633 (+656820 1633 from overseas), email to this address or fax in to 67251603.

Best regards
Justin Cheng
Customer Affairs

----------------------------

Don't you just love Justin, in an era where people reply you things which are so much bullshit? Justin, you're damn good. You may be a manager, but you probably can be king.

Anyway, let's calm down and see Justin's message content. It's shocking, right? So your S$4,000 to S$35,000 LCD TV which does not have HDCP will just display the wonderful message, rendering your digital port .... useless for HD.

One more point - I'm not sure that Justin's workaround on the analog port is accurate. Here's my additional query to Justin:

-----------------------------

From: Michael Tan
Mailed-By: gmail.com
To: "customerservice@starhub.com"
Date: May 31, 2006 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: HD TV trial programme enquiry


Justin, thank you for your excellent answer, MDA's reply paled very much in comparison.

One clarification - if one switches over to analog when you get the message, there has been talk about the HDCP scheme requiring analog output to be downgraded to 480P/576P from HD resolutions. Is this true?

This is summarized here:
http://miketan.blogspot.com/2006/05/less-discussed-complications-of-hdmi.html

with sources from here:
Matthew Torres of About.com thinks that the signal may be blocked

On a HD DVD or a Blu-ray disc, if the manufacturer or publisher of the disc has set the HDCP protection flag set as ON, if this player is connected to a non-HDCP compliant LCD TV, the player will output a downsampled signal of 540p .

This question I think is essential, because out of 300K people who have plasma/flatscreen, 90% of them have it without HDCP.

----------------------------------

Let's hope Justin replies my question and sheds more light on this situation.

MDA Starhub Mediacorp HD Press Conference

The Media Development Authority of Singapore (MDA), together with MediaCorp and StarHub, invited the press to a press briefing on the launch of High- Definition Television (HDTV) trials in Singapore. This briefing took place today.

From some feedback I heard, this was not terribly informative but some information was distilled from there. I think they intended this to be a Rah Rah affair but somehow, the Q&A pretty much drew a lot of blanks and difficult issues out. Kudos to whichever reporter sharp enough to ask the tough questions.

A hearsay distillate (I wasn't there):
  1. HDCP would not be implemented during the HDTV trials
  2. HDCP MAY be implemented during the commercial HDTV rollout pending evaluation (MT: wow. Who said that MDA, Starhub and Mediacorp had enough clout to determine the future of HDCP inclusion in today's bit-torrent enabled world?)
  3. A full two hundred to three hundred sets of flat screen LCD/Plasma screens exist in Singapore today (MT: wow again. How many of these are really HD ready? 10%? We're in for a load of troubles once people start to receive HDCP feeds with the broadcast flag enabled to degrade picture quality on non-HDCP TVs! And pity those guys who have ... errr.... 1024x1024 plasmas.... )
  4. One of the powers-that-be mentioned that, if HDCP were implemented, no problem, just get the analog component and all will be fine. A reporter queried him - hey, won't there be degradation if you pump a HDCP enabled signal through the analog? (He was referring to `plugging the analog hole' as mentioned here and referred to here - which in summary, that there are moves to make HDCP equipment degrade content if played through analog in an attempt to stop the bypass of HDCP content protection by recording HD through analog.) The speaker said - NO. Analog will not degrade the quality, you will still get very good quality content (MT - this betrays a total lack of understanding on the part of the speaker about the brewing battles between the content providers, broadcasters and the device manufacturers, where they are fiercely fighting the battle on how to plug the analog hole)
  5. Starhub's flagship content for this trial starts with the World Cup, and Mediacorp's flagship content for this trial starts with the ... err... Lord of the Rings - The Two Towers .... OMFG! << (not particularly an exclamation of joy.)

Well, now we know that they know little more than us, and perhaps a lot less than some of the enthusiasts who have been watching the developments hawkeyed. We're in for a load of forum complaints, I'm certain.

HD Ready Logo INSUFFICIENT!

The official stand by most HD device marketeers when somebody asks them - which HDTV to buy? They'll say: "Simple! Look for the official HD Ready logo!"

NOT so simple!

The HD Ready logo was announced by the European Industry Association for Information Systems, Communication Technologies and Consumer Electronics (EICTA) in Jan 19, 2005 with regard to DISPLAY DEVICES ONLY. Who can display this logo? Simple. Anybody who pays a license fee to the EICTA and proves that their set meets the bare minimum of requirements set by the EICTA, can display the logo. So let's distil the requirements (see Annex A in this link):

  1. Must be able to display HD sources at higher than PAL (576i resolutions)
  2. At least 720 physical lines at a 16x9 picture aspect ratio (widescreen). Note: this is merely a requirement for physical lines. This does not mean that the device has to render to the maximum of 720 lines, and the mere fact that there are 720 lines already means that this requirement is complied with.
  3. Device must accept HD content using Component, DVI or HDMI interfaces, and able to support 720p AND 1080i
  4. HDCP content protection must be supported.
Problems:

  1. A false sense of security - the introduction of a logo like this, gives buyers a false sense of security. It implies that `you're all set if you get one with the logo' but does not readily imply the caveats below.
  2. Source-display incompatibility - well, if you get a transmission at 1080i, and you get a LCD TV with 768 physical lines, your picture may be downscaled to 576p, and you'd not get the 720 line display which you so dearly want. This is already happening in the Singapore Starhub HD trials with the Advanced Digital Broadcasting box.
  3. Older models which are indeed HD Ready do not exhibit this logo - if the authorities or broadcasters spin that HD Ready is required for their transmissions, that'll spur a lot of unneccessary HDTV changes!
  4. The HD-Ready specification does not care HOW MANY ACTUAL LINES ARE DISPLAYED, it merely states the physical requirement. It does not require the device to actually render the video on the screen in pixel perfect resolution. This is a real ass!
  5. Broadcasters will not dare to advertise HD Ready as a requirement - they won't. It'll kill their HD sales! Everybody who bought a LCD panel before the EICTA announcement, before the existence of the logo, will have second thoughts about subscribing to the HD service simply because they don't know for sure whether their HDTV will support any HD service which is advertised to require the HD Ready logo. So they won't do it unless they're forced to.
  6. Lack of publicity of the HD Ready logo - if the broadcasters won't advertise the requirement for the HD Ready logo, who will? A big part of the user education should come from the broadcasters, and what comes out from the broadcasters is authoritative. If the manufacturers advertise their HD Ready logo, and the broadcasters don't require it officially, makes it a pretty futile exercise, won't it?

I really think there is no alternative to the broadcasters publishing detailed technical requirements. The use of the HD-Ready logo is misleading, and anybody who passes the buck to the HD Ready logo scheme is irresponsible, and could do better than that. For the HD Ready logo scheme to be really relevant, they should have 2 versions: HD-Ready720 and HD-Ready1080 - at least, and these 2 versions should require PIXEL accurate reproduction to 720 or 1080 lines.

So those who think, don't leave it all to the logo. Demand an exact specification from your broadcaster, and try to understand the concepts, then buy your HDTV. Don't let them sweep it all under the carpet just with a mention of the logo scheme.

Tuesday, May 30, 2006

ERP accidents-Tougher Penalties Please


Yesterday, I saw a typical accident in the Central Expressway, JUST before the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) gantry. More than 5 cars were involved and it was the type of accident which in some cars the entire trunk was crushed.

Just a normal ERP accident I thought, where some idiot saw the gantry and stood on the brakes because he didn't have enough funds on his card or his card was not inserted - just to avoid a S$12 fine. I see these kinds of accidents so often, it's become `normal'. Just that in this one, an ambulance was racing to the scene with obvious difficulty since this accident caused a fair bit of congestion.

When I saw a baby in the arms of one of the accident victims, my blood boiled though. The survivalability of a baby without a car seat, is relatively low. Even with a car seat, he'd be traumatized. I know - somebody slammed to the back of my car before and my 4 months old baby went berserk for a few minutes.

First, who in the world took the `easy' decision to eschew collecting monthly payments in favour of the prepaid cashcard system, only he knows whether the blood of accident victims is on his hands. Look - offenders have to be mailed anyway, and mature billing systems exist for almost every public utility and telecommunications service in Singapore, why not have a billing system for the roads? At least it'll minimize ERP accidents!

If the government doesn't budge from this fateful decision, then let's have the government do the easy thing. Slap an enhanced fine on people causing ERP accidents. By no means is this going to be easy - the guy in the front of the pileup is probably not the one who stood on the brakes, it's probably the guy a car or two in front of him. Still, just bring on the big stick. Put them into prison, cane them, whatever. It's the easy thing to do, and hopefully, it'll save a life or two. And reduce all the congestion caused by the damn ERP accidents!

Monday, May 29, 2006

Fuji F30-world's best P&S camera


The Fujifilm F30 is easily the best point and shoot digital camera in the world right now. hpicckcy of DPreview forums has given us the first installment of his incredible pictures, and it's fantastic. In lousy conditions, it gave such perfect quality I could not believe that it came from a cheap P&S DSC. The possibilities are endless - just by stepping up the ISO up to 3200, you can handhold most of your shots, even night shots for that matter!

Christmas seemed to come early this year. My previous blogpost on What Next for Digital Cameras came to life with the F30 for point and shoots. This F30 has such incredible dynamic range, such low noise levels, that ... for anyone in the market for a point-and-shoot digital camera today, it simply HAS to be the F30, even though it uses XD.

Probably, XD will find a new lease of life with this one. So will Fuji.

HDTV-Plasma or LCD?

Before you go out and buy a nice big 42 inch screen for HDTV, ponder on this first.

My assertion is that an LCD display is more suited for HD than Plasma, because Plasma usually comes in real small resolutions.

LG is the world's largest Plasma manufacturer, so taking a look at their website:

Model : 42PX4RV Resolution 852x480 (WVGA) eerrr... a 42" Plasma Display which supports 480P only?

Model : 42PX5R
Resolution 1024x768 (XGA) - what a weird resolution... for 720P at 16:9 ratio, the number of vertical lines should be 720/9 x 16 = 1280, 1024 needs to be rescaled.

This is not comprehensive, but just before you buy, take a close look at the plasma's resolution specification. for 720P, you need 1280x720, and for 1080I or 1080P you need 1920x1080. I've limited my discussion previously to LCD TVs only, so if you elect to buy a plasma, which is way cheaper, take a few minutes to look at the brochure!

Friday, May 26, 2006

HDTV confusion - I'm not alone!

Look at the UK - one in 5 TV viewers in the UK don't know they have to get a HD TV to view high definition TV. And then half of them don't know they have to get a HD set top box, and 2 thirds of them don't know that they have to pay to get HDTV.

Looks like I'm not alone in my confusion. In Gadget Crazy Singapore, people will get a HDTV whether or not they want to view HD or not. SO it's different. BUT our broadcasting authority, the MDA, must make clear statements to the people, so that they know what to do. If we're gonna get struck by HDCP, they must tell us. And they must tell us what happens if our TV isn't a HDCP. And they MUST TELL US NOW. Because so many people are buying new TV sets in preparation for the world cup, the urgency is even greater now.

And IF THEY DON'T KNOW THE ANSWERS, THEY HAVE TO SAY SO. Not saying so, and still implying to be the `know it all', gives people a false sense of security. If they don't know, PERHAPS people may hold off purchases until they do.

Granted, their website has stated many things. Among them, they stated plasma technology. Hey, PLASMA may not give you the resolution you need for HD. Did they tell anybody that? Or it's not their job? Whose job is it anyway? Mine?

They're having a press conference next week. I fear that some of the answers that the fully prepped press will ask might not be answered there. And I fear, if the MDA doesn't know, then why are they into HDTV at all. So much money spent now at HDTV's infancy, on equipment which may well be outdated once things become clearer globally. The whole wide world is rife with rumours, misinformation, half censored marketing information, and real uncertainty.

And if some of the things I said come to pass, like HDCP blacking out your analog outputs or degrading them, tons of people will NOT be happy - as late as 1 year ago, many LCD TVs and Plasma TVs were sold as HD-ready devices, without HDCP!!!!! And since TVs last a normal human being in Singapore for 5 to 10 years, won't they be pissed?

The way it's going now, why do we even need a broadcast authority? One broadcaster's going on about having MPEG4 HD based on what was previously known as H264, and the other's probably gonna broadcast on MPEG2 HD, and nobody knows whether HDCP is going to be embedded or not. That's the state of affairs in Singapore, and yet, they're gonna charge us for the HD trials. Nobody knows nothing, and let's face it - the MDA's not gonna change the minds of any of the content owners, so what's the use anyway? There's no standardization, no information, no real insight, no nothing. So, might as well leave it to the free market huh? And save a few million bucks a year not having an MDA.... after all, isn't it ideal to have the free market without extraneous funny considerations, like national pride of being the first in Southeast Asia to have widespread HD Trials, to blur the distinctions between what is best for me/us and what is best to the regulatory body?

But yet, the allure of watching the World Cup 2006 on HD is .... intoxicating.

Intel Woodcrest Benchmarks Claimed WRONG!

I spent the entire half of today in the Intel seminar launching the Bensley platform, a new platform with allegedly great improvements over their old stuff. The Platform Manager himself showed us some `recently available' benchmarks showing that Intel had finally caught up with AMD and will NO LONGER PLAY CATCH UP.

I thought, Wow. Opterons had so much lead over the Intels, and nothing much has changed except for the CPU, what must have changed, I thought, was that the new 0.65nm process gave the Woodcrest processors so much more lead. I even asked the platform manager WHEN he was about to integrate their memory controller unit into their CPU, and he told me that this is not necessarily yet (in view of the benchmarks) and in a few years they'd do it.

Imagine my surprise, when I came back, I found this thread in my Instant Messaging:

Intel Woodcrest performance claim a fraud

In summary, the blogpost content includes:
1) Intel based their results on the tpc.org results, but Intel claimed that the AMD Opteron machine was using 64bit software like the Intel machine, but at the tpc.org website, the Opteron machine was loaded with 32bit software.
2) The AMD machine was using different, smaller hard disk storage compared to the Intel machine


Anyway, let these guys clarify this first. Intel Server Platform Group has been informed of this blogpost, and he'll respond.

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Writely Integration with Blogger/Blogspot

I've been curious how Google integrated writely with Blogger/Blogspot, and here is the result (if it appears).

We can easily put in tables:

Row 1 Column 2, row 1
Row 2 These table cells can be sized to content!


Best thing about Writely was that you can cut and paste with all the hyperlinks intact. Can this be done here?

From Internet Explorer:

XpertVision has again expanded its lineup of graphics cards to take into consideration the new DDR2 and DDR3 designs for mid-end and entry level cards, to create an incredible performance boost - the highest performance cards in its class. Please download the XpertVision specification chart for details.
Click Here for complete product line specification chart.

From Excel: (table deleted coz can't publish to blog if it's here)

Looking better!

What about pictures?

Wow! Now just hope that it can be pumped into blogger!

Under Blog, you can set your blog settings, and sure enough, Blogger is the easiest one to handle.

Well, life is good! But damn, I'm getting this error from blogger: "object reference not set to an instance of an object"

A search in the Writely forums http://forum.writely.com/showthread.php?t=489&highlight=object+reference+-set reveals that I'm not alone. This seems to be a blogger problem and SOMETIMES IT WORKS. Seems that if you try like tons of times, it might work once. So here I go pumping and pumping .... If you see this post, means I've succeeded.

OK I must have tried a hundred times, and 2 different errors came out of it.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

Media Development Authority of Singapore (MDA) responds: Commercial Rollout of HD WILL have HDCP!

Yesterday, I emailed a query to MDA:

Subject: Starhub Minimum Requirement Different From MDA minimum requirement for HD

Anyway, a summary of events:Starhub has released HD trials. Great!http://miketan.blogspot.com/2006/05/starhubs-requirements-not-matching.html

So how now?

Well, I think Starhub will not broadcast HDCP content in the trials, but eventually they will do so. But once they implement HDCP, if our monitor do not have HDCP, the content will be degraded to 480P from 720P. http://miketan.blogspot.com/2006/05/less-discussed-complications-of-hdmi.html

They responded:


From: MDA CIR Staff4
To: michaeltanyk
Date: May 24, 2006 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: [SPAM] Starhub Minimum Requirement Different From MDA minimum requirement for HD


Dear Mr. Tan,

Thank you for your email.

With regards to HDCP, MDA aims to keep the public informed of developments and to future proof consumers' purchase of HD-Ready TV.

For this HD Ready TV Trial, the broadcasters are to determine the best operating mode for their business which will include the activation of HDCP for content protection in the eventual commercial rollout.

Thank you.

Best Regards,
Community & International Relations
Media Development Authority

So what this this all mean? It's not clearly written at first look, but carefully reading this email reply together with their FAQ and our current knowledge now, here's my try.

Statement: With regards to HDCP, MDA aims to keep the public informed of developments and to future proof consumers' purchase of HD-Ready TV.

My interpretation: MDA's FAQ is not wrong. Their HD requirements are future proof. So, it is clear: You MUST have HDCP to future proof your LCD-TV purchase.

Statement: For this HD Ready TV Trial, the broadcasters are to determine the best operating mode for their business which will include the activation of HDCP for content protection in the eventual commercial rollout.

My interpretation: Broadcasters are free to determine the best way to represent themselves and the requirements at the time of the TV trial, optimized for their own business. HOWEVER, eventual commercial rollout WILL include (not 'MAY', MDA used 'WILL') HDCP.

So, this means, go buy a HD screen with HDCP, this is clear. Also, if MDA is right, commercial HD, by any broadcaster in Singapore, will activate HDCP. This further means that, questions of whether the content will be degraded when it goes over analog or to a non-HDCP compliant TV, will best be answered in - it's up to the HDCP parties, the content providers, the broadcasters, the device manufacturers, etc.

I asked MDA to comment on whether content will be degraded if played to a non-HDCP compliant TV - they did not respond yet, but once they do, I'll post here.

Microsoft and Sony may have agreed not to degrade HD resolutions output on non-HDCP compliant ports

OK things move really fast. Since I don't read German, I had to wait until some smart guy in Daily Tech to post a comment on a German article on Spiegel online that HDCP may not be necessary until after 2010.

I held my horses and took a good look at the article. After all, it might have been groundbreaking news! But turns out to be pretty old news. Or at very best, insignificant news.

First of all, there are `rumours' that Microsoft and Sony agreed not to degrade HDCP content on non-HDCP compliant ports. This has already been reported in the Wiki entry on HDCP at least only for Sony.

However, the Hollywood guys did not agree. And it's the Hollywood guys who are important, aren't they? Sony WAS a major supplier of playback and display equipment, but today, they're no longer as great as they were a decade ago. And their major preoccupation is the Playstation 3, which judging from the PS2's history, few people use a game console to play Hollywood content - it's a Game Console for god's sake.

Since the Hollywood guys did not agree, I'm gonna piegonhole this piece of news to the KIV folder.

So there.

Getting hung up on HDMI and eschewing DVI?

Many people have responded and criticized my selection of DVI over HDMI in my previous blogpost here. Many have also questioned the need to connect a PC to the LCD TV in the living room. I was looking for an opportunity to spend a bit of time to post my counter arguments on this.

Thankfully, a certain gentleman Samsas at the MDA HDTV trial forum posted the gist of most of these objections, so I took the effort to write my comments on his reasons for HDMI and against DVI. Here's the post and my reasons:

-------------------------begin---------------------

samsas wrote:
That's an interesting article. But I don't agree that DVI is the way to go over HDMI. The reasons for this.

1. DVI does not support audio. Period. We're talking TV here, and the HDTV signal will have multi channel sound whenever available in a program. Now if you are going to use a fibre connection to a reciever for audio and DVI for video its highly probable that there will be a sync problem. The sound and video signals won't be simultaneous for the most part, so you will need a reciever that can adjust for this and believe me it's not a simple task.

MT: All receivers will have AC3/Optical out. If you connect via DVI, which does not multiplex digital audio inside itself, you can use the AC3/Optical out to connect to external AC3 receiver or the TV itself since all TVs which support digital audio will have AC3/optical. It is assured that there will not be a sync issue, since this technology has been used ever since DVD was born. We are now using AC3 with DVI for most DVD output even, in computers, and in some China players. NO sync issues as long as encoded stream do not have sync issues.

2. Wer'e talking TV again here. How many of us are going to hook up desk top computers to the living room TV? It's a logistic problem. Even if we did we'd need a tuner for the TV signal going into the PC. It's a bit easier with portable lap tops, but you still need a laptop with a tuner built in. And even if you get one not many laptops give you 5 channel sound output, so you need a card from Creative or whatever.

MT: This is 2006. Intel has released the ViiV, Apple release Mac Mini with frontrow. Many people have content based non-standard codec, and require the flexibility of a CPU to decode. Singapore IPTV service by Mediacorp mobtv.sg is right now PC-only. Many people view football with Asiabookie web page on the same screen, half half. See Donald Trump Apprentice #1? It's an LCD TV connected to the computer leh. Surfing has become a lifestyle, to be performed in the living room, not only the study, bedroom and computer room.

Just surf forums.hardwarezone.com and you see tons of people trying to connect their computer to the living room. The era of a living room PC is here already. LCD TV last you for 10 years. Within this 10 years, you're willing to bet you not gonna connect your PC to the TV?

3. Every upscaling DVD player I've seen in the shops now outputs the upscaled DVD signal via HDMI not DVI.

MT: Upscaled DVD content can traverse whether over HDMI or DVI. There is no issue. HDMI can easily be converted to DVI and vice versa, and yet DVI has the advantage of computer compatibility. This is not a point to get hung up on.

4. Correct me if I'm wrong but the new HD DVD player on the market in US (Toshiba) has only HDMI out.

MT: Toshiba is one of the smallest major brands in the market for DVD, and I don't usually follow them. In any case, HDMI is equal to DVI when it comes to the video protocol profile, therefore, HDMI can easily be converted to DVI using a direct mapping cable. This is also not a point to get hung up on.

5. I don't think HDTV will go beyond 1080i for some years to come, so if you want resolutions beyond 1080i you're back to scalers again. So your PC internal DVD or HD DV player must be able to upscale to the higher PC resolutions above 1080i and 1080p (HDMI ver 1.3). You're going to need a top range desktop to go anywhere near the processing power you need.

MT: My point on preferring DVI to HDMI is not because I want higher resolutions. It's because of PC resolution compatibility, since DVI supports ALL and HDMI by definition only supports 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p, pending further developments. Today, a S$1K PC with a nVidia 7600GS card can already drive a WQXGA display very satisfactorily, and that's 2560 x 1600, in 3D even.

So unless the TV came with both DVI and HDMI in, I'd go with the HDMI option. Its the most practical.

MT: As stated in my blogpost at http://miketan.blogspot.com/2006/05/less-discussed-complications-of-hdmi.html most of the dual HDMI+DVI options you can find, only have HDCP on the HDMI port and not the DVI port. The trick is to look for a LCD TV with only DVI and the HDCP will be implemented on the DVI port. if you see Vincent's post here at http://www.mycarforum.com/forum/Help_on_LCD_tvs_P1356966/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=1346681;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=-1;guest=2398 he found a LG 32" which did exactly that.

ALWAYS REMEMBER, the TV and DVD and set top box manufacturers will manufacture an entire range of products with every Input output available, since it's almost free for them. They're not gonna limit the number of outputs and inputs, because more outputs and inputs will make their player more flexible and for reverse compatibility. Don't get hung up on HDMI because it's `newer', because it's not. It's same as DVI for video, and multiplex normal AC3 into is own transmission envelope, nothing we can't do normally even now with AC3 out and DVI combined.

-------------------------end---------------------

ALL THIS MAY BE MOOT! I have just been informed by VincentV that HDCP may not be necessary until after 2010 ... I'll read it up and repost.

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Starhub's requirements not matching MDA's requirements for HD

I just want to post that Starhub's requirements do not match MDA's requirements for minimum requirements for HD-Ready displays.

See here: http://www.hdtv-trial.sg/faq.htm

Under point #7: http://www.hdtv-trial.sg/faq.htm (update 6Jul06 - they took out point #7 from the web. LOL)

7. What are the minimum requirements for “HD-Ready” displays?
7.1
The minimum native resolution of the display must be at least 720 physical lines in aspect ratio of 16:9. The display must be able to resolve either 720p, 1080i or 1080p.
7.2 The display device must accept HD input via:
Analogue Component Y-Pb-Pr, and/ or HDMI ( High Definition Multimedia Interface) or DVI ( Digital Visual Interface )
7.3 HD capable inputs must accept the following HD video formats:
- 1280 x 720 @ 50 Hz progressive ( “720p”)
- 1920 x 1080 @ 50 Hz interlace ( “1080i” )
7.4 The HDMI or DVI input must support content protection , HDCP ( High- Bandwidth Digital Content Protection System )

Point 7.4 is critical. STARHUB DOES NOT MENTION HDCP COMPLIANCE IN THEIR WEBBIE HERE: http://www.vocanic.net/hdtv/crs/edm/appendixA.html


MDA seems to require HDCP, but perhaps NOT NOW.

What they fail to state, is that if one uses Analogue Component, there is a big chance that the video will be downgraded from 720P to 480P. And they fail to tell us what happens if you connect the display to a non-HDCP DVI/HDMI port.

Rocket science it is, but these guys are rocket scientists, can't we have more clarification?

All in all, it is still worth to get the Starhub HD, because a component, DVI or HDMI interface is a big sight better than the composite connection offered by Starhub Digital Cable. But I think it is imperative that more details are given to the public - after all, this is a PAY trial, not a FREE trial.

Monday, May 22, 2006

Starhub readies HDTV trials

Starhub makes ready their HDTV trial here: http://www.vocanic.net/hdtv/crs/edm/

OK, you gotta pay: a one-time trial fee of $52.50 and basic install charge of $31.50 applies. But World Cup will be in HD though, so that's cool.

What do you need to be HD-ready according to Starhub? Quite lax requirements, actually! See this here: http://www.vocanic.net/hdtv/crs/edm/appendixA.html

1) The minimal vertical resolution of the HD-ready display must be at least 720
lines in an aspect ratio of 16:9;

2) The display device has an interface to accept HDTV signals such as Component interface (Y-Pb-Pr), HDMI (High Definition Multimedia Interface) or DVI (Digital Visual Interface); and

3) The HD inputs is capable to accept the following HD video format:
-1280 x 720 @ 50Hz progressive (720p)
-1920 x 1080 @ 50Hz interlace (1080i)

Wow! The way they say it, means you don't need HDCP! Cool! Ready to record the HD content totally unprotected? This is like sex without a condom, people!

More implications for this:

1) Starhub's HD broadcasts are gonna be WideScreen.

2) The box will have component out (analog) and DVI and HDMI as digital outs! Excellent, especially for the DVI part!

3) As expected, 1080P will not be resolution of choice. As such, a 720P view would be better than a 1080P.

4) No mention of HDCP! YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now, say that if you successfully get a picture, then later, Starhub gets a directive to put HDCP into their content. What then? Your subscription is screwed? You pay money to get 480P back all over again?

Anyway, you can sign up here. I'm gonna do it now and if I am selected, you'd be the first to know.

Edit: Do you get HD on all the channels? No, only the channels with HD, like World Cup, but all the other channels which don't have HD content will look MUCH BETTER because of the component/DVI/HDMI interface will be a BIG SIGHT better than the sucky composite/RCA interface now.

Friday, May 19, 2006

The Less Discussed Complications of HDMI, HDCP and DVI in our HD world

The following article is my attempt to understand this technology and its complications. It is RAW (Researching As I Write) and comments as to mistakes are greatly appreciated.

It seems to be a daunting task to buy an LCD TV today, in an era where the world's laws are reeling from an onslaught of digital content piracy, new distribution methods and usage paradigms for video content, powerful processing power of consumer electronics and a new renaissance for Digital Rights Management after a multitude of failed attempts. It was for me. 3 factors inspired my research culminating in this blogpost:

  1. My company has become one of the major players for LCD panels and PC VGA cards in Singapore
  2. I had to buy 2 LCD TVs in the past month for personal usage, and embarassingly, I did it blindly despite the fact that we sell thousands upon thousands of LCD panels.
  3. Most of all, an excellent forum thread in Hardwarezone titled 'Discussion on LCDTV vs LCD monitor'
Don't let the acronym-heavy title intimidate you. After some research which results pissed me off, that's like playing to the hands of the powers that be. Just to prime you up, here's a very simple glossary I found from about.com:


HDCP - HIGH-BANDWIDTH DIGITAL CONTENT PROTECTION

HDCP stands for High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection and was developed by Intel Corporation. This link stands for how it works, Electronics Engineer version. MT - One comment about HDCP - it's Content Protection, not Copy Protection. What's the difference? Copy protection prevents copying/recording and all the consequences like time shifting, pausing, etc. which is stupid, as these functions are DESIRED and USEFUL. Content Protection does not prevent copying of content, but allows the Licensor and Licensee of the Content Protection scheme to control the usage of this content - putting the control of who can view this content, in what quality level to show it, what devices can view this content, what devices can record this content, how much of this content is permitted to be stored, etc. on the hands of the device manufacturer, who can do whatever he wants within the terms of his HDCP license. This is an essential, but subtle difference - it makes the desicions of the Designer of the a HDCP licensed product FINAL, and not subject to second guessing by hackers etc until HDCP is indeed irretrievably broken. And it enables future changes to rules, without needing to change the entire content protection scheme. So, CONTROL, not PREVENTION.


DVI - DIGITAL VISUAL INTERFACE

DVI was created by the Digital Display Working Group, and stands for Digital Visual Interface. It allows for a high speed uncompressed connection between a digital television, personal computer, and other DVI-based consumer electronics devices. The input is something like you’d find on the back of your computer. One big benefit of DVI is the uncompressed transfer of high definition video.

While you don’t see it when you receive HD programming, it goes through a conversion from the source to the set-top box to your screen. Usually, component cables are used to transfer the red-blue-green signal. The advantage of DVI is that it only requires one cable to transfer the red-blue-green signal, and the speed it transfers an image is significantly faster than the analog component cables, which benefits the overall viewing experience on DLP, Plasma, and LCD televisions.

Combined with HDCP, DVI was the standard for digital television until a few years ago when HDMI was introduced.

HDMI - HIGH-DEFINITION MULTIMEDIA INTERFACE

HDMI stands for High-Definition Multimedia Interface, and like DVI, it allows for the uncompressed data transfer of video between a digital TV and HDMI-enabled consumer electronics devices. The big difference between HDMI and DVI is that HDMI transfers the video and audio signal. DVI only carries the video signal.

According to the HDMI’s official Web site, the advantages of HDMI are:
1) The highest quality video seen and audio heard
2) Fewer cables behind the TV means less mess and confusion-free connection
3) Automatically configures remote controls of devices connected by HDMI
4) Automatically adjusts video content to most effective format
5) HDMI is compatible with DVI, which means it will allow connection to PCs

Because it combines the audio and video signal, HDMI has tremendous support from the MPAA. It was created by some of the heavyweights in the consumer electronics industry - Hitachi, Matsushita, Philips, Silicon Image, Sony, Thomson, and Toshiba. The HDMI input is similar to a USB connector on a PC.

HD

High Definition video, comprosing of a picture higher in resolution that what we were using for the past 30+ years. The only variants worth considering are 720p, 1080i and 1080p, where the numbers signify the number of horizontal lines, and p and i signify progressive and interlaced line drawing patterns, a legacy from the old electron gun scanning paradigm for traditional TVs.

Now that you have the basic official stand, now get the dirty secrets from my perspective.

First of all, if you're buying an LCD TV today, there's a lot of bullshit which is going to hit your face courtesy of salespeople, forum posts and magazine articles, and worst, official positions which don't tell you the whole story. Well what I write here may be bullshit too, and misinformed and ill-researched. So read this article AND many other articles on the web. Google is your friend.

Keep it simple if DVD quality is good enough

There is one kind of guy I can simplify life for, just instantly! If you:

1) are NOT the kind of guy who downloads video torrent files, and not planning to connect your PC to your LCD TV, and yet
2) want need to buy an LCD TV right now, because your old CRT TV is failing, and
3) need the ability in your life sometime within the next 3 years to play all those HD broadcasts on your TV in DVD quality at least,
4) Want to play all your DVDs at the best possible resolution the DVD can garner, and
5) Firmly believe that DVD-quality is good enough

then keep your selection process simple. Get ANY widescreen 16:9 LCD TV with a component input. These sets, you'll be equipped to enjoy DVD-quality video without issues and without needing to worry about anything else. And they can get really cheap if you don't ask for stuff like DVI, HDMI, HDCP etc. Most of the sales may be stock closeouts, you will really get a great bargain without trying hard.

Why not worry about HD? Why is my recommendation above devoid of any recommendation for any digital video interface and I cut through all the HDMI/HDCP/DVI complications? Simple, LCD TV and DVD player and Set top box manufacturers, and broadcasters, are not going to eschew the component interface. They DARE NOT. If they take out all the composite, S-Video and component connections - NOBODY WILL BUY THEIR TV OR BOX. And it costs them next to nothing to implement these interfaces on their machine anyway. So, you'll still get HD in some way - the component, S-Video and composite RCA interfaces will still be there, and you can play future HD content using the component interface at least in DVD quality, assured. You're covered for playing any HD stream in at LEAST DVD-quality anytime from now to a forseeable future 3 to 5 years from now. Case closed.

The rest of this blogpost will be focussing on the digital interfaces, and more on what they have been engineered TO UNDERPERFORM THE TECHNOLOGY'S POTENTIAL, and less focus will be placed on what they CAN do. Suffice to say, these interfaces, DVI and HDMI, can do MUCH MORE beyond what is reasonably demanded of. DVI today, with DUAL-Link function capability, can support stratospheric resolutions like 2560 x 1600 WQXGA - so there are NO technical limitations with these interfaces which we can reasonably push against within a foreseeable timeframe of 3 years or perhaps 5 years.

Most of all, now I'll speak about things close to the hearts of people who want to connect PCs to LCD TVs, and want to really use their LCD TVs to the highest resolution and people who are treating their cable and terresterial and satellite feeds as secondary, and want to use their LCD TVs as new media devices, having the LCD TV to display their Windows Desktops, high resolution web pages, photos, very high resolution videos, or combine all the windows on 1 screen.

OK, the way things are going, here are the pitfalls not usually discussed, but you can find them on the web.

1) Video Degration because of HDCP, or the lack of it

If the FCC (US government) and MPAA (Hollywood guys) have their way, any television displaying a program encoded with HDCP not connected through DVI or HDMI might be degraded – meaning a high definition signal of 1080i will be automatically converted to a lower resolution. Matthew Torres of About.com thinks that the signal may be blocked, but I think that's not ever going to happen. You'd still at least get DVD resolution. In a limited way, I've already been proven right: On a HD DVD or a Blu-ray disc, if the manufacturer or publisher of the disc has set the HDCP protection flag set as ON, if this player is connected to a non-HDCP compliant LCD TV, the player will output a downsampled signal of 540p. (More good news: Sony has declared that they will NOT set the downsample flag and a US court has already struck down the FCC's broadcast flag regulations)

It is clear that sometime in the near future, bad things (from the perspective of a pixel geek) are going to happen if you use a TV not equipped with HDCP to view HDCP encoded video. If you MUST view your official, legal content, like high definition Video discs of the future, HD cable, HD Digital Terresterial Video broadcasts, HD Satellite feeds, HD Cable feeds at the very highest resolutions it was transmitted at, AT THE EXPENSE OF COMPUTER VIDEO FEEDS, you MUST get a LCD TV with the evil HDCP embedded in its heart. There is no alternative short of breaking the HDCP scheme with some third party device like Spatz-Tech's DVIMAGIC which might be illegal. What's more, breaking the HDCP scheme is not as straightforward as obtaining the keys, as compromised keys can be revoked as part of the HDCP scheme.

Still, if you do get a HDCP-enabled LCD TV, you are signing on to HDCP's draconian terms. Note that HDCP licensees all sign agreements with the HDCP Licensor, Digital Content Protection, LLC, to LIMIT the capabilities of their products. These agreements are both private and public, some limitations may be more draconian than others. The money you spend on the technology is already substantial, and paying MORE for HDCP just to have it cripple the technology your purchased, is pretty much a bad deal.

2) The HD-Ready Label - without it, can I play HD?

Yes you can. On January 19, 2005, the European Industry Association for Information Systems (EICTA) announced that HDCP is a required component of the European "HD ready" label. However, HDCP is NOT a technically essential component mandatory for the playback of HD content, and it ignores HD content not encrypted with HDCP, for example, titles from Sony, PC-generated HD video without HDCP, or any HD video in general not employing HDCP for example high quality videos from Usenet or some peer-to-peer download.

There are gems of LCD TVs not having the HD-Ready logo, which might give you (the pixel geek) better technology without HDCP in it. If you exclusively play torrent files, you need not care about any HD-Ready label nor HDCP. Just get a LCD-TV with DVI and not HDMI-only (discussed below).

3) If you buy a HDCP compliant LCD TV, there is a possibility that your HDCP keys may be revoked sometime, anytime.

Heck, the original agreement is here ... I don't know how up to date it is. The plain english is here, and the excerpt below reworded in the context of LCD TVs.

For instance, let’s assume that you’ve purchased an LCD TV with HDCP. Everything is going fine, until one day, it's no longer working with your some new HD-DVD discs you just bought and some channels you're watching on your HD cable. What happened is that your cable box just used some signals, within the architecture of HDCP, to invalidate the keys used by your LCD TV. From that point on, your cable box and HD-DVD player will treat your LCD-TV as a rogue device. As such, it will not allow it to play HDCP content, or at best allow you to play it at lower resolutions.

Why did this happen? HDCP has the capability to revoke `compromised keys'. Say the HDCP keys of your LCD TV, which are essential for its proper operation, have been hacked by some hacker in Brazil - the HDCP licensor can initiate a procedure to invalidate the keys on almost EVERY HDCP device in the world which has that key, online or not, by using a myriad of methods including the signal from broadcasters of HDCP-embedded content and HD-DVDs.

In short, if you buy a HDCP compliant LCD TV, you MAY be worse off than not buying into HDCP if your keys are revoked. Fancy that!

Simple lesson - if you read about some easily hackable LCD TV model on the forums, avoid that. Yes, this is a paradigm shift from buying DVD players - where you'd go for the most easily hackable model. In the HDCP world, eventually that LCD TV would act worse than a non HDCP box. Your legal remedies are unclear, but now that you're forewarned, why would you want to place yourself in that position?

4) You may not be able to feed a high resolution signal into a HDCP LCD TV

So far, all that I have posted, points the way that the only LCD TV I should buy, is one which has HDCP built-in. Don't jump the gun. HDCP is evil to some people.

What if you feed a video signal with no HDCP whatsoever in that signal, into a HDCP-capable LCD TV? What about the high resolution 1600x960 desktop? Can you feed it into the HDCP LCD-TV? With partial aid from about.com I have compiled the feed-display matrix below and the issues involved:

Computer to LCD-TV connection matrix. Computer is an May 2006 computer built with readily available parts, the VGA card with or without HDCP license (2 matrices below), using both a DVI (digital) and VGA (analog) output. Assume that you have a Media Player software with HDCP support capability and the requisite drives.


With non-HDCP compliant VGA card

HDCP LCD non-HDCP LCD
HDCP content, digital output Content downsampled since VGA card is non-compliant Content downsampled since VGA card is non-compliant
non-HDCP content, digital output OK OK
HDCP content, analog output HDCP bans rendering full resolution to Analog, video degradation by computer HDCP bans rendering full resolution to Analog, video degradation by computer
non-HDCP content, analog output OK OK
With HDCP compliant VGA card

HDCP LCD non-HDCP LCD
HDCP content, digital output OK Content downsampled since LCD TV is non-compliant
non-HDCP content, digital output OK OK
HDCP content, analog output HDCP bans rendering full resolution to Analog, video degradation by computer HDCP bans rendering full resolution to Analog, video degradation by computer
non-HDCP content, analog output OK OK



What does all this mean? A lot. We can deduce some rules from this, and some parts of the conclusion is based on these 2 matrices.

Rule 1: HDCP is adverse to analog
Every time HDCP sees analog, it degrades the resolution of the HDCP content.

Rule 2: HDCP needs all devices in the chain to be HDCP compliant for full resolution
If you break the chain, HDCP degrades the resolution.

Rule 3: HDCP does not affect non-HDCP content
This might be obvious, but it took the most time in my research. Some forum posts I encountered in my research, gave me a sinister suspicion that HDCP would be adverse to high resolution non-content as a measure to plug the torrent hole. Continued research and my own testing, disproved this suspicion.

5) HDMI will fully be backward compatible with DVI, but ...

Aside from HDCP, all DVI-only LCD TVs today will be supported by HDMI sources now and in the future video-wise. Read that carefully though - video-wise. The multi-channel audio of HDMI will not be supportable in its native form, but surely there will be stereo downmix - in LCD TVs and playback devices, all present HDMI outputs have a corresponding analog audio output, and all present DVI inputs have a corresponding analog audio input. So audio shouldn't be too much an issue.

Quoting from HDMI site's FAQ:

Is HDMI backward-compatible with DVI (Digital Visual Interface)?
Yes, HDMI is fully backward-compatible with DVI using the CEA-861 profile for DTVs. HDMI DTVs will display video received from existing DVI-equipped products, and DVI-equipped TVs will display video from HDMI sources.
The big BUT - what's worse about using a HDMI connector (compared to a DVI connector) in an LCD-TV with a PC is this: HDMI supports only 720P and 1080I/P, as stated here:

What types of video does HDMI support?
HDMI has the capacity to support existing high-definition video formats (720p, 1080i, and 1080p/60). It also has the flexibility to support enhanced definition formats such as 480p, as well as standard definition formats such as NTSC or PAL.

This is brought to a head by Solano in Hardwarezone, who stated in the Hardwarezone forum posting - In the scenario that you use your computer's DVI graphics port, convert it easily (just a pin remap) to HDMI and connect the computer to your LCD-TV's HDMI port, and if your screen HAS resolutions like 1366x768 (commonly), and you pump a standard computer output like 1280x720 into that, the LCD-TV has got to scale it to 1366x768, you'll get the horrible fuzziness. Here is his text quoted ad verbatim:

In case you don't know, both DVI and HDMI support two formats: computer format and video format. Computer format goes by 1280x720 or 1920x1080. Video format
goes by 720p or 1080i. These two formats are not compatible. Okay maybe I should
rephrase it - What TV makers do is making their HDMI port NOT to support the
computer format at all. So the LCD TV is always expecting a video format from
the HDMI connector. So you will have to output a video format though DVI, which
can be done actually. But for 1366x768 LCD TV neither 720p nor 1080i matches its
native resolution, so the TV's scaler start working and gives you a fuzzy picture, which is exactly what IceShelterX has got into. This fuzzy picture, although is digital, is much worse than the analog VGA connection, so I don't even consider it as workable.

What Solano says, I have found corroboration in various other sources on the web, and in my opinion it is true. As a consequence, the preponderance of text in most computer applications other than games, the screen looks horrible on an LCD display. LCD displays are razor sharp in their native resolution, but if you have to scale it to another resolution, it looks horrible.

When you connect a computer to an LCD screen through the HDMI port, WHY can't you choose 1366x768? Because HDMI doesn't support it, at least, not for what we can buy currently. When you connect a PC to an LCD TV, the LCD TV in question will supply Extended display identification data (EDID) to tell the capabilities of the monitor to the PC's graphics card, and 1366x768 native resolution won't be among the supported resolutions because HDMI doesn't support it.

Can we bypass EDID? Sure! Current NVidia (and perhaps ATI) drivers allow you to bypass the EDID. Uncheck "Hide resolutions that this monitor does not support". Then just select from the big long list. BUT, that doesn't mean the monitor will accept the custom resolution, and timings etc have to be specified in addition to the resolution and even if everything were specified correctly, the firmware and design of the LCD panel or your graphics cards may have critical bugs which prevent the custom resolution from working. So you're back to square one.

Can we connect the PC's DVI port it to the LCD-TV's DVI port? Sure, if it has the DVI port. And if the DVI port reports the EDID data correctly as 1366x768, which it should unless the manufacturer of the LCD TV intentionally sabotages it. From what I've seen, DVI ports on LCD-TVs have faithfully supplied the correct EDID to date as far as I know.

So, let's use the DVI port! What's the catch? From reading the specsheets of several LCD-TVs, for LCD-TVs equipped with both HDMI and DVI ports, the DVI ports are the DVI-I type of port - meaning they're digital AND analog. Why, I don't know. I always thought that DVI-I were important for outputs, not inputs. And LCD-TVs which have both HDMI and DVI ports put HDCP support at the HDMI port, not the DVI port. This is a double whammy - HDCP doesn't like analog, and the manufacturer doesn't put HDCP on the DVI. This means, if you connect your computer to the DVI-I port of an LCD-TV which has both HDMI/HDCP and DVI ports, your computer isn't going to be able to play HDCP content on this LCD-TV in full resolution.

What about VGA? VGA is analog, and if HDCP sees analog, it's going to degrade the HDCP video to a lower resolution. And analog is slightly fuzzier than a digital interface. Besides this fuzziness, the EDID should be correct, and the full 1366x768 resolution would be offered to your computer without the need to scale. So, this is not a perfect solution.

Is there a perfect solution? Happily, yes, at least in theory. Certain LCD-TVs - which were designed for no-nonsense corporate use, like the LG L3200TF, have DVI/HDCP inputs. I find these kind of monitors few and far between, mainly because consumers PREFER HDMI/HDCP inputs as the HD interface of choice, mainly because of the industry's push towards HDMI for products meant for the general home user, for reasons unknown (I can only speculate that the industry pushes HDMI to the consumer, and DVI for industrial use, as internal corporate politics to segment the market between their consumer electronics and industrial/computer electronics departments). Anyway, the DVI/HDCP LCD-TVs looks like it is the perfect solution for now. And somehow, they're cheaper.

So why don't the LCD manufacturers make 1280x720 panels to exactly match HDMI's resolution? I don't know. Really. Do any of you LCD manufacturers wanna tell me? Email me, all names will be kept confidential.

Update 22 May 2006 - Solano has some suggestions on why the LCD manufacturers do not make 1280x720 anymore here.

A summary of his suggestions: 1280x720 LCD TVs do exist in the past, but they are no longer in vogue now, and a lone Toshiba 27" exists in that resolution. Then when Sharp came up with a non-matching resolution like 1366x768, then everybody followed suit into that marketing black hole. He also mentions that since most future Blu-ray content would be 1080i, the manufacturers thought that since that video content would have to be rescaled anyway, might as well rescale it to 768 and not 720, for more detail (MT - but that would screw PC users, as I have stated). And the most compelling thing which Solano said in his excellent post, was that most TV is shown overscanned, and now that we have 768, we can see the entire size of the video now since 768 is 6.7% more than 720, fully accomodating the traditional 5% overscan. MT - All this is nice for traditional settings, but today when more and more people want to usefully connect their computers to LCD TV, the `enhancements' they did by upping 720 to 768, makes it very difficult for us to connect PCs to LCD TVs. The best compromise is to to use the DVI interface. It it that difficult to sacrifice HDMI in favour of DVI even though you lose nothing?


6) Is HDMI going to be THE standard for the next 5 years?

Looks like the answer is NO. A new standard called the Unified Display Interface is poised to take over the torch from HDMI. Another new standard by VESA called the DisplayPort, backed by pretty much the same guys who backed UDI, is also competing. With big names like Intel, Apple, LG, nVidia, ATI, Dell, LG, Samsung backing one or both of these standards, looks like HDMI may have very serious competition in the near future. How near? How does 2007 sound like?

7) Are graphics cards available as of May 2006 capable of supporting HDCP?

There's a class action suit against ATI at present, where it's claimed that `ATI has begun to revise its website materials to delete reference to video cards being HDCP ready or compliant. A respected PC hardware site, Firingsquad.com, has an article on the Great HDCP fiasco where they claim that none of ATI's or nVidia's cards support HDCP.

8) Can a driver upgrade for a graphics card make it HDCP compliant?

There is an implicit assumption that no driver is trustworthy, and `upstream authentication' which detects driver cheating `masquerading HDCP compliance' was not included in the original HDCP specification.

I do not know whether, in the failure of fixing an `upstream authentication', whether it is allowed for a graphics cards in a PC be HDCP compliant. A companion specification has been defined, however, but watch this space.

The keys have to be stored in a secure location, and it is unclear whether current graphics cards have a secure location within the chip to store these keys. Drivers are definitely not a secure location. The 2002 EDN article states (probably outdated, but I lack a better link):

Adding an HDCP-capable DVI output to a product such as a graphics adapter or
set-top box is a similar exercise. You still need to add the interface silicon,
the nonvolatile key memory, and the DVI connector.
Looks like a mere driver upgrade won't be able to support HDCP. nVidia seems to say, in the Firingsquad.com article on the HDCP fiasco, that BOARD manufacturers have to be responsible for building in HDCP compliance, so that's another indication that, if the board manufacturers are oblivious to the dangers and pitfalls of HDCP, if they are not HDCP licensees, the keys are not implemented, and there's no HDCP on any existing graphics board today.

More confirmation here:

An ATI representative said: “People will not be able to turn on HDCP through a software patch since the HDCP keys need to be present during the manufacturing. We are rolling out HDCP through OEMs at this time but we have not finalized our retail plans yet.”
Well, what about NVIDIA? They were actually very direct: “The boards themselves
must be designed with an extra chip when the board is manufactured. The extra
chip stores a crypto key, and you cannot retrofit an existing board after the
board is produced.”
What was the problem? It's clear to me, that the whole HDCP scheme requires a lot of reading up to understand. I spent an entire day. And I'm not exactly foreign to this. End-users, big company marketeers, salespeople, EVERYBODY, did not bother to spend this DAY. Well, this blogpost just takes a few minutes of reading, and I hope it's clear. Now you know.

In Conclusion ...

The most striking thing I found, was the surprising crap I found out about HDMI. As a video standard, HDMI is not superior to DVI or vice versa. By HDMI's commitment, HDMI has to appear in DVI TVs and DVI has to be able to appear in HDMI TVs. Whatever HDMI can do, DVI can do. But obviously, whatever DVI can do (for example, support a wide range of PC resolutions) the HDMI interface does not do yet, but it can. So it seems that right now, DVI is the superset and HDMI merely the subset of DVI, at least in terms of video.

I managed to go through all the stuff, and surprisingly, I only have 3 recommendations.

  1. For people who think DVD quality is good enough and want an LCD TV for space and aesthetic considerations, and do not plan to attach a PC to it, buy any LCD TV you want.
  2. For people who want to connect their PC to an LCD TV, in addition to connecting HDCP devices like HD DVD players and future set top boxes, get a HDCP compliant LCD TV with a HDCP-compliant DVI port. Most probably this LCD TV would not have HDMI, and you won't miss it.
  3. For people who do not plan to play any HDCP content, but need to play HD content which are not HDCP-encoded, get a non-HDCP LCD TV with a DVI input. They're cheaper. Won't hurt to buy a HDCP LCD-TV tough besides hitting your wallet.
Any clarifications, please leave a comment below.

Time has come for Phones to kick Point and Shoot butt


I always chose phones based on functionality, and my present phone is a Nokia Communicator 9500.

It's the last of the line though. My new phones will be based on megapixel count. The time has come that a good 3.2 megapixel autofocus handphone with a Xenon flash will kick Point and Shoot butt - the Sony Ericsoon K800i - which even comes with an image stabilizer (whether it's digital or optical remains to be seen, but .... ain't that important to me).

Dell finally will release an AMD machine, but ....

Ok, they'll let customers buy AMD-based Opteron servers at the end of the year. Guess the negotiations with Intel took too long. But this smacks of ... big company slow bureaucracy syndrome. Makes them seem out of touch. Why so much sacrifice, when clearly Intel's new chips are pretty much gonna kick AMD's butt real soon?

Of course, I may be missing something.

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Creative Labs users up in arms

Looks like one of my posts was quite spot-on, that it was also addressed in the Inquirer:

http://miketan.blogspot.com/2006/05/creative-long-overdue-losses-reported.html
Their X-Fi cards create incompatibilites with the nVidia nForce4 chipset by
refusing to share resources. Whether it's the motherboard manufacturer's fault
or Creative's fault, Creative was later, they should have worked around the
problem. Well it's their loss - the people who bought motherboards with nForce4
chipsets, who are actually the main target segment of the X-Fi enthusiast sound
cards, didn't bother much with the X-Fi.

From this Inquirer article:
PUNTERS using Creative Lab's Sound Blaster X-Fi card are so miffed that the
outfit will not fix its bugs in the product they have got an online petition
together.

And from the Hardwarezone thread on this, seems like Singaporeans are pretty pissed with Creative, including comments like:
Like I always said, their QC department really deserve the sack.

Vote with your wallets. Don't buy Creative.


This deserves the classic LOL!

Stupid Traffic Congestion in Singapore

Well the best run country in the world now shows signs of getting all the megajams plauguing all the big cities in Asia. Trip times are multiplied by 3 in the past few years, in spite of the government's efforts to both earn revenue from high tech Electronic Road Pricing techniques with the excuse of improving traffic this way.

Well my main assertion is - people are stupid, and if you place a price on the highways, and people know no alternative route, he's screwed anyway and would have to take the same highway and pay a price. Which is great for the purposes of revenue generation but destroys any excuse for using ERP to control road-use behaviour.

Simple solution though - introduce a system where real time traffic data is streamed to a GPS unit in the car, and the GPS calculates the optimal route. This is not rocket science and is a hell of a lot cheaper than the ERP system for example. It's called RDS/TMC - Traffic Messaging Channel via Radio Data System.

With RDS/TMC it would instruct users where to go to avoid traffic. This will distribute traffic properly, making it possible for us to have tons of cars on the roads and yet move properly.

There's an entire thread discussing RDS/TMC in Singapore, including `why the government won't do it', here: http://forum.carma.com.sg/showthread.php?p=17536783#post17536783

How it works in essence, is this:

Singapore already has a pretty comprehensive traffic monitoring system set up by the LTA, called EMAS. Unfortunately, all it does is to tell you - MASSIVE JAM AHEAD when you're already on the highway. Man, this is priceless.

This traffic data can easily be parsed into TMC format, and distributed via RDS using the existing radio stations, and the in-car GPS receivers will pick up this data, merge it with their calculations and tell you the optimal route to take to avoid traffic and make your destination in the fastest possible time. A Wiki primer on RDS/TMC can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_Message_Channel The Wiki primer has model implementations, which I am sure from the variety of models there, the pen pushers at the Land Transport Authority of Singapore would be able to modify to local needs.

There were many cynical questions in the thread regarding - why would the government do it if it didn't make them money? Well, that's part of a bigger problem - THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WE HAVE WITH OUR ROADS WAS THAT IT WAS BUILT BY GOVERNMENT. So everything is not based purely on market, but majorly on the notion of garnering public approval cloaked with the vague notion of the `public good' and calls go unheeded in favour of reports made by a bureaucrat who probably doesn't drive like most do. Now that we have a technology which garners microvotes in real time - RDS/TMC, where people can vote for the best road a million times a minute totally depending on the dynamics of the traffic situation, when the people can finally decide `what's good for them' the government stalls on its implementation while they spend billions on projects of questionable good like the Electronic Road Pricing system, EMAS which is utterly unreservedly useless and Speed Cameras. For the record, my personal experience is that idiots who STAND ON THE BRAKES every time they see the ERP gantry and
a speed camera, are far too common and too frequently cause accidents. I strongly believe if that we had an accident map of Singapore where a red dot signifies an accident, the ERP gantries and speed camera areas would be stained blood red.

TRULY, RDS/TMC is merely a workaround the problem. THE BEST SOLUTION BY FAR, we must PRIVATIZE OUR HIGHWAYS and ROADS. Once we privatize, the prevailing dogma is that the private companies will ensure maximum volume of traffic go through their roads. A competitor who may have less traffic on their roads, then BAM! he will advertise and and the RDS/TMC system will serve to redistribute traffic to his roads. While this does not guarantee FAST TRIPS, it will guarantee optimization to the wishes of the people! After all, people are voting by driving on the roads they choose. Pricing will be real and market based.

Now go to http://forum.carma.com.sg/showthread.php?t=1228740 and place a post and write your suggestions, or you can write a suggestion here and I transfer it over to the thread.

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

A Secondary Serial Presence Detect - TRULY, LOL!

In a world where memory is supplied by billion dollar companies with billion dollar fabs, retail memory sales is dominated by ONE large company and many many smaller companies vie for the remainder of the sales, what does one of the smaller companies do to increase profits and get noticed?
  1. 1) Put a voltage probe on your memory module
  2. 2) Give fancy colored heat sinks for the RAM chips
  3. 3) Send more and more memory to the review sites
  4. 4) Sell fewer modules even, much more expensively
  5. 5) Put a secondary, more complete Serial Presence Detect table on the chip and get a big name to endorse it

6) All of the above

Well, Corsair has been around for a long time, and it has done all of the above. This entry deals with point #5. The Serial Presence Detect is a chip introduced a decade ago, storing information on the general properties of the memory module so if a computer does query the memory module on the settings it is capable of supporting, the SPD just dumps the table to the computer so that it can adjust its own settings to support the memory module optimally based on the settings put on the SPD.

Let's not talk about normal people. Normal people don't know what SPD is, they just put memory inside, and normal computers have their SPD detection set ON by default.

But Corsair is NOT peddling memory to normal people here. Normal people buy whatever is cheapest and it's normally Kingston. Look at the Techreport link - they're putting it on their TwinX premium modules. These modules are usually peddled to poseurs or enthusiasts.

Let's also not talk about poseurs. A poseur who buys a Tiptronic Porsche Turbo (a 996, because a 997 Turbo Tiptronic is faster than a Manual and thus may not ONLY be a Poseur Car) is at least more easy to understand (he can show it off, it's loud, and he can be seen coming outta it) than a Poseur who buys a memory module and puts it into his PC then seals it up. What good is it to a poseur if he can't show it off?

So, poseurs being dangerous territory, let's just discuss enthusiasts. REAL hardcore PC enthusiasts like Shamino of VR-zone.com or even Macci. Or any of the thousands of them who lurk in Anandtech and Hardwarezone in search of project ideas, and who get their minds and hands dirty with their projects.

Enthusiasts have long eschewed SPD. And rightly so. Because no memory company can afford the days spent in stability testing to find the true limits of a certain memory module in relation to a customized motherboard or rig set-up, so no SPD describes the limits of the memory modules. Each motherboard is different, their tolerances and design are different, even different firmware revisions for the same motherboards differ in their tolerance for memory, at its limits, so any SPD which settings even approach the true limits of its host memory module, may work for one motherboard but not for another. Each motherboard manufacturer makes compromises and judgement calls on setting the limits of their pathways, and tweak their BIOSes either to the way of sheer performance or compatibility. One can't have their cake and eat it, though a good designer can come damn close.

So, now nVidia and Corsair now have this thing called EPP or Enhanced Performance Profiles. Basically it's a secondary, more complete SPD, which include `signal drive strength settings, write recovery and active refresh settings, and delay and setup times'. First, I must commend nVidia. This is completely to their interest. It makes their chips easy to use.

But for Corsair, ... , well, it smacks of the poseur gearbox syndrome (again, think Porsche Tiptronic Poseur Gearbox). Firstly, no way in hell can Corsair test each chip to the limits. And no way they can guarantee that, after months of extreme use, their module will be able to sustain the same limits it exhibited when new. So, the SPD and EPP will all exhibit very conservative settings.

So it will definitely help the poseur crowd, but for the enthusiast, nothing has changed. As long as the automated SPD and EPP does not reach the limits, they eschew it, or SCREW it.

Still, this EPP should be valuable for the normal human being or the poseur crowd. Probably Kingston ValueRAM should implement it, at least the normal humans of the world can take advantage of slightly better performance on default settings.

BS scanner off. Ambigious result.

Monday, May 15, 2006

High Speed Review - 2006 GS300


On my trip back from KL yesterday, the GS300 hit something like 230km/h, but just for a while, because the road undulations were partly resonating with wheel natural frequency. I think that a wheel change to lighter one to move resonance freq to higher.

It felt good to feel the VVTI2 system (meaning, both intake and exhaust) working to optimize torque. Yes, you feel it at high load high rev (as opposed to hitting 4K rpm at 2nd gear only which you won't be able to feel), just like VTEC, only that VVTI2 is more gentle and got more steps.

At high speed in the bright daylight for the GS300, here are my findings:

Natural speed is at 180km/h without resonance. At 181 to 190kmh, the stock wheels will resonate with Malaysian roads which are based on TAR. On concrete Melaka roads, there is no resonance. This resonance stops at 200km/h, then increases at 225km/h all the way to dunno what speed, but at 230km/h still will have resonance. All speeds according to speedo, not real speed.

The GS300 speeds above 100km/h is reporting 5km/h faster than REAL speed as measured by GPS. So, at 230km/h speedo, actual is 225km/h. I think that the error is logarithmic, so my comment not so accurate.

Compared to E240 and C200 Kompressor, GS300 suspension so much better over mini-humps caused by bridges. GS300 you will not AT ALL feel frightened by the undulations, but on the Mercs, they demand flat road, undulations will make the car fly. The GS wheels kept contact at all times. So for Malaysia roads, the GS300 is much better than the E and C-classes.

Aerodynamics for GS300 is better from perspective of wind noise. The C classes, wind noise gets unbearable at 190km/h onwards, for E-Class, 220km/h onwards. GS300 at 230km/h wind noise is un-noticeable.

So high speed performance, GS300 beats the E and C classes all the way. Now just for BMW people to HONESTLY post about 3- and 5- series high speed performance please.

Engine? Wow. Damn. The 3GR-FE engine is smooth all the way to max rpm at high gears (could not reach max rpm on 6th gear, must do it at 5th, but if longer distance it is possible). The older 3-valve/cyl E240 engine.... engine sounds COARSE at high rpm high gear. C200 engine no need to say, both the M111 and M171 2l and 1.8l is agricultural at high rpm high gear. There is no fear that engine burst, if that's a more meaningful comment.

As for presence, I did not get much respect from the C-Class, or E-Class, kanchils still keep going on the fast lane even when they see my car. For the GS- it commanded more respect, apparently. The most respect I ever got was in a ML320, which was no use coz the ML320 could not reach anything higher than 160km/h without much complaint.

Post trip, for the C and E class will always get some squeaks from the shock absorber after high speed trip. Not for the GS though. No difference whether drove long or short difference, GS felt the same before and after the trip.

I have no regrets. The GS300 fits my expectations totally. Turns out that the only thing causing me to keep within 180km/h for most of the journey was that my baby sleeping peacefully.

Saturday, May 13, 2006

What next for digital cameras?

What's the next big thing? Improved noise levels? Better sensors? Motion reduction and image stabilizers? Perhaps, but these things are boring. Merely evolutionary changes, not radical enough to garner much interest.

Things looked boring until a certain remark by Herbert Keppler of Popular Photography magazine piqued my interest - a remark on High Exposure Latitude sensors by Canon. Few picked this up though, even established forums did not speak much about it. All is not lost though, here are some links which speak about this:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FfVV&tag=

http://www.popphoto.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=47746

Just a summary here. Digital camera sensors are almost as unforgiving as slide film - can't make too big an exposure error, else your picture will be shot. This is what they call low exposure latitude - no margin for error.

Print films like Fuji Superia gave at least 4 stops of exposure latitude, if you screwed up, all you'd need was to print 3-4 stops lower or higher exposure to remedy the error. And the result would almost be as perfect as if you had the exposure spot on. It would be excellent if digital sensor technology had this kinda latitude, and with instant preview after shooting, the percentage of usable shots would be of a higher ratio once high exposure latitude were possible on digital camera sensors.

The limitations of digital camera sensor technology was the same, whether using CMOS or CCD sensors. Though Herbert Keppler were to term this technology as increased exposure latitude, it would be easier to find out more about this technology if you were to use the equivalent `new age' term - `High Dynamic Range' or HDR. High Dynamic Range is roughly equivalent to Increased Contrast Ratio and is roughly equivalent to Increased Exposure Latitude - in this perspective all three terms refer to roughly the same thing.

After doing additional research, it was clear that Canon was not the first off the block with this technology. It was Fujifilm with the FujiFilm FinePix S3 Pro - employing 2 kinds of photodiodes in their SR CCD sensor, ones with high sensitivity (S) and low sensitivity (R) on each pixel. With the image processor combining image data from both pixels, the system can increase the dynamic range to 400% of normal sensors' 1000:1 dynamic range, which Fujifilm equates to 2 stops. More information here: http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/camera/review/30/page_1.html

This method is similar to that of HDRsoft's implementation - www.hdrsoft.com - where a camera takes 3 pictures of a similar scene, one underexposed (to better capture highly illuminated (bright) nuances), one normally exposed and one overexposed (to better capture low-light (dim) nuances, and combine all three into a HDR picture, then tone map the HDR to normal dynamic range, with the high dynamic range compressed but yet preserving the enhanced highlights and shadows, for that incredible effect you see in the picture at the beginning of this post.

The only thing not going well for Fujifilm is the cumbersome dual photodiode system, which may increase diffraction because of the interference of the light wavefronts. I have not seen this phenomemon but it has been reported in the forums as `chromatic abberation'. Unlike purple fringing, this chromatic abberation has colors of a rainbow, much like you see an oil film on water - classic evidence of wavefront interference.

Keppler says that Canon's first implementation would be on a SLR, and presumably it would be in a single photodiode to span the entire increased dynamic range. And His Venerableness says that this will happen in 2007 while Canon soldiers on with the EOS30D the entire 2006. So from this statement, seems that the world's first fully integrated high dynamic range mainstream sensor will be APS based.

So, DSLR folks, you can do your bit by not buying a 5D or 30D today, to force Canon's hand. Once a mainstream HDR DLSR comes out, you can bet Canon's lead over everybody else (yes, including the lead over Nikon) will increase to an insurpassable extent. And that would be the time I sell my entire Nikon lens collection and experience the joy of cheap (relatively) USM and IS.

Problem is that the initial use for printed photos will merely be that of increased exposure latitude since print film sucks at showing high dynamic range images. LCDs are slightly better but their dynamic range is only about 700:1 for current implementations (LG will have 1400:1 later this year in August). So tone mapping would probably be the only way to see HDR, and many will object to the the highly artificial looking tone mapped images, which to the film crowd, would be SUPER HIGHLY SATURATED VELVIA.

This is gonna be exciting.