NO attention to detail at all. "Works with both Windows, Linux and Mac". LOL
Lol, so and about the product itself any comments?
Wireless HDMI for Everyone
91–100 of 153 posts
Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone
#92I could buy a Chromecast for half the price and use a free service to mirror my desktop for meetings. Or I could buy another Apple TV for a little more and have a lot more functionality and video outlets (HBO GO, Netflix etc.). Although this option only works if you use Macs. Or as another poster said just use the built in wifi on my TVs in my house.
Chromecast supported netflix from the day it shipped and hbo go as of today. Also you don't have to "use macs" to watch netflix/hbo-go/etc on Apple tv... well, you only have to use one mac at least.
Why would you buy an apple tv if you dont own apple products?
Roku is a much better choice anyway.
Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone
#93Doesn't this already exist? http://www.amazon.com/Nyrius-Transmitter-Streaming-Satellite...
Personally I prefer the idea of only requiring software on my computer, and no need for a dongle sticking out the side.
Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone
#94Back of the envelope calculation: (1920 * 1080 * 3 * 60) / 1024.0 / 1024.0 => 355.96 MB/s 300mbps wireless n: 300 / 8.0 => 37.5 MB/s Given that the whole point of HDMI is image quality, how are they going to shove 355MB/s through a 37.5MB/s link without lowering the quality hugely? It all seems rather pointless to have a large, high quality display and content, and force it through a small link.
Yet don't forget your satellite provider has achieved the same to put HD content over a satellite and through an HDMI link.
Sky HD in the UK probably encodes each channel at around 12-18 MB/s.
The key is in the compression and latency for real time applications.
Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone
#95Back of the envelope calculation: (1920 * 1080 * 3 * 60) / 1024.0 / 1024.0 => 355.96 MB/s 300mbps wireless n: 300 / 8.0 => 37.5 MB/s Given that the whole point of HDMI is image quality, how are they going to shove 355MB/s through a 37.5MB/s link without lowering the quality hugely? It all seems rather pointless to have a large, high quality display and content, and force it through a small link.
From what 355.96 MB/s source are you receiving that video? For some very common use cases, it's either HDTV channels or Blu-Ray, both of which give you compressed bitstreams of less than 50 Mbps. 802.11n can handle that with ease. Granted that recompressing content in real-time doesn't do great things for the quality, but it's good enough. The point of HDMI is that it's a standard connector. Nobody's going to buy a VGA dongle these days.
OnLive and Sony/Gaikai are streaming game A/V over the public Internet, and Amazon has a new platform to do it for arbitrary Windows apps. Again, a decent in-home wireless network is a far superior medium and should have no problem.
Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone
#96Sadly a better solution already exists: my 2012 Panasonic TV connects wirelessly to my network, and my laptop can stream videos to it without having to install anything , all via DLNA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Living_Network_Alliance Here's Panasonic's page outlining such features in their TVs: http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_GB/Products/VIERA+TV/VIER... It's a lovely idea for retrofitting to older TVs…
Sadly DLNA is only for sharing and streaming files. If all you want is playing movies from your laptop, it should work. If you want to play e.g. something from youtube, it will work only if you find a player that supports DLNA. If you want to play a game, it just won't work because it's not intended for it.
Second, while it looks good on paper, last time I've tried even playing movies sucked:
* it's buggy and "almost, but not really" compatible. Getting a Sony TV to see anything non-Sony took an entire evening. There were no error messages, the only feedback was "it works" vs "it hangs up for 30 seconds and then timeouts".
* Because it's build around sharing files, if you want to play a movie you need to make sure it's using a codec supported by your TV or it'll need to be transcoded it on the fly. Only some DLNA servers support transcoding, user-friendly ones and the servers built into devices often don't. Then the only video codec that works reliably with all/most devices is MPEG2 with limited bitrate. There was a small but perceptible loss in quality when playing high bit-rate x264 video.
* There's a difference between a DLNA "server" and a DLNA "controller", the "server" serves files, the "controller" is the user interface you use to select a movie to play, play/pause/stop, change volume etc. Many apps support one but not the other. If the app you put on your phone is a "dumb" DLNA server without a controller, then you can select the movies/music/pictures only by navigating the menus on your TV (which hopefully has a controller built in).
* All problems have workarounds, but these cause more problems. E.g. in the server i settled on the, transcoding data was saved to disk to a separate video file that grew and grew until i ran out of disk space. Would you know that before playing a movie you need to make sure you have 100GB of free disk space? Yes, in theory the software could hide all this from me, but it isn't there yet and it doesn't look like it ever will be.
Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone
#97First, I know nothing about electronics or how this device it's made or why they did it like that, this is just a humble opinion. Please, please stop making USB dongles which are big and occupy more than one port, if I put that device in my smartTV it will block the other one.
Chromecast comes with a short HDMI extender cable. Enjoy the dangly future.
I suspect TV makers will adapt before long and sprinkle HDMI connectors a bit farther apart.
Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone
#98To the inventors: I made this "Works with" (instead of "with both") and it is available at http://i.imgur.com/8VDAlrK.png Great idea, and good luck.
Thank you!! Will be updated shortly :-)
Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone
#99I could buy a Chromecast for half the price and use a free service to mirror my desktop for meetings. Or I could buy another Apple TV for a little more and have a lot more functionality and video outlets (HBO GO, Netflix etc.). Although this option only works if you use Macs. Or as another poster said just use the built in wifi on my TVs in my house.
I have Chromecast, and love it for what it is. But it is very much tied to the wifi network it is on. You could not just walk into a conference room and plug it into the TV and go, it would take a little bit of time to setup. Assuming I had the software installed on my computer for wifitame, it seems like it is designed to be a little bit more mobile.
Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone
#100Sadly a better solution already exists: my 2012 Panasonic TV connects wirelessly to my network, and my laptop can stream videos to it without having to install anything , all via DLNA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Living_Network_Alliance Here's Panasonic's page outlining such features in their TVs: http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_GB/Products/VIERA+TV/VIER... It's a lovely idea for retrofitting to older TVs…
[deleted]