AudioNervosa
Systemic Development => Multiple Personality Disorders => Optometry Equipment => Topic started by: richidoo on July 02, 2010, 06:19:59 PM
-
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=18902
-
Interesting. Guess I'll put off that new projector/ new receiver purchase for a while. Sounds like it may be a serious cost benefit for the longer runs usually required for projectors (have you seen the prices of the long run specialty HDMI?).
My Northstar transport/ DAC uses ethernet to transmit its i2s audio signal. I haven't experimented with upmarket ethernet cables, though I find generic 12s sounds better than inexpensive coax.
-
It may be rolling out in 2011, but I would bet a fair bit of change that it will take a few years before it's common place.
I actually like the idea but I seem to recall thinking laser discs, DVD-A, HD-DVD, HDMI and a few others were also cool! :lol:
-
Forget cables all together... a projector with 802.11n would make life a heck of a lot easier...
-
Can wireless handle high def in real time? I wouldn't think it'd be seamless.
I really like the RJ45 idea.. I wondered why they hadn't already done this... I also wondered why they didn't use RJ11/phone cable for USB... It's just weird how companies rush to waste resources rather than use something that exists... just so they can market it (lie) to get more money. Oh well, as long as there are people without much other choice, there will always be a market.
-
Can wireless handle high def in real time? I wouldn't think it'd be seamless.
I really like the RJ45 idea.. I wondered why they hadn't already done this... I also wondered why they didn't use RJ11/phone cable for USB... It's just weird how companies rush to waste resources rather than use something that exists... just so they can market it (lie) to get more money. Oh well, as long as there are people without much other choice, there will always be a market.
I had the same though about the adequacy of wireless bandwidth for transmitting HD video.
As for the RJ11 jack, IMO it was passed over for us with USB because it is not rugged enough for frequent insertions and removals. Lets remember what the RJ11 was originally designed for, to connect a telephone to a wall jack. In that application the phone is most often plugged in and left undisturbed for years. The little locking tab on the RJ11 would never stand up to the number of insertions that many USB cables have to endure.
-
Well, you can always future proof and run multiple runs of Cat 5 or Cat 6. 2 runs with a balun on each end will allow you to do HDMI now and then swap over without rewiring when the new standard kicks in.
Bryan
-
Damn you're smart! :thumb:
-
http://www.keydigital.com/IW_Products.m4p.pvx?;ITEM?ItemCode=KDCATHD&Company=KEY
Not smart, just know how to use Google on a big job I'm doing that needs LOOONG HD runs from a video server.
:-k
Bryan
-
Can wireless handle high def in real time? I wouldn't think it'd be seamless.
I really like the RJ45 idea.. I wondered why they hadn't already done this... I also wondered why they didn't use RJ11/phone cable for USB... It's just weird how companies rush to waste resources rather than use something that exists... just so they can market it (lie) to get more money. Oh well, as long as there are people without much other choice, there will always be a market.
Well... I would think 802.11n would do...
I have a roku box in our bonus room which is completely on the opposite end of the house, and different floor of the house as our wireless router which is 802.11g... and the signal strength is roughly 50%. Granted... roku is buffered, but everything we stream is in HD. However, with the much faster rate, and better range, I would think 802.11n would suffice.
-
Interesting topic.
Eight years ago when I built this house, I spread 1,000 feet of Cat5e throughout. A good majority of it from various places in the HT room to the main equipment rack area. Also, made runs from most of the rooms in the house to a centralized closet in the basement. My thinking was "eventually", I'd run whatever without breaking a sweat.
Along comes WiFi.......Ended up using half the cable for phone, the other half just dangles not doing anything.
Would be cool if it turns out I could use it and find out I was having a good idea eight years ago. :rofl:
Bob
-
Me too, Bob, but I also ran 8 zones of speakerwire. :duh That was before I knew that 16ga plenum speaker wire isn't really speaker wire and before wireless media players entered my life. I use only one set of the speaker wires going to the back porch. And maybe someday the garage too, but probably none of the others. Technology marches on....
-
Me too, Bob, but I also ran 8 zones of speakerwire. :duh
Yea, I ran several myself. Like you, I only used one as well. :lol:
Oh well, live and learn.
Bob
-
Can wireless handle high def in real time? I wouldn't think it'd be seamless.
I really like the RJ45 idea.. I wondered why they hadn't already done this... I also wondered why they didn't use RJ11/phone cable for USB... It's just weird how companies rush to waste resources rather than use something that exists... just so they can market it (lie) to get more money. Oh well, as long as there are people without much other choice, there will always be a market.
Well... I would think 802.11n would do...
I have a roku box in our bonus room which is completely on the opposite end of the house, and different floor of the house as our wireless router which is 802.11g... and the signal strength is roughly 50%. Granted... roku is buffered, but everything we stream is in HD. However, with the much faster rate, and better range, I would think 802.11n would suffice.
Now that I think about it the biggest problem with using 802.11n might not be bandwidth, but rather interference and channel contention. Along with the higher throughput, 802.11n also brought us wider coverage than previous 802.11 incarnations. If everybody and his brother starts using it for TV connections there is a good chance you will start seeing users overlap on another , especially in higher density housing areas like apartment buildings, townhouse complexes or even just urban and suburnan areas where homes are close together (typical property sizes an Long Island are in the area of 60' x 100' plots) I don't know how many channel they designated in the final 802.11n standard but I would be surprised if it was much more than a dozen or so. And the wider the coverage gets the more likely you and a neighbor will end up contending for the same channel. This could end up being the biggest problem with using wireless in a Metro area.
-
You could always do HDMI over Ethernet if your wired. Its not too expensive. Run USB over Ethernet while your at it. You know, in the meantime.
-
If everybody and his brother starts using it for TV connections there is a good chance you will start seeing users overlap on another , especially in higher density housing areas like apartment buildings, townhouse complexes or even just urban and suburnan areas where homes are close together (typical property sizes an Long Island are in the area of 60' x 100' plots)
60' X 100'???!!! Wow... the benefits of living in somewhat rural NC...
As far as congestion... some 802.11n models operate in the already congested 2.4GHz spectrum... so you're right... big issue there. Although 802.11n can also operate in the 5GHz range where congestion is not nearly as big of an issue.
It all depends on the implementation... which if memory serves me correctly... 802.11n is still draft status... there's always the unknown... something could change.
Dave
-
60' X 100'???!!! Wow... the benefits of living in somewhat rural NC...Dave
:lol: Yea, sounds more like barn dimensions than size of personal property.
My nearest neighbor is 400' away. Not much worry of wireless goodies interfering with each other.
-
60' X 100'???!!! Wow... the benefits of living in somewhat rural NC...Dave
:lol: Yea, sounds more like barn dimensions than size of personal property.
My nearest neighbor is 400' away. Not much worry of wireless goodies interfering with each other.
About 2 years ago my wife and I were visiting a friend who lives in Boston in the North End in a 4 story walk up apartment. While I was there she asked me to take a look at the wireless setup on her new laptop because she was having trouble connecting when in her apt (it worked fine at Starbucks, so it wasn't a hardware problem.) I got into the wireless setup screen and did a search for wireless networks. What came up was 17 different routers that she could hit from her living room (and 9 of them were unsecured, which is another story altogether). And this was before people were using 802.11 N which has a further reach than earlier wireless router standards. I am sure it is even worse now. And remember is is only data traffic. If we start doing TV connections via wireless you will see even more people putting up 802.11 devices making the problem even worse. You see the same types of problems with cellular systems in a city environment. In more rural areas cells are engineered to maximize coverage so you don't have any dead spots. In the city the problem is exactly the opposite. because of the population density cells become limited not by the number of square miles they can cover. but rather by the amount of traffic they can carry. Once the traffic in a cell exceeds the capacity of the available spectrum the carrier has no choice but to split the cell into 2 or more smaller cells. But at that point the RF propagation must be engineered not to maximize coverage, but rather to restrict it so the signals from the now smaller cells don't step on each other. It's a whole new world for those of us who have always engineered radio system with a mindset that more signal is always a better thing.
-
Remember the good old days when "wireless was the thing to have" and everybody was getting away from wires? :rofl:
Given what's being told here, I can see a day (soon) that "the thing to have" will be having your house built with a structured wiring panel feeding a harness to every room.
Bob
-
Remember the good old days when "wireless was the thing to have" and everybody was getting away from wires? :rofl:
Given what's being told here, I can see a day (soon) that "the thing to have" will be having your house built with a structured wiring panel feeding a harness to every room.
Bob
Back to the Future?