New NVidia Wireless Display Technology Due Soon(blogs.nvidia.com)
blogs.nvidia.com
New NVidia Wireless Display Technology Due Soon
http://blogs.nvidia.com/2012/07/tegra-enhances-miracast-wireless-display-on-hdtvs/
17 comments
Except AirPlay requires an existing WiFi network and uses the existing infrastructure.
Miracast still uses WiFi radios but works end-to-end, forming some sort of ad-hoc network.
Miracast still uses WiFi radios but works end-to-end, forming some sort of ad-hoc network.
> Except AirPlay requires an existing WiFi network
Indeed, but AirDrop does not, and there's no denying that technically AirPlay could trivially be made to work that way. My bet is Apple chose not to.
I certainly don't want the 12 YO neighbour to send crap on my TV. So what's interesting about AirPlay currently requiring an AP is that it therefore requires authentication with the network to be used. What's more, the AirPlay receiver is constantly passively waiting and requires no acknowledgement on the device itself, whereas AirDrop requires 1. entering AirDrop mode at the same time and 2. ack on both parties. I certainly would not want such a scheme to happen on my TV, but it would be necessary so that not anyone can connect.
Indeed, but AirDrop does not, and there's no denying that technically AirPlay could trivially be made to work that way. My bet is Apple chose not to.
I certainly don't want the 12 YO neighbour to send crap on my TV. So what's interesting about AirPlay currently requiring an AP is that it therefore requires authentication with the network to be used. What's more, the AirPlay receiver is constantly passively waiting and requires no acknowledgement on the device itself, whereas AirDrop requires 1. entering AirDrop mode at the same time and 2. ack on both parties. I certainly would not want such a scheme to happen on my TV, but it would be necessary so that not anyone can connect.
Agree whole-heartedly. I'm a big fan of the AirPlay protocol, and I am by no means trying to downplay AirPlay or hype up Miracast. I was just pointing out that the technical points you were making seemed a little muddled since the implementation details are radically different.
If you were wondering:
"open wireless display standard with the core goal of increasing the ease of use and quality of the end-user experience for streaming of audio and video content between Wi-Fi devices"
It also streams the audio, which is awesome :) Hopefully this will run all the proprietary protocols from the market. If this takes off as a standard like HDMI it might remove the need for _any_ data cables in your home cinema setup.
"open wireless display standard with the core goal of increasing the ease of use and quality of the end-user experience for streaming of audio and video content between Wi-Fi devices"
It also streams the audio, which is awesome :) Hopefully this will run all the proprietary protocols from the market. If this takes off as a standard like HDMI it might remove the need for _any_ data cables in your home cinema setup.
I really wish wireless charging would take off, too. Inductive charging like the Palm Pre and HP Touchpad are nice, and we could take it further. It really doesn't seem like that tech is being pushed anymore, which is a shame.
That tech is being pushed as hard as tech can be pushed. There is just nothing we know at the moment that could transfer energy efficiently without a wire.
Technology like that only comes with great scientific breakthroughs that improve our understanding of the universe. But breakthroughs like that come randomly and can't be forced much at all.
Technology like that only comes with great scientific breakthroughs that improve our understanding of the universe. But breakthroughs like that come randomly and can't be forced much at all.
It looks very cool, but I must say I'm skeptical about their claims about the latency. Judging by the video, it's at least 200ms, perhaps as much as 500ms. Contrast this with John Carmack, who has recently talked about the importance of low latency for an immersive experience. And Carmack talks about the impact of just 1 or 2 frames of lag, which is the equivalent of 3 miliseconds!
> And he's talking about the impact of just 1 or 2 frames of lag, which is just ~3 miliseconds!
That is 16-32 milliseconds. In fast paced action gaming.
That is 16-32 milliseconds. In fast paced action gaming.
You're right about the latency. I think latency matters a great deal for any game that aims for immersion. And here we're dealing with a clearly visible delay between the large and small screen.
Carmack is talking about VR. Most high-profile console games run with latencies in the three digits. (E.g. lookup Eurogamer's Digital Foundry articles on latency.)
Of course, adding another 200 ms in the middle won't exactly help...
Of course, adding another 200 ms in the middle won't exactly help...
Carmack talked about VR too, but I'm referring to the comments he made about framerate and latency in the context of Rage.
See http://www.computerandvideogames.com/videos/e3-2011-john-car... - around 16 minutes in he mentions how a few frames latency makes a big difference.
A lot of console games indeed have pretty awful latency, and don't get a smooth 60fps either. And TVs can add latency on top of that with the postprocessing they do.
See http://www.computerandvideogames.com/videos/e3-2011-john-car... - around 16 minutes in he mentions how a few frames latency makes a big difference.
A lot of console games indeed have pretty awful latency, and don't get a smooth 60fps either. And TVs can add latency on top of that with the postprocessing they do.
So it's AirPlay without the flexibility, WiDi without Intel's backing, DNLA without the install base, and they have to define and implement and debug any controller scheme you might possibly want to send over the air. Good luck.
Look at what is already possible today:
http://esrlabs.com/android-transporter-on-the-raspberry-pi/
Or how about something that is already shipping !
http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/airplay.html
http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/airplay.html
By the time ouya comes out, we will have powerfull phones which can stream HD video to TVs.
which sort of makes ouya redundant..
which sort of makes ouya redundant..
No it doesn't. Ouya is about providing a platform. Wether or not people in the future will use the actual Ouya device is of less relevance. If your phone will implement the Ouya interface then that's awesome.
Be aware that if the Ouya device actually gains traction the next iteration of the device will have a lot more money behind it, and might scale up the specs to compete with Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo.
Be aware that if the Ouya device actually gains traction the next iteration of the device will have a lot more money behind it, and might scale up the specs to compete with Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo.
AirParrot shows how doing this in software is not realistic except for the lightest loads.
[0] http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-tech...