Originally Posted by MMC57
If the cables do not work in the future with "verified consumer devices" how do we know these devices are correct.
The reason you have a STANDARD in the first place is to ensure the interchangeability of the products that are governed by the STANDARD.
In the industry I worked in... first you would be laughed at ... then a lawsuit ... if you told customers that the product you buy might work... and might not work.. just buy it and hope for the best!
Either your product meets the STANDARD or it does not.... if you market your product that it meets the STANDARD when you know it does not meet the STANDARD that is fraud plain and simply.
If you do not have independent confirmation by a third party to show compliance then you need to wait to go to market.
When a TV, AVR, Projector, HDMI cable says it meets HDMI 2.1 then it should meet all the requirements of the document.
Correct! And that has been the problem with HDMI almost since its inception. The hardware protocols are fine for the ever-evolving video standards. Its the connection technology that has always lagged behind and is where the problem lies. Just look at how cables have been and are being marketed now. To me it's a lot of false advertising and claims just to get folks who don't know any better (I fear the majority of consumers outside of AVS) to buy into overly expensive cables (Monster, AudioQuest comes to mind) when cables costing much less work just as well. However, as the newer video standards become more demanding and require that cables handle more and more, the "industry" should have put as much energy (R&D) into ensuring that the transport mechanism (cable) was ready to meet those demands when the new standards and devices were released. But device mfrs and cable mfrs have different end goals and the consumer is caught in the middle. That's the idea behind certification and something that HDMI et al should have demanded from day one. Any cable that is sold or marketed for a specific HDMI protocol set must be validated by a standardized set or procedures that is recognized by the industry and cable mfrs. That hasn't happened to the extent that it needs to be. It's expensive to do that and all the cable and device mfrs want to do is increase their bottom line as effectively and cheaply as is possible. The market is just flooded with cables, good ones, bad ones, cheap Chinese knock-offs and counterfeits all to the confusion, dismay, and anger of the consumer.
I think starting with HDMI 2.0 and maybe even HDMI 1.4 the cable industry started to pay attention to the anger and confusion of consumers. Too little too late in my opinion. HDMI.org even went as far as to ask that cable mfrs not to label their cables with the hardware specification and just use the Standard or High Speed designations. The "Premium" designation was a step in the right direction to separate certified cables from non-certified cables. They even setup "rules" for marketing in HDMI 2.1. However, none of that is enforceable and they left it up to the cable mfrs as to whether they would follow that or not, or how they would market their products.
HDMI.org should have also worked much closer with the device mfrs to ensure that if the device was marketed as "HDMI 2.0" that compatibility with different mfrs would not be an issue (CEC is a glaring example). However, in the case of CEC, they just left it up to the various device mfrs as to how they wanted to implement that protocol option. That in turn makes if difficult for the cable mfrs, not that they are above any blame. Certification then did not offer the consumer 100% compatibility as one would hope because of that.
My hope is that companies like Ruipro and other mfrs of copper, fiber, and hybrid fiber cables will work closer with HDMI and the device mfrs to ensure that their cables will in fact be able to meet the new hardware specifications. Ideally, they would list which of the HDMI specifications their devices and cables have been tested and certified for so the consumer would know exactly what they are getting and not just assume that an HDMI 2.0/2.1 device and cable met all of the specifications.
However, the horse has long left the barn and I fear we will continually be stuck with this mess that's called HDMI.