Xbox 360 HDMI Capable

[London Geezer]

Uhm... no.

HDCP is something the publishers will enforce. It's not something that depends on the hardware. Much like region coding on DVDs, it can be there and i can be left out (Region 0), and it's up to the publishers to decide whether to protect the DVDs or not (and they always do).

If a studio releases movies on both formats, and the studio wants HDCP, then both formats will have HDCP for movies from that studio. It's not a "HDDVD won't have HDCP but Bluray will" kind of scenario.

The only thing i can think of is if Sony wants HDCP, then that's a lot of movies with HDCP. And we know that they DO want HDCP at all costs. But so do all other publishers.

 

[expletive]

Yes but what this means is that HDCP may not be part of the HDDVD/BR spec so publishers can have the choice to NOT force HDCP if they dont want to. Yes i'm sure they do want to do so, but will they in light of hte fact that they cut their installed base down quite a bit by requiring it?

 

[London Geezer]

Yes but what this means is that HDCP may not be part of the HDDVD/BR spec so publishers can have the choice to NOT force HDCP if they dont want to. Yes i'm sure they do want to do so, but will they in light of hte fact that they cut their installed base down quite a bit by requiring it?

Of course, but do you really see that happening, taking into consideration these money eaters want to DRM our lives down to our underwear?

 

[expletive]

Of course, but do you really see that happening, taking into consideration these money eaters want to DRM our lives down to our underwear?

I would say a resounding 'no,' but currently i can get all the HD movies i want off of my cable box via component so its not out of the realm of possibility. (If i were so inclined, i could also record HD movies to D-VHS via the firewire jacks on it as well).

 

[wco81]

HDCP is a part of both specs through AACS.

However, according to discussions at AVS, some studios may allow full HDTV resolution over component during a trasition period. So say for 5 years, they let owners of old sets enjoy full resolution but the understanding would be that afterwards, you would need HDCP inputs. There is a flag or token they can set to enable or disable full resolution over analog.

Even if they don't allow full resolution, it's expected that the downrez would be higher than 480p but still under 720p. IIRC, it was something like 960x540.

Some studios have said they believe owners of sets with only analog inputs should be able to enjoy full resolution. Others have been silent. Then again, supposedly Disney and Warners have said they are no longer interested in region coding but that's not a view everyone shares.

BTW, the way sales have been accelerating the last couple of years, the installed base of set with only analog is fast becoming a minority. People will want to upgrade anyways, as better display technologies come to market, supporting 1080p for instance, as well as better form factors like plasma, LCD and so on.

 

[expletive]

HDCP is a part of both specs through AACS.

Sorry, youre correct, i mis-stated that. It is part of the 'spec' just not decided on whether or not it will be required by the studios, thanks for clarifying.

 

[expletive]

Big news for those of you who have been following the this last HD hurdle for Win MCE. This will provide the ability to record HD from cable and satellite boxes. Seems that the 360 will be able to stream this HD content as well, with or without HDMI.

http://www.audioholics.com/news/pressreleases/MicrosoftCableCARDXbox360.php

Seems that all is left to discuss is whether HD-DVD will be 'streamable' and then output over component.

 

[vjPiedPiper]

I know the GPU in the xbox360 can create/output a digital signal, so i iagine it's a small jump to an HDMI signal.


NOTE** technically capable does not mean it will definetly happen, but it is definetly TECHNICALLY possible.

PP.

 

[expletive]

Given that a TDMS chip and HDMI license fee would run about $10, i can see why they wouldnt want to include that equipment as standard internally.

 

[Guden Oden]

Given that a TDMS chip and HDMI license fee would run about $10

...Which would be subject to negotiation anyway. I'm sure if MS said, "hey, we'll include a TDMS transmitter in the product we're projecting will sell in the tens of millions of units, but we won't pay more than a buck and a half per unit. If you want ten bucks then screw you", that Silicon Image wouldn't turn them down. They would be idiots to do so, who would rather NOT make millions of dollars by charging a small fee, than not making a single buck by charging a high?

 

[expletive]

...Which would be subject to negotiation anyway. I'm sure if MS said, "hey, we'll include a TDMS transmitter in the product we're projecting will sell in the tens of millions of units, but we won't pay more than a buck and a half per unit. If you want ten bucks then screw you", that Silicon Image wouldn't turn them down. They would be idiots to do so, who would rather NOT make millions of dollars by charging a small fee, than not making a single buck by charging a high?

Well since we:
A. Dont know what it costs SI to fab the chip...

and

B. Have no idea why they would take a LOSS on any ANYTHING they sell (unless it moved them into some new band of 'economies of scale' on something, which at this point im sure they reached them all)

I dont see how we can make that assumption.

What does SI care if theres 120 million or 130 million of their TDMS transmitters out there now if theyre taking a loss and the 10 million they sell to MS?

 

[Guden Oden]

Christ. Have you taken a peek at the TMDS transmitter chip on a graphics board? It's tiny, and it's packaged in a very unsophisticated manner. Undoubtedly, the fabrication cost is quite small. There's also many GPUs today (most? all?) that integrate the transmitter on the GPU die itself, and thus the only fabbing cost is that paid by the GPU manufacturer. Silicon Image merely rakes in a license fee, with no cost whatsoever on their part.

 

[expletive]

Christ. Have you taken a peek at the TMDS transmitter chip on a graphics board? It's tiny, and it's packaged in a very unsophisticated manner. Undoubtedly, the fabrication cost is quite small. There's also many GPUs today (most? all?) that integrate the transmitter on the GPU die itself, and thus the only fabbing cost is that paid by the GPU manufacturer. Silicon Image merely rakes in a license fee, with no cost whatsoever on their part.

Have you taken a peek at an acutal SIlicon Image website before posting this? So because its small, it's cheap? Your comments seem to based on "The world according to Guden" but mine were based on facts.

For example, from the press release of the 9030 HDMI transmitter:

Packaging, Pricing and Availability The latest PanelLink Cinema devices are manufactured in a 0.18-micron process. Silicon Image is currently sampling the devices to select customers. Volume production is scheduled for the second quarter of 2004. The SiI 9030 transmitter is packaged as an 80-pin TQFP and priced at $11.40 in 10K quantities. Packaged in a 144-pin TQFP, the SiI 9021 receiver is priced at $10.70 in 10K quantities. The SiI 9031 receiver is packaged in a 144-pin TQFP and priced at $14.10 in 10K quantities.

http://www.siliconimage.com/news/press/detailpressrelease.aspx?id=217

Maybe you could do just a little googling before making assumptions like this.

 

[Guden Oden]

Maybe you could do just a little googling before making assumptions like this.

Ho hum. Says the one who assumes there's some magical correlation between sales price and manufacturing cost... Try to apply some logic to your reasoning before attacking like this, alright?

Look, man. Whatever they CHARGE has no bearing on what the thing cost them to MAKE in the first place. As seen in the case of music CDs for instance. And like I said, integrated transmitters don't cost SI anything.

 

[expletive]

Ho hum. Says the one who assumes there's some magical correlation between sales price and manufacturing cost... Try to apply some logic to your reasoning before attacking like this, alright?

Look, man. Whatever they CHARGE has no bearing on what the thing cost them to MAKE in the first place. As seen in the case of music CDs for instance. And like I said, integrated transmitters don't cost SI anything.

Seeing as ICs are SI's core business i see no reason for them to sell HDMI transmitters as a loss. I'm pretty sure theyre listed with a dollar value on the Sony PS3 BOM too. For example, its one thing for Sony to lose money a PS3 but quite a different thing for them to lose money on HDTVs or music CDs. I understand your point and the concept but dont see how it applies here.

 

[Guden Oden]

Seeing as ICs are SI's core business i see no reason for them to sell HDMI transmitters as a loss.

Why would they have to sell anything at a loss? That's not what I've been suggesting. You obviously haven't been reading my posts (properly).

 

[expletive]

Why would they have to sell anything at a loss? That's not what I've been suggesting. You obviously haven't been reading my posts (properly).

I'm not sure what your point is really. How about I say theres no addtional cost to include HDMI in every console and theres no cost benefit to making it an a-la-carte option? Would that make you happy?

 

[mistwalk]

http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/index.asp
SONY is one of the HDMI founders. ;-)
I think HDMI in PS3 is no licensing fee,only a little silicon cost(it's dirt cheap).
To Guden Oden:
If SI charge MS lower price,other company which also have products with HDMI may complain" Why you Silicon Image charge MS lower price? We want same treatment,too!!" ;-)

 

[Randell]

things is as my DVD player in my Sony all in one Home Cinema is 4 years old and not even prog scan, then I want to know if the Xbox 360 can upscale SD DVD to 720p via HDMI as I contemplate using it as a DVD upgarde whilst I wait for Blu-ray/HD-DVD to settle.

Surely MS could see that some people would use it as the centre of a budget HC system?