Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wireless HDMI for Everyone

indiegogo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 153 posts

Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone

#131

Post by alongenemylines »

mgkimsal wrote: post #32
rvlt wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to install anything, it's plug&play and open source. And can you stream to multiple tv's with that panasonic setup? And if you have multiple tv's from diferent models? A nice solution is something that doesn't rely on specific models or brands.

Not sure on multiple TVs, but I thought DLNA was gaining wider adoption. My brother's got a TV that's not Panasonic and it has DLNA as well, and he can stream to it. Would be nicer to simply have a wireless standard that devices - DVD players, boxes, etc - would bundle so that we didn't needs cables to the TV box. Or... hey - maybe just wireless audio from a TV to external speakers (bluetooth 4?) to cut down on wires…

Downside of wireless audio is you still need to power the speaker.

Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone

#132

Post by yosoyzenitram »

rohu1990 wrote: post #10

Their software is open source, that means if funding goes success and they release their software we could use any mini pc running ubuntu (or raspberry pi) as the dongle for tv.

Actually, the dongle (according to the pic) has an Allwinner A10 processor, which is the one that came on the first Android TV dongles that popped up more than a year ago.

Even though a bit old and single-core, it's more than enough to stream some H.264, and back then it was a quite awesome processor for 7$/ea approx. Now they will be even cheaper.

Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone

#133

Post by fatbat »

So I have been wanting a HDMI dongle or similar solution and this sounds promising. I was hoping Chromecast would have delivered something closer to this but alas it focused too much on entertainment content (and tab casting barely works for me).

I know it is a WIP, but this would have been much more attractive/awesome if they managed to power without separate USB and add wifi AC support. That would have made it a serious competitor even if at a higher price point.

Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone

#134

Post by Navarr »

Neat, but not what I was expecting.

I was hoping it'd be the type of dongle that I could plug one end into an HDMI out and one end into an HDMI in and have "wireless HDMI."

This is not that.

Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone

#135

Post by nitrogen »

deelowe wrote: post #113
mootothemax wrote: post #23

Sadly 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…

DLNA doesn't work for a lot of use cases. What I want is chromecast, but without the cloud BS. TVs at this point should really just be wireless monitors. From there, I could walk into the room with my wifi device and display whatever I want on my TV. This would be especially great for tablets where both the tablet and the TV are "lean back" experiences. I want bluetooth for displays (and high def audio and devices, e…

I want bluetooth for displays (and high def audio and devices, etc...). I just want to walk into a room and have my phone, computer, tablet, etc. find my printer, display, mouse, and all other useful devices.

This level of convenience requires either an up-front pairing process with each individual device, or a gaping security hole that anybody with a high-gain antenna can exploit (imagine mischievous teenagers driving around neighborhoods with small kids and beaming illicit videos onto unprotected wireless TVs).

Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone

#136

Post by atiti »

fatbat wrote: post #133

So I have been wanting a HDMI dongle or similar solution and this sounds promising. I was hoping Chromecast would have delivered something closer to this but alas it focused too much on entertainment content (and tab casting barely works for me). I know it is a WIP, but this would have been much more attractive/awesome if they managed to power without separate USB and add wifi AC support. That would have made it a se…

Hi fatbat,

Infact you can power it from an HDMI 1.4 + MHL port if your tv supports it!

It also comes with dual wifi cards.

Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone

#137

Post by deelowe »

nitrogen wrote: post #135
deelowe wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DLNA doesn't work for a lot of use cases. What I want is chromecast, but without the cloud BS. TVs at this point should really just be wireless monitors. From there, I could walk into the room with my wifi device and display whatever I want on my TV. This would be especially great for tablets where both the tablet and the TV are "lean back" experiences. I want bluetooth for displays (and high def audio and devices, e…

I want bluetooth for displays (and high def audio and devices, etc...). I just want to walk into a room and have my phone, computer, tablet, etc. find my printer, display, mouse, and all other useful devices. This level of convenience requires either an up-front pairing process with each individual device, or a gaping security hole that anybody with a high-gain antenna can exploit (imagine mischievous teenagers drivi…

> This level of convenience requires either an up-front pairing process with each individual device

I see no issue with this. Everything I mentioned already works with bluetooth (for the most part) except for display.

Re: Wireless HDMI for Everyone

#139

Post by ZoF »

wil421 wrote: post #92
ZoF wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You probably wouldn't, just saying it was possible. And I agree Roku would be the better choice in that case if Chromecast didn't fit your needs.
Post reply on HN