| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Digital-Home Group Outlines Specs | |
|
||
| Time: 18:39 EST/23:39 GMT | News Source: ExtremeTech | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
The DHWG was formed last year to facilitate the convergence of PC and consumer-electronic devices, with an eye toward networking and universal plug and play. Members said Tuesday at an event in San Francisco that the group has since grown to include 145 members, plus 17 promoter members including Fujitsu, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Kenwood, Microsoft, Sony, and Thomson and Texas Instruments. One exception is Apple Computer, which has not yet signed on but is welcome to join, executives said. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 310 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:18:55 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 6/22/2004 8:14:48 PM |
|
"Obviously Apple is going to make a great incompatible standard at first then a Windows version 2 years later."
Please... This "Working" group is so retarded... they didn't realize for a year that "working" group was a bad name. In a year, they've agreed to wireless standards that were an obvious choice two years ago while Apple is preparing to move to Wireless FireWire and/or WiMax (802.16) soon (both IEEE standards by the way). And, if I can recall correctly, Apple is a leading WiFi gear provider... I believe only behind Cisco's Linksys in revenue for total global sales... not sure though. They've chosen IP4 despite the fact that IP6 was invented because the internet was set to proliferate to non-computer devices... and now when IP6 may actually enter the mainstream, these fools are using version 4. They've chosen UPnP which languished for years when Rendezvous, which is an open IETF standard (ZeroConf), has progressed more rapidly in the past year than UPnP has done over it's entire life. For video and audio standards, they've selected... everything that was known would be available today three years ago... And they've chosen everything! That's not standardization. That's a grab bag... They've done nothing to formalize DRM... haven't accounted for DV connector standards (likely to be IEEE 1394 by the way)... and simply do not provide anything that wasn't known or established 3 years ago... Why should Apple join? What have they advanced? Why would Apple create an incompatible standard when they already supported the bulk of these standards and/or have supported more open standards for the last several years? To summarize, Apple supports 802.11a/b/g/(i), IPv1 through v6, Rendezvous (ZeroConf) -- an open IETF standard; not a MS proprietary standard, GIF, PNG, TIFF, JPEG, JPEG2000, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 (all parts), AC3, AAC, AVC... all standards which are either open or de facto standards across ALL platforms today. Please explain this imagined need to create an incompatible standard that will need to be released for Windows 2 year later. please. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 at 20:35. |
| #2 By 5444 (64.185.18.230) at 6/22/2004 11:33:40 PM |
|
soda,
I do want to point a few items. the "spec" does state that IPv6 is a foward looking spec. there are a few things that should be noted about IPv6 that warrents starting with ipv4 now and move on to ipv6(does state that any coded ip stack should not hard code to a xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx standard btw.) IPv6 took a very important regression with site local spec. something that may delay its acceptance a year or so. The reason being that site local was contrary the concept of IPv6 with a universal addressability, it brought back the problem of a NAT within the spec. While I do agree that some of the platform is there. when the working into the platform was started wifi g didn't exist. it was a forward standard. moving to it will be a platform. UWB (the basis for both wireless USB and wireless Firewire is at least a year away) although I do see wireless firewire becoming the interconnect standard. fairly quickly. Some aspects are still woring out. I do like the concept of ZeroConf. much better than UPnP unfortantly both do not support IPv6 as a underlayer. The difference is if they state they are a digital home device you know they support most of the standards listed. and that is where the seal comes in. Believe me now it is a jungle working to put a networked platform in place. even fram a apple centric point of view. El |
| #3 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 6/23/2004 12:32:03 PM |
|
el, I understand. My point is largely this: this group is not being forward looking enough ... (They are establishing these specs even though they know this will only work for un-copyrighted materials, which is essentially meaningless to the whole concept of a digital home and media sharing... so they might as well look forward to the specs which will be useful... All other working groups generally are forward looking; they don't just adopt the standards that were already locked down 2 years ago. And, yes, I see that they will adopt IP6 and roll most media formats to MPEG-4 at some future date.)
Secondly, Apple is largely conformant with these specs. Thirdly, Apple has done more to introduce new and open standards to the tech community than most organizations, whether or not they are a member of a particular group. And, fourth, this group introduces little that isn't already possible without close participation; Apple can do more for the digital home by making its products work with products it considers desirable (working with Griffin and Belkin to extend the iPod, working with BMW to add iPod support to cars, developing their own Airport Express/Airtunes to "share" music with ANY audio component, being a first adoptor of technology like 802.11g, IEEE 1394, H.264, 3GPP, etc., simply being one of the largest distributors in the world of standards-compliant and open Wi-Fi gear, etc...) This post was edited by sodajerk on Wednesday, June 23, 2004 at 12:47. |
| #4 By 5444 (64.185.18.28) at 6/23/2004 6:47:39 PM |
|
Soda,
I will agree apple has taken chances on alot of the leading edge standards. on IEEE1394, they had better had since they wrote the original standard. I agree I wish they DHWG should had standardize on later standards, but that group is also a huge amount of companies to even get them to agree on what was done is a a MAJOR accomplishment. Going forward they have commented that they will support IPv6 by 2k5/2k6 which is about right given the current status of the standard. and all current implementations are to be forward compatable to it. IOW IPv4 is not to be hard coded in. Apple does have one advantage, it is both a hardware company and a software company it controls its entire platform from the ground up. Take the list of companies that are listed for the dhwg there are several companies there that are the same boat. but are not PC companies. most of the CE hardware is platform dependent. to take that and expand it to be independentwill take time. el |
| #5 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 6/23/2004 7:08:17 PM |
|
El, I didn't say they have taken chances. In fact, I would say Apple has been safe, smart, and organzied about what standards they support. Just because they've been early/first adopters hasn't made it risky or chancy.
Anyway, let this group do what it will... I see little reason to join it, anticipate that it will result in very little (that will not be otherwise accomplished by other means), and see no harm to Apple, nor do I see how this group would benefit from Apple's participation. |
| #6 By 5444 (64.185.18.28) at 6/23/2004 11:37:52 PM |
|
Soda,
On that part I can agree. Defining the underlying standard is only a starting point. there is still the communication and ui related to that. that is what will need to be standardized or at least a least common denominator needs to be presented. beyond the wintel buch I havn't seen many that have worked to allow the software stack to do that in the past. el |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 310 Last | Next |
The time now is
7:18:55 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
