Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Why aren’t they all hdmi 2.0, isn’t it backwards compatible? Or it’s just to save them a $ while technically still being able to advertise it as hdmi 2.0 ?


I'm going to assume it was cost cutting.

The boss said to make sure it had an HDMI 2 port. The engineer could have interpreted it two ways, so they did both ways in one.


Probably it would need a better CPU to handle more traces and that's the real expense




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: