isn't there already some tests somewhere already test the quality of cables and they all came out the same? i wouldn't listen to the BS the sales has to say about cable quality...

yea rocketpig , you are right those new "1.3 compliant " stickers on high-price cables are only there to sell them to [s]fools[/s] uninformed people,who believe the normal HDMI-cables wouldn't be able to transmit HDMI 1.3 signals

Entroper- and anyone who said retailers see cables as an easy sell- are dead on. Here we talk about videogame attach rates, well the same concept applies to tv, dvd players, computers, etc. My department is monitored to see who many "unattached" items we sell.

For my part, I always tell people that they do not need an expensive cable. As long as a cable is digital, it should be good. I really hate other stores that sell "premium" cables. I once asked a guy in Radio Shack about cables, on a whim, and he suggested some $100 hdmi cables. When I am on the clock I am required to try to sell people items in our store/website but I never try to talk them up in price.

Yup.  Very little profit is made on the "main" items like your TVs, computers, cameras, etc.  (NOTE: Not true for appliances, as these aren't sold with accessories.)  It's just like a car dealer; they try to throw in "extras" at ridiculously high margins, hoping you won't notice because you're getting such a great deal on the big-ticket item.  "Since you're spending $2000 on this TV, you want to get the best quality picture on it, right?  You want to get these $100 cables then."  And of course people buy them, because what's an extra 5% of the total bill to "make the most of their investment"?  It was bad enough when signal strength sort of mattered with analog signals, but with HDMI, it's irrelevant.

Yes, they do track the percentage of items that go out the door with attached accessories.  They also track the number of customers who walk out the door without buying something.  Retail chains have "scorecards" for absolutely everything, and you can bet that the employees know where they stand and what their "goals" are.

Meh, I'm going to stop before I write 6 pages on scorecards.  :)

rocketpig said: iclim4 said: rocketpig said: iclim4 said: rocketpig said: I hate to be the one to tell you this, buutttttt.... HDMI is a digital signal. You either get the signal or you don't. There is no quality corruption like there is in an analog cable. In short, a $4 cable works just as well as a $150 cable. Sorry you got screwed, man. from what i understand 1.3 works differently than 1.2, in that it doubles bandwidth. but only for applicable sourcces, its kinda like future proofing. though new sony video cams already take advantage of HDMI 1.3 See, but 1.3 still uses the same cabling. Just like a 1.1 USB cable works for 2.0. It's a digital signal. If you have the same copper running from port to port, it will work.  yeah it will work, but if your devices are 1.3 capable and you bought a cheap cable, youll be missing out on some new features. so no, i dont agree that 4$ cables would work just as well as $150 ones. Unless I'm gravely mistaken, a 1.1 HDMI cable will work with 1.3 with no problem whatsoever. BTW, I'd like to point out that I just bought a 1.3 cable for $5 on Monoprice. Guess what? They listed 1.1 cables as the same part number. Like I said, digital is digital. Same port, same number of pins= same fucking cable.  And honestly, if you can take complete advantage of HDMI 1.3 right now, you're a liar.

for a mod you lose your cool way too quick

since we both seem to use monoprice as a source heres a quote from them.

"Question: What''s the difference between different versions of HDMI? Would a 1.3 be better than 1.2?
Would 1.2b be better than 1.2a?

Answer: 



Like any advanced technology, HDMI is a continually progressing and improving system. While HDMI
was designed from the start to support advanced features like Full HD 1080p resolution, uncompressed
digital audio, and high resolution multi-channel digital formats like Dolby Digital, as the technology improves,
enhancements are added to the specifications to ensure proper interoperability between devices.

Most of the enhancements to HDMI until 1.3 were fairly minor and had no effect on the bandwidth. At 1.3 they doubled the throughput in order to support new upcoming features like higher resolutions, deep color, new multi-channel audio formats,
etc. So 1.3 cables are required for transmitting this additional data. However, since HDMI versions remain backward and
forward compatible, you can still use HDMI devices and cables of differing versions with each other.

Sub revisions denoted by a, b, and c, tend to be clarifications of specifications outlined in that particular revision. So,
a 1.2a cable is designed with a clearer understanding of what the 1.2 standard is, but a 1.2a is not necessarily better in performance than a 1.2."

 "And honestly, if you can take complete advantage of HDMI 1.3 right now, you're a liar. "

and where may i ask did i say this?
i didnt say i was taking advantage of 1.3, i said its future proofing.
and that if your devices were 1.3 compatible and your using 1.1 youd be missing out on some cool new features.
sony xbr4/5's are 1.3 compliant, and the new sony cameras take advantage of that with deeper color (x.v color)
sony ps3's also uses HDMI 1.3

but , if HDMI1.3 cables cost as cheap as you say it is and if you can find one for 4 dollars, that would pretty much end our initial discussion that 4$ cables work as well as $150 ones.

but again, even though the 1.1 cables would work in hdmi 1.3 ports, you wouldnt be able to take advantage of
the new features.

 oh and your usb 1.1 and 2.0 analogy, it will work but you lose the new features.
so yeah i like your analogy.

"We are quite certain that USB 2.0 flash drives are a good buy today. High-speed USB 2.0 ports are now available in all modern mainboards; in the near future they will completely replace USB 1.1 connectors, at the same time offering backward compatibility with all USB 1.1 devices.

As we have said in the beginning of the review, we were at first uncertain about USB 2.0 flash drives and thought it were a mere marketing trick. But we changed our opinion after we saw these drives in action. In our today’s contest, A-Data Speed Drive was four times faster than a USB 1.1 drive. To enjoy this speed you only need to have a USB 2.0 controller in your PC.

Speaking about this given USB 2.0 drive, we should say that the speeds we got during our tests (3MB/s read; 4MB/s write) are rather far from the ones promised by the manufacturer (7.5MB/s read; 5MB/s write). This is much higher than 600-800KB/s data-transfer rates of USB 1.1 flash drives, but still is much lower than 60MB/s – the maximum theoretical throughput of the USB 2.0 interface.

Flash drives have reached another milestone. The transition to USB 2.0 means that they got rid of their main disadvantage: low speed. We can’t say 4MB/s is very high, but A-Data’s device is just the beginning. There will be new and faster flash drives combining small dimensions, light weight, high capacity and high speed. "

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/storage/display/usb20-flash_10.html

Don't get sucked in people. Analog signals can take advantage of more expensive cables (i.e. better shielding) - but for digital cables, its a complete rip-off.

There is *no* difference between a $2 job and a $2000 job - none at all. If it works, you are getting the best possible data you will ever get. There is no "better".

rocketpig said: I hate to be the one to tell you this, buutttttt.... HDMI is a digital signal. You either get the signal or you don't. There is no quality corruption like there is in an analog cable. In short, a $4 cable works just as well as a $150 cable. Sorry you got screwed, man.

 You are "almost" correct. All cables work fine (I have 3 HDMI cables bought at $6 each). But some can be better than others and it actually matters for HDMI since sometimes some pixel data does not arrive (or arrives corrupted) and you will not see the pixel(s) for that frame. It's called "sparklies", just search for it plus hdmi.

Anyway, I agree with you, all cables work fine and expensive cables are a scam.

 

shams said: Don't get sucked in people. Analog signals can take advantage of more expensive cables (i.e. better shielding) - but for digital cables, its a complete rip-off. There is *no* difference between a $2 job and a $2000 job - none at all. If it works, you are getting the best possible data you will ever get. There is no "better".

it's both true and not true at the same time. Cheaper digital cables are fine when under 6' after you get past the 6foot or 6 meter barrier quality counts a lot more. In short if it's a temporary cable or not gonna be messed with get a cheap cable under 6' if it's going to be put in a wall and expected to hold up for years upon years you're gonna want to pay for the additional quality, better shielding better plating etc. As of now HDMI's are standard however as they become the dominant form of interface connection we may see them formated for only specific items(kinda like wii has it's own component/composite in or PS3's etc.) Multi av outs and plugs formatted for certain products may come in in the future a lot like what happened with standard A/V composite cables.

I got an HDMI to DVI cable for my LCD for $6 shipped off eBay. Yeah, buddy

 

... you got PWN3D, son!!!!

interesting! you learn something new every day! i shall keep this in mind for the future :P