Technology

59421 readers

5527 users here now

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

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

853

The HDMI Forum rejected AMD's open source HDMI 2.1 implementation (www.gamingonlinux.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

153 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 52 points 8 months ago (14 children)

I believe USB-C is the only connector supported for carrying DisplayPort signals other than DisplayPort itself.

The biggest issue with USB-C for display in my opinion is that cable specs vary so much. A cable with a type c end could carry anywhere from 60-10000MB/s and deliver anywhere from 5-240W. What's worse is that most aren't labeled, so even if you know what spec you need you're going to have a hell of a time finding it in a pile of identical black cables.

Not that I dislike USB-C. It's a great connector, but the branding of USB has always been a mess.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (7 children)

would be neat to somehow have a standard color coding. kinda how USB 3 is (usually) blue, maybe there could be thin bands of color on the connector?

better yet, maybe some raised bumps so visually impaired people could feel what type it was. for example one dot is USB 2, two could be USB 3, etc

[–] [email protected] 20 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Have you looked at the naming of the usb standards? No you havn't otherwise you wouldn't make this sensible suggestion.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

the shenenigans with USB 3 naming you mean? you're right, this would be too logical for USB lol

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Don't worry, they made it worse with usb 4.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

oh they did? how so?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

USB 3.2 2x2 with 20 Gbps is the same as USB 4 Gen 2×2 with 20 Gbps

USB 4 Gen3x2 has 40 Gbps and was then renamed to USB 4 1.0

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

jesus what the fuck

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (10 replies)