This time I'm sure of it. New group to simplify (or should I say enable) HD networking.

[Link: blog.ce-pro.com]

Julie,

As much as I agree with you on the basic premise of 1394, I don't understand why all the major manufacturers (except Mitsu, and cable boxes.) haven't developed much product for it.

TI developed a cool chipset that would convert 1394 A to 1394 B for transmission via Cat 5, a few years ago, yet no major product announcements came, except for USTec.

When I asked a major manufacturer a few months ago why 1394 video wasn't in more product; he told me that there were too many different 1394 variations. I personally think that's a bunch of _ _ _ p, but I have to wonder why 1394 hasn't been universally adopted by now.

Personally, I think 1394 makes the most sense of all the transport systems, no matter how how it's sent (coax, Cat 5 etc).

Dawn

One of the big reasons is because Apple gets a buck per port.

Does Apple get a buck per port from HANA?

* * * * *

Julie's article describes remote control use that sounds to me like a GUI-styled one-for-all. It sounds like you have to go to the TV, turn it on, choose an input after an appropriate time, go to the amp, turn it on, choose an input after an appropriate time, go to the DVD Player, hit PLAY to turn it on or start the movie.... I believe there is an $80 remote that will let you do this, and I wonder what advantage Firewire has over plain wires and that remote.

The single issue that makes a home theater out of a bunch of components is a remote control that uses macros to automatically perform the functions needed to go from OFF to a CD, or from a CD to a DVD or from a DVD to a cable program. I don't hear even a hint of this capability in the description. Perhaps that is because we are at the starting point. I don't know but I hope that is the reason.

I described that in terms of sources because the whole point is for the customer NOT to have to know what to do, in what order, with six to ten remotes. A home theater is not supposed to be a hobbyist's delight; it is to deliver programs with ease. It would be pointless to have a GUI that showed the different components and commands that take this system from OFF to "PLAY."

Ernie,

The GUI and remote control aspect of 1394 is probably of the least interest to most of us here.

More important is that 1394 is the only system that will allow us to record HD. Now unless someone has figured out a way to record via HDMI, 1394 will be our only way to record and archive HD programming to the high definition disc systems coming out next year.

And just slightly off-topic, I have heard that the only non-down-converted output from these players will be HDMI and 1394. Say goodbye to component for hi-res stuff.

Dawn

Go to the bottom of cepro blog to comments and there is an update about some of the remote-control issues. This is less about figuring out the remote-control issue, and more about exploiting 1394 to do the things it ALONE can do (multi streams HD over Cat 5 with DRM and control capabilities).

But 1394 may well die AGAIN if the only people who can figure out how to use it, or the only people who can put up with not having ease of use, are us hardheaded gearmongers.

Dawn, I'm glad you mentioned down-conversion. I don't think it is so off-topic because it is part and parcel of the changes that will occur when 1394 takes hold. If you know, component signals will be down-converted to what? 720p? 480p? 480i? The way things are growing, soon 1080i could fairly be called downconverted!

I'm guessing 480p.

Maybe after we go to 4k it will be 720p :-)

Great point! What DOES qualify as down-rezing in an era of 1080p and beyond?

Heres a link to an article from digg, about this very topic.

[Link: digg.com]

For those unfamiliar with www.digg.com users submit tech stories that make it to the front page based on how many "diggs" the story gets from other users.