Since it's obvious you think I'm an idiot, allow me to quote some other people. Maybe you'll listen to them:
"The Cable Guy wrote on Jan 2, 2008 2:45 PM:
" Very good and informative article. Interesting comments: 50% right and 50% still ignorant. "
"Electrical Engineer wrote on Jan 10, 2008 11:44 PM:
" Even it's digital signal, there's a thing call Bit Error Rate (BER). Signal with better quality usually has less BER, so it's not a poor cable will not work completely. It'll still work, but the throughput will hurt as the receiver may throw away packet that has bit error in it. "
"our high cost isn't only due to the the fact that the best quality cables are used, but also the best and most durable connectors, the most effective shielding, and also for market positioning. ....... For longer distances (over 15ft) quality matters, and as someone mentioned if you care frequently connecting and disconnecting them, our cables are for you. "
leek wrote on Jan 2, 2008 6:29 AM:
" Actually, DVI/HDMI does not have digital error correction, and is limited to a short cable length before the signals break up. Component video, OTOH, can go for miles if the cables and ends are impedance-matched: http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messa...79/122868.html
fdsa wrote on Jan 1, 2008 11:39 PM:
" Eh, how about the original author give me some physics or go get an EE degree? Just because it's not analogue doesn't mean it doesn't get effed up along the way. I've had multiple bad experiences with HDMI cables resulting in blue tinted screens, non-sharp images, etc. That's because you get bad connection at the tip, and data loss along the high resistance wire.
"Glad you think you know what you're talking about enough to publish it... and lead many people astray. Whoever comments saying that this article is "absolutely correct" and whatnot should really go learn some science. "
Mike wrote on Dec 31, 2007 10:37 PM:
"You [the original author] are wrong. Are you an EE? Your terminology seems to suggest you are an "enthusiast". A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. "
Carlman wrote on Dec 31, 2007 9:02 PM:
" Saying a cable doesn't make a difference because it is carrying a digital signal shows some ignorance. Your article assumes everyone is Joe Consumer that just walked into a big box store and bought a new flat screen monitor. Be sure to indicate your audience and that this is your opinion rather than spouting that all digital cables, connections, error corrections are absolute and perfect.... and that if anyone says otherwise, it's a scam. I would wager you're a no-name writer with a gripe given the way this article is written.
"Some people can see and especially hear a difference with various types of digital cables. Do your own research and make up your own mind before believing anyone. I agree expensive cables aren't for everyone but not that they aren't for anyone.
"Alec wrote on Dec 31, 2007 5:48 PM:
" This is important information for consumers, however part of your statements are incorrect. There is a common misconception that information traveling over cables can either be "analog" or "digital". This isn't entirely true. Both analog and digital signal devices technically send information through cables in analog! The difference is the way in which the bits of information are encoded in the voltages traveling over the wire. This isn't saying that HDMI doesn't provide a very nice picture, only that it's incorrect to say that the HDMI cable doesn't use analog."
"Jaume wrote on Dec 31, 2007 1:23 PM:
" This is not correct. Digital signals don't exist in the real world (analog). "
hdmi_designer wrote on Dec 31, 2007 12:26 PM:
"You are completely wrong. Because the digital signal traveling over HDMI cables is high-speed, they are subject to "analog" loss in the cable. Thicker cables have less loss and are usually more expensive. For example, a 3m AWG28 cable (thin & cheap) can perform worse than a 10m AWG24 cable (thicker & expensive). Once you are in the sub-10m range I agree that almost all cables will work, but there certainly is a "better" cable which can justify the cost for longer ranges. "
Gerry wrote on Dec 31, 2007 12:03 PM:
" Actually, a poor cable could cause some 0's to become 1's and vise-versa. This would not be cleaned up by the TV, nor would the picture be especially bad. The picture may just be less than optimal. Maybe you don't need an expensive cable, but you'll need something decent. "
colas wrote on Dec 31, 2007 12:15 PM:
" Yup, as others I agree.. except for long cables. A medium-priced ($50) 30 ft DVI cable was unusable for me, a high-end one ($100) worked perfectly. "
And on and on and on.....