Main > Main Forum
Wireless graphics card. PC to TV
ahofle:
--- Quote from: RayB on October 01, 2010, 12:36:10 pm ---
--- Quote from: ahofle on October 01, 2010, 12:20:06 pm ---I don't understand the point of this at all. If you want to run PC games on your HDTV, wouldn't you just put the PC next to the TV and use a DVI-HDMI cable and bring a wireless keyboard/mouse to the couch?
--- End quote ---
You just answered your own question. It's like asking whats the point of WiFi when all you have to do is run an ethernet cable to your router.
--- End quote ---
Because not everyone has an ethernet jack in every room? Everyone however can run a cable between the PC and TV which are a couple feet apart. This card enables you to put your PC under the coffee table instead of next to the TV? :dizzy: About the only use I could see is playing videos from a PC in another room, but they seem to specifically say this is geared towards PC gamers. Maybe I'm just missing something?
bkenobi:
I disagree that this is useless. Maybe I'm the only one...
The way most people want to use their flat panel TV's is to have them mounted on a wall like a picture frame. If you do that, then you have to find a way to route the video cables to the display without having a giant cable bundle dangling to the floor. The best current solution is to put a hole in the wall and run the cables from behind the monitor to wherever the A/V components reside (typically directly below on a component rack of some kind). This tech could mean an end to the clutter!
Now, on a more practical side, this is not going to work well since there is already a limited amount of frequencies available to transmit such data. The device has to stay in open bands that the FCC (in the US anyway) has made available for open use. That means this device will compete with phones and routers among other things. Unless they have some way to deal with that, this will NOT work well. It seems ridiculous that the only way they can find the bandwidth is by taking up 5 frequency bands/channels.
Oh, and either way the TV still needs power. Thus, you still have to cut the wall or have a wire dangling.
ahofle:
--- Quote from: bkenobi on October 01, 2010, 12:56:47 pm ---I disagree that this is useless. Maybe I'm the only one...
The way most people want to use their flat panel TV's is to have them mounted on a wall like a picture frame. If you do that, then you have to find a way to route the video cables to the display without having a giant cable bundle dangling to the floor. The best current solution is to put a hole in the wall and run the cables from behind the monitor to wherever the A/V components reside (typically directly below on a component rack of some kind). This tech could mean an end to the clutter!
--- End quote ---
I think the more practical way to avoid a bunch of HDMI cables going to your TV would be a receiver with multiple HDMI inputs and one output. At any rate, you've described the exact reason I don't mount my TV on the wall (trying to hide all the cabling).
bkenobi:
I don't have a flat panel for this and several other reasons. The only advantage I currently see to them over my GIGANTIC CRT is that it uses less energy, so it's cheaper to run. I don't see a savings of a few dollars a month as a justification to spend thousands. But, that's just me. :cheers:
severdhed:
there are definite uses for this, but the are so limited, it probably isn't worth while. for instance, i could build a control panel on a pedestal, put the pc inside the pedestal and wirelessly send the video to my ceiling mounted projector, and play mame on my 102" screen. i'd still need to plug the pedestal into the power, but not having to run really long video cables across the floor to my receiver would be cool. but then there is the sound issue.
well, the more i think about it, it still seems kinda dumb