tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1559941250974523786.post8280548686299518139..comments2023-05-02T05:48:40.496-07:00Comments on Confessions of a Pixel and ink-stained wretch: HDBaseT Interoperability FolliesCzhorathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15456061999435980085noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1559941250974523786.post-44916675264578515942013-11-22T08:07:50.071-08:002013-11-22T08:07:50.071-08:00Very good points, Harald, and I didn't look at...Very good points, Harald, and I didn't look at Ethernet or control (as I likely should have). <br /><br />There've been mixed success in implenting control via HDBaseT in endpoints using the Valens chipset. See Gary Kayye's editorial here: http://www.ravepubs.com/hdbaset-standard-less-standard-2/<br /><br />I can draw a little bit of a parallel with CEC control, in which manufacturers are reluctant to use "standard" command sequences in order to preserve a certain synergy within their product line. The problem becomes that this isn't a natural synergy in similar products working together but an artificial one caused by deliberately sabotaging cross-manufacturer interoperability.Czhorathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15456061999435980085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1559941250974523786.post-69356391122023283272013-11-16T10:52:23.068-08:002013-11-16T10:52:23.068-08:00Thanks for the post. However, sorry to say, but yo...Thanks for the post. However, sorry to say, but your assumptions of HDBaseT being a standard and your test are simply two totally different things! ;-)<br />Matter of fact is: HDBaseT is nothing more than a system bringing Ethernet and HDMI (ok and some power) over a CAT cable.<br />1. Transporting HDMI:<br />HDBaseT takes a HDMI signal and instead of routing it onto a HDMI connector it gets fed into the HDbaseT transmitter. On the other end it gets "decoded" to the point that it looks IDENTICAL as the signal would come from an HDMI input connector. The good news is, that implementation is very easy for all those manufacturer of endpoints (TV, Proj., etc.) because they dont need to change anything; it simply does not matter if the signal is going in/out via a physical HDMI connector or a HDBaseT chipset.<br />However, this implies that HDBaseT has *ZERO* to do with HDCP, EDID, etc. as it is simply a "different cable".<br />The reason why your tests failed is simply because maufacturer of intelligent SYSTEMS like Cretron's DigitalMedia do quite a lot of stuff before/after the HD-BaseT *transport* like HDCP key handling, EDID management, etc.<br />2. Ethernet<br />Basically the same with the Ethernet channel. It gets merged into the HDMI signal on one end and extracted on the other end; to the outside world it is transparent; again HDBaseT is just a "different cable"<br />Now there is a new HDBaseT LIGHT out now in the market, which simply does not transmit Ethernet at all. I guess many manufacturers simply dont want to use the features but bring down the price even more. Welcome to the consumer world! ;-)<br />Long story short: There is much more going on in a receiver/transmitter than a HDMI to HDBaseT conversion.<br />Or would you have imagined, that for example there is a fully managed and VLAN capeable LAN switch built into every Crestron DM receiver? I assume other guys do have similar functionality in order to make all those system functionality possible, which is simply impossible with plain vanilla HDMI.<br />Without this, it is simply a different HDMI cable! And we all know how good of a standard it is even when we get rid of the connector! ;-)<br />Conclusion: Hookup a HDBaseT projector from Panasonic or so to a DM and you will see, that HDBaseT indeed works but dont be fooled by the marketing lingo, that HDBaseT does anything beyond transmitting LAN+HDMI over the same cable.Harald Steindlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047913644192131646noreply@blogger.com