mattnyc99 writes "After discovering a blinking problem associated with the HDCP handshake from an HDMI cable to the PlayStation 3, then solving it, Popular Mechanics has now set off a mini-war between Westinghouse and Sony. The 1080p TV set maker appears to be blaming Sony as the source of the blinking PS3, and the two powerhouse companies have organized a meeting to settle the score. From the article: '[Westinghouse had] one suggestion for PS3 owners with blinking Westinghouse televisions: Purchasing an HDMI to DVI adapter to bypass HDCP. Average cost of an adapter: $30. As we reported last week, Popular Mechanics has found an even easier solution: Unplugging the HDMI cable, and then plugging it back in'"
There's a lot of review in the first link and very little "blinking problem". Here's the relevant paragraph.
Our console also had a few technological burps that we weren't sure could be attributed to the PS3 or our test equipment. For instance, on multiple occasions, the HDMI connection to our 1080p set (a stunning piece of equipment itself) caused the image to blink on and off repeatedly--a problem that was solved by simply unplugging and replugging the cable. Was this Sony's fault or Westinghouse's? We're not sure, but no other device has caused our equipment to blink like that. Hmmm.
I'm giving it slightly more weight against Westinghouse than Sony. It seems odd to me that the PS3 would work perfectly fine with other HDTVs, and then be at fault for not working with one particular brand. It's possible that some small quirk of the PS3 is contributing, but given that we haven't seen reports of the PS3 failing with Samsungs, Toshibas etc. I highly doubt Westinghouse's claims about it being a problem with the "source".
It seems odd to me that the PS3 would work perfectly fine with other HDTVs, and then be at fault for not working with one particular brand.
Isn't it just as peculiar that the Westinghouse works just fine with other HDCP compliant devices without this issue? Your suspicions on this company are a symptom of Sony Fanboyism. There is a problem with these two companies products, they (not just Westinghouse) need to fix it.
Please refrain from the fanboyism card. Were it true, I'd be an Apple-Microsoft-Linux supporting hardcore Wii-Xbox-PS3 gamer voting Republican-Democratic-Independant. Having read the articles, Westinghouse initially blamed their own firmware before changing their story to blame the PS3. I also believe the articles imply that Westinghouse's TVs are somewhat slower than usual when handshaking the HDCP key. It's possible that the PS3 doesn't act forgivingly when the handshaking comes slowly. However, I don't th
As the PS3 suffers under far greater scrutiny here, I would postulate any problems with Westinghouse TVs would go largely unnoticed.
I don't for a second believe that the 200,000 PS3s in the world recieve more scrutiny than the Westinghouse LCDs. These TVs are quite popular amongst AV junkies because they are the most reasonably priced 1080p HDTVs available. If you think they aren't being agonized over by AV nerds, I'd suggest you take a look at AVSFORUM.COM. If I were in the tinfoil hat crew, I'd suggest th
Not having access to either a PS3 or a Westinghouse TV my questions would be: 1. Does the PS3 work with all other devices that have implemented this feature? 2. Does the Westinghouse TV work with all other devices that have implemented this feature? 3. Is there an issue with the connection (as in - are the cables good or to blame)?
I don't care either way. It doesn't impact me (and likely won't in the future)....unless the problem pops up with other HDMI interfaced devices.
No comment on whether they did the job right, they might suck at it and this could all be their fault, I'm just saying that as a practical matter they have to support the inputs that devices people will want to hook up will output. Anyone with a PS3 obviously isn't turned off by DRM on principle, and it would be foolish of Westinghouse not to support HDCP. They don't only support HDCP, they support multiple inputs, again for practical reasons. They don't seem to really care about DRM, either, other than
Its just a matter of the handshake for HDCP not waiting long enough. The PS3 expects a reply to the handshake within a certain amount of time, and some older sets or ones that cut corners (Westinghouse - why did you think it was so cheap?) take an awfully long time to say 'yes, hi, here's the signal'.
So - not Sony's fault. However, I don't see why Sony couldn't easily tell the PS3 to wait a bit longer for the handshake, which is probably what will happen.
Also - there's typically no need to re-plug the HDMI cable if you happen to have this blinking phenomenon happening to you; just cycle the video Sources on yout TV. That should force it to re-negotiate. (My TV doesn't do this but a friend's does.)
Honestly, I almost think Sony shouldn't increase the PS3's handshake time. It would certainly fix the issue, but at the same time it might give Westinghouse and those who would see Sony perish in flames fuel for the fire. It's be much better if first they could get a concession from Westinghouse that its HDCP response was beyond normal tolerance levels and outside the reasonable wait time an HDMI compliant device should expect. Then they could clearly say, "The PS3 was fine, but we're fixing this so that our
Westinghouse also previously claimed the problem was in their firmware before changing their story to lay the blame on the PS3. That's a large part of why I'm giving Sony the benefit of the doubt. The articles indicate that Westinghouse TVs take longer for their handshakes than other televisions. Perhaps the PS3 is less forgiving when this falls out of the HDMI specs than other equipment, and could be blamed slightly for not handling exceptions well. However, that doesn't change that Westinghouse appears to
Its just a matter of the handshake for HDCP not waiting long enough. The PS3 expects a reply to the handshake within a certain amount of time
And within the HDCP documentation is their a timeout value specified when the sending unit should give up? If so, is Sony giving up before the specified timeout?
If there's no timeout value specified, I'd say it's the designers of the specification that are to blame. This kind of problem crops up all the time. There's some critical spec that isn't specified, and one
It seems odd that this issue would only appear on Westinghouse displays if the problem was with the PS3. I own a PS3 and have it connected to a Samsung TV via HDMI and have never seen this issue.
Yes, but if the PS3s were the problem, we'd be hearing about it from more than just Westinghouse owners.
At BEST its something in the combination of the two (Westinghouse not being quick enough on the reply and Sony not allowing any leeway in waiting for the reply).
I am now worried to death that my tv will have issues with the PS3. Even though Sony demo'ed the PS3 with the tv that I have, it still means nothing to me until real people post up real info. If you have your PS3 hooked up via HDMI please post your results here. I am looking for a Sony xbr2 (46 inch version if that matters at all) that has tried this. Thanks for any info guys and gals.
Sony xbr2 60 inches-Displays image fine when it is available but losses image randomly. Blackouts happen and then the image reappears. xbr2 46 inch-No issues at all, syncs right up. xbr1 50 inch-only displays at 720p (this could be because this set doesnt support 1080p, more research neeed) xrd 60 and 50 inches-Randomly loses signal like the 60" Sony xbr2
Samsung BD-P1000-steady flickering image other display "sparkly" noise images with 1080p resolution but seems fine with 720p. 4696D-reports no signal found via hdmi sometimes and other times it works great. HL-S5087W-no issues with hmdi
Panasonic TH42PX500-Randomly loses signal like the 60" Sony xbr2
Westinghouse LVM-47w1-Randomly loses signal like the 60" Sony xbr2 42w2-flashing screen and signal loss but works fine via hmdi-dvi 37w3-flashing screen and no signal, turn off the tv and turn it back on and it seems to work.
JVC JVC HD-61FN97-seems to work fine with everything except 480p via hdmi
Is any of the content you're playing through the HD-DVD Player HDCP protected? My understanding is that HDCP use is still optional and the content being played determines if it's enabled (but i may be wrong on that). If the HDCP handshake is what's causing the flickering, and none of your HD-DVD's are forcing the DVD player to use HDCP, it the issue wouldn't show up with the device.
As Popular Mechanic already pointed out this is the TV's fault. Westinghouse isn't responding the the HDCP handshake fast enough (as defined by the HDCP spec). If you call Westinghouse they will even send out a tech to update your firmware to fix it.
Before you get that tech out to fix it, the DVI convert will work well, or Component cables, or the hack-o-the-week of unplug the HDMI cable.
What we don't know if the handshake time is part of the spec for HDMI/DVI. It is possible that Westinghouse is within the specified handshake period, and that the PS3 is not waiting long enough because in their testing with their Sony sets, everything worked fine ^ ^. Of course it is also possible that Westinghouse is out of spec. It's also possible that there is no spec at all for that particular aspect of the protocol.
Why they didn't just have HDMI's "copy protection" be ROT13?
It wouldn't be any less secure than the stupid crypto they used, would still make sure the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions are in force, and would be less likely to be F@#)$(*ed up.
(This post has been double-encrypted with ROT13. Reading this post without authorization will violate the DMCA anti-circumvention protections)
Here's where the providers of "stuff" for "us" have gone astray... They're arguing the wrong argument. None of us give a flying f*** whose fault the blinky is... we're freaking customers! And instead of apologies and fixes with humble apologies to the customers, these people don't have enough fingers on their hands to point blame on someone else.
Message to providers of stuff: Provide us with good products, easy to use, and at reasonable cost and price. If something is wrong with the product, fix it.
Reminds me of the old tire pressure debate. Auto-makers recommend tire pressures that improve the car's ride. Tire-makers, conversely, recommend tire pressures that improve the life of the tire. They are constantly bickering over this and many other issues [wikipedia.org]. It's in both their financial and legal best interests to blame one another rather than concentrate on the consumer and his interests.
I knew about the HDMI->DVI solution a while ago as I started off without an HDMI->HDMI cable. After installing the 1.50 firmware released last night my PS3 menu would not appear. I got a black screen (but the TV detected signal). When I managed my way blindly through the menu to start a game the game appeared fine. But when I quit back to the menu I was once again welcomed by a black screen.
I called Sony support. They had me power off (I forgot about that switch in the back) and connect the composite cables (yuck) then reselect HDMI from the menu. This worked.
I didn't want to get into the blinking issue with him, but when I told them that I worked around it with an HDMI->DVI cable the rep expressed surprise that it didn't break my TV and told me that Sony does not support this method.
The Popular Mechanics article mentioned that some VIP at Westinghouse said technicians would be sent out to repair all of the affected TVs. When I called Westinghouse (prior to contacting Sony), they said that they haven't figured out the logistics of the sending technicians all around the world to upgrade the firmware. They told me to call back in a few weeks.
After purchasing my first HDMI->DVI cable from RadioShak for $50, I picked up all my other HDMI and DVI cables from mycablemart.com for under $10. They work excellently. You'll have a hard time finding a better price.
You can get them even cheaper online at www.monoprice.com - extremely good cables (I have several HDMI, DVI, DVI->HDMI adapters, fiber optical, etc.) and you can get long 25 feet ones for $30.:)
I don't know what "HDMI to DVI adapter to bypass HDCP" means, and quite honestly, I don't care. But my question is, do manufacturers expect consumers to be able to understand all of this mess? What ever happened to plugging a game system into a TV? How many adapters and acronyms are people going to tolerate just to plug the damned thing to the TV? Sounds ridiculous to me. I'm a big fan of plain ol' RCA jacks: Red and white for audio, yellow for video. It's simple, and you can't screw it up. Just beca
In theory, HDMA makes this even easier than your three little RCA jacks. One plug does everything. It really couldn't be any more simple. Unfortunately, some people cut corners and managed to screw it up.
In theory, HDMA makes this even easier than your three little RCA jacks. One plug does everything.
I wouldn't want it do everything, though. The speakers built into my TV set are pretty lousy; I'd rather put the audio through my 5.1 surround receiver. With discrete audio and video connections, it's easy to set this up: the component video cables go from my DVD player to the TV, and the TOSlink optical audio cable goes from my DVD player to the receiver.
I don't know how I'd even do that with HDMI connection
I never noticed all of the noise in composite signals until I got a nice TV display. The noise isn't interference, it's due to the frequency-division multiplexing that composite video uses to send three signals down one wire
But my question is, do manufacturers expect consumers to be able to understand all of this mess? What ever happened to plugging a game system into a TV?
When was this ever true? Even the original NES had people dealing with RF-output versus composite, and back then customers also had to deal with TVs that took mono-in, and figuring out that you could just connect the RCA jack for one stereo channel and it would work.
Just because the new sets and devices (like the PS3) are higher definition doesn't mean that plugging the damn things in should be so complicated. Why do I need 6 ways to connect a TV to a signal (coax cable, RCA plugs, S-video, HDMI, DVI, optical, etc.)? It makes me realize that I'm happy with my regular tube TV. It's cheap, it's simple, it looks good, and you don't have to go through 12 pages of directions to plug it in.
Owners of black and white TV's thought their sets "looked good" too until they saw o
"The 1080p TV set maker appears to be blaming Sony as the source of the blinking PS3, and the two powerhouse companies have organized a meeting to settle the score."
So, are we talking a death match here or will it be paper rock scissors to settle this?
The problem is neither Sony, nor Westinghouse. It's Intel.
The problem is due to the Digital Compatibility Prevention (HDCP) [wikipedia.org]. The protocol is designed to prevent devices working together unless each manufacturer pays royalties to Digital Content Protection LLC, a subsiduary of Intel. The connection used is HDMI, whose specification mandates the use of Digital Compatibility Prevention, which is a shame, because otherwise it would be a nice connector.
Until there is a digital connection standard which does not require that end-users be treated like criminals for having expensive displays, I will not be buying an HDTV, nor a PS3, and I urge others to do the same.
I'm betting on delivering video over gigabit ethernet winning, because it's cheap, cat 6 cables are dirt cheap, and it doesn't require royalties. I would suggest HD-SDI (co-ax is even cheaper than UTP), but the licence agreement prevents it being used in "consumer" applications.
Until there is a digital connection standard which does not require that end-users be treated like criminals for having expensive displays, I will not be buying an HDTV
DVI + S/PDIF FTW!
I believe Sony does get some royalties for the the digital audio standard, but they don't mandate any form of copy prevention on it though.
All an HDMI to DVI adaptor does is take the video signal alone, without the audio channels, and feed it through the DVI side. If the video is HDCP encrypted, it will be encrypted on the DVI side as well as the adaptor is just passing the signal through - with the same results if the problem is the handshake speed as described.
The problem is the HDCP encryption, not the cable itself. The way to think of HDMI is a cable that bundles together DVI video and PCM audio all in one cable (that's not quite correct, but a good way to think about it).
The summary stated that Westinghouse said "Oh, just use an HDMI to DVI cable" - except that would defeat half the point of trying to use HDMI in the first place - the handshake is to let the DRM know that it's ok to send the 1080p signal because there isn't a recording device in between the PS3 and TV set (for pirating media such as movies)...
The other half of using HDMI is for the audio and video to be on one cable. It's actually rather funny, because my brother-in-law still thinks that HDMI is just for putting the a/v on one cable, and that there's no DRM involved...
While I appreciate the pun in saying Westinghouse is a powerhouse company, it should be noted that in the present situation, they're actually a very small company. Westinghouse (the giant company) sell its trademarked name for other companies to use. So the TV maker Westinghouse's only relationship to Westinghouse Electric Company is the logo.
translation: The HDMI cable is useless hardware created to make life more difficult for consumers who respect copyrights, decreasing the inherent value of retail media, and increasing the value of pirated goods.
There's only one way this can be settled... (Score:5, Funny)
Super Mario Kart (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Rainbow Road (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Banana peels (Score:2)
the irony? sony winning using a nintendo game.
Relevant Section (Score:3)
Yes, It's Sony's fault (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
There you go overspecifying again.
Re:Yes, It's Sony's fault (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Yes, It's Sony's fault (Score:5, Insightful)
Isn't it just as peculiar that the Westinghouse works just fine with other HDCP compliant devices without this issue? Your suspicions on this company are a symptom of Sony Fanboyism. There is a problem with these two companies products, they (not just Westinghouse) need to fix it.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Having read the articles, Westinghouse initially blamed their own firmware before changing their story to blame the PS3. I also believe the articles imply that Westinghouse's TVs are somewhat slower than usual when handshaking the HDCP key. It's possible that the PS3 doesn't act forgivingly when the handshaking comes slowly. However, I don't th
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't for a second believe that the 200,000 PS3s in the world recieve more scrutiny than the Westinghouse LCDs. These TVs are quite popular amongst AV junkies because they are the most reasonably priced 1080p HDTVs available. If you think they aren't being agonized over by AV nerds, I'd suggest you take a look at AVSFORUM.COM. If I were in the tinfoil hat crew, I'd suggest th
Re:Yes, It's Sony's fault (Score:4, Insightful)
So by your logic, if the TV works fine with EVERY other player out there, then the ONE that's not working (the PS3) must obviously be at fault right?
What we have here is a compatibility issue between the two. Any finger pointing to lay blame on one or the other is pointless.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
1. Does the PS3 work with all other devices that have implemented this feature?
2. Does the Westinghouse TV work with all other devices that have implemented this feature?
3. Is there an issue with the connection (as in - are the cables good or to blame)?
I don't care either way. It doesn't impact me (and likely won't in the future)....unless the problem pops up with other HDMI interfaced devices.
Layne
Westinghouse has to be compliant (Score:3, Interesting)
No Sony's Fault but Sony-fixable (Score:5, Informative)
So - not Sony's fault. However, I don't see why Sony couldn't easily tell the PS3 to wait a bit longer for the handshake, which is probably what will happen.
Also - there's typically no need to re-plug the HDMI cable if you happen to have this blinking phenomenon happening to you; just cycle the video Sources on yout TV. That should force it to re-negotiate. (My TV doesn't do this but a friend's does.)
Re: (Score:2)
It's be much better if first they could get a concession from Westinghouse that its HDCP response was beyond normal tolerance levels and outside the reasonable wait time an HDMI compliant device should expect. Then they could clearly say, "The PS3 was fine, but we're fixing this so that our
Re: (Score:2)
That's a large part of why I'm giving Sony the benefit of the doubt. The articles indicate that Westinghouse TVs take longer for their handshakes than other televisions. Perhaps the PS3 is less forgiving when this falls out of the HDMI specs than other equipment, and could be blamed slightly for not handling exceptions well. However, that doesn't change that Westinghouse appears to
Re: (Score:2)
Its just a matter of the handshake for HDCP not waiting long enough. The PS3 expects a reply to the handshake within a certain amount of time
And within the HDCP documentation is their a timeout value specified when the sending unit should give up? If so, is Sony giving up before the specified timeout?
If there's no timeout value specified, I'd say it's the designers of the specification that are to blame. This kind of problem crops up all the time. There's some critical spec that isn't specified, and one
I think I'm on Sony's side on this one... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
At BEST its something in the combination of the two (Westinghouse not being quick enough on the reply and Sony not allowing any leeway in waiting for the reply).
Re:I think I'm on Westinghouse's side on this one. (Score:5, Informative)
From phantomhitman on AVS Forums thread http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=7
Parent
Re:I think I'm on Westinghouse's side on this one. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
For once it isn't Sony's fault (Score:5, Informative)
Before you get that tech out to fix it, the DVI convert will work well, or Component cables, or the hack-o-the-week of unplug the HDMI cable.
Re: (Score:2)
Won't you then be hosed when you want to use the system to watch movies that require an HDCP interconnect?
Really what we need is for the FCC to ban HDCP in the interests of interoperability.
Re: (Score:2)
What we don't know if the handshake time is part of the spec for HDMI/DVI. It is possible that Westinghouse is within the specified handshake period, and that the PS3 is not waiting long enough because in their testing with their Sony sets, everything worked fine ^ ^. Of course it is also possible that Westinghouse is out of spec. It's also possible that there is no spec at all for that particular aspect of the protocol.
OWEL
So.. how is this Sony's fault exactly? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm all for bashing Sony, but, if the TV has an upgrade that eliminates this problem, why is this Sony's fault?
Ahh, StupidDRM strikes again... (Score:3, Funny)
It wouldn't be any less secure than the stupid crypto they used, would still make sure the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions are in force, and would be less likely to be F@#)$(*ed up.
(This post has been double-encrypted with ROT13. Reading this post without authorization will violate the DMCA anti-circumvention protections)
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit! You cracked ROT26!
what about we the customers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's where the providers of "stuff" for "us" have gone astray... They're arguing the wrong argument. None of us give a flying f*** whose fault the blinky is... we're freaking customers! And instead of apologies and fixes with humble apologies to the customers, these people don't have enough fingers on their hands to point blame on someone else.
Message to providers of stuff: Provide us with good products, easy to use, and at reasonable cost and price. If something is wrong with the product, fix it.
Re: (Score:2)
-Eric
They should get Muslix64 to fix it (Score:2)
-Eric
Sony doesn't support HDMI-DVI cables (Score:5, Informative)
I called Sony support. They had me power off (I forgot about that switch in the back) and connect the composite cables (yuck) then reselect HDMI from the menu. This worked.
I didn't want to get into the blinking issue with him, but when I told them that I worked around it with an HDMI->DVI cable the rep expressed surprise that it didn't break my TV and told me that Sony does not support this method.
The Popular Mechanics article mentioned that some VIP at Westinghouse said technicians would be sent out to repair all of the affected TVs. When I called Westinghouse (prior to contacting Sony), they said that they haven't figured out the logistics of the sending technicians all around the world to upgrade the firmware. They told me to call back in a few weeks.
After purchasing my first HDMI->DVI cable from RadioShak for $50, I picked up all my other HDMI and DVI cables from mycablemart.com for under $10. They work excellently. You'll have a hard time finding a better price.
Re: (Score:2)
Acronym hell? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't want it do everything, though. The speakers built into my TV set are pretty lousy; I'd rather put the audio through my 5.1 surround receiver. With discrete audio and video connections, it's easy to set this up: the component video cables go from my DVD player to the TV, and the TOSlink optical audio cable goes from my DVD player to the receiver.
I don't know how I'd even do that with HDMI connection
Re: (Score:2)
Of course you're referring to composite signals there. Simply adding two more RCA cables will get you a *much* better component signal.
Check out the wikipedia articles on composite video [wikipedia.org] and component video [wikipedia.org].
I never noticed all of the noise in composite signals until I got a nice TV display. The noise isn't interference, it's due to the frequency-division multiplexing that composite video uses to send three signals down one wire
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When was this ever true? Even the original NES had people dealing with RF-output versus composite, and back then customers also had to deal with TVs that took mono-in, and figuring out that you could just connect the RCA jack for one stereo channel and it would work.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Owners of black and white TV's thought their sets "looked good" too until they saw o
I can see it now.... (Score:2)
So, are we talking a death match here or will it be paper rock scissors to settle this?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
-Eric
Neither (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is due to the Digital Compatibility Prevention (HDCP) [wikipedia.org]. The protocol is designed to prevent devices working together unless each manufacturer pays royalties to Digital Content Protection LLC, a subsiduary of Intel. The connection used is HDMI, whose specification mandates the use of Digital Compatibility Prevention, which is a shame, because otherwise it would be a nice connector.
Until there is a digital connection standard which does not require that end-users be treated like criminals for having expensive displays, I will not be buying an HDTV, nor a PS3, and I urge others to do the same.
I'm betting on delivering video over gigabit ethernet winning, because it's cheap, cat 6 cables are dirt cheap, and it doesn't require royalties. I would suggest HD-SDI (co-ax is even cheaper than UTP), but the licence agreement prevents it being used in "consumer" applications.
Re: (Score:2)
DVI + S/PDIF FTW!
I believe Sony does get some royalties for the the digital audio standard, but they don't mandate any form of copy prevention on it though.
HDMI - DVI would do nothing (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is the HDCP encryption, not the cable itself. The way to think of HDMI is a cable that bundles together DVI video and PCM audio all in one cable (that's not quite correct, but a good way to think about it).
Using HDMI (PS3) to DVI (TV) is pointless (Score:3, Insightful)
The other half of using HDMI is for the audio and video to be on one cable. It's actually rather funny, because my brother-in-law still thinks that HDMI is just for putting the a/v on one cable, and that there's no DRM involved...
Westinghouse not a Powerhouse (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)