Philips announces pricey Wireless HDMI solution

C

omputer and gadget lovers like us are no strangers to the rat's nest of hanging cables that usually forms behind our desks. But this isn't the only place where electronic components are wired together; more and more our living rooms have morphed into media centers with at least a mid-sized TV, several audio / video components and typically a gaming console.

Fortunately there has been some development aimed at wirelessly connecting HDTVs to our entertainment setups, particularly with Wireless HDMI and WirelessHD. The bad news: it's expensive and not entirely practical for now. Nevertheless, looking to gain an early foothold on the market, Philips has announced a pair of Wireless HDMI boxes which aim to let users connect audio and video devices to their TVs without all the clutter.

The Wireless HDTV link will let you relocate or even hide your components up to 20 meters away while still sending a 1080p/30 HD signal. But getting rid of wires will come at the cost of adding two separate boxes; the image source (Blu-ray player, for example) is connected to a transmitter box and the TV or projector is connected to a smaller receiver box. 

This setup makes more sense if the two devices are not located next to each other, but eventually Wireless HDMI technology will be built into home electronic products -- thus obviating the need for transmitter and receiver boxes. Phillips' solution includes two digital HDMI connections, two component connections, and a hefty 600 Euro ($850) price tag.

Read more...

YouTube to offer movie rentals for $4?

Still trying to turn lucrative, YouTube is reportedly working on a movie rental service. The online video sharing site has been almost entirely reliant on user-submitted content, but it is in talks with various film studios about securing licenses to host motion pictures. Among the names in the discussion are Sony Pictures, Lions Gate Entertainment Corp., and Warner Bros. Studios.

Speculation has it that while some movies will be viewable for free on an ad-supported basis, others will cost $4 to rent. This shouldn't come as a surprise as YouTube has been working to catalog more premium content. Turning to feature films may bring Google a welcomed profit, having failed thus far to earn a buck off their $1.65 billion investment.

I get the feeling that many people will condemn the thought of YouTube offering paid content. With a slogan like "Broadcast Yourself," it's easy to call YouTube a sellout and think that it's becoming a little less about you, and a little more about pushing mainstream media. I ask you, though, if the current system remains unaffected, is there really a problem?

Read more...