this post was submitted on 29 Feb 2024
805 points (98.8% liked)

Technology

70528 readers
3475 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml 185 points 1 year ago (6 children)
[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is there a reason or way to prevent display port from having so many connection issues specifically on port replicators (docking stations)?

In corporate environments I find so many times that you plug them up over and over, unplug over and over and check the connection a million times before turning everything off one final time, holding the power button on everything (kind of like an smc reset) and then booting up everything like you originally did and they come up. Is this a result of the devices trying to remember a previous setup or is their an easy way to avoid it?

I've hooked up dozens of them and still ran into issues when a family member brought a setup home to work when they were sick last week.

We use Dell WD-19 docks. Not sure if you use similar. Updated dock firmware and laptop drivers made a difference for us with connection issues. Sometimes you gotta perform a reset on them to make them behave (disconnect dock power and USB-C and hold power button for just over 15 sec). Sometimes the laptop NVRAM needs to be reset instead (for Dell, disconnect all devices and power while off and hold button for just over 30 sec). Overall, though, no huge issues with DP specifically if the dock and laptop firmwares are up to date. Third-party docks/replicators definitely have way more issues, though.

[–] StopSpazzing@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

DP for life!

ftfy

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 140 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is really frustrating. This is the only thing holding Linux gaming back for me, as someone who games with a AMD GPU and an OLED TV. On Windows 4k120 works fine, but on Linux I can only get 4k60. I've been trying to use an adapter, but it crashes a lot.

AMD seemed to be really trying to bring this feature to Linux, too. Really tragic that they were trying to support us, and some anti-open source goons shot them down.

[–] Sudomeapizza@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

ive found that the issue in my experience is that X11 only supports a max of 4k60, but Wayland supports 4k120 and beyond. I dont think the cable matters as the same cable im using works on windows with 4k160.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's a matter of cable bandwidth. 4k120 4:4:4 requires more bandwidth than hdmi 2.0 can provide. You can drop down to 4:2:0, but that's a pretty bad experience and ruins the image quality.

I've been using an adapter cable, but it's really flaky, I don't know if it's a bad cable or what. But a normal hdmi cable just plain works on Windows, since the windows amd driver supports hdmi 2.1.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm a bit confused by your comment. I have a 120Hz Monitor and use an AMD GPU on linux without issues. Connected via the display port on my GPU to the HDMI Port on my monitor (because samsung does not enable DDC on the display port for some reason).

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I'm using an LG C2 Oled TV that doesnt have displayport.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] generalpotato@lemmy.world 79 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Should… should we sic EU on them?

[–] smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] tarmarbar@startrek.website 34 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Apple didn't want to change either hehe

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 66 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (16 children)

So why is it rejected?

Just because they're still trying to use HDMI to prevent piracy? Who in fuck's name is using HDMI capture for piracy? On a 24fps movie, that's 237MB of data to process every second just for the video. A 2 hour movie would be 1.6TB. Plus the audio would likely be over 2TB.

I've got a Jellyfin server packed with 4K Blu-ray rips that suggest there are easier ways to get at that data.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The CEO's of the media companies are all fucking dinosaurs who still think VCRs should have been made illegal. You will never convince them that built in copy protection is a dumb idea and a waste of time.

[–] SuddenlyMelissa@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Where are they finding dinosaurs to fuck that know what a VCR is?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sarmale@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can't you compress what the HDMI outputs in real time so that it would have a normal size?

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure. But why bother when you can rip it right from the disc in higher quality than you could ever hope to capture in real time?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 8 points 1 year ago

HDMI Splitter + capture card.

No video put on a streaming service produced in the next 40 years will need HDMI 2.1 to display.

[–] lengau@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago

The profiles HDMI 2.1 enables are even worse - 4k@120fps type stuff. Not exactly something needed for a movie.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] nivenkos@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This sucks as all new TVs use HDMI2.1 for modern features and modern games consoles rely on those for 4k 60Hz HDR, etc.

So now Valve can't just make their own home console with Steam OS for TVs directly (and support high-end features at least).

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 4 points 1 year ago

I believe this is specifically for FRL. Other features should still work afaik.

[–] Godort@lemm.ee 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What's the over/under that this was about preventing people getting around HDCP using a modified driver?

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 6 points 1 year ago

FRL != HDCP. I think HDCP works on Linux already?

[–] Declamatie@mander.xyz 39 points 1 year ago

Alright, from now on I will never again buy any electronics with HDMI.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago

No disrespect meant towards GamingOnLinux, but this article from Tom's Hardware has a much better description of what's going on, including quotes.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 32 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


If you were hoping at some point to see HDMI 2.1+ on Linux with AMD + Mesa, you're out of luck right now as it's simply not going to be happening.

There's been a bug report on the Mesa GitLab of "4k@120hz unavailable via HDMI 2.1" that's been open for a few years now, with lots of comments and chatter about the issue.

In an update on the bug report, AMD engineer Alex Deucher commented: "The HDMI Forum has rejected our proposal unfortunately.

So if you're on Linux, it's going to continue to be best to buy hardware that uses DisplayPort.

On the NVIDIA side though, it seems like it may not be an issue, as developer Karol Herbst wrote on Mastodon: "Even though AMD might not be able to add support for HDMI 2.1, nouveau certainly will as Nvidia's open source driver also supports HDMI 2.1 so there is no reason to believe that at least some drivers can't support HDMI 2.1

It's quite backwards, but apparently having all the logic inside firmware (like Nvidia does) will probably help us implementing support for HDMI 2.1"


The original article contains 244 words, the summary contains 183 words. Saved 25%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] FartsWithAnAccent@kbin.social 20 points 1 year ago

Boo! Get off the stage HDMI Forum!

[–] NoLifeGaming@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Always thought that display port is better anyways lol. Anything that HDMI does or have that display port doesnt?

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Eli5, what are the security risks of my HDMI cable?

[–] thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world 76 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Piracy being easier is the only risk. Once again ruining the experience of legitimate customers to try and stop a thing that they have had no success at even slowing down.

[–] Acters@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

Even further, it made it more expensive to buy products from all the dumb licensing fees that all the middlemen try to shoehorn in.

[–] fidodo@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

The security of mega Corp IP.

[–] Eideen@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

HDMI 2.1cspecs are closed source.

[–] smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago

Having to use systems that swing to more closed solutions is going to degrade security in more places.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BetaDoggo_@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

VESA or bust

[–] chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 1 year ago
load more comments
view more: next ›