HDMI to be replaced with an ethernet cable?

According to the HDBaseT press release, LG Electronics, Samsung Electronics, Sony Pictures Entertainment and Valens Semiconductor are working to kill HDMI. They are trying to replace it with a new standard which will transport the video and audio signals through an ethernet cable. The new stardard will be called HDBaseT.

In the past when industry groups create new standards for audio and video delivery they create a proprietary cable to go with it, but with HDBaseT any Cat 5e/6 cable that you might have laying around will get the job done. "The cornerstone of HDBaseT technology is 5Play™, an unrivaled feature-set that converges full uncompressed HD video, audio, 100BaseT Ethernet, high power over cable and various control signals through a single 100m/328ft CAT5e/6 LAN cable. HDBaseT has the bandwidth to support the highest video resolutions such as full HD 1080p as well as 3D and 2Kx4K formats. HDBaseT is the first to provide all-in-one connectivity, making it possible for a single-connector TV to receive power, video/audio, Internet and control signals from the same cable."

The goal of the technology is to allow all of your devices to be networked together which will allow communication and media sharing throughout the entire house. The technology is expected to be available by the second half of 2011. Companies will be able to license the technology this year which means we should see some of devices show up at CES 2011 in January.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

AT&T stores start receiving Windows Phone 7 promo materials

Next Story

Apple responds to iTunes fraud

114 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I like it!!!! I wonder if it would be possible to transmit a 1080p HD signal over some sort of a WiFi protocol, just elimate the need for cables altogether.

Yeah, but what's gonna happen with some mobile devices (i.e HTC EVO 4G) that have already implemented the HDMI protocol?

Well it's rather ironic than you can actually already use ethernet cables in place of normal HDMI cables by simplying adding HDMI adaptors to the ends of the ethernet cable. This is what most professional installs use as the ethernet cable is infinitely easier to manage, and of course cheaper.

coth said,
They better working to replace unreliable ethernet.

Ethernet cabling (Category 5e or better) is quite reliable, and not very expensive (especially if you buy in bulk). Fry's, MicroCenter, and most electrical-supply houses (Rexel in particular) sell bulk Ethernet cabling from Category 3 to Category 6, including pull-boxes of one thousand feet. The issue with HDMI cabling is that you usually can't get custom lengths.

This will help sell more TV's. When displays come down in price and they can be cabled in using only 1 cable what's to stop them appearing all over homes and businesses.

This is good for consumers. Good point someone made about fibre connection although no way to send power over fibre.

This will be a godsend for digital signage where long cable runs are required and presently VGA over Cat5 is how we do it.

ssid_y_llan said,
This will help sell more TV's. When displays come down in price and they can be cabled in using only 1 cable what's to stop them appearing all over homes and businesses.

This is good for consumers. Good point someone made about fibre connection although no way to send power over fibre.

This will be a godsend for digital signage where long cable runs are required and presently VGA over Cat5 is how we do it.

Please! HDMI has been around how long?

Most FP displays include at least one HDMI input (my plasma TV has two), including PC displays (only the absolutely-lowest-end FP displays don't support HDMI these days); even some old-school CRT TVs support the standard (Sony WEGA, anyone?). The issue is price-gouging at retail (particularly RadioShack and Best Buy). E-tailers (MonoPrice has come up a fair number of times in this thread; three other choices are BlueJeanCables, NewEgg, and even MicroCenter) don't pull such shenanigans. In other words, the real issue is price. (That is also largely why DisplayPort, at least in North America, has gone nowhere.)

what's funny... broadcasting has already been using ethernet like connections for a bit. I'm surprised it took this long tbh.

The only reason why it's *sensible* is because DisplayPort is (in North America) a dismal failure, and there is deliberate price-gouging (at the retail level) on standard six-foot HDMI cables. (There are exceptions; notably Acer America, which includes a six-foot HDMI 1.3-compliant cable with every PC display that supports HDMI, and Comcast, which treats the same-length cables as *consumables*. Otherwise, typically at retail, there is a horrendous markup in the pricing of HDMI cabling.)

Also, how will HDCP (which is part-and-parcel of HDMI) be addressed with HDBase-T?

Let me get this straight. An HDBaseT press release is what this posting is related to. Is that right? And low-and-behold, the new standard, according to them, will be called...HDBaseT!

Imagine, an organization promoting their own standard.

Who would of thunk it?!

If I understand it well, that new format does everything that the license-free DisplayPort does... (yes, the one that's already on all the macs and a few graphic cards...).

Well for my 2 cents go to http://www.monoprice.com and here you can get cable cheap. I have a 30 ft one I paid only 25 dollars for and my 3 foot ones were something like 1.50 to 2.00 dollars each.

They are great cables and meet all the specs and then some. I have them in my movie room as well as a few other places and are just as good as the monster cables. I bought them once, ONCE and that was all it took. A computer dealer I work with at my work told me about monoprice and that is now where we get all our cables.

IdahoTech said,
Well for my 2 cents go to http://www.monoprice.com and here you can get cable cheap. I have a 30 ft one I paid only 25 dollars for and my 3 foot ones were something like 1.50 to 2.00 dollars each.

They are great cables and meet all the specs and then some. I have them in my movie room as well as a few other places and are just as good as the monster cables. I bought them once, ONCE and that was all it took. A computer dealer I work with at my work told me about monoprice and that is now where we get all our cables.

Comcast purchases cabling in bulk from MonoPrice (which is a major reason why the company treats it as a consumable); Acer America includes HDMI cables with every PC display that supports HDMI regardless of size or price. However, such deals from Comcast, MonoPrice, and Acer America are the exception, not the rule. (In fact, other than Acer, name *one* brand of PC display that not only supports HDMI across the board of their FP displays, but includes the cables.)

Is it HDMI they are trying to kill, or DisplayPort (which has gotten absolutely nowhere in North America)?

I think the most appealing aspect of all of this is that, finally, digital is paying off.

For anyone that wired their house with CAT5e, or CAT6 ethernet cables: they're about to get a lot of flexibility. For new home owners, it means that they can put in a "hub" room somewhere that utilities can pipe in their stuff (preferably somewhere where wires can easily come into the house), and then the ethernet cables can be used to go everywhere in the house.

TV. Power. Internet.

Given a few more years, devices will learn to be able to talk to each other automatically (no more confusing messes of cables for the hobbyist movie center analogous to plugging in umteen devices into the back of a Receiver).

In other words, hopefully this brings forth the future where we can just unbox the device, and plug in its ethernet cable into the receiver/hub, and voila, it will all just work.

pickypg said,
I think the most appealing aspect of all of this is that, finally, digital is paying off.

For anyone that wired their house with CAT5e, or CAT6 ethernet cables: they're about to get a lot of flexibility. For new home owners, it means that they can put in a "hub" room somewhere that utilities can pipe in their stuff (preferably somewhere where wires can easily come into the house), and then the ethernet cables can be used to go everywhere in the house.

TV. Power. Internet.

Given a few more years, devices will learn to be able to talk to each other automatically (no more confusing messes of cables for the hobbyist movie center analogous to plugging in umteen devices into the back of a Receiver).

In other words, hopefully this brings forth the future where we can just unbox the device, and plug in its ethernet cable into the receiver/hub, and voila, it will all just work.


On that note, besides the electricity cables in our house, ethernet cables.

According to the spec it provides up to 100w of power -- im wondering how they will achieve this -- proprietairy inline power adapter? and Switchs may have issues handling this

dw2003 said,
According to the spec it provides up to 100w of power -- im wondering how they will achieve this -- proprietairy inline power adapter? and Switchs may have issues handling this

I was wondering the same thing. Either they will need to transmit power at extremely high voltages, or they won't be able to use standard ethernet cables and will need much larger ones with much, much thicker wires to handle the greater current.

When has Sony EVER, EVER been interested in finding ways for the consumer to save some money? Here's to guessing you will need a "special" ethernet cable to get full functionality.

soLoredd said,
When has Sony EVER, EVER been interested in finding ways for the consumer to save some money? Here's to guessing you will need a "special" ethernet cable to get full functionality.

You get what you pay for. Lemme guess...Vizio TV?

interesting. could solve some of the problems of HDMI. ethernet is a great cable and has been around forever and has yet to reach it's potential, so if they make this the standard connector it could last another 10-20 years like the old connectors of yesteryear.
ofc there are also cons to this tech, and we can expect to see some heavy DRM snafu's associated with it, though if the companies involved do it right we could have unbealievable functionality using relatively cheap hardware that already exists- but i'll lol if that actually happens knowing how these companies work, there will be special routers to network your TVs and home theatre systems.
there are some good possibilities with this tech, we just have to hope the hardware and media companies involved don't fubar it to death, and especially not in a way which affects the other uses of the ethernet cable.

Nice ploy to get us all to buy new AV gear. I will be sticking with my current receiver, TV, Blu Ray and Xbox for a long time. Since there is little profit margin in this, I will be surprised if this ever becomes mainstream.

Purify said,
HDbaseT.

What a user friendly name!!! Nice idea but they need to work on a new name.

Like it actually matters. I work in retail and the amount of times people ask me if I have "HD leads" is ridiculous.

I work at a facility with a lot of test cells that need video feeds going to them. We've been wanting to move towards HD for awhile now but HDMI cables that are long enough are too expensive (and suffer from long cable problems) and component cables are like old technology.

This may be the solution we have been waiting for! I'm very excited about this.

I have some Monster Ethernet Cables I'll start selling, $100/ft. It's the Only way to experience TRUE HD.

Ryoken said,
I have some Monster Ethernet Cables I'll start selling, $100/ft. It's the Only way to experience TRUE HD.

hahahahahahahahaha

This was my point but again some people have there blinkers on

If it really work without any problem then surely is great,we can save a lots of space and doesn't need to specify port for internet,audio,video...by doing all in one in the single cable!
Hopefully this things is not a fool because the idea can save up many messy wire as well

But the functioning is most important stage to pass,although maybe single cable to power all in one stuff is pretty requiring something to afford*

Since it is all already possible it should be simple for them to actually get this done, they already have VGA/DVI over Ethernet extenders, so it would be nice to just be able to put out the video over a NIC on a computer to your TV or whatever. This is how I solved an issue at work after long arduous hours of complaints to IT about the poor quality of a 150ft VGA cable being used the IT guy said he had an extender over ethernet. After working with IT we finally got it going, now if we did not have to worry about the whole two boxes and an ethernet connection was already on the projector then I could of connected directly to it.

So, excited to hear that they might just push this through and I dont have to worry about another issue with a 150ft VGA cable.

Seeing how great my U-verse runs on Cat6, I'm very excited to see how this works. This could be something awesome!

I don't understand all of the naysay and negativity towards this, I think it's a brilliant idea and it'll certainly be a feature that sways me when I go to purchase a new TV/Blu-ray player/Console/etc. in the future.
For me, the most exciting thing about it is the sheer simplicity of it. Because it's essentially an Ethernet system, it would be trivial "networking" all your devices together. Anyone who has a vaguely passive interest in home cinema knows this story - you have x devices and your TV or audio system has y ports for those devices. You can find yourself forking out more for a higher model purely because it has an extra HDMI port or whatever. This would render that a thing of the past. One cable for each of your devices and some kind of switch or "router" in the middle of it all. Need more ports? Add another switch to the mix and off you go.
Depending on how well thought out the standard is, it could lead to easy solutions to other "problems". Want multiple displays showing the same image? No reason why this wouldn't be able to do that and without the need for some fancy AV system in the middle.

And most importantly, it should be cheap. There's no reason why it needs to be expensive and that, for me, is the best thing about it. Especially as I have hundreds of meters of Ethernet cable just lying around.

It sounds interesting - it would be nice to make connections simpler. I'd really *really* love it if it made multiple device connections a snap. Think of it - if it were to use cat5e/6 cable wouldn't it also be possible to have your devices (that support it) plugged into a hub? No more "2 HDMI, 3 Component" stuff, no more need for switches (I have 1 component switch and 1 HDMI switch - my TV only supports 1 HDMI and 2 Component in)... that would be awesome. *dreams*

EDIT: Just think - they could exist on their own video network, everything plugs into a hub - no more limit on input connections... heck they could even do one source to multiple TVs (though one TV at a time). Of course, they'd license the hell out of it and it'd cost a lot to do, and they probably won't implement it that way - but just think about it - it'd be awesome!

One day they will kill the entertainment by asking people to change their hardwares every year. And then they will blame piracy because that's the only thing they can do.

LaP said,
One day they will kill the entertainment by asking people to change their hardwares every year. And then they will blame piracy because that's the only thing they can do.

It's not like they are going to kill off HDMI. We still have A/V, component, and coax inputs on the back of TVs. If it's a good brand then they'll just include an extra port.

It would be real nice though if everything else just phases out and we're left with ethernet cables. It would make everything much easier.

LaP said,
One day they will kill the entertainment by asking people to change their hardwares every year. And then they will blame piracy because that's the only thing they can do.
You people are amazing. You seem to think that once they release this new cabling standard, all your current equipment is going to stop working. As Bengal said, HDMI hasnt displaced component, scart, composite, etc on the back of TVs, so why will this? It will just make it easier for those that are buying new kit at the same time. I for one would love a single cable going to my TV. will make it much easier to hide or bury in the wall. I hope this new format lets you connect several devices together too, so that say your games console, blu ray player, satellite tv box, all connect together, and then one of them connects to the TV.

I think a few dont get what some of us are saying.

There is no doubt this is a good idea and will work, but have you ever wondered why they never did it in the 1st place?

The tech has been there, right, so why bother with HDMI in the 1st place? Why not go straight to using CaT5?

If you can work that out yourself then you will have a better understanding of what some of us are getting at.

Deacon Brown said,
I think a few dont get what some of us are saying.

There is no doubt this is a good idea and will work, but have you ever wondered why they never did it in the 1st place?

The tech has been there, right, so why bother with HDMI in the 1st place? Why not go straight to using CaT5?

If you can work that out yourself then you will have a better understanding of what some of us are getting at.


Ok. By that same token then, why didn't they include all the features of HDMI 1.3 into the original 1.0 spec then? After all, the cabling "tech" was there at the time 1.0 was released.

For one reason, the specification hadn't been developed yet. The same is true of the new HDbaseT standard. Nobody in the past had developed a standard that incorporated power, networking, video and audio in the same cable. Now they have. It's called progress mate.

Ci7 said,
let see how that is going to fly facing intel LP technology
Agreed, I see LP as a more versatile future-proof technology than anything copper based.

I think it sounds great.
Companies will still make money because you'll probably need to buy a 5play approved PoE switch to go with it.
It will definitely make it a lot simpler for normal people to interconnect devices. The user interface on the TV could be completely revamped to take advantage of the convergence. Quite revolutionary IMHO

My god man. We just wasted how much money on HDTVs and HDMI cables and now we gotta buy new ones again? Go to f'ing hell.

Kreuger said,
My god man. We just wasted how much money on HDTVs and HDMI cables and now we gotta buy new ones again? Go to f'ing hell.

Yes, because the moment they release this new cabling standard, all your current TVs, Blu-Ray players, etc will instantly stop working and you'll need to buy new ones.

Jaxkesa said,
Ohh man....that sucks

You do realise he was being sarcastic, right? As others have pointed out, past technologies are still available for your TV (Scart, etc.). There is going to be nothing that forces you to upgrade if this technology becomes mainstream.

Personally, this sounds like a good idea. I'll be interested to see how it all pans out.

The question with this is how long will it last till everything goes optical? Why don't they just skip the copper phase and go optical with it all? They already have optical audio, how hard would it be to make it video as well?

If this goes forward, then HDMI was a mistake. Why confuse the consumers and make them spend more money? Oh wait...

Stingray said,
If this goes forward, then HDMI was a mistake. Why confuse the consumers and make them spend more money? Oh wait...

It really was a mistake, the interface alone was poorly designed.. The cable end is too heavy and puts stress on the input/output port, and there is no locking connection. Everything else pretty much has some sort of security lock to it. DVI has two screws to secure it, RG45 (CAT5) has the clip, hell even old RCA cables tighten when connected.

My only concern is how will they handle mini/micro HDMI connections on phones and small devices?

quick said,

My only concern is how will they handle mini/micro HDMI connections on phones and small devices?

A mini/micro cat5e standard might be created.

I do not see why this would not work being that all it is inside is cable the end of the cable should not really matter that much you would think except for the gauge and material the cable is made of.

As long as they don't mess up this 'standard' with some propietary communications protocol I'm fine. Make video be carrier by standard IP and make TV able to receive video from any ip connected device. Make it so the ethernet connection could be upgraded to Wifi ethernet so we could connect video wirelessly too.But don't create new protocols, we can do it with the existing standards!

TokyoKiller said,
This won't fly at all...HDMI was created to please the RIAA and the MPAA, other copyright groups.

HDCP was... HDMI was created by the "industry" including Sony. HDCP was developed by Intel. HDCP works over DVI as well, so I'm assuming using it over xBaseT would be a non-issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H..._Digital_Content_Protection

EDIT: It turns out this IS a non-issue. HDCP 2.0 will provide "Interface Independent Adaptation, Any IP based interface, compressed or uncompressed"

majortom1981 said,
Why is everybody saying this wont work? ONe cable that powers the tv ,sends video signals, and internet.

I love the idea. You can buy spools of ethernet for cheap and slap on your own connectors.

[deep voice] "One cable... to rule them all" [/voice]

While a new cable would be overkill given the relatively shot age of HDMI, using Ethernet cables is an interesting decision as it is laying around on most homes.

Lol

How stupid, sony and the others will get crushed by the powers that be.

Where is the profit in making TV that have this option?
There is not

lol

Do we have devices that support 4k? Is there a 3d format that has more data than 1080p? Are customers complaining about their wifi and hdmi cable connections to their devices? Are they unhappy that their components can't talk to each other (that well)? HDMI encrypts video, which is why studios love it. 5play doesn't say if they cover this (important if it's a licensed technology!) Doesn't seem to be a legitimate need yet...

axebox said,
Do we have devices that support 4k? Is there a 3d format that has more data than 1080p? Are customers complaining about their wifi and hdmi cable connections to their devices? Are they unhappy that their components can't talk to each other (that well)? HDMI encrypts video, which is why studios love it. 5play doesn't say if they cover this (important if it's a licensed technology!) Doesn't seem to be a legitimate need yet...

It's HDCP that protects the media. HDMI is just the plug.

axebox said,
Do we have devices that support 4k?
Yes. Sony has a projector that supports it. Costs like $20k and the bulbs are $3k but they are out there.

This will work until someone at the RIAA, MPAA, (Insert the European version here), says that the makers of "Music, Movies, TV, etc" will be hurt by such a device or option at which point HDbaseT will become HDpointless since thats what always seems to happen to new stuff these days.

That would be great. I'm tired of paying $40 for a $2 cable with "licensed" connectors on it. I'm assuming there will be adapters?

GreyWolf said,
That would be great. I'm tired of paying $40 for a $2 cable with "licensed" connectors on it. I'm assuming there will be adapters?

I was thinking the same thing

Problably will be adapters.

onesolo said,
Don't get this industry, really...

As anyone ever heard HDMI 1.4?!?! HDMI that also does ethernet... geez...

Yes, but that isn't the point. HDMI cables cost a lot. They have come down in price over the last few years but try to buy a 50+ foot HDMI cable and you will be putting down a lot of coin. If you can use a standard Cat5e/6 cable then you save a lot of money and make installs a lot easier. Lower cost in cables should be one of the benefits to going digital. HDMI failed to deliver that because the cable manufactures kept prices high. Cat5e is mass produced and can be had dirt cheap. If there is no loss in quality then why not use a standard cable?

You can find HDMI cables for a few dollars. They are becoming cheap. If you are willing to buy overpriced Moster Cable to be cool then it's not our problem

LaP said,
You can find HDMI cables for a few dollars. They are becoming cheap. If you are willing to buy overpriced Moster Cable to be cool then it's not our problem

Well, I bought a 2-foot HDMI cable for $4.00
I'd say that's relatively cheap, no?

I can buy at least ten times that, if not more if I went to buy an ethernet cable. Your point?

LaP said,
You can find HDMI cables for a few dollars. They are becoming cheap. If you are willing to buy overpriced Moster Cable to be cool then it's not our problem

Well, I bought a 2-foot HDMI cable for $4.00
I'd say that's relatively cheap, no?

I can buy at least ten times that, if not more if I went to buy an ethernet cable. Your point?

PeterKD said,
I bought myself a 10$ one but it dosen't compare to my 100$ monster cable one, there is actually a difference.

Not really. I really wish I still had a link to it. But a consumer group tested an array of HDMI cables and monter cables weren't really any different than your average HDMI cable.

If there's a difference then it's negligable. Definately not worth paying 10 times the amount. But like all electronics, if you have the money to spend then by all means.

Metodi Mitov said,

Well, I bought a 2-foot HDMI cable for $4.00
I'd say that's relatively cheap, no?

I can buy at least ten times that, if not more if I went to buy an ethernet cable. Your point?


His point being that he was looking for a 50+ foot cable in length, not 2.
I can get that cheap over here as well. But the longer they get, the more exponentially the price goes up.

PeterKD said,
I bought myself a 10$ one but it dosen't compare to my 100$ monster cable one, there is actually a difference.

You got screwed. Sorry. You don't need to pay $100 for an HDMI cable. That coulda been money to take your girlfriend out to eat.

KSib said,

You got screwed. Sorry. You don't need to pay $100 for an HDMI cable. That coulda been money to take your girlfriend out to eat.

Monster cable owners have girlfriends? I put them in the same area of the venn diagram as WoW players....

KSib said,

You got screwed. Sorry. You don't need to pay $100 for an HDMI cable. That coulda been money to take your girlfriend out to eat.


Yes, Monster Cables are too expensive. But there's also a speed rating attached to the cables. I ain't taking about the quality of the materials. I'm taking about the bandwidth capacity of the cable. If you have say, 1080p video and DTS-HD audio A 2$ cable will do just fine ?

If so, then why is there speed ratings on HDMI cables ? (and Monster isn't the only brand that tells that info)

PeterKD said,
I bought myself a 10$ one but it dosen't compare to my 100$ monster cable one, there is actually a difference.

There is a scientific term for that difference too - it's called the "placebo effect".

xplatinum said,

Yes, Monster Cables are too expensive. But there's also a speed rating attached to the cables. I ain't taking about the quality of the materials. I'm taking about the bandwidth capacity of the cable. If you have say, 1080p video and DTS-HD audio A 2$ cable will do just fine ?

If so, then why is there speed ratings on HDMI cables ? (and Monster isn't the only brand that tells that info)

That kinda has to do more with the length. Short cables will probably also work as cat-2 cables.

xplatinum said,

Yes, Monster Cables are too expensive. But there's also a speed rating attached to the cables. I ain't taking about the quality of the materials. I'm taking about the bandwidth capacity of the cable. If you have say, 1080p video and DTS-HD audio A 2$ cable will do just fine ?

speed ratings on HDMI cables is like dynamic contrast ratios on LCD monitor specs completely pointless If the cable says it supports HDMI 1.2 or 3 or 4 then it supports it fully no matter who makes it and spending 100 bucks on an 1.5mtr cable is just for epenis or Ignorance reasons and nothing more

If so, then why is there speed ratings on HDMI cables ? (and Monster isn't the only brand that tells that info)

xplatinum said,
If so, then why is there speed ratings on HDMI cables ? (and Monster isn't the only brand that tells that info)

Its just erroneous INFO designed to confuse and befuddle the ignorant into the hope they'll spend more than they need to on a cable that shouldn't cost an arm and a leg

Ryoken said,
It's a great idea, but it's not gonna happen..Component, Compost, hell even Coax is still around.

So is the diskette, CD and DVD. Point?

Ryoken said,
It's a great idea, but it's not gonna happen..Component, Compost, hell even Coax is still around.

Diskette's are hardly around and a blu-ray player will read CDs and DVDs, but you won't be able to plug an HDMI connector on an ethernet port, will you?

Julius Caro said,

Diskette's are hardly around and a blu-ray player will read CDs and DVDs, but you won't be able to plug an HDMI connector on an ethernet port, will you?


It wont be long before someone comes up with an adaptor for HDMI to RJ45