Print

[bucko]

But I thought ANA Scaler was changed to HANA because ANA was analogue only. So if they make a adapter of some sort surely it would be a kind of box in the middle of the cable converting the signal to digital?

[feflicker]

QUOTE

I still dont understand why anyone would claim that component matches VGA or HDMI, i can only presume that these people have either never tried such cables or dont have a TV thats capable of showing you the difference

QUOTE

Alot of people dont think there is a real world diference between the two

Of course there are variables. Different ways of creating pictures, quality of components, different manufacturers have different technology, etc. It is very possible that some would think HDMI doesn't look better, but then see a different TV that has more separation between component/hdmi and change their mind.

IMO, if your TV is very good at handling component, you won't notice much of a difference when going to VGA or HDMI, especially if your TV doesn't handle VGA/HDMI well. You see the point? There are tons of variables here, down to how the picture is generated (CRT, lcd, plasma, projection, etc)

[lostboyz]

i think the only advantage would be audio. I dont know for certain but HD sound formats are too much for optical but that dosent mean the 360 is incapable of making the signals. Again, I haven't messed with the 360s AV port or looked specifically.

[ConteZero76]

It probably will be a component->HDMI cable; there's no reason to a HDMI->component cable since the AV connector is still the same as the older unit, so you can just plug a component cable even on a Elite SKU.
A component->HDMI could fool some idiot who doesn't understand that in a analog to digital converter the bottleneck is the analog signal, so the whole purpose of a HDMI converter is fooled.

PS: PerfectGun: If they keep going this way they'll probably finish to "update" the unit just two days before XBox720.

[mike8519]

Would be better if they released a cable that plugs into the back proprietary port and converts a VGA signal (for upscaling/1080p) with an inline adapter to HDMI.

[slyt]

Surely VGA -> HDMI would be better as you could then get 1080p upscaling, or native HD content.

I use VGA for the upscaling purposes, ok so you dont notice much difference, but I like to know my DVDs are being upscaled all the same.

Component -> HDMI would not upscale DVD, where as VGA-> HDMI would.

Im not overly impressed by the sound of Elite, sounds like a lot of cash for something that I dont need, VGA is the best my TV can handle (720p / 1080i) and unless someone prevents HD upscaling over VGA (wouldnt this affect many PC users?) there is no benefit to me.

I could just get the HDD separately and wait for a 65nm core, quite DVD drive core machine. Seems best option for me right now to be honest.

[redwolf]

QUOTE(picopir8 @ Mar 29 2007, 07:28 PM)

First, HDMI is not better than component.  If you use good cables, component will look just as good.  People somehow think that HDMI will look better because its all digital, and while it reduces the odds of signal noise, the picture itself is no better than a component signal on a good cable which is more resistant to noise.

i have to disagree with you on that. not sure what model TV you have or whatever. but there are clearly BIG difference in component vs VGA on xbox 360. not matter how much you spend on time adjusting & tuning your TV from colour to sharpness, but picture in VGA is much sharper and clearer. ok xbox360 may have little in the washout colour department, but it is still much better then component cable... so with HDMI you'll get even better quality.

though not sure how this component to HDMI will work... and if they are working on this adaptor, why would Microsoft make it Component to HDMI (or even VGA to HDMI)? will it have "Component-in" connection? so people can use it on other devices apart from Xbox 360? hmm probably they wanna sell more. IMO they probably make something like the Dreamcast had with the VGA adaptor. ie. one end plugs directly to x360 and other with HDMI out  

[TheIrishLad]

Component to HDMI?    You've got to be kidding me....

[elitegamer360]

QUOTE(BigSteel @ Mar 29 2007, 06:23 PM)

Here's how it will go:

1) Rumor starts (we have that now)
2) A photoshopped image appears
3) Everyone calls fake on the image
4) A real image will appear
5) Everyone calls that fake too
6) M$ sends a msg that they can neither confirm nor deny the rumor
7) The adapter is confirmed real in the xbox community
M$ offically annouces the adapter at some ridiculous price
9) Everyone bitches about the price and everything else

That is pretty much how all things seem to go lately  

Spot on.

QUOTE(PerfectGun @ Mar 29 2007, 08:21 PM)

Since the old outdated Premium 360 cannot output a digital signal I don't see what the advantage would be.  I'm thinking this is BS.  Even for audio there is no advantage over the current optical output.  Since HDMI has it all in one cable but if you are coming off a component it defeats that purpose as well.  Current Premium owners where just beta testers for the real console that has been planned all along(Elite).  Even the early adopters of the Elite will get burned since it doesn't include the 65nm chipset or the quieter DVD drive, it will still be a ticking Red Ring of Death timebomb and being black that's even more heat being obsorbed.  Hopefully the 65nm and quiter drive will be in later this year around Holiday 07.

Thank you, people should not get conned by MS again, people should just wait until the 65nm CPU is out and we will have the real Elite, by dong this MS wants to get more money out of us until the proper Elite is out.

QUOTE(mike8519 @ Mar 29 2007, 08:58 PM)

Would be better if they released a cable that plugs into the back proprietary port and converts a VGA signal (for upscaling/1080p) with an inline adapter to HDMI.

Sounds good but the signal is still analogue so picture will be the same just different port.

[jdsony]

If they COULD make an adapter they wouldn't have needed to make the "ELITE" at all. The only reason they are making the Elite is because of the whiners wanting HDMI. HDMI is a hyped up interface by the consortium that gets paid for every license and the people that brought you copy protection. Sure there is a difference, sure its quality is variable depending on your TV but is it really worth crying about and spending so much extra money on? But...but...it only uses one cable! If you want it so bad buy it otherwise find something else to cry about. Babies.

[jaygould30]

QUOTE(EMoNey1 @ Mar 29 2007, 08:55 AM)

Did anyone elese notice that it says component to HDMI in the title and HDMI to component in the body.  Obviously, it is HDMI to component which will do this guy no good.  I don't see a point of a component to HDMI as you are only as good as your weakest interface.  Someone please correct me if I am wrong here.

There is no reason that they would release a HDMI to component adapter. There is still the regular A/V connection on the elite and it also includes the component/composite cables that come in the premium system. Therefore you already have the option of HDMI/Component/Composite.

QUOTE(picopir8 @ Mar 29 2007, 09:28 AM)

First, HDMI is not better than component.  If you use good cables, component will look just as good.  People somehow think that HDMI will look better because its all digital, and while it reduces the odds of signal noise, the picture itself is no better than a component signal on a good cable which is more resistant to noise.

That said, Component to HDMI, possible.
HDMI to component, no way in hell!.  HDMI signals carry digital copy protection which only allows the signal  to pass when connected to an approve device when the copy protection flag is set.  Otherwise, the signal is blocked to prevent someone from recording the signal.  Such a converter would either filter out the copy protection which would be illegal in the USA under the DMCA, or the thing would block the signal when the copy protection flag is set.  If that flag is ever set on HD-DVDs, then this device would block those DVDs from being viewed on your xbox-360.

In very general terms you are completely correct.

QUOTE(wans @ Mar 29 2007, 09:58 AM)

Not to mention the fact the the "elite" uses a new upscalling chip called the HANA chip, current gen boxes have the analouge equivelent called ANA.

Component picture sucks, i used VGA for months untill my amp brok and i havent bothered to find an adaptor to use stereo sound with my cable.  Ive never used anything other than an upscalling DVD player through HDMI, and trust me, it beat the component cables that were also supplied with the unit.

I still dont understand why anyone would claim that component matches VGA or HDMI, i can only presume that these people have either never tried such cables or dont have a TV thats capable of showing you the difference.

Component does not suck. Component has been used for years and has been one of the best types of connections for a long time. How you can say component sucks is beyond me.  If your getting a poor picture over component then your equipment has a poor component parts or your using a very poor cable.  There is a lot more to the comparison of component/vga/hdmi/dvi/etc. then what you can read in a few page article or what most people are even able to comprehend, believe me I've done testing and studying of all forms of connections over the years. Do you realize that a majority of cable and satellite boxes have been proven to produce a better picture through component then HDMI? I bet, like most people, you don't. I'm not even going to get into a debate over this (as I've been through many of them) but know that your assumptions of component is very incorrect. If I followed this logic then all digital projectors would be better then their comparable CRT projectors which is not the case. Do you know that there are 10 year old CRT projects that display 1080p and greater through component? And that the image quality from these 10 year old projectors is actually more realistic than those produced by digital projectors releases in the last few years? But I guess everyone should listen to you because "you tried one upscaling DVD player with both component and HDMI"? Wow! It never crossed your mind that the component cables supplied in the unit were shitty or that the HDMI connection on the back of box was made of high quality parts then the component connections were? It never crossed your mind that the companies intentionally do this to promote the use of HDMI because, well, you bought a DVD player with HDMI so they expect you to use it instead of the component connection thus they spent no money towards the component parts? What I'm trying to say is don't make some sweeping generalization about something you obviously have little experience with because "you've tested it on your one DVD player.".

[dokworm]

QUOTE

HDMI Myths and Misconceptions:

1. "Only HDMI carries High-Definition Signals." Wrong, wrong, wrong. Analog component video and RGB both support high-definition resolutions, and what's more, they're more robust and dependable over distance. There likely will be cases, in the future, where high-definition signals are available from certain source recordings only through the HDMI port, and only downconverted standard-definition video will be available on analog outputs. However, as of this writing, none of the recordings available on high-definition disc formats have the "flag" set to limit HD output to HDMI. Some "upconverting" DVD players will output their upconverted signals only on HDMI, but the value of DVD-player upconversion ranges from dubious to clearly negative as in most cases it only adds an additional rescaling step to the signal chain.

2. "HDMI provides a pure uncompressed HD signal." This is one of those statements which is true if taken in a wholly irrelevant sense, and untrue if taken in its only meaningful sense. Unless you work in a video production facility, chances are that you've never seen uncompressed HD video. That's a shame, because it's gorgeous; side-by-side comparison with, say, an ATSC broadcast signal or an HD-DVD signal can be a rude awakening, and just serves to highlight how heavily-compressed and artifact-laced all of the HD video sources we view are. No broadcast, and no recording medium, on the consumer market provides uncompressed HD video, and none are likely to do so in the near term.

So what is meant by the assertion that the HDMI signal is uncompressed? What this too-often-repeated statement actually means is that the signal is not further compressed when it is translated from its source format to HDMI. But the same is true of all source-to-display baseband video formats; component video and RGB are not compressed after the signal is decoded from a DVD or a broadcast signal. The assertion that HDMI is "uncompressed HD video" means only, then, that HDMI is no worse in this respect than any competing video format.

3. "When I use a digital source, I get a pure digital-to-digital signal chain using HDMI." This, again, is true in an essentially meaningless sense, and untrue in the sense in which most people actually understand it. The assumption behind the statement is that the signal flows, unaltered and without degradation, from a digital source to a digital display without ever being converted, and that by eliminating these conversions--specifically, digital-to-analog conversions--one gets a better picture. But the HDMI signal is not the same as the signal recorded on a DVD, or sent in an ATSC or QAM transmission; all of those are compressed formats which encode video in an entirely different way from HDMI. Accordingly, to get from the one to the other requires decoding and conversion. In every case, the signal is decoded and rendered as a video stream. If the original signal is in one resolution, and the output format is in another, the image will be rescaled; if the original signal is recorded in one colorspace and the output format is in another, it'll be converted. There is nothing inherently perfect or error-free about digital-to-digital, as opposed to digital-to-analog, scaling and conversions, and some things -- scaling, in particular -- are often more easily done well in the analog domain than in the digital domain.

So, yes, a DVD player putting out an upscaled HD resolution through an HDMI cable into a plasma display is an "all-digital" signal chain--but it's an all-digital chain in which the colorspace is being converted, the original signal is being decoded and converted to another format, and the image is being rescaled not once, but twice along the way. Is doing this digitally superior to doing it in a chain that involves analog conversions? In any particular case it may be, or it may not be, but there's no reason in principle to think that it necessarily will.

[wolrahnaes]

Am I the only one missing the point of such a thing?

No matter what you're plugging in to the TV, it's still coming out of the Xbox as analog.  You're not gaining anything and instead spending a lot of money for basically nothing.  These things won't be cheap.  Sampling analog signals accurately at HD resolutions while also converting a S/PDIF signal to the audio format HDMI uses (I have no idea what it is, but it's not S/PDIF) is the stuff of expensive chips.

I do have to disagree with dokworm, HDMI is clearly better than either analog interface at 1080p (hell, on a computer monitor I can usually tell the difference from VGA to DVI at 1440x900 and above., but below that it's hard to tell the difference.

[kevhonda]

QUOTE(BigSteel @ Mar 29 2007, 06:23 PM)

Here's how it will go:

1) Rumor starts (we have that now)
2) A photoshopped image appears
3) Everyone calls fake on the image
4) A real image will appear
5) Everyone calls that fake too
6) M$ sends a msg that they can neither confirm nor deny the rumor
7) The adapter is confirmed real in the xbox community
M$ offically annouces the adapter at some ridiculous price
9) Everyone bitches about the price and everything else

That is pretty much how all things seem to go lately  

ROFLMAO oh my GOD is this some sort of "Operation Standard" for news lately!! Not saying that the HDMI "adapter" will have GREAT quality but  1.) It will eliminate some bitching about running out of ports b/c xbox doesn't offer HDMI 2.) Im sure M$ will figure something out to make the adapter perform a little bit better than a standard adapter would (just maybe)

@BigSteel ....these 9 rules should be on the home page of all xbox news sites.

[stepeters]

QUOTE

I still dont understand why anyone would claim that component matches VGA or HDMI, i can only presume that these people have either never tried such cables or dont have a TV thats capable of showing you the difference.

hmm.

my tv supports VGA / HDMI / Component.

i've run the 360 via VGA and the picture is good, but the colours appear a little washed out for my liking.
i've since reverted back to component (720p) and can say that the picture is vastly superior to VGA.

i also have a telewest / v+ drive which is connected via HDMI (also 720p, and a £50 HDMI cable). the picture
from that is great, but, tbh is no better or worse than when i've tested the tv drive with component cables.

the only advantage i can see of using VGA / HDMI is the option for 1080p, which my tv doesn't support
anyway. so, for me component in 720p is every bit as good as HDMI in 720p.

Ste