Nouveau Supporting HDMI 2.1 Won't Hopefully Be Too Challenging Thanks To NVIDIA Firmware

[piotrj3]

Oh no, I fear a certain person will come here and sing it's praises for closed source.

I think it is a lot personal take.

Some people want fully open sourced everything (but judging by success of linux kernels without closed source firmware or that libreSOC success etc... not succesful at all).

Some people don't care much about firmware and simply wants driver interacting with firmware opensource. I am this camp. Also I would like good documentation how stuff is interacting in and out of open source driver. I believe it decreases work to be done by contributors as they don't have to do rocket science and they just interact with firmware.

Some people don't care about open source at all in that aspect and just will use standard LTS kernel with nvidia driver and use CUDA. Some people simply has specific work and only cared about this specific work.

[CommunityMember]

No, it's not. I may be wrong, but I think you have to be a member of VESA to use the branding though.

You also have to be a member of VESA to see all the specs for DisplayPort.

[Jakdaw]

What people seem to forget is that, on the context of TVs, HDMI is an audio+video connection. Adding DP is not straightforward as you need a load of UI rubbish to describe where audio should come from when watching a DP source. What we need is Audio over DisplayPort.

[Anux]

DisplayPort costs either $5K or $10K plus HCDP fees.

So DP has the same pay up to access the docs but no additional per device cost apart from HDCP, that still makes it cheaper than HDMI. Also no open source restrictions for DP.

That still doesn't explain to me why TVs only have HDMI. Because per device cost is what matters if you sell more than 10 million devices.

Edit: Companies even make their devices worse to safe fractions of a cent. There must be some other reason beside costs.

[brad0]

I still believe that the solution is to write tons of emails to LG/Samsung to put some DP ports on the TVs.

Never happening.

[skeevy420]

So DP has the same pay up to access the docs but no additional per device cost apart from HDCP, that still makes it cheaper than HDMI. Also no open source restrictions for DP.

That still doesn't explain to me why TVs only have HDMI. Because per device cost is what matters if you sell more than 10 million devices.

That's the point. HDMI has driven an ecosystem where everything else is HDMI-only. Look at the HDMI founders. They're Sony, Phillips, Toshiba...major, major players. Take Sony and 3rd party HDMI cables with PS branding, they get HDCP revenue, HDMI logo revenue, PS5 certification revenue, and PS5 logo revenue. If they moved the PS5 to DisplayPort they'd only get HDCP revenue and PS5 revenue. Each device that uses HDMI generates more revenue than if it was DP-only due to licensing revenue.

TVs aren't going to use DisplayPort if VideoThings and GameBoxes don't use them. VideoThings and GameBoxes won't use them because a lot of them, and the TVs, are made by HDMI Licensing Group members. They limit their use to HDMI to force everyone else to use HDMI to pay them fees.

It's like JPEG-XL and Chrome pulling support. The HDMI LG members control so much of the market and refuse to use DisplayPort on their products so there's no incentive for anyone else to make a DisplayPort TV since that might require adapters and those adapters will require HDMI licensing. It's a bit of a Catch 22 since either way the company will end up paying HDMI licensing costs.

[sarmad]

So what's the difference here, why isn't HDMI forum complaining about this? Is it just because GSP is closed source? That is called security through obscurity, which is never a real security measure. Do they think that hackers won't be able to disassemble the GSP and figure out what's going on?

[Anux]

... there's no incentive for anyone else to make a DisplayPort TV since that might require adapters and those adapters will require HDMI licensing. It's a bit of a Catch 22 since either way the company will end up paying HDMI licensing costs.

They could make 2 DP and 2 HDMI ports (or 3 and 1) instead of 4 HDMI, no adapter problems. But maybe you're right the biggest players earn more and small ones just cave in.

Most AMD cards have only one HDMI and the rest DP but that might be due to the monitor world being more independent of those structures.

[skeevy420]

They could make 2 DP and 2 HDMI ports (or 3 and 1) instead of 4 HDMI, no adapter problems. But maybe you're right the biggest players earn more and small ones just cave in.

Most AMD cards have only one HDMI and the rest DP but that might be due to the monitor world being more independent of those structures.

My 144hz PC monitor has 2x HDMI and 1x DP . The joke is that HDMI goes to 120hz and DP goes to 144hz .

The HDMI prevalence is literally due to it coming first and all the revenue licensing it generates gives too much incentive for member companies to not support any other competing standard. It really doesn't help that DP has ties to MPEG LA since MPEG LA is known as a sue-happy group.

[Anux]

... It really doesn't help that DP has ties to MPEG LA since MPEG LA is known as a sue-happy group.

What ties do they have, didn't you post about it earlier that VESA refuted all their claims?